SEGA does what Nintendon't? I had these arguments with a mate back in school, where we'd bitch at each other about one platform of choice 'ripping-off' the other. We were about 10. "Microsoft paid to get all these genres on their platform!" well before that it was "man, Microsoft are really lacking in JRPGs and racing sims!" so, decide what you want and stick to it.
Two strawmen in the same post? What?
I'm saying knock it off, you sound like bloody children bickering over who got there first and is therefore the better. They saw gaps in their gaming lineups that people (not you, personally, well done!) were complaining about, and made efforts to fill them. Somehow this is drawn to a negative conclusion?
The discussion was about Kinect's lack of software, I pointed out that this was because Microsoft had always followed other companies examples and didn't really know how to lead the market themselves. Wwas it irrelevant? No, so why the hell would I knock it off? Because fragglefart's feelings got hurt? Or yours?
Personally, I think Microsoft should've left those gaps to third parties to cover and instead come up with exclusives that actually set their system apart. And I think Sony (specifically SCEA) should've done the same thing when they went FPS crazy at the start of this generation. Though I also think that Sony can afford to do something like that a lot more than Microsoft, mostly because they've got like three times the amount of developers (maybe four or five actually, Sony have a lot of second party relationships).
With Nintendo and Microsoft both showing off their shiny new hardware cocks, Sony will be forced to show new hardware in 2013 with a 2014 release date (having their 10 year plan rudely interrupted). Sony, out of all the groups, probably doesn't want to move on given how much the PS3 cost them, but they'll be forced to after everyone else does. Though they could surprise me and do things at the same time as Microsoft and release in 2013..
Shiny new hardware cocks? Ew.
As for the 10 year plan, as I've pointed out numerous times before, it's never meant what people have wanted it to mean. All it's ever meant is that Sony will support the system for 10 years. And by 'support' they don't mean that they won't release its successor or that they'll still be releasing lots of games on it, they just mean that they'll still producing new units. They said the same thing about the PS1 (which lasted like 11 years) and PS2 (which is still going and will probably last at least another 5 years in places like South America and Africa).
I expect we'll see both the PS4 and 720 next year.
Timesplitters 4.....that's precicely what this industry needs....more shooters. :?
At least the Timesplitters games were clever about it....but then again, companies nowadays have a tendancy to get a great classic license, and then brown it up and take away everything that made the old games charming and fun.
If it even is being made, as has been said, it'll be by Free Radical who were bought up by CryTek. The ones who made the other games charming and fun.
According to a report from Kyodo News, citing official Japanese government documentation, Sony Computer Entertainment knowingly delayed telling the public about the extent of an attack on its PlayStation Network so as not to "bewilder" its customers.
The report, submitted to the Japanese government and obtained under a freedom of information request, says that SCE was able to confirm internally on April 25 (American time) that a "fairly large amount of data" had been exposed to hackers. A press release issued the next day, however, only stated that Sony could not "rule out the possibility" that personal information had been compromised.
It's also claimed that PlayStation boss Kaz Hirai gave incorrect information in a statement issued on May 1, in which he said Sony didn't learn about the extent of the attack until April 26 (American time), a full day later than the company confirmed matters internally.
The official document also says that Sony delayed informing the public of the extent of the breach so as not to "bewilder" its customers, a spokesperson saying "We hadn't figured out (at that time) what kind of data had been leaked. If only passwords and IDs (were breached), they cannot be considered personal information, and so we didn't want to bewilder our customers."
While being out by a day seems minor, that discrepancy combined with the gap between what Sony knew internally and what it told people publicly still raises the possibility - and this is why the Japanese government is looking into this - that, as Kyodo News puts it, Sony "deliberately attempted to downplay the seriousness of the situation by not fully disclosing information".
Link Sony knew data breach was massive but withheld full disclosure [Kyodo news, subscription required]
So before leaving the house today I saw an article on gamespot about EA opening a brick and mortar store for EA sports titles (I'd link to it, but I'm now at work). I didn't really have time to read it, but if I did indeed read it right, that makes like no sense to me.
I mean, I do still buy the EA NHL series of games regularly, but I can't see how they think this will be profitable. Honestly I would think a Mass Effect store (Mass Effect 3 preorder DLC only available here!) would probably have more success than an EA sports store.
Valleo on
0
Options
Brainiac 8Don't call me Shirley...Registered Userregular
edited June 2011
What is in the link, as I am so not chancing opening it here.
SEGA does what Nintendon't? I had these arguments with a mate back in school, where we'd bitch at each other about one platform of choice 'ripping-off' the other. We were about 10. "Microsoft paid to get all these genres on their platform!" well before that it was "man, Microsoft are really lacking in JRPGs and racing sims!" so, decide what you want and stick to it.
Two strawmen in the same post? What?
I'm saying knock it off, you sound like bloody children bickering over who got there first and is therefore the better. They saw gaps in their gaming lineups that people (not you, personally, well done!) were complaining about, and made efforts to fill them. Somehow this is drawn to a negative conclusion?
Improving one's gaming lineup is not universally a positive thing. For example, whenever Activision sees gaps in their lineup and buys up your favorite franchises.
Obviously Microsoft's situation is different but you summarized it in such a way that implied there was no way this could ever go wrong.
He was talking about Microsoft's very specific situation, though. And since the genres they have been accused of 'ripping off' by Unco include 'epic big budget JRPG' and 'racing sim', you know, they types of games which have been on every single successful system since the 8-bit days, long before Sony entered the market, darley has a point.
I mean, if you want to critisize 'Scene It' for ripping of 'Buzz!' or 'Lips' for ripping off 'Singstar' you might have a point. Except Scene-It is a third party game based on a popular TV / DVD game which pre-dated Buzz! and can now be found on all consoles. And Lips / Singstar I'll give you but at the end of the day it's just Karaoke anyway.
As for the 'motion control sports game' (I'll assume you meant Kinect Sports) while Microsoft were keen to offer motion control as an option KS is far from a Wii sports ripoff. Rare went on record immediately since they knew comparisons would be drawn - the reason sports were chosen (and their more experimental gameplay ideas put into minigames within the title or on the backburner for a later release) was due to the immediate nature of the gameplay - people could jump in and attempt to 'play' sports without any real instruction, based on real-life experience and expectations. This helped to overcome some of the barriers which might prevent accessibility due to Kinect and motion control in general.
Kinect Sports didn't start as Kinect Sports, it evolved that way. There have been plenty of details about the other stuff Rare were working on for that title before it settled into what was released - fact is they all enjoyed playing the sports games around the offices the most! They did not set out to copy the success of Wii Sports and the game is much better as a result of this.
Still, the other specific titles which were mentioned in Microsoft's defence (Halo, Gears, Viva Pinata, Banjo N&B) were sadly missing from Unco's response anyway, since that would invalidate his theory further, so I doubt any of this information will matter either.
What is in the link, as I am so not chancing opening it here.
Basically some dude saying LulzSec are dicks, their actions are going to lead to negative public opinion and harsh laws being passed and that they have nothing to do with Anonymous. Except in the incredibly immature language you'd expect from the hobos of the internet.
It's funny because a) it seems to ignore the fact that Anonymous' dickish actions have already resulted in negative public opinion and b) that it's impossible to say they aren't part of Anonymous because the entire point behind Anonymous is that they're anonymous, you don't know who is part of Anonymous and who isn't.
Well here's the thing. Anon just basically DDOSes. That's it. They don't ever really hack a site to steal personal information. The thing lulzsec is doing is catching media attention which means there will probably be government intervention sooner or later. Which can't be good for anyone.
What is in the link, as I am so not chancing opening it here.
Basically some dude saying LulzSec are dicks, their actions are going to lead to negative public opinion and harsh laws being passed and that they have nothing to do with Anonymous. Except in the incredibly immature language you'd expect from the hobos of the internet.
It's funny because a) it seems to ignore the fact that Anonymous' dickish actions have already resulted in negative public opinion and b) that it's impossible to say they aren't part of Anonymous because the entire point behind Anonymous is that they're anonymous, you don't know who is part of Anonymous and who isn't.
Anonymous is about to reach critical mass and fold in on itself.
Following on from three arrests in Spain last week, a further 32 suspected Anonymous members have been detained by Turkish authorities.
The individuals were caught after Turkish police carried out raids in 12 of the country's provinces on Monday, the International Business Times reports.
Click to view larger image
The raids were a response to distributed denial of service attacks the hacking group is suspected of launching on Turkish telecoms regulators last week.
Anonymous - or a splinter group of the hacking collective - is widely thought to have been behind the recent attack on the PlayStation Network.
We have no idea how many Anonymous members there are left, but a backlash following the latest arrests wouldn't surprise us in the slightest. If Anonymous knocked the Spanish police force's website offline because just three of its number were arrested, who knows what it might try next.
I mean really, they just coincidentally made an epic big budget JRPG, karaoke game, racing sim, trivia game (complete with Buzz controller) and motion control sports game?
This isn't unique to Microsoft.
As a matter of fact, it's an incredibly common thing to do. It's called competition.
After acknowledging the query was a "loaded question", he replied: "Honestly [360] is a puzzle, a puzzle box. It's a matter of figuring out how to squeeze water from a stone at this stage in the generation.
"If you look at games like the new Tomb Raider, or look at Gears [3], these are games that weren't really possible when the consoles first came out. Only when the developers mastered what the console was capable of were they able to squeeze that much graphic power from it.
"I still think we can still squeeze some more out of it, right? It's a matter of optimising how you run your work flow and what you do with it."
So I'm wondering if they'll design the new Xbox for a new Kinect sensor, but keep that under wraps for a few years into its lifetime so they can ride this one out and thenask everyone to upgrade when it's more acceptable.
The simple answer is to do what they're already doing; multiple versions of the hardware. Perhaps instead of HD size being the differentiating point, sell one edition with Kinect built in, and a cheaper model without it that is compatible with the old ones out there.
Meets the needs of pretty much all three groups; those that don't own it already and want it, those that do own it already and don't want to spend extra for a device they already own, and those that don't want it at all.
Forar on
First they came for the Muslims, and we said NOT TODAY, MOTHERFUCKER!
As for the 'motion control sports game' (I'll assume you meant Kinect Sports) while Microsoft were keen to offer motion control as an option KS is far from a Wii sports ripoff. Rare went on record immediately since they knew comparisons would be drawn - the reason sports were chosen (and their more experimental gameplay ideas put into minigames within the title or on the backburner for a later release) was due to the immediate nature of the gameplay - people could jump in and attempt to 'play' sports without any real instruction, based on real-life experience and expectations. This helped to overcome some of the barriers which might prevent accessibility due to Kinect and motion control in general.
Kinect Sports didn't start as Kinect Sports, it evolved that way. There have been plenty of details about the other stuff Rare were working on for that title before it settled into what was released - fact is they all enjoyed playing the sports games around the offices the most! They did not set out to copy the success of Wii Sports and the game is much better as a result of this.
I don't know. It sounds like they copied both Nintendo's method exactly and the ended up in exactly the same place. Unless you are going to claim that Rare were sequestered for the last 5 years then it's hard to say that it isn't a copy. Maybe they would have produced exactly the same game before they saw the Wii. What we do know is that they didn't. Things that seem obvious in a post Wii era, were far from obvious before then. You know, like cat flaps.
Just think of how revolutionary Kinect Sports would have been if it came out before the Wii. We would have seen nothing like it. Everyone would have noted that it was easy for non-gamers to pick up, etc., etc., etc. But as it is, everyone thinks "Oh yeah, it's Wii Sports but for Kinect", because that's exactly what it is.
Bolded part of the last paragraph is just crazy talk.
In general, I think both MS and Sony try to ensure that their platforms have a good number of tent pole games in various genres. Sony went after Halo and MS went after GT and FF (which was considered Sony's at the time). Nothing wrong with that and there is no reason to criticize MS for outsourcing more of those games rather than developing in house. That's just a question of what give more bang for the buck.
lowlylowlycook on
(Please do not gift. My game bank is already full.)
So I'm wondering if they'll design the new Xbox for a new Kinect sensor, but keep that under wraps for a few years into its lifetime so they can ride this one out and thenask everyone to upgrade when it's more acceptable.
The simple answer is to do what they're already doing; multiple versions of the hardware. Perhaps instead of HD size being the differentiating point, sell one edition with Kinect built in, and a cheaper model without it that is compatible with the old ones out there.
Meets the needs of pretty much all three groups; those that don't own it already and want it, those that do own it already and don't want to spend extra for a device they already own, and those that don't want it at all.
Not going to happen. One of the big ways they could make the next XBox 360 better than the current one is with a better, more accurate, less laggy version of Kinect. Backwards compatibility with the old Kinect would destroy that.
The Rare of old would have come up with some truly crazy crap for Kinect's launch. That was before Microsoft started cracking the whip something fierce, though. Le sigh.
At any rate, yep, there is indeed an EA Sports store coming.
Over the past year and a half, Electronic Arts has launched a number of initiatives designed at pocketing more money from the games it sells. These programs include EA Sports' Online Pass, which erects a pay gate around online modes for those who play the label's games secondhand, and the digital-download service Origin.
Madden NFL 12: It's in the store.
Now, EA Sports has made a move to cut out the middleman altogether. Speaking to Forbes, EA Sports VP of brand marketing Chris Erb said that the publishing label plans to open up its own chain of retail stores. The first EA Sports brick-and-mortar store is expected to open this fall.
"As pervasive as digital is, there's still an offline component to acquiring new customers that remains important," Erb said. "Our approach is to be creative and innovative with whatever we're doing offline and ensure that it connects with our digital strategies. For example, we just started construction on our first North American EA SPORTS retail store, which will open this fall in the Charlotte, NC, airport."
"It is the first of what we hope to be at least three new retail stores to open in the next year, and it's a place people will be able to interact and buy their favorite EA SPORTS games," he continued. "As we look to expand the overall sports game audience, it's important for us to create environments for people to get their hands on our products and experience how much interactive sports experiences have evolved over the past few years."
The opening of the first EA Sports store coincides with the launch of some of EA Sports' biggest brands, including Madden NFL and FIFA Soccer.
He was talking about Microsoft's very specific situation, though. And since the genres they have been accused of 'ripping off' by Unco include 'epic big budget JRPG' and 'racing sim', you know, they types of games which have been on every single successful system since the 8-bit days, long before Sony entered the market, darley has a point.
I mean, if you want to critisize 'Scene It' for ripping of 'Buzz!' or 'Lips' for ripping off 'Singstar' you might have a point. Except Scene-It is a third party game based on a popular TV / DVD game which pre-dated Buzz! and can now be found on all consoles. And Lips / Singstar I'll give you but at the end of the day it's just Karaoke anyway.
You really think it's just a big list of complete coincidences? That Microsoft just happened to come up with their own racing sim when Gran Turismo was at its peak (15+ million sold, second highest selling game last gen)? That they came up with their own big budget JRPG when it seemed like Square Enix wasn't going to give them that much support? That Scene It pre-dated Buzz but just so happened to use an exact copy of the controller (and Microsoft published it so no, not a third party title). Come on.
As for the 'motion control sports game' (I'll assume you meant Kinect Sports) while Microsoft were keen to offer motion control as an option KS is far from a Wii sports ripoff. Rare went on record immediately since they knew comparisons would be drawn - the reason sports were chosen (and their more experimental gameplay ideas put into minigames within the title or on the backburner for a later release) was due to the immediate nature of the gameplay - people could jump in and attempt to 'play' sports without any real instruction, based on real-life experience and expectations. This helped to overcome some of the barriers which might prevent accessibility due to Kinect and motion control in general.
Kinect Sports didn't start as Kinect Sports, it evolved that way. There have been plenty of details about the other stuff Rare were working on for that title before it settled into what was released - fact is they all enjoyed playing the sports games around the offices the most! They did not set out to copy the success of Wii Sports and the game is much better as a result of this.
Yep, they also claimed that they came up with Avatars long before Nintendo did and I sure do believe them. Oh and I also believed Sony when they claimed that they came up with the Sixaxis functionality before Nintendo had unveiled the Wii. Corporations never lie.
Still, the other specific titles which were mentioned in Microsoft's defence (Halo, Gears, Viva Pinata, Banjo N&B) were sadly missing from Unco's response anyway, since that would invalidate his theory further, so I doubt any of this information will matter either.
I ignored them because a couple of examples doesn't mean a whole lot compared to the numerous examples I brought up. But hey, now that you've brought them up, I'll go through them. Halo was well into development before they bought Bungie and Bungie is no longer part of Microsoft. Gears of War was from an established PC developer, Microsoft doesn't own it and it is actually pretty derivative of RE4. Viva Pinata and Banjo I'll give them credit for (even if one was in a previously established, popular franchise), though shortly after those games came out, Microsoft seemed to replace that energetic little company with... Rowdy.
Now that I've gone through them, how about you explain these: Avatars. You're In The Movies. Kinectimals.
I mean really, they just coincidentally made an epic big budget JRPG, karaoke game, racing sim, trivia game (complete with Buzz controller) and motion control sports game?
This isn't unique to Microsoft.
As a matter of fact, it's an incredibly common thing to do. It's called competition.
I get that but I think when most of your products are derivative, you go from the company that came up with Windows, to the company that came up with the Zune.
Let's be fair here. Blue Dragon wasn't an attempt to rip off Final Fantasy, it was a knee-jerk attempt to make the 360 more popular in Japan. Remember those days? We got that and Ninety Nine Nights and... something else, I guess? And then they gave up entirely.
At any rate, there's a LOT of overlap between JRPGs, just as there's a lot of overlap between shooters.
Speaking of Gears:
In response to long-running rumours started at GDC, Epic design director Cliff Bleszinski has said that "there's zero chance of Gears of War being on the PlayStation 3. Can we bury that now?"
Speaking to Industry Gamers at E3, he also added, "we have a great deal with Microsoft, they're a great partner".
When asked about Epic's President Mike Capps's comments during GDC – " I'd love to ship the Gears trilogy on PlayStation" – Bleszinski riposted, "It's one of those things that would be exciting news. Hopefully DualShock would get tweaked a little bit, but anyway, enough about that." (Cliffy B's entertaining vilification of the DualShock controller has long been a source of amusement and incendiary headlines for the online games press.)
So it seems that Microsoft will retain, for the forseeable future, exclusivity to one of its headline franchises. That's that rumour dead, then. Anybody surprised?
Gears of War 3 is out September 20. Incidentally, VG24/7 has noticed that the BBFC has listed Gears of War 3 as containing 90 minutes of cutscenes.
Yep, they also claimed that they came up with Avatars long before Nintendo did and I sure do believe them. Oh and I also believed Sony when they claimed that they came up with the Sixaxis functionality before Nintendo had unveiled the Wii. Corporations never lie.
Actually I do believe them, just not to the extent they're trying to say it's important. Sony once toyed with motion control and decided it wasn't worth it, as they do with many projects behind closed doors. Nintendo showed them it was worth it, so they quickly ran with it and now say they did it first. Likewise I bet all three major players have experimented with screens in the controller before.
It doesn't matter who was really first, who the first person was at an internal meeting to say "how about we make some simple sports games." The important thing is who actually released to the public first and the resulting public perception.
It's entirely possible (all too depressingly possible, considering Microsoft's crackdown of Rare and the resulting exodus of all the long-timers) that the development behind Kinect Sports boiled down to "what can Rare finish by Kinect's launch?" The days of them spending five+ years screwing around with Banjo concepts and starting over from scratch twice before finally delivering a game are long, long gone.
So I'm wondering if they'll design the new Xbox for a new Kinect sensor, but keep that under wraps for a few years into its lifetime so they can ride this one out and thenask everyone to upgrade when it's more acceptable.
The simple answer is to do what they're already doing; multiple versions of the hardware. Perhaps instead of HD size being the differentiating point, sell one edition with Kinect built in, and a cheaper model without it that is compatible with the old ones out there.
Meets the needs of pretty much all three groups; those that don't own it already and want it, those that do own it already and don't want to spend extra for a device they already own, and those that don't want it at all.
Not going to happen. One of the big ways they could make the next XBox 360 better than the current one is with a better, more accurate, less laggy version of Kinect. Backwards compatibility with the old Kinect would destroy that.
Which is the problem I was trying to bring up, that Kinect as it is now could use some improvement, but I fear that bringing out a new camera to go with a new console in 2013 will only upset the market they're aiming for. If they want to introduce a new camera, I reckon they would be better using the current model for a year or two into the lifespan of the next Xbox, then releasing a Kinect 2 with a whole stack of games that won't work with the old one. The price of the console will have dropped from launch making it a more attractive prospect, and it leaves longer between Kinect releases that people should feel more inclined to buy the new one.
darleysam on
0
Options
Brainiac 8Don't call me Shirley...Registered Userregular
edited June 2011
Lets see if I beat Cloud to this. :P
Last night at the Webby awards, two little birds told me some interesting news about Angry Birds. Okay, it was actually a Mighty Eagle, founder Peter Vestebacka, and one of his product managers, Ramine Darabiha. The Angry Birds games now have been downloaded 250 million times across all mobile platforms.
So what’s next for Angry Birds? Vestebecka says that they are working on a new game called Wine and Dine and a cookbook which will feature egg recipes. But the most what piqued my ears the most was Angry Birds Magic, a location-based platform which will be built into all Angry Birds games.
We’ve already seen a hint of Magic when Rovio showed off an Angry Birds game that unlocked new levels and characters with an NFC-enabled phone. It will also work with Angry Birds stuffed toys which will have NFC chips inside them. But Angry Birds Magic goes way beyond NFC phones (which are by no means mainstream). Magic is a platform that will also be based on location, so that you can unlock new experiences depending on where you are playing Angry Birds.
“Magic Places will work on any phone,” says Darabiha. “So you can think of Magic as a way to deliver new things via interactions in the physical world.”
And what about new games that don’t involve birds flinging themselves at objects? Wine And Dine will be more about the pigs, but new games with completely different gameplay (but the same characters) are also in the works.
So, the only way to get all the new levels is to buy their crap, eh? And it sounds like this could easily be cross-marketed to give you new levels when you go to, say, Starbucks. If nothing else, Rovio's been extremely aggressive about marketing themselves. There's a ton of Angry Birds merch out there, and they've updated the original game to give you ads for more Angry Birds crap on the pause screen.
At any rate. 250 million downloads? Geez, that's amazing/boring/significant/insignificant/mauve/a cow wearing a beanie (pick one)
As for the 'motion control sports game' (I'll assume you meant Kinect Sports) while Microsoft were keen to offer motion control as an option KS is far from a Wii sports ripoff. Rare went on record immediately since they knew comparisons would be drawn - the reason sports were chosen (and their more experimental gameplay ideas put into minigames within the title or on the backburner for a later release) was due to the immediate nature of the gameplay - people could jump in and attempt to 'play' sports without any real instruction, based on real-life experience and expectations. This helped to overcome some of the barriers which might prevent accessibility due to Kinect and motion control in general.
Kinect Sports didn't start as Kinect Sports, it evolved that way. There have been plenty of details about the other stuff Rare were working on for that title before it settled into what was released - fact is they all enjoyed playing the sports games around the offices the most! They did not set out to copy the success of Wii Sports and the game is much better as a result of this.
I don't know. It sounds like they copied both Nintendo's method exactly and the ended up in exactly the same place. Unless you are going to claim that Rare were sequestered for the last 5 years then it's hard to say that it isn't a copy. Maybe they would have produced exactly the same game before they saw the Wii. What we do know is that they didn't. Things that seem obvious in a post Wii era, were far from obvious before then. You know, like cat flaps.
Just think of how revolutionary Kinect Sports would have been if it came out before the Wii. We would have seen nothing like it. Everyone would have noted that it was easy for non-gamers to pick up, etc., etc., etc. But as it is, everyone thinks "Oh yeah, it's Wii Sports but for Kinect", because that's exactly what it is.
Bolded part of the last paragraph is just crazy talk.
They have been on record talking about the development process which lead towards Kinect Sports. You can dispute it if you like, but the reasons thye gave appear sound. Of all the little games and demos they made, people seemed to take to 'football, table tennis, boxing' better than they took to 'wave arms to fly pigeon and punch meteors from space'.
4. Kinect Sports is a radical departure from what we’re used to from Rare. What was it about Kinect Sports that drove you to take it forward rather than something that the majority would call ‘more traditionally Rare-like’ and how would you address criticisms that it’s just an attempt to outdo Wii Sports?
Traditionally Rare like? What no googly eyes? Look at our back catalogue over the last 25 years and then tell me what’s traditional Rare? Sports though was such an obvious choice as everyone on the planet has a good idea of how they need to move for most Sports so we don’t need to teach the player what to do at all – they just mimic the Sports in front of the TV and the game does the rest – it was a totally obvious choice.
You may have a point with the 'totally obvious after Wiisports' idea, but fact is they put effort into making these games as close to the sports as possible, not 'how much can we make this game like Wii Sports'. The fact that Rare are making a sequel with a pile of new sports IMO supports this since if all that was required was Kinect Wiisports rip-off edition, why would they bother making another game? That box has been ticked for Microsoft. Fact is, it's what they enjoy making, it is selling well and it's a bloody good game.
We had - I'm not joking here - 20 or 30 little games that were just proving out some sort of concept. The ones that always got a crowd were sports. Whatever that sport was, it was sports. I remember the goal kicks, one of the first prototypes we did that started to lead to soccer... Football.
We were just taking goal kicks, and it was a rough wireframe stick man with a ball. What we were trying to prove out was you could interact with a virtual object. So to put a virtual object in front of you and your skeleton could move around. You could visualise it was there.
We found you could put a virtual ball a metre in front of the stick-man in the game space, and the player in the real world would go and move around and address a ball a metre in front of them in the real world.
This is probably going back 18 months from now. It became quite clear, we didn't know why at the time, that sports was something everybody related to. We were putting these very early prototypes into user research as well, and they were always the things that came back as people just got [clicks fingers], like that.
We wouldn't tell them anything. You just put a stick-man on the screen with a wireframe table tennis table and then go, 'Here you go.' People worked these out much quicker. And it turned out in the end it was all about the relate-ability of sports, because everybody, even if they've never played the sports, knows of them, either through TV or friends that play it or school. You've got some good idea of how to play it. And also just by watching somebody play you can get what you're supposed to do, even if there's a lot of skill involved.
We look back now, it was a no-brainer. It's an obvious thing. If you do something that everybody's going to get and go, 'Oh, I can do that. I can watch you. You actually look like you're bowling, and I've been bowling. Therefore, get out of the way and give me a go.' No more training required. Lowering the barrier to entry.
That was pretty much it, even though we were going, "should we do a sports game?" We had all these other crazy ideas for things, and we've still got them - there's going to be some bonkers things with Kinect in the future. We're scratching the surface.
If you like we're doing the obvious gateway things. The things that lend themselves initially, the thing people are going to go [clicks fingers] I get that straight away. If you hit them with something really off the wall, it's like, 'Whoa, what does that even mean?'
There we go, knew I read about that stuff from somewhere, was bloody ages ago now. :P
A large part of my job is dealing with people who work in public relations. The vast majority of those whose do PR for video game companies are polite, well-intentioned, and extremely professional. They need us to get their games coverage, and we need them for access to the developers and early code to review in a timely manner. The press and PR relationship may sometimes be strained, but it’s rarely adversarial.
That is, until the Redner Group’s official Twitter account posted something you almost never see: an open threat stating that outlets who reviewed Duke Nukem Forever poorly may not receive review copies of games in the future. Anyone who has done this job for any amount of time has suffered through a dry spell after giving a publisher a bad review, but this is the first time the threat of a blacklist has been made public.
“Too many went too far with their reviews…we are reviewing who gets games next time and who doesn’t based on today’s venom,” the company tweeted. “Bad scores are fine. Venom filled reviews…that’s completely different,” another tweet read. Currently, Duke Nukem Forever has a Metacritic score of 49 on the Xbox 360, the format most commonly sent to the press. For a game with such a large marketing budget and name recognition, that’s shockingly low.
The tweet has since been deleted, but we took a screenshot when it was originally published.
It’s not, however, that surprising. The game received tepid write-ups after the Los Angeles preview event, and industry gossip always painted the game as a barely finished product. It’s hard to find a good review for the game, although the PC version of Duke Nukem Forever seems to be doing slightly better than the console port. The game will sell well regardless — Duke Nukem Forever is the definition of a release that’s critic-proof — but no one feels good when their game is beaten up so badly by the reviews.
What’s shocking about that tweet isn’t that some outlets may get blacklisted — that’s something you risk every time you give a game a low score — but that the Redner Group would release a public statement letting outlets know they are on notice if they went “too far” in their review. This sends a chilling message to those who review games professionally: hold your tongue if you feel strongly about a game, or you may not have timely coverage of a future release.
I contacted Jim Redner for comment on this story, and this is the response I received:
I have had a wonderful relationship working with you in the past. I plan to continue working with you in the future on all projects, if you will allow me.
I believe reviews are completely subjective. Everyone is welcome to their own opinion and opinions are never wrong.
It is not my intention to bully anyone. I over reacted. I just voiced an opinion. I have poured my heart into this project and I just want it to succeed.
It is my hope that you understand.
Another tweet was posted publicly apologizing, and a longer, more personal apology was sent, although that wasn’t made available for publication.
“In a situation where a game receives a bad score, it’s important to realize that these reviews and scores are delivered as a means of telling a customer whether to buy a game,” another person working PR told me, on the condition he would not be identified. “It’s a learning opportunity—see what wasn’t liked, and come back stronger with a better game next time.” They pointed out that a bad score isn’t malicious, it’s only a reviewer saying they didn’t like the game.
During my years as a game reviewer I’ve grown close to a number of writers at other sites, and I’ve also enjoyed long working relationships with many people working public relations. Speaking generally, I’ve known people both on the giving and receiving end of blacklists, and it’s an ugly, but private weapon used against — and sometimes by — the press. That’s why it’s so insidious: it’s nearly impossible to prove that interview opportunities are being held back or review copies aren’t being sent due to a prior, negative review.
In some cases the press will even blacklist a publisher, as is the case with Kotaku’s punishment of Warner Bros.’ use of embargoes in order to give another outlet an exclusive.
Our Duke Nukem Forever review was tough, but I stand by every word of it. It’s never worth pulling a punch when you talk about a game due to fear of retaliation. The professionals in PR understand that bad reviews happen, and those that will punish you for them come and go. It’s your readers that are important, and when you’re faced with this kind of behavior, the only sane thing to do is shine a bright light on it and let everyone know you won’t be pushed around.
While PR does control much of who I talk to, what I see, and how early I play something, the industry needs writers to talk about their games and to promote the exceptional work that is released on a regular basis. Reviewers need to feel free to write what they feel about games, and PR needs to understand that not every game deserves praise. Threatening outlets is never a winning strategy, and in many cases it may actually backfire.
Yep, they also claimed that they came up with Avatars long before Nintendo did and I sure do believe them. Oh and I also believed Sony when they claimed that they came up with the Sixaxis functionality before Nintendo had unveiled the Wii. Corporations never lie.
Actually I do believe them, just not to the extent they're trying to say it's important. Sony once toyed with motion control and decided it wasn't worth it, as they do with many projects behind closed doors. Nintendo showed them it was worth it, so they quickly ran with it and now say they did it first. Likewise I bet all three major players have experimented with screens in the controller before.
It doesn't matter who was really first, who the first person was at an internal meeting to say "how about we make some simple sports games." The important thing is who actually released to the public first and the resulting public perception.
If you're talking about the Move then yeah, I agree. They publically demoed a lot of that technology as far back as 1999. SCEI and SCEA just never had the balls to run with any of the 'casual' stuff SCEE was doing, so the success of those games was mostly just limited to Europe, Aus and NZ. And if Nintendo had never come up with the Wii, that's how it would've stayed (but they did and we all know what happened after that).
The Sixaxis though? While I'm sure they had played around with it for months beforehand, it was still a pretty last minute decision that as far as I can tell, only happened for 2 reasons. The first was Nintendo had just demoed motion controls a few months earlier and people were really excited about it. The second was that they were in the middle of a lawsuit over the Dual Shock and had to come up with something for their controller (whether it was an excuse or just a feature to throw on the box).
cloudeagle: Well they already got rid of the concept demos Rare used to come up with last year, so yeah, from now on I'm sure there'll be a lot less experimentation and a lot more "we want you to do this and have it read in x amount of time".
This is probably going back 18 months from now. It became quite clear, once we saw the success of Wii Sports and our superiors told us to replicate it, that sports was something everybody related to. We were putting these very early prototypes into user research as well, and they were always the things that came back as people just got [clicks fingers], like that. Almost like they had played it on another console before.
I get that but I think when most of your products are derivative, you go from the company that came up with Windows, to the company that came up with the Zune.
Eh. I don't see it as a huge detriment. Especially when it's a matter of MS and Sony, two late comers into the console world. Sony definitely has it's own share of criticisms of being copy cats.
I like how much of a dick Cliffy B is when it comes to saying a simple, "Nah, no plans."
Then problem is that a comment like that just gets treated as "don't comment on rumour and speculation", so people will still keep bringing it up. I just figure he decided to put it down once and for all.
That reminds me, I follow Rare on Twitter, and they kept talking about Kinect Sports 2. I thought it was being developed by BigPark, whoever they are? Well, I went to their site, and it turns out Kinect Sports 2 is being co-developed by Rare and BigPark.
Man. I know there's nothing inherently wrong with co-productions, but to think that Rare went from the company that took an eternity to try to make stuff like Kameo and Banjo N&B interesting to a company that will do whatever it takes to turn out games annually is deeply depressing.
Posts
The discussion was about Kinect's lack of software, I pointed out that this was because Microsoft had always followed other companies examples and didn't really know how to lead the market themselves. Wwas it irrelevant? No, so why the hell would I knock it off? Because fragglefart's feelings got hurt? Or yours?
Personally, I think Microsoft should've left those gaps to third parties to cover and instead come up with exclusives that actually set their system apart. And I think Sony (specifically SCEA) should've done the same thing when they went FPS crazy at the start of this generation. Though I also think that Sony can afford to do something like that a lot more than Microsoft, mostly because they've got like three times the amount of developers (maybe four or five actually, Sony have a lot of second party relationships).
Shiny new hardware cocks? Ew.
As for the 10 year plan, as I've pointed out numerous times before, it's never meant what people have wanted it to mean. All it's ever meant is that Sony will support the system for 10 years. And by 'support' they don't mean that they won't release its successor or that they'll still be releasing lots of games on it, they just mean that they'll still producing new units. They said the same thing about the PS1 (which lasted like 11 years) and PS2 (which is still going and will probably last at least another 5 years in places like South America and Africa).
I expect we'll see both the PS4 and 720 next year.
The last game those guys made was Haze.
PLEASE NOTE THIS IS NSFW!!!
I mean, I do still buy the EA NHL series of games regularly, but I can't see how they think this will be profitable. Honestly I would think a Mass Effect store (Mass Effect 3 preorder DLC only available here!) would probably have more success than an EA sports store.
Nintendo Network ID - Brainiac_8
PSN - Brainiac_8
Steam - http://steamcommunity.com/id/BRAINIAC8/
Add me!
He was talking about Microsoft's very specific situation, though. And since the genres they have been accused of 'ripping off' by Unco include 'epic big budget JRPG' and 'racing sim', you know, they types of games which have been on every single successful system since the 8-bit days, long before Sony entered the market, darley has a point.
I mean, if you want to critisize 'Scene It' for ripping of 'Buzz!' or 'Lips' for ripping off 'Singstar' you might have a point. Except Scene-It is a third party game based on a popular TV / DVD game which pre-dated Buzz! and can now be found on all consoles. And Lips / Singstar I'll give you but at the end of the day it's just Karaoke anyway.
As for the 'motion control sports game' (I'll assume you meant Kinect Sports) while Microsoft were keen to offer motion control as an option KS is far from a Wii sports ripoff. Rare went on record immediately since they knew comparisons would be drawn - the reason sports were chosen (and their more experimental gameplay ideas put into minigames within the title or on the backburner for a later release) was due to the immediate nature of the gameplay - people could jump in and attempt to 'play' sports without any real instruction, based on real-life experience and expectations. This helped to overcome some of the barriers which might prevent accessibility due to Kinect and motion control in general.
Kinect Sports didn't start as Kinect Sports, it evolved that way. There have been plenty of details about the other stuff Rare were working on for that title before it settled into what was released - fact is they all enjoyed playing the sports games around the offices the most! They did not set out to copy the success of Wii Sports and the game is much better as a result of this.
Still, the other specific titles which were mentioned in Microsoft's defence (Halo, Gears, Viva Pinata, Banjo N&B) were sadly missing from Unco's response anyway, since that would invalidate his theory further, so I doubt any of this information will matter either.
Basically some dude saying LulzSec are dicks, their actions are going to lead to negative public opinion and harsh laws being passed and that they have nothing to do with Anonymous. Except in the incredibly immature language you'd expect from the hobos of the internet.
It's funny because a) it seems to ignore the fact that Anonymous' dickish actions have already resulted in negative public opinion and b) that it's impossible to say they aren't part of Anonymous because the entire point behind Anonymous is that they're anonymous, you don't know who is part of Anonymous and who isn't.
Anonymous is about to reach critical mass and fold in on itself.
This isn't unique to Microsoft.
As a matter of fact, it's an incredibly common thing to do. It's called competition.
CliffyB does not understand what "water from a stone" means.
http://www.computerandvideogames.com/307276/news/bleszinski-xbox-360-isnt-maxed-out/
The simple answer is to do what they're already doing; multiple versions of the hardware. Perhaps instead of HD size being the differentiating point, sell one edition with Kinect built in, and a cheaper model without it that is compatible with the old ones out there.
Meets the needs of pretty much all three groups; those that don't own it already and want it, those that do own it already and don't want to spend extra for a device they already own, and those that don't want it at all.
I don't know. It sounds like they copied both Nintendo's method exactly and the ended up in exactly the same place. Unless you are going to claim that Rare were sequestered for the last 5 years then it's hard to say that it isn't a copy. Maybe they would have produced exactly the same game before they saw the Wii. What we do know is that they didn't. Things that seem obvious in a post Wii era, were far from obvious before then. You know, like cat flaps.
Just think of how revolutionary Kinect Sports would have been if it came out before the Wii. We would have seen nothing like it. Everyone would have noted that it was easy for non-gamers to pick up, etc., etc., etc. But as it is, everyone thinks "Oh yeah, it's Wii Sports but for Kinect", because that's exactly what it is.
Bolded part of the last paragraph is just crazy talk.
In general, I think both MS and Sony try to ensure that their platforms have a good number of tent pole games in various genres. Sony went after Halo and MS went after GT and FF (which was considered Sony's at the time). Nothing wrong with that and there is no reason to criticize MS for outsourcing more of those games rather than developing in house. That's just a question of what give more bang for the buck.
(Please do not gift. My game bank is already full.)
Not going to happen. One of the big ways they could make the next XBox 360 better than the current one is with a better, more accurate, less laggy version of Kinect. Backwards compatibility with the old Kinect would destroy that.
Zeboyd Games Development Blog
Steam ID : rwb36, Twitter : Werezompire, Facebook : Zeboyd Games
At any rate, yep, there is indeed an EA Sports store coming.
http://www.gamespot.com/news/6319589/ea-sports-opening-retail-stores-this-fall?tag=newstop%3Btitle%3B2
I'd say it's pretty nutty to open a store based on such limited stock, but it worked for Apple.
(Please do not gift. My game bank is already full.)
Yep, they also claimed that they came up with Avatars long before Nintendo did and I sure do believe them. Oh and I also believed Sony when they claimed that they came up with the Sixaxis functionality before Nintendo had unveiled the Wii. Corporations never lie.
I ignored them because a couple of examples doesn't mean a whole lot compared to the numerous examples I brought up. But hey, now that you've brought them up, I'll go through them. Halo was well into development before they bought Bungie and Bungie is no longer part of Microsoft. Gears of War was from an established PC developer, Microsoft doesn't own it and it is actually pretty derivative of RE4. Viva Pinata and Banjo I'll give them credit for (even if one was in a previously established, popular franchise), though shortly after those games came out, Microsoft seemed to replace that energetic little company with... Rowdy.
Now that I've gone through them, how about you explain these: Avatars. You're In The Movies. Kinectimals.
You mean like how I criticised SCEA for going overboard on the shooters this gen?
I get that but I think when most of your products are derivative, you go from the company that came up with Windows, to the company that came up with the Zune.
At any rate, there's a LOT of overlap between JRPGs, just as there's a lot of overlap between shooters.
Speaking of Gears:
http://xbox360.ign.com/articles/117/1176501p1.html
Yay, more overly-dramatic wife killing!
Actually I do believe them, just not to the extent they're trying to say it's important. Sony once toyed with motion control and decided it wasn't worth it, as they do with many projects behind closed doors. Nintendo showed them it was worth it, so they quickly ran with it and now say they did it first. Likewise I bet all three major players have experimented with screens in the controller before.
It doesn't matter who was really first, who the first person was at an internal meeting to say "how about we make some simple sports games." The important thing is who actually released to the public first and the resulting public perception.
Which is the problem I was trying to bring up, that Kinect as it is now could use some improvement, but I fear that bringing out a new camera to go with a new console in 2013 will only upset the market they're aiming for. If they want to introduce a new camera, I reckon they would be better using the current model for a year or two into the lifespan of the next Xbox, then releasing a Kinect 2 with a whole stack of games that won't work with the old one. The price of the console will have dropped from launch making it a more attractive prospect, and it leaves longer between Kinect releases that people should feel more inclined to buy the new one.
http://techcrunch.com/2011/06/14/angry-birds-downloads-250-million-magi/
Nintendo Network ID - Brainiac_8
PSN - Brainiac_8
Steam - http://steamcommunity.com/id/BRAINIAC8/
Add me!
At any rate. 250 million downloads? Geez, that's amazing/boring/significant/insignificant/mauve/a cow wearing a beanie (pick one)
They have been on record talking about the development process which lead towards Kinect Sports. You can dispute it if you like, but the reasons thye gave appear sound. Of all the little games and demos they made, people seemed to take to 'football, table tennis, boxing' better than they took to 'wave arms to fly pigeon and punch meteors from space'.
http://www.rarewarearchives.co.uk/view_feature.php?id=101&gameid=19
You may have a point with the 'totally obvious after Wiisports' idea, but fact is they put effort into making these games as close to the sports as possible, not 'how much can we make this game like Wii Sports'. The fact that Rare are making a sequel with a pile of new sports IMO supports this since if all that was required was Kinect Wiisports rip-off edition, why would they bother making another game? That box has been ticked for Microsoft. Fact is, it's what they enjoy making, it is selling well and it's a bloody good game.
AH-HA! Found the article:
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2010-08-27-rare-on-kinect-sports-interview
It's massive, so I'll selectively quote.
There we go, knew I read about that stuff from somewhere, was bloody ages ago now. :P
http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2011/06/duke-nukems-pr-threatens/
If you're talking about the Move then yeah, I agree. They publically demoed a lot of that technology as far back as 1999. SCEI and SCEA just never had the balls to run with any of the 'casual' stuff SCEE was doing, so the success of those games was mostly just limited to Europe, Aus and NZ. And if Nintendo had never come up with the Wii, that's how it would've stayed (but they did and we all know what happened after that).
The Sixaxis though? While I'm sure they had played around with it for months beforehand, it was still a pretty last minute decision that as far as I can tell, only happened for 2 reasons. The first was Nintendo had just demoed motion controls a few months earlier and people were really excited about it. The second was that they were in the middle of a lawsuit over the Dual Shock and had to come up with something for their controller (whether it was an excuse or just a feature to throw on the box).
cloudeagle: Well they already got rid of the concept demos Rare used to come up with last year, so yeah, from now on I'm sure there'll be a lot less experimentation and a lot more "we want you to do this and have it read in x amount of time".
Eh. I don't see it as a huge detriment. Especially when it's a matter of MS and Sony, two late comers into the console world. Sony definitely has it's own share of criticisms of being copy cats.
Then problem is that a comment like that just gets treated as "don't comment on rumour and speculation", so people will still keep bringing it up. I just figure he decided to put it down once and for all.
I'm pretty sure most of us have seen Pirates of Silicon Valley, but thanks.
Man. I know there's nothing inherently wrong with co-productions, but to think that Rare went from the company that took an eternity to try to make stuff like Kameo and Banjo N&B interesting to a company that will do whatever it takes to turn out games annually is deeply depressing.
I've never even heard of it. What is it?
I'm envisioning a sweet CG Pirate movie.
Oh, that's your answer to everything.