At any rate, Duke Nukem is getting a lot of advertising. Maybe a little too much.
Um, woops.
I saw this on Consumerist this morning and I'm still trying to figure out what the problem is. Ooh a toy store that also sells games is advertising an M rated title, oh no!
The remote control is pretty much required for movie viewing on the PS3.
I would like to know why this is the case.
Because using the controller to utilize the functions of a DVD or Blu-Ray is terribly unwieldy and frustrating. Keep in mind you have a lot more options with watching Blu-Rays than you do just watching a DVD on your 360.
I think this video GUI for the PS3 (and PS2) are bad enough to really warrant this, but that's just my own experience.
I simply cannot wait till Netflix starts getting streamed to my bowl of cereal for breakfast.
Thinking about it, I couldn't count the number of devices I own with purported Netflix capabilities on more than 1 hand. It's almost a non-issue.
But in reference to touchy/dodgy controls, hopefully once Netflix hits the Wii U all the inputs will be given through the screen.
V Faction on
Nintendo Network ID: V-Faction | XBL: V Faction | Steam | 3DS: 3136 - 6603 - 1330 PokemonWhite Friend Code: 0046-2121-0723/White2 Friend Code: 0519-5126-2990
"Did ya hear the one about the mussel that wanted to purchase Valve? Seems like the bivalve had a juicy offer on the table but the company flat-out refused and decided to immediately clam up!"
At any rate, Duke Nukem is getting a lot of advertising. Maybe a little too much.
Um, woops.
I saw this on Consumerist this morning and I'm still trying to figure out what the problem is. Ooh a toy store that also sells games is advertising an M rated title, oh no!
Not a Big Deal[TM].
I'm really confused. What's wrong this ad?
CygnusZ on
0
Options
ShadowfireVermont, in the middle of nowhereRegistered Userregular
edited June 2011
Some goose is complaining on his blog (ooh, a blog!) that advertising Duke in a TRU flyer is inappropriate, forgetting that they've advertised and sold M rated games in the past.
Companies rip off each other all the time. It's nothing new in the least. MS has a tendancy to do it more now than they used to though. And Fraggle, I know you like these games, but it does not mean that they didn't decide to run with these ideas after it was proven that people wanted them and liked them.
It doesn't mean they aren't good ideas for MS to run with either. My biggest beef with some of MS current implamentation was that they relegated Rare to a closet to do nothing but minutiae.
Heck Sony and Nintendo have taken or 'ripped off' ideas from other companies too, why argue about a regular practice in the business. :?
I guess fragglefart thinks Microsoft are the lynchpins of creativity or something? Dude seemed to go insane over this argument. Microsoft didn't rip off Mii's? They would've come up with Forza even if GT had never existed? Yeah uh, sure.
Also, Cliffy B of all fucking people lists RE4 as the main influence in Gears of War and if you've played both games, it should be completely obvious. Gears is basically a poor mans RE4 with more shooting and Killswitch's cover mechanic.
Oh and modern day Rare being turned into Rowdy was in reference to this:
Now, I should probably leave this argument... Oh look Kinectimals 2! *Runs out the back door before fragglefart stabs him with a knife 127 times*
EA's first-person shooter Crysis 2, released earlier this year, has been removed from digital distribution service Steam and now sports an 'Only on Origin' tag on the EA site.
However, despite the 'Only on Origin' tag, Crysis 2 is still available on Direct2Drive and Impulse, and has only been removed from Steam.
Update: EA has issued a response to the game's removal, saying that it was "not an EA decision or the result of any action by EA," saying instead that the game was removed because an agreement that developer Crytek made with "another download service" violates an unspecified rule Steam has for its distribution partners.
Don't claim that games available on Steam are only available on a different service? :P
According to Crytek, they have no problem with Valve and love Steam, so to me it sounds like EA were trying to do something (probably to promote Origin, maybe even to discourage Steam use) and Valve told them to piss off.
If they try to pull this shit with Mass Effect 3, I'll just buy the PS3 version. I was probably going to end up with both versions anyway but it probably would've been the other way around otherwise (best version first, then console version).
Okay, I don't think Microsoft are a paragon of creativity, but I can't for a second understand the RE4=Gears thing. What are you talking about? That they both feature chainsaws?
RE4 sort of kicked off the current trend of over-the-shoulder games by finally getting the fucking camera right. A game like Gears of War built off that.
To call it a poor man's RE4 is just asinine though.
You could refute my points without the childish insults Unco.
I still find it hilarious that you somehow think GT single-handedly invented the racing genre. One of the most derivative titles of all time yet you accuse Forza of 'ripping it off?'.
Massive hypocrisy there man. Turn 10 are just showing PD how it's supposed to be done.
Oh and modern day Rare being turned into Rowdy was in reference to this:
Now, I should probably leave this argument... Oh look Kinectimals 2! *Runs out the back door before fragglefart stabs him with a knife 127 times*
Um, OK so Rare is a 'stuffed dog'? Well I didn't catch the obscure reference... good job you don't have to play their games then, huh? Everything they have released recently has been gold, and I'm looking forward to Kinect Sports 2 so, whatever dude.
No idea what you are going on about regarding Kinectimals 2.
And I'd comment more thoroughly on the Gears thing but like others have said, bar the camera and elements of horror, the two are entirely disparate, the comparison is asinine, you might as well accuse them of ripping off Castlevania 64, FFS.
You may have a massive hate-boner for Microsoft and think they demonstrate a lack of originality but man, 'clutching at straws' comes to mind. In gaming and entertainment, originality and innovation can stem just as much from consolidation and the refining of ideas as it can from individual breakthrough moments. Which is part of the reason Microsoft are doing so well; they've taken a look at what works, built upon it and made their own mark. Fact is, they don't have characters and history like Nintendo does, that takes time to build up - Nintendo can be accused of over-relying on their mascots (just like MS with Halo). Sony, similarly, when they started, wanted a game to market for genre X, Y and Z. Microsoft are most recent to the table, and customers expect certain genres to be represented. But they are still trying new things and carving their own path, if they weren't, no-one would be buying the console, everyone would have stuck with Nintendo or Sony.
Okay, I don't think Microsoft are a paragon of creativity, but I can't for a second understand the RE4=Gears thing. What are you talking about? That they both feature chainsaws?
It was only just discussed in the DmC thread so it's easy to find you an article:
Bleszinski said the seeds of Gears of War were sown by three titles. The first was Capcom's Resident Evil 4, which made an indelible impression on Bleszinski even before its January 2005 release. "I really liked the pacing and the over-the-shoulder view," said the designer.
...
Speaking of viewpoints, Bleszinski went on a mini-rant about how badly he feels the camera is positioned in most third-person shooters. "My big pet peeve...is when I see the [main] guy blocking the line of sight," he said. Once again he said that RE4's over-the-shoulder camera angle, which always faced the enemy, was a big influence on Gears.
...
Some of the more interesting things about Bleszinski's speech were his descriptions of features that weren't included in Gears of War. One concept was called "combat cash," a system that would let players "scoop up the spoils of war" and buy new items on the battlefield--a system (again) reminiscent of Resident Evil 4's mysterious "What are ya buyin'?" merchant. After consideration, though, the lead cabal felt the feature would take away from the game's "pure action" dynamic.
In case you get confused about the pacing comment (as someone did in the DmC thread), he's talking about the minute-to-minute pacing. So instead of endless waves being thrown at you (like a number of other more mediocre shooters), they throw quick waves at you and let you catch your breath in between.
There's other stuff too, like the fucking minecart level of all things.
Scottsman: Hey now, don't get insulted, there are a lot of games I'd fit under that label.
fragglefart: Sure, I'll quit the childish insults when you quit masturbating over Microsoft's logo. Because really, going on about fans of one game being "butt-hurt", because you totally think your game's better, is far more childish than any of my silly little insults. What next? "ujelly"?
Next, when the fuck did I ever claim Gran Turismo created the racing genre? Christ. What Gran Turismo did, was popularise the sim racing sub-genre. How on earth can I claim this I hear you asking? Because GT3 sold 15 million fucking copies, that's GTA kind of sales and more than any other game in that sub-genre combined (excluding GT1 and 2). So yeah, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that Forza was an attempt by Microsoft to move in on that audience. And how the hell was GT "one of the most derivative titles of all time" may I ask?
If I were to claim Sonic was Sega's attempt to get in on Mario's market, would you have the same absurd defensive stance? I mean, Nintendo didn't invent platforming games right? So surely it was just one big coincidence that Sega just came up with their own mascot platformer that they quickly put their entire company behind.
Yes, Rare are the 'stuffed dog' because they're no longer the company they were, instead they're the dull-eyed 'casual' factory of Microsoft Game Studios. And of course I don't have to play their games, I don't HAVE to play any games. I still find it sad that a company with their kind of history have been reduced to their current role (and hilarious that Microsoft paid so much for them).
And no, I'm not a "Microsoft hater" (never had any problems with Vista and really like 7), I just don't think they're exempt from criticism like you seem to think they are.
Yoshiki Okamoto's Game Republic studio, an early star in the move towards independent development studios founded by former Capcom super producers, appears to be in trouble.
Recently, there were reports that the Game Republic website had gone missing (try for yourself!). Now something even bigger has gone missing: the Game Republic office!
Gaming site G-Dash, concerned about the fate of the people who made Xbox 360 launch title Every Party, decided to visit Game Republic's Tokyo office in the Toritsu Daigaku area.
This is what they found:
According to G-Dash, the Game Republic office was on the fourth floor of this building, which is located within a minute of Toritsu Daigaku Station, right across from the St. Marc Cafe (and near one of those special shops where you can go to get games early). Now, it looks like the fourth floor is vacant. A tenant solicitation sign has been posted on the window.
Okamoto, where are you?
Sad really. They've come up with a number of good games like Genji 1 (spiritual successor to Onimusha 3), Dark Mist, Folklore and Majin and the Forbidden Kingdom, but never really found that much success. Hopefully Okamoto can find a job somewhere, the guy is a legend (directed 1942 and a number of other Capcom arcade classics, then took up a similar role to Inafune's old job throughout the 90's, overseeing RE, SF, Dino Crisis, BoF and a large number of others).
And no, I'm not a "Microsoft hater" (never had any problems with Vista and really like 7), I just don't think they're exempt from criticism like you seem to think they are.
I have never said that, I'm merely debating the points you have made, since I'm entitled to an opinion, and if you want to openly critisize something, perhaps you should anticipate someone not sharing your opinion. I never liked the original oXbox, as I've said many times.
Most of your critisism which is aimed at Microsoft could be similarly levelled towards Sony.
fragglefart: Sure, I'll quit the childish insults when you quit masturbating over Microsoft's logo. Because really, going on about fans of one game being "butt-hurt", because you totally think your game's better, is far more childish than any of my silly little insults. What next? "ujelly"?
Basically, rather than talk about the main point I made, you'd rather bang on about fan masturbation, state that I 'seemed to go insane over this argument' and that you need to *Runs out the back door before fragglefart stabs him with a knife 127 times*. That's basic character assassination at work. It would be very easy for me to reply "Take Sony's cock out of your mouth you are choking on their jism and it is making you delirious" but I'd rather you started acting like a fucking adult engaged in reasonable debate.
So here it is for you again, try to keep the insulting under control this time;
You may have a massive hate-boner for Microsoft and think they demonstrate a lack of originality but man, 'clutching at straws' comes to mind. In gaming and entertainment, originality and innovation can stem just as much from consolidation and the refining of ideas as it can from individual breakthrough moments. Which is part of the reason Microsoft are doing so well; they've taken a look at what works, built upon it and made their own mark. Fact is, they don't have characters and history like Nintendo does, that takes time to build up - Nintendo can be accused of over-relying on their mascots (just like MS with Halo). Sony, similarly, when they started, wanted a game to market for genre X, Y and Z. Microsoft are most recent to the table, and customers expect certain genres to be represented. But they are still trying new things and carving their own path, if they weren't, no-one would be buying the console, everyone would have stuck with Nintendo or Sony.
And your point about Gears is off by a fucking mile. A third person camera, pacing and a minecart level? Tenuous at best considering the range of differences which conversely marks each game as distinct. Pretty sure noone blasting through late night competitive multiplayer or helping a buddy through a co-op campaign, or is busy fighting the fight with a bunch of Cogs vs Locust in Horde mode has ever wondered if they are actually playing RE4. Like I said, might as well point back to Castlevania 64 and accuse them both of being rip-offs.
Which brings me back onto Forza vs GT thing. GT is one of the most derivative games of all time. This is because racers have been plainly evolving for all to see since gaming began, through every hardware generation, on every platform. Racing is one of the most well-represented genres available. See, I don't have a problem with this, you obviously do, since you want to criticise Turn 10 with their Forza series for being 'too similar' to GT. Well, so fucking what. If it wasn't that it would be PGR, Metropolis Street Racer, Trackmania, GRID, SEGA GT, Shift, or Dirt, or whatever-Kart, or Need For Speed, or McRae, or Sega Rally, or Virtua Racing, OutRun, or Micro Machines, Ridge Racer, or Turbo Esprit, Pole Position, Rally-X, Final Lap, Hard Drivin', or whatever. Racers have always sold. You want to somehow draw a line under GT and then criticise Microsoft for being 'rip-offs'? Forza represents the next rung of a very long evolutionary ladder above GT, so you can't! :P
Okay, I don't think Microsoft are a paragon of creativity, but I can't for a second understand the RE4=Gears thing. What are you talking about? That they both feature chainsaws?
It was only just discussed in the DmC thread so it's easy to find you an article:
Bleszinski said the seeds of Gears of War were sown by three titles. The first was Capcom's Resident Evil 4, which made an indelible impression on Bleszinski even before its January 2005 release. "I really liked the pacing and the over-the-shoulder view," said the designer.
...
Speaking of viewpoints, Bleszinski went on a mini-rant about how badly he feels the camera is positioned in most third-person shooters. "My big pet peeve...is when I see the [main] guy blocking the line of sight," he said. Once again he said that RE4's over-the-shoulder camera angle, which always faced the enemy, was a big influence on Gears.
...
Some of the more interesting things about Bleszinski's speech were his descriptions of features that weren't included in Gears of War. One concept was called "combat cash," a system that would let players "scoop up the spoils of war" and buy new items on the battlefield--a system (again) reminiscent of Resident Evil 4's mysterious "What are ya buyin'?" merchant. After consideration, though, the lead cabal felt the feature would take away from the game's "pure action" dynamic.
In case you get confused about the pacing comment (as someone did in the DmC thread), he's talking about the minute-to-minute pacing. So instead of endless waves being thrown at you (like a number of other more mediocre shooters), they throw quick waves at you and let you catch your breath in between.
There's other stuff too, like the fucking minecart level of all things.
.
So Did you intend to be that patronising, or is it unintentional for you?
Influenced by is rather different to being derivative of something. You're genuinely arguing that for a game to be taken seriously it has to be utterly innovative? Because Gears is a rather different experience, and if you're debating that it didn't do anything at all new I'm confused as all hell. Cover shooters hadn't been done as competently before, and they got that system right as well as all the other bits necessary. Cover systems had been done before, but not as well, just like console FPSes existed before goldeneye and halo, but that was the first one that made them properly work at the repective level of each of those.
Refinement is as important as totally new ideas. It is not a bad thing, and the actual details of gameplay of RE4 and Gears are so utterly different that in this case I'm not even sure what your point is.
The point of RE4s gameplay was to be clunky. It was part of the aesthetic, it was a way of pacing it. Gears of War was about smooth, easy action.
I thought it was pretty obvious that Microsoft looked at what was popular on PS2 (and later Wii) and then tried to get their versions of those games. I have never played a Forza game but I know I hate it because I hate GT. GT (unfortunately) popularised the console sim racer, when it came out in 1998 on PS1 there was nothing quite like it. Back then Sega Rally, Wipeout 2097 and Ridge Racer were the top sellers, all as far removed from GT as you can get.
Influenced by is rather different to being derivative of something. You're seriously arguing that for a game to be taken seriously it has to be utterly innovative? Because Gears is a rather different experience, and if you're seriously debating that it didn't do anything at all new I'm confused as all hell. Cover shooters hadn't been done as competently before, and they got that system right as well as all the other bits necessary. Cover systems had been done before, but not as well, just like console FPSes existed before goldeneye and halo, but that was the first one that made them properly work at the repective level of each of those.
Refinement is as important as totally new ideas. It is not a bad thing, and the actual details of gameplay of RE4 and Gears are so utterly different that in this case I'm not even sure what your point is.
The point of RE4s gameplay was to be clunky. It was part of the aesthetic, it was a way of pacing it. Gears of War was about smooth, easy action.
I never intended on this spinning out into a ridiculous debate but no, I don't think a game has to be utterly innovative to be taken seriously. I never said anything of the kind. I just don't think Gears can be held up as an innovative game, because it's derivative of a number of other sources (mostly RE4, but there's some Killswitch, WH40k and a couple other influences in there). That doesn't mean I think it's a bad game or rip-off, it managed to refine those systems (as you pointed out) into a game a lot of people liked. And yet despite those refinements, I still by far prefer RE4 to it.
As for the pacing, I disagree. The clunky gameplay was only part of it. The more important part was the enemy spawning and level design. This is what I think influenced Gears (in just that area, obviously).
I feel sorry for @TheRednerGroup today. We are blacklisted by @2KGames and it seems to be standard practice.
The guy works at Eurogamer.
God bless threats of not giving interviews, early review copies, preview shit, advertising, etc.
Again, they weren't fired cause they were gonna blacklist people. They were fired for admitting it. No gaming journo I saw was surprised by it at all: they actually found the straightforward brusqueness and lack of spin refreshing.
Brainiac 8Don't call me Shirley...Registered Userregular
edited June 2011
First off: It's Kinectimalz 2 (I kid, I kid)
Second: The only important detail about Forza vs GT is that they both suck, because sim racers are boring and sucky. Burnout Paradise rules all.
Third: I agree with Unco that it is incredibly sad what MS did to a company with the history and franchise catalogue like Rare. They had the ability to give MS a plethora of 1st party franchises, but due to some snafus in sales for some of their games, they were shifted to Wii Too territory. (Sorry Fraggle, the chance that they would have implemented things like the Avatars or Kinect Sports without the crazy success of the Wii is very slim)
Fourth: I'm hungry and want pizza
Fifth: I want OoT to be out now but instead it's not out until Sunday. Eek, I'm enabling Nintendo! :shock:
I thought it was pretty obvious that Microsoft looked at what was popular on PS2 (and later Wii) and then tried to get their versions of those games. I have never played a Forza game but I know I hate it because I hate GT. GT (unfortunately) popularised the console sim racer, when it came out in 1998 on PS1 there was nothing quite like it. Back then Sega Rally, Wipeout 2097 and Ridge Racer were the top sellers, all as far removed from GT as you can get.
Lost Odyssey was genuinely a better Final Fantasy game than XIII. Even with it being really brazenly designed to be just that from the start. Like, MS said 'we need Final Fantasy but they won't let us have it, let's make our own!'. Turned out alright though.
Scottsman: Hey now, don't get insulted, there are a lot of games I'd fit under that label.
I'll stop "getting insulted" when you stop using insulting language. "Deeply inspired by RE4" does not equal "a poor man's RE4." That language alone implies that anyone who like Gears of War is accepting an inferior product.
Seriously "poor man's RE4" would make ME the poor man. Excuse me if I find your statement INCREDIBLY ASININE.
Shares in publisher Take-Two have fallen by four per cent meaning that since mid May the company has lost over 15 per cent of its overall value.
Market Watch says that despite nearing 1m unit sales in the US alone, recent Rockstar release LA Noire has failed to meet sales expectations and is one cause for the slump.
Traders are of the opinion that its 900k sales compare badly to last year's Red Dead Redemption, which sold 1.5m units in the same period.
The other is the critical reaction to Duke Nukem Forever, which has already lead to controversy in the US. No doubt the drop was not helped by the Grand Theft Auto V no-show at E3 last week.
Ironically, the news follows a prolonged period of success in the UK. LA Noire recently topped the UK charts for three weeks in a row and was only displaced when fellow Take-Two release Duke Nukem Forever arrived last weekend.
Couscous on
0
Options
Brainiac 8Don't call me Shirley...Registered Userregular
As much as I like picking on MS about jumping headfirst into the motion craze started by Nintendo, at least they came up with something unique. The Kinect, while not for me yet, is an interesting piece of tech with some neat possibilities. At least they didn't just throw a black plastic casing over the Wii Remote and call it a day. (I know there was more to it than that, I'm just messing) :P
On one hand, what happened to rare is tragic and a dark spot upon the industry. On the other hand, they're games had shitty sales. Rare had six years to produce a hit and failed to do so, and it wasn't due to them making bad games or broken games, so MS telling them to do a better job isn't really addressing the issue. It's not terribly surprising they wound up being Microsoft's kinect bitches.
Blame probably falls on MS for the poor sales though, since I'm guessing it was an advertising issue. (Then again, they spent HOW much on that Viva Pinata animated show?)
On one hand, what happened to rare is tragic and a dark spot upon the industry. On the other hand, they're games had shitty sales. Rare had six years to produce a hit and failed to do so, and it wasn't due to them making bad games or broken games, so MS telling them to do a better job isn't really addressing the issue. It's not terribly surprising they wound up being Microsoft's kinect bitches.
Blame probably falls on MS for the poor sales though, since I'm guessing it was an advertising issue. (Then again, they spent HOW much on that Viva Pinata animated show?)
ffffff
I had forgotten that they actually intended to cultivate Viva Pinata as this multimedia mammoth ala Pokemon. Like trying to recreate an artificial Mt. Everest with a few hundred shovels and sand from Floridian beaches.
Posts
Which will cause their chickens to hatch.
And lay eggs, which will then all be put into one basket.
I saw this on Consumerist this morning and I'm still trying to figure out what the problem is. Ooh a toy store that also sells games is advertising an M rated title, oh no!
Not a Big Deal[TM].
*Except when they are!
http://www.destructoid.com/bit-trip-complete-has-new-content-love-letters-to-fans-203788.phtml
That's a pretty huge amount of added content.
Looks like I'll be getting this for 3DS and Wii...I don't usually double dip on games...but I have to with this.
Nintendo Network ID - Brainiac_8
PSN - Brainiac_8
Steam - http://steamcommunity.com/id/BRAINIAC8/
Add me!
I think this video GUI for the PS3 (and PS2) are bad enough to really warrant this, but that's just my own experience.
The 20 challenge levels for Runner will be the greatest thing.
Thinking about it, I couldn't count the number of devices I own with purported Netflix capabilities on more than 1 hand. It's almost a non-issue.
But in reference to touchy/dodgy controls, hopefully once Netflix hits the Wii U all the inputs will be given through the screen.
Pokemon White Friend Code: 0046-2121-0723/White 2 Friend Code: 0519-5126-2990
"Did ya hear the one about the mussel that wanted to purchase Valve? Seems like the bivalve had a juicy offer on the table but the company flat-out refused and decided to immediately clam up!"
I'm really confused. What's wrong this ad?
So basically, nothing is wrong with the ad.
I guess fragglefart thinks Microsoft are the lynchpins of creativity or something? Dude seemed to go insane over this argument. Microsoft didn't rip off Mii's? They would've come up with Forza even if GT had never existed? Yeah uh, sure.
Also, Cliffy B of all fucking people lists RE4 as the main influence in Gears of War and if you've played both games, it should be completely obvious. Gears is basically a poor mans RE4 with more shooting and Killswitch's cover mechanic.
Oh and modern day Rare being turned into Rowdy was in reference to this:
Now, I should probably leave this argument... Oh look Kinectimals 2! *Runs out the back door before fragglefart stabs him with a knife 127 times*
According to Crytek, they have no problem with Valve and love Steam, so to me it sounds like EA were trying to do something (probably to promote Origin, maybe even to discourage Steam use) and Valve told them to piss off.
If they try to pull this shit with Mass Effect 3, I'll just buy the PS3 version. I was probably going to end up with both versions anyway but it probably would've been the other way around otherwise (best version first, then console version).
To call it a poor man's RE4 is just asinine though.
I still find it hilarious that you somehow think GT single-handedly invented the racing genre. One of the most derivative titles of all time yet you accuse Forza of 'ripping it off?'.
Massive hypocrisy there man. Turn 10 are just showing PD how it's supposed to be done.
Um, OK so Rare is a 'stuffed dog'? Well I didn't catch the obscure reference... good job you don't have to play their games then, huh? Everything they have released recently has been gold, and I'm looking forward to Kinect Sports 2 so, whatever dude.
No idea what you are going on about regarding Kinectimals 2.
And I'd comment more thoroughly on the Gears thing but like others have said, bar the camera and elements of horror, the two are entirely disparate, the comparison is asinine, you might as well accuse them of ripping off Castlevania 64, FFS.
You may have a massive hate-boner for Microsoft and think they demonstrate a lack of originality but man, 'clutching at straws' comes to mind. In gaming and entertainment, originality and innovation can stem just as much from consolidation and the refining of ideas as it can from individual breakthrough moments. Which is part of the reason Microsoft are doing so well; they've taken a look at what works, built upon it and made their own mark. Fact is, they don't have characters and history like Nintendo does, that takes time to build up - Nintendo can be accused of over-relying on their mascots (just like MS with Halo). Sony, similarly, when they started, wanted a game to market for genre X, Y and Z. Microsoft are most recent to the table, and customers expect certain genres to be represented. But they are still trying new things and carving their own path, if they weren't, no-one would be buying the console, everyone would have stuck with Nintendo or Sony.
It was only just discussed in the DmC thread so it's easy to find you an article: http://uk.gamespot.com/news/6167213.html?action=convert&om_clk=latestnews&tag=latestnews;title;0
In case you get confused about the pacing comment (as someone did in the DmC thread), he's talking about the minute-to-minute pacing. So instead of endless waves being thrown at you (like a number of other more mediocre shooters), they throw quick waves at you and let you catch your breath in between.
There's other stuff too, like the fucking minecart level of all things.
Scottsman: Hey now, don't get insulted, there are a lot of games I'd fit under that label.
fragglefart: Sure, I'll quit the childish insults when you quit masturbating over Microsoft's logo. Because really, going on about fans of one game being "butt-hurt", because you totally think your game's better, is far more childish than any of my silly little insults. What next? "ujelly"?
Next, when the fuck did I ever claim Gran Turismo created the racing genre? Christ. What Gran Turismo did, was popularise the sim racing sub-genre. How on earth can I claim this I hear you asking? Because GT3 sold 15 million fucking copies, that's GTA kind of sales and more than any other game in that sub-genre combined (excluding GT1 and 2). So yeah, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that Forza was an attempt by Microsoft to move in on that audience. And how the hell was GT "one of the most derivative titles of all time" may I ask?
If I were to claim Sonic was Sega's attempt to get in on Mario's market, would you have the same absurd defensive stance? I mean, Nintendo didn't invent platforming games right? So surely it was just one big coincidence that Sega just came up with their own mascot platformer that they quickly put their entire company behind.
Yes, Rare are the 'stuffed dog' because they're no longer the company they were, instead they're the dull-eyed 'casual' factory of Microsoft Game Studios. And of course I don't have to play their games, I don't HAVE to play any games. I still find it sad that a company with their kind of history have been reduced to their current role (and hilarious that Microsoft paid so much for them).
And no, I'm not a "Microsoft hater" (never had any problems with Vista and really like 7), I just don't think they're exempt from criticism like you seem to think they are.
True Fact: There are gradients of opinion that fall in between "faultlessly positive" and "hate-boner"
But anyway, sad news:
http://www.andriasang.com/e/blog/2011/06/15/game_republic_office_closed/
Sad really. They've come up with a number of good games like Genji 1 (spiritual successor to Onimusha 3), Dark Mist, Folklore and Majin and the Forbidden Kingdom, but never really found that much success. Hopefully Okamoto can find a job somewhere, the guy is a legend (directed 1942 and a number of other Capcom arcade classics, then took up a similar role to Inafune's old job throughout the 90's, overseeing RE, SF, Dino Crisis, BoF and a large number of others).
And the original ad was posted but I don't think this has been:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=50_fIyfn1uk
Love Robin Williams.
I have never said that, I'm merely debating the points you have made, since I'm entitled to an opinion, and if you want to openly critisize something, perhaps you should anticipate someone not sharing your opinion. I never liked the original oXbox, as I've said many times.
Most of your critisism which is aimed at Microsoft could be similarly levelled towards Sony.
Basically, rather than talk about the main point I made, you'd rather bang on about fan masturbation, state that I 'seemed to go insane over this argument' and that you need to *Runs out the back door before fragglefart stabs him with a knife 127 times*. That's basic character assassination at work. It would be very easy for me to reply "Take Sony's cock out of your mouth you are choking on their jism and it is making you delirious" but I'd rather you started acting like a fucking adult engaged in reasonable debate.
So here it is for you again, try to keep the insulting under control this time;
And your point about Gears is off by a fucking mile. A third person camera, pacing and a minecart level? Tenuous at best considering the range of differences which conversely marks each game as distinct. Pretty sure noone blasting through late night competitive multiplayer or helping a buddy through a co-op campaign, or is busy fighting the fight with a bunch of Cogs vs Locust in Horde mode has ever wondered if they are actually playing RE4. Like I said, might as well point back to Castlevania 64 and accuse them both of being rip-offs.
Which brings me back onto Forza vs GT thing. GT is one of the most derivative games of all time. This is because racers have been plainly evolving for all to see since gaming began, through every hardware generation, on every platform. Racing is one of the most well-represented genres available. See, I don't have a problem with this, you obviously do, since you want to criticise Turn 10 with their Forza series for being 'too similar' to GT. Well, so fucking what. If it wasn't that it would be PGR, Metropolis Street Racer, Trackmania, GRID, SEGA GT, Shift, or Dirt, or whatever-Kart, or Need For Speed, or McRae, or Sega Rally, or Virtua Racing, OutRun, or Micro Machines, Ridge Racer, or Turbo Esprit, Pole Position, Rally-X, Final Lap, Hard Drivin', or whatever. Racers have always sold. You want to somehow draw a line under GT and then criticise Microsoft for being 'rip-offs'? Forza represents the next rung of a very long evolutionary ladder above GT, so you can't! :P
Influenced by is rather different to being derivative of something. You're genuinely arguing that for a game to be taken seriously it has to be utterly innovative? Because Gears is a rather different experience, and if you're debating that it didn't do anything at all new I'm confused as all hell. Cover shooters hadn't been done as competently before, and they got that system right as well as all the other bits necessary. Cover systems had been done before, but not as well, just like console FPSes existed before goldeneye and halo, but that was the first one that made them properly work at the repective level of each of those.
Refinement is as important as totally new ideas. It is not a bad thing, and the actual details of gameplay of RE4 and Gears are so utterly different that in this case I'm not even sure what your point is.
The point of RE4s gameplay was to be clunky. It was part of the aesthetic, it was a way of pacing it. Gears of War was about smooth, easy action.
God bless threats of not giving interviews, early review copies, preview shit, advertising, etc.
Also, you two need to calm down don't you think?
I never intended on this spinning out into a ridiculous debate but no, I don't think a game has to be utterly innovative to be taken seriously. I never said anything of the kind. I just don't think Gears can be held up as an innovative game, because it's derivative of a number of other sources (mostly RE4, but there's some Killswitch, WH40k and a couple other influences in there). That doesn't mean I think it's a bad game or rip-off, it managed to refine those systems (as you pointed out) into a game a lot of people liked. And yet despite those refinements, I still by far prefer RE4 to it.
As for the pacing, I disagree. The clunky gameplay was only part of it. The more important part was the enemy spawning and level design. This is what I think influenced Gears (in just that area, obviously).
Again, they weren't fired cause they were gonna blacklist people. They were fired for admitting it. No gaming journo I saw was surprised by it at all: they actually found the straightforward brusqueness and lack of spin refreshing.
3DS Friend Code: 2165-6448-8348 www.Twitch.TV/cooljammer00
Battle.Net: JohnDarc#1203 Origin/UPlay: CoolJammer00
Second: The only important detail about Forza vs GT is that they both suck, because sim racers are boring and sucky. Burnout Paradise rules all.
Third: I agree with Unco that it is incredibly sad what MS did to a company with the history and franchise catalogue like Rare. They had the ability to give MS a plethora of 1st party franchises, but due to some snafus in sales for some of their games, they were shifted to Wii Too territory. (Sorry Fraggle, the chance that they would have implemented things like the Avatars or Kinect Sports without the crazy success of the Wii is very slim)
Fourth: I'm hungry and want pizza
Fifth: I want OoT to be out now but instead it's not out until Sunday. Eek, I'm enabling Nintendo! :shock:
:P
Nintendo Network ID - Brainiac_8
PSN - Brainiac_8
Steam - http://steamcommunity.com/id/BRAINIAC8/
Add me!
Yeah, suck on those apples!
8-)
Sega needs to do a new F-Zero for the Wii U.
You kidding me, Sony was definitely guilty of filching ideas over the course of their three systems.
*coughcoughanaloguestickscoughcoughSIXAXIScoughcough[strike]Wii[/strike]MoveRemotecoughcough*
Nintendo Network ID - Brainiac_8
PSN - Brainiac_8
Steam - http://steamcommunity.com/id/BRAINIAC8/
Add me!
Lost Odyssey was genuinely a better Final Fantasy game than XIII. Even with it being really brazenly designed to be just that from the start. Like, MS said 'we need Final Fantasy but they won't let us have it, let's make our own!'. Turned out alright though.
Exactly.
And forget Rare - remember Psygnosis?
Bastards!
All this shit is cyclical.
Seriously "poor man's RE4" would make ME the poor man. Excuse me if I find your statement INCREDIBLY ASININE.
http://www.mcvuk.com/news/44918/Take-Two-shares-tumble
As much as I like picking on MS about jumping headfirst into the motion craze started by Nintendo, at least they came up with something unique. The Kinect, while not for me yet, is an interesting piece of tech with some neat possibilities. At least they didn't just throw a black plastic casing over the Wii Remote and call it a day. (I know there was more to it than that, I'm just messing) :P
Nintendo Network ID - Brainiac_8
PSN - Brainiac_8
Steam - http://steamcommunity.com/id/BRAINIAC8/
Add me!
Blame probably falls on MS for the poor sales though, since I'm guessing it was an advertising issue. (Then again, they spent HOW much on that Viva Pinata animated show?)
:rotate:
ffffff
I had forgotten that they actually intended to cultivate Viva Pinata as this multimedia mammoth ala Pokemon. Like trying to recreate an artificial Mt. Everest with a few hundred shovels and sand from Floridian beaches.