grregg wrote...
Dragoonlordz wrote...
(...)
I explained that if something you dislike happens once you might be dissapointed, if happens a second time you might be annoyed but if happens 3, 4 or 5 more times those feelings get stronger. Thats life and human nature. It is quite simple to understand. Much like if someone flicks a hard boiled sweet at you, it might not hurt but if keeps doing it for hours on end you will be far from pleased or just disappointed. The same principle applies. Something irritating happens once its annoying but you move on, happens few times it gets irratiating and start to get much more bothered by it then if happens half dozen times or more times you begin to lose patience.
X-Com happened stategy to FPS genre change, it was annoying but not huge deal as was just one of the many franchises I loved as a strategy genre franchise. Then again happens with Front Mission strategy again title to action this time, I start to get more annoyed that now two of my most favorite franchises in all the years gaming has also now switched genre for quick profit. Warhammer again was strategy titles and now action too followed by now Syndicate into FPS, I'm starting to get pissed off that all these franchise I liked "were" strategy franchises and now are FPS or action titles because developers hate variety [spice of life] or only care about profit rather than quality of choice available to the customer.
Leave the fecking much loved past strategy franchises alone if you don't wish to make strategy games.
Hmm... I am afraid that you are explaining up the wrong tree so to speak. I do understand that if a somewhat annoying event happens repeatedly, it can build up the annoyance to reach the level of anger/rage.
Unfortunately what I'm failing to understand is why the event would be annoying in the first place. As I said before, someone working somewhere on a game that I don't have to play, buy or even see, has no emotional impact on me whatsoever. So people doing so repeatedly has no impact either, along the lines that N * 0 = 0. Admittedly that gets problematic as N approaches infinity, but we're far from infinity yet.
Now, can you explain why the first event, someone making a crappy remake of a classic, is problematic? Because that's where, I think, the core difference and misunderstanding lies.
Can you tell me that since changing the genre of that original "strategy" into the FPS and action titles which switched genre to cash in on the fanbase of the original series by using brand name now used to create a high profit FPS and action titles, that they will change it back to strategy now or ever. The answer is no and I bet you can't name a single FPs or action title which changed genre to strategy.. Once they have changed a franchise from strategy into another genre it never goes back. Originally strategy franchises that will never again create another strategy title because of the simple fact once changed at no point in my memory have they ever gone back. Thats less choice and less variety, less of one type of genre in favour of another by changing genre of originally strategy franchises into those other genres all for simple profit.
If they ever lay a hand on Battle Isle series and try to change that from strategy to FPS or action I will kick up a **** storm so vast the entire planet will implode in order to escape. It will be the final nail in the coffin as it were.
Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 14 septembre 2011 - 08:59 .
Retour en haut
And thank you guys for a good, intelligent debate. İt's hard to find that on the net nowadays.
