230 réponses à ce sujet

[Kel Riever]

I give Love Sherri this round of pWnzOr. Though there is very little as far as prizes go for winning. Still, well done.

[Love Sherri]

Kel Riever wrote...

I give Love Sherri this round of pWnzOr. Though there is very little as far as prizes go for winning. Still, well done.

Merci, mon ami, merci

[Talogrungi]

I would say that the most valuable lesson I learned was that a vast amount of "professional" gaming journalists are untrustworthy sycophants, and that in many facets of the industry .. money and ego are WAY more important than integrity and honesty.

The ignorance and contempt displayed by certain sites/individuals has not gone without notice. I have a low tolerance for people/organizations that fail to meet my expectations, and an even lower one for those who attach arbitrary labels such as "entitled vocal minority" and attempt to tell me that I'm not permitted to express my disapproval.

[The RPGenius]

Blueprotoss wrote...

Love Sherri wrote... 

Please, tell me again on how insulted you feel.

Your general attititude towards people like you're holier than thou.

A team of oxen would collapse under the sheer staggering weight of the irony you just produced.

[Blueprotoss]

The RPGenius wrote...

Blueprotoss wrote...

Love Sherri wrote... 

Please, tell me again on how insulted you feel.

Your general attititude towards people like you're holier than thou.

A team of oxen would collapse under the sheer staggering weight of the irony you just produced.

Yet the irony is on you.

[Blueprotoss]

simfamSP wrote...

It's very simple really.

Anything that EA touches turns bad. Why? Because EA doesn't understand the concept of *time.* No matter how large your team is, you need some ****ing time to make a good game. ESPECIALLY an RPG.

I really feel sorry for BioWare because they can't lash out pubicly and we can't help them directly.... or can we. Does the internet have the power to tell EA to give BioWare more time in the future?

You act as if time is a good thing whle its a double-edged sword that hurt Too Human, Splinter Cell: Conviction, and Duke Nukem Forever. The irony here is that ME3 started its developement and production alongside ME2, which means there estnough time. It seems like some people still want to make excuses for a conclusion that they would have griped about no matter what happened.

[Renmiri1]

simfamSP wrote...

It's very simple really.

Anything that EA touches turns bad. Why? Because EA doesn't understand the concept of *time.* No matter how large your team is, you need some ****ing time to make a good game. ESPECIALLY an RPG.

I really feel sorry for BioWare because they can't lash out pubicly and we can't help them directly.... or can we. Does the internet have the power to tell EA to give BioWare more time in the future?

Someone should tell EA that 9 women can't give birth to a baby in a month. sometimes adding people will not cut time, no matter how many you add.

[Renmiri1]

simfamSP wrote...

It's very simple really.

Anything that EA touches turns bad. Why? Because EA doesn't understand the concept of *time.* No matter how large your team is, you need some ****ing time to make a good game. ESPECIALLY an RPG.

I really feel sorry for BioWare because they can't lash out pubicly and we can't help them directly.... or can we. Does the internet have the power to tell EA to give BioWare more time in the future?

Someone should tell EA that 9 women can't give birth to a baby in a month. sometimes adding people will not cut time, no matter how many you add.

[KotorEffect3]

It has made me realize how spoiled and whiney the consumer base of the gaming industry is. ME 3 isn't the first time where a game comes out it is a very fun game to play and then you go online to discuss it and there is nothing but whining about how new games suck and old games are better. (yet if you go back in time when the old games were new, apparently they sucked to) Why do gamers look at old games with rose tinted glasses but hate everything about new games?

[Wayning_Star]

I think users want more, they get the equipment to run the game, hoping for more realistic immersion and interesting RP as well as exciting action. The gaming experiment(can't bring myself to actually call it an industry,eventhough the buzz words seem fitting, but don't) has created a loop from advertizing all the 'stuff' in and about games, then the games don't add up to the expectation, leaving for disgruntlement. Why do animated movies have all the good production, but games only have the cut scenes. They are getting better, visually, but then the story has to meet the mark according to the hype, but cannot for what ever reasons, not good enough for users to fork over the bucks for them. So it must be a time will tell thing, or a user demand thing. Purely commercial. Beats me?!? I know I don't like the online and mini game for phones, supposed gold rush thats going on lately. What with all the virtual items for sell, or NO GAME mandate. An even cheaper shot, imho. Less for more, as it were...

[Femlob]

How has ME3 changed your view of the video game industry?

It hasn't. It has merely reinforced my already concrete belief that this industry is in dire need of a repeat of the 1983 video game crash.

There's too many publishers and developers out there nowadays who should no longer be allowed to exist.

[Wayning_Star]

Femlob wrote...

How has ME3 changed your view of the video game industry?

It hasn't. It has merely reinforced my already concrete belief that this industry is in dire need of a repeat of the 1983 video game crash.

There's too many publishers and developers out there nowadays who should no longer be allowed to exist.

the less devs there are, the more the games may cost, as they control the flow of creativity,ie have the monopoly on it. Besides, the hub bub of the ME3 disapointment quotient will/has had an effect on the publishers and devs who pays attention to user interface... what the consumers will want/pay for. I think 60+ $$ for any over hyped video game is too much to pay, as well as the over estimated necessity of super duper hardware to play said games. Hype may sell, but won't last. imo

[Wayning_Star]

we have the technology,we have the resources, we can make you stronger, faster, smarter, more patient, more receptive, more, just ... more.

[Ksandor]

Talogrungi wrote...

I would say that the most valuable lesson I learned was that a vast amount of "professional" gaming journalists are untrustworthy sycophants, and that in many facets of the industry .. money and ego are WAY more important than integrity and honesty.

The ignorance and contempt displayed by certain sites/individuals has not gone without notice. I have a low tolerance for people/organizations that fail to meet my expectations, and an even lower one for those who attach arbitrary labels such as "entitled vocal minority" and attempt to tell me that I'm not permitted to express my disapproval.

This!!!

Sadly like AC DC says...

Come on come on, lovin' for the money

Come on, come on, listen to the money talk

Come on come on, lovin' for the money

Come on, come on, listen to the money talk

[Ksandor]

Wayning_Star wrote...

Femlob wrote...

How has ME3 changed your view of the video game industry?

It hasn't. It has merely reinforced my already concrete belief that this industry is in dire need of a repeat of the 1983 video game crash.

There's too many publishers and developers out there nowadays who should no longer be allowed to exist.

the less devs there are, the more the games may cost, as they control the flow of creativity,ie have the monopoly on it. Besides, the hub bub of the ME3 disapointment quotient will/has had an effect on the publishers and devs who pays attention to user interface... what the consumers will want/pay for. I think 60+ $$ for any over hyped video game is too much to pay, as well as the over estimated necessity of super duper hardware to play said games. Hype may sell, but won't last. imo

But we have a problem here! First they make crap games or bad endings... Then they say we won't make Single Player games because they do not sell. So let's forget good scnipt and focus on action MMOs.

But actually if they make good SP games we would buy them. I think they are using ME3 case as an excuse for future crappy MMOs.

[Wayning_Star]

Ksandor wrote...

Wayning_Star wrote...

Femlob wrote...

How has ME3 changed your view of the video game industry?

It hasn't. It has merely reinforced my already concrete belief that this industry is in dire need of a repeat of the 1983 video game crash.

There's too many publishers and developers out there nowadays who should no longer be allowed to exist.

the less devs there are, the more the games may cost, as they control the flow of creativity,ie have the monopoly on it. Besides, the hub bub of the ME3 disapointment quotient will/has had an effect on the publishers and devs who pays attention to user interface... what the consumers will want/pay for. I think 60+ $$ for any over hyped video game is too much to pay, as well as the over estimated necessity of super duper hardware to play said games. Hype may sell, but won't last. imo

But we have a problem here! First they make crap games or bad endings... Then they say we won't make Single Player games because they do not sell. So let's forget good scnipt and focus on action MMOs.

But actually if they make good SP games we would buy them. I think they are using ME3 case as an excuse for future crappy MMOs.

yeah, but I'd guess it's more of a trick of fate, rather than a design function. Companies of all kinds get used to the hoped mass influx of bucks from popular selling items, kind of spoiled, but really laxidasical. Their mistake, from what you state,is 'expecting' a postive result from an unknown quantiy, ie a gamble. The story reaction from fans on ME3 is a shocker for most, I'd bet. Bioware/EA should fix that, but I don't know if they can, for money reasons or just plain in operablity. I hope they do tho. I like the series,even the suspected crappy storyline, has it's pluses. The MMO's are/always has been a bit of challenge to make totally popular with the single player ilk(like me, I don't do online games, never did.I even went as far as to quit any casual games online.) but many do like them and there is a market for it,even if they're required to buy virtual stuff, my main turnoff with MMOs., the chase for stuff just to play them. Anyway, it just seem preditory to me. Nothing for something. In the end, I suppose if you market something,even nothing in place of something, it'd better be even better entertainment, at least thats something for the money.

[Dominus]

On one hand, they've got the largest variety of consequences from a previous title in a video game as far as I know. On the other hand, it's made me more and more bored of sequels. I'm getting tired of the current industry state as most of the innovation tends to involve graphical quality, set pieces, and it isn't setting a precedent outside of the technical level. Sort of feels like we're running in circles, rather than moving forward. I like pretty, but I'd also like depth too.

[Wayning_Star]

DominusVita wrote...

On one hand, they've got the largest variety of consequences from a previous title in a video game as far as I know. On the other hand, it's made me more and more bored of sequels. I'm getting tired of the current industry state as most of the innovation tends to involve graphical quality, set pieces, and it isn't setting a precedent outside of the technical level. Sort of feels like we're running in circles, rather than moving forward. I like pretty, but I'd also like depth too.

we gotta admit bioware actually tried with ME. I wonder if their is such thing as 'too deep' for all users. Its hard to reflect deeper meaning when the meaning is so deep it cannot be reflected in a video game. We can only  identify with that what we know, after that its all speculation...

Like me talking about mass marketing.

[Ksandor]

I don't think that they expect a positive outcome from an unknown quantity. I think they know that cost efficiency usually means crap games. I think sacrificing the plot of ME3 was a deliberate choice.

Probably they think... Well if I make 100 games and even if 97 of them fail at various degrees, I could still make 2-3 AAA games in 10 years, and still get my return of investment. So why bother on quality? Let's make many mediocre games and maintain the cash flow. If 2 of them will be AAA games we will be saved. Blizzard did the same with Diablo III. So they do not care.

Consider what if EA goes bankrupt? Their investors would just invest in different industries or companies.

CEOs and marketing managers are the bane of game industry. They care about only money and only the steady income. As long as EA profits to some degree its investors won't tell CEOs to make better games for a marginal increase in profit. Safe and secure, rather than taking risk.

But now cloud gaming, Indie games and Android console OUYA come. The market is changing and there is this economic crisis. Maybe the leechers will fail big time this time and learn that they are not as smart as they think .

Modifié par Ksandor, 21 juillet 2012 - 01:18 .

[Wayning_Star]

Ksandor wrote...

I don't think that they expect a positive outcome from an unknown quantity. I think they know that cost efficiency usually means crap games. I think sacrificing the plot of ME3 was a deliberate choice.

Probably they think... Well if I make 100 games and even if 97 of them fail at various degrees, I could still make 2-3 AAA games in 10 years, and still get my return of investment. So why bother on quality? Let's make many mediocre games and maintain the cash flow. If 2 of them will be AAA games we will be saved. Blizzard did the same with Diablo III. So they do not care.

Consider what if EA goes bankrupt? Their investors would just invest in different industries or companies.

CEOs and marketing managers are a bane of game industry. They care about only money and only the steady income. As long as EA profits to some degree its investors won't tell CEOs to make better games for a marginal increase in profit. Safe and secure, rather than taking risk.

But now cloud gaming, Indie games and Android console OUYA come. The market is changing and there is this economic crisis. Maybe the leechers will fail big time this time and learn that they are not as smart as they think .

even so, like the racers used to say, you can't beat cubic inchesnow they tip the techno can. ONE really exceptional game will/would oustrip any or all crappy games via instant returns and lasting popularity. Well built products always wins over the lesser, even if quick returns seems the hot tip, they're really not.  Hype'n instant gratification is an illusion, always has been. I hope our resident money grubbers take heed here...

[Ksandor]

Agreed. But that is my point. Nowadays they make many mediocre games and try different ideas WITHOUT taking any of them seriously. And hope one of those games to become an AAA game, a saving grace. Meanwhile the market becomes full of crap games and we fans suffer . ME2 was the last game which was intended as an AAA game from the start I think

[Wayning_Star]

Ksandor wrote...

Agreed. But that is my point. Nowadays they make many mediocre games and try different ideas WITHOUT taking any of them seriously. And hope one of those games to become an AAA game, a saving grace. Meanwhile the market becomes full of crap games and we fans suffer . ME2 was the last game which was intended as an AAA game from the start I think

I don't know, I think ME3 was  an attempt to bring it all together, I think what the writers missed was the fact that users didn't want Shep to die off, no matter what his ledgend did for the ending. I can see your point tho, as the game did seem hurried and the ending was left a bit too open, but all in all, it was OK. Even with that, there just seemed like something was missing from the overall experience, so I blame Sheps demise as too strict and the getting there during ME3 too conservative. Everything else, to me anyways, seemed similar to the other two in the series. Bioware kept to the basics on it, but with the deeper meaning thing, kind of fizzled. But this is only because of our interest in the series and immersive effect of the game, we expect stuff, when we don't get our version of that stuff..grumble grumble. That last part is what game makers needs to really understand, the grumble grumble, it's a marker for what to expect from their customers. Important subject to them, or should be, if I'm/users are ever to consider video games as an actual industry, not just a social experiment...

[C9316]

I've learned that certain publishers, and by extension certain developers, think we gamers are just a bunch of drooling idiots that will readily accept and rejoice in whatever garbage we are given. I've also learned that when we of course throw the crap back at them they will respond in a completely condescending manner..

[Ksandor]

Wayning_Star wrote...

Ksandor wrote...

Agreed. But that is my point. Nowadays they make many mediocre games and try different ideas WITHOUT taking any of them seriously. And hope one of those games to become an AAA game, a saving grace. Meanwhile the market becomes full of crap games and we fans suffer . ME2 was the last game which was intended as an AAA game from the start I think

I don't know, I think ME3 was  an attempt to bring it all together, I think what the writers missed was the fact that users didn't want Shep to die off, no matter what his ledgend did for the ending. I can see your point tho, as the game did seem hurried and the ending was left a bit too open, but all in all, it was OK. Even with that, there just seemed like something was missing from the overall experience, so I blame Sheps demise as too strict and the getting there during ME3 too conservative. Everything else, to me anyways, seemed similar to the other two in the series. Bioware kept to the basics on it, but with the deeper meaning thing, kind of fizzled. But this is only because of our interest in the series and immersive effect of the game, we expect stuff, when we don't get our version of that stuff..grumble grumble. That last part is what game makers needs to really understand, the grumble grumble, it's a marker for what to expect from their customers. Important subject to them, or should be, if I'm/users are ever to consider video games as an actual industry, not just a social experiment...

Couldn't agree more. I see this nearly in all çompanies. Managers or owners are so focused on experimenting on the ways of earning more money that they do not take serisously even their own business. But if you only say this is just business you lose competitive creativity.