Brothers in Arms: WTF?! (aka "Furious Four")

[binvjoh]

It's like Inglorious Basterds: The Game.

 

[Jegsimmons]

please for the love of christ and poetic video games....change the fucking title, gear box.... Call it furious four....not brothers in arms...just FF.

 

[Dense_Electric]

I think the game looks like it could be fun.

Considering I haven't enjoyed a single Brothers in Arms game, this could be a good thing.

Seriously, that's just the thing. It actually looks fairly interesting and fun on it's own merits. But I'm never going to play it because Gearbox has basically told me to go fuck myself. ALL THEY HAD TO DO was pick a different name.

I don't see why people (X-Com fans mostly) care. Judge the game, not a name.

Did you get pissed off when Mario wasn't a 2d platformer??

Mario didn't go from a serious look at the nature of war combined with intelligent, tactical gameplay to HOLYFUCKINGBATSHITLETSKILLKOOPASWITHAFUCKINGCHAINSAWBATMAN in ONE GAME. Not at all a valid comparison.

But that's just the thing, it's not the name itself, it's the fact that chose to use it. They chose to take something that had a rather dedicated (if small) following and tell the fans of that something to fuck off. A game that I might have otherwise played and enjoyed will now not be played by me because they told me to fuck off.

It doesn't even make sense from a business perspective - the whole point of using an existing IP is to attract fans of that IP. But what they've done here is taken our game, held it down, murdered it right in front of us, then showed us a new game and said "you will like this now." They're not going to attract many existing BiA fans, they've done just the opposite.

 

[Enkidu88]

when i saw it, i lol'd

seriously, what's wrong with NOT taking a straight-faced approach to world war 2? in my opinion, those kind of games are a dime a dozen

but to take an extreme, over the top approach like Inglorious Basterds did? now THAT'S pushing the medium forward and taking the risks that everyone on this site complains the industry doesn't take.

Nothing wrong with it, I love me some Dinosaurs in WWII, but just doesn't really even need the B-I-A tag on it. They only put it there for marketing purposes.

And it's not really pushing the industry forward, more than likely the game is going to either like Team Fortress 2 or Borderlands and Bulletstorm. In other words its still going to be a rehash of stuff we've seen before.

 

[Super Toast]

If it wasn't called Brothers In Arms, I'd be more positive about it.

 

[WrongSprite]

Could be alright, but it needs to be a new IP, this is NOT Brothers in Arms, and doesn't deserve the title.

 

[Dense_Electric]

when i saw it, i lol'd

seriously, what's wrong with NOT taking a straight-faced approach to world war 2? in my opinion, those kind of games are a dime a dozen

There's nothing wrong with that, there's something wrong with taking an existing IP, turning it into something that is COMPLETELY unrecognizable for what it once was, then telling fans of that IP that they get to eat shit by using that IP's name.

 

[bob1052]

when i saw it, i lol'd

seriously, what's wrong with NOT taking a straight-faced approach to world war 2? in my opinion, those kind of games are a dime a dozen

There's nothing wrong with that, there's something wrong with taking an existing IP, turning it into something that is COMPLETELY unrecognizable for what it once was, then telling fans of that IP that they get to eat shit by using that IP's name.

Do you also assume that when you're on the highway and the person in front of you is only going 90 that he is purposefully going slow to try and piss you off and that it is a personal attack on you?

 

[the monopoly guy]

Oh no someone is breaking the mold and doing something different. Fire up the rage machines and call the secret police.

I think it looks awesome, and I love Gearbox's humor so I really can't wait. The Inglorious Basterds influence is pretty clear but I can't say thats a bad thing.

EDIT: And I understand that some fans are mad because they liked the way the series was, but this seems more like a lighthearted spin off.

 

[Gaiseric]

I've been looking forward to the next game in the series since I finished Hell's Highway, and I feel like I just got kicked in the nuts.

F**K!!! I wanted to see the guys in Bastogne.

 

[Dense_Electric]

when i saw it, i lol'd

seriously, what's wrong with NOT taking a straight-faced approach to world war 2? in my opinion, those kind of games are a dime a dozen

There's nothing wrong with that, there's something wrong with taking an existing IP, turning it into something that is COMPLETELY unrecognizable for what it once was, then telling fans of that IP that they get to eat shit by using that IP's name.

Do you also assume that when you're on the highway and the person in front of you is only going 90 that he is purposefully going slow to try and piss you off and that it is a personal attack on you?

No, because that person didn't willingly kill a beloved IP in the process.

You raise a good point though, I suppose I shouldn't attribute to malice what can be attributed to stupidity. It's more likely someone at Gearbox is fucking retarded.

 

[YuheJi]

Oh no someone is breaking the mold and doing something different. Fire up the rage machines and call the secret police.

I think it looks awesome, and I love Gearbox's humor so I really can't wait. The Inglorious Basterds influence is pretty clear but I can't say thats a bad thing.

The problem isn't that they're doing something different. It's that they're taking an existing franchise known for a deep, emotional, realistic story and turning it upside down. At that point,why even use the name? Fans of the series certainly aren't going to like the changes, and I don't think that the Brothers in Arms name would improve sales (as the games have never sold well).

 

[Neverhoodian]

Oh no someone is breaking the mold and doing something different. Fire up the rage machines and call the secret police.

I think it looks awesome, and I love Gearbox's humor so I really can't wait. The Inglorious Basterds influence is pretty clear but I can't say thats a bad thing.

EDIT: And I understand that some fans are mad because they liked the way the series was, but this seems more like a lighthearted spin off.

I don't have a problem with innovation, but this is such a radical departure for the series that it shouldn't even be called a Brothers in Arms game, spin-off or no.

Moreover, this just feels insulting to a longtime fan of the series. It's like they're saying "Hey, remember all those things you love about these games? Well this latest installment has NONE of it, but we know you'll buy it anyway because it has 'Brothers in Arms' in the title. Now give me your money, *****."

Again, if it had been its own series I would be more charitable towards it.

 

[godofallu]

What in the fuck? Seriously they already abandoned the good multiplayer in the last gane. Now they are going to abandon the singleplayer too?

This just made me sad and angry at the same time.

 

[Dense_Electric]

I think the game looks like it could be fun.

Considering I haven't enjoyed a single Brothers in Arms game, this could be a good thing.

Seriously, that's just the thing. It actually looks fairly interesting and fun on it's own merits. But I'm never going to play it because Gearbox has basically told me to go fuck myself. ALL THEY HAD TO DO was pick a different name.

I don't see why people (X-Com fans mostly) care. Judge the game, not a name.

Did you get pissed off when Mario wasn't a 2d platformer??

Mario didn't go from a serious look at the nature of war combined with intelligent, tactical gameplay to HOLYFUCKINGBATSHITLETSKILLKOOPASWITHAFUCKINGCHAINSAWBATMAN in ONE GAME. Not at all a valid comparison.

But that's just the thing, it's not the name itself, it's the fact that chose to use it. They chose to take something that had a rather dedicated (if small) following and tell the fans of that something to fuck off. A game that I might have otherwise played and enjoyed will now not be played by me because they told me to fuck off.

It doesn't even make sense from a business perspective - the whole point of using an existing IP is to attract fans of that IP. But what they've done here is taken our game, held it down, murdered it right in front of us, then showed us a new game and said "you will like this now." They're not going to attract many existing BiA fans, they've done just the opposite.

So I'm guessing you're okay with Mario not being the same as it was originally, right? Same for Zelda, or Metroid, or X-Com, or Final Fantasy?

You're right, they should have just made another WWII game that was serious in nature. There is such a clamoring for it, I don't know what I was thinking when I said this game looks to be fun.

Lets not contemplate buying a game because of its name. That just makes so much sense.

Obviously I don't have a problem with a game not being identical to the game before it, I've criticized the recent Call of Duty games several times for being too similar to each other. But Mario 64 was still definitely Mario. Sure, it was 3D, had a whole ton of new features and introduced the whole jumping-into-paintings thing, but it was still Mario. This was an example of change done right.

This, on the other hand, is basically the gaming equivalent of a Shawshank Redemption sequel that was a slapstick comedy-musical done by Monty Python. Tell me, do you think that would be a good idea? Because that's basically what's been done to Brothers in Arms.

I think you're seriously missing the point here. It's not about "oh waaah, they didn't make another serious World War II game," I don't think ANYONE is disagreeing that there are plenty of those. It's about the fact that they've taken a franchise that has long been established as a very realistic, very melodramatic, very serious game series, and turned it into Kick-Ass. Sure, it may be fantastic in it's own right, but the simple fact that they killed an existing IP to do it is enough to ensure that I, and many other fans of the series, won't buy it. I'm willing to bet if someone took one of your favorite games and turned it into a joke of itself you'd be none to happy either.

Also (directed in general now), I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that this is going to be another generic first-person shooter with CoD-style "realistic" action gameplay, rather than at least preserving BiA's actually realistic tactical gameplay.

 

[lord canti]

Ahh the logic of "This game looks like it might be good in several aspects but it has a name of a series I like so I don't want anything to do with it".

 

[lord canti]

Maybe this will be dead island all over again. We get a deep emotional trailer and then the actual gameplay is over the top and goofy.

 

[YuheJi]

I think the game looks like it could be fun.

Considering I haven't enjoyed a single Brothers in Arms game, this could be a good thing.

Seriously, that's just the thing. It actually looks fairly interesting and fun on it's own merits. But I'm never going to play it because Gearbox has basically told me to go fuck myself. ALL THEY HAD TO DO was pick a different name.

I don't see why people (X-Com fans mostly) care. Judge the game, not a name.

Did you get pissed off when Mario wasn't a 2d platformer??

Mario didn't go from a serious look at the nature of war combined with intelligent, tactical gameplay to HOLYFUCKINGBATSHITLETSKILLKOOPASWITHAFUCKINGCHAINSAWBATMAN in ONE GAME. Not at all a valid comparison.

But that's just the thing, it's not the name itself, it's the fact that chose to use it. They chose to take something that had a rather dedicated (if small) following and tell the fans of that something to fuck off. A game that I might have otherwise played and enjoyed will now not be played by me because they told me to fuck off.

It doesn't even make sense from a business perspective - the whole point of using an existing IP is to attract fans of that IP. But what they've done here is taken our game, held it down, murdered it right in front of us, then showed us a new game and said "you will like this now." They're not going to attract many existing BiA fans, they've done just the opposite.

So I'm guessing you're okay with Mario not being the same as it was originally, right? Same for Zelda, or Metroid, or X-Com, or Final Fantasy?

You're right, they should have just made another WWII game that was serious in nature. There is such a clamoring for it, I don't know what I was thinking when I said this game looks to be fun.

Lets not contemplate buying a game because of its name. That just makes so much sense.

With most series, people buy the next game because they enjoyed the previous iterations, and because they want more of that. Maybe this game will be amazing and blow us all away like Super Mario 64 did, or Metroid Prime did, or Ocarina of Time did (at which point, we would be seen as rather stupid for doubting such a game). But those games still stuck to what made their franchises special, or unique. I mean, Super Mario 64 still had Mario, Metroid Prime still had Samus, Ocarina of Time still had Link and Zelda, etc.

But Furious Four has almost nothing in common with its previous iterations, outside of setting. Fans of the series want another serious WW2 game, because that's what they enjoyed from the last few games. And now they're severely disappointed in that regard. They feel betrayed by the company for turning their beloved franchise into something that looks nothing like the previous games. And that's why they're upset. Same thing with X-Com fans that really just wanted more games like the old X-Com games (which were rather unique in their own right), and instead got a first person shooter.