Jimquisition: GUNS GUNS GUNS GUNS GUNS GUNS GUNS

[CardinalPiggles]

There is only one mindless shooter worth playing. Borderlands 2. It has the most guns, it is colorful, it has a good art design, a lot of enemy variety and every type of gun you can imagine. Why would anyone want to play any other mindless shooter when they are all in a way integrated into Borderlands 2?

How the eff can be Borderlands "mindless"? Don't the series have RPG components?

Yeah, but it's still just mindless fun. No real plot. The only goal is to get better guns to kill stronger enemies.

And distribute skill points into the right abilities, and pick the right guns for the right situation, and pick the right class mods. It's not just mindless fun, but it's as close as you can get with a triple A game in my opinion.

And just because a game doesn't have a 'real' story, doesn't mean it's for dummies.

 

[BehattedWanderer]

Was anyone expecting a massive turn from either Microsoft or EA? Kinect, shooters, and sports are about all they have to showcase, while the XBLA does it's thing the next room over, and few like to make that association. It's usually left the the studios to get people psyched for anything else.

 

[Adam Jensen_v1legacy]

And just because a game doesn't have a 'real' story, doesn't mean it's for dummies.

I didn't say it's for dummies. In fact, it's a mindless game for hardcore gamers. Quake is pretty mindless as well. It doesn't make it a game for dummies.
Leveling system is there to give you the option to customize your character to your play style a bit more and to give you something to work towards to. There are no wrong choices. You upgrade what you think is best and what you think will offer you most fun.

 

[Mr_Terrific]

My only problem with the shooters that were at this years E3 was than none of them were Bioshock Infinite and how in the f*** does Sony/MS not advertise Metro Last Light???? The most underrated shooter this side of Killzone gets no love...but there's plenty of coverage for DLC to a shooter that launched last year...?

 

[carpathic]

The Jennifer Love Hewit of video games? Does that mean you have two big.... Nevermind.

I've stopped looking at Microsoft's presentation since 2009. I still think Ubisoft was pretty impressive though.

Shame that all of their idiotic DRM means I'll never buy another game from Ubisoft. I know it is a little thing, but it is something I can do.

 

[Sonic Doctor]

Actually, the video was still running when I posted this. Not my fault you did not get to Wonderbook before I finished my thought.

That is why it pays to watch a video then comment in the thread.

I'm surprised by how many people do what you did. It doesn't really make sense to me.

At least you didn't say something like, "The video was too long, so I didn't bother watching all of it", which I find an alarming amount of people similarly comment, but about articles, when people point out to such commentators that certain things were in an article and they would've seen it if they had read said article.

--------------------------------

On the video:

I'm actually really glad that this year looks like it will turn out average and/or lower in the amount of awesome games. The only thing I'm remotely thinking of getting out of what I saw, is Halo 4. So this gives me time to work on my backlog of games, and save money for other things or future gaming purchases.

Now, back to Skyrim and to actually doing something constructive in the game, and not horsing around.

 

[Vault101]

I hope Dead Space 3 doesnt lose what made the others unique...

 

[aba1]

E3 is for the shareholders, not the customers. So it's not really surprising it's basically saying "here's next year's line-up of sure bets!"

Very interesting point I never thought of this I don't think many people consider this. It explains a lot and makes sense.

 

[Bricky]

To be honest I didn't even notice that there were a ton of shooters at e3 this year because the only e3 coverage i have been paying attention to is what the yogsccast have uploaded and so far they have covered 3 FPS games, 2 MMORPG's, their own weird Yogventures game, Dishonored which is a first person game but its more in the style of Dark Messiah of Might and Magic then Call of Duty/Battlefield, the new XCOM game, Magic The Gathering and Lego Lord of the Rings...

 

[ThunderCavalier]

I'll be quite honest here... I didn't keep up with any E3 news this year. At all. I mean, I already knew what games I would be buying (Halo 4 and Blops 2, because I'm a Halo fanboy and because I enjoy Treyarch CoDs respectively), and what games I thought would look nice (The Last of Us, which is up there with Metal Gear Solid 4 and Uncharted for 'games that make me want to get a PS3'). Everything else seemed to look like some kind of shooter that I didn't enjoy before and I probably wouldn't enjoy now, or were part of Nintendo's stuff and, quite honestly, I hate the Wii U's design and I don't think any game they release can convince me that tablet's worth the money.

If we're just going to go for FPSs nowadays, I hope The Last of Us does happen to have some kind of fairly good story and at least sparks a trend of FPSs with semi-good stories. I mean, if we're going to saturate the market with FPSs, we could at least make them really good FPSs.

 

[Yopaz]

Dude, did you miss Sony's presentation? It introduced a lot of games that were not First Person Shooters. Wonderbook was different than anything else that was out there. The Last of Us presented a unique form of combat that was not as clean as seen in other AAA titles.

Above: A comment from a person who posted before finishing watching the video.

Actually, the video was still running when I posted this. Not my fault you did not get to Wonderbook before I finished my thought.

Your logic is astounding. You commented on what a video lacked and says it's not your fault for not watching all of it when someone points out that the video didn't lack it? Did you have any reason for posting before you watched it to the end? If not it's your fault. If you want to make excuses at least do a little effort on them.

 

[Gunner 51]

Dude, what the hell was with that drawn out motivational tape crap? You're not turning into Game OverThinker, are you?!

Jim is right on the money again, my main problem with this series is the point is normally half way through the show in this case nearly 2 minutes in a 7 minute video.

I'm finding it hard to get pass the asshole to the point he is trying to make.

@Targen: I think Mr Sterling has been on that road for quite some time. Ever since the moderators started doling out sanctions to those who dare criticise their contributors. I understand that a lot of it was abusive in places - most of it went along the lines of "get rid of the attitude" from what I can remember.

By doing this, they accidently created a wave of Yes Men and now Mr Sterling cannot tell that the whole ego thing is wearing quite thin. (At least for me anyway.) It's all a massive shame really, to echo what Mark B had said while Jim might be right on the money and have a lot of interesting points to make - but his argument is being lost in his schtick.

Please get to the point, Mr Sterling!

 

[Vault101]

If we're just going to go for FPSs nowadays, I hope The Last of Us does happen to have some kind of fairly good story and at least sparks a trend of FPSs with semi-good stories. I mean, if we're going to saturate the market with FPSs, we could at least make them really good FPSs.

last of us?

a FPS?

.....whaaaaaaat???

 

[Sexy Devil]

*deleted*

 

[Reptiloid]

Now I'm just sad... time to reinstall Painkiller!

 

[Chairman Miaow]

Stop blaming publishers and blame the consumers Jim!
They are not gonna waste money on new things if we only buy the same old crap!
But no no no you just keep screaming."THE PUBLISHERS THE PUBLISHERS IT'S ALWAYS THE PUBLISHERS !"
Once the consumers start buying new things the publishers will make new things.

I don't think it's that black and white.
If we're fed mainly shooters and the publishers mainly push shooters and promote mainly the big name shooters then the consumer starts to loose choices.

It's the lazy thing to do, to publish an FPS because publishers feel like those projects are safer bets. Those shooters getting published can quite easily mean that a fresh IP or original idea isn't pursued or published because it's considered too risky.
There's nothing the consumer can do about that and no one asked the consumer. Who's to say that if Syndicate was made into a modern RTS it wouldn't have done better than if they just went the FPS route. I don't remember many players demanding Syndicate come out as an FPS, yet it did, again limiting the consumers options.
It's publishers following graphs.

remember Enslaved?

It was critically acclaimed and an overall great game. Totally bombed. Even a bad FPS has a pretty good chance of making the money back.

How much was spent on the marketing for that game compared to just about any FPS on the market I wonder? Hell, I didn't even see Enslaved in stores. I don't even remember when it came out.

it had banners, the works. Every web comic ever did a piece. It was the game everyone knew no1 bought. I dont think it had TV spots, but neither had Haze. And it made its money back.

I guess that just goes to prove you can't use a single game as evidence of any kind of correlation then doesn't it?

Well true. A small pool of testing isn't good evidence. It doesn't however mean you can deny it.

Fine, but then I could give examples of massive successes that weren't FPS and use them as "evidence".

 

[banksy122]

E3 was on? I was too busy playing Guild Wars 2 Beta to notice.