MW3

[Jesse Willadson]

snip

What games do you think are made for an artistic reason? What does that even mean?

Gah okay maybe I can explain what I mean with a quick story.

The before-mentioned game school I was in also had a fashion degree as well (IADT for anyone interested). I had a friend in the fashion degree who already made a slight living selling original clothing that she would make. She would get an order from specific people or small companies and make it for the cash. She did more for the money it put in her pocket then the artistic outlet.

Sometimes though she would make an original design and throw it out there, wanting to make money off of it, but it was driven more by her artistic need then her financial need.

From my experiences people who are artistically driven want to make something because they can. They also can make a living off of it, but there is an idea and a desire behind it. To me limbo seems like a game that someone had an idea, wanted to make it, and made it. Yeah he wants to make money with it, but that's not the only reason.

To me, modern warfare exists because there's a group of people who want to be rich so decide to will be made again.

snip

snip

I know, that was what I went thru while I was in school for game design. Also I said I was simplifying didn't I? What I ment by the statement was more its continued to be pushed out because of the amount of money it makes, and less about someone having a cool idea, if that makes sense.

Also it seems that people think I don't like the game and that we should stop talking about it. To clarify I enjoy the game, though I really don't play it that much anymore. And I do think there should be a discussion about it. Its more that I don't need to see magazines with two page reviews/ websites putting up reviews to tell me something I already know.

You know what would be better?

If y'all let this subject go. Jesus H. Christ people, ITS A FUCKING GAME... you don't have to even acknowledge it.

I'm no cod fan and the last cod game I owned was World at War. But regardless of how repetitive the game gets I find the people who constantly feel obliged to rant and rage over the game to be far more irksome then any CoD game could every manage.

Seriously, the best way to combat it, is to IGNORE IT.

Agreed.

And I go right back to what I just said, there is NO game that isn't being pushed out for money. The world does not run on puppy dog smiles and unicorn farts, money is the single biggest driving factor for the gaming industry. YOU don't think MW3 has cool ideas but I completely disagree and will continue buying CoD games until I do not enjoy playing them anymore.

Also, you can't bring up and bash a game and then say "Agreed" when someone says we should stop talking about it. You are the one who brought it up and now you get to deal with the people telling you why you're wrong.

.... I never said it didn't have cool ideas, I just said the core-gameplay doesn't really change

Also I was agreeing with the if you don't like it ignoir it part then the rest. As previously stated, I like the game, I just don't play it that much anymore

 

[Rednog]

You are not right, at all. Pokemon may make alot of money but dear god they are not shoved out for the purpose of that.

Please tell me that was sarcasm?


Pokemon is an exercise in capitalism(if one defines capitalism as the creation of goods or services for the purposes of maximum profit), that's all. I'm surprised whoever invented it has yet to produce a thesis called "Consumerism: How to win at it by combining adorable collectible characters and every form of media.".

A lengthy title I'm aware, but that's why I'm not sat atop my golden throne paid for by the sale of a billion Pikachu dolls.

Please tell me that you've played all of the pokemon titles? That were not spin-offs.

Its self-explanitory that every new pokemon has introduced something that alters the gameplay, at its core it plays the same, the results are different.

Really?
Pokemon is one of the most horrendous example of money grubbing in the video game industry.
Seriously releasing what is essentially the same exact game in three different "versions".
There is no reason for this kind of release besides the fact that they know that people will buy each "version" to get the handful of different pokemon.
Each generation has introducing something that alters gameplay...sure but can you really justify each step as anything more than a few minor tweaks and addons. We're not talking about sweeping changes to the mechanics, it is almost akin to them just reskinning (new pokemon) and adding a few bells and whistles and charging you for a brand new game.

 

[Malyc]

Not to burst your bubble, but isn't creating a thread titled "MW3" kind of inviting MORE people to come in and argue about it?

 

[Jdb]

After gameplay, a game's tone is my biggest quality factor. Modern Warfare 3 has good gameplay, but its tone gets me wrong. I rate tone on a gradient scale, with 'less realistic' on the right side and 'more realistic' on the left side. The further away from the center something is, the better. Products toward the center feel like they're insulting me, and I don't like that kind of thing. Modern Warfare 3 snugly fits in the center. If future Call of Duty games want to impress me, they need to either feel like a war instead of a silly action movie, or have acrobatic terrorists dual wielding machine guns and rocket launchers.

 

[Awexsome]

So long as it keeps being fun I'll keep playing it. People want to make excuses all they want but in the end, haters are haters.

It's not the best story, it's not the best graphics, it's not the most innovative, but it's fun.

That's all that matters.

 

[tippy2k2]

snip

snip

Gah okay maybe I can explain what I mean with a quick story.

The before-mentioned game school I was in also had a fashion degree as well (IADT for anyone interested). I had a friend in the fashion degree who already made a slight living selling original clothing that she would make. She would get an order from specific people or small companies and make it for the cash. She did more for the money it put in her pocket then the artistic outlet.

Sometimes though she would make an original design and throw it out there, wanting to make money off of it, but it was driven more by her artistic need then her financial need.

From my experiences people who are artistically driven want to make something because they can. They also can make a living off of it, but there is an idea and a desire behind it. To me limbo seems like a game that someone had an idea, wanted to make it, and made it. Yeah he wants to make money with it, but that's not the only reason.

To me, modern warfare exists because there's a group of people who want to be rich so decide to will be made again.

snip

snip

snip

You know what would be better?

If y'all let this subject go. Jesus H. Christ people, ITS A FUCKING GAME... you don't have to even acknowledge it.

I'm no cod fan and the last cod game I owned was World at War. But regardless of how repetitive the game gets I find the people who constantly feel obliged to rant and rage over the game to be far more irksome then any CoD game could every manage.

Seriously, the best way to combat it, is to IGNORE IT.

And I go right back to what I just said, there is NO game that isn't being pushed out for money. The world does not run on puppy dog smiles and unicorn farts, money is the single biggest driving factor for the gaming industry. YOU don't think MW3 has cool ideas but I completely disagree and will continue buying CoD games until I do not enjoy playing them anymore.

Also, you can't bring up and bash a game and then say "Agreed" when someone says we should stop talking about it. You are the one who brought it up and now you get to deal with the people telling you why you're wrong.

.... I never said it didn't have cool ideas, I just said the core-gameplay doesn't really change

Also I was agreeing with the if you don't like it ignoir it part then the rest. As previously stated, I like the game, I just don't play it that much anymore

He was saying that if you don't like the game, don't rant and rave about it. You came onto here to rant about it but I'll go ahead and give you the benefit that either you mis-read his statement or I mis-read his intentions.

Lastly, the game industry is a completely different beast than the fashion industry (or really any industry). Realistically, you need at least a dozen people and a very large chunk of money to make a game that will make any kind of a splash. You get the odd-ducks like Minecraft that skate by PURELY on concept and not require a lot but 99.8% of games can't be a love game. It's all about the money in this industry (whether that is good or bad is a completely different argument than the one here).

 

[Deathmageddon]

I say if you don't like it, shut up and don't play it. The Pokémon analogy was right on, each game is an updated version of the last. I know this, I'm OK with it, and there are enough differences between games to keep me interested.

CoD has hit that cultural sweet spot inhabited by Twilight and the english Conservative party where everyone with half a brain hates it, but it has so many idiot fans that it will always be there.

Truer words have never been said. It makes me sad, quite honestly.

It makes me sad that elitist pricks like these two look down on people whose opinions, tastes and preferences differ from theirs. "You don't agree with me on EVERYTHING? You're and idiot." GTFO if you don't like it, don't play.

 

[JochemHippie]

Too be quite honest the only reason I don't like it is because the shotguns aren't any good.

 

[Terminate421]

You are not right, at all. Pokemon may make alot of money but dear god they are not shoved out for the purpose of that.

Please tell me that was sarcasm?


Pokemon is an exercise in capitalism(if one defines capitalism as the creation of goods or services for the purposes of maximum profit), that's all. I'm surprised whoever invented it has yet to produce a thesis called "Consumerism: How to win at it by combining adorable collectible characters and every form of media.".

A lengthy title I'm aware, but that's why I'm not sat atop my golden throne paid for by the sale of a billion Pikachu dolls.

Please tell me that you've played all of the pokemon titles? That were not spin-offs.

Its self-explanitory that every new pokemon has introduced something that alters the gameplay, at its core it plays the same, the results are different.

Really?
Pokemon is one of the most horrendous example of money grubbing in the video game industry.
Seriously releasing what is essentially the same exact game in three different "versions".
There is no reason for this kind of release besides the fact that they know that people will buy each "version" to get the handful of different pokemon.
Each generation has introducing something that alters gameplay...sure but can you really justify each step as anything more than a few minor tweaks and addons. We're not talking about sweeping changes to the mechanics, it is almost akin to them just reskinning (new pokemon) and adding a few bells and whistles and charging you for a brand new game.

Here is the way a generation of Pokemon works:

Nintendo will release 2 versions of the same game, the main difference (besides locations in B/W) is in the pokemon, not because they know it makes money but to encourage the feature that has been around since the dawn of the franchise: Trading.

The whole point of pokemon is to catch 'em all, though it isn't the main goal anymore since there are now 649, but getting there legitelly is quite a feat.

Then they will release a third version to that, this one is more fan influenced as it does have the DLC feeling, but it does offer a refresher to the pervious version, prestige mode WITHOUT having to erase your previous game. Not only that but the third version does seem to come with a larger story to it. Lastly, it comes with a larger amount of pokemon that were unavailable in previous games.

Finally, they release the remakes of a generation, knowing them, they will give the 3rd generation the stimpak of remake. This one has the nostalgia feel but it is made for the last bit of pokemon they need to add to the game's generation, making all pokemon accessible at that level.

Then...repeat with a new generation.

Before you say: "Oh wait, you proved yourself wrong! They can easily release a game with all the pokemon at once! Its such a cash in!"

Have you even looked at features they add? Have you even played newer games? Notice how refined they are, no glitches, balanced to the best of their ability, given a sense of challenge, improving them for the generation at the time.

 

[Stephen Wo]

The other day I played splitscreen "Five" on my neighbors PS3. You know what? I really enjoyed it! It was like a stress-ball version of Left 4 Dead.
Then I played the campaign. I quickly opted to show him Yahtzee's review of the game.
After it had ended, he quietly sat in his chair for a few minutes before bursting out laughing. "Everything he said is true", he answered.
That said, we were still able to have fun chuckling to ourselves while we played the campaign.

Yeah, so COD isn't an epic military opera. Get over yourself! It never really will be, but its fun, and it fills a niche!

 

[Thoughtful Sociopath]

While I agree that some fans of COD can be a pain in the ass sometimes, keep in mind why people play. Some people use their console purely to unwind, maybe play for 30 minutes after school or work, and then turn the console off. And for those who go around trash talking everyone who kills them, I agree that they are idiots. But not all COD players are.

 

[F'Angus]

To be honest I don't see that many MW posts...most I what I see are posts about people bad mouthing MW.

I'd like it if both types of post would stop and people could get back to actually...you know...playing games.