Right now Portal 2 is the only one really worth remembering, most everything else so far has been completely forgettable.
Poll: 2011 GOTY?
- Thread starter Drummodino
- Start date
Recommended Videos
That doesn't even come close to even bending my point. You're obviously not the only one who wants something new and interesting(which isn't mutually exclusive with liking sequels and "knockoffs" btw), but the demand for those other games is stronger. The games you cited are generally successful(or in the case of the non-released come from successful lines) and what people want. If they didn't, people wouldn't buy it, profits would be lost, and the developers would move on to something new. Just because it's not what you or your minority like doesn't make it bad. If you have a problem with the games being put out or the direction the industry is taking then don't buy the games, find a source that is putting out the games you like, and maybe even go make a game that is what you want. Going off on the industry and painting them as bad people, and by extension the consumers too, just makes you look bad. They are here to please as many people as possible. You aren't always going to be in that group.Mikeyfell said:
Edit: And just to be crystal clear, I'm not saying you can't dislike what games the industry is putting out and want them to do something different. I am saying maligning them because of it is ridiculous.
Some of the best games out there are sequels, as they have the benefit of refined gameplay and already defined world and characters.Mikeyfell said:
Super Mario Bros 3, Legend of Zelda: OoT, Fallout 2, Morrowind, COD4, Diablo 2, Warcraft 3, Street Fighter 2 (I think), Metal Gear 3, Final Fantasy 7 etc.
If you want a new IP, expect a lot of trial and error and blind faith before its gameplay can stand up to the other stuff.
The problem is when you judge the games industry like the movie industry. The more franchise oriented setup has its benefits, as the studios don't have to keep reinventing the wheel when they make their new idea. A lot of modern movies are spiritual sequels, which siphon the originality and get none of the established characters and world that accelerates the pacing.
Who's talking about movies?Spencer Petersen said:
The sequels I'm ripping on are the identical sequels.
Wasn't OoT the first 3D Zelda game?
Plus I'm reluctant to call anything with an engaging story a knockoff. For instance Mass Effect and Gears of War play similarly if they're muted. But the writing and story in Mass Effect keep it interesting while the writing and story in Gears of War induce vomiting.
If one of those CoD knockoffs had writing worth giving a shit about it would be worth playing.
But for all the thought those devs put in to their game's story you might as well just mute the dialog and play "America Fuck Yeah!" in the background.
Some of the best games are sequels. Technically Prince of Persia Sands of Time is just a reboot.
I don't care about how recycled any particular IP is just so long as there's INNOVATION or IMPROVEMENT
There is none of either in any of the myriad of CoD knockoffs and sequels that have ever come out. and yet they consistently make more money than god.
The games I cited are all similar to one game that was popular and people are stupid enough to pay for it every single time it's offered.LetalisK said:
Is Battlefield Bad Company 2 better than Modern Warfare? No. Did everyone buy B:BC 2 anyway? Yes.
Guaranteed profits for minimum effort inevitably leads to stagnation, which is what we're seeing now.
I think it's bad for the entire human race when only a minority wants innovation.
I know we're only talking about videogames but if an entire generation gets programed to seek out repetition and stagnation for the sake of entertainment human evolution is doomed.
Yes bashing someone for heartless profiteering is ridiculous.
Those poor misunderstood Enron executives.
I will admit that I've been spoiled by high production values. Seeking out independently developed games just doesn't seem all that appealing to me. I like high resolution graphics and Dolby sound and that third dimension thing.
Epic Games or Infinity Ward should just give some Indy developers $1,000,000,000 and tell them to spruce up their games. I mean they can afford it.
You honestly believe that they're trying to please anyone?
They're not just trying to make as much money as possible?
Dead Island...IF it gets released this year. The prospect of a zombie orientated first person melee brawl over a vast and stunning looking free roaming island just makes me want to jump around and sing with glee. That is of course if they ever release the damn game ¬_¬
Yes, I think I am in a minority preferring GTA IV to RDR, different strokes for different folks I suppose. I think LA Noire may push me over the edge and I will no longer be a Rockstar fanboi and just a GTA fanboy (or "canonised" GTA fanboi) as I didn't like TLaTD, TBoGT or Chinatown Wars anywhere as near as much as GTA IV.Hiphophippo said:
I'm just saying that its not absurd that GOTY contenders are mostly sequels. Yes a lot of clones do well in the market but its not a viable long term strategy for a franchise. Im just saying don't write off a game just because of its sequel status.Mikeyfell said:
And the fact that OoT was a sequel made it stronger as a game. It didn't have to go in depth about the mythology of the world characters and items, because people were familiar with the similar style of the previous games. The combat also drew from the earlier games with the hack n slashing with various ranged weapons and items, just in a 3rd dimension. If OoT was the first in the series then people would feel alienated by the strange world and people without the benefit of previous experience to help them.
And about CoD ripoffs they never win GOTY because they never develop a devoted fanbase. Strong games win GOTY because they distinguish themselves from the pack. Remember that the core of an industry has never really pushed for innovation, regardless of what that industry is. The companies that make games that push the bar higher and go further than what was thought possible lead the industry, and I don't think we need to worry about them.
OP: If Valve keeps Portal 2 updated with new levels and features then it is a strong contender.
ME3 isn't impressing me so far. If they can shed the antiquated 2 bar morality system, find a way to tell a story without taking a text dump on you and develop a combat system that actually evolves over the course of the game it might be worth trying.
Minecraft shouldn't get GOTY as its essentially a level editor without a game but it deserves an honorable mention (if it gets released this year). Probably LEOTY material
Uncharted3: No PS3, cant play
Killzone3: Absolutely average Fps from the looks of it. But alas, no PS3
DragonAge2: Average Bioware game with the story and gameplay segregated into completely different games as usual, just with less options. An improvement over DA:O, but only because that game sucked.
Battlefeild3: A game being marketed as a CoD killer that looks to subscribe to the same faults that plague that franchise. BFBC2 was essentially CoD with big maps, clunky movement and dirty visuals. Maybe worthwhile if it harkens back to the BF2 and BF:Vietnam days, Start by axing the inevitably awful single player.
LA:Noire: Awesome looking so far, but will make or break depending on how well it plays and how rewarding the gameplay is. Looks really fun, but I'm reserving my judgement.
Skyrim: Probably the more attractive of the options. Oblivion was a load of fun and had a lot of room for improvement. I would consider it an unpolished diamond. Looks average on the outside but it has a solid core with great depth (as opposed to Bioware's proverbial polished turd). Bethesda always focuses on core gameplay and leaves room for modding, another thing which is in short supply these days.
Arkham City: If they fix the problems with Arkham Asylum (mainly the boss fights) then this is a solid niche stealth-beat-em-up winner here.
Other contenders:
Brink: Looks to recapture the more floaty and smooth running FPS days with a focus on teamwork and objectives over just deathmatch and its variants. Great customization, cool art style, great premise. But what will make or break is how balanced it is and if the community can get a foothold.
Diablo3: If its released this year (I would bet on a Christmas release). It looks great, and if it can capture the fun action and pillaging feel of the second game with the smooth flow and control of modern technology it could very well be the most addictive and fun to play game of our time.
I will say that the worst game so far has to be Homefront. No other game subscribes to that absolutely most average and soul-crushing blandness as much as Homefront, and no one has been more bitchy about its sub-par reception than its creators. Maybe not the worst technically, but the worst precedent for modern gaming.Mikeyfell said:
What is the point of a business? I'm pretty sure it's to make money, not to please people.Mikeyfell said:
Oh and btw I bought Bad Company and loved it. Did I buy BC2? No but I believe that I would still enjoy it immensely. The studios cater to the mainstream audience, who will buy and love these games even if they are very similar to the previous editions. They aren't gonna care about the minority like you who rage just because they fail to innovate sufficiently for you. I would love it if they did but it just isn't gonna happen so stop whining.
But you don't see a problem with that?drummodino said:
I find it impossible to believe that people everywhere can't see that this is a bad thing.
It's not only lack of innovation they're not improving anything either.
They have looking and shooting down perfectly.
But they never moved on to improve other things, the obvious ones are tings like story and level design, but they never update that stuff.
How long will it be before this blows over, 5 years? 10 years? Will Modern Warfare 26 break all previously held sales records? How long until the only games left are WoW and COD?
You mean people who enjoyed one game enjoyed another game that was similar to it? Clearly those people are stooges, because, after all, why would people seek out a formula they know they enjoy? It makes as little sense as people liking certain kinds of music. It's crazy.Mikeyfell said:
Again, you're assuming that people who enjoy these games wouldn't also welcome innovation.
False equivilency, try again.
Uh....both? Those two things kind of feed into each other.
