What Games Should Stop Being Made?
- Thread starter Xannidel
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I'm still racking my brain for the reason behind re-designing Black and White.Mau95 said:
What is the point?
Pokémon should have stopped at Generation IV. I say this because I liked Ruby, I thought Diamond was not without its redeeming qualities (though the selection of 'mons sucked), and HeartGold was a major nostalgia trip with the added ability to run around with your favorite 'mon always at your heels. Since I started with Crystal, I feel like I came full circle with that game. It is my opinion that the Pokémon franchise should have stopped there.
<img src="http://i803.photobucket.com/albums/yy311/rcrobinson85/oh_you.jpg" width="250" /img>Sirron Kcuch said:
I am amazed that while fans are very critical of periodical releases in a series, Valve has managed to generate an opposite fan response with (the lack of) Half Life 2: Episode 3.
Anyway, I'd have to say that the only series I want to end (at least right away) is Mass Effect. It is perfect as is, and should be neatly wrapped up and shelved for future generations to look upon: how you do a branching story right.
While I was somewhat disappointed in 'S Creed: Revelations, I know that was just a temporary case of Ezio overstaying his welcome, and I also knew the series wasn't going to stick with that particular setting and style for good. I'm waiting to see how 'S Creed 3 mixes things up before I form an opinion on whether or not the series itself should go. If it's a nice step in a new direction, then all is well. Should it fail to mix things up beyond a ctrl-c/v and re-hash of the past engine, then I'll be calling for the series's terminus.
I know there are people out there who still enjoy the sports titles, but they should definitely cut back to, oh... one every four years per sport. That seems to work for both the seasonal Olympic games. Give them time to develop and mature properly between each rendition before anything else.
Halo. Ooh, that's a tricky one. As someone who walks the walk and talks the talk, I say Halo's multiplayer has gone long ways since Combat Evolved. There have been tweaks in the transition to 2 and 3, and a ground up re-haul for Reach. When I play, I feel the difference, and I am most eager to see how this new Halo trilogy intends to stride.
Since the Chief doesn't have much of a personality outside the novels, I don't have a problem with that cardboard prop making a re-appearance. He's a pretty good icon for "I shoot things," and that's really all that's needed. He stays unobtrusive, lets his AI do all the talking, and doesn't afraid of anything. If I wanted good characterization, I'd play Mass Effect. If I wanted a nice and convoluted plot, then I'll strap into the animus. If I want to shoot things with my online buddies, then the Halo ring is the place for me. It recognizes its niche for accessible multiplayer action, and doesn't try to be what it isn't.
Sonic and the various Nintendo titles have their own communities formed around them, and are still enjoyable if repetitive. As someone who never had much stock in them outside of Pokemon, I say let them keep going.
While I was somewhat disappointed in 'S Creed: Revelations, I know that was just a temporary case of Ezio overstaying his welcome, and I also knew the series wasn't going to stick with that particular setting and style for good. I'm waiting to see how 'S Creed 3 mixes things up before I form an opinion on whether or not the series itself should go. If it's a nice step in a new direction, then all is well. Should it fail to mix things up beyond a ctrl-c/v and re-hash of the past engine, then I'll be calling for the series's terminus.
I know there are people out there who still enjoy the sports titles, but they should definitely cut back to, oh... one every four years per sport. That seems to work for both the seasonal Olympic games. Give them time to develop and mature properly between each rendition before anything else.
Halo. Ooh, that's a tricky one. As someone who walks the walk and talks the talk, I say Halo's multiplayer has gone long ways since Combat Evolved. There have been tweaks in the transition to 2 and 3, and a ground up re-haul for Reach. When I play, I feel the difference, and I am most eager to see how this new Halo trilogy intends to stride.
Since the Chief doesn't have much of a personality outside the novels, I don't have a problem with that cardboard prop making a re-appearance. He's a pretty good icon for "I shoot things," and that's really all that's needed. He stays unobtrusive, lets his AI do all the talking, and doesn't afraid of anything. If I wanted good characterization, I'd play Mass Effect. If I wanted a nice and convoluted plot, then I'll strap into the animus. If I want to shoot things with my online buddies, then the Halo ring is the place for me. It recognizes its niche for accessible multiplayer action, and doesn't try to be what it isn't.
Sonic and the various Nintendo titles have their own communities formed around them, and are still enjoyable if repetitive. As someone who never had much stock in them outside of Pokemon, I say let them keep going.
The only thing I can think of is Call of Duty
Everything else hasn't had that much of a track record
Everything else hasn't had that much of a track record
You know Witcher game was based on books? That had an ending. With Geralt being dead. If we would use the logic You propose Witcher game could never even exist.tzimize said:
Final Fantasy series, each are happening in different universe pretty much (with some exceptions maybe here and there, but generally each game is separate story, just reusing same archetypes/names)
Mass Effect. Yeah that's a different story because trilogy is 3 games. Doesn't mean They can't use the universe for something fun (sadly it probably won't be with the whole "keep Your saves" crap, but oh well).
Sonic the Hedgehog that little rodent has gotten a free ride from an overobsessive fandom for far too long only to bravely wave the banner of. "We made a game that slightly didn't suck! And it only took two decades!"
Sega should take that money and put it to Shennmue
Sega should take that money and put it to Shennmue
Actually, Halo is on 2-3 year increments between releases. Halo 3 came out in 2007 and Halo: Reach came out in 2010. ODST and Wars were more spin-offs that didn't have much replay value, thus making them not really count on that part.crappingpegasus said:
Halo 4 will either be an Xbox720 title or a 360 title of next year giving it about 2-3 years after Halo: Reach.
Not really. Although the 2 is questionable, we have yet to see what they are doing to the game itself, besides, this is the first "sequel" to a pokemon game since Pokemon Stadium.Mau95 said:
At least give it a chance before saying "no" to pokemon.
Also, Pokemon is great, I want a Generation 6 at some point (Not now, we just got Black and White!)
None should be stopped, but some do need to give our wallets some slack as well as give time to improve their games. CoD and sports games are right up there on this. As much as I love games like FIFA, a bit of time out to properly refine new additions and iron out bugs would be nice.
THANK YOU! I cannot tell you how many people have said to me "Hey you wanna play Madden NFl (insert year here)" To which I say, nah, lets go outside, at which point they lose all interest in American football.ChaosDemon said:
None. If they can afford to keep making games for a series then there is obviously a good number of people that enjoy playing them. Why deprive them of what they enjoy when I can just choose not to play the games? No skin off my back if people want to play Halo 7, but Reach was the end of the series for me.
Ha Dead (end). I don't see it continuing after 2 anyway, what made you think it should stop?way2sl0w said:
Of course I can assume it's because 1 & 2 were basically the same game, like just about every game on your list, (with which I completely agree with). Maybe not elder scrolls & 'Fantasy' RPG's since Skyrim & Fallout 3 are the only ones I have played.
Yeah, good point. Really there are very few games I'd really like to see them stop making pretty much because I can just choose to not buy the ones I don't like; the exceptions being the Call of Duty type military gun wank games and only because elements of them seem to be leeching into games I do enjoy.Tyrant55 said:
Also MMOs. ...for the same reason come to think of it. I'm looking at you Blizzard.
Really though, now that I've sampled a few MMOs thanks to the lovely F2P model, my biggest beef with them is mostly that when I play I feel like my actions are largely insignificant. You see one of the things I enjoy about video games is being a hero. I like thinking that I'm actually making a difference in that tiny virtual world, and in modern games seeing the fuits of my labours manifested in that virtual world.. However in an MMO, no matter how many quests/missions I complete the world remains unchanged and there's always the undermining knowledge that these same quests/missions have already been completed by about 10,000 players before me and will be completed again by another 10,000+ after me. The NPCs never remember my successes and nothing ever changes no matter what I do. Of course I'm well aware of why it is that way, but that doesn't make it any more bearable.
They said ME3 is going to be the end of Shepard's story, but they're going to continue the series with spinoff games.tzimize said:
If Portal, Left 4 Dead and Team Fortress 2 are HL2 mods, then Red Dead Redemption is a GTA4 mod, Fallout 3 is a Oblivion mod, Planescape Torment is a Baldurs Gate mod and a number of other examples. All of these have the same things in common: created by the same developer using the same game engine (and in all but one case, their own engine) in broadly the same genre.LiquidSolstice said:
Allow different developers and a lot of games could be considered mods of one of the Unreal titles, including Bioshock, Bulletstorm, Rainbow Six Vegas, Brother In Arms: Hell's Highway, America's Army, perhaps at a stretch even Borderlands and Mass Effect.
While I can sort of see your point, it's a bit unfair to downplay all of Valve's games as mods, since many other devs can be blamed of doing the same thing. The only difference is the frequency at which they do it. I'll admit Valve has a quite a record there.