• 50 results
  • 1
  • 2
#1 Edited by MarkTheSlark (26 posts) -

SF 4 sold very well. Its been forever, why havent they released a new one?

Where the hell has Jak been? A whole gen with no jak. Is Sony just going to bury an amazing franchise like Microsoft did to Rare's games? Enough with the fuckin Uncharted series, give it a rest, jak deserves a new sequel before that series comes back. Naughty God knows how to squeeze everything out of hardware, Jak 4 could look like a LEGIT Pixar movie.

What the hell happened the PoP? It was afar better series than Ass Creed. Ass Creed has turned into the year CoD milking, so why not bring back its spirtual predecessor and either give ass creed a 2 year break, or maybe even rotate them every year giving 2 year life cycles. Stop the fucking CoD formula and bring back an amazing series for fucks sake Ubi.

Have ANY of you heard anything about these 3 series at all online/ rumors etc...? I am dying to see them reborn on next gen hardware

#2 Posted by Turtlebird95 (2284 posts) -

Capcom would rather milk SFIV for all it's worth, Jak 4 could happen but not for awhile, and I don't know about Prince of Persia. Ubisoft is probably working on something.

Also this thread is random as fuck

#3 Posted by DonutFever (3548 posts) -

There will probably be a Street Fighter V, but I hope they take their time with it and make it something new.

Naughty Dog was briefly working on a Jak reboot. They decided to make The Last of Us instead, not Sony's fault.

Rare isn't really Rare anymore (though if you're looking for that sort of game check out A Hat in Time).

Prince of Persia has not had great sales. A bummer, because 08 was an awesome game.

#4 Posted by Petiew (1322 posts) -

Fighting games take a long time to get figured out, releasing SSF5 this soon would be kind of pointless. SSF4 has the most entrants for EVO this year and there's a new update coming so it still has a lot of players. There's no need for a new game now, I think it's best they hold off until they have some good ideas to differentiate 5 from 4.

As for Jak I wonder how popular the series would be if they brought it back now. I'd like to see a new game eventually though.

#5 Posted by Oscar__Explosion (2181 posts) -

Street Fighter 4 is getting yet another roster update so I'm assuming a SFV isn't going to happen for a long while.

Not ever series needs a new chapter to it. Let jak stay in the past and let Naughty Dog move on.

#6 Edited by JJOR64 (18890 posts) -

No point in releasing Street Fighter V while SF4 is still very strong in the competitive scene.

#7 Edited by Barrabas (325 posts) -
@jjor64 said:

No point in releasing Street Fighter V while SF4 is still very strong in the competitive scene.

Wasn't 3 still going on pretty strong in the competitive scene right before 4 was released despite it being 10 years old? I think 4 is going to keep going on strong there regardless of how long they wait. Unless anther fighter comes along and steals its thunder. Which they shouldn't wait for because there's no guarantee they get it back with the next release.

#8 Edited by mrfluke (5049 posts) -

there wont be a street fighter 5 for a while.

naughty dog is more interested in other stuff like the last of us than doing a jak game

and prince of persia is likely set for next year.

#9 Edited by BaneFireLord (2908 posts) -

While we're at it, where's Fallout 4? Where's Just Cause 3? Where's Red Dead Revengeance?

#10 Posted by gokaired (470 posts) -

They'll most likely re release SFIV at a discount for the PS4 with everything on it, because that's the Capcom way... ;)

#11 Posted by c_rakestraw (818 posts) -

I want to say there was some concept art of something of a new Prince of Persia that leaked out a while back. Didn't look very Prince of Persia-y if I recall right.

#12 Edited by believer258 (11564 posts) -

Naughty Dog seems to enjoy making a new series every generation. Also, there was another Jak game, it was called "The Lost Frontier", it was for PS2 and PSP and it was made by someone else. Naughty Dog doesn't seem to want to make Jak and Daxter games. And, frankly, I'd rather see them flex their creative muscles instead of just make a bunch of sequels, even if I didn't particularly like where they flexed those muscles. We have enough problems with iterative sequels instead of creative endeavors these days.

There have been two Prince of Persia games this generation. One of them came out in 2008, it had some absolutely fantastic platforming and some gorgeous graphics but people hated it because it's not Sands of Time. So when they made another game in the Sands of Time universe, people didn't buy it. People did buy Assassin's Creed. Go fucking figure.

There have been a ton of fighting games released this generation. Capcom themselves have release Street Fighter IV, Marvel Vs. Capcom, and Street Fighter X Tekken, along with re-releases of the former two.

Online
#13 Posted by thatdutchguy (1267 posts) -

WHERE THE FUCK IS SHENMUE 3 ?

#14 Posted by Silver-Streak (1328 posts) -

I would back a sequel to PoP2008 on Kickstarter, or anywhere else. God damnit I want a conclusion, and I enjoyed that game as much as, if not slightly more than, I enjoyed the Sands of Time series.

#15 Posted by SpaceRunaway (826 posts) -

"A whole gen without Jak?"

Jak was only around for one generation.

#16 Posted by OneKillWonder_ (1691 posts) -

There absolutely MUST be a Jak 4. It would be a damn shame if ND abandoned the series for good. I really wonder if, if they did do it, they would even make it similar, in terms of gameplay, to the other games or continue in the type of third-person experience that Uncharted and The Last of Us offers. Platformers aren't exactly all the rage anymore, but a Jak 4 would be a great opportunity to bring them back.

#17 Edited by DarthOrange (3828 posts) -

SF 4 sold very well. Its been forever, why havent they released a new one?

They are still tweaking Street Fighter 4, keeping it fresh.

http://www.giantbomb.com/forums/street-fighter-iv-97/sfiv-ae-2014-apparently-we-are-getting-another-upd-1429657/

Where the hell has Jak been? A whole gen with no jak.

Yup, a whole gen with no Jak.


What the hell happened the PoP?

There was a rumor going around that a new one would be revealed at E3. I bet they are working on another one. If it doesn't get revealed at Gamescom or the VGAs then E3 2014 at the latest (if I had to guess).

#18 Posted by Hailinel (23683 posts) -

@darthorange: I don't think a Jak and Daxter collection and a pair of shoddy mascot titles really count in this argument.

Online
#19 Posted by DarthOrange (3828 posts) -

@hailinel said:

@darthorange: I don't think a Jak and Daxter collection and a pair of shoddy mascot titles really count in this argument.

Battle Royale was pretty good. Besides, he said there was no Jak all gen. That is false.

#20 Posted by McLargepants (354 posts) -

Naughty Dog didn't have a good idea for Jak 4, so they made The Last of Us instead, I assume Uncharted sells better than Jak ever did, add that to not having a good idea for the game means a new one probably won't ever happen.

SS4 is HUGE. There is no reason to release a new competitive fighting game (a ridiculously difficult thing to do, especially with a franchise so nostalgic), and they are releasing a roster update (5 new fighters, or something) in the near future, so year, SF5 is not happening for a long while.

Prince of Persia doesn't sell. They attempted to reboot the franchise 5 years ago and it didn't sell well enough to make a follow up, or else there would be a follow up. Assassin's Creed exploded, and for better or worse, that's their flagship franchise now.

Online
#21 Posted by Hailinel (23683 posts) -

@hailinel said:

@darthorange: I don't think a Jak and Daxter collection and a pair of shoddy mascot titles really count in this argument.

Battle Royale was pretty good. Besides, he said there was no Jak all gen. That is false.

Battle Royale was hot garbage, if you ask me. Terrible roster comprised of too many third-party promotional characters, not enough classic characters, terrible UI design, and most importantly, the game wasn't fun. At all.

Online
#22 Posted by gokaired (470 posts) -

Lets give SF5... 4 years into the next gen then

#23 Posted by DarthOrange (3828 posts) -

@hailinel said:

@darthorange said:

@hailinel said:

@darthorange: I don't think a Jak and Daxter collection and a pair of shoddy mascot titles really count in this argument.

Battle Royale was pretty good. Besides, he said there was no Jak all gen. That is false.

Battle Royale was hot garbage, if you ask me. Terrible roster comprised of too many third-party promotional characters, not enough classic characters, terrible UI design, and most importantly, the game wasn't fun. At all.

I strongly, strongly, disagree.

#24 Posted by DonutFever (3548 posts) -

@hailinel said:

@darthorange said:

@hailinel said:

@darthorange: I don't think a Jak and Daxter collection and a pair of shoddy mascot titles really count in this argument.

Battle Royale was pretty good. Besides, he said there was no Jak all gen. That is false.

Battle Royale was hot garbage, if you ask me. Terrible roster comprised of too many third-party promotional characters, not enough classic characters, terrible UI design, and most importantly, the game wasn't fun. At all.

I strongly, strongly, disagree.

"It plays like no other fighting game ever released before."

lol

#25 Posted by Hailinel (23683 posts) -

@darthorange said:

@hailinel said:

@darthorange said:

@hailinel said:

@darthorange: I don't think a Jak and Daxter collection and a pair of shoddy mascot titles really count in this argument.

Battle Royale was pretty good. Besides, he said there was no Jak all gen. That is false.

Battle Royale was hot garbage, if you ask me. Terrible roster comprised of too many third-party promotional characters, not enough classic characters, terrible UI design, and most importantly, the game wasn't fun. At all.

I strongly, strongly, disagree.

"It plays like no other fighting game ever released before."

lol

Wow. Just, wow.

Online
#26 Posted by believer258 (11564 posts) -

@hailinel said:

@darthorange: I don't think a Jak and Daxter collection and a pair of shoddy mascot titles really count in this argument.

Battle Royale was pretty good. Besides, he said there was no Jak all gen. That is false.

There were no games that really starred Jak and Daxter on the PS3. He was in games as a mascot character, but there wasn't a main Jak and Daxter game to be seen. Nothing like Jak 3 or even Jak X.

Also Battle Royale was if nothing else just Super Smash Bros. I can't make a judgement call on its quality because I only played it a handful of times in stores, but it undoubtedly took most of its ideas from Nintendo's mascot fighter.

Online
#27 Posted by TobbRobb (4554 posts) -

@darthorange: Looking at your list made me realise just how different tastes can be. I wouldn't call any of those games bad per say, but definitely not for me. Perspective get!

#28 Edited by Barrabas (325 posts) -

@hailinel said:

@donutfever said:
@darthorange said:

@hailinel said:

@darthorange said:

@hailinel said:

@darthorange: I don't think a Jak and Daxter collection and a pair of shoddy mascot titles really count in this argument.

Battle Royale was pretty good. Besides, he said there was no Jak all gen. That is false.

Battle Royale was hot garbage, if you ask me. Terrible roster comprised of too many third-party promotional characters, not enough classic characters, terrible UI design, and most importantly, the game wasn't fun. At all.

I strongly, strongly, disagree.

"It plays like no other fighting game ever released before."

lol

Wow. Just, wow.

I like how you guys are making fun of that quote when it's completely accurate. Unless you can name another fighting game where you do no damage to characters, and the only point of attacks are to build meter so you can use super moves that are all 1 hit kills. That's way different than Smash Bros or any other fighting game that I can think of. Also it's a major reason as to why most people don't like the game. It probably would have been a better game if it had just straight ripped off Super Smash Bros.

#29 Posted by DonutFever (3548 posts) -

@barrabas said:

@hailinel said:

@donutfever said:
@darthorange said:

@hailinel said:

@darthorange said:

@hailinel said:

@darthorange: I don't think a Jak and Daxter collection and a pair of shoddy mascot titles really count in this argument.

Battle Royale was pretty good. Besides, he said there was no Jak all gen. That is false.

Battle Royale was hot garbage, if you ask me. Terrible roster comprised of too many third-party promotional characters, not enough classic characters, terrible UI design, and most importantly, the game wasn't fun. At all.

I strongly, strongly, disagree.

"It plays like no other fighting game ever released before."

lol

Wow. Just, wow.

I like how you guys are making fun of that quote when it's completely accurate. Unless you can name another fighting game where you do no damage to characters, and the only point of attacks are to build meter so you can use super moves that are all 1 hit kills. That's way different than Smash Bros or any other fighting game that I can think of. Also it's a major reason as to why most people don't like the game. It probably would have been a better game if it had just straight ripped off Super Smash Bros.

But it ends up playing pretty similarly. Most fighting games have metres that build up to super moves, and when you add the damage done by normal attacks, the opponent would usually be dead.

#30 Edited by Hailinel (23683 posts) -

@barrabas said:

@hailinel said:

@donutfever said:
@darthorange said:

@hailinel said:

@darthorange said:

@hailinel said:

@darthorange: I don't think a Jak and Daxter collection and a pair of shoddy mascot titles really count in this argument.

Battle Royale was pretty good. Besides, he said there was no Jak all gen. That is false.

Battle Royale was hot garbage, if you ask me. Terrible roster comprised of too many third-party promotional characters, not enough classic characters, terrible UI design, and most importantly, the game wasn't fun. At all.

I strongly, strongly, disagree.

"It plays like no other fighting game ever released before."

lol

Wow. Just, wow.

I like how you guys are making fun of that quote when it's completely accurate. Unless you can name another fighting game where you do no damage to characters, and the only point of attacks are to build meter so you can use super moves that are all 1 hit kills. That's way different than Smash Bros or any other fighting game that I can think of. Also it's a major reason as to why most people don't like the game. It probably would have been a better game if it had just straight ripped off Super Smash Bros.

But it ends up playing pretty similarly. Most fighting games have metres that build up to super moves, and when you add the damage done by normal attacks, the opponent would usually be dead.

Not to mention the fact that it plays like a tweaked version of Smash Bros. Saying it plays like no other fighting game ever released before is ignorant of Smash Bros. and every other Smash clone that came before PSAS. It's giving Sony's game credit where credit is not due.

Online
#31 Posted by Barrock (3525 posts) -

Weren't there leaked screen shots of what looked like an Assassin's Creed-like Prince of Persia game?

#32 Posted by Demoskinos (14520 posts) -

Im with Darth. I think All-Stars is pretty damn great. And playing "like" something doesn't mean its that. There are enough differences that I would consider the two different enough to be entirely unique experiences.

#33 Posted by Barrabas (325 posts) -

@hailinel said:

@donutfever said:

@barrabas said:

I like how you guys are making fun of that quote when it's completely accurate. Unless you can name another fighting game where you do no damage to characters, and the only point of attacks are to build meter so you can use super moves that are all 1 hit kills. That's way different than Smash Bros or any other fighting game that I can think of. Also it's a major reason as to why most people don't like the game. It probably would have been a better game if it had just straight ripped off Super Smash Bros.

But it ends up playing pretty similarly. Most fighting games have metres that build up to super moves, and when you add the damage done by normal attacks, the opponent would usually be dead.

Not to mention the fact that it plays like a tweaked version of Smash Bros. Saying it plays like no other fighting game ever released before is ignorant of Smash Bros. and every other Smash clone that came before PSAS. It's giving Sony's game credit where credit is not due.

Maybe it's because I play a lot of fighting games and am pretty in tune to the differences between them, but these arguments seem insane to me. I mean would you say Tekken, MvC, and Dive Kick all play just like Street Fighter? Because I would call all four of those very different and unique experiences. Dive Kick also being an example of a game like PSAS that I would say plays like no other fighting game ever released before.

#34 Posted by Counterclockwork87 (580 posts) -

It's gonna be a while until Street Fighter V, and it probably should be. Remember how long the wait was for Street Fighter 3? I didn't even think they were EVER gonna make Street Fighter IV, that's how dormant that franchise was. I think it's safe to assume it'll be awhile.

#35 Edited by RobotHamster (4170 posts) -

Ratchet and Jak crossover for next gen I'm calling it now.

#36 Posted by Sooty (8082 posts) -

Capcom would rather milk SFIV for all it's worth

Milking it by releasing two free balance updates? (v2012, v2013 is coming)

Wow. Those bastards.

#37 Edited by cikame (964 posts) -

@sooty said:

@turtlebird95 said:

Capcom would rather milk SFIV for all it's worth

Milking it by releasing two free balance updates? (v2012, v2013 is coming)

Wow. Those bastards.

The upcoming update is $15 for 5 characters, 4 of which are assets taken from SFxT and 6 stages apparently also from SFxT.
It's also worth noting, the 2012 update was for people who purchased the arcade edition dlc.

#38 Edited by Hailinel (23683 posts) -

@cikame said:

@sooty said:

@turtlebird95 said:

Capcom would rather milk SFIV for all it's worth

Milking it by releasing two free balance updates? (v2012, v2013 is coming)

Wow. Those bastards.

The upcoming update is $15 for 5 characters, 4 of which are assets taken from SFxT and 6 stages apparently also from SFxT.

It's also worth noting, the 2012 update was for people who

purchased

the arcade edition dlc.

Of course. That's because the balance update covered the entire breadth of SSFIV content including the AE DLC.

@barrabas said:

@hailinel said:

@donutfever said:

@barrabas said:

I like how you guys are making fun of that quote when it's completely accurate. Unless you can name another fighting game where you do no damage to characters, and the only point of attacks are to build meter so you can use super moves that are all 1 hit kills. That's way different than Smash Bros or any other fighting game that I can think of. Also it's a major reason as to why most people don't like the game. It probably would have been a better game if it had just straight ripped off Super Smash Bros.

But it ends up playing pretty similarly. Most fighting games have metres that build up to super moves, and when you add the damage done by normal attacks, the opponent would usually be dead.

Not to mention the fact that it plays like a tweaked version of Smash Bros. Saying it plays like no other fighting game ever released before is ignorant of Smash Bros. and every other Smash clone that came before PSAS. It's giving Sony's game credit where credit is not due.

Maybe it's because I play a lot of fighting games and am pretty in tune to the differences between them, but these arguments seem insane to me. I mean would you say Tekken, MvC, and Dive Kick all play just like Street Fighter? Because I would call all four of those very different and unique experiences. Dive Kick also being an example of a game like PSAS that I would say plays like no other fighting game ever released before.

Can you honestly say that PSAS was in no way inspired by Smash Bros.? The rules may not be exactly the same, but the resemblance is more than passing.

Online
#39 Posted by Barrabas (325 posts) -

@hailinel: Of course it was inspired by Smash. The same way FPS games are inspired by Doom, RPGs are inspired by D&D, and Fighting games are inspired by Yie Ar Kung-Fu. However, it plays different enough from Smash on a fundamental level that I would say it plays like no other fighting game ever released. You're the one that seems to be unwilling to recognize that it has tried to do something very different from Smash.

Anyway, I've had enough of this. I don't even like PSAS. I think it's a terrible game. If you want to keep letting your fandom of Smash blind you from seeing that PSAS is something very different then fine.

#40 Posted by Hailinel (23683 posts) -

@barrabas said:

@hailinel: Of course it was inspired by Smash. The same way FPS games are inspired by Doom, RPGs are inspired by D&D, and Fighting games are inspired by Yie Ar Kung-Fu. However, it plays different enough from Smash on a fundamental level that I would say it plays like no other fighting game ever released. You're the one that seems to be unwilling to recognize that it has tried to do something very different from Smash.

Anyway, I've had enough of this. I don't even like PSAS. I think it's a terrible game. If you want to keep letting your fandom of Smash blind you from seeing that PSAS is something very different then fine.

I've played PSAS. The only things I got from it were that it's a Smash clone, and what changes it did make were poorly done. It's certainly not the revolution that DarthOrange seems to contend.

Online
#41 Edited by ADAMWD (562 posts) -

That terrible cell shaded Prince of Persia that captured none of what made that series fantastic is what happened.

#42 Posted by BlatantNinja23 (930 posts) -

Street Fighter IV is still getting updates. V won't come till the the new consoles of a good ground. Same with Prince of Persia, they're probably trying to get a next gen reboot but it sounds like they keep on scrappin what they have.

#43 Posted by WMoyer83 (624 posts) -

When the hell is Blinx the Timesweeper 3 coming out, or Prey 2, or PsMove presents Danny Trejo's Adventures in Punching 2??

#44 Posted by Sooty (8082 posts) -

@cikame said:

@sooty said:

@turtlebird95 said:

Capcom would rather milk SFIV for all it's worth

Milking it by releasing two free balance updates? (v2012, v2013 is coming)

Wow. Those bastards.

The upcoming update is $15 for 5 characters, 4 of which are assets taken from SFxT and 6 stages apparently also from SFxT.

It's also worth noting, the 2012 update was for people who

purchased

the arcade edition dlc.

SFIV came out 4 years ago, it's the dominant fighting game and continues to be excellent. I don't understand people who can be upset by this. Maybe they should stick to buying Call of Duty annually.

and I didn't know 2013 had become a paid update with extra content, sounds more than worth the price, anyone who disagrees obviously has no idea how game changing new characters + a balance update is, it's like playing an entirely new game because of the shake up.

#45 Posted by DarthOrange (3828 posts) -

@hailinel said:

@barrabas said:

@hailinel: Of course it was inspired by Smash. The same way FPS games are inspired by Doom, RPGs are inspired by D&D, and Fighting games are inspired by Yie Ar Kung-Fu. However, it plays different enough from Smash on a fundamental level that I would say it plays like no other fighting game ever released. You're the one that seems to be unwilling to recognize that it has tried to do something very different from Smash.

Anyway, I've had enough of this. I don't even like PSAS. I think it's a terrible game. If you want to keep letting your fandom of Smash blind you from seeing that PSAS is something very different then fine.

I've played PSAS. The only things I got from it were that it's a Smash clone, and what changes it did make were poorly done. It's certainly not the revolution that DarthOrange seems to contend.

I never claimed it was a revolution. Did you even read what I wrote?

I had more fun playing this then any other game this year, and thus it gets my number one spot.

The whole thing was about how much fun I had with it. That is about as subjective as it gets. I never contended anything about where it ranks among the pantheon of fighting games.

#46 Posted by Turtlebird95 (2284 posts) -

@sooty said:

@turtlebird95 said:

Capcom would rather milk SFIV for all it's worth

Milking it by releasing two free balance updates? (v2012, v2013 is coming)

Wow. Those bastards.

Perhaps milk wasn't the best term for my comment, but what I meant was that instead of making a whole new Street Fighter, Capcom is just going change balances and add "new" characters, which I'm perfectly okay with.

Also, on an unrelated note, do you ever post anything that isn't totally sarcastic? Not trying to be a dick, but whenever I see your picture the reply you leave is always negative.

#48 Edited by Hailinel (23683 posts) -

@darthorange: Sorry about that. I guess I must have just misinterpreted your comment about it being like nothing before.

Online
#49 Posted by LackingSaint (1764 posts) -

I thought All-Stars was a refreshing addition to one of the most stale subgenres in modern gaming (a subgenre that is apparently owned exclusively by Super Smash Bros, the brawler). It's a shame that it's very unlikely there will be any kind of follow-up.

Wait a second, that's not what this thread is about at all!

#50 Posted by SomeDeliCook (2203 posts) -

The fuck is a new Timesplitters at?