Something went wrong. Try again later

Dookysharpgun

This user has not updated recently.

622 0 34 12
Forum Posts Wiki Points Following Followers

Dookysharpgun's forum posts

Avatar image for dookysharpgun
Dookysharpgun

622

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

12

Followers

Reviews: 32

User Lists: 0

You are passing the blame onto third parties when the blame really does lie with Nintendo. Yes, it is true that third parties have not been putting out quality games on Nintendo consoles for quite some time, but Nintendo is the one to blame for this. The Wii U is the fourth straight Nintendo console that has one stupid decision that effectively killed any chance for third party developers to release multiplatform games on Nintendo consoles. Allow me to illustrate the point.

Nintendo 64: By opting to go with cartridges despite the fact that both their competitors had moved to CD, most of the multiplatform or de facto Playstation exclusives (after the Saturn became irrelevant) were technologically incapable of being released on the N64. Games that exceeded the small capacity of the N64 cartridge, games that used lots of prerendered video, and games that featured voice work were either not released on the system or were released in a diminished state (lack of FMV, highly compressed audio, etc.).

Gamecube: Nintendo once again made a format decision that would cost them many multiplatform games, this time deciding to go with 1.4 GB mini discs that were less than 1/3 the capacity of standard DVDs. This was the generation where their decision probably hurt them the least, since the cheap production cost of these proprietary mini discs meant that games could easily fit on multiple discs (look at RE4), but there were still many instances of games that came out on both the PS2 and Xbox but did not release on the Gamecube.

Wii: This one is pretty obvious. By making a system so vastly under-powered compared to the competition, Nintendo basically made the decision for third parties. Even though the Wii had a higher install base than it's two competitors, the install base of the 360 and PS3 combined dwarfed that of the Wii, making multiplatform development much more lucrative than Wii exclusive development. If the Wii were capable of running multiplatform games without much effort in the port job, developers may have actually spent the time to add some Wii exclusive features to make use of the system's unique aspects, but because games couldn't be ported to the Wii, the only instances of multiplatform games released on the system were inferior versions farmed out to second tier development studios. You say developers only put out crappy games on the Wii, but think of it from a business perspective. The publisher is spending tens of millions of dollars on a game, are they going to have their top tier studio make a game for ridiculously outdated hardware with a lackluster online infrastructure and no HD capability that has a potential install base of 100 million or have them work on more modern hardware with a potential install base of 150 million (plus PC in some cases)?

Wii U: Nintendo simply didn't learn. They made the exact same mistake as the Wii generation. They opted to go with input "innovation" and simply did not make a machine capable of matching the competition on a technical level. Third parties will be left with the exact same scenario as last generation and they will make the same decision. They will always choose the option with the larger install base and the more advanced hardware. While 360 and PS3 versions of games are still being made, the Wii U may get some ports of convenience, but once the industry shifts completely to the next generation systems, Nintendo will once again be completely abandoned by third parties, and once again they have no one to blame but themselves.

This was pretty much what I was going to say. I mean, for an example of how underpowered the Wii was, look at The Last Story. I love that game, but the main city hub, at times, didn't load in its entirety, the gameplay stuttered near water, and at times, at one boss that existed in a water-filled area, my Wii nearly shat a brick trying to deal with it. Nintendo shoot themselves in the foot by thinking small, and it's shrinking the audience. It's the sense of self-imposed alienation that really gets me though. They seemingly have very little business smarts when it comes to their consoles, it's quite sad.

Avatar image for dookysharpgun
Dookysharpgun

622

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

12

Followers

Reviews: 32

User Lists: 0

Final Fantasy communities can be terrible. They tend to hate criticism, and don't bother engaging in discourse involving anything you say. To them, you're wrong because you hate all things Final Fantasy...despite the fact that you may be criticising the shitty new games, loving the previous ones. Then again I have an issue with general Square Enix fans. They don't tend to acknowledge the faults of the company, and hate the fact that you point out potential flaws in future titles.

Avatar image for dookysharpgun
Dookysharpgun

622

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

12

Followers

Reviews: 32

User Lists: 0

@super_aids: It requires a minimum of a 1.5 Mbps connection. MS are also skipping the launch for countries all across the world that already have live, because the standard net connections aren't fast enough to accommodate for the Xbone's needs. Just because people have the internet doesn't mean it's good internet. Mine is pretty fast, but it drops like a bastard, slows during random hours and sometimes just breaks horribly when the line goes down.

Americans have mixed lines depending on providers. When this console comes out, how many people are going to be returning them because they weren't aware of the 1.5 Mbps connection necessary to connect to the internet and play the games that they bought? The answer, I'd say, is a lot.

OT: This MS dude, if he is who he says he is, seems to be contradicting himself, given how he managed to speak about how people are being fucked by gamestop, but it's been somewhat confirmed that a backroom deal making gamestop one of the participating retailers you can trade Xbone games in to has been made. He also states that competition is good - then essentially says that he wants to eliminate competition entirely because vision! but that's not how it works. Digital gaming will kill competition, allow publishers and companies to control the entire retail industry and kill consumer rights. Not because it's a bad idea, but because like all good ideas, when shitheads get their claws into it, it turns terrible. I'll keep my physical discs thanks, and no online check in, because I own what I paid for.

Avatar image for dookysharpgun
Dookysharpgun

622

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

12

Followers

Reviews: 32

User Lists: 0

#4  Edited By Dookysharpgun

@flindip: Oh I'm talking purely from a MP perspective here, I just find it odd that character models can't be tailored to gender, it seems pretty weird that they apparently have a female model within SP, but can't (or won't) migrate it over to MP as a basis for customization.

@azteck: Woah, now that came outta left field there. C'mon dude, I'm just bringing up the very obvious issues that are raised and are quickly put into the 'non-issue' catagory. The money side of things means fuck all nowadays, too many games have overblown budgets anyway, this game being, more than likely, no acception. Toss a little of that over for some MP diversity, and you've got an FPS that has broken from the pack, it could be interesting to see how it goes. What I am saying, however, is that female protagonists, or characters in general that have, y'know, character, are difficult to get out into the mainstream market due to marketing fears, leading me to believe that anything to do with women in any sort of game setting is a hard sell in general for these publishers. Women can play games as much as they like, but what plenty of people, myself included, would like to see is a bit of diversity in the industry instead of muscley dudes with no character whatsoever. The same old shite with the excuse of 'financial contraints' means nothing. Also (and bearing in mind that I'm a Battlefield fan) BF has had some of the worst hitbox detection I've ever seen, especially in BF3, whose patches went about ruining what was a pretty decent MP. When some dude can fire a very inaccurate gun, beating your highly accurate weapon in a straight on attack, when you've got the jump on him, then something is wrong. If we're going to have shitty hitboxes, I'd rather it be because of the character models being slightly different as opposed to some weird, patch-related voodoo.

@krullban: It's like swings and roundabouts with you, so I'll just make this quick: just because you may think it isn't an issue because something isn't there, doesn't mean it isn't an issue. This game should, in MP content at least, have female avatars. So-called 'crying' over the issue, isn't crying - you're just attributing that widely used internet term to something that people are suggesting is a little bloody stupid to omit from a game, especially given the fact that women can now serve in combat roles in the military. It doesn't have to be in the SP, but I'll be damned if it couldn't have gone in the MP. It shouldn't be an issue in this day and age because those avatars should already be in there, that's all I'm saying. You don't mind? Well good for you, but other people - who aren't you - place importance on some things that offer them a little bit more in terms of what's part of a games content. It's the little things that make a game interesting, not recreating some boring, brown and gray shooter with no risks taken. People care, you don't, but other people do...we good now?

Avatar image for dookysharpgun
Dookysharpgun

622

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

12

Followers

Reviews: 32

User Lists: 0

@krullban said:

@dookysharpgun said:

As someone who plays both male and female characters in games, I fail to see the huge issue with actually putting them into the freaking game. It's actually pretty easy, the hitbox issues have been sorted by other devs, there are literally no reasons not to do it.

Who gives a fuck if someone has a male or female avatar, why is it that the devs and the publishers make such a big deal out of these things, forcing the reaction from people who just want the option? It's an option, that's all; Halo can do it, Blacklight can do it, why can't anyone else?

Do you not see the irony here? Exactly, who gives a fuck. It literally doesn't matter, and the people making a big deal about it are you, not the devs. It's a fucking character in a game that will die in a couple of minutes of playing, why the hell does the gender matter at all? The games you mentioned it's hardly even noticeable if you're playing as another gender. I could be playing as a pigeon for all I care, it's multiplayer, my objective is to shoot things. Who gives a shit about who you're playing as.

This shit is just getting ridiculous and annoying. Stop making issues where there aren't any issues.

It's stuff like this that makes me hate the gaming community sometimes. There is no irony there. None whatsoever. You're taking just one line and examining it in your light, which is great if you want to totally ignore my overall point, but it doesn't take into account what I was saying. What I'm saying, in the most basic terms, is that the issue shouldn't be huge, due to the fact that it shouldn't exist: because female avatars should already be available. That is what I meant. Purely from my perspective, as an individual who finds it astonishing that female avatars and characters in military FPS's haven't become a standard yet. It shouldn't be a big deal, because this problem shouldn't exist, female avatars should be present, end of story. The issues that are being raised here is why MP avatars can't be both genders. Giving a fuck about the gender has only come up because the devs brought it up, and are giving shit excuses as to why there are none, when we're dealing with an industry that doesn't want to put female characters on cover-art, because it might drive away sales. It's a legitimate thing that has been done, and in Halo especially, you notice the different builds of the Spartans and the different voices too. It needs to be addressed, and just because you don't agree doesn't mean it shouldn't be raised...it's an extra that may invite a bigger portion of the market over a longer term, why is that so wrong?

See, what's getting ridiculous is the sheer amount of denial going on in the gaming community at large when it comes to situations like these: I'm just stating that it would corner an option in the FPS market that hasn't been done enough, paving the way for a more long-term, progressive strategy that would benefit the BF franchise as a whole. Issues like this do exist, like it or not, they damn sure exist and they need to be addressed. Nobody is assaulting your games, or trying to take them away from you, or trying to push something down your throat...what they're trying to do is raise the awareness that, yes, realistic military FPS titles need to, if they wish to be realistic, introduce female avatars because they're trying to be realistic and you can't claim that until you encapsulate every aspect of the realistic military situation.

If you want the issue to disappear; just support the idea that there should be female avatars in games like this, it's about fucking time there was, just face it. People are literally putting more effort and time into arguing against the idea of female avatars than the people arguing for it.

Avatar image for dookysharpgun
Dookysharpgun

622

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

12

Followers

Reviews: 32

User Lists: 0

@wrighteous86: Honestly, I kinda find it hard to believe that whole business perspective. It would have separated BF4 from the next CoD, and actually given them a small feature for customization that may have drawn in more female players. That would be a good, long-term business decision.

I guess I'm just tired of money being used as a piss-poor defence for the exclusion of something that should come naturally into any game's customizable MP...or maybe I'm just jaded and a damn sight more mature than most companies who think that it's not worth the funding to work on a feature that really needs to be in games nowadays.

Avatar image for dookysharpgun
Dookysharpgun

622

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

12

Followers

Reviews: 32

User Lists: 0

As someone who plays both male and female characters in games, I fail to see the huge issue with actually putting them into the freaking game. It's actually pretty easy, the hitbox issues have been sorted by other devs, there are literally no reasons not to do it.

Who gives a fuck if someone has a male or female avatar, why is it that the devs and the publishers make such a big deal out of these things, forcing the reaction from people who just want the option? It's an option, that's all; Halo can do it, Blacklight can do it, why can't anyone else?

Avatar image for dookysharpgun
Dookysharpgun

622

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

12

Followers

Reviews: 32

User Lists: 0

@aurahack: Oh yeah, Vettel has serious disrespect, and is by far one of the biggest arseholes I've seen in F1. People have every right to feel that way, I just think the sheer danger that faced them both, due to Vettel's actions, which comes back entirely to him and solely him, is enough to crucify him already.

Don't worry about it, Alonso's accident was so early it was overlooked quite a bit. I do agree though, he should have pulled into the pits to get that fixed, he was ordered to do so, it was logical and safety-related and the right call...and he just fucking ignored it. You're right, it was lucky that it didn't fly off and outright kill another driver, or multiple drivers...we've seen big crashes before. Jesus I see that and it was just...I don't get shocked easily, but when his front steering locked when that bastard came off, he was lucky he didn't plow into anyone else. That shit has to be addressed too, it's stupid and careless in a sport where the slightest fuck-up can kill someone, or injure multiple people!

Avatar image for dookysharpgun
Dookysharpgun

622

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

12

Followers

Reviews: 32

User Lists: 0

#9  Edited By Dookysharpgun

@aurahack: I have to say, while I agree with you in this case, the team orders in F1 in general have always been a bit...off-putting for me. I mean, Vettel should have laid off, he put himself and his teammate in serious danger, and could have cost them both what they'd worked for the entire race, but as team orders go...I still remember the bullshit order given to let Schumacher pass Barrichello a couple years back (or many, I only really got back into F1 over the last year) I know it was a tight year and the points were needed, but with only two in the difference, and given Barrichello's great driving, that was such an unpopular decision that I think every fan in the world complained.

At times, the orders are cruel and take away a drivers' chance for victory, which is a casualty of the points system in place I guess. However, Vettel did pull a really dangerous stunt and that should be the main focus of any and all criticism of his actions. Team orders or not, we'd already seen Alonso come off a lap into the race when he tried to get up Webber's tail for an overtake, plenty of that seems to be happening this season, it's only a matter of time until something bad happens, so Vettel should be at least given a slap on the wrist for endangering a teammate to show other drivers that this won't stick.

Avatar image for dookysharpgun
Dookysharpgun

622

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

12

Followers

Reviews: 32

User Lists: 0

#10  Edited By Dookysharpgun

@Darji said:

@Dookysharpgun said:

Vanessa Hunter has said everything that needed to be said on the matter really, and it's the exact same thing that I mentioned in the previous thread about this. It's literally putting forward a headless, legless, armless corpse with two perfect breasts - effectively removing any resemblance to a woman - to market to what Deep Silver thinks is their fanbase: a collection of necrophilia-worshipping, classic 'nerds' who are so repressed and feel that women are 'against' them, that they want a representation of the perfect woman. This is not the case, this was never the case, and the fact that they go so far as to attempt to absolve themselves of all blame is shocking and stupid to an extent I can't quite fathom.

Not only is this fucking disgusting, but it paints a pretty grim picture of what Deep Silver actually think of their fans, and the industry in general. I fail to see the reason behind the backlash against the outrage, seeing as the outrage is justified. If you don't feel offended, grand, nobody is saying you should and is attempting to shame you into thinking otherwise, what they are saying is that you should understand how it makes other people feel, and take into account how it represents and affects the position women in general, instead of saying 'it doesn't offend me, why does it offend you?' or what essentially equates to: 'I didn't read the article, but I'll leave an uninformed anti-feminism comment because being progressive is dumb'. As for the guys trying to use the old: 'what if it was a man's corpse?' crap...just go away, go back to your sandbox and don't pull the girl's pigtails just because you think they get special treatment over toys. Christ.

You have serious issues my friend. People who have bought this would not haven been classic "nerds" what ever that is. It would have been horror and expoitation fans. That is exactly what these kind of movies with zombies and gore movie represented back in the 70s, 80s and 90s.

...you just honed in on exactly that one thing and rolled with it, didn't you? What did I say there exactly? Lets just look at it one more time: That it's what Deep Silverthinks of their fanbase...they shunned the blame to their fans in their apology letter, if that doesn't tell you enough about it, then I can't convince you otherwise. Even so, despite your reply, does it make it any better? No. It doesn't. It's an offensive and distrubing piece, and serves no other reason to exist other than to be a testament to the poor decision making that pervades videogames lately...it's common sense, don't put a disassembled, prestinely-breasted model as part of a 'zombie-bait' (that's a whole other kettle of fish) edition of a game out into the public as that is fetishising death and depersonalising women in general. Deep Silver never took into account just what they were really saying with this, oh we know what they initially thought they were saying, but ignorance can only be tolerated to a certain degree, but not for a company that exists in the same environment as the rest of the industry. And I'm totally sure that argument will be used by even Deep Silver, but no. It's a videogame in 2013, that shit got old fast and it's time to grow up and move on.