This is what the marketplace has dictated for years with their voting dollars, and people are surprised?
jakob187's forum posts
Honestly, if the world is well-designed to be memorable at every corner, there should be absolutely no need for a mini-map.
I played Grand Theft Auto III and Red Dead Redemption so much that I never needed a goddamn map. I could look at any given building or a landmark and know exactly where I was at, then deduce which way I needed to go.
If we're talking about something like Skyrim, I think they handled it INCREDIBLY well. They give you a little bar on the bottom that says "hey, there is some shit over here" and you move that direction. In the process, you discover other shit.
Someone mentioned Dead Space earlier, and that is another fantastic example of how to make navigation functional in-game without needing a damn map.
However, here's the thing that pisses me off more than anything else: cinematics. Please...kill cinematics. This is an old trend used as a way to force eye candy into your game, and it is now used as a passive way to offer exposition. Seriously? We can't get this shit IN-GAME?! There are so many examples of games that handle this stuff in-game that cinematics just feel obsolete and unnecessary to me. If you ARE going to have cutscenes, at least pull a Resident Evil 4 with the damn things and still keep me SOMEWHAT involved in the game, ya know?
Cutscenes and cinematics make me almost immediately care less about a game. I want to PLAY A GAME, not WATCH A MOVIE!
Eventually, I will download it onto a PC with working internet...after I've purchased it. Somehow, I missed it and instead have Armageddon.
I miss our times with Guerrilla. So much stupid and ridiculous fun on that game. One of the best multiplayer experiences out there.
Mythic became a shell of its former self. Warhammer MMO didn't go over well, and the support for it was tragic at beast. The MOBA...thing...they made wasn't much better. That Dungeon Keeper mobile game? Fucking travesty.
Essentially, Mythic became EA's lapdog, doing whatever they were asked to do. If anything, it should be liberating that they are finally out of EA's grasp.
Meanwhile, Barnett did some good work with EA to get some of their classic PC titles available again through digital distribution. Wing Commander is finally available!
Moreover, there are plenty of guys over there that are already starting a new thing that will continue support for Dark Ages of Camelot. I still can't believe that game is going, but when you create greatness, it carries on.
I'm sure many of them will also...rather quickly...find themselves either employed or hitting the Kickstarter/indie scene with new projects.
Good luck to everyone affected. I enjoyed many of your products...although not in recent years.
I don't actually LIKE Family Guy, but I can sit down and watch episodes without feeling like my senses are offended by it or anything.
As for his movies, I loved Ted. The movie is hilarious, throws back to a lot of great stuff, and has conversation between John and Lori that is ACTUALLY BELIEVABLE in a given relationship. It gets a little outlandish, but that's fine by me. It was entertaining as hell.
His new movie, A Million Ways To Die In The West? That trailer had me rolling on the floor hard. Funny as fuck.
It only becomes unethical when the company is knowingly putting out a version of the game that is inferior to what they have shown in the press for the months and years before the game's release. Aliens: Colonial Marines is a PRIME example of this, and I think it should be the point where reviewers look back and say "remember this bullshit?!"
After THAT debacle, I just can't think of how review embargoes help anything other than someone's bottom line. It's people being shady in general. The embargoes aren't the only problem, though, and most of you will only see half of the problem with that.
When you are behind the scenes, you also have the smaller sites that are fighting with publishers regularly to get review copies, to keep a website up and running. Those smaller sites are getting e-mails with words like "incentives" and "rewards" if their game gets above a certain score from the website. Why? As long as that site is counted on Metacritic, it means the average goes up. I saw those kinds of e-mails, particularly from EA when GoldenEye: Rogue Agent was released.
Of course, Rogue Agent was a flaming pile of shit...and I reviewed it accordingly with a 5.0 score attached to it...and then sent EA a link to the review along with a note saying "my integrity isn't for sale...we'll just make sure we only cover the games that we WANT to cover from your company." Obviously, they didn't give a shit about the little guy on the totem pole, but our reviews WERE added into the overall average on GameRankings at the time, so a bad review score COULD affect the average at the time.
You know what? Looking through all of that, I take back what I said. Review embargoes are unethical as fuck. It's just a bunch of guys in suits wanting more money without giving you the whole picture.
I think people are raising a huge stink about that original artwork without actually thinking of ANY OF IT within context.
I mean, did people forget the entirety of Far Cry 3?! Hell, the cover for THAT game was pretty harsh as well. Bad guy with a guy buried up to half his head in sand on the incoming tide, bodies hanging from a tree in the background by their feet, a machete on the coast stabbed into the ground, and the bad guy has a gun pointing ever so casually with a loose grip towards the guy in the sand?
That shit is fine and a-okay, no complaints...but you put a blonde, (most likely) European guy dressed in outlandish and ridiculous clothing with his hand on the head of someone who is a different color holding a grenade with a look of dread and fear on his face, surrounded by weapons on a religious shrine...and simply because of the guy of color, that image is just terrible?
Let this studio touch on some ACTUAL MATURE THEMES and not be joking around about it for once. They took on some of that stuff with Far Cry 3, and it was fantastic!
Personally, I've hated review scores for a long time. There has to be some level of meaning to the number that is actually given to it, but there are a LOT of people that never even read a review. They have a preconceived notion in their own mind that says "this is what a 7 means" or "this is what a 3-star means." That tells us nothing without actually reading multiple reviews from a given source and understanding what those scores mean to THEM.
I am much happier with the idea of just reading a review, seeing what a person thought, and having THAT being the determining factor.
Nonetheless, review scores will never go away, as Metacritic is literally ingrained into every aspect of the industry itself. = /