What the hell is going on with Epic?
TheGorilla's forum posts
Why does JJ Abrams suddenly have control over everything nerdy?
Because that Star Trek reboot was pretty damn good
Assuming you don't really know/care what "Star Trek" is all about and only want to see it's surface elements skinned over a generic sci-fi action flick.
Bullshit. As someone who has watched all of TNG and most of DS9 I loved 2009's Star Trek and it definitely has some of the core principles of the franchise. The most important part of any story is its emotional core, and for Star Trek that tends to be self-sacrifice and friendship, two things the reboot was full of. Everything else is just the window dressing.
@Branthog: What endings are you even talking about? Has he even been involved in the endings of any of the TV shows he started? He didn't write the endings to any of those shows, and I don't know if he was even still involved at that point. You can't really judge him by his early work, so all you're really left with is MI3 and Super 8 which both had fine endings and Super 8 had a great last scene.
I think videos are probably a better use of their time. They have all the numbers so I presume that way more people watch their videos than read their articles. They still write stuff occasionally though. Alex's primary job is writing articles and it's a pretty big reason why Patrick was brought on in the first place.
I hope Volition is supported and that Vigil is able to find a home before there is nothing left of that company. I was kind of hoping EA might pick something up from this but that's just because I think EA has a terrible game lineup right now and I wanted some developer to step in and teach them how to make interesting games again.
I wouldn't use this thing if I got it for free. Seems like a terrible idea. Why won't this awful steambox idea just die?
@IanYarborough: You realize ILM isn't a structured format that everyone needs to be there for? Often times one of them is off doing something else. They're in meetings, at press events, or busy reviewing a game. They don't just sit at their desks all day. It's easy for one of them to be off doing something when the others film ILM.
@Morrow: I totally understand where you're coming from. The problem is that it's just really, really, really hard to get one type of control system working perfectly. Adding a second one would be way more expensive, time consuming, and create some confusion over how the game is supposed to be played. Just look at Fallout, its third person camera, while kind of cool, is totally terrible compared to games that focus exclusively on third person. The basic design of the world also changes depending on the kind of view the game has, things like detail on objects etc.
I'm all for giving credit where credit is due, be it praise or monetary, but you're taking everything about that original statement out of context and it's complete and utter bullshit. Video games are still a business, and like all businesses, need to be in the business of making a profit. Yes, it's true, a corporation or a company isn't a person. But it consists of people. A business is built up of people, and that business and it's people deserves it's dues for the role it has to play in making video games a sustainable, profitable, and everlasting venture.
As jaded as your opinions can get about companies like EA or Activision, games are in the business of making money. Your enthusiasm for the art and the majesty of designing and building video games is appreciable, but you're living in a fantasy world if you think the the business of video games only consists of employing "marketing tricks", and therefore is dumb and/or meaningless.
So maybe before you go off and insult an entire swath of the workforce that takes some pride in knowing that their actions and hard work had a hand in the business of video games, you should think twice. You know. Before you say something really fucking stupid.
lol, you really ran with my comment in a weird direction. I'm as pro-profit as you can get. I'm the kind of nut who is disgusted by people who are disgusted by video game business policies like on disc DLC and such. I have no problem with EA or Activision for anything they've done. And I think companies are fantastic and wonderful. My stomach turns when I hear people hoping a company like EA will go out of business.
My one problem is with the idea of assigning all credit for a game to that company instead of the specific individuals who created it. I want Paramount to make a massive profit with the new Star Trek movie, but I want the credit for the movie to go to JJ Abrams, the writers, actors, and producers. I don't want those people to be known simply as "Paramount" or "Bad Robot." I want them to be known as specific individuals. I think that's best for everyone in the movie industry and I think the games industry could be helped by similar thinking. I think this actually helps people get over their anti-business bullshit. If we all started referring to the individuals in charge of these games instead of more or less faceless companies like "EA" people would hopefully be less likely to freak out and get angry over business decisions.
The "marketing tricks" comment refers only to getting gamers to talk about companies and not specific talent. I don't know where you got the idea that I was trying to say the entire "business of video games only consists of employing 'marketing tricks.'" I was trying to explain why I think it's silly that gamers act like a studio is the same studio over a 15 year period. Often times the talent changes so dramatically that it just seems absurd to act as if it's the same people making the games over the lifetime of a company, but many people seem to act that way. That doesn't mean the studio is any worse, they could be better than ever, but they are still largely a different group and not the same people responsible for the companies previous work.
I also don't see how I really insulted anyone. If you get insulted when someone suggests that we should try and give more credit to specific individuals on a project then... well, then you be crazy, son! Go ahead and disagree, but your post reads as if you are pissed as all shit.
No point in calling people "really fucking stupid" in bold lettering on the internet either. I don't think anyone's ever proven their point or sounded sane that way.
I guess my point boils down to this: I don't know what Irrational Games means. I know who Ken Levine is. I know a bit about who Scott Sinclair is, and other people who've been influential at the studio. And I know there are many, many wonderful people who work there, but Irrational Games is a meaningless term without knowing who some of those individuals are. My respect for the names I know working there are what gives me respect for the names I don't know working there. The company title isn't what makes me care, it's the individuals. I hope the company makes a killer profit, and I think the best way to do that is to make me recognize people I trust, rather than associating the legal entity with the work, associate the individuals within that legal entity with the work.
I HOPE I MADE SOME SENSE AND DON'T SOUND LIKE A TOTAL LUNATIC TO YOU AGAIN.
companies don’t make great games - in fact companies don’t do anything at all because they only exist in a legal sense.
I love this. I'm sick of the idea of a company getting the credit for a game. That just means no human being is getting any credit. Blizzard can get credit for all the Diablo games, but I'm sure very different teams were behind those games. So the idea of crediting the company so that the whole team is recognized is silly. It's just a marketing trick.
A ton of people work on a movie to get it made. Especially for really big movies. But we only bother to remember a few names for each film. That's the most that can be expected. Games are no different. If we are going to credit actual human beings instead of dumb, meaningless company names we have to pick a few people at most on a project.
Most creative works involve many, many people but there is one central figure we choose to recognize above all others. That's just the way of it. If someone doesn't like the idea that some of their work might get more directly credited to their boss they should get out of the field. As Don Draper said on Mad Men "That's what the money is for!"
Captain Walker from Spec Ops: The Line. No question. I've never seen such good character development in a video game.
The people that said characters from Asura's Wrath frighten me. It was a good ridiculous game with a silly story, but god damn those are not great characters.