thenexus

I been very upset to see the quality drop on the video player. I wait for them to upload it on youtube a bit later and if not put up with the player here.

Likely due to being in New Zealand but still, with youtube it was fine and was not as bad with the other player either but the videos take SO LONG to load for me now no matter what location let alone device I am on. Just is slow everywhere even on fast connections :(

Been a disapointing change for me.

There are a lot of things that can be at play here and even if your still turning a profit in this day an age you need to cut out what you can.

1. You could have it where a staff member has improved and learnt more skills or is just very productive and you do not need the 3 other people doing roles because this person can manage it. You can give them a bit of a pay rise which they would be very happy with but it would be a lot less then paying three other people.

2. Modern software and online software and even just better systems in place for project management, time management and so on means that if you had people managing or a coordinator as they are often termed are not needed as much so you can cut those too.

3. As someone mentioned - Marketing. I think a lot of these roles are a big waste of money anyway But with the power of the net for example you could produce some interesting CGI and post it on youtube and get a lot of traffic and buz greater then what you would have got from magazines.

Exclusives and these deals for news and information, limiting this gets people interested and want to know about the product, even if it is crap. You just have to know. All these sorts of modern techniques can be achieved without the staff you once had...

Just a few examples of why this sort of thing happens. Since this is a statement of 90% not related to game development this is just streamlining that often happens. They will take on new projects when profits are high and then higher more staff and then scale back again at another period of time.

@Draxyle said:

Seems like a weird thing to build the third game at the same time as the previous two side-iterations. Will the third game have the minor advancements of Brotherhood and Revelations? Was the story even planned out with this order in mind? It is a relief to hear that it's been in development for 3 years though. We might actually get sufficient changes (and then another mini-trilogy to burn them out, of course).

Reading some of the other discussion here, I never understood the hate for AC1. I got into it a bit late, expecting a mediocre game from everything I've heard.. but it was pretty fantastic, like nothing I have ever played before. Yea the missions had a bit of repetition, but they were still fun to do. Still doesn't make much sense to me.

Not really. This news actually makes the last two games make sense.

The last two games were the side teams, Using the same assets, making changes, filling in story elements and developing the multi player element, introducing some new concepts to trial them out.

The Main team continuing to work on number 3. If it is out in October the main story and plot etc has been wrapped up already by now and so the staff who have left also makes sense. Done, 3 games done, story wrapped up - move on.

I bet you pretty much the last two games were test bed's for features of 3. Some mechanics and defiantly the multi player being produced. We been Test Chimps for he last couple of games.

Why would you Move and not copy?

Thanks Guys,

VERY helpful, All info is out there I guess but never had anything concrete.

EA account knows things I did in Mass effect and it is not about the save really. All they need to know is - What you look like, what decisions you made in 1/2. Getting that in the Cloud as it were and allowing your choice info to work cross platform would be a prudent thing to do. Now more companies have online aspects of their system through steam, EA etc they should do this sort of option as standard.

I can not find anything concrete in this. I played mass effect 1 and 2 on the 360 and loved it. I know have a near full spec PC (I went to town) and I'm in there with the converted playing games with my controller on the PC and I have a 37inch display for my PC (not my tv, need for sem, work :) ) Now I'm keen to play ME3 on PC. Now with BF3 it new my bits of ME2 because of the link account from the online element of 2. In theory you could have you save from the 360 or at least the decisions you made ported to PC through your account. Question is, have they said you could do this? I invested in my chapter and decisions and I know in the big scheme of it, it does not really matter but I played ME2 all over so no one died so I'd like to feel connected still. Anyone know? Thanks

You can buy UDraw and use it on the wii because hey, there is not much else and different to do on the console. Being on 360 or PS3 there is plenty of awesome games and things to be getting on with. Of course no one is going to bother with them. I would have thought that was obvious?

You can take that too far, WoW within the context of it's environment has product placement and working with other companies to produced themed merchandise in and out of the game.

You would at least do this in your other MMO now you have got all that implemented already for something else. Going further as well is of course a possibility. If it is Starcraft for example then sci fi cities would have those bladerunner style placements for adverts. Getting some money that make them real adds, as long as their not obtrusive I do not mind.

@Xeiphyer said:

Pulling back and focusing on their core games is exactly what they need to do. Assuming they're not just doing damage control and are going to go out of business, this'd be a great time to invest in THQ. They have some great IPs and talent over there.

That is the thing right now, we will not know until it all happens.

They are not doing so well but have some great titles in the works. Focusing on these, getting these out the door rather then likely wasting money and resources on just "ok" games which will likely not make that much money is a good thing.

BUT

IF what maybe going down is indeed true ALL you can do is lie your ass off about this and say it is all bull. Your stock is low as it is and if you want to make an attractive company up for sale, this sort of information so soon will not only lower stock further but will put off potential buyers as as a result.

Some interesting times ahead for them, IT may be the end or it very well may be their time to shine.

One of the things that always stands out from outcry's and often over reaction with game reviews people disagree with often stem around the score. There can be both praise and valid critical analytical digression of a review but to many then get hooked up on the score. People have tried and failed to come up with a rating score system that reflects the many aspects, positives ad negatives of a game.

The Giantbomb team themselves have been involved with not just one incident that seemed to be final score for many in terms of reviewing games and rating at Gamespot.

I like the simplistic and honest review score on Giantbomb but I also hate the score rating. It is an at a glance thing and far to many people (wrongly) look at that and compare that to their own opinion be it a valid one or one based on a fandom nature and the web being the web lash out.

The review is the guts of the thing and can express many positives and negatives for a game/movie/product.

There has been three things that I hold to heart when reading a review.

1. The person

Respect for the person, their writing, their knowledge and who they are. Geff I respect greatly for everything he says. He is very clear on the types of games he likes, his nature of playing games and what he writes is always consistent. He has my respect as a result.

@patrickklepek has come to Giantbomb and been very open, he has delved deep into what this industry is and reported with an open heart. Couple of times based on the information he has been wrong (not his fault) but everything he has posted feels a sense of knowing who the average gamer is and what are feelings are and will be in regard to a peace of news, announcement etc.

The varied tastes and styles of play are very clear with the giantbomb team and they mix things up with reviews and who reviews them and never hide aware from making it clear everything is of their taste and opinion in terms of what they say.

2. The summary paragraph. Pretty much the first thing I read when I do not want to read a full review. Often I do but even still I read the summary at the end. I do not count this as if I was reading the end of a book first. though.

I often feel peoples reactions to a review, positive or negative are based on their already formed opinion of the game.

People form opinions of a game from a 30 second reveal trailer, and a LOT do.

We all form an opinion on something no matter what it is or how early or how little we have seen of it. Good people keep an open mind and allow their decision to change based on the facts in front of them.

Unfortunately many people don't and why you have the whole fanboy concept for example.

For me the summary gives a proper insight into the review's feelings of the game, the key highlights of what this game is and why it fails or successes in making the review feel positive or negative about that game.

3. The good, The Bad.

I have became a big fan of reading a review of a product that has no overall score rating. It has a great review, break down of what it has and the opinions of the reviewer. The bullet list positives they walked away with and what they did not like will differ from person to person but there will also be a lot of coalition. A glitch nature of the game will be a negative even though overall it could be a great game! I have grown to prefer this over a score rating.

===============================

In terms of what has been said in the emails I really have to disagree with calling out that "Uncharted 3 is the most exciting game in the world, but only until you deviate from the script." meant a complaint about the linear basis of the game.

For me this is totally untrue. Scripting for me is not the same as meaning it is linear. There are great games and bad games that are linear but when you play you do not feel that while it is linear your not overall forced down a narrow corridor.

Scripting too is a means of unfolding the story of the game and how tight that is to you playing.

MW for example through every version has took away you playing and offered up more of a view roller-coaster to follow you through the story the developers want to show you. Some games have little or no scripting.

Now I have not said that is a bad thing or a good thing, that is not a critical point, that is stating just the facts. people read this sort of statement and conclude someone hates or loves something which is wrong.

Uncharted has some positives and negatives in terms of the linear aspect and the scripting of the game.

I think there are some fantastic moments in the Uncharted game that are heavily scripted and linear but offer a huge wow factor, like the train ride for example or the sinking ship.

I think Naughty dog are the best at the small 10 second, 5 second, 30 second scripted even where they take control of the character off you to offer up a fluid transition between moments, new parts of the environment or new event. It makes the game flow very very well and many other companies who do similar do not do it as well. (MW)

The term quicktime event has come from these transitions and how many companies offer a button bashing moment to give some form of interaction o that event.

Uncharted 3 for me falls in the very common trap of being great but doing to much of what makes it great. These scripted moments, these events and the fact that this is a linear game to help drive the story and game for the player are great BUT because those elements are what makes the game great, me like many others see how apparent these are because they are used to much.

You have fish and chips - You poor on some ketchup and its bloody YUM! Poor to much on your fish and chips and you have ruined the whole thing. The person that made the chips, did a good job, they are nice, ketchup is nice, the fish is nice but you get that balance wrong and it is not a good thing.

Uncharted still has those high quality scripted aspects and drives you down a path but with every sequel you have to up the anty or do something different.

You do make improvements over the negatives but when you make a number 2 of anything you can either fail or it be a massive success. You have ramped up the aspects people have liked and worked on what people did not like.

With a number 3 you have to go further or be drastically different and most of the time you will fail in terms of how people react to it. Even if you have made a good game.

Change it up to much, even if good the fans will hate you for changing because you changed it. Even if it is good, you changed it and that is bad in their eyes.

You do much of he same;

Now this makes things more apparent, the scripting is more obvious and the linear nature stands out more, its still cool but it feels to much. Fanboys will love you for it but a more critical person - Like someone reviewing the game will see that and point that out and feel more negative about it.

And in that that is absolutely fair. Still a great game but its done, to much of a good thing can lead to a bad thing. And any comments of Uncharted being too scripted and thus making you see the linear aspect of the game to much and thus feel more constrained and as if you have less control is correct in this case. But it still a great game 8/10 is very good in terms of a score. It is not a 9 because all of the same thing, 2 often tends to be that perfect moment.

The next Mass effect will come out, it will look great, have a great story and will have many improvements. BUT it is a number 3 and while most will love it and it could be a game of the year contender it wont be as well received as number 2 just because it is a number 3.

I could be wrong here but for any developer that is what they are having to work with when they make a 3rd game in a series. They now have to up the anti on what they did in two to make it more compelling, try and improve on what people did not like in 2 but then also have to try and add something new.

Fans wont like the changes, some wont mind, some will hate you for it and others like someone who is forming a review will note anything that you have done to much as something that is a bit to much.

IF anyone one bothers to read this stupidly long rant, thanks for your time. I hope Patrick, you have and I hope you agree on some of this.