PJ

The tonal shift in 4 was really off putting since it wasn't what I've come to expect from GTA. It's not a bad thing really, just that my expectations were set in a different direction. While there still were a lot of similaritys to the old GTAs the tone made me experience them in a different and not so fun way. The game felt downright overbearing at times. I really hope they lighten up the tone a bit in this one and dont take it self super seriously like 4 felt like it did, even though that's not really the case.

@JRock3x8 said:

the only way this garbage stops is if you all agree not to buy the game and we all know that will never happen

Yeah, it won't happen because why wouldn't I buy one of my most anticipated game of the year. I always buy new games and have a 100mbit/s internet connection. These things doesn't bother me one bit.

And frankly, why does WB have to give you something you didn't pay them for? I actually think these online passes are a good thing since that way the publisher and developer get money from (some) used copys of the game and it encourages people to buy new copys of the game.

If you want to experience the game as intended by the developer/publisher then pay them for the game. If you don't want to pay them then you shouldn't expect them to give you the same service as those who did. It's as simple as that.

@plaintomato said:

@Shuborno said:

@PJ said:

@Shuborno said:

Don't know what the point in resurrecting old forgotten IP...

A perk with using an old ass IP is that not only do you get the old fans thanks to nostalgia but you can market it as a whole new game for a new audience so...

I question how big that existing audience is with that old IP...

I'd agree with Shuborno on that one. Syndicate pulled you in because it was dark and different in a world of mostly games for kids, but relative to the sales that will be expected in order for the remake to be counted a success...the size of the original fan base has to be just a drop in the bucket. What using the old IP gets them is street cred - it changes the game from a Deus Ex inspired new IP into something that was around long before Deus Ex. Now even if they end up imitating [Deus Ex, Bladerunner, any RTS/FPS Hybrid], their PR can drop hints that these other IP's were inspired by Syndicate instead of vice versa. But I'm willing to hope it's not a Deus Ex cash-in and really is a worthy Syndicate reboot.

Like you said, they get street cred when using an old IP. I didn't really mean that the old fans would buy the game, but more that it gets more buzz on the internet by being a reboot of an old IP opposed to a new IP that you have to put alot of money behind to get the buzz going. Its a double edged sword of course but on some level even bad publicity is publicity since you get the game out there through no real effort.

I'm not necessarily saying its a good thing to take old IPs and and make a completly different game out of it but it is a money saving way since you can ride the buzz from the old game and just focus on pushing the game mainstream instead of both the enthusiast press and the mainstream. Marketing is a huge part of a games budget these days and if you can cut it in any way is a win.

It's more marketing driven then anything to do with them loving the old IP so much that they want to bring it back.

This will be a bad example since the games are pretty much the same unlike XCOM and Syndicate. But Bioshock owes most of its success to System Shock. After they first showed it, it was called a spiritual successor to System Shock and that created a huge hype for the game that most likely wouldn't have been there if it had no connection to System Shock at all. Granted the developers behind it were a source for the hype as well but System Shock is pretty much loved by everyone and has a rabid fanbase. And if im not totally missremembering most of the marketing for that game was thowards the massmarket and didn't really create big events around the game for the gaming press.

@Shuborno said:

Starbreeze is a good developer.

Don't know what the point in resurrecting old forgotten IP in the form of a shooter is all the rage (eg. Shadowrun, XCOM, Syndicate). Why bother? Why not start fresh if the people who liked the original are not your audience?

Shadowrun is actually also a role playing game that has been active ever since the first game came out with new editions released as recently as 2005 and 2009.

Also the 360 and SNES game are not in the same universe and have noting to do with one another unlike XCOM and Syndicate that are both pretty much considered as reboots.

A perk with using an old ass IP is that not only do you get the old fans thanks to nostalgia but you can market it as a whole new game for a new audience so. It's pretty much the same has having a new IP but with a built in fanbase.

@PJ said:

@Brodehouse: The sim-racing genre is a bit different. The inclution of licenced cars is a huge part of the experience(since its simulating real-life racing and you can't do that with fake cars) and its not like the gameplay in Forza will suffer by them adding cars.

If licensed cars are a 'huge part of the experience' then it should matter to developers/publishers of sim racing games to acquire those licenses before their competitors do. I'm sure you can criticize EA for not sharing something they paid for, but the games industry isn't a nice little game of hacky-sack, it's a constant competition to provide the best product. EA doesn't have to share their advantages with Microsoft anymore than Turn 10 should share their code with Slightly Mad.

I can't imagine EA sending out a press release, "we really wanted to make a Warhammer 40k game, but THQ and Relic have exclusivity and won't let us, for shame."

@Buzzkill said:

EA is starting to make Activision look good.

Not to defend EA on this matter(because its kind of a dick move but still completly understandable) but them preventing competators from using a license that they own vs. running every single gamefranchise into the ground and taking a studio and putting it to work on a game genre thats not really in their wheelhouse and then closing it when the game doesn't perform well is totally the same thing.

@Brodehouse: The sim-racing genre is a bit different. The inclution of licenced cars is a huge part of the experience(since its simulating real-life racing and you can't do that with fake cars) and its not like the gameplay in Forza will suffer by them adding cars.

There's a simple solution. Buy the game(as you should) and then crack it it the alwasy on DRM bothers you.

I personally don't see a problem with doing so since you've already payed for the game.

Or there's an even simpler solution. Buy the games on a console if you have one.

Shit like this is what comes with PC gaming. PC gaming is a real shitfest to be honest. I really dont blame the companys for putting some kind of DRM on their games since the extreme majority will pirate the game on PC. You can look at it from a different p.o.w. aswell. Since the game is going to be pirated anyway theres no need for DRM and thereby not inconvenience the people that bought the game. I can see the logic in borh arguments and neather is better then the other. Well the second argument is more consumer friendly but the people investing in the company thats making the game won't see it that way and that's the real problem.

DRM in PC games are more of a statement then someting to protect the games from being stolen. In the history of PCs there has been not one game that has been pirate proof and there never will be. The people cracking the games are far greater in number and most likely intelligence then the people making the DRM-

And I for one like to see companys keep trying with DRM because the day they stop is the day they stop supporting PCs as a gaming platform. And nobody wan't that.

Well this wont be a problem when the sequal comes out. Drenched.

@swomar said:

@President_Barackbar said:

@Styl3s said:

@swomar said:

@President_Barackbar said:

Oh yeah, True Crime AND Square Enix, two names I immediately associate with quality /eyeroll

I know that it's cool nowadays to shit on Square Enix, but their games are generally of high quality whether you're into them or not. Of course they've had a couple of flops, especially recently, but every publisher has some of these. And they're the exception not the rule.

Completely agree, really bites my ass that gamers are so goddamn jaded these days, for how many years no decades has square given us quality titles? so what if they released some shitty ones are companies not allowed to have some shitty games? this isn't blizzard, these companies actually release more than 1 game every 10 years so everything can't be perfect.

First EA was shitted on, then Activision now capcom now back to SE it's ridiculous, play your games and be happy you are able to play them you jaded whining little babies, be thankful you have the money/ability to play your games, be thankful the gaming industry survived when it was supposed to die.

God forbid one of you actually make it a day in your life enjoying a video game instead of coming to the internet to complain about games you don't even care about, i used to think PC "elitist" were bad but the console kids are just ridiculous

/rant

Now i am off to enjoy FF13, yeah i bought it and enjoyed it deal with it haters.

Dear oh dear, where do I start with this one? I will admit, I give fuckall about Final Fantasy, but Square doesn't make what I consider to be quality titles. Not only that, True Crime is CERTAINLY not a franchise that's had ANY kind of quality in the past. And you automatically say I'm some kind of "console kid" because I'm skeptical of a product that was already cancelled once being revived by a company I don't think delivers quality entertainment? What the fuck does that even have to do with platform elitism? And saying you enjoy FFXIII doesn't make you some kind of "deep" gamer. Why do people think championing games that aren't very well regarded makes them better than everyone else?

Referring to the Final Fantasy series "games that aren't very well regarded"

O.k. I get it now, will stop feeding you.

Name someting non Final Fantasy and Dragon Quest games thats been good attached to the Square Enix name the last few years. I wont accept Kingdom Hearts since that series is not good.

SE are a far cry from what they once were. And the only interresting games coming out of SE are former Eidos properties like Tomb Raider, Deus Ex and Hitman.

The problems that Square Enix faces are problems that have plagued japaneese game development for almost a decade

The fact is that Japaneese game development has fallen so far behind that the only good or interresting games coming out of Japan are the batshit crazy ones or games that are completly unique. That would be good if they weren't so few and far between. Japan can no longer fight on the same terms in the game industry. They are forced to go so far of the beaten path just to get noticed in the west that they end up not appealing to the avarage gamer and don't sell.

Since the japaneese games don't sell well in the west, they focuse on making games that appeal to the japaneese market. The means that they can't have big budgets becuase they can't hope to make a return and thats why the games don't appeal to the big budget centric western market.

Just looking at this and next years most antisipated games they are almost all from western developers. It's not fun to see that since I grew up playing japaneese games but now they are eather stale, boring, uninterresting or down right bad. Its been a long time since I played a japaneese developed game that I really enjoyed AND that sold well.