TPoppaPuff

Let's all sing the praises of Valve, even though they perpetually act foolish and irrational ever since Steam became popular (see: this, essentially banning any developer who wants to sell DLC directly to fans, anything gabe newell says about consoles, etc.). You know, cuz just charging prospective developers an applicant fee was through the old system was too confusing for Valve, right? Point is, maybe a handful of games from SteamGreenlight will ever make it on to Steam. The number of votes necessary seems outrageous. And the $100 fee for the illusion of a chance of making it onto Steam is equally outrageous. Sure $100 will stop almost every single fake game from entering submission, but guess what? $20 or $25 would've done the exact same thing. And those two or three that would've been entered at $20 would have been so rare that most people would never know they existed, and those that did see it would have villified the submissions and buried them from every seeing the light of day. The entire culture of Steam Greenlight would have taken care of those two or three submissions because it would have been taken seriously. Obviously the culture Steam Greenlight was introduced in couldn't do this because Valve isn't all that bright and amazingly forgot how reality works in regards to the internet. $20 or $25, even if it was per submission, is much more sane and rational than what Valve did, which was pure idiocy (again).

Honestly, what does it say about Valve when XBox Live Indie Games submission system is much more fair to both parties than Steam Greenlight? Isn't that just sad?

Phil Fish has enough money on his own to easily pay for the patch while hardly batting an eye. But he'd rather blame Microsoft, cuz that's what Fish does. And what's sad is he's duped the majority of the gaming community into taking his side. He could honestly post a kickstarter and get more than enough money to pay for the patch, but he would just take the money and run. He doesn't wanna work on the game anymore; pure and simple.

Microsoft should offer refunds to those affected. Microsoft should recoup that money from all future sales of Fez until paid for.

@Corvak said:

@Moncole: I believe the reason for no minecraft on steam is related to how the verification and update process works - Minecraft is so big that trying to migrate the current account system onto Steam would involve too much work - and Notch/Mojang would probably rather spend that time on new projects than fixing something that already works.

That, and he probably doesn't want to needlessly fritter away profit he can make by adhering to Steam's update policy and give them a cut of money he was going to make anyway. He's done just fine on his own and managed to not have to give Valve a chunk of the profit.

Well that's business for ya. It's too bad Vancouver isn't smart enough to try to give Rockstar an incentive or match what Ontario could give them in tax breaks, etc.

I have three questions about this game:

1. Is it being developed by Treyarch?

2. Is it running on the Black Ops or Black Ops 2 versions of the engine instead of the IW version?

3. Is it the original Modern Warfare?

If the answer is no to (1) then the game as evidenced by all the other non-Treyarch CoDs is woefully unbalanced. If the answer is no to (2) then the game is running on an inferior version of the CoD engine. If the answer is no to (3) then the game is not fun.

@NoelVeiga:  

Absolutely agreed. Eidos is absolutely right; it has become insanely overblown and is tarnishing the game and the studios reputation simply because gaming "journalists" are simply trying to get page counts rather than offer legitimate news or editorials. It's pathetic and made all the more horrible due to the overwhelming amount of hypocrisy given how often these same tactics are held against the "mainstream" media you see on TV.  
 
"My message to the developer and publisher would be to not tackle subjects you’re afraid to defend." Truth be told, they didn't ever want to defend the subject matter or tackle the subject matter at all. Nor did they ever want to even pretend like they were progressive in storytelling or subject matter in games. They're simply telling an origin story of a character and as already pointed out by the devs, we've seen 100% of the rape scene that 'transforms her into the hero we know today' (to paraphrase). But guess what? The three seconds of rapey-ness in that scene is not what transformed her; it was the far longer sequence where she struggles for her life and kills the dude. The damn-developers have said so themselves on repeat. I'm pretty sure you can see that video here on this very site. The rape-stravaganza is nothing, has zero impact on the story or character or the rest of the game.  
 
By the way, it's not even "rape" in that scene anyways; it's sexual assault. So yeah, Tomb Raider is 100% rape free, which unfortunately can't be said about the relationship between the view-count hungry media and Eidos. Even at E3, no less! Anything for a good story though, right? Truth be damned. So where was the media backlash against Epic for Gears of War 3 for not delving deeper into the psyche of Marcus after committing genocide on an entire race of beings? What? That wouldn't have created a large enough thread count or got enough views? Exactly.

@Peanut: The approval process I can understand would take time to change or get everyone's ass in gear, but letting the devs or publisher choose the price point really is that simple. And letting them choose the release window (say a 4-5 week period) really is that simple too.

@SnakeEyes327 said:

@rebgav said:

@Milkman said:

Harada just threw internet trolls into a volcano.

Great, now they're going to come back with demon wings and laser eyes.

This is why we have "professional" community managers. Harada has a completely valid and legitimate point, sadly wrapped up in miserable whiny bullshit.

Yes, telling them up front how something works is miserable whiny bullshit.

Agreed. It only sounds like miserable and whiny bullshit when he reflects exactly how whiny and full of bullshit those complainers are back onto themselves. There was virtually no subjectivity in his list of his reasons why the sounds may or may not be the same. He specualated as to why some "fans" might interpret the sounds as different and stated objectively many reasons why things are the way they are, but there was nothing in there that I would say was whiny and miserable. The only thing sad about this is that he had to specifically state to these dumb ingrates how reality works.

@lordofultima: I'd figure for sure SF is a bigger deal in Japan than Tekken. Certainly here in NA. I'm largely just going by sales and I'm pretty sure the titles I mentioned all outsold the last actual Tekken game here. Regardless, I still maintain that, as Klepek said, Tekken isn't as relevent as it was in it's heyday. It's impossible. It has nowhere near the market-share that it once had in the 90's in the fighting genre, much less the console market or games in general.

Back in the day it was one of the top ten IPs when you listed off games. Now? *chuckles*

@Peanut said:

See, this is the thing that still gets to me about the XBLA/XBLIG argument. On one hand, you've got a strict approval process (probably way too strict) and people bitch and moan about how long it takes, but generally you're going to get some pretty quality stuff on XBLA. On the other hand, you've got a pretty open "do whatever" stance over in XBLIG and people bitch and moan because there's so much fucking garbage clogging it up. So, one way or the other "Microsoft is terrible!" is the only thing you ever hear about this shit.

I think people REALLY need to cut them some slack, especially considering what Microsoft probably thought XBLA would be and what it has become, not to mention what it's done for the downloadable game experience over the last several years. If the new Xbox comes out and XBLA (and XBLIG, if it exists) has the same awful issues, then I think everyone is totally entitled to shit on the entire process. I don't know that continually hating a service that has encouraged and delivered some of the best games in this generation deserves to be lambasted so consistently.

The issues people have with either system have very little if anything to do with the hardware, xbox live on 360 or any other technical limitations. The entire problem devs have with XBLA is purely Microsoft dicking them around. MS approval process has absolutely nothing to do with the quality of the game; only with the technical issues and silly guidelines like "must have a start screen" or "player must be this many seconds away from directly playing the game from boot up" (making story driven games close to impossible). And at this point their approval process simply takes too long! It's not a technical issue, it's purely a laziness issue. Their approval teams either are very slow and bad at their job or they are woefully understaffed. Also, they dictate the price, so even though you know your game might sell incredibly well at say $10, they can shoot it up to $15 or $20 and watch your potential sales plummet. Then once approved they have to wait until MS decides when to release the title with no input from the developer, meaning you can have to wait up to around a year before your game gets released. And they also decide what to promote that week, so they might bury your game eight months after it's been finished on what historically has been proven to be the worst week to release a digital title with zero advertising on XBL at double or even quadruple the intended price!

None of the things mentioned above have anything to do with the hardware. It is purely an issue with Microsoft's insane practices. And most XBLA games are polished Indie Games titles anyways. Most of them are prettier versions of Indie Games with less bugs but same largely ameteurish gameplay design at triple the cost. Very, very few a year are worthwhile.