warrenEBB

man this crushes my soul a bit. a lot.

I actually really dug Dyack's excessively brainy comments on the psychology and cultural failings of the uninformed opining on forums. I didn't follow his babble about a one console future (makes no sense from a "in the real world, where business compete" perspective). But I clung to this idea that he was a damned smart and interesting dude. Plus, I liked TooHuman (the beginning was weird and confusing. the middle was frustrating. but by the end it was extremely thrilling. I'm not convinced all the haters actually stuck with it).

Whenever this case has come up, I've been quick to defend SK. Mostly by reminding people of the historical context. (that this was about Unreal_3_ engine game development, in the year 2006. That SK gave a notoriously shitty demo at E3 that year, while Epic gave a Gears demo that blew people's socks off. And I thought it was also important to remember that TooHuman was on a short list of highly anticipated Xbox360 post-launch exclusives, alongside Halo3,MassEffect, and ShadowRun).

So when Dyack said "wait for the trial. everything will come out during the trial" - I waited with baited breath.

but now it all seems to be passing like a small fart. Mark Rein just drops a small tweet, that generates "articles" everywhere. And Randy Pitchford just tweeted a public diss on SK/Dyack's credibilty (by saying Randy is part of a group who knew Epic had the integrity to be validated by all this). And here Patrick Klepek points out that none of the court docs have come out, and they're hidden in this bullshit pay-to-view system. sigh.

fuckkkk. I find it very hard to acknowledge that this wasn't a david verses goliath case after all. and all these fucktards on forums who have been oversimplifying, and mangling the facts (for 5 years?) may still be basically right about SK in the end. feel kind of sick. Dyack's silence is DEAFENING.

interesting (thanks for doing this!)

I was just haggling over SOPA with someone, regarding the antiquated ideas of protecting publishers copy rights, and this point came up : if hollywood or thevideogamesIndustry falls apart, then we won't get huge spectacle any more. no one will be able to afford a Dragon Age 3, or a Transformers 4.

I argued that we can do without the spectacle. If budgets go away : the talented people behind those projects will still make interesting things.

Now, within your interview, I see Manveer say "...[low scores] makes it seem like our games have less quality, and that is painful to those of us who spend our lives crafting experiences for players to enjoy." And all I can think is : maybe you should embrace that pain, dude. Maybe spending a lot of money doesn't mean a company deserves a high score. Maybe the fact that Mass Effect 3 can't top Mass Effect 2's high scores : says something very important about the inherent value of sequels.

I'll tend to buy games (within my favored genres) if I can find any excuse to. When I see a game being lambasted, I tend to read reviews looking for the "but this part was genius" caveat. If it has that, i'll still probably buy it just to witness the good bits. Overcoming the glitches or bad designs of a game (as long as there some genius waiting on the other end) feels like a badge of honor. (Amy would be a good example of this phenom).

I've never understood simple number systems though, and don't know how anyone can give them any weight. Seems more like a way of rating the reviewer than any individual game. (ah, this is a guy that gives 1 star reviews. Ah, this is the asshole who gives a lot of 5/5 stars.)

I dimly recall the GTA IV debut trailer was just shots of NY. It wasn't until the second trailer that we got some story hints to be excited about.

This trailer strikes me as very similar. I just have a strong sense of the city. eager for another trailer to expose the characters.

so what's the status of their lawsuit against Epic, for fucking them on the Unreal Engine?

Isn't the whole point of that suit that Too Human suffered bad early press, and then was delayed while they wrote their own engine? If the studio is crumbling, wouldn't this be relevant?

(personally, I loved Too Human, and doubt all these people talking shit about it actually played it through.)

(However, I didn't see any reason to buy the recent xmen doody game... because everyone talked shit about it. hmmf.... but in a much more consistent way).

great read. inspiring.

my random pipe dream hope is that Harmonix will : bridge the gap between real musicians and people who wish they were musicians. Right now, real musicians are assholes to anyone who enjoys rock band.

It'd be great if they found a way to use social networks to connect strangers - so that different skill levels could "start a band". like I could play drums, you play simple bass via plastic guitar, and some lady in canada sings. I'd sign up for that on Facebook. (while I'd love to take part in such a thing, i have no idea how they could make money off it).

I loathe reviews that end up being about the reviewer. (When people have to generate endless reviews, they seem to turn it into theatre. they promote themselves, to keep it interesting to them). I also hate when reviews go for vague summaries, which I think is tied into the first problem of self promotion. I don't care that some dude thinks BF3's single player isn't good. I'd like to know why. (I mention this because the few reviews I read of BF3 pissed on the single player. But I see little nuggets mixed into their vagaries, which suggest I still might like it. like, i haven't played the Modern Warfare games, so maybe I don't care if it's a knock off).

Vague reviews also reek of "not have the vocabulary to communicate." I read a lot of meh reviews of Rage, but still bought it. then I realized what they were trying to say. The game has no pulse. it's like being in a pretty museum where nothing seems relevant to my modern interests. It feels like watching a movie with great actors who have nothing to say. like The Phantom Menace.

And part of me is still happy to fuck around with the game. I just wish reviewers could have better prepared me for it. (most of the blame here is probably on id's immature PR push, which repeatedly mentioned "open world" and "RPG" elements).

I'm rambling (I'm no journalist!), but I think figuring out how to communicate the ups and downs of the experience for those who haven't experienced them yet is what I want from a reviewer.

(like, I've really enjoyed the Splatterhouse reboot. I don't care about some of the bad design moments, and slow loads, because I think the rest of the game more than makes up for it. But I don't remember reviews being very even handed with the game. They were mostly just crapping on it and moving on. Which is what I expect from a rock star personality, not from a serious critic).

These days I mostly enjoy reading philosophical rants about specific game mechanics on Gamasutra, or various brainy blogs. seems so much more interesting than all the people who rushed though a game to crank out a vague summary for it's release date. :\

(however, I mostly come back to Giant Bomb for the rockstar personality's and raw humor. but mixed in with that is a sense that these guys aren't afraid to say what they want. they won't hold back for fear of hurting feelings. which seems to be evaporating from our culture. but I really REALLY enjoy)