Positives about PC gaming: You can save money on the shitty games through p2p.



Disclaimer: I buy the games that deserve my money

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN dont argue with the yanks nutter, they know best!

Well, ive been gaming for 26ish years now, so im really only interested in games that bring a whole lot of newness to a genre (supreme commander) or exemplify how a genre should be done (bioshock). I certainly steer clear of the franchise games, yuk! Have played far too many games to fall in love with any new rendition with slightly better graphics. Especially when I grew up with a C64!

And im STILL waiting on a modern tie fighter-like space battlefest! Fvck, its 11+ years now. Someone make a space sim ffs.

Games to look out for on PC that fit the above criteria imo:

Supreme commander: forged alliance (next week, woohoo!)
Sins of a solar empire (feb 2008)
Alone in the dark (TBA 2008)
Spore

Its getting harder and harder (and more expensive) to make "new" games, so save your cash for the titles that really shine. Its like voting for your favourite developer

___________________

I hear ya on that one. The industry has shaped itself so that its become near impossible for a company to gain a real profit off brand new material, because its just too risky to release something 'unique' to a crowd when it doesnt have Mario or Master Chief on the cover. Plus, companies are greedy bastards, just like people. They see that adding a new year on the end of a title 5 years old will be considered a new title altogether in the eyes of a casual gaming audience. I'm actually surprised Bioshock did so well, but maybe thats moreso related to the rave reviews it received, which therefore became good word of mouth. Like pkc said, thats a game thats deserving of a purchase.

This is why Electronic Arts' offices should be burned to the ground, seeing as how they are practically the pioneers of multiplatforming every franchise possible and turning it into a mundane piece of shit with "good production values." Ubisoft is catching up.

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN Well, ive been gaming for 26ish years now, so im really only interested in games that bring a whole lot of newness to a genre (supreme commander) or exemplify how a genre should be done (bioshock). I certainly steer clear of the franchise games, yuk! Have played far too many games to fall in love with any new rendition with slightly better graphics. Especially when I grew up with a C64! And im STILL waiting on a modern tie fighter-like space battlefest! Fvck, its 11+ years now. Someone make a space sim ffs. Games to look out for on PC that fit the above criteria imo: Supreme commander: forged alliance (next week, woohoo!) Sins of a solar empire (feb 2008) Alone in the dark (TBA 2008) Spore Its getting harder and harder (and more expensive) to make "new" games, so save your cash for the titles that really shine. Its like voting for your favourite developer

holy fuck...how had i not heard about this game?
just watched a half hour thing from some convention of will wright talking about it and demoing it
god damn it looks amazing

___________________

http://www.youtube.com/mezzir

quote:

Originally posted by CONNERMAN2000 This is why Electronic Arts' offices should be burned to the ground, seeing as how they are practically the pioneers of multiplatforming every franchise possible and turning it into a mundane piece of shit with "good production values." Ubisoft is catching up.

very true. its sad seeing a company that used to be a publisher of new, interesting games in the state theyre in currently. when i was a kid and i saw a game with EA on it, it meant quality. fuck, populous 2 was brilliant, and imo a better strategy game on a console than anything released by sony or microsoft.

its like anything tho- books, music, tv shows- there's a lot coming out and most of it isn't terribly good. piracy obviously doesn't help either.

and yeah mezzir, spore looks interesting. if they ever get it done. its EA or sierra thats running things there i think? i hate sierra ever since they cancelled their B5 space sim that was going to revolutionise the genre. cvnts.

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN And im STILL waiting on a modern tie fighter-like space battlefest! Fvck, its 11+ years now. Someone make a space sim ffs.

I HOPE you've played Freespace and Freespace 2

___________________
ID THESE TRACKS PLEASE

IDing tracks is like having sex, the more you get the happier you'll be!!

Want to download a Digweed set? TA ID HUNT!

Welp, looks like everyone here's got it covered... though anyone who's in this thread complaining yet also owns a copy of Halo 3 should be shot in the face.

Welcome to the future, folks - the casual gamers are where the money is made, so no one gives a fuck about what those of us who actually care about innovation and quality have to say.

___________________
last minute disco dot net

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN very true. its sad seeing a company that used to be a publisher of new, interesting games in the state theyre in currently. when i was a kid and i saw a game with EA on it, it meant quality. fuck, populous 2 was brilliant, and imo a better strategy game on a console than anything released by sony or microsoft. its like anything tho- books, music, tv shows- there's a lot coming out and most of it isn't terribly good. piracy obviously doesn't help either.

Agreed 100%. General Chaos and Road Rash were classics as well. Then right around the late 90's/early 2000's, with all the money they made with Madden and such, they began snapping up all the other 3rd party companies they could find and turning their games into franchises. I DO want to say that there is an occasional EA hit that comes along that I have fun with, but the game usually isnt anything new or creative, and thats what this industry needs.

quote:

Originally posted by RJT Welcome to the future, folks - the casual gamers are where the money is made, so no one gives a fuck about what those of us who actually care about innovation and quality have to say.

Hate to say it, but you are correct, sir. I'm guessing its because of the improved technology that game development costs shot through the roof, forcing companies to resort to recognizable franchise names for the casual gaming crowd to drool over so they could make their money back. I want more LittleBigPlanet, more Spore, more games without numbers at the end of them.

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by BTG I think it's bullshit that I have to pay $64.99 for NHL 08 when all they did was tweak the gameplay a bit, and make a 'practice' mode. What the hell? It probably takes a month of hard work and they just wait until the end of the season to get a roster update to put on the disc (another thing that's bullshit is they havn't even released a new roster online...and its already a month into the season). Also, they have the same shitty songs, and the same play by play as they do in NHL 07. complete gayness. Furthermore... Guitar hero 3. probably takes an hour to do the programing for each song, and the graphics are weak and lame....i mean they're still using 2D sprites for lamps. That's DOOM technology ffs. Just because the game is "FUN" doesn't give it the right to charge the same price as the games that take years and years to make. Guitar hero 3 and NHL should be a low $39.99 /my rant

it is my understanding that games are quite expensive to produce these days and even tho one game could possibly sell for less, it is quite risky for the publisher since so many games these days simply do not make their money back. And believe me it takes much more than just a months of hard work to put out a title. You could even put in a years hard work and get a shitty title. I think with the graphical quality nowadays and the attention of detail developers are putting into games these days, gamers are getting a bargain. If you do not like the game then don't support that company with your dollars. but for most titles out there the developer might just get only 30% of each title sold...the rest going to the publisher, retailer, etc

I agree however EA has not been doing their fans and customers a service by rehashing out the same product essentially year after year.

___________________
"The only monster here is the gambling monster that has enslaved your mother! I call him Gamblor, and it's time to snatch your mother from his neon claws!" - homer

It's pretty simple:

Despite trying to minimize risk by avoiding innovative concepts in favor of rehashing previous successes, major game developers typically lose money on more than half of the games they publish. Why? Because making modern games with "good" 3D graphics is hugely expensive. That means they have to recoup those losses somewhere, and make a profit to boot, just to remain in business. They do this with primarily two types of games: massive hit games that bring in extremely high sales, and games which recycle enough previous development that they cost much less to make than most games.

Competition between developers to push the boundaries of graphics has all but killed gaming, so what I usually look for is a game with bad graphics - any game developed outside of that paradigm is much more likely to be fun than one developed within it.

quote:

Originally posted by Arbiter any game developed outside of that paradigm is much more likely to be fun than one developed within it.

I agree with the majority of what you wrote, but unfortunately I don't see how a game developed outside of that paradigm is automatically more likely to be fun than one developed within it.

Shit games come in all colors and sizes.

I do, however, agree that this push to maximize technical aspects of games over actual gameplay in concert with the desire to appeal to the lowest common denominator at all times is what has made the vast majority of what is released every Tuesday utterly unplayable, which is an absolute shame.

___________________
last minute disco dot net