The Escapist's Best of E3 2014 Award Winners
The best games we played and things we touched at E3 2014.
Read Full Article
The best games we played and things we touched at E3 2014.
Read Full Article
The Escapist's Best of E3 2014 Award Winners
- Thread starter The Escapist Staff
- Start date
Annoyingly, Rainbow Six: Siege was probably the biggest surprise for me this year even if it's not listed here. Games like the original Rainbow Six, Ghost Recon, or the amazing SWAT 3 and 4 have gone out of style lately and to see a game in a similar vein appear out of nowhere and in such style was a fantastic surprise... It's just too bad it's Ubisoft involved with the game.
Still I think I'll adopt a cautious wait & see approach for this one, I've been waiting for a game to fill the gap SWAT 4 left for years now so it'd be a shame to dismiss the game outright just because of the publisher. Otherwise what was shown of Witcher 3 was absolutely jaw-dropping and Arkham Knight is looking like an amazing followup to Rocksteady's Arkham Asylum and Arkham City, but then neither of those are really a surprise that they'd look great given the developers involved.
No Man's Sky looked neat but I'm still a bit skeptical, same with Elite: Dangerous. Lots of potential to be amazing games, but lots of potential to mess it up as well.
Can't say much else really caught my attention however. The new Civ game already had my interest beforehand and I don't have any consoles to enjoy any of the other exclusives, even if they were something that I thought might interest me.
Here's a question though: Obsidian were supposed to be showing off Pillars of Eternity with Paradox at E3, but I've not been able to find anything about it. Were they actually present or not?
Still I think I'll adopt a cautious wait & see approach for this one, I've been waiting for a game to fill the gap SWAT 4 left for years now so it'd be a shame to dismiss the game outright just because of the publisher. Otherwise what was shown of Witcher 3 was absolutely jaw-dropping and Arkham Knight is looking like an amazing followup to Rocksteady's Arkham Asylum and Arkham City, but then neither of those are really a surprise that they'd look great given the developers involved.
No Man's Sky looked neat but I'm still a bit skeptical, same with Elite: Dangerous. Lots of potential to be amazing games, but lots of potential to mess it up as well.
Can't say much else really caught my attention however. The new Civ game already had my interest beforehand and I don't have any consoles to enjoy any of the other exclusives, even if they were something that I thought might interest me.
Here's a question though: Obsidian were supposed to be showing off Pillars of Eternity with Paradox at E3, but I've not been able to find anything about it. Were they actually present or not?
Glad to see Splatoon make the list. It's refreshing to see Nintendo release a new IP that looks fun enough to keep all the fanboys from booing it just because it isn't a new Zelda or Metroid or Star Fox.
Splatoon was like Watch_Dogs a couple years ago. I had never heard of it before the show, the reveal seemed a little dull, then seeing the gameplay made me go "I didn't know I wanted this before, but I want to play this now." Not the game that got me the most excited, but went the fastest from "what's this?" to "want this".
And since it's Nintendo making it (or at least a company besides Ubisoft), I might actually still be excited for the game when it comes out. At least there won't be a reveal of 5 different collectors editions after news comes out that the graphics aren't as good as the graphics shown during the presentation...
And since it's Nintendo making it (or at least a company besides Ubisoft), I might actually still be excited for the game when it comes out. At least there won't be a reveal of 5 different collectors editions after news comes out that the graphics aren't as good as the graphics shown during the presentation...
If a console doesn't have exclusives, it doesn't sell. If the console doesn't sell, the competitor crushes the opposition and makes it go out of business. If the competitor remains the only reasonable way to get games, they can set the expectations themselves without having much say from its customers. It's all money-grubbing if you look at it that way, at least we have some competition still. A reasonable thing to do would be to just look forward to other great games on the other consoles. Exclusives aren't the problem (especially considering PC probably has the most exclusives out of any gaming platforms combined)Jasper van Heycop said:
Once again another E3 and no word on an HD remake of Big Rigs: Over the Road Racing. Such a shame 
could not finish reading this, as my browser got stuck multiple times to the point of needing to endtask. whateter is loading from taboola.com (two scripts are loaded from that) is making my firefox crash when doing these multiple page things. so yeah would be nice if you got that sorted.
batman looked a lot like "lets take Crysis guy and make him batman" to me. maybe thats the costume design.
Looks like many good games this time, which is bad for me, there are more good games than time to play them
batman looked a lot like "lets take Crysis guy and make him batman" to me. maybe thats the costume design.
Looks like many good games this time, which is bad for me, there are more good games than time to play them
Thats the thing though. The competition isn't between ps4 and xbone. Its between ps4, xbone, wiiu, steam, gog, green man, humble bundle, origin ect ect. The devices shouldn't hold the product at gun point to promote their platform. Do you see blue rays holding movies for their blue ray player?Ferisar said:
Getting rid of exclusives is better for the industry and the consumer.
I honestly doubt that it's at all possible, though. Blue-ray player is only competing with streaming services and digital distribution, but on the physical front it's without any contention superior to things like DVD's. The comparison would be more in line with "PC vs. Console" in terms of power: the only reason the two compete is because they share the medium which is provided, not because of the readily-presentable power divides (in which PC is superior, but less accessible). I would say that the only "exclusives" that are the worst offenders are the ones that avoid the PC, as there's really no competition between the PC market and the console one (in my opinion), and releasing games as exclusive+PC is hardly a bad thing. End of the day, it's widely available on multiple fronts without having to give your friends over at XBOX or PS4 any slices (especially since the console/PC user divide is often driven not by exclusives but by preferences). Not a lot of people are going to invest in a console and a powerful PC, so there really shouldn't be fear of losing potential customers.Ragnar47183 said:
I really can't see them doing away with exclusives though. They drive console sales, and that's the reality. If Xbox wasn't doing so hot, but had a good line-up of exclusives, they'd be fine. If they weren't doing so hot, and made those available on PS4, they're literally fucked because the people with and without the PS4's are going to be more likely to just buy a PS4. This is speaking without any moral sentiments taken into consideration, obviously. Consumer trust is a whoooole other matter.
You know, if asked several years ago, I would respond with "if the PC didn't have its own subset of games that relied on the PC to either produce the best visual fidelity or were simply PC-centric (like strategy games or MMOs), then what is the point of having a PC?" It holds many games as exclusive. The thing is, PC's don't sell primarily as gaming platforms. They don't have to worry about the console market, because they are/were safe. The only real thing that the "PC" is being held back by is the console bottom line in terms of graphical capability, as a game that wasn't made with the PC power in mind would simply look worse because it... well, wasn't made with the PC in mind.Jasper van Heycop said:
On the console front, you are literally selling a device that plays games and has some "cool" secondaries. If people don't buy it to play games, you're fucked. What you're saying is literally promoting homogenizing. It's like saying that two horror games shouldn't exist because "one sold more".
Exclusives aren't new, and they aren't the devil. If you have a moral problem with getting a console, than you're not at fault for not buying it. If you think that they're assholes for holding an IP on their console to help said console succeed (especially since it's usually a first-party effort) then you should probably not have the conflicting argument in your head. IF you're conflicted, then good, they're giving you, the consumer, a reason to buy their console. It isn't an essential. You have other ways to access games. It's why I'll take Bayonetta 2 being on Nintendo existing versus Platinum getting shafted on their IP and not making it at all because of no willing publishers. And, lo and behold, people are willing to buy the Wii U for it!
Ta da!
I guess what I'm saying is I'd rather take two competing devices that have their own services provided rather than one device that can tell me to fuck off and cry more when charging 90 bucks for a game that statistically makes them money.
But neither were some others (DA:I, for example, which was a hands-off video presentation). It might be that the escapist's staff isn't the most excited for the Witcher 3 given its review of the second game, but that's taking that one person who reviewed the game as the whole website, so... eh. Who knows.lawrencein said:
I know that DA:I was playable as talked about in this video (30:50). As for other games I don't know about them but that was the official reason given why some of the bigger games weren't on the list.Ferisar said:
I'm sorry, but the only one that even cause me to stir even a bit was Alien Isolation, only because I'm desperate for a good alien game.
The Order MAY have potential, but I need to see way more of it. And it needs something completely original or fun, like an experimental steam punk gun customization mode, where the more pressure gauges and pipes, the better.
The others, especially Nintendo Splooge, look so...committee designed. So safe and dull and boring, like a blank piece of paper. Not offensive in any way, but so mundane as to be unnoticeable next to say...paint drying. I get that the very idea of Nintendo doing something new is considered novel in its own right, but I wish they would do something good for a change.
Once again, E3 is more about companies w*nking off and reporters telling us that's totally not whats happening.
Why do we still even watch these things?!
The Order MAY have potential, but I need to see way more of it. And it needs something completely original or fun, like an experimental steam punk gun customization mode, where the more pressure gauges and pipes, the better.
The others, especially Nintendo Splooge, look so...committee designed. So safe and dull and boring, like a blank piece of paper. Not offensive in any way, but so mundane as to be unnoticeable next to say...paint drying. I get that the very idea of Nintendo doing something new is considered novel in its own right, but I wish they would do something good for a change.
Once again, E3 is more about companies w*nking off and reporters telling us that's totally not whats happening.
Why do we still even watch these things?!
While exclusives can be frustrating, they can allow developers to deep dive into the tech of a single system. That usually means they can put more resources into story, level design, multiplayer, etc because they don't have to write code for multiple systems.Ragnar47183 said:
