Atomic Boss Calls Out Kotick Over Bungie Comment

[ArmorArmadillo]

"Gears of War. Portal. Borderlands. None of these games re-hashes the same old formulas. They innovate. And, they're made by independent developers, of course."
Mainstream dreck, innovation, mainstream dreck. Well, it's not all innovation, but at least it's an innovation sandwich.

Edit: Actually, although I almost instinctively think of Portal as innovative, it may not really be that innovative. It has a cool mechanic, but it's a relatively formulaic puzzle platformer that just happens to be very well made and written extremely well.

People should probably stop using the term innovation as though it were just a synonym for good...it means taking things in a new direction.

in no va tion [in-uh-vey-shuhn]
?noun
1.
something new or different introduced: numerous innovations in the high-school curriculum.
2.
the act of innovating; introduction of new things or methods.

Gears of War innovated the 3rd person shooter genre with the streamlined cover system.
Portal innovated on how puzzle games can be approached, and gave us the portal gun.
Borderlands innovated on artstyle and meshed the FPS with RPG-like looting.

Whether they're "good" or not is debatable, but they each had their own impact on the industry (Not so much Borderlands, but you get my point).

As for Breach, I've barely heard of it and it looks like a standard online shooter, not innovating on anything (har d har). I really don't get why they're hyping up a downloadable shooter so much.

I guess I'm being excessively demanding as to what qualifies innovation...I suppose that these games are innovative compared to most games, still they aren't as groundbreaking as...say...Sands of Time or Silent Hill.

As for Breach, this plays out as a tiny developer of an unknown game trying to generate publicity by picking out the big name of the big company... sort of like when some random conspiracy nut tries to sue the president.

 

[Radelaide]

said it before say it again, this sounds like breach is going to suck so he is trying to get pr by attacking everyones favorite strawman with an idiotic buisness idea.

I agree, I've never even heard of Breach and I frequent this site and Joystiq regularly.

I like the mockup though.

Heard of it or not, he's right. If Bungie are the last good dev in the game, then everyone is screwed. Good thing he's wrong since Kotick probably couldn't find his feet, let alone form a correct opinion.

Oh, Bobby. You so crazy!

 

[Baby Tea]

Maybe you should do some research before you call a game "mainstream dreck"? Gears of War did innovate. You know all those cover based shooting mechanics that games love to have these days? Do you want to know who did that first and who everyone else is trying to emulate in their game?

Killswitch?
Rainbow Six Vegas?
Metal Gear Solid 1 or 2...or 3?
Winback?
Read Dead Revolver?
True Crime, Streets of LA?
Ghost Recon, Advanced Warfighter?
Perfect Dark Zero?

Any of those? They were made before Gears of War.
Well, not Rainbow Six Vegas. That was made at the same time, and release two weeks after Gears.
But Gears certainly didn't invent, or perfect, the 'cover system'.

Gears is a fun game, I enjoy it, but I would be the last person calling it 'innovative'.
Fun? Heck yeah. I really enjoy the game.
Not innovative.

More on topic: This guy just needs to ignore Kotick like the rest of us. The guy follows himself on twitter, he's so ignored. Talking to or about him only feeds his lust for the spotlight. Let the douche be a douche.

 

[Jumplion]

I guess I'm being excessively demanding as to what qualifies innovation...I suppose that these games are innovative compared to most games, still they aren't as groundbreaking as...say...Sands of Time or Silent Hill.

As for Breach, this plays out as a tiny developer of an unknown game trying to generate publicity by picking out the big name of the big company... sort of like when some random conspiracy nut tries to sue the president.

That's understandable, I would much rather want groundbreaking innovations than just tiny steps, but it isn't practical. Games have gone to the point where they're so huge, and produced with huge budgets, that any small innovations can provide the building blocks for even more down the road.

And I suppose I'm picking on the lil' guy here a bit too much, Breach may very well be a good game but I've been seeing advertising for it that would rival a AAA game. I think they're overblowing it a wee bit too much.

 

[crobulator]

If I had a gun with two bullets and was in a room with Bobby Kotick, Bin Laden and Adolf Hitler, I'd shoot Bobby twice.

this made my day so thank you

 

[lacktheknack]

Well, it's ALMOST enough to make me buy Breach, but it's Mirror's Edge fixed the entirely wrong way.

EDIT: Wait, that's Brink... What on earth is Breach?

Working backwards; lol, same thing I said.

And whats wrong with Brink?

It's Mirror's Edge, with the guns done right.

I don't WANT the guns done right, I want the running done right! Mirror's Edge very nearly had it, Brink does not appear to.

 

[WanderingFool]

Well, it's ALMOST enough to make me buy Breach, but it's Mirror's Edge fixed the entirely wrong way.

EDIT: Wait, that's Brink... What on earth is Breach?

Working backwards; lol, same thing I said.

And whats wrong with Brink?

It's Mirror's Edge, with the guns done right.

I don't WANT the guns done right, I want the running done right! Mirror's Edge very nearly had it, Brink does not appear to.

Could I point out you're compairing Brink to Mirror's Edge, when while they do share the same idea in terms of use through Parkour, have not a damn thing in common.

Mirror's Edge was not a FPS, it was, I believe the term they used was First-Person Experience. The shooting wasnt all that good because it wasnt meant to be a shooting game, it was meant to be a free-running game. I think the problem was that they game it a story, they really should have done what they did with the bit of DLC it had, where its just an abstract environment for you to jump around. The story felt restrictive on the rather fun Parkouring I was doing.

Brink, on the other hand, is an FPS with Parkour machinics added. Its focus is one gunplay AND the freedom of movement.

If you dont like Brink because its focusing on FPS over the parkour of Mirror's Edge, maybe you should instead play Mirror's Edge...

That last part might sound somewhat mean-spirited, but that wasnt my intention...

 

[lacktheknack]

Well, it's ALMOST enough to make me buy Breach, but it's Mirror's Edge fixed the entirely wrong way.

EDIT: Wait, that's Brink... What on earth is Breach?

Working backwards; lol, same thing I said.

And whats wrong with Brink?

It's Mirror's Edge, with the guns done right.

I don't WANT the guns done right, I want the running done right! Mirror's Edge very nearly had it, Brink does not appear to.

Could I point out you're compairing Brink to Mirror's Edge, when while they do share the same idea in terms of use through Parkour, have not a damn thing in common.

Mirror's Edge was not a FPS, it was, I believe the term they used was First-Person Experience. The shooting wasnt all that good because it wasnt meant to be a shooting game, it was meant to be a free-running game. I think the problem was that they game it a story, they really should have done what they did with the bit of DLC it had, where its just an abstract environment for you to jump around. The story felt restrictive on the rather fun Parkouring I was doing.

Brink, on the other hand, is an FPS with Parkour machinics added. Its focus is one gunplay AND the freedom of movement.

If you dont like Brink because its focusing on FPS over the parkour of Mirror's Edge, maybe you should instead play Mirror's Edge...

That last part might sound somewhat mean-spirited, but that wasnt my intention...

I do get what you're saying. And I'd rather play Mirror's Edge.

But here's the thing: I finish Mirror's Edge, and want moar. So I go hunting for other games with parkour as a focus. I find a Brink tech demo.

"Hey! This looks like Mirror's Edge!"

All the Youtube comments: "Hey! This looks like Mirror's Edge!"

I get excited.

Several weeks later, a new gameplay trailer comes out. I quickly jump at it.

"...Hey, this doesn't feel like Mirror's Edge at all!"

And I am disappointed, and mildly bitter at being led around for a few weeks.

 

[WanderingFool]

-Epic snip

I do get what you're saying. And I'd rather play Mirror's Edge.

But here's the thing: I finish Mirror's Edge, and want moar. So I go hunting for other games with parkour as a focus. I find a Brink tech demo.

"Hey! This looks like Mirror's Edge!"

All the Youtube comments: "Hey! This looks like Mirror's Edge!"

I get excited.

Several weeks later, a new gameplay trailer comes out. I quickly jump at it.

"...Hey, this doesn't feel like Mirror's Edge at all!"

And I am disappointed, and mildly bitter at being led around for a few weeks.

Ahhhhhh... I see where you're coming from. They do need to make a new Mirror's edge game, but at the same time, make it less like Mirror's edge.

The gunplay in Mirrors Edge was pretty basic, but after one such gunbattle, I thought of something, "Why did they have guns in the game?" I came to the conclusion that it was because of the story, which made me ask another question, "Why does this game need a story?"

I think the whole problem I had with Mirror's Edge was the fact that I was confined to this pretty dull story, which made conflict with gun-wielding enemies inevitable. I also didnt like the whole "being a carrier of illegal packages", I just wanted to run across rooftops and and shit.

I think if anyone was to make a new Parkour based game, they should make it without a story, just focus on the Parkour. Give you a character creation bit at the start, and let you run around. Of course, this would get boring pretty quick without some type of carrot, so another thing to do is make it a full MP game. Have up to 32 people or so running around at the same time, you can challenge other players to a race to some point on the map, play a game of tag (which I think would be quite impressive with 32 people jumping across buildings) or something.

I think that would be atleast an interesting game, though I dont think it would fly for $60, so its undoubtable a $25-$30 game. But if a game like this was to come out, I would buy it.

 

[lacktheknack]

-Epic snip

I do get what you're saying. And I'd rather play Mirror's Edge.

But here's the thing: I finish Mirror's Edge, and want moar. So I go hunting for other games with parkour as a focus. I find a Brink tech demo.

"Hey! This looks like Mirror's Edge!"

All the Youtube comments: "Hey! This looks like Mirror's Edge!"

I get excited.

Several weeks later, a new gameplay trailer comes out. I quickly jump at it.

"...Hey, this doesn't feel like Mirror's Edge at all!"

And I am disappointed, and mildly bitter at being led around for a few weeks.

Ahhhhhh... I see where you're coming from. They do need to make a new Mirror's edge game, but at the same time, make it less like Mirror's edge.

The gunplay in Mirrors Edge was pretty basic, but after one such gunbattle, I thought of something, "Why did they have guns in the game?" I came to the conclusion that it was because of the story, which made me ask another question, "Why does this game need a story?"

I think the whole problem I had with Mirror's Edge was the fact that I was confined to this pretty dull story, which made conflict with gun-wielding enemies inevitable. I also didnt like the whole "being a carrier of illegal packages", I just wanted to run across rooftops and and shit.

I think if anyone was to make a new Parkour based game, they should make it without a story, just focus on the Parkour. Give you a character creation bit at the start, and let you run around. Of course, this would get boring pretty quick without some type of carrot, so another thing to do is make it a full MP game. Have up to 32 people or so running around at the same time, you can challenge other players to a race to some point on the map, play a game of tag (which I think would be quite impressive with 32 people jumping across buildings) or something.

I think that would be atleast an interesting game, though I dont think it would fly for $60, so its undoubtable a $25-$30 game. But if a game like this was to come out, I would buy it.

See, I want them to do away with gunplay on YOUR part. I like the "carrier of illegal packages", and my favorite moments involved sailing over a twenty foot gap with a five-hundred foot drop below while bullets sailed past my head.

I'd pay $50 for a game that took the sandbox route, with the carrot being package deliveries and avoiding police.