Bodycount Dev: Bulletstorm Proves There Is a Market Outside of Call of Duty

[Laser Priest]

It took a terrible game to prove the obvious?

 

[Baralak]

Wow, I must be one of the few people that really enjoyed Bulletstorm, and I'm someone who HATES the current shooter trends.

Dude, Bulletstorm was AWESOME. I loved Painkiller, and I loved Bulletstorm. I can't wait to find out what else People Can Fly has up their sleeve!

 

[SovietPanda]

hopeful optimism about serious sam 3, from what little ive seen it should be a joyfully chaotic game.

 

[Throwitawaynow]

Bulletstorm was short with bad multiplayer. Why exactly is it looked at as a success? Being new and bad is much worse than the CoD formula.

 

[GrizzlerBorno]

Bulletstorm was a success? I mean I quite liked it, but it didn't seem like it succeeded....at anything, really?

Except maybe at how to do Shooter Protagonists right? As much hate as Steven Blum gets, he voiced the protagonist well. Wasn't too obnoxiously talkative during battles; Was pretty funny; and succeeded in not making Bulletstorm too cutscene-infested like other games with voiced protagonists.

 

[Hristo Tzonkov]

borderlands, TF2, brink,perfect dark even halo i mean yea it's milatarised but theres lots of colour and its pretty over the top. There's always been room in the market for sureal and colourful shooters. As long as the gameplay is solid, the maps are well thought out and the guns are fun to play with.

Damn Ninja.
But yes, Trade Fortress 2, Borderlands and all that proved this way before bulletstorm did.

It turns out that you don't have to be a brown and grey military shooter to sell well.

So you can be orange and dirt-yellow instead?
The only distinction Bulletstorm has is that it comes a list of moves for somewhat modified conventional weaponry and lots of swear words. You figure out which one of those two was deemed innovative.

Yeah, I agree. As yahtzee said, the game's weapons are like something from a game that's not trying to be a "supa-relistack military brown&bloom" game, but the enemies, the chest high walls everywhere speak a different story. The game's like 'Gears of ridiculous weapons & dick jokes.'

I didn't see any chest high walls...Was there a cover mechanic in that game?Also the enemies were zombies pretty much and monsters.This was covered in Extra Credits.It's meant to make people feel ok.Imagine killing real people by impaling 3 of them on a cactus - that's just not cool.They were still fairly colourful and they exploded in a lot of colors not just red.Bulletstorm was a breath of fresh air because it had awesome enviroments,a decent B movie like story,extremely awesomesauce voice actors and it was really fun to play.I mean I replayed it 3-4 times and it didn't feel repetitive then jumped to an actually different type of multiplayer.If you don't like dick jokes just leave it there.You don't need to make any other points as to why you didn't like the game.

The TF2 comments are pretty hipster.I'd agree the game is awesome,colourful and cheerful and it did do it before Bulletstorm but they didn't try to recreate that.

I believe Codemasters wanted to make a game that suddenly seemed very similiar to Bulletstorm.It happens sometimes when ideas start taking shape.I'm actually applauding developers for recreating the arcade style shooting of the 90s rather than grey/brown military shooter or heavily scripted linear shooters with some story.Not that I don't also play those but diversity makes people happy.

 

[Assassin Xaero]

Sequel to black!? Awesome! I loved that game...

 

[Hristo Tzonkov]

Bulletstorm was a success? I mean I quite liked it, but it didn't seem like it succeeded....at anything, really?

Except maybe at how to do Shooter Protagonists right? As much hate as Steven Blum gets, he voiced the protagonist well. Wasn't too obnoxiously talkative during battles; Was pretty funny; and succeeded in not making Bulletstorm too cutscene-infested like other games with voiced protagonists.

Blum gets hate? He's a dude.

And Bulletstorm was a lot of fun to play. What more did it need to do to succeed? It also managed an engaging plot. It was humerous and the writing and character development worked quite well. It didn't take itself too seriously and it was colourful.

Honestly, it's everything people have been asking for, yet they still moaned about it.

You seriously cannot please gamers. We just like to moan.

Personally I think it was one of the best lighthearted shooters I've ever played. It was certainly better than DNF and I don't see Serious Sam being that good.

Also, MOAR CUTSCENES No game suffers from too many cutscenes syndrome, not if the story is interesting.

Not even MGS4.

Oh man you covered this shit so good.I wholeheartedly agree with you.You aren't supposed to take critics at heart people.They are meant as guidelines and critisism is aimed at the creators themselves.

 

[GrizzlerBorno]

Also, MOAR CUTSCENES No game suffers from too many cutscenes syndrome, not if the story is interesting.

Not even MGS4.

Well that's your opinion. One that, as I'm sure you're aware, will be heavily contested in these forums. Lot of hate for Cut-scenes here. I'm neutral, personally, but there you go...

 

[Mr Somewhere]

Bulletstorm was a success? I mean I quite liked it, but it didn't seem like it succeeded....at anything, really?

Except maybe at how to do Shooter Protagonists right? As much hate as Steven Blum gets, he voiced the protagonist well. Wasn't too obnoxiously talkative during battles; Was pretty funny; and succeeded in not making Bulletstorm too cutscene-infested like other games with voiced protagonists.

Blum gets hate? He's a dude.

And Bulletstorm was a lot of fun to play. What more did it need to do to succeed? It also managed an engaging plot. It was humerous and the writing and character development worked quite well. It didn't take itself too seriously and it was colourful.

Honestly, it's everything people have been asking for, yet they still moaned about it.

You seriously cannot please gamers. We just like to moan.

Personally I think it was one of the best lighthearted shooters I've ever played. It was certainly better than DNF and I don't see Serious Sam being that good.

Also, MOAR CUTSCENES No game suffers from too many cutscenes syndrome, not if the story is interesting.

Not even MGS4.

Really? But there are much more effective means of storytelling in games rather than relying on impersonal cut scenes. It's very much old hat at this stage.

 

[Mr Somewhere]

Bulletstorm was a success? I mean I quite liked it, but it didn't seem like it succeeded....at anything, really?

Except maybe at how to do Shooter Protagonists right? As much hate as Steven Blum gets, he voiced the protagonist well. Wasn't too obnoxiously talkative during battles; Was pretty funny; and succeeded in not making Bulletstorm too cutscene-infested like other games with voiced protagonists.

Blum gets hate? He's a dude.

And Bulletstorm was a lot of fun to play. What more did it need to do to succeed? It also managed an engaging plot. It was humerous and the writing and character development worked quite well. It didn't take itself too seriously and it was colourful.

Honestly, it's everything people have been asking for, yet they still moaned about it.

You seriously cannot please gamers. We just like to moan.

Personally I think it was one of the best lighthearted shooters I've ever played. It was certainly better than DNF and I don't see Serious Sam being that good.

Also, MOAR CUTSCENES No game suffers from too many cutscenes syndrome, not if the story is interesting.

Not even MGS4.

Really? But there are much more effective means of storytelling in games rather than relying on impersonal cut scenes. It's very much old hat at this stage.

Bullhockey.

A cutscene shouldn't be the only way a story is told, but when they're done right they can advance a certain plotpoint very quickely and effectively that would otherwise have taken a while to drop hints at during gameplay or simply wouldn't have been as effective in doing so.

A story should be told through a multitude of ways. Be it through backstory, ausiotapes, in game interactions and cutscenes.

They're terribly outdated. I don't play videogames to have the control taken off every so often. It simply kills pacing. I don't mind quick cuts, such as the kind used in the original Dead Space or such. I just think cut scenes are rather played out, there are much more effective ways of gleaning information. It's just weak, and not very involving, which is the very point of videogames. It's counter intuitive.
I play games to play games.
I watch movies to watch movies.

They are separate and should remain as such. None of this Heavy Rain nonsense.

 

[Mr Somewhere]

Bulletstorm was a success? I mean I quite liked it, but it didn't seem like it succeeded....at anything, really?

Except maybe at how to do Shooter Protagonists right? As much hate as Steven Blum gets, he voiced the protagonist well. Wasn't too obnoxiously talkative during battles; Was pretty funny; and succeeded in not making Bulletstorm too cutscene-infested like other games with voiced protagonists.

Blum gets hate? He's a dude.

And Bulletstorm was a lot of fun to play. What more did it need to do to succeed? It also managed an engaging plot. It was humerous and the writing and character development worked quite well. It didn't take itself too seriously and it was colourful.

Honestly, it's everything people have been asking for, yet they still moaned about it.

You seriously cannot please gamers. We just like to moan.

Personally I think it was one of the best lighthearted shooters I've ever played. It was certainly better than DNF and I don't see Serious Sam being that good.

Also, MOAR CUTSCENES No game suffers from too many cutscenes syndrome, not if the story is interesting.

Not even MGS4.

Really? But there are much more effective means of storytelling in games rather than relying on impersonal cut scenes. It's very much old hat at this stage.

Bullhockey.

A cutscene shouldn't be the only way a story is told, but when they're done right they can advance a certain plotpoint very quickely and effectively that would otherwise have taken a while to drop hints at during gameplay or simply wouldn't have been as effective in doing so.

A story should be told through a multitude of ways. Be it through backstory, ausiotapes, in game interactions and cutscenes.

They're terribly outdated. I don't play videogames to have the control taken off every so often. It simply kills pacing. I don't mind quick cuts, such as the kind used in the original Dead Space or such. I just think cut scenes are rather played out, there are much more effective ways of gleaning information. It's just weak, and not very involving, which is the very point of videogames. It's counter intuitive.
I play games to play games.
I watch movies to watch movies.

They are separate and should remain as such. None of this Heavy Rain nonsense.

At the risk of repeating myself.

Bullhockey.

If you don't want story driven games, don't play them.

A combination of good ingame story telling and cutscenes is the best way to tell a story in a game.

When did I say I didn't want to play story driven games? When I play a game it's (usually) for the story, if I'm interested, which, mind are few and far between.
There are much, much, much more effective means of telling a story.

Isn't it wiser to involve the player rather than just rely on a cutscene? I have no impact during a cutscene, it's a weak outdated method. Even giving the illusion of control during a scripted event can garner a more meaningful impact. Again, I think cutscenes are old hat.

 

[Mr Somewhere]

Bulletstorm was a success? I mean I quite liked it, but it didn't seem like it succeeded....at anything, really?

Except maybe at how to do Shooter Protagonists right? As much hate as Steven Blum gets, he voiced the protagonist well. Wasn't too obnoxiously talkative during battles; Was pretty funny; and succeeded in not making Bulletstorm too cutscene-infested like other games with voiced protagonists.

Blum gets hate? He's a dude.

And Bulletstorm was a lot of fun to play. What more did it need to do to succeed? It also managed an engaging plot. It was humerous and the writing and character development worked quite well. It didn't take itself too seriously and it was colourful.

Honestly, it's everything people have been asking for, yet they still moaned about it.

You seriously cannot please gamers. We just like to moan.

Personally I think it was one of the best lighthearted shooters I've ever played. It was certainly better than DNF and I don't see Serious Sam being that good.

Also, MOAR CUTSCENES No game suffers from too many cutscenes syndrome, not if the story is interesting.

Not even MGS4.

Really? But there are much more effective means of storytelling in games rather than relying on impersonal cut scenes. It's very much old hat at this stage.

Bullhockey.

A cutscene shouldn't be the only way a story is told, but when they're done right they can advance a certain plotpoint very quickely and effectively that would otherwise have taken a while to drop hints at during gameplay or simply wouldn't have been as effective in doing so.

A story should be told through a multitude of ways. Be it through backstory, ausiotapes, in game interactions and cutscenes.

They're terribly outdated. I don't play videogames to have the control taken off every so often. It simply kills pacing. I don't mind quick cuts, such as the kind used in the original Dead Space or such. I just think cut scenes are rather played out, there are much more effective ways of gleaning information. It's just weak, and not very involving, which is the very point of videogames. It's counter intuitive.
I play games to play games.
I watch movies to watch movies.

They are separate and should remain as such. None of this Heavy Rain nonsense.

At the risk of repeating myself.

Bullhockey.

If you don't want story driven games, don't play them.

A combination of good ingame story telling and cutscenes is the best way to tell a story in a game.

When did I say I didn't want to play story driven games? When I play a game it's (usually) for the story, if I'm interested, which, mind are few and far between.
There are much, much, much more effective means of telling a story.

Isn't it wiser to involve the player rather than just rely on a cutscene? I have no impact during a cutscene, it's a weak outdated method. Even giving the illusion of control during a scripted event can garner a more meaningful impact. Again, I think cutscenes are old hat.

You're neglecting the fact that giving the audience/player control diminuishes the directors/creators control.

How are you supposed to rely on the audience/player to know how and when to react with the same effect as a carefully planned and choreographed cutscene.

It's never going to have the same effect.

I have already mentioned scripted events, akin to Half Life 2. Or even moments in game as emphasis for the plot. Or the kinds of conversations you see in most modern western rpgs. There are much more meaningful ways to get the plot across. Look at the original Metroid Prime, sure it's peppered with short cut scenes, but they're minimal. The majority of the story was told through the environment. Cut scenes are used as an unimaginative crutch.
Too often you have to sit around and watch a cutscene.
Would you rather watch a cutscene in which you're shown a building crumble to pieces, or have it occur in game through a scripted event. There's much more meaning if you see it happen.

Compare Metroid Prime to Metroid Other M.