Bioware had half-decent storytelling skills. Some people feel this makes up for the lackluster gameplay their games exhibit. A smaller number of people feel that placing in the Special Olympics that is video game storytelling makes them the second coming of Jesus.crowbarlove said:
Games or developers you hate on principle
- Thread starter repeating integers
- Start date
Recommended Videos
* Seconds This *burntheartist said:
Maybe I just don't like EA because they focus on Sports titles ( not saying that's all they make )& it's not something I'm into.
I don't know I'm just not a big EA fan.
being a pc gamer. And being called elitist and a snob already earlier in this thread, i'll act as one:
i hate console gaming.
but then again pc gaming has suffered a lot as well, what happened to long, complex, difficult games with steep learning curves and loads of options???
but thats why i hate consoles, i blame them for those changes.
i hate console gaming.
but then again pc gaming has suffered a lot as well, what happened to long, complex, difficult games with steep learning curves and loads of options???
but thats why i hate consoles, i blame them for those changes.
Some people really like the gameplay. And I personally think it's the way they balance the humor/quirkiness with the decent-ish storytelling people like, rather than the storytelling itself. HK-47 is probably one of the most liked things they've ever written.theamazingbean said:
As someone who loves his NES, I have to say that console gaming is not what killed the difficult games with steep learning curves. This probably applies to every quality you listed, but the things that killed those were technological improvements increasing the time(/money) it takes to produce a top of the line game and the casual market.hyplion said:
I would agree with you if this wasnt basically true. I love halo and i basically never lamp on about halflife or valve unless its the discussion but i have to say its a good game. Valve do know what they are doing. TF2 also is a great game, best balenced multiplayer ive ever seen in my life. Its kinda shallow to hate something JUST because of others opinions on it... dont you think? Form your own opinion. Hate the hasslers not the developers, the only crime they are guilty of is making good games. They dont ask people to go on and on about it. DO hate the player. Halo reach is also an epic game. PLay halflife on the PC also. Better experience.OhJohnNo said:
Anyway i dont hate any on principle. Because i make rational and fair opinions not based entirely on other peoples action but all on the skill of the developer and the quality of their games.
EA, beacause every game they release has unused potential.
Activision, for making their games simple ports for the pc.
Ubisoft, because of their crusade against pc piratism, which they only provoke by doing so.
Lionhead studios, for lying about their games (I'm talking about black and white 2 and it's multiplayer).
Crytek, Because they didn't refine their engine better. It always overheats my processor, even if I play on min settings.
Activision, for making their games simple ports for the pc.
Ubisoft, because of their crusade against pc piratism, which they only provoke by doing so.
Lionhead studios, for lying about their games (I'm talking about black and white 2 and it's multiplayer).
Crytek, Because they didn't refine their engine better. It always overheats my processor, even if I play on min settings.
As someone who had a disagreement with Steam over them charging me twice for a game, and subsequently got banned from it after my bank canceled the second charge, I have to say otherwise. The way I see it, everygame I had bought from Steam that was multi-player only was stolen from me because of their DRM.bloodmage2 said:wow. i guess you really only do judge based on concept. because, you know, if someone throws a gold brick at you, they are an ass, because, hey, they threw a brick at you. its the same as steam. valve found a way to make DRM good, but nope, its terrible, 'cause its DRM, that means it must be bad.Alpha1089 said:Valve I sort of hate because of Steam. It has some pretty good things going for it, such as allowing me to keep in contact with mates while I'm gaming and it caters to my lazy nature by auto-updating my games for me, but at the end of the day it's still just a cleverly disguised form of DRM. What I really hate, though, is when I buy a game in a store and go to install it, only to discover that my supposedly "DRM-free" game requires Steam. Yeah, fuck off game companies, you're not fooling me with your bullshit claims about the game having no DRM.
Also, Steam has resulted in publishers shafting us Aussies even more ridiculously. Before digital distribution they could at least attempt to claim that the costs of importing the games and taxes and such raised the price. How the fuck do they justify a price difference like this when there are no costs outside of keeping a server up and running:
I don't spend a lot of time hating games, seeing as most of it is spent on ones I like.
However, I don't like Harmonix, on account that they make games I like to play but suck horribly at.
However, I don't like Harmonix, on account that they make games I like to play but suck horribly at.
I hate fanboys too. I have learned to not hate what a fanboy likes but instead to directly hate the fanboy (and punch him or her in the face when given the chance). Misdirecting your anger will only bring you sadness hate the player not the game.
I really don't hate anyone on principle but avoid games from a few companies simply because there usually work doesn't entice me.
I really don't hate anyone on principle but avoid games from a few companies simply because there usually work doesn't entice me.
Bioware is OK at story telling but its real shine comes through on its charactors in my opinion. Alot of their stories offer you a diverse and interesting charactor lineup. Even their most cliche charactors have something about them that is interesting. As well, they often allow more role definement for your main charactor than alot of the competition out there. Until a developer really embraces the idea that choice = consequence instead of choice = good/evil they will hold a big audience for RPG fans. I personally see bioware as the first company with real potential to break free of this cycle as this is an area of the game Bioware pays a large focus to.theamazingbean said:
I don't feel that Bioware's gameplay is lackluster, it just doesn't have the execution that "top" action games offer. In the give and take system of great content delivery versus flawless game mechanics they strive in the former. Their gameplay is pretty average or even above average when you really look at the entire game market out there and use the term average at its very meaning. I wouldn't recommend a bioware game to someone looking for a good action based game. "Oh, you like Halo? You should try Mass Effect." That statement makes no sense. But replacing Halo with Bioshock or Fallout 3 does make sense.
That's just my take on it. I am a fan of RPGs so I am a Bioware fan. Bioware is where Troika was heading before they got axed. Troika was doing things in games back in the late 90s that people find "innovative" by today's standards. The business side to gaming oddly hurts itself at times.
As for PC gaming elitism - Elitism is the true plague of the gaming industry. It is the very nature behind this thread. It is probably the leading cause to about 40-60% of all threads started on this board. It is why Yahtzee is so popular. It is the root of the words l33t, pwn, uber, and many more. I almost made a thread about this entirely but could never be bothered to actually get it done. There is a huge trend in gaming today that is basically the attitude that "my opinion as a gamer is more important than yours." Whether it is because you like "better games" or you have "higher standards" all the way down to "I play this while you play that piece of crap system." Anyone that hates PC gaming because of a few elitist are only becoming what they despise. Ironic isn't it? Now you are an elitist console gamer because you have classified an entire set of people that have a preference to a system and deemed yourself better. I don't know if a calculator can count the amount of people on here that consider themselves above Wii fans on this board.
OT: WoW for me. It did nothing but polish a dying system in MMOs and effectively stall the evolution of the genre as other developers looked at the system as "hmm, maybe it CAN make money" and try to immulate it instead of try something new. Then the fanbase insists on calling every MMO that comes out a WoW clone. And what irks me about this is WoW has no room to talk about cloning other media. It foundation of mechanics is based heavily on the old MMO setup in Everquest and many other games like it. As well, the idea of Warcraft itself was taken from the miniatures game of Warhammer. So WoW is nothing but an amalgam copycat strategy. However, bringing any of this up in a conversation about MMOs will get met with rage and people will say I just dont like WoW because its cool to hate on WoW. And that irks me a little bit more as if it is unfathomable to not be mesmerized by this title of mediocrity.
I'm presuming because your bent out of shape they didn't release one full game, and opted to make Starcraft II longer to give a better overall view of the story to the player through individualized campaigns as opposed to say releasing Starcraft 2 with shorter campaigns but all on the same disc. They made it perfectly clear that they were doing this so it would be easier to tell the story rather than try to cram it all in on one disc.JordanJefferson said:
Naturally you could say this "Well they could have released all three games one 3 separate discs or all three campaigns at once seperately" to which my reply would be "No they couldn't, the development time would have been the same regardless after they chose to split the games into 3 campaigns, and rather then get part of it now you'd have to wait an extra two years. Two years when people have been waiting for at least 12 for anything related to Starcraft.... and since they announced this in roughly 2006 to 2007, that would have been a 5 year development cycle, which people would be entirely frustrated with as they would have to wait even longer."
And many of those games a mentioned have an overarching storyline that bleeds into one another. It could be said that GoW 1 and 2 and 3 are essentially the same as splitting Starcraft 2 into 3 games, because they have an overarching storyline.
Actually, a better example of that is Half Life 2.... they made the inital game and two episodes, but you didn't hear many complaining that it was split instead of being made into HL 3..... although we do have complainers about Episode 3 that doesn't seem to exist XD
I'm pretty sure you mean "Activision pushing over Infinity Ward", seriously, just because they were rushed on only one game (which isnt even a bad game at all by a long shot) they dont deserve to be shat over so much*Rewold said:
*I know this is sounding like it's personal and that I'm taking on you, well not, this is more general =P
I did not get bent out of shape. It's just a basis of pricipal for me. Either come out with the whole thing or not at all.Kaez said:
I honestly don't see why you care so much, half life is just a generic first person shooter with some pretty guns and a decent story, since when has a 7/10 game modeled after the single most fucking abundant gameplay style in xbox history been worthy of godhood?Ekonk said:
Seriously It's just another FPS, theres only 6000 of those around.
That seems silly to condemn a game company because they were trying to give as much entertainment as they could. True they did go about it slightly wrong (prolly charge 50-60 dollars for each) but it seems that they really wanted to help bring a high amount of entertainment to the customers. So you would have rather waited til at least 2012 for a game had they not split it up but provided the amount of content they intended when they split it up into three games. It's not like they created the game and intentionally left things out so you could get it through DLC.JordanJefferson said:
Actually lets go back in time, technically every game that has an expansion is considered an unfinished game until you installed that expansion. Generally companies used to release expansions to include things that didn't make the cut, or could improve on the existing formula, things they wanted int he initial game, but do to time constraints or budget issues or simply not knowing how to first implement it released an unfinished game (some more polished then others). I suppose you didn't pay for those either? If you did, you technically go against your own principals.
I agree, I wasn't much impressed with Half-Life but then again I am not a FPS fan by nature. Battlefield 2142, Halo, and Ghost Recon were my favorites. Beyond that, MW1 then 2 were alright. If you want to see the content in half-life and be entertained watch this:Hisshiss said:
Episode 2-30 for season 1. It is a work in progress. Pretty good though.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J9C78b_FhKA&list=SL&playnext=1 episode 2-30 for season 1. It is a work in progress.