Alone in the Dark was dreadful. I can't really think of any other games I feel don't have the right to exist.
mors616 said:here is a place to discuss games that were total pieces of money wasting shit, for example mario galxay 2
Even if I don't agree, I might still find it an interesting argument. For now, I am just curious.Inkidu said:Dude, don't be that guy. Because no matter how good my point is, you're not going to be swayed. Ten bucks says you've got half a reply formulated to whatever you think I'm going to say. Just let people *****.
Fine. Ever since the original Diablo came out Blizzard peaked on that series at 2. Now in this day and age you'll inhabit a lifeless meaningless avatar to depopulate the world of it's cuddly hideous fauna over and over again in a game that feels more like an MMO than anything else. That was great for 2001. Now, they're going to render Diablo 3 in 3D add a few classes finally let people chose their sex (if I remember correctly) but underneath the tweak-like updates it'll still be Diablo and nothing will have changed... and they will make a fortune. It's a good business model, minimum work for maximum profit, but when I think about it I feel a little more hollow inside.4RM3D said:Even if I don't agree, I might still find it an interesting argument. For now, I am just curious.Inkidu said:Dude, don't be that guy. Because no matter how good my point is, you're not going to be swayed. Ten bucks says you've got half a reply formulated to whatever you think I'm going to say. Just let people *****.
Hey, Rockstar's "The Warriors" was awesome.synobal said:Any game based on a movie, ever.
Oh, *that* business model. Simply put, it's a cash cow game. So, that would mean you are against all franchises that are actively recycling their games. Like Call of Duty, Need for Speed, all sport games from EA. I think Diablo scores pretty well compared to those recycled games.Inkidu said:Fine. Ever since the original Diablo came out Blizzard peaked on that series at 2. Now in this day and age you'll inhabit a lifeless meaningless avatar to depopulate the world of it's cuddly hideous fauna over and over again in a game that feels more like an MMO than anything else. That was great for 2001. Now, they're going to render Diablo 3 in 3D add a few classes finally let people chose their sex (if I remember correctly) but underneath the tweak-like updates it'll still be Diablo and nothing will have changed... and they will make a fortune. It's a good business model, minimum work for maximum profit, but when I think about it I feel a little more hollow inside.4RM3D said:Even if I don't agree, I might still find it an interesting argument. For now, I am just curious.Inkidu said:Dude, don't be that guy. Because no matter how good my point is, you're not going to be swayed. Ten bucks says you've got half a reply formulated to whatever you think I'm going to say. Just let people *****.
Not precisely. I'm against taking ten plus years to make a cash cow game and then it sell atrociously well because fans are fans. Shovelware is easy to spot and avoid and naturally gets removed by the more discerning gamer and when it doesn't make money it goes away. Blizzard get to do the same thing, sell it as new, and make oodles of money. It's like a scam. It's hard to fight the shovelware gag reflex when it's got ten years of hype behind it.4RM3D said:Oh, *that* business model. Simply put, it's a cash cow game. So, that would mean you are against all franchises that are actively recycling their games. Like Call of Duty, Need for Speed, all sport games from EA. I think Diablo scores pretty well compared to those recycled games.Inkidu said:Fine. Ever since the original Diablo came out Blizzard peaked on that series at 2. Now in this day and age you'll inhabit a lifeless meaningless avatar to depopulate the world of it's cuddly hideous fauna over and over again in a game that feels more like an MMO than anything else. That was great for 2001. Now, they're going to render Diablo 3 in 3D add a few classes finally let people chose their sex (if I remember correctly) but underneath the tweak-like updates it'll still be Diablo and nothing will have changed... and they will make a fortune. It's a good business model, minimum work for maximum profit, but when I think about it I feel a little more hollow inside.4RM3D said:Even if I don't agree, I might still find it an interesting argument. For now, I am just curious.Inkidu said:Dude, don't be that guy. Because no matter how good my point is, you're not going to be swayed. Ten bucks says you've got half a reply formulated to whatever you think I'm going to say. Just let people *****.
EDIT: But yeah, point taken.
they would have just destroyed it somewhere else. like cod or everquest or any of the 100 other games that people spend 20+ hours a week playing.Strain42 said:World of Warcraft, think of all the lives its destroyed
If it wasn't those games then people would ***** about the popularity of other games. There's no escaping the flame war.cyrogeist said:annnd
for my own answer
CoD,Halo and battlefield
i enjoy these 3 game series but the internet would be better off without the flamewars they spawn >_>
Well see, the Diablo fans would be outraged if it had been massively changed, anyway. I'm going to try to refrain from fueling you but as far as dungeon crawlers and RTS' stand, the genre as a whole would probably not be nearly as big if it weren't for Blizzard.Inkidu said:Not precisely. I'm against taking ten plus years to make a cash cow game and then it sell atrociously well because fans are fans. Shovelware is easy to spot and avoid and naturally gets removed by the more discerning gamer and when it doesn't make money it goes away. Blizzard get to do the same thing, sell it as new, and make oodles of money. It's like a scam. It's hard to fight the shovelware gag reflex when it's got ten years of hype behind it.
Inkidu said:Not precisely. I'm against taking ten plus years to make a cash cow game and then it sell atrociously well because fans are fans. Shovelware is easy to spot and avoid and naturally gets removed by the more discerning gamer and when it doesn't make money it goes away. Blizzard get to do the same thing, sell it as new, and make oodles of money. It's like a scam. It's hard to fight the shovelware gag reflex when it's got ten years of hype behind it.4RM3D said:Oh, *that* business model. Simply put, it's a cash cow game. So, that would mean you are against all franchises that are actively recycling their games. Like Call of Duty, Need for Speed, all sport games from EA. I think Diablo scores pretty well compared to those recycled games.Inkidu said:Fine. Ever since the original Diablo came out Blizzard peaked on that series at 2. Now in this day and age you'll inhabit a lifeless meaningless avatar to depopulate the world of it's cuddly hideous fauna over and over again in a game that feels more like an MMO than anything else. That was great for 2001. Now, they're going to render Diablo 3 in 3D add a few classes finally let people chose their sex (if I remember correctly) but underneath the tweak-like updates it'll still be Diablo and nothing will have changed... and they will make a fortune. It's a good business model, minimum work for maximum profit, but when I think about it I feel a little more hollow inside.4RM3D said:Even if I don't agree, I might still find it an interesting argument. For now, I am just curious.Inkidu said:Dude, don't be that guy. Because no matter how good my point is, you're not going to be swayed. Ten bucks says you've got half a reply formulated to whatever you think I'm going to say. Just let people *****.
EDIT: But yeah, point taken.