Gearbox Boss Says id, Crytek are "Risking Failure"
- Thread starter Andy Chalk
- Start date
Just so you know, COD:MW2 sold LESS than 1 million. So beating COD:MW2 while STILL aiming for high end users, not a bad feat there.ForgottenPr0digy said:
But Crysis was playable on quite a lot of PCs, just that you couldn't max it out. It was still prettier than the other games on the market.
While I still find Gearbox Half-Life Opposing Force the best Expansion out there on the market. I'm not sure what to think of them now.
Hmm 6 Brother in Arms games. 6 WHOLE games about WW2 alone O_O and they wonder why it sold bad.
Borderlands? They need to patch things up before I'll really like it.
Only when you push the envelope do you advance.ForgottenPr0digy said:
I think that doing this stuff has helped them gain gamer respect, which can build brand loyalty.
and, um...crytek is trying to max out the consoles with crysis2, so yeah. STFU and make some free borderlands shit with your seemingly ample free time
I do have to question his logic on crytek and id considering their next games are multiplatform releases and thus are targeted and hampered by current generation consoles
Who the hell does this guy think he is? I didn't bother with it at first, but it seems like the guy thinks he's some sort of video game prophet. Hell, he's been at this how long? Yet little old Gearbox thinks they know more about making games than not just Valve, but id and Crytek? Are you kidding me?
Seriously, are you?
Seriously, are you?
I wish this lad could find another way to spend his free time instead of scratching his 3 balls and verbally bashing other people that are trying to do their job. Who the fuck is this guy? I did not even know him until last month. I appreciate the concern but last time I checked, you weren't in my list of people that I consider influential or part of my inner conscience. Simply make games. If you insist on playing counselor on other companies, then work for them. Or go shoot your mouth off. You got options. About 87 bazillion of them.
PS. The fact that Crysis sold as many copies as Bioshock kind of makes me lose my fate to the gaming world.
PS. The fact that Crysis sold as many copies as Bioshock kind of makes me lose my fate to the gaming world.
"Pitchford could have a point, I suppose, but I'm inclined to think that it's just more noise from someone who clearly craves attention."
Can I expect to see this sort of statement used to describe Newell the next time he bloviates?
Can I expect to see this sort of statement used to describe Newell the next time he bloviates?
heres the problem with his argument:
hardware drives software development. its a fact. it wasant until the advent of consumer multi-core processors that developers started making their programs multithreaded even though several processors in the past had used simultaneous multithreading and the advantages of multihreaded applications were very clear.
theres nothing wrong with developing for high end hardware, just as long as you at least make it capable of running on lower end machines, and this is exactly what developers, including crytek with crysis (despite the pervasive notion that it takes a super computer to run), have done.
the other problem is that this is what id has been doing since doom and wolf3d, for over 17 years, and they are still around. id broke MAJOR ground with the quake 3 engine by doing away with software rendering and requiring a graphics card, and if id managed to survive that then how can making games for high end systems that push boundaries of what is graphically possible make them fail? this is also assuming that both developers make games solely for the pc, and while that was true of both companies in the past they are both now very much multiplatform developers.
hardware drives software development. its a fact. it wasant until the advent of consumer multi-core processors that developers started making their programs multithreaded even though several processors in the past had used simultaneous multithreading and the advantages of multihreaded applications were very clear.
theres nothing wrong with developing for high end hardware, just as long as you at least make it capable of running on lower end machines, and this is exactly what developers, including crytek with crysis (despite the pervasive notion that it takes a super computer to run), have done.
the other problem is that this is what id has been doing since doom and wolf3d, for over 17 years, and they are still around. id broke MAJOR ground with the quake 3 engine by doing away with software rendering and requiring a graphics card, and if id managed to survive that then how can making games for high end systems that push boundaries of what is graphically possible make them fail? this is also assuming that both developers make games solely for the pc, and while that was true of both companies in the past they are both now very much multiplatform developers.
the problem here is that while bioshock had what is one of, if not the, best, deepest stories in any game the actual gameplay (aka, shooting) wasant all that great, whereas crysis had a weak story but the gameplay/shooting was excellent. this is also taking into account the pc sales of bioshock only and NOT total sales which did exceed the number of copies that crysis has sold.katsabas said:
I didn't realize Crysis sold 1 million copies. Wow.
I mean, I know it was pirated to hell and back but I didn't realize that many people bought it. I do actually plan on getting it because I really enjoyed Far Cry (one) (except the story, lol) and it just seems like more of that.
I think id and Crytek will be okay, but I agree that they are sort of gambling with their consumers. I know wolfenstein and quake have huge followings, but they want to do a new ip, (since not enough post-apocalyptic games are out there I guess, heh) and certain projects of theirs should get more attention in my opinion (quake live, quake 4, doom 3)
I mean, I know it was pirated to hell and back but I didn't realize that many people bought it. I do actually plan on getting it because I really enjoyed Far Cry (one) (except the story, lol) and it just seems like more of that.
I think id and Crytek will be okay, but I agree that they are sort of gambling with their consumers. I know wolfenstein and quake have huge followings, but they want to do a new ip, (since not enough post-apocalyptic games are out there I guess, heh) and certain projects of theirs should get more attention in my opinion (quake live, quake 4, doom 3)
Well, I do believe making very expensive games for a relatively small audience is not a good business strategy. However, since Crysis sold pretty well (I believe) I'm probably completely wrong on this.
Crytek is a very prominent and professional game developer and they haven't turned out a bad game yet. They aren't going anywhere. Crysis was awesome and Warhead was even better. I bought both and will buy Crysis 2 when it comes out.
He releases a half-decent FPS and now he thinks that he's an expert on all things gaming. If we didn't have people trying to push the bar, where would the world be?
Well let's see, Newell recently bloviated about how the L4D2 boycotters were preordering the game at a higher ratio than non boycotters, with actual proof to back it up. Pitchford on the other hand has been like "holy shit I put out a game time to say stupid shit." and has thus proceeded to say things that are hilariously erroneous at best and outright lies at the worst.SaintWaldo said:
And now, now that he's actually gotten towards making sense with what he says I really just wish he'd keep quiet. He's become like another Cliffy B.