Okay so I've been watching all the end of year reviews of 2010 video game-wise and just generally remembering all the big game stuff of this year. In truth, it wasn't too great. I mean sure it wasn't a HORRIBLE year (Actually looking back at the evidence compared to the last 4 years, it was.) there was some good stuff, but there weren't a lot of truly amazing things. And if there were they mainly seemed to be just off the end of last year. Think about it, how many really good games came out this year? (PS: The text under each game is my opinionated overview of the games. If you don't feel like reading all that just look over what games I listed and read the part at the bottom so you can take an informed part in the conversation. Also make sure you vote in the poll. Thanks.)
[hr/]
[hr/]
Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood
->Or Assassin's Creed 2.5 really just updating the great 2009 game but without too many major renovations in the series other than more Desmond play which they promised in 2 but didn't really fulfill.Otherwise just more AC:2
->Good, but just as good as the last game was really.
Halo: Reach
->Basically just for all of those who are (a) already into Halo or (b) always wanted to see Master Chief John-117 "Smith" [Which I take as his full name] to die, apparently several times. It also still goes with my issue with Halo on it hasn't really gotten too many gameplay changes since Halo 2. I mean it's 2010 and NOW you make it so you can sprint? And only as a power up? Really guys? Also it did the AC:2 thing of "Really press that you will get an interesting gameplay sequence [ex. Leonardo's glider; Space fight] and then make that sequence last about 5 minutes. Plus since the idea that all the characters would die was presented at the beginning of the game, it wasn't really shocking when disposable characters 1-6 died. (Actually the sniper kinda got away, which I thought was an odd thing)Also it continues the story of "If the entire Earthern military force, including their elite hordes of super-soldiers were unable to last a day against the alien hordes, how can the one guy not only survive against them (without really ever being harmed), but pretty much annihilate them? Was it because characters that don't speak or have personality live longer or something?
->Good game overall; great if you are already a big Halo Fan, until you realize this is the last halo and cry over your master chief helmet and noble team statue.
Mass Effect 2
->I was surprised to be reminded that this game came out this year. Truthfully it was almost riding the last wave of awesome games from late 2009 (it came out late January) This game would by far be my game of the Year. Some great gameplay on top of THE most compelling story in this year and possibly the last several years (next to say Portal, Bioshock, Shadow of the Colossus, Resistance 2, and of course Mass Effect) I think it is interesting how both games have this series have had great writing. If The third one tops 2's story then this will be the only series I can think of that has been able to make a trilogy of games that has had a Story in each game, continuing a good story-arc throughout the trilogy, and topping each previous game in the sequel. This series is probably the only thing having me keep my X-box (that is unless ME:1 gets ported onto PS3 also and PSN gets Fallout DLC around the same time as XBLA)
->AWESOME<-
God of War 3
->Yeah... Awesome gameplay and some of the coolest animation and just general size I have seen in a game recently. Other than that it was just a game for those who need to blow off some steam by way of gruesomely murdering all Greek mythology. This series seems to get better gameplay in each game while it loses all interesting story. I mean I was all with Kratos quest for revenge against the jack-wagon that was Ares in the first game, but then in the second game Kratos is the jack-wagon who needs to be killed... but he's the guy the audience is supposed to get behind? I mean in game 3 he just goes around destroying the world just because just because Zues stabbed him for trying to destroy the world. So... yeah. Also I'm surprised that this game got away with an M rating with the amount of disturbing violence and full frontal nudity it had on screen. A lot of times at the same time. But since the it isn't male nudity and women getting killed it's perfectly okay. I mean Kratos rips Helios' head off and uses it as a flashlight, along with the gruesome murders of pretty much every other male God, but then he mostly leaves the women alone. Of course he murders gorgons, harpies, and titans all the time but human women, he leaves the alone. Of the two human-ish women he murders in games 1-3 one was on accident and the other was provoked/unintentional. I'm confused at how the man who kills a guy by beating him, bashing his head into a wall, throwing him into a rock, gouging his eyes out, and then snapping his neck and throwing him off a cliff has a code of conduct against killing all the women-folk.
-> Good. Technologically great. Really almost an exploitation game. Great fun for sociopaths.
Red Dead: Redemption
-> Fun cowboy-ish-ness in a game. Cool. Nice to have a long game, but it gets a bit boring due to how easy the gameplay is. When you can murder everything ever in one shot before they fire, it's cool, but repetitive at times. One of the only big flaws in this game was how it was really three parts (America; Mexico; More America) Being that the Mexico part of the story SUCKED. No one in the whole country hates your guts on site (To quote Croshaw: "...[All] brought together by their mutual desire to kill Whitey")I mean in America you can just ride around, but as soon as your in Mexico every person every is trying to kill you. And those who aren't (mainly the revolutionaries) are the biggest jack-wagons in the history of mankind. I really don't understand why Marshton allied with anyone and just went out and killed all of Mexico. I mean with how easy the gun-play is I can't understand how that would be hard for him since he's apparently he is one of the horsemen of the apocalypse or something (If only he could get one of their horses... wait...) By the time I went back up to America I was so tired of the game to want to continue. (Also Apparently it is all Marshton's fault why Mexico is controlled by jack-wagons and drug dealers now...) I mean the first part of the game is an awesome set up to raid villian's lair, but then after you go to Mexico to help jerk A defeat jerk B to become king of the jerks since the only cool guy moves to America and the only nice (but crazy) girl DIES. I just thought the whole process of helping people that don't really seem to appreciate you helping them to take down one guy in a base similar to the one you just raided and owned almost single handedly (like a few guys helped you kill the last couple guys) is just a huge stain on an almost otherwise great story and game.
-> Really Good. Mexico (in the game) sucks. Kind of repetitive shooting. Totally deserved zombies.
Dead Rising 2
->The second installment in a game by Japanese people trying to make an american-like game. The whole idea of having to level up and love in your first few runthroughs to actually win is annoying, and the time limit on everything just confines what would otherwise be an awesome zombie killing sandbox. Weapon creation is fun but seems more limited by what the creator's could think of and not what you can. Also, it's weird how instead of DLC they release mini games that you don't need the actual game to play. I think that is actually interesting and kind of cool since I usually rent games and don't feel like buying DLC to play on a game I don't own and won't be able to use after I return it. I do thinkit is weird though that the Case West DLC made it so the "Almost but not quite" ending the canon one, and not the A++ WINNER ending.
->Good zombie killing. Be ready to lose playthrough 1-3 o so until you get enough levels to win. Slightly convoluted plot that doesn't totally get resolved, which is too bad. Basically at the end you don't accomplish much except murdering a lot of zombies and maybe saving a few people.
Fallout: New Vegas
-> Another game this year that really just seems as an updated last game. Better story than the last I say, which it seems a lot of reviewers don't agree with. I don't know why so many have latched onto the idea that the whole "looking for your lost dad" plot is good in a game where the moral views of your character are based on the player. I mean, unless you are goody McGee why would you care where your dad went? Wouldn't you just go do whatever in the wasteland and leave him be? And then you get commissioned to save the wastes later... but if your guy was scary mass murderer why would he want to? I mean the whole series of event's in the game breaks if your evil, and sometimes too if your just neutral. Plus your character is supposed to be 18 when you create how he looks, which gets weird if you make him look like a crazy old war veteran pirate or something. This game your character's creation and motivations are more up to you. I mean the first quest is "find guy who shot you in your face and stole your package you were supposed to deliver". Now I don't see how (a) getting revenge on the guy who tried to kill you and/or (b) get the stuff he also stole from you back is not enough motivation for any character type other then some odd non-confrontational pacifist who would be odd to try to play in a post-apocalyptic shooter/action/rpg game. Also after that you become famous enough that the different factions of New Vegas enlist you to help then take over the wasteland all of different moral codes, and if you don't want to help any, you don't have to and can just take over the place for yourself. I just like the classic multiple choice answer of [d] None of the above being implemented.
-> Really good if you like the long trekking, violent killing, and world saving / ruining gameplay of the Fallout series.
Call of Duty: Black Ops
-> Now that I'm here I notice that probably the main reason this year has been so slow was the lack of almost any great shooter or action/adventure series. The ones we did get were few and far apart. This game was a joy, since before it I hadn't played a good shooter I liked since Mass Effect 2 came out. (That would be about 11 months later; And sorry, I don't like Halo since I think it plays like a shooter from 2001, since I don't think the series has had any real change since it's inception) Treyarch I like since they are actually able to make CoD good (Which I sometimes forget after playing the crap infinity ward shovels out) I mean this game has the benefit of just going "You know that whole pressing 'realism' and then making a game ridiculous didn't totally work with Infinity Ward, so let's just make a fun game." Also, let me just say that fighting Russians, only makes sense in the COLD WAR. I also like that this game goes through the wars that America didn't actually win, instead of the usual "World War / make up a war" scenarios. Also let me just say something: I don't like the Halo 1-3 style that just give you immortal "Captain Awesome-Sauce" characters since it doesn't give the action in that game any kind of excitement since your destroying everything was just a stroll in the park; then the Halo: Reach and CoD4:MW2 type thing of "Your Dude Be Screwed" Where (a) you know your guy will die at the beginning of the game, or (b) Every character you play dies five seconds after you get to play as them. Also Reznov from World at War returns, which is AWESOME. I just like the idea that they made this into a series and not a Final Fantasy type thing where none of the games connect. I mean we even get to see what Dimitri Petrenko (Your character in the Russian part of that game) looks like. Plus this game is the only game I've seen since Resistance 2 that actually contains so much stuff. You have your full-length campaign, a couple zombies levels (more of which will probably be added in DLC), and a giant very good multiplayer mode that you can even play single player while still being able to rank up in (which is a seperate rank and stuff from the multiplayer one). That last one is cool especially since more games should do that. I have a few friends who don't have internet hookups to their consoles but would still like access to what is really half of the game content, and hey, sometimes I want to play even when my internet connection is busted or I'm too tired to deal with the seven-year-olds in the X-Box Live Idiots and Douches Guild of America (or XBLIDGA for those members of the Guild who are illiterate. Which is probably most of them.)
->Really Great. I'd say if it wasn't for mass Effect this would be my game of the year. Great gameplay, alright story, actually balanced online play, and of course, Kennedy, Nixon, and Castro vs. Zombies.
[hr/]
[hr/]
And that is about it.
Let Me Quickly State:
>I know I'll have missed someones random "Favrit Gaem Evar" or however the heck they will spell it. It's not the point.
>Also I know I'll get flak from halo uberfans especially after I say that they prefer the very 90s concept of emotionless invulnerable protagonists in games that have no story over "Defeat Bad Guys" instead of getting any kind of progress or new ideas being implemented into games.
>I do know I missed most computer releases (i.e. Starcraft 2) but I don't have a PC to play on.
>I also didn't list Gran Turismo 5, Fable 3, and Super Street Fighter 4 weren't listed since I don't like to judge games I haven't played through thoroughly, but I know they were big games this year.
>Finally, I know that WoW fans are all Cataclysm amped now (I personally know my WoW playing friends are super into it) but the only thing is that at this point you're either playing WoW or aren't so another release for that only really has any meaning to those already playing that game. Plus I did play for a bit and from what I played and heard from my top leveled friends, other than the world updates the main new fun stuff comes from the new really high level quest lines. Otherwise it's still mostly WoW.
Now to the rational association of folk to whom I still want to get my point out. Now really look at that list of games. Those were the good ones really but none of them really did too much super revolutionary except maybe God of War's scale and Mass Effect 2's, well, just in general coolness. I mean it's unfortunate coming off of a year that brought us Assassin's Creed 2, Borderlands, Forza 3, Uncharted 2, Infamous, Killzone 2, Dragon Age, and Batman: Arkhum Asylum to name a few. And that was nothing compared to 2008s spread of amazing game launches. Also this year hasn't provided as many new IPs (as in ones that will continue as series) as 08 and 09. Is this because those years did see so many new game series come out that this is just that filler time until all the good new stuff comes out? Interestingly enough it looks like it.
I mean look at the list of games that are set to come out in 2011: Killzone 3, Resistance 3, Mass Effect 3, Bioshock Infinite(actually early 2012 but still), Mortal Kombat, Gears of War 3, Portal 2, Uncharted 3, Little Big Planet 2, Dead Space 2, Marvel VS CAPCOM 3, Guild Wars 2, Forza 4, Diablo 3, Dragon Age 2 and even some new games that look cool like Brink, Bulletstorm, and Homefront. Heck even DUKE NUKEM FOREVER IS COMING OUT IN 2011!? I mean is this some kind of conspiracy that no good games can come out except for about every couple years? I mean if it's just coincidence that all these game companies are running on the same production cycles that they keep releasing so close together, then we need to see if we can disperse things a bit more. If you look at it it seems that most major releases now are set on about 2-3 year cycles. I doubt that that is good economically for some of these corporations to be basing their profits on being raked in at that time-rate. I understand that every company takes time to produce games but do they have to take the SAME time? I mean the lineup for next year is going to be amazing, but is that going to mean that around 2015 we are going to get another game drought? It seems the problem is that so many of the series out now are from 2006 - 2008 and not to many other big IPs have dropped in the last two years. Hopefully as the game industry grows we can start getting a little more of an even dispersion in game releases.
If anything at least know this: 2010 didn't give out too many good games, but hell if 2011 isn't going to make up for it at least.
(Also for the Poll. Just go by what you think the quotes mean. Or heck, just choose a quote from a game you liked. If you know what all these quotes are good for you, nerd. Personally I just want to say that #4 is THE best quote from one of the best written games ever.)
[hr/]
[hr/]
Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood
->Or Assassin's Creed 2.5 really just updating the great 2009 game but without too many major renovations in the series other than more Desmond play which they promised in 2 but didn't really fulfill.Otherwise just more AC:2
->Good, but just as good as the last game was really.
Halo: Reach
->Basically just for all of those who are (a) already into Halo or (b) always wanted to see Master Chief John-117 "Smith" [Which I take as his full name] to die, apparently several times. It also still goes with my issue with Halo on it hasn't really gotten too many gameplay changes since Halo 2. I mean it's 2010 and NOW you make it so you can sprint? And only as a power up? Really guys? Also it did the AC:2 thing of "Really press that you will get an interesting gameplay sequence [ex. Leonardo's glider; Space fight] and then make that sequence last about 5 minutes. Plus since the idea that all the characters would die was presented at the beginning of the game, it wasn't really shocking when disposable characters 1-6 died. (Actually the sniper kinda got away, which I thought was an odd thing)Also it continues the story of "If the entire Earthern military force, including their elite hordes of super-soldiers were unable to last a day against the alien hordes, how can the one guy not only survive against them (without really ever being harmed), but pretty much annihilate them? Was it because characters that don't speak or have personality live longer or something?
->Good game overall; great if you are already a big Halo Fan, until you realize this is the last halo and cry over your master chief helmet and noble team statue.
Mass Effect 2
->I was surprised to be reminded that this game came out this year. Truthfully it was almost riding the last wave of awesome games from late 2009 (it came out late January) This game would by far be my game of the Year. Some great gameplay on top of THE most compelling story in this year and possibly the last several years (next to say Portal, Bioshock, Shadow of the Colossus, Resistance 2, and of course Mass Effect) I think it is interesting how both games have this series have had great writing. If The third one tops 2's story then this will be the only series I can think of that has been able to make a trilogy of games that has had a Story in each game, continuing a good story-arc throughout the trilogy, and topping each previous game in the sequel. This series is probably the only thing having me keep my X-box (that is unless ME:1 gets ported onto PS3 also and PSN gets Fallout DLC around the same time as XBLA)
->AWESOME<-
God of War 3
->Yeah... Awesome gameplay and some of the coolest animation and just general size I have seen in a game recently. Other than that it was just a game for those who need to blow off some steam by way of gruesomely murdering all Greek mythology. This series seems to get better gameplay in each game while it loses all interesting story. I mean I was all with Kratos quest for revenge against the jack-wagon that was Ares in the first game, but then in the second game Kratos is the jack-wagon who needs to be killed... but he's the guy the audience is supposed to get behind? I mean in game 3 he just goes around destroying the world just because just because Zues stabbed him for trying to destroy the world. So... yeah. Also I'm surprised that this game got away with an M rating with the amount of disturbing violence and full frontal nudity it had on screen. A lot of times at the same time. But since the it isn't male nudity and women getting killed it's perfectly okay. I mean Kratos rips Helios' head off and uses it as a flashlight, along with the gruesome murders of pretty much every other male God, but then he mostly leaves the women alone. Of course he murders gorgons, harpies, and titans all the time but human women, he leaves the alone. Of the two human-ish women he murders in games 1-3 one was on accident and the other was provoked/unintentional. I'm confused at how the man who kills a guy by beating him, bashing his head into a wall, throwing him into a rock, gouging his eyes out, and then snapping his neck and throwing him off a cliff has a code of conduct against killing all the women-folk.
-> Good. Technologically great. Really almost an exploitation game. Great fun for sociopaths.
Red Dead: Redemption
-> Fun cowboy-ish-ness in a game. Cool. Nice to have a long game, but it gets a bit boring due to how easy the gameplay is. When you can murder everything ever in one shot before they fire, it's cool, but repetitive at times. One of the only big flaws in this game was how it was really three parts (America; Mexico; More America) Being that the Mexico part of the story SUCKED. No one in the whole country hates your guts on site (To quote Croshaw: "...[All] brought together by their mutual desire to kill Whitey")I mean in America you can just ride around, but as soon as your in Mexico every person every is trying to kill you. And those who aren't (mainly the revolutionaries) are the biggest jack-wagons in the history of mankind. I really don't understand why Marshton allied with anyone and just went out and killed all of Mexico. I mean with how easy the gun-play is I can't understand how that would be hard for him since he's apparently he is one of the horsemen of the apocalypse or something (If only he could get one of their horses... wait...) By the time I went back up to America I was so tired of the game to want to continue. (Also Apparently it is all Marshton's fault why Mexico is controlled by jack-wagons and drug dealers now...) I mean the first part of the game is an awesome set up to raid villian's lair, but then after you go to Mexico to help jerk A defeat jerk B to become king of the jerks since the only cool guy moves to America and the only nice (but crazy) girl DIES. I just thought the whole process of helping people that don't really seem to appreciate you helping them to take down one guy in a base similar to the one you just raided and owned almost single handedly (like a few guys helped you kill the last couple guys) is just a huge stain on an almost otherwise great story and game.
-> Really Good. Mexico (in the game) sucks. Kind of repetitive shooting. Totally deserved zombies.
Dead Rising 2
->The second installment in a game by Japanese people trying to make an american-like game. The whole idea of having to level up and love in your first few runthroughs to actually win is annoying, and the time limit on everything just confines what would otherwise be an awesome zombie killing sandbox. Weapon creation is fun but seems more limited by what the creator's could think of and not what you can. Also, it's weird how instead of DLC they release mini games that you don't need the actual game to play. I think that is actually interesting and kind of cool since I usually rent games and don't feel like buying DLC to play on a game I don't own and won't be able to use after I return it. I do thinkit is weird though that the Case West DLC made it so the "Almost but not quite" ending the canon one, and not the A++ WINNER ending.
->Good zombie killing. Be ready to lose playthrough 1-3 o so until you get enough levels to win. Slightly convoluted plot that doesn't totally get resolved, which is too bad. Basically at the end you don't accomplish much except murdering a lot of zombies and maybe saving a few people.
Fallout: New Vegas
-> Another game this year that really just seems as an updated last game. Better story than the last I say, which it seems a lot of reviewers don't agree with. I don't know why so many have latched onto the idea that the whole "looking for your lost dad" plot is good in a game where the moral views of your character are based on the player. I mean, unless you are goody McGee why would you care where your dad went? Wouldn't you just go do whatever in the wasteland and leave him be? And then you get commissioned to save the wastes later... but if your guy was scary mass murderer why would he want to? I mean the whole series of event's in the game breaks if your evil, and sometimes too if your just neutral. Plus your character is supposed to be 18 when you create how he looks, which gets weird if you make him look like a crazy old war veteran pirate or something. This game your character's creation and motivations are more up to you. I mean the first quest is "find guy who shot you in your face and stole your package you were supposed to deliver". Now I don't see how (a) getting revenge on the guy who tried to kill you and/or (b) get the stuff he also stole from you back is not enough motivation for any character type other then some odd non-confrontational pacifist who would be odd to try to play in a post-apocalyptic shooter/action/rpg game. Also after that you become famous enough that the different factions of New Vegas enlist you to help then take over the wasteland all of different moral codes, and if you don't want to help any, you don't have to and can just take over the place for yourself. I just like the classic multiple choice answer of [d] None of the above being implemented.
-> Really good if you like the long trekking, violent killing, and world saving / ruining gameplay of the Fallout series.
Call of Duty: Black Ops
-> Now that I'm here I notice that probably the main reason this year has been so slow was the lack of almost any great shooter or action/adventure series. The ones we did get were few and far apart. This game was a joy, since before it I hadn't played a good shooter I liked since Mass Effect 2 came out. (That would be about 11 months later; And sorry, I don't like Halo since I think it plays like a shooter from 2001, since I don't think the series has had any real change since it's inception) Treyarch I like since they are actually able to make CoD good (Which I sometimes forget after playing the crap infinity ward shovels out) I mean this game has the benefit of just going "You know that whole pressing 'realism' and then making a game ridiculous didn't totally work with Infinity Ward, so let's just make a fun game." Also, let me just say that fighting Russians, only makes sense in the COLD WAR. I also like that this game goes through the wars that America didn't actually win, instead of the usual "World War / make up a war" scenarios. Also let me just say something: I don't like the Halo 1-3 style that just give you immortal "Captain Awesome-Sauce" characters since it doesn't give the action in that game any kind of excitement since your destroying everything was just a stroll in the park; then the Halo: Reach and CoD4:MW2 type thing of "Your Dude Be Screwed" Where (a) you know your guy will die at the beginning of the game, or (b) Every character you play dies five seconds after you get to play as them. Also Reznov from World at War returns, which is AWESOME. I just like the idea that they made this into a series and not a Final Fantasy type thing where none of the games connect. I mean we even get to see what Dimitri Petrenko (Your character in the Russian part of that game) looks like. Plus this game is the only game I've seen since Resistance 2 that actually contains so much stuff. You have your full-length campaign, a couple zombies levels (more of which will probably be added in DLC), and a giant very good multiplayer mode that you can even play single player while still being able to rank up in (which is a seperate rank and stuff from the multiplayer one). That last one is cool especially since more games should do that. I have a few friends who don't have internet hookups to their consoles but would still like access to what is really half of the game content, and hey, sometimes I want to play even when my internet connection is busted or I'm too tired to deal with the seven-year-olds in the X-Box Live Idiots and Douches Guild of America (or XBLIDGA for those members of the Guild who are illiterate. Which is probably most of them.)
->Really Great. I'd say if it wasn't for mass Effect this would be my game of the year. Great gameplay, alright story, actually balanced online play, and of course, Kennedy, Nixon, and Castro vs. Zombies.
[hr/]
[hr/]
And that is about it.
Let Me Quickly State:
>I know I'll have missed someones random "Favrit Gaem Evar" or however the heck they will spell it. It's not the point.
>Also I know I'll get flak from halo uberfans especially after I say that they prefer the very 90s concept of emotionless invulnerable protagonists in games that have no story over "Defeat Bad Guys" instead of getting any kind of progress or new ideas being implemented into games.
>I do know I missed most computer releases (i.e. Starcraft 2) but I don't have a PC to play on.
>I also didn't list Gran Turismo 5, Fable 3, and Super Street Fighter 4 weren't listed since I don't like to judge games I haven't played through thoroughly, but I know they were big games this year.
>Finally, I know that WoW fans are all Cataclysm amped now (I personally know my WoW playing friends are super into it) but the only thing is that at this point you're either playing WoW or aren't so another release for that only really has any meaning to those already playing that game. Plus I did play for a bit and from what I played and heard from my top leveled friends, other than the world updates the main new fun stuff comes from the new really high level quest lines. Otherwise it's still mostly WoW.
Now to the rational association of folk to whom I still want to get my point out. Now really look at that list of games. Those were the good ones really but none of them really did too much super revolutionary except maybe God of War's scale and Mass Effect 2's, well, just in general coolness. I mean it's unfortunate coming off of a year that brought us Assassin's Creed 2, Borderlands, Forza 3, Uncharted 2, Infamous, Killzone 2, Dragon Age, and Batman: Arkhum Asylum to name a few. And that was nothing compared to 2008s spread of amazing game launches. Also this year hasn't provided as many new IPs (as in ones that will continue as series) as 08 and 09. Is this because those years did see so many new game series come out that this is just that filler time until all the good new stuff comes out? Interestingly enough it looks like it.
I mean look at the list of games that are set to come out in 2011: Killzone 3, Resistance 3, Mass Effect 3, Bioshock Infinite(actually early 2012 but still), Mortal Kombat, Gears of War 3, Portal 2, Uncharted 3, Little Big Planet 2, Dead Space 2, Marvel VS CAPCOM 3, Guild Wars 2, Forza 4, Diablo 3, Dragon Age 2 and even some new games that look cool like Brink, Bulletstorm, and Homefront. Heck even DUKE NUKEM FOREVER IS COMING OUT IN 2011!? I mean is this some kind of conspiracy that no good games can come out except for about every couple years? I mean if it's just coincidence that all these game companies are running on the same production cycles that they keep releasing so close together, then we need to see if we can disperse things a bit more. If you look at it it seems that most major releases now are set on about 2-3 year cycles. I doubt that that is good economically for some of these corporations to be basing their profits on being raked in at that time-rate. I understand that every company takes time to produce games but do they have to take the SAME time? I mean the lineup for next year is going to be amazing, but is that going to mean that around 2015 we are going to get another game drought? It seems the problem is that so many of the series out now are from 2006 - 2008 and not to many other big IPs have dropped in the last two years. Hopefully as the game industry grows we can start getting a little more of an even dispersion in game releases.
If anything at least know this: 2010 didn't give out too many good games, but hell if 2011 isn't going to make up for it at least.
(Also for the Poll. Just go by what you think the quotes mean. Or heck, just choose a quote from a game you liked. If you know what all these quotes are good for you, nerd. Personally I just want to say that #4 is THE best quote from one of the best written games ever.)
