"Snooty" Shooter Critics Anger Rage Dev

[Woodsey]

"If they buy the next Call of Duty, it's because they loved the last one and they want more of it."

Not so sure about that.

The amount of times I've seen: "MW2 totally sucked, BlOps is gonna rulez! Whoop Treyarch!", and now: "BlOps sucked, MW3 gonna stick it to da bitches!" is... well, a lot of times. I think a lot of people play them just because their mates do.

And perhaps the snobbery exists somewhat because some of us don't like CoD, and don't want its influence in every other bloody game released (which is happening a lot in some form or another)?

Still, I get his point, but "popular = good" is just as irritating as "popular = bad" to me.

Imagine what games would be like now if people had invested in the Deus Ex school of design, and not the "we're not even gonna let you open a fucking door" one. Sigh.

Games would all be like Alpha Protocol and we'd have suffered another catastrophic market crash.

Oh, sorry. I really shouldn't have tried to bring some perspective into your short sighted nostalgia.

"Invested in properly with competent developers" I should have said. And its not nostalgia, I played Deus Ex the other day. Its design (apart from obvious stuff that naturally gets better over time - weapon feel, enemy AI, etc) trumps most of the stuff coming out nowadays.

We'll reexamine the argument once Human Revolution has launched (you know, that one that's had a third of itself leaked and has everyone wanking over it), but for now, I'd suggest staying away from accusing other people of being narrow-minded when your own example is taken from a famously incompetent developer (arguably not their fault) who was in business with a supposedly pushy and interfering publisher.

 

[jamesworkshop]

By this idiots logic, the Transformers movies are really bloody good.

Just seems like an easy way to dismiss negative feedback to me.

I'm betting that some people really like the Transformers movies, but that doesn't make them idiots. And did you just call John Carmack an idiot? He practically invented FPS's as we know it.

...and? Doesn't mean he can't say something stupid now.

It doesn't mean that simple english can't be misunderstood

He did not in fact say that popularity made things good, only to say that because something is popular hence it has no merit, is an asinine remark

 

[Turigamot]

Carmacks argument here is that CoD is popular and therefore good.

No, not at all. His argument is CoD is a good game regardless of its popularity. Simply being popular -doesn't- make it bad.


Also, a game or movie's worthiness is subjective. Personally, I don't care for Call of Duty, nor the Transformers films. But does that mean that somebody else is not allowed to think differently?

If something is bad, then let detractors cite reasons that are not simply popularity.

 

[TheRightToArmBears]

hmmm... seems like a rather good argument for lazy game design, but there's truth in it. I'll be damned if most CoD hate doesn't just come from it being insanely popular.

 

[JediMB]

Anyway, I'm incredibly startled to find that there are developers making decisions about their games based around the number of frames per second. What the fuck? if it's playable, then it's fine. Right?

Thing is that 60 frames per second also equals a minimum of 60 "game loops" per second, which means that all sorts of calculations (including those from controller input) can be made more quickly and lead to a smoother and more responsive experience.

 

[42]

He is right, nearly every new game i've played has suffered from trying to innovate in some way. the only game in which they almost change nothing (that i can think about) to the engine or gameplay was..... Fallout New Vegas. sure the thing was as buggy as fuck, it was still as fun if not more then Fallout 3. but we learn a couple of lessons from this. A) never trust Obsidian with any IP as they won't change a single thing and they'll be buggy as fuck (KOTOR II was good and i enjoyed it.) especially if it's a sequel and B) While the need for something new in games is needed once in a while it is not a bad thing to go back to pure mindless fun in between heavy experiances. like Amnesia the dark descent etc. basically its what the id fella said. but with more analogies.

 

[Frostbite3789]

I was with him right up until the 60 fps thing. Then I sighed, shook my head and realized I couldn't take anything he said seriously for that entire thing.

I can't imagine him saying that in anything but an incredibly sarcastic voice, because that isn't a feature you guys. That's an admittance that what is being made isn't that great, so they have to resort to anything that sounds like it might be positive.

 

[Jumplion]

Games would all be like Alpha Protocol and we'd have suffered another catastrophic market crash.

Oh, sorry. I really shouldn't have tried to bring some perspective into your short sighted nostalgia.

Funny, really, Alpha Protocol wasn't that bad, just really rough around the edges. Had some really interesting concepts. Shame it couldn't be polished out a bit more/was made by Obsidian.

And what, we're not already on our way to another catastrophic market crash? It's really only a matter of time, the industry is just saturated.

OT: Carmack is a smart noodle, but I don't think he quite gets it here. We don't need innovation in every other game for sure, but it's just that the FPS has become so stagnant over recent years that it'd be nice to get a breath of fresh air once in a while. I find it funny how he thinks Rage is different from the competitors when it's probably only different in the small details. It's come to the point where any small "innovation", in the FPS genre especially, or just looking slightly different is grounds to say "Look! We're so radical and unique!" when it's hardly a change at all. The whole FPS genre has gotten me jaded and cynical.

We need something to break the mold, to break the monotony. Some people may enjoy Call of Duty, that is totally fine, I am not ragging on them. Some people might really love their military/apocalyptic/post-apocalyptic shooters, go at it, I have no problems with it. Doesn't mean we can't have an innovative one along side those (Bioshock: Infinite? Please? Looks nifty, to say the least...).

 

[Canadish]

Carmacks argument here is that CoD is popular and therefore good.

No, not at all. His argument is CoD is a good game regardless of its popularity. His argument is that being popular -doesn't- make it bad.

Being popular doesn't make something bad. However...
When something like COD hits the market, it causes a WAVE of copycat/bandwagon clones. This clogs the industry up and discourages other genres or any kind of innovation at all.

And that IS bad.

The hate people spew at COD is visceral for the most part, but the deeper reasoning behind that is not hate towards COD itself(a very good game), but towards the effects its had on the industry (causing the selves to be full up of nothing but lazy shooters).

So popularity CAN and does have adverse effects.

 

[Hagi]

By this idiots logic, the Transformers movies are really bloody good.

Just seems like an easy way to dismiss negative feedback to me.

They are good movies.

They're not good artistic movies. They're very good blockbuster movies.

I don't like them, you don't like them. But they did exactly what they were supposed to do. Provide simple entertainment for the masses and lots of cash for the producers. It succeeded. It did good. It's a good movie. Just not the type of movie you're looking for.

 

[WayOutThere]

"It's like 'Oh, we?re not being creative.' But we're creating value for people - that?s our job! It?s not to do something that nobody?s ever seen before."

If the games industry is lacking innovation (not getting into that here) then it's important not to direct our frustration over the matter at the games or the game developers. Instead, we should direct it at the public who doesn't demand more innovation. To be clear, it is not "snooty" to bemoan a lack of innovation. Far from it, it is our duty as gamers. Just don't attack the games themselves (which are usually popular because they're good) or the game developers (who are doing their job well).

Edit: About my statement "duty as gamers", I admit that may be a silly thing to say. My point stands.

 

[sapphireofthesea]

I think people are interpreting his words wrong. He is just making a point about AAA games not being a Bad thing. He has not said anything against inovation, just that there is a place for the same.

And I for one can relate to it. Some games I have played I just wanted more of the game, to keep the feel with a bit more story to go with. This is where the lack of overall change (with some tweeking) has a place. Other times I feel that the story has been told in full and the expreience was nice and complete so I would prefer something completely new.
He has not shot down either of these two views, merely agreed that both have a valid development point. And as it is the continuation view that get the most stick, it is that that he has chosen to defend in this article (in the same way we favor the things we wish to defend in out own arguments).

Those are my thoughts and I do agree with him. STALKER is a nice example of not putting one's Dick in a pie (points for reference). They tweek but the keep the overall feel the same. While Final Fantasy has done alot (bar the actual story setup) to change their games every time. Ca't say I agree with ll the Final Fantasy games or that I will like all the STALKER games that come out (was too keen on the shift to open world in the lastest STALKER, which is a good second point in favor of keeping things the same), but if each does to the best what they choose to do then surely that will result in the variation needed to keep everyone happy.

(Also worth noting, I play mario games to jump on the heads of things and to use a dinosuar to eat things, that works very very well. Change of scenery and enemies is always nice though, don't need much story to do the jumping and the eating)

 

[theamazingbean]

He's criticizing the critics, before they critique his product. That alone tells me he knows how shitty that product is.

 

[Ironic Pirate]

By this idiots logic, the Transformers movies are really bloody good.

Just seems like an easy way to dismiss negative feedback to me.

What? He's saying that because something is popular, it doesn't mean it's bad, not that if it's popular it's good.

I find it amusing that you're calling him an idiot based on your misunderstanding of what he said.

"It's like 'Oh, we?re not being creative.' But we're creating value for people - that?s our job! It?s not to do something that nobody?s ever seen before."

If the games industry is lacking innovation (not getting into that here) then it's important not to direct our frustration over the matter at the games or the game developers. Instead, we should direct it at the public who doesn't demand more innovation. To be clear, it is not "snooty" to bemoan a lack of innovation. Far from it, it is our duty as gamers. Just don't attack the games themselves (which are usually popular because they're good) or the game developers (who are doing their job well).

Duty as gamers? Our duty as gamers is nothing, because that's silly.

 

[Woodsey]

Games would all be like Alpha Protocol and we'd have suffered another catastrophic market crash.

Oh, sorry. I really shouldn't have tried to bring some perspective into your short sighted nostalgia.

Funny, really, Alpha Protocol wasn't that bad, just really rough around the edges. Had some really interesting concepts. Shame it couldn't be polished out a bit more/was made by Obsidian.

And what, we're not already on our way to another catastrophic market crash? It's really only a matter of time, the industry is just saturated.

Because thats what caused the crash in the eighties. Too many awesome games.

"If they buy the next Call of Duty, it's because they loved the last one and they want more of it."

Not so sure about that.

The amount of times I've seen: "MW2 totally sucked, BlOps is gonna rulez! Whoop Treyarch!", and now: "BlOps sucked, MW3 gonna stick it to da bitches!" is... well, a lot of times. I think a lot of people play them just because their mates do.

And perhaps the snobbery exists somewhat because some of us don't like CoD, and don't want its influence in every other bloody game released (which is happening a lot in some form or another)?

Still, I get his point, but "popular = good" is just as irritating as "popular = bad" to me.

Imagine what games would be like now if people had invested in the Deus Ex school of design, and not the "we're not even gonna let you open a fucking door" one. Sigh.

Games would all be like Alpha Protocol and we'd have suffered another catastrophic market crash.

Oh, sorry. I really shouldn't have tried to bring some perspective into your short sighted nostalgia.

"Invested in properly with competent developers" I should have said. And its not nostalgia, I played Deus Ex the other day. Its design (apart from obvious stuff that naturally gets better over time - weapon feel, enemy AI, etc) trumps most of the stuff coming out nowadays.

We'll reexamine the argument once Human Revolution has launched (you know, that one that's had a third of itself leaked and has everyone wanking over it), but for now, I'd suggest staying away from accusing other people of being narrow-minded when your own example is taken from a famously incompetent developer (arguably not their fault) who was in business with a supposedly pushy and interfering publisher.

So you're basically trying to claim that the reason that idea keeps failing is because its devs are incompetent, yet you claim that the smashing successes that comnpetent developers have had in linear games is undone because you can't handle a well crafted experience.

No, I was telling you why your example was pointless. Alpha Protocol failed due to incompetent handling, most people haven't bothered trying to attempt anything Deus Ex-y because they find it too intimidating, which is understandable, but its also the reason why CoD won't even let you open doors for yourself. If we wanted a somewhat close comparison, then I'd cite Bethesda with the Fallout and TES games. But yeah, you're right, they fucking bomb in the charts.

And no, I didn't say that either. I love linear experiences (Half Life 2, Portal 2, The Sands of Time, Mafia, Uncharted 2, etc.). But good ones; ones that don't feel like they've got your dick in a vice, in spite of being linear. And I just wish that people had bothered to follow up on a game design that is far more interesting.

I mean, the medium has more potential than any to do new shit, and yet what we're getting for the most part, in the most popular genre, is fucking B-movies that let you move the cameraman forward.

 

[Jumplion]

Games would all be like Alpha Protocol and we'd have suffered another catastrophic market crash.

Oh, sorry. I really shouldn't have tried to bring some perspective into your short sighted nostalgia.

Funny, really, Alpha Protocol wasn't that bad, just really rough around the edges. Had some really interesting concepts. Shame it couldn't be polished out a bit more/was made by Obsidian.

And what, we're not already on our way to another catastrophic market crash? It's really only a matter of time, the industry is just saturated.

Because thats what caused the crash in the eighties. Too many awesome games.

You know damn well what I mean. We're not on the best of paths if "innovation" means bringing back the multi-weapon system from the old games.

 

[Smooth Operator]

The problem isn't that CoD is bad the problem is market saturation, everyone is doing the same bloody shooter, not to mention Activision alone is pumping out the same game every year.
They successfully turned CoD it into EA's sports titles.

 

[TheOneandOnly]

"develop |diˈveləp|
verb ( -veloped , -veloping )
1 grow or cause to grow and become more mature, advanced, or elaborate"

What was that you were saying about the job of developers?

 

[WhatHityou]

Well I think he is speaking in good spirits and means what he said. I agree popularity shouldn't just be a write off that it has no value. I think making a blatant copy is but that's not that developers fault, He never stated that is always good or always bad but you need to at least give it a chance.

Also on the 60fps thing. He meant that when they wanted to decide what framreate would "feel" best for there game. By looking at 60fps games he noticed it was smoother and felt better. He could of gone with a 30fps which would have been easier and require less work but because of these games he is trying to see how far he can push his game.

All he is saying is you should at least give popular games a chance before writing it off.