He said that something is popular because people enjoy it, and there are plenty of people who enjoy the Transformers movies. Now, does that mean they are critically good? Not necessarily, but the films wouldn't be anywhere near as popular if people didn't enjoy them. That's what Carmack is trying to convey-- he doesn't think something has to be innovative to be fun and enjoyable, which he would be right. He thinks game developers should make games that are fun.General_Knowledge said:By this idiots logic, the Transformers movies are really bloody good.
Just seems like an easy way to dismiss negative feedback to me.
Let me guess: you never actually played Alpha Protocol, and are just one of those people who bash an innovative, intriguing, and wholly compelling game because some asshole "game critic" said so, and you were too lazy to actually play the game and postulate your own opinion? It was rough around the edges, sure, but as soon as you looked past its flaws, you would find a really interesting game that is miles above what we typically get from mainstream gaming.OutrageousEmu said:Games would all be like Alpha Protocol and we'd have suffered another catastrophic market crash.
To explain what I was getting at, the state of gaming being stagnant (see previous disclaimer) is an unfortunate thing and that working to correct this state of affairs by denouncing it and not buying games that perpetuate it is a good thing. It is not snooty to want better for the medium. Do I think gamers have a "duty" to help progress the medium like this...perhaps that's not fair. So I may take that statement back, my point in that comment still stands though.Ironic Pirate said:Duty as gamers? Our duty as gamers is nothing, because that's silly.
Not at all. "Popular doesn't equal bad" doesn't mean that "popular equals good." There's still stuff that's popular and bad; Transformers is a great example of that. But you shouldn't automatically dismiss something solely because it's popular. That's all Carmack is saying.General_Knowledge said:By this idiots logic, the Transformers movies are really bloody good.
Just seems like an easy way to dismiss negative feedback to me.
I think we're going to have to agree to disagree here. You think he's saying one thing, and I think he's saying something else. Personally, I think you're jumping to conclusions, but I don't really want to get sucked into an argument about it.General_Knowledge said:I draw your attention to the following:Logan Westbrook said:Not really, he never says that bad games should get a free pass. What's he's sick of is people dismissing shooters just because they're shooters.General_Knowledge said:By this idiots logic, the Transformers movies are really bloody good.
"That's still a proven formula that people like, and it's a mistake to [discount that]. As long as people are buying it, it means they're enjoying it," he said. "If they buy the next Call of Duty, it's because they loved the last one and they want more of it."
Replace Call of Duty with Transformers in that quote.
"And then have a nuke go off in your face before crawling around dying in the fallout. Oh wait, that scene doesn't count."OutrageousEmu said:And then have a nuke go off in your face before crawling around dying in the fallout. Oh wait, that scene doesn't count.Woodsey said: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.OutrageousEmu said:Because thats what caused the crash in the eighties. Too many awesome games.Jumplion said: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.OutrageousEmu said: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.
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.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.Woodsey said:"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.OutrageousEmu said:Games would all be like Alpha Protocol and we'd have suffered another catastrophic market crash.Woodsey said:"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.
Oh, sorry. I really shouldn't have tried to bring some perspective into your short sighted nostalgia.
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.
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.
And excuse me? "B-Movie"? You're idolising a game about a shadowy conspiracy group stopping terrorists who blew up the Statue of Liberty from hoarding all the cure for themselves.
What if you replace that game with Demons Souls? Or Psychonauts? Yes, it's not a bad idea to go with what works. But you make a logical fallacy since you are implying all innovative games are on the level of Mind Hack (I haven't played it... I would like to if I ever saw it cheap though), which is entirely inaccurate. All that shows is that experiments can fail, which is obvious to anyone with half a brain. Sometimes experiments work, and sometimes they don't. And just because that's true doesn't mean people shouldn't experiment. At one time, those mechanics in Uncharted 2 were nothing but crazy experiments some developer put forth, but they actually worked.OutrageousEmu said:-snip-
I think you'd be hard pressed to find somebody who thinks the reverse. Hell, I grew UP on id's old stuff, and we all know what nostalgia does to a body.octafish said:I like id's old stuff better than their new stuff.
I am currently holding two games. In my right, an FPS. In my left, another FPS. One of these games started a whole trend, one is following it. One of them is said to be similar to it. Can you guess what games they are? Actually, I lied, I'm holding up [http://i52.tinypic.com/1zpmq7r.jpg] twelve games [http://i53.tinypic.com/2myt6zb.jpg] (god I love Cracked [http://www.cracked.com/blog/the-6-most-ominous-trends-in-video-games/]).OutrageousEmu said:I am currently holding two games. In my right, Mindjack. In my left, Uncharted 2. One of these games is innovative, one is not. One of these games is considered one of the greatest of all time, one is not. Which game did I hold up first and second?
You don't need to reinvent the wheel, but it helps to put some effort into building it.Have you ever heard the expression "don't reinvent the wheel"? What, you think that readers are getting bored reading books made with words, and they want books you feel instead? Or tv watchers are clamoring for a tv that periodically releases scents?
You need to plant the seed before something grows. Innovation isn't going to grow if innovation isn't being sold.Innovation for innovations sake is just a retarded idea put foward by loudmouthed egotists. Innovation happens organically, and is not fucking needed to happened every single month.
I really enjoyed Alpha Protocol...OutrageousEmu said:Games would all be like Alpha Protocol and we'd have suffered another catastrophic market crash.Woodsey said:"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.
Oh, sorry. I really shouldn't have tried to bring some perspective into your short sighted nostalgia.
I was arguing against him, although I'll agree with him that the game's not very good. But yeah, the concept was intriguing and could certainly have been something.Stall said:He said that something is popular because people enjoy it, and there are plenty of people who enjoy the Transformers movies. Now, does that mean they are critically good? Not necessarily, but the films wouldn't be anywhere near as popular if people didn't enjoy them. That's what Carmack is trying to convey-- he doesn't think something has to be innovative to be fun and enjoyable, which he would be right. He thinks game developers should make games that are fun.General_Knowledge said:By this idiots logic, the Transformers movies are really bloody good.
Just seems like an easy way to dismiss negative feedback to me.
Also, did you SERIOUSLY just call Carmack an idiot? Did you SERIOUSLY just call one of the single most influential, famous, important, and brilliant developers in not only FPSs, but in the history of our medium an idiot? Are you 13?Let me guess: you never actually played Alpha Protocol, and are just one of those people who bash an innovative, intriguing, and wholly compelling game because some asshole "game critic" said so, and you were too lazy to actually play the game and postulate your own opinion? It was rough around the edges, sure, but as soon as you looked past its flaws, you would find a really interesting game that is miles above what we typically get from mainstream gaming.OutrageousEmu said:Games would all be like Alpha Protocol and we'd have suffered another catastrophic market crash.
Sigh...