"Snooty" Shooter Critics Anger Rage Dev
- Thread starter Logan Westbrook
- Start date
I really enjoyed the transformers movies. They weren't spectacular, but the were fun to watch. Also, why does everyone on this site hate Black Ops so much? I thought it was light years ahead of MW2 especially in the story department. Prop's to Treyarch for at least trying to mix up call of duty in it's fairly mundane story departmentGeneral_Knowledge said:
It's fine with me, as long as those people don't decide that their opinions are somehow more valid than tens of millions of other people.Kahunaburger said:
Note that I'm not saying you're in a minority and therefore don't matter. In fact, there's probably more people who hate Twilight, Transformers and COD than there are people who like them. I'm just saying, declaring something "bad" based on the prevailing opinion of your circle of friends is very narrow-minded. They have to be doing something right to attract such a massive audience. I don't believe in the "everyone is just too stupid to know better" argument.
Uh... no, I'm "declaring these things are bad" because I experienced them first-hand and noticed that they were bad. Other peoples' opinions have no bearing on the issue. I think the same thing about Lars Von Trier, for instance.James Joseph Emerald said:
EDIT: And really, why get mad about people judging things based on the opinions of people they trust? I can eat an entire shit sandwich and decide it's a bad sandwich, take a bite of a shit sandwich, put it down, and decide it's a bad sandwich, or hear my friend's opinion on a shit sandwich and decide I trust his opinion that it's a bad sandwich. Those are all valid reasons to decide shit sandwiches are unattractive as food options, and they're valid no matter how many people swear by shit sandwiches.
I think hardly anyone here can attest to the fact that 'popular=bad' because I assume of the majority here only really buy triple AAA games. Call of Duty is successful, but there are a lot of other games we love and play that are as well.
But I think disregarding criticism of call of duty due to the fact that said of opinion could be a result of them hating 'popular stuff' is foolish. Its a common logical fallacy to assume inherent quality in something because its popularity, and anyone who takes a look at the top media can see that. Criticism of a product should stand regardless of the external factors that surround it. Tons of people played MW2, but that doesn't change the fact its multiplayer was a glitched, exploitable mess that tore apart at the seams weeks shortly after its release.
Saying the industry "doesn't always need to innovate" would be a true statement, if the industry did in the first place. As of right now, its getting more and more stagnant due to the pressures gaming production is facing(too much money to make games now). If we're going to see any innovation it will be from the indie genre, where innovation sets games apart from the pack.
But I think disregarding criticism of call of duty due to the fact that said of opinion could be a result of them hating 'popular stuff' is foolish. Its a common logical fallacy to assume inherent quality in something because its popularity, and anyone who takes a look at the top media can see that. Criticism of a product should stand regardless of the external factors that surround it. Tons of people played MW2, but that doesn't change the fact its multiplayer was a glitched, exploitable mess that tore apart at the seams weeks shortly after its release.
Saying the industry "doesn't always need to innovate" would be a true statement, if the industry did in the first place. As of right now, its getting more and more stagnant due to the pressures gaming production is facing(too much money to make games now). If we're going to see any innovation it will be from the indie genre, where innovation sets games apart from the pack.
Interesting bit from Carmack. Looking over the first page's posts I think he hit a few targets. Oh well. Those who love to crticise often can't take it.
As for people not liking games like MW2, mostly they just didn't buy it (I didn't). The people who did may whine about parts of it but they spent money on it for a reason. That reason would be "fun", whether they just like the game or want to play one with their friends doesn't matter. And as for whining, gamers do. A lot. I do. Doesn't mean we stop playing games, and enjoying them.
It's about time people remember games are "fun", it's not just about being different / innovative. Different / innovative can be good -- or bad. As for what games people play, it will be whatever they like. And good for them. Personally I don't care what other people play as long as they have fun. I don't have to rain on their parade if they like something I don't.
As for people not liking games like MW2, mostly they just didn't buy it (I didn't). The people who did may whine about parts of it but they spent money on it for a reason. That reason would be "fun", whether they just like the game or want to play one with their friends doesn't matter. And as for whining, gamers do. A lot. I do. Doesn't mean we stop playing games, and enjoying them.
It's about time people remember games are "fun", it's not just about being different / innovative. Different / innovative can be good -- or bad. As for what games people play, it will be whatever they like. And good for them. Personally I don't care what other people play as long as they have fun. I don't have to rain on their parade if they like something I don't.
I personally find that logic severally flawed, and almost frightening to be honest. Just because experiments CAN fail doesn't mean you shouldn't do then. That line of logic is downright despicable and incredibly damaging if you were to generalize it outside of video games, and would almost immediately negate the simple existence of Science and human tenacity as a whole. Experimentation and innovation CAN fail... it's an understood risk when you try something new. But just because there is that inherit risk in experimentation doesn't mean one should never do it. If no one ever TRIED to be innovative, then progression wouldn't even happen "naturally," as you put it. Not even bothering to try to be innovative because of the inherit risk present would be considerably more damaging than the occasional failed experiment.OutrageousEmu said:
In addition, we know something doesn't work because it has been tried, and failed. You don't know if something will, or will not, until it has been realistically implemented. As a statistician and scientist (to some degree), I can testify you learn just as much when your hypothesis is wrong as when it is right. Failed innovations are just as important to moving the medium forward as successful ones, as we as an industry learn from them either way. You shouldn't discount failed innovations as not being important just because they failed. Didn't your parents always tell you to "learn from your failures"?
Silly people. All FPS's I've played have been a barrel of fun and adrenaline. No matter how similar they are, they just aren't. As long as there's something to do on them, it will be awesome.
Like I said, your opinion is yours, and however you form it is fine with me. What I'm taking issue with is the fact that you seem to think that your opinion is universally "correct" (especially when reinforced by other like-minded friends/people on the Escapist, which is what I meant by the "circle of friends" comment).Kahunaburger said:
My only point is that, like Carmack was saying, certain high-minded types tend to have a bias against popular games like Call of Duty. And I think that's evidenced by the fact that you would compare it to a shit sandwich. If you actually look at it objectively, suspending all prejudicial bias, I think you'd find a substantial amount of positive elements. And I think that if say, Deus Ex was an extremely popular, over-hyped game and Call of Duty or Halo was fairly obscure, there would be a tendency to have the exact opposite opinion about those games.
No, I'm comparing CoD to a shit sandwich because I played it for a couple of years, and am comparing my CoD experience with my experience playing stuff like Halo, TF2, and Bad Company 2. And continuing with our sandwich metaphor, I don't care how tasty the bread and mayonnaise is if the core of the sandwich is this:James Joseph Emerald said:
So in other words, the assumption that people (for instance) hate on CoD/Twilight because there's some sort of elitist conspiracy against popular stuff is kind of silly when the simpler explanation is that they played/read CoD/Twilight and didn't like it, or someone whose opinion they trust played/read Cod/Twilight and didn't like it.
Yes, because insulting me and just pushing aside whatever I said is grounds for a good debate. I'm so glad we could stay civil in this, really I am.OutrageousEmu said:
....and? Your point? It just seems to me, and for some others, that this trend is prevalent in the FPS genre.
Here's a shocker; I never said that. Infact, I specifically remember saying "They may very well all be great games, more power to them if they are, but that doesn't really help the fact that we are just heavy in FPS saturation."
Good, 'cause I don't really care about Moviebob in the slightest nor do I know what episode you're referring to.
You don't seem to understand that I really don't want to be thinking what I am thinking right now mainly because, to an extent, I just want fun games. But it's just not enough (for me, personally, anyways) to just be "fun".
100s of manhours are spent on "Dora The Exploerer: The Video Game", does that mean we should give it a pass despite it being a load of rotten carps? You should be asking them why they spend 100s of manhours on a CoD clone that barely pushes past the 1 million mark.
And then we get to "Why are they working those 100s of man hours?" with crunch time and the like, but that's a different can o' worms.
Wat. I really don't know how you came to that conclusion, most every single one of those brings something to the table in some form or another, or expand on it. A little extra sprinkles of some more ingenuity, and a dash of more games taking some extra risks, and I think we'd be better for it.
Though I'd agree the first person perspective does come with a lot of nagative connotations as in:
"they yook my favourite franchise and turned it into a god damn FPS"
But I think the industry including critics are enlightened enough to know that First Psrson Shooters/something can be great:
-Half Life 2
-Bioshock
-Elder Scrolls
-Fallout 3+
-Deus Ex
-Portal
-Metroid Prime
As examples of great and held to almost elite status FPS games.
I am really looking forward to RAGE, I like the increased RPG elements yet a high emphasis on good combat it seems to be in a similar vein to Deus Ex or Bioshock, I like that FPS/RPG fusion.
"they yook my favourite franchise and turned it into a god damn FPS"
But I think the industry including critics are enlightened enough to know that First Psrson Shooters/something can be great:
-Half Life 2
-Bioshock
-Elder Scrolls
-Fallout 3+
-Deus Ex
-Portal
-Metroid Prime
As examples of great and held to almost elite status FPS games.
I am really looking forward to RAGE, I like the increased RPG elements yet a high emphasis on good combat it seems to be in a similar vein to Deus Ex or Bioshock, I like that FPS/RPG fusion.
When another game developer tries to cash in on the success of a game that isn't theirs, people start to wonder where the creative genius has gone from those that no longer want to defend their own innovations as unique, and start admitting;
"yes, we are aiming to provide something similar to what makes this other popular title popular."
Carmack should be staunchly defending why his games are different from a rival's successful product. How they are instead similar to his own previous successes, etc etc.
No doubt he's been backed into a corner by some journalistic pressure and said something that was later thrown in false light by whatever media has reproduced his words.
I can't think of a better example of the repurcussions of making a game similar to COD than Crysis 2 was, in a multiplayer aspect at least.
Everyone started saying, "oh this is just a COD clone, why play this when I can play the real thing?"
And all you get as a developer is the public comparing your game to the other, and more often than not people coming up with things where your game fell short of the other, rather than focusing on what makes your game unique. You just heard a lot of "it's just COD with a nanosuit", rather than "this shooter runs great with this nanosuit mechanic."
Crysis 1 may have been similar to Halo with the nanosuit, but you clearly only had people comparing the whole 'suit' aspect, as opposed to calling crysis1 "halo in the jungle".
But no doubt Carmack here is just having a whinge about the most pretentious of critics who might abuse him for not being willing to take a total diversion from usual shooter and create a full innovation on the shooter, at the high risk of flopping totally.
He's probably just trying to say "I do what I'm good at and that should be popular because people like what I'm good at, and that's been popular before so why should I change?"
But as they say in the media, "If you've opened your mouth you've already said too much."
But if you mean that it's a game that many others have copied after and enjoyed relative success, then that is definitely true.
"yes, we are aiming to provide something similar to what makes this other popular title popular."
Carmack should be staunchly defending why his games are different from a rival's successful product. How they are instead similar to his own previous successes, etc etc.
No doubt he's been backed into a corner by some journalistic pressure and said something that was later thrown in false light by whatever media has reproduced his words.
I can't think of a better example of the repurcussions of making a game similar to COD than Crysis 2 was, in a multiplayer aspect at least.
Everyone started saying, "oh this is just a COD clone, why play this when I can play the real thing?"
And all you get as a developer is the public comparing your game to the other, and more often than not people coming up with things where your game fell short of the other, rather than focusing on what makes your game unique. You just heard a lot of "it's just COD with a nanosuit", rather than "this shooter runs great with this nanosuit mechanic."
Crysis 1 may have been similar to Halo with the nanosuit, but you clearly only had people comparing the whole 'suit' aspect, as opposed to calling crysis1 "halo in the jungle".
But no doubt Carmack here is just having a whinge about the most pretentious of critics who might abuse him for not being willing to take a total diversion from usual shooter and create a full innovation on the shooter, at the high risk of flopping totally.
He's probably just trying to say "I do what I'm good at and that should be popular because people like what I'm good at, and that's been popular before so why should I change?"
But as they say in the media, "If you've opened your mouth you've already said too much."
Tho Im not sure about Deus Ex, Im pretty sure Elder Scrolls is not a shooter...Treblaine said:
But if you mean that it's a game that many others have copied after and enjoyed relative success, then that is definitely true.
Best argument: InceptionKahunaburger said:No, I'm comparing CoD to a shit sandwich because I played it for a couple of years, and am comparing my CoD experience with my experience playing stuff like Halo, TF2, and Bad Company 2. And continuing with our sandwich metaphor, I don't care how tasty the bread and mayonnaise is if the core of the sandwich is this:James Joseph Emerald said:
So in other words, the assumption that people (for instance) hate on CoD/Twilight because there's some sort of elitist conspiracy against popular stuff is kind of silly when the simpler explanation is that they played/read CoD/Twilight and didn't like it, or someone whose opinion they trust played/read Cod/Twilight and didn't like it.
Really good film, really weird and complex yet sold really well. People don't JUST hate things because they are successful.
It's just things don't have the be the best in the world to sell more than anyone else, it just has to get the essentials right like marketing, conversion rates and so on. That just means popularity alone can't give anything a free ride.
In other words if can sell well because it is good, or simply more marketable.