Zero Punctuation: Aliens: Colonial Marines

hermes

New member
Mar 2, 2009
3,865
0
0
GildaTheGriffin said:
General Vengeance said:
1. I hope this crushes Gearbox, they have no integrity.
2. I hope this ends people preordering games, it just encourages assholes like Gearbox to make cash grab games.
3. I hope Yahtzee starts to review good games, constantly reviewing bad games is cute and funny but its like shooting fish in a barrel.
Really? No integrity? Gearbox is an asshole? Gearbox is like the uncle of the video game revolution. Half Life, Counter Strike, Borderlands, Borderlands 2, Halo CE, and Brothers In Arms.

Don't down talk a company that was involved in so much of the video game's history.
You give them too much credit. Of all those examples, the only series that are truly theirs are Borderlands and Brothers in Arms. For Counter Strike they did some development (main developers were Valve and Ritual), and their involvement in HL and Halo was mainly porting jobs. Nice jobs, but hardly the pillars of videogames history you presume.
GildaTheGriffin said:
I would like to know, why the hell everyone bitches about this game? Not once in my both playthroughs did I ever have a glitch. The controls are fine, the weapons are fine, the AI needs a bit of a touch up (Works well enough), and the adventure on the planet was fun. You people just don't appreciate what people TRY to do for you. The game was to give a backstory of what happened after Aliens 2 and Gearbox worked hard on this. I bet some of you didn't even go through the first damn mission and came up with some 'review' just because a graphic mesh didn't pop in. You people are unbelievably stupid and arrogant. The whole gaming community is filled with petty little children and ignorant people.
Here is the deal... everyone works hard on everything. Games are hard, and you can be sure the developers of any facebook game worked as hard (or harder) than the developer of some AAA game; so working hard is no real differentiation on the quality of something.

The idea of something being excused of being bad because its hard is not a real excuse. If I cook a cake made of shit, I don't expect people to eat it because "I worked hard on it", not when there are a lot of other cakes around that are NOT made of shit, and not when I try to CHARGE people for my shit cake. And I won't be taken seriously if I start saying "this cake is not shit" or "its shit, but so tasty you barely notice it". Want to know why we ***** about this game? Because its not good, they know it, yet they expect us to act like it was god gift to us (or, at least, just as good as any other game).

Sorry, but companies don't make games "for you", they make them to sell them TO YOU. Pitchford made himself clear when he talked down, banned or threatened people that had complains with his games, that his idea of community is not based on sympathy, so he shouldn't expect sympathy from us. They don't work "on good intentions"; they don't sell games "on good intentions", so they shouldn't expect people to pay them "on good intentions". That kind of attitude can be understandable on an indie developer that makes a small game as a hobby on his free time and is trying to make a name for himself; but Gearbox is a big company, with a big budget, years of experience and dozens of people working full time for 6 years... So, no. What they "TRY to do" is not good enough, and it "works well enough" is not good enough.

I do feel bad for people that truly worked on the game and had no way of communicating to the outside world that it was shit and no real power to change it, so if Gearbox goes down the sink tomorrow (which it deserves), I will hope for two things: that the few talented people had little problem to find a new job, and that the people responsible for this overpriced shit cake sinks with it.
 

GildaTheGriffin

New member
Jul 4, 2012
80
0
0
hermes200 said:
GildaTheGriffin said:
General Vengeance said:
1. I hope this crushes Gearbox, they have no integrity.
2. I hope this ends people preordering games, it just encourages assholes like Gearbox to make cash grab games.
3. I hope Yahtzee starts to review good games, constantly reviewing bad games is cute and funny but its like shooting fish in a barrel.
Really? No integrity? Gearbox is an asshole? Gearbox is like the uncle of the video game revolution. Half Life, Counter Strike, Borderlands, Borderlands 2, Halo CE, and Brothers In Arms.

Don't down talk a company that was involved in so much of the video game's history.
You give them too much credit. Of all those examples, the only series that are truly theirs are Borderlands and Brothers in Arms. For Counter Strike they did some development (main developers were Valve and Ritual), and their involvement in HL and Halo was mainly porting jobs. Nice jobs, but hardly the pillars of videogames history you presume.
GildaTheGriffin said:
I would like to know, why the hell everyone bitches about this game? Not once in my both playthroughs did I ever have a glitch. The controls are fine, the weapons are fine, the AI needs a bit of a touch up (Works well enough), and the adventure on the planet was fun. You people just don't appreciate what people TRY to do for you. The game was to give a backstory of what happened after Aliens 2 and Gearbox worked hard on this. I bet some of you didn't even go through the first damn mission and came up with some 'review' just because a graphic mesh didn't pop in. You people are unbelievably stupid and arrogant. The whole gaming community is filled with petty little children and ignorant people.
Here is the deal... everyone works hard on everything. Games are hard, and you can be sure the developers of any facebook game worked as hard (or harder) than the developer of some AAA game; so working hard is no real differentiation on the quality of something.

The idea of something being excused of being bad because its hard is not a real excuse. If I cook a cake made of shit, I don't expect people to eat it because "I worked hard on it", not when there are a lot of other cakes around that are NOT made of shit, and not when I try to CHARGE people for my shit cake. And I won't be taken seriously if I start saying "this cake is not shit" or "its shit, but so tasty you barely notice it". Want to know why we ***** about this game? Because its not good, they know it, yet they expect us to act like it was god gift to us (or, at least, just as good as any other game).

Sorry, but companies don't make games "for you", they make them to sell them TO YOU. Pitchford made himself clear when he talked down, banned or threatened people that had complains with his games, that his idea of community is not based on sympathy, so he shouldn't expect sympathy from us. They don't work "on good intentions"; they don't sell games "on good intentions", so they shouldn't expect people to pay them "on good intentions". That kind of attitude can be understandable on an indie developer that makes a small game as a hobby on his free time and is trying to make a name for himself; but Gearbox is a big company, with a big budget, years of experience and dozens of people working full time for 6 years... So, no. What they "TRY to do" is not good enough, and it "works well enough" is not good enough.

I do feel bad for people that truly worked on the game and had no way of communicating to the outside world that it was shit and no real power to change it, so if Gearbox goes down the sink tomorrow (which it deserves), I will hope for two things: that the few talented people had little problem to find a new job, and that the people responsible for this overpriced shit cake sinks with it.
1. Facebook games are not under the pressure like a 'real' company is. Companies have hundreds or even thousands of workers in over several locations around the world with several positions of bosses/managers that rely on the cooperation of there workers to do their jobs the way they see fit. Games like Aliens CM have publishers, who market and fund the games. Games like Farmville don't. So they have to fit in a budget and make sure its to fit the platforms with the hardware and software it has. You are trying to compare two different types of games and thinking it makes sense to you. But I do my research, I look at how things are made and woven together from both a publisher's view and a developer's view.

2. Trying is the best thing you can do. Employees at Bungie stated when Halo CE was in development, they were not sure of their abilities to make a triple A title so they just followed their ideas and hoped that game sold well. Valve employees did the same thing during Half-Life's development, because they were designing a game that was of nothing the world had seen before in that time period, so they just tried their best and followed through. Nobody really knows how people react to it, so they TRY. So please, show some respect for all those game developers who do their hardest to please you with something they hope makes you happy and gets them their paychecks. If they didn't make you happy, then at least pat them on the back and tell them they did the best they could with the software, the money, and the talent they had to work with.
 

Vigormortis

New member
Nov 21, 2007
4,531
0
0
Bindal said:
Vigormortis said:
Hardly their game - they just did about 10% of it as the game when they got it was more or less finished. You can't blame them for that.
...Just as it was their fault Duke Nukem Forever released in such an awful state.
Except I was talking about DNF?
So you're saying Duke Nukem Forever being released as such an awful mess wasn't their fault because, after purchasing the rights to the game, they only bothered to put "10%" of the work into the final product?

Do you not realize how utterly ridiculous that sounds? If they saw how bad the game was when they bought the rights to it (which they assuredly realized) but never bothered to even try to fix it, how is it NOT their fault the game released as such a piece of shit? They knew what they had. They released it anyway. It's riddled with their logos. Randy Pitchford still makes a point of bragging about the game and saying it's dramatically better than it is.

Then, to add insult to injury, they (especially Randy Pitchford) lied to us about what it was. And, had the audacity to charge sixty dollars for it.

Still failing to see how the awfulness of DNF and A:CM weren't Gearbox's fault.
 

Vigormortis

New member
Nov 21, 2007
4,531
0
0
GildaTheGriffin said:
General Vengeance said:
1. I hope this crushes Gearbox, they have no integrity.
2. I hope this ends people preordering games, it just encourages assholes like Gearbox to make cash grab games.
3. I hope Yahtzee starts to review good games, constantly reviewing bad games is cute and funny but its like shooting fish in a barrel.
Really? No integrity? Gearbox is an asshole? Gearbox is like the uncle of the video game revolution. Half Life, Counter Strike, Borderlands, Borderlands 2, Halo CE, and Brothers In Arms.

Don't down talk a company that was involved in so much of the video game's history.
But how much respect can you give to someone who simply rides the coat-tails of the revolutionaries?

I agree the artists, programmers, and engineers over at Gearbox deserve a lot of respect. They are some damn talented people. However, the corporate side of Gearbox isn't something I'd openly brag about. If anything, their corporate level employees are holding back their best designers.
 

Andrew_Mac

New member
Feb 20, 2011
330
0
0
My fave glitch wasn't a very big or impressive one like most I've read on hear. Mine was a humble alien jumping off a wall, falling through the floor and dying, with but one hand sticking up through the floor. When I shot the hand (as you do in these situations) it started waving. I watched it for about a minute and waved back, thinking, "Maybe these aliens ain't all bad..."
 

MB202

New member
Sep 14, 2008
1,157
0
0
Darth_Payn said:
MB202 said:
Watching this video, I have to wonder... Does Yantzee watch any of Jim Sterling's stuff? Like, he's been going on about the Alien franchise and this game in particular for a few weeks now, so I find it weird that Yantzee would not only not mention this in his video, but called out all Alien fans by saying everything after Aliens was crap.
I think it's general consensus that everything after Aliens sucks; even Ridley Scott discounts everything after Aliens as non-canon (except Prometheus, because that was a prequel). A lot of calls for "Yahtzee should eviscerate Colonial Marines" were made in the comments for Jim's videos talking about Aliens. Although Yahtzee isn't above taking the occasional jab at fellow Escapist contributors (ex: MovieBob).
What you see as a supposed "jab" against MovieBob, I see as Yahtzee giving Bob WAAAAAY too much credit.
 

Darth_Payn

New member
Aug 5, 2009
2,868
0
0
Is it just me, or does the gamebox art look better after Yahtzee gave it the shade of "eggy fart"? Because that is an apt description of the game itself.
 

PainInTheAssInternet

The Ship Magnificent
Dec 30, 2011
826
0
0
Caramel Frappe said:
My favorite glitch was when the soldier who had a chest burster in him just got onto his knees, hollered with a grenade in his hand, and blasted himself to bits sending you and a few other crew members to die...

Which sadly, was not a glitch. It was scripted in the game's plot and honestly was very poorly written.
I like how you are walking through the umbilical facing towards the centre when he blows the grenade (asshole). You then fall backwards out of the Sulaco towards the opening.
 

JellySlimerMan

New member
Dec 28, 2012
211
0
0
Is it just me, or the Co-Op problem in all action horror games could be solved by simply, you know, enabling friendly fire? this way only a FEW people would need to shoot the aliens in a formation that doesnt make their bullets be aimed at the team.
 

Teoes

Poof, poof, sparkles!
Jun 1, 2010
5,174
0
0
GildaTheGriffin said:
I would like to know, why the hell everyone bitches about this game? Not once in my both playthroughs did I ever have a glitch. The controls are fine, the weapons are fine, the AI needs a bit of a touch up (Works well enough), and the adventure on the planet was fun. You people just don't appreciate what people TRY to do for you. The game was to give a backstory of what happened after Aliens 2 and Gearbox worked hard on this. I bet some of you didn't even go through the first damn mission and came up with some 'review' just because a graphic mesh didn't pop in. You people are unbelievably stupid and arrogant. The whole gaming community is filled with petty little children and ignorant people.

It's a game. Not everything is going to work out all the time just because you expect it to.
Pitchford, is that you? :>

Seriously though, I would've thought that the main reasons for most people's gripes with this game have been well-enough documented (time and time again) so I don't understand you saying "I don't know what everyone's complaining about". If you enjoyed it then good for you and if you didn't encounter any glitches then again good for you - looks like you're in the lucky minority.

However I don't think you can just brush this off with 'Gais. Gais. C'mon gais, they tried, so go easy on them' attitude. These are supposed professionals and are supposed to be releasing a product with a professional level of quality and by many accounts they've dropped a turd. Yes, give folks credit for their hard graft - especially as commented the poor artists and coders who did their job but could do nothing really to change the course of what was happening. A released product should come with an expected minimum standard of quality and if many people do not believe a product meets that standard, then complaining about it does not make them stupid, arrogant, petty or ignorant. If you go to a restaurant, order a meal and are given (and then expected to pay for) something that's not up to reasonable standards, you are not the bad person for complaining about it.

EDIT: P.S. Yahtzee, you Callipygian Superman. Don't be so coy. You know we always want you around!
2nd edit: spelling d'oh
 

hermes

New member
Mar 2, 2009
3,865
0
0
GildaTheGriffin said:
hermes200 said:
GildaTheGriffin said:
General Vengeance said:
1. I hope this crushes Gearbox, they have no integrity.
2. I hope this ends people preordering games, it just encourages assholes like Gearbox to make cash grab games.
3. I hope Yahtzee starts to review good games, constantly reviewing bad games is cute and funny but its like shooting fish in a barrel.
Really? No integrity? Gearbox is an asshole? Gearbox is like the uncle of the video game revolution. Half Life, Counter Strike, Borderlands, Borderlands 2, Halo CE, and Brothers In Arms.

Don't down talk a company that was involved in so much of the video game's history.
You give them too much credit. Of all those examples, the only series that are truly theirs are Borderlands and Brothers in Arms. For Counter Strike they did some development (main developers were Valve and Ritual), and their involvement in HL and Halo was mainly porting jobs. Nice jobs, but hardly the pillars of videogames history you presume.
GildaTheGriffin said:
I would like to know, why the hell everyone bitches about this game? Not once in my both playthroughs did I ever have a glitch. The controls are fine, the weapons are fine, the AI needs a bit of a touch up (Works well enough), and the adventure on the planet was fun. You people just don't appreciate what people TRY to do for you. The game was to give a backstory of what happened after Aliens 2 and Gearbox worked hard on this. I bet some of you didn't even go through the first damn mission and came up with some 'review' just because a graphic mesh didn't pop in. You people are unbelievably stupid and arrogant. The whole gaming community is filled with petty little children and ignorant people.
Here is the deal... everyone works hard on everything. Games are hard, and you can be sure the developers of any facebook game worked as hard (or harder) than the developer of some AAA game; so working hard is no real differentiation on the quality of something.

The idea of something being excused of being bad because its hard is not a real excuse. If I cook a cake made of shit, I don't expect people to eat it because "I worked hard on it", not when there are a lot of other cakes around that are NOT made of shit, and not when I try to CHARGE people for my shit cake. And I won't be taken seriously if I start saying "this cake is not shit" or "its shit, but so tasty you barely notice it". Want to know why we ***** about this game? Because its not good, they know it, yet they expect us to act like it was god gift to us (or, at least, just as good as any other game).

Sorry, but companies don't make games "for you", they make them to sell them TO YOU. Pitchford made himself clear when he talked down, banned or threatened people that had complains with his games, that his idea of community is not based on sympathy, so he shouldn't expect sympathy from us. They don't work "on good intentions"; they don't sell games "on good intentions", so they shouldn't expect people to pay them "on good intentions". That kind of attitude can be understandable on an indie developer that makes a small game as a hobby on his free time and is trying to make a name for himself; but Gearbox is a big company, with a big budget, years of experience and dozens of people working full time for 6 years... So, no. What they "TRY to do" is not good enough, and it "works well enough" is not good enough.

I do feel bad for people that truly worked on the game and had no way of communicating to the outside world that it was shit and no real power to change it, so if Gearbox goes down the sink tomorrow (which it deserves), I will hope for two things: that the few talented people had little problem to find a new job, and that the people responsible for this overpriced shit cake sinks with it.
1. Facebook games are not under the pressure like a 'real' company is. Companies have hundreds or even thousands of workers in over several locations around the world with several positions of bosses/managers that rely on the cooperation of there workers to do their jobs the way they see fit. Games like Aliens CM have publishers, who market and fund the games. Games like Farmville don't. So they have to fit in a budget and make sure its to fit the platforms with the hardware and software it has. You are trying to compare two different types of games and thinking it makes sense to you. But I do my research, I look at how things are made and woven together from both a publisher's view and a developer's view.

2. Trying is the best thing you can do. Employees at Bungie stated when Halo CE was in development, they were not sure of their abilities to make a triple A title so they just followed their ideas and hoped that game sold well. Valve employees did the same thing during Half-Life's development, because they were designing a game that was of nothing the world had seen before in that time period, so they just tried their best and followed through. Nobody really knows how people react to it, so they TRY. So please, show some respect for all those game developers who do their hardest to please you with something they hope makes you happy and gets them their paychecks. If they didn't make you happy, then at least pat them on the back and tell them they did the best they could with the software, the money, and the talent they had to work with.
1. That's... not even close to the point. My point was that quality and difficulty are independent, and even games with no quality are as difficult to make as the best AAA game. Hardship is a given in any example, so it is not be differentiation factor. In that case, "being difficult" and "working hard" are not really excuses for delivering something of less quality, especially in the professional environment. So, your rebuttal is that they are "difficult" on a different sense? That's not even close to the point. Does it bother you so much that I choose examples that are not equal because the funding is different? How about Daikatana and Deus Ex (they are both published by external entities, are made for the same platform and are even from the same year)... Does that sound like a fairer comparison to you? Should I hold them on equal terms of quality because "John Romero tried so hard to make me his *****"? No one can deny a lot of people worked hard on both of them (at least, someone has to), but that alone says nothing of the end result.

Also, if you think facebook developers answer to no one, are not under pressure or don't have budget and time restrictions to make their work, you need to go back to "research". Ask any of the thousands of employees of Zynga or EA/Facebook how is it not to work for a "real" company.

2. Here is a revolutionary concept in gaming development that both your examples use extensively (I am sure as someone that "do my research, I look at how things are made and woven together from both a publisher's view and a developer's view", you have stumble on it), its called "iterative development". This is how it work: people TRY something, evaluate it, learn from it, find what doesn't work, fix it and TRY again, evaluate it, learn from it, and so on. Alternatively, they might realize it doesn't work at all and dump it entirely. No idea should go straight from the mind of his creator to the finished product; great ideas are not done by accident, they are iterated time and time again by several people until they are up to his creators standards, or they die in the cutting room floor (to make those decisions is the job of the game director). Valve and Bungie are great examples because they don't just "go with their guts"... nothing, from the tone of voice of GLADOS to the opening of Halo 1 is the result of chance, but the result of a cohesive vision that was given form after countless details has been done and redone. Rovio made 27 games before angry birds, each of which contributing (in terms of experience acquired and knowledge of what did and did not work) to the success of their latest game, and each of them iterating countless times themselves.

So, yes... I appreciate when artists and developers try new things (in fact, experimenting is a vital part of design and development on any field) or designers make their intentions public; but attempts and intentions are cheap. I appreciate a lot more when they iterate on their attempts to make them better and more consistent with the game they work on, not when they try a few times and give up because someone decides "that is good enough". Or, you can say: when they all act as professionals about it.
 

Kallindril

New member
Apr 22, 2010
15
0
0
So this is one to avoid. I really hope Metal Gear Revengeance is going to get a video review, I liked the game and Yahtzee's take on the final boss by itself would be worth it.
 

Chattermouth

New member
Nov 5, 2008
24
0
0
Vigormortis said:
Bindal said:
Vigormortis said:
Hardly their game - they just did about 10% of it as the game when they got it was more or less finished. You can't blame them for that.
...Just as it was their fault Duke Nukem Forever released in such an awful state.
Except I was talking about DNF?
So you're saying Duke Nukem Forever being released as such an awful mess wasn't their fault because, after purchasing the rights to the game, they only bothered to put "10%" of the work into the final product?
Keep in mind DNF is abbreviation for Did Not Finish, as well.
Which is just fine description of both games, on several layers.

They are all to blame. Never mind arguing about who's to blame MORE.
 

Teh Jammah

New member
Nov 13, 2010
219
0
0
IamLEAM1983 said:
It's not a glitch per se, but a pretty severe narrative derp. At the game's onset, you're making your way through the umbilical and towards the Sulaco. One of your guys suddenly is afflicted with a Chest-Burster; nevermind how a Facehugger never even entered the picture!

"Uuuuh, Randy, we gotta use that animation! We gotta!
- But it makes no sense in the current build!
- WE GOTTA USE IT OR IT'S GAME OVER, MAN! GAME OVER!
- Okay, fine! Use it! Jeeze!
- Kthnxbai!" *gleefully proceeds ahead with the murder of an already moribund plot*
Not gonna argue with you as to whether or not the whole blowing up a grenade in the middle of an umbilical and fucking a whole bunch of other marines was stupid and/or bad writing (because it was). But on the whole 'facehugger never entered the picture' thing, you are actually wrong my friend.

The moron who blows himself up, Keyes, is the first marine you encounter on the Sulaco. He's one of Rhino squad, the group that was sent in before you. Remember where you found him? It was in the room with the lurker, which you probably remember as actually being atmospheric and a little scary due to the cat and mouse game you play. Now, do you remember what you were doing before the lurker interrupted you and what you finish doing afterward?

You cut him free from where he's been cocooned into the wall. Remember what else is in that room? Alien eggs. Some of which are open. And if you take a moment or two to explore, know what you can find on the floor? Dead facehuggers.

So him getting chestburst is actually foreshadowed. The scene itself is still dumb as all hell, but doesn't come out of nowhere
 

IamLEAM1983

Neloth's got swag.
Aug 22, 2011
2,581
0
0
Teh Jammah said:
IamLEAM1983 said:
It's not a glitch per se, but a pretty severe narrative derp. At the game's onset, you're making your way through the umbilical and towards the Sulaco. One of your guys suddenly is afflicted with a Chest-Burster; nevermind how a Facehugger never even entered the picture!

"Uuuuh, Randy, we gotta use that animation! We gotta!
- But it makes no sense in the current build!
- WE GOTTA USE IT OR IT'S GAME OVER, MAN! GAME OVER!
- Okay, fine! Use it! Jeeze!
- Kthnxbai!" *gleefully proceeds ahead with the murder of an already moribund plot*
Not gonna argue with you as to whether or not the whole blowing up a grenade in the middle of an umbilical and fucking a whole bunch of other marines was stupid and/or bad writing (because it was). But on the whole 'facehugger never entered the picture' thing, you are actually wrong my friend.

The moron who blows himself up, Keyes, is the first marine you encounter on the Sulaco. He's one of Rhino squad, the group that was sent in before you. Remember where you found him? It was in the room with the lurker, which you probably remember as actually being atmospheric and a little scary due to the cat and mouse game you play. Now, do you remember what you were doing before the lurker interrupted you and what you finish doing afterward?

You cut him free from where he's been cocooned into the wall. Remember what else is in that room? Alien eggs. Some of which are open. And if you take a moment or two to explore, know what you can find on the floor? Dead facehuggers.

So him getting chestburst is actually foreshadowed. The scene itself is still dumb as all hell, but doesn't come out of nowhere
Whoa. The game has to be rather frightfully generic for me to not remember that, because you're absolutely right.

Put it down to the whole thing feeling so monumentally dumb I didn't even bother to remember anyone's names. Except maybe O'Neill, but that's because O'Neill's AI seems to be frightfully bad.

Forget Amnesia. Forget H.P. Lovecraft adaptations. O'Neill's AI is utterly terrifying in its ineptitude.
 

Vigormortis

New member
Nov 21, 2007
4,531
0
0
Chattermouth said:
Vigormortis said:
Bindal said:
Vigormortis said:
Hardly their game - they just did about 10% of it as the game when they got it was more or less finished. You can't blame them for that.
...Just as it was their fault Duke Nukem Forever released in such an awful state.
Except I was talking about DNF?
So you're saying Duke Nukem Forever being released as such an awful mess wasn't their fault because, after purchasing the rights to the game, they only bothered to put "10%" of the work into the final product?
Keep in mind DNF is abbreviation for Did Not Finish, as well.
Which is just fine description of both games, on several layers.

They are all to blame. Never mind arguing about who's to blame MORE.
That's what I was saying in my previous posts. They all have equal blame in regards to the two games "that shall not be named".

The person I was "conversing" with seemed bent on alleviating Gearbox of all fault. Which, to me, was ridiculous.
 

BosBaBe

New member
Apr 18, 2012
1
0
0
My favorite glitch was when the npc characters would stand behind cover completely frozen, staring off into space like they were waiting for the next mother ship to land, and you'd stand there waiting for them so you can continue on, only for them to randomly run out from behind cover screaming at you about how they'll leave your pussy ass behind if you don't grow a pair and run. My next favorite glitch was how when you played as a alien you could sometimes crawl on things that weren't there, or glitch through walls.
 

Chattermouth

New member
Nov 5, 2008
24
0
0
Vigormortis said:
Chattermouth said:
Vigormortis said:
Bindal said:
Vigormortis said:
Hardly their game - they just did about 10% of it as the game when they got it was more or less finished. You can't blame them for that.
...Just as it was their fault Duke Nukem Forever released in such an awful state.
Except I was talking about DNF?
So you're saying Duke Nukem Forever being released as such an awful mess wasn't their fault because, after purchasing the rights to the game, they only bothered to put "10%" of the work into the final product?
Keep in mind DNF is abbreviation for Did Not Finish, as well.
Which is just fine description of both games, on several layers.

They are all to blame. Never mind arguing about who's to blame MORE.
That's what I was saying in my previous posts. They all have equal blame in regards to the two games "that shall not be named".

The person I was "conversing" with seemed bent on alleviating Gearbox of all fault. Which, to me, was ridiculous.
He can't have meant that. I mean, seeing as how the nice-looking demo, with all that juicy dynamic lighting and great content which simply does not exist in the full game, was actually presented by Gearbox with comments and bragging by Pitchford!
They can't possibly shy away from from taking their fair share of the steaming fecal-pie.
 

Vigormortis

New member
Nov 21, 2007
4,531
0
0
Chattermouth said:
He can't have meant that. I mean, seeing as how the nice-looking demo, with all that juicy dynamic lighting and great content which simply does not exist in the full game, was actually presented by Gearbox with comments and bragging by Pitchford!
They can't possibly shy away from from taking their fair share of the steaming fecal-pie.
You'd think that, but he basically was. I think he honestly meant it. And, he's not alone. Quite a few Gearbox/Borderlands fans have been doing the same.

As for Gearbox, well....they're* acting about the same as they were with Duke Nukem Forever.

One minute they're saying the game is "amazing" and that gamers are just "whining". The next they're saying, "It's not our fault! did it! We made Borderlands! You can't hate us!"

[sub]* and by "they're" I mean Randy Pitchford.[/sub]
 

xopher

New member
Mar 16, 2009
20
0
0
I was in Best Buy a few weeks ago looking for something to spend my rewards certificate on, and the employee working in the game department suggested this game. LOL I picked it up and looked at it and put it right back down when he had his back turned. I knew it was more than likely trash before I even watched this review. The part about the glitching was hilarious.