# The 6 Most Ominous Trends in Video Games



## Bloody_Inferno (Jun 13, 2011)

The 6 Most Ominous Trends in Video Games | Cracked.com

Yeah, another cracked article from me, and even I'm thinking it's getting old.  But it's another well thought out and written one about games, and the what's yet to come. I was gonna post it on the E3 thread, but it merit's it's own discussion. 

Have a read and express your opinion.


----------



## Stealthdjentstic (Jun 13, 2011)

It already pisses me off how the Halo series requires new maps or else you pretty much can't play anything online


----------



## Grand Moff Tim (Jun 13, 2011)

Bite your tongue! Cracked _never_ gets old!


----------



## Bloody_Inferno (Jun 13, 2011)

Grand Moff Tim said:


> Bite your tongue! Cracked _never_ gets old!


 
Yeah, you're right. 

Though I didn't need a cracked article to tell me that a lot of that is true. I've never been into war simulation game to pay attention that a lot of them are starting to look and play the same. One could argue that fighting games (something more closer to my interest) do get revamped for the sake of updates and balance, but really it's still the same premise. Even with the whole Street Fighter vs Mortal Kombat arguments of yesterdecades, while totally different in playing and style, it's still just one on one fighting. 

Maybe I'm just showing signs of age? Especially considering I recently did a thread like this... 

Also the opening pic is priceless:


----------



## GazPots (Jun 13, 2011)

The section on the relentless number of sequels is shocking when you realise.



Call Duty 8!!!

Halo 4 (which is infact Halo 7 and will go up to Halo 10 if they get their way)

Battlefield 3 (which is technically Battlefield 9 )




And i was pissed off at hollywood for lacking originality. Fuck, the games indusrty is even worse.


----------



## Grand Moff Tim (Jun 13, 2011)

I can't complain _too_ much about originality. My favorite games of the last 5 or 10 years are Oblivion and Oblivion With Guns... er... Fallout 3, and their various and sundry DLCs.


----------



## Xaios (Jun 14, 2011)

Just remember now, Jedi Academy was actually Dark Forces IV: Jedi Knight III: Jedi Outcast II: Jedi Academy. And that was released in 2003!


----------



## Konfyouzd (Jun 14, 2011)

What's up w/ the recent lack of local multi play? Not a fan...


----------



## Bobo (Jun 14, 2011)

Bloody_Inferno said:


> Also the opening pic is priceless:



Reminds me why I like Gears of War so much. So much more to the gameplay than most FPS's. Yet I will enjoy games like Halo, Far Cry, and Battlefield...even if it's just the same old song and dance


----------



## Konfyouzd (Jun 14, 2011)

Bobo said:


> Reminds me why I like Gears of War so much. So much more to the gameplay than most FPS's. Yet I will enjoy games like Halo, Far Cry, and Battlefield...even if it's just the same old song and dance


 
True... To an extent I think it's the same old song and dance *because* we like it, but I can also see why gamers want them to push the limits a bit more. The article also brought up the interesting point of... "But where the hell do we push them?"

I'm seriously not down with having to play my games remotely from a EA owned server or whatever, though.


----------



## Bobo (Jun 14, 2011)

Those great FPS's are still going to be great I think. No need to fix what's not broke. I'm a sucker for great gameplay, graphics, and storytelling. Maybe what's next will come with the next gen consoles. Maybe the added power will inspire something new. But I'm just happy with the current state of gaming.


----------



## Konfyouzd (Jun 14, 2011)

That's another good point. I've found that I'm almost willing to deal w/ "the same game" so long as the story doesn't get stale for me. For instance... I'm really slow about making my way through Dragon Age and it's taking FOREVER, but the story has kept me interested despite the fact that Dragon Age: Origins and ALL the expansion--to include Awakenings--is pretty much the same thing over and over and over. You put up with it to find out what happens next. 

I've been a bit disappointed thus far in the campaigns in games like COD and the like since they tend to be so short and I'm not really big on the whole "lemme go online and flex my nuts to ppl across the globe I don't even know." I'm not calling any of you out unless you're that kind of person and we all know there's an abundance of those out there. So I tend to avoid the multiplayer realm altogether most times unless it's something cooperative like Survival Mode in L4D, Firefight in Halo or... Well you get the point...


----------



## Scar Symmetry (Jun 14, 2011)

Basically sums up my feels on Kinect, it takes away options rather than giving you more... and for only the price of a new console, how kind of you Microsoft!

In fact I'm shocked that nearly a third of all Xbox 360 owners have gone and bought one, unbelievable.


----------



## synrgy (Jun 14, 2011)

Scar Symmetry said:


> In fact I'm shocked that nearly a third of all Xbox 360 owners have gone and bought one, unbelievable.



I'm really grateful I had someone who let me borrow one, as it meant I didn't have to make a purchase I would have instantly regretted just to find out whether or not it was worth it.

I tried Kinect for about a week. In brutal honesty, I had it plugged in for a week, but I only made use of it twice. I found it utterly useless. Granted, if I were more of an electronics geek and had the brain for taking one apart and re-purposing it, there is some really cool stuff happening out there in that regard. Still, in terms of it's out-of-the-box intended purposes, I just don't see the point. I like the implied potential, but we're SO not there, yet.

Just as a side, I'm kind of disappointed that developers (save very few exceptions) never really bothered to take advantage of the microphones on the xbl headsets for voice command use. We've had microphones for the life of the console, but voice command is 'new' and only in use via a Kinect? Lame sauce.

*edit* Also, in direct response to this bit of the article:



> So what the hell are you supposed to do when you're trying to convince those customers to drop $400 on a game machine with all of the accessories (extra controllers, peripherals, online subscriptions) plus $60 for each game?



Here's a thought: Don't charge $400 a console or $60 a game!


----------



## highlordmugfug (Jun 14, 2011)

Konfyouzd said:


> That's another good point. I've found that I'm almost *willing to deal w/ "the same game" so long as the story doesn't get stale for me. *
> 
> *I've been a bit disappointed thus far in the campaigns in games like COD and the like since they tend to be so short and I'm not really big on the whole "lemme go online and flex my nuts to ppl across the globe I don't even know." *I'm not calling any of you out unless you're that kind of person and we all know there's an abundance of those out there. So I tend to avoid the multiplayer realm altogether most times unless it's something cooperative like Survival Mode in L4D, Firefight in Halo or... Well you get the point...


Good stories and awesome campaign modes are what got me really into video games in the first place. More campaign length and story development! 

Like you said: fuck all these people across the globe (and down the street), it needs to be tons of fun alone as well.


----------



## Scar Symmetry (Jun 14, 2011)

synrgy said:


> Just as a side, I'm kind of disappointed that developers (save very few exceptions) never really bothered to take advantage of the microphones on the xbl headsets for voice command use. We've had microphones for the life of the console, but voice command is 'new' and only in use via a Kinect? Lame sauce.



Rainbox Six Vegas 2 made great use of the headset, I don't know why that didn't catch on because while it wasn't perfect and occasionally got it wrong it still worked 90% of the time. Great game.


----------



## vampiregenocide (Jun 14, 2011)

Everyone takes games too seriously nowadays, myself included.


----------



## Daemoniac (Jun 14, 2011)

That article is gold, and very true for the most part.


----------



## AxeHappy (Jun 15, 2011)

To be fair, sequels have always been a pretty huge deal with Video games. 

The Problem is the 8 CoDs in like 10 years.


----------



## pink freud (Jun 15, 2011)

I'd like to add:

QTFUCKINGEs

I raged so hard at the end of God of War II because of that cut-scene QTE hybrid monstrosity that randomly generated which button to press...


----------



## MFB (Jun 15, 2011)

Scar Symmetry said:


> Rainbox Six Vegas 2 made great use of the headset, I don't know why that didn't catch on because while it wasn't perfect and occasionally got it wrong it still worked 90% of the time. Great game.



Everyone also seems to forgot the first SOCOMs made GREAT use of it, and that was back on PS2!

I would love for more squad games to allow voice commands, especially for specific soldiers in your squad versus ALL of them doing something and having you just sit back and play commander.


----------



## ittoa666 (Jun 16, 2011)

Scar Symmetry said:


> Rainbox Six Vegas 2 made great use of the headset, I don't know why that didn't catch on because while it wasn't perfect and occasionally got it wrong it still worked 90% of the time. Great game.



Everything about that game was ahead of it's time. The customization was great, and the guns were balanced (until the idiots found it necessary to run around with a famas and no armor, but that was okay because I could get headshots (which were a 1 shot kill)). Love that game so much.



Xaios said:


> Just remember now, Jedi Academy was actually Dark Forces IV: Jedi Knight III: Jedi Outcast II: Jedi Academy. And that was released in 2003!



They need to keep that series going. Loved that game, too, especially online.

Also, about the gun sights in games these days......You can't change that. The only thing you could do is make the sights move like in real life, but it would still be the same. I mean, do you guys not want to aim?


----------



## jymellis (Jun 16, 2011)

i like those games, even though im not a "gamer" i also like the second and 3rd person view games.


----------



## Bloody_Inferno (Jun 16, 2011)

ittoa666 said:


> Also, about the gun sights in games these days......You can't change that. The only thing you could do is make the sights move like in real life, but it would still be the same. I mean, do you guys not want to aim?


 
That was barely the point of the article but more of an opening pic of humour, but however it's real intention becomes apparent in point 3. 

This part in particular:



> And yes, we gamers are ultimately to blame. We don't even perceive how incredibly narrow our range of choices has gotten. For instance, every single gaming forum on the Internet right now is hosting at least one passionate discussion about which is better, _Modern Warfare 3_ or _Battlefield 3_.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




But FPS games are here to stay. It's been like that since Operation Wolf and even before that too, so obviously the gun sight views aren't ever gonna change.


----------



## ittoa666 (Jun 16, 2011)

Bloody_Inferno said:


> That was barely the point of the article but more of an opening pic of humour, but however it's real intention becomes apparent in point 3.



I know. I was just adding my 2 cents just in case anyone took it seriously.
Things do look very similar these days, but with all the new engines, it happens like that as you know.


----------



## Daemoniac (Jun 16, 2011)

^ And that in itself is ridiculous. It is fucked that companies don't have the balls to just do something that they want to, or do something new and interesting as opposed to what "will sell", and it is even _more_ fucked up that the public is generally all too happy to purchase said shit, chow down on it and scream frantically for more 

EDIT: and yes, I am mroe than aware that a new engine takes a metric fuckton of work to create. I am _also_, however, aware that just because one uses the same engine as another game it does *not* mean that you have to look 100% fucking identical to it


----------



## Konfyouzd (Jun 16, 2011)

synrgy said:


> I'm really grateful I had someone who let me borrow one, as it meant I didn't have to make a purchase I would have instantly regretted just to find out whether or not it was worth it.
> 
> I tried Kinect for about a week. In brutal honesty, I had it plugged in for a week, but I only made use of it twice. I found it utterly useless. Granted, if I were more of an electronics geek and had the brain for taking one apart and re-purposing it, there is some really cool stuff happening out there in that regard. Still, in terms of it's out-of-the-box intended purposes, I just don't see the point. I like the implied potential, but we're SO not there, yet.
> 
> ...


 
The Kinect has more uses when connected to a computer than to an Xbox, honestly. They recently released an SDK for it and I've been dying to get my hands on that bitch.


----------



## Konfyouzd (Jun 16, 2011)

Daemoniac said:


> ^ And that in itself is ridiculous. It is fucked that companies don't have the balls to just do something that they want to, or do something new and interesting as opposed to what "will sell", and it is even _more_ fucked up that the public is generally all too happy to purchase said shit, chow down on it and scream frantically for more


 
Preach, brotha...



> EDIT: and yes, I am mroe than aware that a new engine takes a metric fuckton of work to create. I am _also_, however, aware that just because one uses the same engine as another game it does *not* mean that you have to look 100% fucking identical to it


 
Indeed...


----------



## Prydogga (Jun 16, 2011)

I usually love Cracked, but good god this just enforces how negative they can be.

I'm not worried about the future of gaming at all. Like I've said before, it's not always about crazy ingenuity and originality. I just want a game that plays as smoothly as possible, and holds my interest for at least a month of playing. (CoD's 4, MW2, RA2 and GTA: SA probably hold my most gaming time ever, at least 2 months in game play on each game, and with good reason. )


----------



## Daemoniac (Jun 16, 2011)

I don't know exactly how much of it is opinion/nostalgia and how much is fact, but it really is feeling like awesome games are getting fewer and farther between. There are only a handful of absolutely stunning games that I've played in the last few years (and a couple I've heard of that I can't speak for personally), but it just feels like the level of consistency has just completely died.


----------



## Daemoniac (Jun 16, 2011)

Prydogga said:


> I usually love Cracked, but good god this just enforces how negative they can be.
> 
> I'm not worried about the future of gaming at all. Like I've said before, it's not always about crazy ingenuity and originality. I just want a game that plays as smoothly as possible, and holds my interest for at least a month of playing. (CoD's 4, MW2, RA2 and GTA: SA probably hold my most gaming time ever, at least 2 months in game play on each game, and with good reason. )



I agree with the article almost completely. The levels of absolute laziness on the part of developers coupled with what seems like abject apathy on the part of consumers is disturbing and saddening to say the least


----------



## Scar Symmetry (Jun 16, 2011)

Daemoniac said:


> I don't know exactly how much of it is opinion/nostalgia and how much is fact, but it really is feeling like awesome games are getting fewer and farther between. There are only a handful of absolutely stunning games that I've played in the last few years (and a couple I've heard of that I can't speak for personally), but it just feels like the level of consistency has just completely died.



I completely disagree I think with the amount of games out there today there are more great games than ever, the key is to not let yourself get carried away with what you expect from a game.

A lot of incredible games have come out over the past few years, more than us gamers deserve. I say this as a 360 user, so bear that in mind if you choose to reply.


----------



## Daemoniac (Jun 16, 2011)

Scar Symmetry said:


> I completely disagree I think with the amount of games out there today there are more great games than ever, the key is to not let yourself get carried away with what you expect from a game.
> 
> A lot of incredible games have come out over the past few years, more than us gamers deserve. I say this as a 360 user, so bear that in mind if you choose to reply.



There are "good" games a plenty, but when I think back over the last few years of the 90s and first few years of the 2000s, there are several games coming out every single year that were absolutely stunning, not just "good".

I expect a great all around experience from games, that's it. I want a story to it that's good, and that holds my interest to the end, and I want it to have gameplay fun enough to match the story. It doesn't have to be mind-blowingly original or have game-changing play styles (though they don't hurt  ), but it feels like games no are choosing between those elements; you either get the game with the insane and awesome story, but the gameplay or graphics suffer enormously because of it and it ends up a sub-par experience as a whole due to bad planning, or you have a game with great gameplay mechanics and style or awesome graphics but with a story that's so bad it feels like it's been added almost as an afterthought and barely holds your interest through the first half of the game


----------



## Konfyouzd (Jun 16, 2011)

My problem isn't so much with the games themselves as it is with the features they want to change. Typically I seek variety in the types of games I play but I still like playing a game that's at least somewhat familiar and I think that aspect may be what some folks see as every game being the same.

I mean how many ways can you jazz up war before you start to lose "realism"--another inevitable complaint when games attempt to push the boundaries. In other words, given the premise of certain games/series it's almost impossible to do anything other than reinvent the wheel in a new setting.

I'm much more concerned with whether or not I'll be able to invite my buddies over to join in on the carnage or if I'll have to wear that itchy fucking headset. The only option after that is to purchase a separate xbox to system link which also seems a bit excessive considering the 360 is capable of allowing up to 4 controllers to connect to it at once.

Then again, there may be actual design issues preventing developers from being able to achieve the same type of local multiplayer we came to love with earlier systems. Whatever the case, I do feel a tad slighted considering the rising cost of games and gaming systems weighed against all the new "restrictions."

I can rejoice in the fact that the games I seem to like most such as Gears of War, Halo, Call of Duty and Borderlands all include a local multiplay feature. It just sucks more companies are starting to move away from it. And usually they say something like... "It takes away from the experience." Right... Bc playing the game couldn't possibly be fun if you don't have to spend $8/month to play with your friends... 

EDIT: I have also been noticing the proverbial "coin toss" between gameplay and story. If the story is good enough I'm almost willing to deal with small quirks in the mechanics of a game but only to an extent. If the game play is god awful I typically say fuck the story, so I can definitely understand many gamers' need for that balance. It almost goes without saying.


----------



## Daemoniac (Jun 16, 2011)

^ Yeah I _hate_ the fact that local multiplayer has all but died. Bring it and LAN back as a big part of the experience, and lets fuck this whole online multiplayer thing off, and try and get PS3 and 360 back towards social gaming a bit instead of just leaving it to Nintendo's gimmicks 

EDIT: I'm not "anti" online, but if I want multiplayer, generally I want mates to come around and make an event of it instead of just turning on the console and talking (or not talking) to someone on the other end of nothing.


----------



## Hemi-Powered Drone (Jun 16, 2011)

^That's what I hated about Starcraft II, no LAN support. I was never a big Starcraft player, but with Warcraft, which they're supposedly going to make a new one when they finish another WoW expansion,I would love getting together at my local library, installing it on every computer, and having LAN parties. It's easier to strategize when the people are right there next to you. 

As a whole, though, teamwork has died in video games, sadly. If you play Call of Duty, even on team game types like *Team *Deathmatch, everyone goes all Rambo and could just as well play Free-For-All.

Another thing missing from multiplayer that's more common online, people never play the objective. I'm talking mostly about FPSs and TPSs in game types like CTF. People rarely actually try to get the flag or meet whatever objective. With LAN you can at least hit the person if they aren't playing the objective. 

I'm also not being anti-online play, I'm just saying that most of the online community is shit.


----------



## Konfyouzd (Jun 16, 2011)

The local play is also a big deal for me in team games. I feel much more comfortable with a team of ppl I know since I'm not an FPS guru like half the kids I find online. It seems like a lot of the time if the ppl on the other end don't know you they can pretty much give a shit less if you sink or swim in a team match, but they're quick to boot you after they leave you for dead.


EDIT: I'm stupid and didn't realize DragonBlade said all of this before me...


----------



## Bloody_Inferno (Jun 16, 2011)

Prydogga said:


> I usually love Cracked, but good god this just enforces how negative they can be.



My sigs are worse...  To be expected from the same author I guess. 

There were already previous articles from the guy, that built up to this, and there will be more. 

I've been tending to end some of my long winded posts with the whole "just like the arts" statement, but it applies here as well. Trends come and go, certain games can only appeal to a certain number for so long, and the die hard fans will always argue their cause to the bitter end. You know, the usual stuff "just like the arts".  I just wanted to get that out of the way. 

I don't mind upgrades so much. I grew up with Street Fighter 2 (hypermegasuperdooperextracombooncrackediction v.pi and all it's variants so that's absolutely normal for me. It's just like the war games with DLC patches and upgrades. The only reason they're doing this is for the competitive market; those who actually play tournaments and such. For the casual gamer... it's merely an option, where they're free to spend on it, or something else. For the die hard competitive gamer, it's mandatory. The developers know this and will will aim for that market and benefit from them. Starcraft is the one exception to this... until Starcraft 2 came out, which no LAN support, so I guess Starcraft is still the exception. 

I suppose there will be a lot if complaints in development, is that at first glance, all the games of one kind are all lacking variety. From the obligatory competitive counterparts to even their own sequels. 






Superficially, that's dead on. The deeper you look/play (game mechanics among many other factors), no they're not the same games at all.... I won't go along stating all the little differences between 2D and 3D fighting games because I don't have an eternity... however, it's becoming questionable to many that it's becoming all very alike. 

It's coming to a point where everybody is aiming for realism. That's cool. I'm all up for it. It's great that the Wii finally got the full body motion gaming right after decades. And it was only inevitable that PS Move and Xbox Kinnect would follow suit. Though a lot of the ideas just seemed cack. The whole musical instrument gaming... how long did that last? 






Sorry, I just had to. 

Konami's been doing it for ages before Guitar Hero. And now Activision have ceased the GH franchise, and all the other variants are now losing interest. Short lived little niche. 

And then there's the endless sequels that Nintendo have been flogging since their inception. You can put Mario's face and Zelda's name on anything and it'll still sell. Fair enough, but the games themselves? I honestly feel that a lot of the latter games from franchises are stagnating. And it's not only recently. IMO The Donkey Kong Country games started getting worse after each sequel. And honestly, the first game (while very good) was not really all that great to begin with. Graphics? It made a big impact in it's time, and yes it was stunning. But gameplay? Jumping on bad guys? Swinging ropes? Bloody mincart rides? Walking left to right? And to keep it going for 2 more games? Yoshi's Island came out the same year as the first DK game. Similar gameplay but SO much more original and fun and ultimately played much more different than DK. And both are from the SAME COMPANY! In 1994!

It's still "just like the arts" though. There will be the young gamers who adore the realistic side of games. And there will be the older more cynical gamers who can now enjoy his retro classics on his smartphone or some dodgy ROM. It's almost like the direction of the production thread in the recording studio forum is going. Clashing opinions from different schools of thought. 

I've already stated my taste in games lean towards the more obscure games, so I confess on leaning towards the more cynical side (almost just like the author). 

But I don't believe that a lot of the games out there are terrible. There have been some great games over the past few years that have been great and pushes the boundaries.

Psychonauts
Ico/Shadow of the Colossus
Katamari series
Portal series
Okami
Metroid series (yes, even from then to now)
Fallout series
Guilty Gear/Blazblue series


...and that's only scratching the surface. The good games are just harder to find, and not marketed as much... you know "just like the arts"- oh there I go saying it again...


----------



## leandroab (Jun 16, 2011)

I can understand this one:





But not this one:





It's like if all games of 2011 were FPS. Which is bullshit.


----------



## Konfyouzd (Jun 16, 2011)

^ As a side note... All of those games look DOPE.


----------



## leandroab (Jun 16, 2011)

Konfyouzd said:


> ^ As a side note... All of those games look DOPE.



Can't wait for rage and far cry 3 

And diablo 3 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## Konfyouzd (Jun 16, 2011)

Another side note... Please hurry up and get us on page three! I almost piss myself every time I look at that kid playing w/ the wii motes!


----------



## synrgy (Jun 16, 2011)

Bloody_Inferno said:


> Psychonauts



Easily on my all-time list. That game was GREAT. Chock full of imagination, originality, and FUN. I keep hoping they'll make a sequel, but Tim Schaeffer keeps denying it'll ever happen, which is a bummer.


----------



## Xaios (Jun 16, 2011)

Agreed, Psychonauts was a ridiculously fun game. Shame no one bought it.


----------



## synrgy (Jun 16, 2011)

Xaios said:


> Agreed, Psychonauts was a ridiculously fun game. Shame no one bought it.



It's currently (still) one of the top-rated games on XBL. 4.5 stars after 10 thousand some-odd ratings.

Games on Demand - Xbox.com


----------



## SirMyghin (Jun 16, 2011)

This article pretty much sums up why I don't play games much anymore. Single player games are where it is at for me and there just aren't many worth playing.


----------



## Bobo (Jun 16, 2011)

SirMyghin said:


> This article pretty much sums up why I don't play games much anymore. Single player games are where it is at for me and there just aren't many worth playing.



I guess games like Skyrim, Fallout, GTA, etc are where the long, drawn out single player experiences are at. I love some good multiplayer, but I don't know if anything will equal the fun I'll have with Skyrim. It's definitely not the Super Nintendo days anymore.


----------



## synrgy (Jun 16, 2011)

SirMyghin said:


> This article pretty much sums up why I don't play games much anymore. Single player games are where it is at for me and there just aren't many worth playing.



Understanding completely that the game isn't for everyone, have you tried the Mass Effect series? Pretty much my all time favorite.


----------



## SirMyghin (Jun 16, 2011)

synrgy said:


> Understanding completely that the game isn't for everyone, have you tried the Mass Effect series? Pretty much my all time favorite.



Love mass effect, anxiously away the conclusion... Next march. They better not shit on it like they did DA2. That and I will play Heart of the Swarm for sure. 



Bobo said:


> I guess games like Skyrim, Fallout, GTA, etc are where the long, drawn out single player experiences are at. I love some good multiplayer, but I don't know if anything will equal the fun I'll have with Skyrim. It's definitely not the Super Nintendo days anymore.



Skyrim I will give a chance to as I loved Morrowind, Oblivion was too obsessed with graphics and everything else took the back seat in consequence making the game too samey and destroying the adventure/explore every crevice morrowind had (see no massive awesome hidden treasure of doom). It lacked the depth of its predecessors.

Fallout 3 I never finished, got bored about 1/2 way through I guess. It was just oblivion with guns. GTA was fun, the first time, GTA 2 onward I do not enjoy, it was a novelty thing and the novelty didn't last through 10 odd sequels.


----------



## Grand Moff Tim (Jun 16, 2011)

Daemoniac said:


> I am _also_, however, aware that just because one uses the same engine as another game it does *not* mean that you have to look 100% fucking identical to it


 
Case in point, to prove how correct that statement is:




Uploaded with ImageShack.us


----------



## vampiregenocide (Jun 16, 2011)

I bet BF3 is a massive let down.


----------



## Bloody_Inferno (Jun 16, 2011)

leandroab said:


> It's like if all games of 2011 were FPS. Which is bullshit.



No, of course not all 2011 games are FPS. Though if those were the flagship games getting the most publicity in E3, well it's easy to assume that.


----------



## MFB (Jun 16, 2011)

SirMyghin said:


> Love mass effect, anxiously away the conclusion... Next march. They better not shit on it like they did DA2. That and I will play Heart of the Swarm for sure.



Um, thought it was coming out in November?


----------



## Grand Moff Tim (Jun 16, 2011)

I'd be fine if people applied the FO3/Oblivion-style of game to more themes and time periods, lol. Sure, it'd be derivative, but I'd love something like Oblivion but set in feudal Japan.


----------



## MFB (Jun 16, 2011)

vampiregenocide said:


> I bet BF3 is a massive let down.



Shut your whore mouth right now, Ross. RIGHT NOW.


----------



## Scar Symmetry (Jun 16, 2011)

vampiregenocide said:


> I bet BF3 is a massive let down.



Not possible. If it's a let down I will sell you my testicles.


----------



## vampiregenocide (Jun 16, 2011)

I was let down by Crysis 2, and that looked amazing.


----------



## Scar Symmetry (Jun 16, 2011)

vampiregenocide said:


> I was let down by Crysis 2, and that looked amazing.



It was you who let down Crysis 2.


----------



## Xaios (Jun 16, 2011)

vampiregenocide said:


> I was let down by Crysis 2, and that looked amazing.



Frankly, Crysis 2 looked boring as fuck from the very beginning. I watched the first gameplay videos they published and basically said to myself, "wow, this looks... awful."

Crytek needs to get back to what they made great: non-linear gameplay in the jungle. Shame that Ubisoft owns the Far Cry name now. The first Far Cry made me feel like John McClane.


----------



## ZEBOV (Jun 16, 2011)

GazPots said:


> And i was pissed off at hollywood for lacking originality. Fuck, the games indusrty is even worse.


You didn't have to tell me that. Look at how many World War 2 shooters there are. Then look at how many World War 2 GAMES there are (shooter, RTS, airplanes, etc.) After fighting in the Battle of Stalingrad in several different games, I decided "Fuck WW2. I'm sick of this." Now I'm getting tired of modern combat shooters. Battlefield 3 will probably be the last modern warfare style game I play (not including ArmA 2, which is much more of a sandbox game.)

EDIT: I'm getting MW3 for one reason..... I'm going to kill my team mates online. 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dZDGHPtBBeA&feature=channel_video_title


----------



## Grand Moff Tim (Jun 16, 2011)

Bring on the WW1 shooters.


----------



## ittoa666 (Jun 16, 2011)

vampiregenocide said:


> I bet BF3 is a massive let down.



I HIGHLY doubt that. 

Also, never speak such blasphemy, unless you wish me to say the same about MW3


----------



## Daemoniac (Jun 17, 2011)

Grand Moff Tim said:


> Bring on the WW1 shooters.



Bring on some shooters with a bit of fucking substance... The game I am the most excited about this year is Deus Ex: Human Revolution for the exact reasons I mentioned on the previous page - it looks to have great gameplay, graphics, an interesting style/theme AND a well acted and interesting story to top it all off.

Of course I could still be wrong, but from what I've seen the design team had an idea they were passionate about and have stuck to it.


----------



## WickedSymphony (Jun 17, 2011)

vampiregenocide said:


> I bet BF3 is a massive let down.



That's ok Ross, you can just get MW3... 

Which will be the exact. same. thing. as. MW2.


Ah, nice and predictable.


----------



## Prydogga (Jun 17, 2011)

WickedSymphony said:


> That's ok Ross, you can just get MW3...
> 
> Which will be the exact. same. thing. as. MW2.
> 
> ...



MW3: Worldwide Players online: 3

(Ross, Taylor and myself)

 Bring it on!


----------



## WickedSymphony (Jun 17, 2011)

Prydogga said:


> Bring it on!



Aww, I'd love to, but my money is going to BF3.

But hey, when you decide to join us, there's 64 players to a map on pc so there should be plenty of room for you guys!



E: Fuck that article is so true, every forum is having a debate on BF3 vs MW3


----------



## Bloody_Inferno (Jun 17, 2011)

WickedSymphony said:


> E: Fuck that article is so true, every forum is having a debate on BF3 vs MW3


 
The last few posts pretty much validated the article and what I said earlier. 







There is no escape....


----------



## Hemi-Powered Drone (Jun 17, 2011)

Prydogga said:


> MW3: Worldwide Players online: 3
> 
> (Ross, Taylor and myself)
> 
> Bring it on!



Include me in that, I'm just hoping it will have a better anti-cheat.


----------



## vampiregenocide (Jun 17, 2011)

Xaios said:


> Frankly, Crysis 2 looked boring as fuck from the very beginning. I watched the first gameplay videos they published and basically said to myself, "wow, this looks... awful."


 
It looked amazing to me, and graphics wise it is still hands-down one of the best looking shooters I have played. Just the actual gameplay itself was not up to scratch.



WickedSymphony said:


> That's ok Ross, you can just get MW3...
> 
> Which will be the exact. same. thing. as. MW2.
> 
> ...


 
I love Modern Warefare 2 and as long as it has a nice new campaign, and they fix some of the old MP issues and ass new stuff, I will like the new one. I know what to expect, and thats why I like MW. It's consistent but they add with each game. My only problem with Call of Duty is that everyone copies them and things get samey. It's fine when IW does it, but when every other FPS has you in the middle east killing terrorists or Russians in a really dull, desaturated-looking game, well things get boring fast. 

I will agree that modern shooters are becoming very generic, simply trying to emulate the success of either the COD or Halo series and in doing so creating an inferior copy. Few interesting FPS games have come out in the past few years, the Bioshock and Left 4 Dead series are great, but also titles such as Metro 2033 are pretty interesting. 

I think something new is going to have to come along and really change things up. We need a new franchise that is going to go against the grain and give gamers not only what they want, but knew things that will also grab them. I want to see beautiful, colourful looking games with interesting stories and dialogue. I want weapons that aren't just shotgun/pistol/assault rifle but mad shit like the older days of Turok where pretty much all of the weapons are unique. Player customization is always cool as well; being able to give your character an identity on the vast online battlefield is something that Halo and COD have touched on, but not fully explored.


----------



## WickedSymphony (Jun 17, 2011)

vampiregenocide said:


> I know what to expect, and thats why I like MW. It's consistent but they add with each game. My only problem with Call of Duty is that everyone copies them and things get samey.



Yea, and that's pretty much what I meant. I'm not saying that MW3 is going to be the worst game in the world, but when I watch their gameplay demos and trailers, there's nothing in there that makes me feel like it's something I haven't already seen and done before. (This is a problem with many games in the industry these past few years, not just CoD, though CoD definitely abuses it heavily.)

Then when I look at BF3 gameplay videos, it looks like they really put so much effort into it to really make it the best fucking game ever, not just in graphics, but in terms of getting it as close to the real thing as possible and making it a fun experience. And from what I've seen of the MP, it looks a bit more fast paced at times, which is something I love about the CoD series. When DICE first said they wanted to make a CoD-killer this time around, I wasn't even sure if that was possible. But after seeing what they each had to present, I'm confident that they have the better game for me.

I agree with you though, on the point that developers need to come out with something new, and not just in the FPS category. I love a lot of the franchises that will be getting new additions this year and next (and for years to come), but I want something new to play alongside my current favorites, too. While that picture earlier showing that every new game is a FPS was technically incorrect, it wasn't too far off from the truth either. Most of the new games coming out are FPS's, but an even greater portion of them are just new additions to already existing franchises in other genres as well.


----------



## leandroab (Jun 17, 2011)

Bloody_Inferno said:


> There is no escape....



FFFFFFFFFFFFFUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU


----------



## Grand Moff Tim (Jun 17, 2011)

vampiregenocide said:


> I will agree that modern shooters are becoming very generic, simply trying to emulate the success of either the COD or Halo series and in doing so creating an inferior copy. Few interesting FPS games have come out in the past few years, the Bioshock and Left 4 Dead series are great, but also titles such as Metro 2033 are pretty interesting.


 
I got a pretty big kick out of Borderlands, but I didn't try its online multiplayer. It was fun doing split-screen coop multiplayer, though.

Lots of yelling about taking the good loot, though...



Ah, loot. I remember once after I'd been playing Fallout 3 for a while I went to switch my clothes from the washer to the dryer. When I opened the dryer door, I found a bobby pin and my immediate mental reaction was "Oooh! Loot!"

I probably should've taken that as a sign that it was time to take a break, but HELL NAW, NYUKKA. I NEED ME SOME SANDBOX EXPLORATION ERRYDAY.


----------



## brutalwizard (Jun 19, 2011)

this is the reason i never got past the DS for my gaming platforms haha


----------



## Tomo009 (Jun 19, 2011)

Bloody_Inferno said:


> Psychonauts
> Ico/Shadow of the Colossus
> Katamari series
> Portal series
> ...



That is an amazing list. Haven't played Katamari or ICO and I haven't owned Okami, SotC or Guilty Gear but damn I should get around to it sometime. And I would add parentheses to Fallout just because I cannot stand it's modern incarnation (read different game entirely).

Problem is getting marketing behind the great games, Psychnauts being a GREAT example, Tim Schafer has a history of making amazing games... but never advertising them leading to mediocre to bad sales. Then there are companies like Blizzard who were great back in the day, but now it just wouldn't be profitable for them to come up with a new amazing franchise, so we have WoW getting so attention and only sequels (Starcraft 2, Diablo 3, not that they aren't won't be great).

My uni holidays are pretty long, maybe I should search for some of those great games I missed and play them.


----------



## Bekanor (Jun 20, 2011)

Xaios said:


> Crytek needs to get back to what they made great



Pretty visuals at the expense of fundamental gameplay mechanics?

AI routines that are frequently afflicted with super powers that allow them to see me through a concrete wall/shoot me to pieces from a sniper rifle's effective range away with an MP5 or just freak out and start running around in circles because of absolutely nothing?

Putting in vehicles even though the first person perspective has about the same depth perception and peripheral vision as the dead pirate from Goonies? 

Sorry had to get that out, the only developer I hate more than Crytek is Bethesda, mostly because their games don't work properly until they get 6 months worth of updates, and they mostly focus around sprawling RPG environments populated by hundreds of fetch-quest giving NPCs, all voiced by the same 3 people, offering a totally non-linear experience of hauling ass cross-country for an hour and a half to find some guy's useless bits and pieces for 50 bucks and 10xp. Couple that with the ever-present morality system offering you the chance to keep his shit for bad points that make no significant difference in the game short of one or two heavily scripted main story quests.

Tl;dr: Bethesda have a special place in Hell writing bug fixes for Vampire The Masquerade: Bloodlines.


----------

