As much as people love to hate EA now I would honestly take the output over the last few years under Riccitello compared with the previous few years under Larry Probst.
I mean make no mistake, there were a lot of shitty decisions by Electronic Arts under his tenure but the fact of the matter is unlike the previous administration it seemed like they were trying. They put out risky games and they failed. Then they tried to copy what was popular and failed a bit at that too. They made a lot of people angry along the way, but if we remember the EA of 2005 it was pretty grim.
I think it may very well be the case that a lot of EAs customers are telling them that they really do want micro-transactions, that they really do want this stuff.
On the other hand it seems fully real that these two companies are handling them differently. Valve has picked a strategy that does seem less offensive to gamers sensibilities. At least the kinds of gamers who comment about things on the internet.
The vote with your wallet argument is great, but it appears that we've lost the vote. I've bought almost zero bits of DLC or add-in content but it increasingly feels like something that's degrading my experience especially in EA games.
" There are serious and realistic first person shooters. They are not mainstream, they aren't on consoles. I just read a bunch of people writing about bulletstorm and they all used leads saying that the market today is too crowded with serious and realistic shooters. No it's not. You should play Arma II so you know what a realistic shooter looks like. That's not even a knock against Bulletstorm or Call of Duty or support for what these games are. It's just a fact that Arma II or the Original Operation Flashpoint for the PC are the kinds of things that a realistic shooter is like. It's not fast paced, there's a lot involved more than just running around shooting dudes. I don't really like that style of game but they're a realistic game. COD is just as arcadey as bulletstorm it's just a question of what kind of paint you put on it. "
I think what people mean by "serious" or "realistic" are not referring to the mechanics or the gameplay but rather the style of the game and also the tone of the game. Games like COD are generally set in real world situations, using real-world weapons, hence they are going for a "realistic" style even if the gameplay itself is not realistic (i.e. in that sense, there is no such thing as a "realistic" shooter outside of an actual combat simulator). Also while a game like COD doesn't necessarily always take itself seriously, it's definitely much more serious in tone than Bulletstorm, which is intentionally designed to be silly from the start. Though you can certainly argue that COD-style games are usually silly in their own ways. Gameplay wise, Bulletstorm and Modern Warfare isn't that different if we break down the basic game play components (i.e. the main difference would be that Bulletstorm has skill shots) but in terms of tone and setting, they are very different. "
I feel like the tone of the last two CoD games went way off the deep end out of serious land. Like maybe the WWII games were serious but not realistic, but they've gone full speed into crazy-ville in MW and Black Ops.
This. Also OP, why do you have your panties in a knot over something so minute? "
Because words have meanings. I actually love Call of Duty, I think it's a really fun single player game. However, those games are like the absurd speed driven fantasies of someone who thinks Michael Bay movies are high drama.
I was actually kind of convinced that Call of Duty games were satirical after playing MW2 and was shocked to see that the producers were presenting it as something they were serious about.
There are serious and realistic first person shooters. They are not mainstream, they aren't on consoles.
I just read a bunch of people writing about bulletstorm and they all used leads saying that the market today is too crowded with serious and realistic shooters.
No it's not. You should play Arma II so you know what a realistic shooter looks like. That's not even a knock against Bulletstorm or Call of Duty or support for what these games are. It's just a fact that Arma II or the Original Operation Flashpoint for the PC are the kinds of things that a realistic shooter is like. It's not fast paced, there's a lot involved more than just running around shooting dudes.
I don't really like that style of game but they're a realistic game. COD is just as arcadey as bulletstorm it's just a question of what kind of paint you put on it.
Your argument is flawed because it places a misplaced emphasis on Gamasutra.
Yes, Gamasutra is written for game industry professionals. However, it's worth noting that there Game of the Year decisions are made by an editorial body just like all the other ones.
If you want to know what professional game developers think are the best games of the year, you'd get a better read on that by looking at the AIAS and GDC awards. Which are chosen by professional game developers.
The AIAS awards could be read as a split decision or a win for ME2 but it didn't represent an industry landslide towards RDR.
I graduated from The Ohio State University. I have aa BA in Journalism and Political science, and i'm teaching Korean kindergarteners and elementary students to speak English. I've gotten So much use of all those communication theory classes.
I just got up this morning in Korea, I see they now have a paid subscription option but could someone give me a just the facts version of what the heck this thread is about.
Log in to comment