The whole consumer feedback/disappointment problem comes from every game series becoming a franchise it seems. People jump on board a certain series and attach their own hopes and expectations onto someone's story and then try to dictate certain elements subsequently. It's easy to sympathise with people who are spending a substantial amount of money on something and then feeling ripped off, especially now with all this release day DLC. Though I definitely agree that an artist should be free to create their own piece free from mandates set out by others. It makes me wish for more independent stand alone games. Games that don't require a sequel. A recent example for me would be Enslaved.
I believe XIII as a whole, once finished (I don't think it's finished yet!) will be as good as other FFs! I'm really fond of XIII and XIII-2 (which is my joint favourite game with VIII and X!), but the story doesn't yet feel complete... A lot of information is given in the fragments and less appears in the story, which I suppose does make it appear flawed... but we see similar things in games like Morrowind, Oblivion and Skyrim, which tell us about the history of the land through numerous texts scattered across the world map! It's something different within the Final Fantasy series, but I don't think it's necessarily bad. I'd rather that than they conveniently explain everything through the dialogue!
I still remember CoD back before it was Mass Market /hipster. But joking aside Activision killed the series for me with Modern Warfare II and the whole yearly installations thing. I went into my local GAME on friday with Vikk to pick up a few games and the guy behind the counter asked me in a rather excitable manner "Do you want to preorder Black Ops II?" I gave him that look, the one you see on television programmes thats often described as "Coming into someones house of Christmas day and urinating all over there presents" look before simply saying "Nope, can't stand the series" Rewind to CoD 1 - MW1 I absolutely adored the series, it was fresh, it was fun and I could sink hours into it without a care in the world...so how did I end up hating it so much? Was it because of mainstream? Not really, more players should mean more people to potentially "gib". It's because the game hasn't changed a single bit in gameplay mechanics since MW1. For me it's like getting a car and having it for years, you are now fed up of it but decide to give it a new lick of paint...perhaps a new bodykit, heck you even go for the 18 inch wheels and full interior makeover. Well guess what, it's still the same car, same engine, same handling, same everything...apart from it now looks more pretty with a few novelties. Thats what I think of the CoD series, they upgrade the graphics, few new maps or recoloured older maps, few new guns and call it a brand new game....no it's still MW1 because it plays exactly the same as MW1 and that won't change until you work on changing the gameplay mechanics. Unfortunatley, for every person put off by CoD, there are several more ready and willing to camp outside the shops for the midnight release. This is why Activision continue to repackage the same game every year, because it still shifts by the truckload. But this is one little black duck that isn't interested.
Originally Posted by Gingerbread Man You're right that it erupted with CoD4: Modern Warfare. Before that it was a respectable franchise, but not one that annoyed masses of people. I played CoD: Finest Hour (I think that was what it was?) and CoD3 (I think?) and enjoyed them both a lot. They were my favourite FPSers at the time. I'm not actually an avid FPSer so I don't have a long tradition to draw from (my other favourite FPS was King Kong - which says it all). I particularly loved the Stalingrad sequence, but also really, really enjoyed the North African part. For the time I thought they were really well done. The online was quite fun too, but it was more innocent back then. Now when I got CoD4: Modern Warfare I did enjoy it a lot too. It was a fun game. The story was quite good, but the online was a vast improvement. People actually played the online too. All of the time, in fact. I never had difficulty finding a game. I guess this was the appeal to me as you could just turn the PS3 on and load straight into a game and then kill loads of people whilst listening to your ipod. To me though, that's all it was. When the next one came out, and then the next one, and the next one, I felt no real reason to buy them. The online was the focus, and I wasn't as interested in the storylines of the modern CoD settings. I was also unable to buy any of these games on release, so by the time it could be possible to buy another CoD everyone else on the face of the Earth would instead be playing CoD Blops 400. I've always said that I'm now more interesting in seeing a FPS go the other way, and take the player back in time. A WW1 setting... A Crimean setting... A Napoleonic setting... An American Civil War setting (I know some exist)... Or for more abstract but very fun settings... A pirate setting... A Victorian / steampunk setting... A prehistoric setting - with dinosaurs (like Turok, etc, but with decent quality online functions)... Ancient settings, etc... I've recently heard that someone somewhere (already forgotten about the company name) is making a War of the Roses battle game. I don't think it's entirely a FPS (shooter / slasher) but it has FPS elements to it, and when it gets beyond the testing stages it could be very fun. I don't feel I need to play another CoD at present - not until they come up with something very interesting and unexpected. It's a bit like fashion. I don't follow the fashion of this Earth, but if I did I'd need new clothes every other week. I am glad you agree with me, I think you've agreed with me in both of my blogs haha, we must share the same view. I am actually interested to see where the new 2025 setting will take it. If at E3 it is shown and it looks ok I will consider it when it has dropped in price, otherwise never again.
You're right that it erupted with CoD4: Modern Warfare. Before that it was a respectable franchise, but not one that annoyed masses of people. I played CoD: Finest Hour (I think that was what it was?) and CoD3 (I think?) and enjoyed them both a lot. They were my favourite FPSers at the time. I'm not actually an avid FPSer so I don't have a long tradition to draw from (my other favourite FPS was King Kong - which says it all). I particularly loved the Stalingrad sequence, but also really, really enjoyed the North African part. For the time I thought they were really well done. The online was quite fun too, but it was more innocent back then. Now when I got CoD4: Modern Warfare I did enjoy it a lot too. It was a fun game. The story was quite good, but the online was a vast improvement. People actually played the online too. All of the time, in fact. I never had difficulty finding a game. I guess this was the appeal to me as you could just turn the PS3 on and load straight into a game and then kill loads of people whilst listening to your ipod. To me though, that's all it was. When the next one came out, and then the next one, and the next one, I felt no real reason to buy them. The online was the focus, and I wasn't as interested in the storylines of the modern CoD settings. I was also unable to buy any of these games on release, so by the time it could be possible to buy another CoD everyone else on the face of the Earth would instead be playing CoD Blops 400. I've always said that I'm now more interesting in seeing a FPS go the other way, and take the player back in time. A WW1 setting... A Crimean setting... A Napoleonic setting... An American Civil War setting (I know some exist)... Or for more abstract but very fun settings... A pirate setting... A Victorian / steampunk setting... A prehistoric setting - with dinosaurs (like Turok, etc, but with decent quality online functions)... Ancient settings, etc... I've recently heard that someone somewhere (already forgotten about the company name) is making a War of the Roses battle game. I don't think it's entirely a FPS (shooter / slasher) but it has FPS elements to it, and when it gets beyond the testing stages it could be very fun. I don't feel I need to play another CoD at present - not until they come up with something very interesting and unexpected. It's a bit like fashion. I don't follow the fashion of this Earth, but if I did I'd need new clothes every other week.
I understand where you coming from, but for some reason I cant get used to Battlefield's gameplay in multiplayer. Maybe im too used to cod. Like press start for score rank etc. Its easy in cod but battlefield ita really weird. Graphics actually distracted me too much in multiplayer. Maps too big for my taste so I got popped in a sec because some sniper was hiding and in prone in a bush. Ppl blowing me up with vehicles etc... Im too used to cod I guess. Honestly mw3 is a huge disappointment imo. I was fed up with their copy paste games. Barely innovation etc. I agree cod has become shitty and ita pretty mediocre. But BO will have zombies so thts the last cod I will ever buy. Im sick and tired of cod.
Peer pressure is only a little aspect of it, everyone is going to buy it cause they bought the last one, the only new people are parents buying kids a game they think they would like. Any shooter is competitive and COD isn't as big as any other shooter out there, it doesn't require any particular skill when you watch youtube videos of the best people, it is all down to failures in the physics and quick scoping. If people didn't care about realism Battlefield wouldn't have sold so well, yes it didn't do no where near but it converted some COD players over. BF3 itself is more realistic but it is not a simulation of any sorts, it brings around the concept of believability. COD has far more campers in the game and the only thing I agree on is the classes are not the best. But I respect its not your play style each for their own. I have avidly played them both and can form a valid opinion.
I believe its because of several things: Peer pressure (ppl want to play/buy because everyone buys/plays it) Competitive element (ppl always strive to be the best to boost their ego's) Action and Fun! Not over complicated Ppl dont care about realism, cause realism takes away the fun. In real war you dont go rambo and start blasting at ppl, cause it get you killed instantly. Battlefield which is a lot more realistic than mw3 tends to be this way. So you get campers. Ppl hiding in bushes. Ppl hiding in vehicles. Shitty classes. I just want to have fun. Kill ppl rapidly and blast them! Not sit out and wait for an enemy. Screw tactics if I hardly see ppl at my screen. Battlefield is too big for my taste and its not my style. I want to play a game not a simulation.
I'm glad it has been reviewed favourably. I'm planning on seeing it at some point this weekend. I've waited a long time for it, and I didn't want it to be a car crash and to do poorly. Hopefully it is a success and the franchise continues on the up.
Thank you for this review! Me and my family are gonna check it out on the fifth and we cannot wait! Anything Joss whedon touches turns to gold, so it only makes sense. ♥
I believe that is true in the end its their work and you can't tell an artist how to paint their imagination.
Go to Profile
Mark as Read
