Jimquisition: GUNS GUNS GUNS GUNS GUNS GUNS GUNS

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 NEXT
 

Its funny you said the new Tomb Raider looks like Uncharted.
When Uncharted came out everyone said it looked like a upgraded Tomb Raider.
Its really come full circle now.....I don't know if thats a good thing or a bad thing.

rolfwesselius:
Stop blaming publishers and blame the consumers Jim!
They are not gonna waste money on new things if we only buy the same old crap!
But no no no you just keep screaming."THE PUBLISHERS THE PUBLISHERS IT'S ALWAYS THE PUBLISHERS !"
Once the consumers start buying new things the publishers will make new things.

Thank you very much.

If anything the amount of shooters compared to other titles is a good showing off how well the industry is doing. A shooter is a safe game.

Hilarious starting segment.

I love FPS's. I do. I buy more of them than I do any other genre and even I'm tiring of them.
This is why I was so pissed when they made Syndicate of all things in to a forgettable, run-on-the-mill, "me too" shooter.

You can just see the Publishers in an office going "hey, which old IP can we make in to a shooter now?! Which shooter was successful recently and how can we integrate what it did into our product?"

The worst part is that a lot of these me-too shooters often try and ape a similar product (for eg. CoD) and then end up doing it less well and looking super derivative in the process. So if people have to choose they'll take the tried and tested game over the one that is "sort of like it, but not as good".

I think publishers are not thinking that if one (or more) titles have a strangle hold on a genre, then it's probably better to try and make an awesome game, just in a different category.
But their thinking is just "if that game sold so many copies, we can make something just like it that will also sell that many copies".

I didn't really notice it was any more proportionally shootery than usual. Maybe that's even more damning of the state of E3 but who knows.

Most of it I didn't actually mind. I think the thing that bothered me the most was there already being a new Gears. MS has tons of options at their disposal even with established IPs, even other established shooters(cough Perfect Dark).I am willing to cut them a little slack since we are at the tail end of this console cycle and 1 prequel with Gears. However if they keep doing this up in the next console cycle of having so few worthwhile exclusives on any given year than why the hell even bother with exclusives at all and just release the "exclusive" titles on PC as well similar to Alan Wake within a year of the console release.

As I have gotten back into PC gaming recently i am finding little reason to bother with any third party titles on console when I could get them on PC.

Guns? I didn't notice any guns... but then again, maybe I was distracted by Pikmin 3 and Rayman Legends.

What about Nintendo's? The only "Shooter" given some attention was ZombiU, and that looks more like pure survival horror than a shooter. They showed of Pikmin, Mario, Arkham City, Lego GTA (I can't even remember the name so I'm calling it that), Nintendo Land, Wii Fit U, Luigi's Mansion and a few more. There was only one game where you shoot guns in there, and people aren't mentioning Nintendo when talking about how many shooters there were. Heck, the only two big offenders were Microsoft and EA. Ubisoft had Rayman Legends, AC3 and Watch Dogs for there non shooty games. Sony had Sony Smash Bros, Last of Us and God of War.

rolfwesselius:
Stop blaming publishers and blame the consumers Jim!
They are not gonna waste money on new things if we only buy the same old crap!
But no no no you just keep screaming."THE PUBLISHERS THE PUBLISHERS IT'S ALWAYS THE PUBLISHERS !"
Once the consumers start buying new things the publishers will make new things.

I don't think it's that black and white.
If we're fed mainly shooters and the publishers mainly push shooters and promote mainly the big name shooters then the consumer starts to loose choices.

It's the lazy thing to do, to publish an FPS because publishers feel like those projects are safer bets. Those shooters getting published can quite easily mean that a fresh IP or original idea isn't pursued or published because it's considered too risky.
There's nothing the consumer can do about that and no one asked the consumer. Who's to say that if Syndicate was made into a modern RTS it wouldn't have done better than if they just went the FPS route. I don't remember many players demanding Syndicate come out as an FPS, yet it did, again limiting the consumers options.
It's publishers following graphs.

MonkeyPunch:

rolfwesselius:
Stop blaming publishers and blame the consumers Jim!
They are not gonna waste money on new things if we only buy the same old crap!
But no no no you just keep screaming."THE PUBLISHERS THE PUBLISHERS IT'S ALWAYS THE PUBLISHERS !"
Once the consumers start buying new things the publishers will make new things.

I don't think it's that black and white.
If we're fed mainly shooters and the publishers mainly push shooters and promote mainly the big name shooters then the consumer starts to loose choices.

It's the lazy thing to do, to publish an FPS because publishers feel like those projects are safer bets. Those shooters getting published can quite easily mean that a fresh IP or original idea isn't pursued or published because it's considered too risky.
There's nothing the consumer can do about that and no one asked the consumer. Who's to say that if Syndicate was made into a modern RTS it wouldn't have done better than if they just went the FPS route. I don't remember many players demanding Syndicate come out as an FPS, yet it did, again limiting the consumers options.
It's publishers following graphs.

But we turned fps's into safe bet's because we buy them so much.
We need to do the same to other genre's

The single greatest gun-based videgame advertisement in history. The game was probably crap, but I go watch this ad every few weeks:

Dr Jones:
Just sniped some awesome stuff from a fellow Bob Dylan fan

Why thank you! Nice reference in your name! and great avatar!

malestrithe:

Jimothy Sterling:

malestrithe:
Dude, did you miss Sony's presentation? It introduced a lot of games that were not First Person Shooters. Wonderbook was different than anything else that was out there. The Last of Us presented a unique form of combat that was not as clean as seen in other AAA titles.

Above: A comment from a person who posted before finishing watching the video.

Actually, the video was still running when I posted this. Not my fault you did not get to Wonderbook before I finished my thought.

You do know you just confirmed what he had said right.

Also not his fault you decided to post a lazy comment before watching the entire video.

Ego take a blow somewhere you needed the motivational tape, or just topping up the narcicism?

It is a tad worrisome. E3 is a big commercial for gaming, and the commercial was for all the shooters they know are going to sell. I've never understood that about marketing: why so much hype gets spent on things already known to sell instead of things that need the boost. Actualy I do know: everything's so independant project by independant project that all products have to stand on their own instead of the successful ones supplimenting the ad revenue of less popular ones. That and the usual capitalistic laziness: why build a fanbase when you can just exploit the current one.

Maybe I'm just sensitive because I've spent most of my gaming years playing games you really only heard about if you looked for them, but still, it would be nice if more niche titles got equal screen time.

All these generic looking shooters just pep me up more for the Zeno Clash sequel. The best game about hermaphrodite pugilism I've ever played.

MonkeyPunch:

rolfwesselius:
Stop blaming publishers and blame the consumers Jim!
They are not gonna waste money on new things if we only buy the same old crap!
But no no no you just keep screaming."THE PUBLISHERS THE PUBLISHERS IT'S ALWAYS THE PUBLISHERS !"
Once the consumers start buying new things the publishers will make new things.

I don't think it's that black and white.
If we're fed mainly shooters and the publishers mainly push shooters and promote mainly the big name shooters then the consumer starts to loose choices.

It's the lazy thing to do, to publish an FPS because publishers feel like those projects are safer bets. Those shooters getting published can quite easily mean that a fresh IP or original idea isn't pursued or published because it's considered too risky.
There's nothing the consumer can do about that and no one asked the consumer. Who's to say that if Syndicate was made into a modern RTS it wouldn't have done better than if they just went the FPS route. I don't remember many players demanding Syndicate come out as an FPS, yet it did, again limiting the consumers options.
It's publishers following graphs.

remember Enslaved?

It was critically acclaimed and an overall great game. Totally bombed. Even a bad FPS has a pretty good chance of making the money back.

Wow, of all the clips of shooters he showed i only recognized halo and crysis, only because of their design and not beign brown

rolfwesselius:

MonkeyPunch:

rolfwesselius:
Stop blaming publishers and blame the consumers Jim!
They are not gonna waste money on new things if we only buy the same old crap!
But no no no you just keep screaming."THE PUBLISHERS THE PUBLISHERS IT'S ALWAYS THE PUBLISHERS !"
Once the consumers start buying new things the publishers will make new things.

I don't think it's that black and white.
If we're fed mainly shooters and the publishers mainly push shooters and promote mainly the big name shooters then the consumer starts to loose choices.

It's the lazy thing to do, to publish an FPS because publishers feel like those projects are safer bets. Those shooters getting published can quite easily mean that a fresh IP or original idea isn't pursued or published because it's considered too risky.
There's nothing the consumer can do about that and no one asked the consumer. Who's to say that if Syndicate was made into a modern RTS it wouldn't have done better than if they just went the FPS route. I don't remember many players demanding Syndicate come out as an FPS, yet it did, again limiting the consumers options.
It's publishers following graphs.

But we turned fps's into safe bet's because we buy them so much.
We need to do the same to other genre's

But then we have the entire marketing machinery targeted towards these shooters. Other types of games are hidden behind huge displays, massive posters, trailers and TV spots only for these shooters. It's sort of a self-fulfilling prophecy really. It's like the publisher won't even trust us to try something new.

really, I'm not hot on Nintendo this year and the WiiU still seems to be "Spunkbubble 2.0" and Mario is still an old and overdone sellout like he was the past decade but amidst all this shooting, jumping on things feels fresh and fun again and this just isn't right.

Falseprophet:
E3 is for the shareholders, not the customers. So it's not really surprising it's basically saying "here's next year's line-up of sure bets!"

This. Pretty much this.

Draech:

MonkeyPunch:

rolfwesselius:
Stop blaming publishers and blame the consumers Jim!
They are not gonna waste money on new things if we only buy the same old crap!
But no no no you just keep screaming."THE PUBLISHERS THE PUBLISHERS IT'S ALWAYS THE PUBLISHERS !"
Once the consumers start buying new things the publishers will make new things.

I don't think it's that black and white.
If we're fed mainly shooters and the publishers mainly push shooters and promote mainly the big name shooters then the consumer starts to loose choices.

It's the lazy thing to do, to publish an FPS because publishers feel like those projects are safer bets. Those shooters getting published can quite easily mean that a fresh IP or original idea isn't pursued or published because it's considered too risky.
There's nothing the consumer can do about that and no one asked the consumer. Who's to say that if Syndicate was made into a modern RTS it wouldn't have done better than if they just went the FPS route. I don't remember many players demanding Syndicate come out as an FPS, yet it did, again limiting the consumers options.
It's publishers following graphs.

remember Enslaved?

It was critically acclaimed and an overall great game. Totally bombed. Even a bad FPS has a pretty good chance of making the money back.

How much was spent on the marketing for that game compared to just about any FPS on the market I wonder? Hell, I didn't even see Enslaved in stores. I don't even remember when it came out.

Dude, what the hell was with that drawn out motivational tape crap? You're not turning into Game OverThinker, are you?!

Only a problem if you buy every shooter. *shrug*

Jim, was that your Londo Mollari impression you were listening to at the beginning? xD

Wait, wait, wait.

Wait.

Wait, wait.

There were lots of FPS titles at E3?

Damn, must have missed them after Nintendo's 3DS stream put me in a retroactive coma.

loved the intro X3

but i've been saying there's to many shooters for years now -.- nice to see every one else is finally starting to realize that to

Daystar Clarion:
Wait, wait, wait.

Wait.

Wait, wait.

There were lots of FPS titles at E3?

Damn, must have missed them after Nintendo's 3DS stream put me in a retroactive coma.

is that good or bad?

Jim is right on the money again, my main problem with this series is the point is normally half way through the show in this case nearly 2 minutes in a 7 minute video.

I'm finding it hard to get pass the asshole to the point he is trying to make.

Chairman Miaow:

Draech:

MonkeyPunch:

I don't think it's that black and white.
If we're fed mainly shooters and the publishers mainly push shooters and promote mainly the big name shooters then the consumer starts to loose choices.

It's the lazy thing to do, to publish an FPS because publishers feel like those projects are safer bets. Those shooters getting published can quite easily mean that a fresh IP or original idea isn't pursued or published because it's considered too risky.
There's nothing the consumer can do about that and no one asked the consumer. Who's to say that if Syndicate was made into a modern RTS it wouldn't have done better than if they just went the FPS route. I don't remember many players demanding Syndicate come out as an FPS, yet it did, again limiting the consumers options.
It's publishers following graphs.

remember Enslaved?

It was critically acclaimed and an overall great game. Totally bombed. Even a bad FPS has a pretty good chance of making the money back.

How much was spent on the marketing for that game compared to just about any FPS on the market I wonder? Hell, I didn't even see Enslaved in stores. I don't even remember when it came out.

it had banners, the works. Every web comic ever did a piece. It was the game everyone knew no1 bought. I dont think it had TV spots, but neither had Haze. And it made its money back.

I'm not sure when people decided Dead Space 3 looks like Gears of War. Co-op is something I've always wanted to see in Dead Space and how exactly are you going to fight necromorphs from cover? Think about it.

rolfwesselius:
Stop blaming publishers and blame the consumers Jim!
They are not gonna waste money on new things if we only buy the same old crap!
But no no no you just keep screaming."THE PUBLISHERS THE PUBLISHERS IT'S ALWAYS THE PUBLISHERS !"
Once the consumers start buying new things the publishers will make new things.

If people gave up on buying shooters, then they would blame piracy, the second hand market, etc and we would be all punished.

Plus, millions of people just buy them because they genuinely like shooters.

Clearing the Eye:
Only a problem if you buy every shooter. *shrug*

It is a problem if you have an irrational hatred for shooters.

ElPatron:

rolfwesselius:
Stop blaming publishers and blame the consumers Jim!
They are not gonna waste money on new things if we only buy the same old crap!
But no no no you just keep screaming."THE PUBLISHERS THE PUBLISHERS IT'S ALWAYS THE PUBLISHERS !"
Once the consumers start buying new things the publishers will make new things.

If people gave up on buying shooters, then they would blame piracy, the second hand market, etc and we would be all punished.

Plus, millions of people just buy them because they genuinely like shooters.

Clearing the Eye:
Only a problem if you buy every shooter. *shrug*

It is a problem if you have an irrational hatred for shooters.

If I have to live with... *gulp*... "dating sims" streaming out of Japan, you can damn well get over a pissy little plague of shooters, dang it! Now you march right up to those shooters and say "Don't eat me!"

Wait... What were we talking about?

Clankenbeard:
The single greatest gun-based videgame advertisement in history. The game was probably crap, but I go watch this ad every few weeks:

The game was not crap, thank you very much!

I quite liked it...

But don't forget, Assassin's Creed 3 was there. Assassin's Creed 3 was everywhere...

There is only one mindless shooter worth playing. Borderlands 2. It has the most guns, it is colorful, it has a good art design, a lot of enemy variety and every type of gun you can imagine. Why would anyone want to play any other mindless shooter when they are all in a way integrated into Borderlands 2?

Jimothy Sterling:

Casual Shinji:
It says a lot when Sony stuck out the most this year with a Smash Bros. Brawl game, a new Heavy Rain, and a new Uncharted. *sigh*

*Fucking Facepalm* Why the HELL did I not say that? Thank God for you.

And Rayman Legends. And the new Sly Cooper.

Draech:

Chairman Miaow:

Draech:

remember Enslaved?

It was critically acclaimed and an overall great game. Totally bombed. Even a bad FPS has a pretty good chance of making the money back.

How much was spent on the marketing for that game compared to just about any FPS on the market I wonder? Hell, I didn't even see Enslaved in stores. I don't even remember when it came out.

it had banners, the works. Every web comic ever did a piece. It was the game everyone knew no1 bought. I dont think it had TV spots, but neither had Haze. And it made its money back.

I guess that just goes to prove you can't use a single game as evidence of any kind of correlation then doesn't it?

I agree with Jim, they really needed to showcase variety. too much of the same thing and it does get hard to tess one shooter from the next.

Sad thing is just watching the clips and aside from a couple in the clips I couldn't tell them apart.

orangeapples:
But don't forget, Assassin's Creed 3 was there. Assassin's Creed 3 was everywhere...

like we need another one of those.

Clankenbeard:
The single greatest gun-based videgame advertisement in history. The game was probably crap, but I go watch this ad every few weeks:

LOL.... oh my god that was fucking awesome!

Chairman Miaow:

Draech:

Chairman Miaow:
How much was spent on the marketing for that game compared to just about any FPS on the market I wonder? Hell, I didn't even see Enslaved in stores. I don't even remember when it came out.

it had banners, the works. Every web comic ever did a piece. It was the game everyone knew no1 bought. I dont think it had TV spots, but neither had Haze. And it made its money back.

I guess that just goes to prove you can't use a single game as evidence of any kind of correlation then doesn't it?

Well true. A small pool of testing isn't good evidence. It doesn't however mean you can deny it.

I would extend this from guns to action in general, I do love a lot of action titles but when my only choice to get away from them is to just disregard AAA all together, and even then I still mostly get simplified puzzle games. I would love to see a balanced selection of games without guns, swords, or fists.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here