Karutomaru: There's no such thing as competition in making games. There are only other companies making their own games. And I said game system. Not a brief experiment that is not regarded as a game system.
What planet do you live on? Of course there's competition! Well OK then if you don't consider the Pippin a console the Atari Jaguar; that didn't sell so gaming is now a failure.
Karutomaru: There's no such thing as competition in making games. There are only other companies making their own games. And I said game system. Not a brief experiment that is not regarded as a game system.
What planet do you live on? Of course there's competition! Well OK then if you don't consider the Pippin a console the Atari Jaguar; that didn't sell so gaming is now a failure.
I think he is trolling... Competition is like essentially for any business.
Karutomaru: There's no such thing as competition in making games. There are only other companies making their own games. And I said game system. Not a brief experiment that is not regarded as a game system.
What planet do you live on? Of course there's competition! Well OK then if you don't consider the Pippin a console the Atari Jaguar; that didn't sell so gaming is now a failure.
I think he is trolling... Competition is like essentially for any business.
I don't think he is as he says it a lot. I know it's probably a lost cause but I'm hoping if it's explained to him enough it might actually sink in.
Karutomaru: If you can name at least 3 genuinely excellent high-quality Wii games Ubisoft has ever made, I might reconsider my stance.
I can't name 3 excellent Wii games made by any company, doesn't mean every company who ever made a Wii game has never made other games which are great.
Which is an important distinction by the way. Ubisoft Montreal made some of the best games of the last two console generations. None of the Wii games (to my knowledge anyway) were handled by that team. So while Ubisoft the publisher may do some stupid things and release some shitty games as an attempt for some quick cash, they are hardly alone, and that really had nothing to do with Ubisoft Montreal who was happy making great games the whole while.
I made a vow after my Rayman Origins review that I would never say a single positive thing about Ubisoft ever again.
I see, so your statements aren't based on things like facts or evidence, but rather some sort of irrational hatred of Ubisoft. Good to know.
Nothing to see here folks.
Karutomaru: That they allow that garbage is bad enough for their reputation. A good company makes good games and scraps the low-quality ones. Like Capcom and Nintendo.
Ha, I have to give you credit, that is the funniest statement I've seen in quite a while. I'd love to know what what strength the rose tinting on those fanboy glasses has to be to make anyone think that Nintendo and Capcom only release quality titles, or give two shits about their customers.
Can we ignore Karutomaru within this thread? I Hate Ubisoft isn't the topic of this thread it's world-building vs game design, a topic I find to be a lot more fun then another hater thread.
I lean in the favor of game design over a believable world, a believable world doesn't work well when I'm going around killing a dozen trained warriors at once, unless the game's character is meant to be some super being which is sometimes the case but not with Assassins Creed and many other games.
Karutomaru: In order for gaming to thrive, all systems must.
LOLWUT? Someone doesn't understand competition. By this logic gaming is a failure because the Apple Pippin was a flop.
Karutomaru: If Ubisoft were a good company, I'd be able to single out any system they've made games for and list at least 3 great games to come from them. I laugh at the ridiculousness of actually doing that.
Again by this logic pretty much every game developer ever is bad. Name 3 good Nintendo games on Virtual Boy. Go on.
I never had a virtual boy, so I can't personally vouch for any of them, but Wario Land and Mario Tennis both got their start on that system, so there's two good games right there. I'm almost positive that at least one of the other Nintendo made games would have been good. But then again, this is Nintendo we're talking about; if a system has three first party Nintendo games, it will have at least three great games.
As for Ubisoft: they have a history of making games that are at the very least good. Their business practices may be terrible, but it's not fair to tar their games with the same brush. That would be like hating Star Wars because it's distributed by Fox.
Karutomaru: In order for gaming to thrive, all systems must.
LOLWUT? Someone doesn't understand competition. By this logic gaming is a failure because the Apple Pippin was a flop.
Karutomaru: If Ubisoft were a good company, I'd be able to single out any system they've made games for and list at least 3 great games to come from them. I laugh at the ridiculousness of actually doing that.
Again by this logic pretty much every game developer ever is bad. Name 3 good Nintendo games on Virtual Boy. Go on.
I never had a virtual boy, so I can't personally vouch for any of them, but Wario Land and Mario Tennis both got their start on that system, so there's two good games right there. I'm almost positive that at least one of the other Nintendo made games would have been good. But then again, this is Nintendo we're talking about; if a system has three first party Nintendo games, it will have at least three great games.
As for Ubisoft: they have a history of making games that are at the very least good. Their business practices may be terrible, but it's not fair to tar their games with the same brush. That would be like hating Star Wars because it's distributed by Fox.
It's a moot point anyway. He said that unless you can name three good games from a company on every system they've made games for they're a bad company. I think you'll agree that that's ridiculous.
Karutomaru: In order for gaming to thrive, all systems must.
LOLWUT? Someone doesn't understand competition. By this logic gaming is a failure because the Apple Pippin was a flop.
Karutomaru: If Ubisoft were a good company, I'd be able to single out any system they've made games for and list at least 3 great games to come from them. I laugh at the ridiculousness of actually doing that.
Again by this logic pretty much every game developer ever is bad. Name 3 good Nintendo games on Virtual Boy. Go on.
Just ignore him, in the end he will say something offensive and get banned, that's how these things always ends.
OT: I like it when the game is shaped after the player, it makes the world awhole lot more fun. There are several ways of immersion, and I can get lost wihtin a game by seeing myself as the person controlling an avatar, not being the character itself.
Karutomaru: Sales mean nothing. The satisfaction of the customer is everything. Ubisoft doesn't know the meaning of the words "satisfied customer." If you can name at least 3 genuinely excellent high-quality Wii games Ubisoft has ever made, I might reconsider my stance. Probably not though. I made a vow after my Rayman Origins review that I would never say a single positive thing about Ubisoft ever again.
And no. Just Dance is shovelware, Red Steel 2 is mediocre, and Rayman Origins is nothing special.
ya bro, thanks for letting us know your opinion it more important than hundreds of thousands that buy the so called crap games by you. ubisoft should just cater to your whims and forget about making any sort of profit whatsoever.
In order for gaming to thrive, all systems must. If Ubisoft were a good company, I'd be able to single out any system they've made games for and list at least 3 great games to come from them. I laugh at the ridiculousness of actually doing that.
So would you point me towards the library of Nintendo games on the PC? Or the 360? At least show me the Nintendo games on the PS3.
To your list: 1: Driver San Francisco. 2: Rayman Raving Rabbits 3: Rayman: Origins
DRIVER SAN FRANCISCO?! Are you kidding me?!?!?! The Wii version of Driver has been slammed into the ground! Nintendo Power's review probably said it best. It's like the kind of garbage you expect from Ubisoft.
Karutomaru: There's no such thing as competition in making games. There are only other companies making their own games.
Skyrim vs. Amalur CoD. vs Battlefield 3 vs. Halo Any MMO vs. WoW
It's marketing.
And I said game system. Not a brief experiment that is not regarded as a game system.
Well by that logic, you aren't talking about the Wii at all. OH HO, SICK BURN. Really, the Wii is just an awful shovelware platform that Ubisoft is only a small part of. Nintendo's awfulsauce 3rd party support and willingness to sign off on all these awfulsauce games is just an indication of their dedication to moneygrubbing without concern for quality. The Wii has 1220 games. Name 10 Wii exclusives that are objectively good with an 85% or better on metacritic. GLHF.
Karutomaru: A good company makes good games. Like Capcom
I have not disagreed with anything so fiercely in the last few weeks as I do now.
Pretty much everything he says about games will do that to you. I think another corker was "The Wii has the best games of this generation".
OT: I did always find the poster thing weird - surely the bigger challenge would be in making people tell guards if they saw you ripping them down at street level? But other then that, I find there's a degree of leniency to which I automatically default. I do think that Assassin's Creed's cities are at their best when you just walk through the streets for a little while.
If I had a bigger problem with AC in that regard I think it'd be the incredibly game-y HUD which fills the whole screen - you can switch it off but a lot of it is kinda necessary.
Unsilenced: I like trying to think of canon reasons for hand-holding measures.
A friend and I came up with what we call "The Looter's Guild," which lays out guidelines for treasure discernment and monster placement. Related is the "Assassin's Architectural Union," which ensures that all buildings have at least one climbable route up them.
Ha, now that's hilarious. Just think of the poor farmer who has to keep haycarts stocked near every single tower.
"Darn Assassins and their jumping"
Elmoth: I agree completely with this article. It's the difference between Fallout 3 and New Vegas.
That might explain why I actually finished New Vegas.
It's a moot point anyway. He said that unless you can name three good games from a company on every system they've made games for they're a bad company. I think you'll agree that that's ridiculous.
OT: I did always find the poster thing weird - surely the bigger challenge would be in making people tell guards if they saw you ripping them down at street level? But other then that, I find there's a degree of leniency to which I automatically default. I do think that Assassin's Creed's cities are at their best when you just walk through the streets for a little while.
If I had a bigger problem with AC in that regard I think it'd be the incredibly game-y HUD which fills the whole screen - you can switch it off but a lot of it is kinda necessary.
Or the part where it keeps breaking down the gameworld in flashes of white light and reassembles it in front of you? I can see how that might bother some. Personally, I still found walking through the streets a bit bizarre whenever the hive mind of the game shone through, like when people start piling up in one place and start shoving each other for no reason. I've actually had an allied soldier stab another other this, it's like you're trapped in a nightmare world where murder is a commonly accepted form of greeting.
On a more general note, it's interesting to see here that it seems we have an almost even split between people who prefer elegant rules and mechanics and those who favor a detailed world.
Do you guys figure this is always a matter of compromise or is it possible to fuse the two perfectly? Which game did best at combining both?
Or the part where it keeps breaking down the gameworld in flashes of white light and reassembles it in front of you? I can see how that might bother some.
Never did it for me - I mean, it brings you out of it, but it's supposed to. Depends on how much any given person likes that side of the fiction; I know some hate it vehemently, I've always quite liked it.
Well, I did. AssCreedRev just seemed to go off the rails.
Karutomaru: There's no such thing as competition in making games. There are only other companies making their own games.
Skyrim vs. Amalur CoD. vs Battlefield 3 vs. Halo Any MMO vs. WoW
It's marketing.
No, it's fan debates over which one they prefer and support. You must also not forget King of Fighters vs. Street Fighter, Sengoku Basara vs. Samurai Warriors, and Dead Rising vs. Dead Island. I wouldn't call that competition. The fighters, however, are all about competition.
Or the part where it keeps breaking down the gameworld in flashes of white light and reassembles it in front of you? I can see how that might bother some.
Never did it for me - I mean, it brings you out of it, but it's supposed to. Depends on how much any given person likes that side of the fiction; I know some hate it vehemently, I've always quite liked it.
Well, I did. AssCreedRev just seemed to go off the rails.
Yeah, it's generally not a problem that they remind you it's supposed to be a simulation of 15th century Italy. The fact that it tends to be a bad simulation in many areas is a bit worse.
Karutomaru: There's no such thing as competition in making games. There are only other companies making their own games.
Skyrim vs. Amalur CoD. vs Battlefield 3 vs. Halo Any MMO vs. WoW
It's marketing.
No, it's fan debates over which one they prefer and support. You must also not forget King of Fighters vs. Street Fighter, Sengoku Basara vs. Samurai Warriors, and Dead Rising vs. Dead Island. I wouldn't call that competition. The fighters, however, are all about competition.
I am sorry... But those games are in direct competition with each other. ESPECIALLY... Call of Duty vs Battlefield, you can't get a better example. The two publishers are literally enemies against each other and it's almost the origin of it.
MW3 and BF3, both Modern Shooters and both released near each other on PURPOSE. BF3 could have released earlier or before, but it released a week or so before MW3 because it knew it could grab sales from MW3 and make people stop playing CoD.
Competition is business 101, I don't think you understand that, competition is essential.
Karutomaru: There's no such thing as competition in making games. There are only other companies making their own games. And I said game system. Not a brief experiment that is not regarded as a game system.
Oh dear
You've gotta just be trolling now, this makes no sense.
Ubisoft makes fun games, they have bad ones too but so do all companies. But you saying capcom is better then ubisoft is just... no words.
No, Ubisoft makes bad games and little else, and unlike other companies with their honest mistakes, Ubisoft tries to rip people off with garbage ON PURPOSE. Capcom on the other hand, established my motto of "There is no such thing as a bad Capcom game." Capcom's games are always fun, always of the utmost quality, and they handle their franchises with the love they deserve.
Skyrim vs. Amalur CoD. vs Battlefield 3 vs. Halo Any MMO vs. WoW
It's marketing.
No, it's fan debates over which one they prefer and support. You must also not forget King of Fighters vs. Street Fighter, Sengoku Basara vs. Samurai Warriors, and Dead Rising vs. Dead Island. I wouldn't call that competition. The fighters, however, are all about competition.
I am sorry... But those games are in direct competition with each other. ESPECIALLY... Call of Duty vs Battlefield, you can't get a better example. The two publishers are literally enemies against each other and it's almost the origin of it.
MW3 and BF3, both Modern Shooters and both released near each other on PURPOSE. BF3 could have released earlier or before, but it released a week or so before MW3 because it knew it could grab sales from MW3 and make people stop playing CoD.
Competition is business 101, I don't think you understand that, competition is essential.
They released the two games near each other so that gamers could enjoy a first person shooter with more choices, and possibly buy the other so that they could decide which one they like more themselves.
No, it's fan debates over which one they prefer and support. You must also not forget King of Fighters vs. Street Fighter, Sengoku Basara vs. Samurai Warriors, and Dead Rising vs. Dead Island. I wouldn't call that competition. The fighters, however, are all about competition.
I am sorry... But those games are in direct competition with each other. ESPECIALLY... Call of Duty vs Battlefield, you can't get a better example. The two publishers are literally enemies against each other and it's almost the origin of it.
MW3 and BF3, both Modern Shooters and both released near each other on PURPOSE. BF3 could have released earlier or before, but it released a week or so before MW3 because it knew it could grab sales from MW3 and make people stop playing CoD.
Competition is business 101, I don't think you understand that, competition is essential.
They released the two games near each other so that gamers could enjoy a first person shooter with more choices, and possibly buy the other so that they could decide which one they like more themselves.
Do you honestly believe that..?
Really?
EA and Activision mud slapped each other when the games were being developed. They couldn't give a fuck what the consumer thought, they released them close together because they hoped BF3 would steal MW3 sales. NOTHING MORE.
I agree with you Deadpan.. I loved games like the early RES games, I loved Ookamii, I loved Psyconauts.. Never really was a fan of the Ass-creed games.. I'm more of a puzzle game, adventure game, and RPG fan myself..
Karutomaru: They're just being silly. Probably for publicity. Making games isn't a competition.
It amuses me that you exist.
OT: There's a fine point to these sorts of things. I think there's a crucial difference between expecting the player to figure something out for himself and just flat-out forgetting to tell him about it. The problem with the sword skill in Risen is, I think, an example of the latter, because it makes it remarkably easy to render hours of progress moot.
Hal10k: I think there's a crucial difference between expecting the player to figure something out for himself and just flat-out forgetting to tell him about it. The problem with the sword skill in Risen is, I think, an example of the latter, because it makes it remarkably easy to render hours of progress moot.
Care to go into detail? I'm not exactly sure how the lack of introduction has retroactively ruined your progress.
The thing is, Piranha Bytes isn't exactly new in the business, so the assumption that they simply don't know better strikes me as a bit curious. I'll take that as an explanation for their combat systems, seeing how they have never managed to create one that is past functional, but I doubt they don't know that other games tend to introduce certain things they don't.
It's a bit like claiming the only reason Nintendo doesn't produce first person shooters right now is because nobody told them they are kind of popular. They probably know.
Karutomaru: There is the X-Box 360, PS3, PSP, Nintendo DS, and the Nintendo 3DS. But those have nothing to do with the topic at hand.
Honestly, I'm curious now. What do you think is the topic at hand here? Because this isn't the place to complain about Ubisoft and I'd take it as a kindness if you stopped forcing this argument in here.
To be on topic, I'm not sure I understand what you mean Lunatic. There are two parts to your post, gameplay vs story segregation and immersion and difficulty in general.
For difficulty, I do have this problem. I view games from a Knox's mystery perspective, the challenges should be solve-able via pre-existing information and hints. No game should force a player to restart and prepare for a certain point.
To be on topic, I'm not sure I understand what you mean Lunatic. There are two parts to your post, gameplay vs story segregation and immersion and difficulty in general.
For difficulty, I do have this problem. I view games from a Knox's mystery perspective, the challenges should be solve-able via pre-existing information and hints. No game should force a player to restart and prepare for a certain point.
Oh, I'm sure there's more than just those two areas. Generally my question is whether you prefer an elegant game, even if it comes at the price of immersion, or a detailed and immersive world, that does not necessarily stick to the rules of game design.
Your point, for instance
No game should force a player to restart and prepare for a certain point.
That's a bad thing for a game to do, but then the idea that you're always prepared for a challenge when you get there can be a bit weird, like the conveniently placed rocket launcher ammo right before boss fights.
Though that's not as weird as the poster placement thing or the hive mind that is Oblivion's City Watch.
Karutomaru: No, Ubisoft makes bad games and little else, and unlike other companies with their honest mistakes, Ubisoft tries to rip people off with garbage ON PURPOSE. Capcom on the other hand, established my motto of "There is no such thing as a bad Capcom game." Capcom's games are always fun, always of the utmost quality, and they handle their franchises with the love they deserve.
Yeah, because Capcom never released games with broken gameplay balance, on-disc DLC, or killed fan favourite games in development because the fans weren't doing enough of the design work.
Karutomaru: No, Ubisoft makes bad games and little else, and unlike other companies with their honest mistakes, Ubisoft tries to rip people off with garbage ON PURPOSE. Capcom on the other hand, established my motto of "There is no such thing as a bad Capcom game." Capcom's games are always fun, always of the utmost quality, and they handle their franchises with the love they deserve.
Yeah, because Capcom never released games with broken gameplay balance, on-disc DLC, or killed fan favourite games in development because the fans weren't doing enough of the design work.
Squidbulb: Back on topic people. I'll accept a game being unrealistic if it makes the game better. I don't care how realistic the game is if it isn't any fun.
This, "realism" in games has been taken too far.
I mean, people on Skyrim forums get worked up about there being no toilets in the game or the fact that they don't have to eat and drink to survive.
Arbitrary conditions are not fun, its faff and padding.
What planet do you live on? Of course there's competition! Well OK then if you don't consider the Pippin a console the Atari Jaguar; that didn't sell so gaming is now a failure.