The Dink Network

Alot people say franchises like
-Halo
-COD
-Assasains Creed
-Mario
ect.
I will say this as along its better or just as good and its a finished product(Yes EA im looking at you) It can be still enjoyable.

A cash cow franchise will get milked for all it's worth. Gamers will not care as long as the franchise gives a good consistent series. Take Final Fantasy, it's a long runner that spans many years, and there is only one game I dislike. (ffxiii for those interested.)
Mass Effect was also another, and it was consistent and good, until the third game that pissed every gamer from here, all around the world and back.

Quit looking at EA and glare at Activision.

Mass Effect was also another, and it was consistent and good, until the third game that pissed every gamer from here, all around the world and back.

The huge outrage was fun. Good times. =) I don't think the ending itself was singularly that bad, it was just way too unsatisfying after the huge journey and plethora choices you made in all of those games. Bioware had no idea how to develop the story after the first game, really; Mass Effect 2 was just a big sidestory (the game ends exactly at the same spot Mass Effect 1 ended), and Mass Effect 3 wrapped things up with a deus ex space tampon.

I'd like to say that cash-cows like those games are a good thing because hey allow a company to fund new, experimental titles... but a lot of the big companies just use that money to pump out more sequels or "new" games that are really just a copy of another...!

Hoorah? I don't see the problem or even a reason why I should care.

I did not see you people just trash talk Mass Effect

Call of Duty is the best example, because the games never change from year to year. The story always sucks, the gameplay is always the exact same. CoD is a bland shooter that makes a shoot load of money, because people have no concept of what a good game is.

My issues with Halo is just that the Sci-Fi sucks, and I just did not enjoy playing either 1 or 3. At least the new games are being made by a different company.

I don't know much about Assassin's Creed as I only really tried the games like 2 weeks ago, and I actually really enjoyed them. I like games that give the option to be stealthy.

Mario is just one of those things that has been around forever and will never die, because he's a classic character that everyone loves. Except me. I don't really care for Mario.

Truly great games like Crysis, Prey, will always be overshadowed by these bland, boring, unoriginal cash-cows like Call of Duty and Halo. The gaming industry is a sad place sometimes.

Call of Duty is the best example, because the games never change from year to year. The story always sucks, the gameplay is always the exact same. CoD is a bland shooter that makes a shoot load of money, because people have no concept of what a good game is.
Story always sucks? No not all the time i mean maybe Black ops did it just jumped all over the place
But MW1 MW2 and MW3 Ecspecially when Soap died that was one of the saddest moments in gaming espiaclly when Price place the Colt M1911 ON Soaps chest the one who Soap receied from Price to kill Zakheav in MW1.

In my opinon the best Devolpers/Publishers are
Rockstar-
Valve-
ID-
Berthesda-
Relic-
2K-

The worst are
Naughty Dog-
EA-
Gearbox-
Activision-
Insomiac-

Don't defend CoD. Nothing is good about the games after CoD 3. They just became bland, unoriginal, shootty clones of each other. Which to be honest, the cloning started at CoD 2, but at least it was the first few games so I'm slightly more forgiving, because at the time they were original.

Rockstar - Bad - GTA is decent, otherwise meh
Valve - Good - Defined 3D FPS games, made some of the best FPS games ever (Half-Life 1 and 2, as well as Portal, a spectacular puzzle FPS)
id - Good - defined FPS games before 3d was truly 3d. Doom was amazing, though 3 was meh. Quake was great, Quake 2 being one of my personal favorite games of all time.
Bethesda - Good - Elder Scrolls. Need I say more?
Relic - No Opinion - I have no idea who the hell that is or what they've made. (I just googled them and they made games I've never played nor ever cared to try.)
2K - Meh - They published Borderlands, which was an amazing FPS RPG. Otherwise not much else.

Naughty Dog - Good - CRASH DUCKING BANDICOOT! One of the best platformer games from the late 90s on the PS1. Uncharted is pretty good, and I really want to play The Last Of Us, it looks so amazing.
EA - Good - Battlefield is a great multiplayer FPS. BF3 single player was a CoD clone but BF4 looks to be redeeming the series. But then again, BF has always been about the multiplayer. They also published Crysis, one of my favorite current gen FPS series, as well as Rock Band (I'm a musician, give me a break.) Mirror's Edge is a great first person platformer. Oh, and I can't possibly forget MASS EFFECT the best sci-fi RPG game series EVER MADE.
Gearbox - Good - They were involved in Half-Life, and created Borderlands. But they made Duke Nukem Forever.
Activision - Bad - CoD. A failure. Spyro was decent. Guitar Hero sucked after 3, and it's good that it's dead
Insomniac - No Opinion - Another developer I'm not familiar with. They came up with Spyro in the first place, and Ratchet and Clank is decently successful.

My favorite developers/publishers: Valve, id, Bethesda, Naughty Dog, Gearbox, Bioware (Mass Effect, Dragon Age), Ubisoft (Assassin's Creed)

Least Favorites: Activision

I'd put Bungie on the list of least favorites, but omfg Destiny looks so dang amazing. And I'm sure I missed a few companies for both lists.

These are my personal opinions. Feel free to bash them if you like, I give no ducks either way

Don't defend CoD. Nothing is good about the games after CoD 3. They just became bland, unoriginal, shootty clones of each other. Which to be honest, the cloning started at CoD 2, but at least it was the first few games so I'm slightly more forgiving, because at the time they were original.

After COD3? What about COD4 the one that got FPS out of the "WW2 era"

Rockstar bad? WHAT?-What about Red Dead Redemption and Max Payne 3
Naughty Dog Good?-No bloody way
EA GOOD?-HAHAHAHAHAHHAHAH!!Just watch this video
Gearbox good?-No the only half decent thing they have ever done is brother in arms its was ok but not great.

Changing the time period, or even the location doesn't suddenly make CoD any better. They change NOTHING about the gameplay. Boring, kill everything missions that never end, sometimes with using vehicles, but that adds little to the gameplay.

Some of my Good/Bad ratings may have been overly or underly harsh. It's just based on the games I've played by those companies. Red Dead Redemption is a Grand Theft Auto clone, but made to be a western, 1918 or something around that time period. I've never played Max Payne, so I don't know what those are about. I wouldn't necessarily say Rockstar is a shoot developer, but they just don't make the best games. GTA is decent and playable, but I hate having to redo 20 minutes of an entire mission because I died due to some stupid tiny mistake. I couldn't get more than half way through GTA4 because of that. And I just couldn't get very far in Red Dead because it was just all the same GTA crap. This goes back to what I said for CoD, changing the time period or location adds little to nothing to enjoyment and/or playability.

Naughty Dog. Seriously, have you never played Crash Bandicoot? That game was one of the best games in the late 90s. It was, at its core, a Mario knock off, but it was still a super fun 3D platformer. As for something more recent, like The Last of Us, it's a very story heavy, very cinematic game from what I can see, and most people love that in games because it can give the player such a close connection to the characters. Clearly, you are not one of those types of people. You're the type who just loves simple, story-less, generally uninspired games.

Gearbox was involved with HALF-LIFE. Give me a break. And Borderlands is one of the coolest FPS games made, because of all that LOOT! And it has a very unique, very interesting graphics style, and it's so fun to play with other people. And the humor of the second game was so great, so clearly inspired by Portal, that it's just so enjoyable. And what makes it even better is the skill trees for each type of character. There are so many different ways you can play each character, it's just fantastic.

I really don't have much to say for EA. They published Mass Effect. They make sports games. I really don't care.

Directed more as a response to DinkKiller than Punisher:

Rockstar: GTA's one of the best game series of the past 15 years. Especially gems such as GTA3, Vice City and San Andreas (not so much 4). And Red Dead Redemption was awesome. But they do need to invent something new soon. They're not gonna dash far by always repeating the same "sandbox-let's go kill people" -game over and over. It has worked surprisingly well thus far.

Valve: Eh, dunno. I never played Portal. But it's hugely popular so I'm willing to say they must be doing something right (that, or people are being brainwashed into liking them. Wouldn't count that out ).

Id: Made some excellent games. I haven't played any of their recent stuff, but I have serious doubts they are AS good as they were back in the day.

Bethesda: Elder Scrolls is a pretty good game series. But they really don't have much else going on that captures my interest.

Relic: What the duck is Relic?! Seriously though, I've heard of them but I can't name a single game from them. That must mean they're not that good.

2K Games: Eh, not really familiar with anything they've made. Borderlands is overrated though, so... there you go.

Naughty Dog: Awesome! Crash Bandicoot is legendary and the Jak -series is quite good too. If you ask me, Uncharted is the worst from them yet.

EA: Varies. I don't know anything about the people behind it, and what they stand for in the gaming industry, but EA has made some decent games over the years. But also many forgettable ones.

Gearbox: Half-Life? Borderlands? A big no-no! Duke Nukem Forever was pretty good though.

Activision: Would rate it quite the same as EA. They were involved with some pretty great games (such as both the PSX and movie Spider-Man -series, which are still some of my favourite superhero games). Yes, those games you mentioned, DinkKiller, suck ass, but I've never played a bad game made by Activision. You know why? Because I only play good games.

Insomniac: One of the best! The original Spyro the Dragon -trilogy is an instant PSX classic. Ratchet & Clank is the stand-in for Spyro for the PS2. Kinda like the Jak -series was for Crash Bandicoot. Only difference is, whereas Jak wasn't quite as good as Crash, R&C was all and even better than Spyro.

As for CoD, it sucks. It's not even necessary to look into them and pick the ones that suck, because they all do.

"Relic: What the duck is Relic?! Seriously though, I've heard of them but I can't name a single game from them. That must mean they're not that good."

Skull, I am very disappointed in you.
Warhammer 40k, Dawn of War? Homeworld/2?

Id's classic Ultimate Doom was awesome back in the day.

I looked into it and their games seem pretty crap. No wonder I've never heard of them. I'm disappointed in the fact that you do know those games.

Warhammer 40k is addictive.

At Skull:

I don't agree that GTA is one of the best game series. I mean, they're good games. But are they on par with things like Half-Life 2, Skyrim, and other top of the food chain games? In my opinion, not even close.

Portal is amazing, you really should try both games out. Rage, from id, which came out like 2 years ago, was really good, I've played through it a couple times and I love it. Is it as good as the old games? Probably not, but in terms of being a 3D modern game, it's really quite good.

Borderlands is overrated? Well, yes, to an extent. They're excellent games, but I have to admit they get repetitive. I've played the hell out of both games and I've gotten so bored of them that it's hard to play them again. I bought the DLCs for the second game, and I just couldn't get all the way through a single one of them. But still, I love the fusion of an RPG class system, the quirky story and characters, and the "gazillions" of guns.

I haven't played too much of Uncharted yet, (I have all 3 currently in my possession as well as my friend's PS3,) but it's not too bad of a game. Probably not Naughty Dog's best, but I still need to play more of it. I really want to try the Last of Us at some point, but I'm not gonna buy a game for a console I don't own myself, so it'll have to wait until I can get it on PS4 probably.

Duke Nukem Forever was good? In a way. It wasn't terrible, I'd say it's underrated, but it wasn't spectacular. The game was just dated. It didn't quite have the awesomeness of Duke Nukem 3D. And I hated only having 2 weapons at any given time, that was just so....not Duke Nukem. What kind of ultimate badass is limited to carrying only TWO weapons? And those vehicles. Bleh. The monster truck was okay, but it was just so not Duke Nukem.

I'm just going to add that I'm a pretty harsh critic when it comes to gaming. When a game is good, I really get into it and play the crap out of it. If a game sucks, or I find a bunch of little things I really don't like about it, I stop playing and never touch it again. For example, I tried out Final Fantasy 7 recently and...(Flame Shield Engaged,) I did not like it. The way the graphics were, how the world you wander around in was laid out, just turned me off of the game so fast. I never thought that I'd dislike FF7 considering I'd heard such great things about it. And that's actually happened to a couple other games I've played too. Highly praised games that I could care less about.

Yes, I'd say San Andreas is one of the best games ever made. Half-Life and Skyrim don't even come close.

I never had the intention to get Portal. It never "grabbed" me, and I'd rather put my money on something that does. I've watched playthroughs of it though, and I can see why people like it. But it's one of those games (like a lot of games these days), which I think would work much better as a movie. The second one especially. Id was good back in the day, because it was innovative. But not really these days anymore.

Don't think Uncharted looks horrible, just the worst from Naughty Dog yet. The Last of Us seems to again suffer from the "would work better as a movie" syndrome. Almost kind of like my Goblin D-Mod. Yes, I am actually comparing my D-Mod, and a game from Naughty Dog. They both seem to be dominated by way too many cutscenes.

Duke Nukem Forever was good, yes. It wasn't excellent, nor even VERY good. Just good. The reason being that it WAS still Duke Nukem, and a game that's been anticipated for 15 years. Kind of like the movie "The Last Stand". Wasn't an excellent movie, but was worth seeing just because Schwarzenegger was in it. Same thing with DNF. Wasn't an excellent game, but was good just because it was Duke Nukem. Although I miss the old style of gameplay, but you can't really expect them to go back to that. I think it was the most non-generic FPS game to come around in a while. The fact that I even bought it shows that, because I pretty much despise FPS games.

I'm pretty critical too, but you seem to be critical on all the games that I think are excellent. Now that you mentioned FF7, yeah, I don't really like it either. It's very off-putting to me, for some reason. But when you say a game series like GTA isn't good, I get the feeling that you gotta be shootting me. Really, San Andreas is the best-selling game for PS2! Of course, that doesn't always mean it's a good game, but in this case, it surprisingly does. Although I would still not rate it quite the best PS2 game.

EDIT: Also, this post probably has lotta spelling/grammar errors. I'm not exactly best at writing in the middle of the night.

I prefer Saints Row over GTA. Though I can't say I'm a big fan of either.

I like IO Interactive(Hitman series), Valve(Half-Life 2), Rockstar(Vice City, San Andreas, Innerloop Studios(IGI 1 & 2), Square(Final Fantasy 7, 8 & 10) and JoWood(Neighbours From Hell).
Funny, I'd had heard the worst things about FF7 before I played it. Af first, I hated it. Then, I grew to love it.

I ghost posted by accident, lol.

I didn't say GTA wasn't good. I do like the games for what they are. At least to some extent. I just don't see them as the greatest games ever. As for best selling, what does that matter? Do you see how many copies of CoD sell? Those games are terrible and they sell more copies than pretty much any other game.

A lot of things some of these games do couldn't possibly fit within a two hour movie. This isn't the best example, but all the things they left out of the Harry Potter movies compared to the books. It just couldn't all be done within a 2-2 1/2 hour time constraint. Some of these games stories take 30+ hours to be told, and a lot of them are just wonderful experiences. In a video game, if it's done right, you can get so involved in the characters, who they are, what they've done, what they do. That's why Mass Effect 3's original ending was so polarizing, because people LOVED Shepard, his crew. They wanted to see it come to a more defined end.

The Last of Us is the same way. It tells the story in such a way that you connect with the characters, and feel emotionally attached to them. These kinds of things just can't be done in a movie.

Duke Nukem Forever was a clone of basically every popular shooter that exists today. Which was the point. But the two weapon thing taken from Halo was just so dumb. Duke Nukem should be able to use what ever weapon he wants, whenever he wants. I don't see how it was still Duke Nukem. His "catchy" one liners were dated, the gunplay was meh. Non-Generic? It ripped off literally everything. I think that makes it generic.

And I'm making it seem like I absolutely hate Duke Nukem in general. I don't. I loved 3D, and I enjoyed DNF to an extent for what it was. A poke at every popular FPS game. But I definitely regret getting it right after it came out. It wasn't worth my $60, because it just wasn't good enough.

Changing the time period, or even the location doesn't suddenly make CoD any better. They change NOTHING about the gameplay. Boring, kill everything missions that never end, sometimes with using vehicles, but that adds little to the gameplay.

It did at trust me at time where the market was flooded with games everyone including me saw it as breath of fresh air
ome of my Good/Bad ratings may have been overly or underly harsh. It's just based on the games I've played by those companies. Red Dead Redemption is a Grand Auto clone, but made to be a western, 1918 or something around that time period. I've never played , so I don't know what those are about. I wouldn't necessarily say is a shoot , but they just don't make the best games. GTA is decent and playable, but I hate having to redo 20 minutes of an entire mission because I died due to some stupid tiny mistake. I couldn't get more than half way through GTA4 because of that. And I just couldn't get very far in Red Dead because it was just all the same GTA crap. This goes back to what I said for CoD, changing the time period or location adds little to nothing to enjoyment and/or playability.

WRONG the game mecahinics were very different then GTA for example when you ride a horse the the end of a large cliff the horse will try to pull itself away for from the cliff for the most part.In GTA with a car no such thing.
aughty Dog. Seriously, have you never played Crash Bandicoot? That game was one of the best games in the late 90s. It was, at its core, a knock off, but it was still a super fun 3D platformer. As for something more recent, like The Last of Us, it's a very story heavy, very cinematic game from what I can see, and most people love that in games because it can give the player such a close connection to the characters. Clearly, you are not one of those types of people. You're the type who just loves simple, story-less, generally uninspired games.
NO NO NO now you are just putting words in my mouth I like inspired games like Fable:The Lost Chapters one of my favorite games of all time and one other thing the last of us sucks ive played at JB HI FI it was on display it was pretty much a cutscene shootfest.
was involved with HALF-LIFE. Give me a break. And Borderlands is one of the coolest FPS games made, because of all that LOOT! And it has a very unique, very interesting graphics style, and it's so fun to play with other people. And the humor of the second game was so great, so clearly inspired by Portal, that it's just so enjoyable. And what makes it even better is the skill trees for each type of character. There are so many different ways you can play each character, it's just fantastic.

Be that as it may, CoD MW1 was still just a clone of the 3 games that came before it. It had the exact same style of gunplay and mission structure. It may have been shinier and in a different era, but it was still the same shootty game at its core.

Red Dead would obviously have minor mechanic differences from GTA with horses and stuff, being a western and all. But with the difference in time period aside, it was the same basic thing as Grand Theft Auto. Same mission structure. Same gunplay. Minor differences to fit with the time period, like a horseshoes mini game I remember playing once. At it's bare bones, it was a wild west Grand Theft Auto. Just with cowboys instead of gangsters.

The Last of Us is a very story driven, very emotional kind of game. Sure, there are people who don't like that. They prefer intense, non-stop action. Those people play CoD. The rest of us enjoy experiencing a piece of art. To gain a connection with fictitious characters. To feel truly involved in the characters actions and how it changes the game world. We like truly unique games that don't just rip off other games, or worse, themselves. We prefer being engaged in the game world, knowing what's going on, and why certain things happen. Story is everything in gaming these days. Blindly killing everything is boring, and is a shootty game. That's why games like Mass Effect, The Last of Us, are so successful. They deliver a good, unique experience, that can't possibly be matched by something so simple and lame as CoD.

Yes, I truly hate Call of Duty. I will never stop bashing it and calling it shoot. I want to bash its brains out until it finally dies, because it really needs to die in a hole. It has overstayed its welcome for far too long.

Be that as it may, CoD MW1 was still just a clone of the 3 games that came before it. It had the exact same style of gunplay and mission structure. It may have been shinier and in a different era, but it was still the same shootty game at its core.
No nor true either will admit it hasnt changed much since COD4 but COD4 did help change Instead of fighting other countries you fight an Ultranationalist faction in Russia Helping the Loyalists to stop Zakheav
Im not saying COD is great or anything just very overated but its still 100x better then duke nukem forever.
You keep saying it hanst changed COD2 COD2 and COD4 are quite different by the way.

Red Dead would obviously have minor mechanic differences from GTA with horses and stuff, being a western and all. But with the difference in time period aside, it was the same basic thing as Grand Theft Auto. Same mission structure. Same gunplay. Minor differences to fit with the time period, like a horseshoes mini game I remember playing once. At it's bare bones, it was a wild west Grand Theft Auto. Just with cowboys instead of gangsters.
Minor? NO WRONG AGIAN its actually pretty major difference the biggest simialrities between RDR and GTA is they are both open world and they are devloped by Rockstar.
The Last of Us is a very story driven, very emotional kind of game. Sure, there are people who don't like that. They prefer intense, non-stop action. Those people play CoD. The rest of us enjoy experiencing a piece of art. To gain a connection with fictitious characters. To feel truly involved in the characters actions and how it changes the game world. We like truly unique games that don't just rip off other games, or worse, themselves. We prefer being engaged in the game world, knowing what's going on, and why certain things happen. Story is everything in gaming these days. Blindly killing everything is boring, and is a shootty game. That's why games like Mass Effect, The Last of Us, are so successful. They deliver a good, unique experience, that can't possibly be matched by something so simple and lame as CoD.
The Last of Us isnt as original as you may think its pretty much children of men/The walking dead knock off.
Ive played and i still hate Naughty Dog along with EA and little bit of Activsion.
Valve ID Rockstar Relic and Berthesda are 100x better then naughty dog.

No nor true either will admit it hasnt changed much since COD4 but COD4 did help change Instead of fighting other countries you fight an Ultranationalist faction in Russia Helping the Loyalists to stop Zakheav
Im not saying COD is great or anything just very overated but its still 100x better then duke nukem forever.
You keep saying it hanst changed COD2 COD2 and COD4 are quite different by the way.

Changing the faction of the enemy, when they still shoot at you in the same way, doesn't mean the game is better. I've played almost every CoD game, so my opinion comes from experience. Even though there was a major jump between CoD2 and CoD4 MW, the gameplay was still the same. As I've already said, new location doesn't change anything. And Duke Nukem Forever is a terrible example. It's almost universally agreed to be mediocre at best. It just didn't live up to the name. But TBH I liked it more than any CoD game. CoD = overrated, DNF = underrated, but mostly deserved.

Minor? NO WRONG AGIAN its actually pretty major difference the biggest simialrities between RDR and GTA is they are both open world and they are devloped by Rockstar.

Again, I've played both games so I speak from experience. At their core, THEY'RE THE SAME GAME. YES, they have differences because one takes place in the 2000s and the other in the 1910s. Mini games in each game are entirely different, and themes of the missions are obviously different. But the CORE CONCEPT of each game is the SAME. Different paint, same result. And because both games are made by Rockstar, that increases the amount of similarities between the games, and more got copied and pasted between them.

The Last of Us isnt as original as you may think its pretty much children of men/The walking dead knock off.

Post-apocalyptic Zombie-ish game. So yes, it's similar to Walking Dead, but it's nothing alike. You should play the entire game before you judge it. It's a story based game about tragic events and two characters finding a way to connect through all the shoot that's going down. Yes, it has similar themes, but with how many zombie related things out in video games and TV, it's difficult to make something 100% unique. Post-apocalypse is a common game setting, and it's been overdone, but a lot of those games are truly great. The Last of Us is one of those. Besides, it's more about connecting with the characters and the story, than the setting. The setting helps set the mood to help bring those connections to life.

But I think my logic and reason goes to waste on you. You seem to forego all logic and reason, so I don't know why I'm even bothering to waste my time.

changing the faction of the enemy, when they still shoot at you in the same way, doesn't mean the game is better.
Have you seen how the Japanses react in WOW they pretty much Banzai charge you very different then the Russians Ultranationalts so they dont shoot/react the same.
gain, I've played both games so I speak from experience. At their core, THEY'RE THE SAME GAME. YES, they have differences because one takes place in the 2000s and the other in the 1910s. Mini games in each game are entirely different, and themes of the missions are obviously different. But the CORE CONCEPT of each game is the SAME. Different paint, same result. And because both games are made by Rockstar, that increases the amount of similarities between the games, and more got copied and pasted between them.

No the AI react very diffrently like i said with the horse instead of a car its not just a cosmetic difference the longer you will use the horse more loyality you its allowing it to use more Staminia and if you tap it too hard the horse Knock you off and like i said before they try to avoid cliffs very different game meachnics.

Yes, MINOR changes based on a different location/time period. Little things like that will happen when you involve horses versus cars, japanese versus germans. Little differences based on different characteristics of real people, animals, or vehicles involved in the game. But at their core, nothing is truly different. You still have to shoot them while not getting shot. Minor differences in an overall simple pattern, requiring minimal strategic differences.

But you're still completely missing my point. The CORE of the game, the bare bones, the most basic controls and functions of the games ARE THE SAME. GTA and RDR both are action/adventure games with gun based combat, third person point of view, long ass missions that you have to completely start over if you die, among many other very similar mechanics shared between both games.

Yes, MINOR changes based on a different location/time period. Little things like that will happen when you involve horses versus cars, japanese versus germans
Germans arnt in COD4
But you're still completely missing my point. The CORE of the game, the bare bones, the most basic controls and functions of the games ARE THE SAME. GTA and RDR both are action/adventure games with gun based combat, third person point of view, long ass missions that you have to completely start over if you die, among many other very similar mechanics shared between both games.

Well in that case EVERY SINGLE game is pretty much the same you need to use the controller/mouse to play and its based on pixels not real life.

I was making general comparisons, not stating what was or wasn't in a certain game. You missed my point.

As for your second statement, I was generalizing again, and once again, you completely missed my points. Basically, what you said is that there is zero difference between a FPS, RPG, platformer, or a fighting game. Obviously every game is different, but GTA and RDR share so many mechanics that they're essentially the same game, with a slightly different experience/slightly different way to play.

I have no desire to continue discussing something that such a small mind cannot comprehend. Logic is a waste. Be glad you're not Vulcan.

I didn't say GTA wasn't good. I do like the games for what they are. At least to some extent. I just don't see them as the greatest games ever. As for best selling, what does that matter? Do you see how many copies of CoD sell? Those games are terrible and they sell more copies than pretty much any other game.

Did you even read what I wrote? I said best-selling doesn't mean it's a good game, but surprisingly in GTA's case, it does.

A lot of things some of these games do couldn't possibly fit within a two hour movie. This isn't the best example, but all the things they left out of the Harry Potter movies compared to the books. It just couldn't all be done within a 2-2 1/2 hour time constraint. Some of these games stories take 30+ hours to be told, and a lot of them are just wonderful experiences. In a video game, if it's done right, you can get so involved in the characters, who they are, what they've done, what they do. That's why Mass Effect 3's original ending was so polarizing, because people LOVED Shepard, his crew. They wanted to see it come to a more defined end.

Eh, I disagree with you. Making a movie out of these games wouldn't be problematic because of not managing to fit everything in. I'd say it's problematic trying to get the movie actually filled. A game like Portal, how are you possibly gonna get a 2-3 hour movie out of that game?! I don't see it happening.

The Last of Us is the same way. It tells the story in such a way that you connect with the characters, and feel emotionally attached to them. These kinds of things just can't be done in a movie.

I have no trouble connecting with characters in movies, thank you. Nor in video games. But the game and the characters have to be especially well-made to get that connection. The Last of Us is just a typical game with typical characters I've seen in at least 20 other games (probably tons more).

Besides, I'm wondering how it even is possible for people to get "emotionally connected" to these characters with such short games? I need to play a game for months to get emotionally connected to the characters. These 3-hour long games these days aren't cutting it for me. You barely get to know the character-mechanisms during that time.

Duke Nukem Forever was a clone of basically every popular shooter that exists today. Which was the point. But the two weapon thing taken from Halo was just so dumb. Duke Nukem should be able to use what ever weapon he wants, whenever he wants. I don't see how it was still Duke Nukem. His "catchy" one liners were dated, the gunplay was meh. Non-Generic? It ripped off literally everything. I think that makes it generic.

Maybe it used a lot of the same elements as a lot of FPS's these days do. But it still had lots of unique stuff in it, I felt. Besides, it has the words "Duke" & "Nukem" in the title. That alone makes it better than any FPS from the last decade.

This thread... So many deranged opinions... what is this

As for your second statement, I was generalizing again, and once again, you completely missed my points. Basically, what you said is that there is zero difference between a FPS, RPG, platformer, or a fighting game. Obviously every game is different, but GTA and RDR share so many mechanics that they're essentially the same game, with a slightly different experience/slightly different way to play.
No i was implining what you said becasue you were talking about the "BARE BONES" of each game
I have no desire to continue discussing something that such a small mind cannot comprehend. Logic is a waste. Be glad you're not Vulcan.
Do not insult me you little b#stard i was trying to explain my point and you resulted into insulting me.

Congradulations you are now on my enemy list.

Congradulations you are now on my enemy list.

Well, there's a big ducking surprise.

I bet he kisses that DN Enemy List hanging above his bed every night before he goes to sleep.

At skull: I'm more talking about the longer games. Mass Effect 3 was a 30+ hour game. I think the Last of Us is in the same ball park. With how in depth some of those games get, a 2 hour movie couldn't possibly do them justice. And in those 30 hours, the game has a good amount of time to bring out characters and develop a connection between them and the player. People enjoy well made characters, which is why Mass Effect is so great.

As for a game like Portal, I don't think a movie could do it justice either. It's a puzzle game. The fun is in figuring everything out for the first time. A movie would just suck.

At punisher: I just laugh at you. I don't care what you think of me or that you hate me, because we all hate you too, and I now know why. So good luck with that childish list of yours.

Well hello guys, I don't want to get too much into this argument but there are a few things I'd like to say, mostly regarding Final Fantasy and a bit regarding my DMOD.

I love Final Fantasy 7 although there are other FF games I much prefer. Why do I love it? Well it's true, the graphics, at least outside of battle are pretty terrible. The animations in battle take way too long to complete, causing boredom. Because the game is old, you don't have the up close and personal style cut-scenes that you get in newer games like Uncharted, which means more imagination is necessary to enjoy the story. The main character can be a whiny she dog sometimes. But like all games, you get what you put in: if you play for only 5 or so hours, you can't expect to be totally invested in the characters, because the most important parts of the plot haven't even happened yet, nor has the game's style had time to grow on you. In game-systems like the awesome materia system allowing you to do amazing things late game have hardly had time to develop. Playing through to the end results in a very good story and development for a lot of characters that is actually quite top-notch and unheard of most games, and gameplay that is actually quite satisfying, with your characters being able to kick some major ass at your discretion, able to do things like counter an enemy attack 6 times in a row if you so please. Not to mention that the music is still quite beautiful today, even with the ps1's sound font. But in 5 hours, none of this has time to grow on you. Because of this, people can have a hard time getting into these types of games.

As an example to how games like this can deceive you, I've seen a couple of hours of uncharted be played (close to the beginning), and if I based my whole opinion on that game based on those couple of hours I would say it's a terribly boring cut-scene fest with no real development or intrigue and boring characters that just get in the way and a story I don't give a crap about. Is that actually true when considering the whole game: I seriously doubt it. The truth is it probably just needs more time for the story to unfold to grasp my interest, and then I would actually begin to enjoy the game.

I'd also like to point out that FF9 fixes (or at least alleviates) most of the biggest flaws present in FF7, along with having even better story/characters. Still PS1 though so there is of course no Uncharted style cut-scenes. It's possible that someone like Dinkkiller may enjoy it more. (it's my favorite FF of all time, although I'm hoping 15 coming out will surpass it)

Finally, I'd like to mention that for the DMOD I am working on, story will be a very important factor, and I hope that doesn't put a bad taste in people's mouth. Exploring and treasure hunting will be paramount as ever, and fights (at least bosses) should be fun. Anyways, I will do my best to make the story grab players at all stages, and not be a "cut-scene fest". Unlike Final Fantasy 7, I have the advantage of adding on to a story we have all already grown on (however simple it is) which will go a long way to making my job easier. I guess I'll find out how I did when I finally get far enough into development to beta test (I will make a topic for it before then). That will of course be quite some time still...

Oh, and as for the original topic...

As long as the game still feels fun and fresh, I don't mind too much about it getting milked, although I hate it when stories won't end like with Kingdom Hearts right now. But games like Mario I don't mind because as long as the games continue to be enjoyable they are doing their job. At least the games aren't all clones like CoD or *gasp* EA sports games.

By the way, nice topic this time ThePunisher, I've enjoyed reading all of your responses.

edit: well, except for the angry responses and some insulting... but eh still nice topic overall.

At skull: I'm more talking about the longer games. Mass Effect 3 was a 30+ hour game. I think the Last of Us is in the same ball park. With how in depth some of those games get, a 2 hour movie couldn't possibly do them justice. And in those 30 hours, the game has a good amount of time to bring out characters and develop a connection between them and the player. People enjoy well made characters, which is why Mass Effect is so great.

Eh, really? Well-made characters? Well, maybe somewhat good by today's video game standards, but not really. I'm also clueless how anyone could manage to spend 30 hours in getting through one of these games. Last game that was supposed to be 25-30 hours, which I played a few years years ago, I beat in 12 (in one sitting, I might add), so there you go. My favourite game takes about 40 hours to beat for 100%, and that one has interesting characters, nice story and good gameplay. 30 hours is nice, if you'd have all the same elements and if it really DID take 30 hours to beat, but I find a lot of games lenghts are exaggerated these days.

I played at least 4 playthroughs of Mass Effect 3, the shortest was around 20 hours (the renegade playthrough, helping no one, just rushing through the main story) and the longest was nearly 40 (doing all side missions, enjoying the depth to the story.) And if you add all the DLC expansions, that adds another 10+ hours to the game, and the DLCs are great as well.

I say the characters are good because they all have their own unique characteristics and personalities, and this is well portrayed by the voice actors and the writing. This is part of why I love Mass Effect so much.

At punisher: I just laugh at you. I don't care what you think of me or that you hate me, because we all hate you too, and I now know why. So good luck with that childish list of yours.

Childish? Ill tell you whats childish your attitude and understanding of a video game.

I think you need to look in a mirror.

I admit, I'm very critical when it comes to games, and I analyze everything in the game, sometimes probably too much. Mechanics, story, how similar it is to other games. Sometimes it's hard for me to get past preconcieved notions about a game which makes it hard for me to enjoy a game. Sometimes they just piss me off and I refuse to continue playing them. With Halo, I hated it before I played it, and I was never able to enjoy it to it's potential. Halo isn't a terrible series, but I just can't like it.

My opinions are based on what the game actually is, how fun it is, how boring it is, how unique they are. I vocalize my opinions, sometimes more harshly or forcefully than intended, but I listen to other people's opinions, and if needed, I provide a reasoned counter-argument. And they reason back. I tried to have a reasoned conversation with you in this thread for a while, but you just wouldn't allow it, and it just started to piss me off. You reject everyone else's opinions and force yours on us. You think you're right, that it's not possible for you to ever be wrong, and everyone else is wrong. Tell me that's not childish. (And to clarify, I'm not just refering to this thread, but every thread you post in/create.)

But you won't because that's just who you are. You act the same way I did back when I first joined here, if not worse. You act like a 13 year old, self-important, arrogant, little piece of shoot. And that's exactly what you are. Prove me wrong, I dare you. You need to be put in your place and grow the duck up.

In my opinion, Mass Effect 3 had the best endings. It was wonderful and the extended cut made it even better. Hardcore CoD gamefags can't understand and whines on it.

You think you're right, that it's not possible for you to ever be wrong, and everyone else is wrong
I never said im always right now your are just putting words in mouth
I will tell you a time that I was wrong i was wrong to Think Skull and KrisKnox could change THERE I JUST TOLD A TIME THAT I WAS WRONG.
Unlike you i can admit when im wrong and right you just think your are always right.
But you won't because that's just who you are. You act the same way I did back when I first joined here, if not worse. You act like a 13 year old, self-important, arrogant, little piece of shoot. And that's exactly what you are. Prove me wrong, I dare you. You need to be put in your place and grow the duck up.

HEY! i wasnt the one who started insulting others just because they had a different opinion NOW! right there that is very childish.

People don't change just because you demand them to or shove your bullshoot down their throat. I admit that I'm wrong all the time. I make mistakes. I'm human. You're a self-centered, arrogant prick. The world doesn't revolve around you. You know nothing. You CAN'T admit you're wrong, that other people have valid opinions. I insult you because you refuse to acknowledge an opinion that differs from yours in any way imaginable. Even if it's 99.99999% the same as yours, you would bash it and insult it, and then attempt to shove yours in that persons face. You need to back down and recognize that there are other human beings with minds of their own, who have their own ideas about whatever. If you don't your life is going to be sad and empty.

Childish: Putting the name of a person on a "list" because they talk back to you or degrade you in even the slightest way, and then you forever hate them.

You need to suck it up and not be offended every time someone says something mean or otherwise hurtful to you. Brush it off, insult them back, and laugh with them about it. Don't ducking take it personally. Be a ducking adult, not a child. Seriously. I'm done.

YEAH! DO YOU EVEN LIFT PUNISHER? LET'S FIGHT YOU SOAB, I'LL KICK YOUR FACE IN!!

You know nothing. You CAN'T admit you're wrong
Did you even read my dam post you bloody idiot?
Even if it's 99.99999% the same as yours, you would bash it and insult it, and then attempt to shove yours in that persons face. You need to back down and recognize that there are other human beings with minds of their own, who have their own ideas about whatever. If you don't your life is going to be sad and empty.
You were the who insulted me first dont act like you never did.
I insult you because you refuse to acknowledge an opinion that differs from yours in any way imaginable.
I do acknowledge it and i respect other peoples opinions i just dont agree, you on the other hand dont respect other peoples opinions by calling them "Small minded" and acting like a little arrogant "Einstein".
Childish: Putting the name of a person on a "list" because they talk back to you or degrade you in even the slightest way, and then you forever hate them.

I only hate people who desereved to be hated for example you.
You need to suck it up and not be offended every time someone says something mean or otherwise hurtful to you. Brush it off, insult them back, and laugh with them about it. Don't ducking take it personally. Be a ducking adult, not a child. Seriously. I'm done.

Listen i do not like being insulted by you or Kris or Skull or anybody insulting others just becasue they dont agree with you is childish we were having a reasonable conversations until you insulted me.

"we were having a reasonable conversations"

Therein lies your overall problem, you need to reevaluate the definition of a reasonable conversation and possibly review how your previous conversations have caused such heated reactions and responses. Until you can successfully accomplish this you're going to find people responding aggressively still.

This is not an insult, this is constructive criticism: Pointing out the flaw in a reasonable manner and offering steps to resolve it, and I'm writing this out of the kindness of my pre-morning coffee drinking wake up call.

Write up your response how you see fit; Should you fail to comprehend what has just been said, I will be able to point out any further flaws and offer more solutions to your methods of conversation. After that you're on your own, however, as I'm off to make that coffee..

And yet another thread has turned into a personal argument. I just want to know, does this happen regularly ?

Yes. Well, on threads that ThePunisher visits it does, at least. We've been unfortunate enough to get a bunch of idiots like him in the past few years, who've really played into this site's downfall.

Us others might be debating about stuff here and there too, but that stuff isn't really personal.

@ExDeathevn
I said we WERE having a reasonalbe conversation until that DinkKiller started to insult me and be mean

@Skull
Yes. Well, on threads that ThePunisher visits it does, at least. We've been unfortunate enough to get a bunch of idiots like him in the past few years, who've really played into this site's downfall.

(Post from skull in i hate bacteria thread)
I wouldn't call him unintelligent either. He actually puts a lot of thought behind his ideas
Well its now official Skull has full blown amnesia

Ugh. Back to the subject. AC wasn't milked. It was ruined when AC2 was released. As for CoD, what do you expect from world war shooting games. As for Half Life, that was milked. They should have never made the sequel(s).

Well its now official Skull has full blown amnesia

"Bunch of idiots like you".

Didn't actually call you an idiot there anywhere. Although I am willing to change my opinions about people, so take it however you want.

It's because of crap like this thread that I never bother with the DN anymore. Or at least, a lot less than I used to.

Didn't actually call you an idiot there anywhere. Although I am willing to change my opinions about people, so take it however you want.

You did dont try to act like you didnt.
You were trying to use me as an example of a idiot.

I said the idiots were like you. Not that you were like the idiots.

I said the idiots were like you. Not that you were like the idiots

That dosent make any god dam sense Do you have split personalitties either that or severe amnesia.

Haha, this guy.

I think the time has come...