• Infinity Ward: Making a new game other than Call of Duty would be "the easy way out"
    232 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Juniez;42035979]LMAO starmade: free blockade runner: you build spaceships masterspace: free scrumbleship: "Hi! I'm Dirkson. I'm trying to make the most accurate space combat simulation. Ever" MAKE: [t]http://www.vergegamestudio.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/screens_MaK_gravity2.jpg[/t] hm yes this looks like minecraft starforge: [t]http://www.starforge.com/screenshots/pic9.jpg[/t] yeap minecraft hm yes 7 days to die: [t]http://7daystodie.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/7DTD_Screenshot_05.jpg[/t] uh huh. minecraft yeap not even going to bother with the rest[/QUOTE] so because some clones are good games, or specific versions of minecraft that are still fun, makes the entire criticism worthless? that's a stupid comment. 7 days to die is a mediocre DayZ/minecraft clone. Starforge is not a minecraft clone, is in alpha, and is pretty mediocre(I own it), no idea about make(looks interesting) I mean you get the point, just because they're being made doesn't mean they're not jumping on a bandwagon, following popular trends, or what not. Sometimes things that do that end up good. Sometimes they don't. What the bloody hell are you trying to get across? that any game is a good game? or intends to be a good game?
[QUOTE=Juniez;42036012]none of those are close at all - honestly I don't know how you can say Call of Duty and Battlefield is "innovative" and turn around and call these clones[/QUOTE] because most of them are really horribly made clones maybe? Battlefield is [B]way [/B]more innovative than some shitty generic minecraft zombie game "7 days to die"
[QUOTE=J!NX;42035906]Still, I really don't see how Devs get into the mentality that they can just copycat another game and expect good results. There are exceptions, but, as fun as they can be, I guess I'll never get why they want to emulate them so badly.[/QUOTE] Looking at other games for inspiration isn't exactly copying, sure the mechanics might work out similarly, but most developers usually play with them a bit at least. Look at all the DayZ-likes out there, they all do something at least a bit different even if it is trying to cash in on the major success of DayZ itself. Most CoD-likes usually bring something sorta interesting along, as awful as Homefront was, it brought the idea of scorestreaks to the masses, something CoD now uses.
[QUOTE=milkandcooki;42035991]There are some cases of developers pulling off good games despite having little time and funding or a shitty publisher. Fallout: New Vegas and Metro Last Light come to mind. Generally I like to believe that it's up to the developer to make a good game or not, but having a lot of funding and time to develop sure as hell helps. There are good games funded by bad or dying publishers (what I listed above) and awful games by rich publishers (like sim city 5.) [editline]31st August 2013[/editline] check the last page[/QUOTE] where you ignored an argument against your argument that the current trend is totally fine? [QUOTE=HumanAbyss;42034641]it's not like those artists, programmers, and other creatives aren't ever burnt out by such practices of such short dev times. nope, this is a perfect practice of the modern gaming industry and shows just how strong it is, and just how much it values the people making those games. oh sorry that sarcasm may be a bit thin.[/QUOTE] yeah sorry I didn't see any 'better' posting
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;42036019]so because some clones are good games, or specific versions of minecraft that are still fun, makes the entire criticism worthless? that's a stupid comment. 7 days to die is a mediocre DayZ/minecraft clone. Starforge is not a minecraft clone, is in alpha, and is pretty mediocre(I own it), no idea about make(looks interesting) I mean you get the point, just because they're being made doesn't mean they're not jumping on a bandwagon, following popular trends, or what not. Sometimes things that do that end up good. Sometimes they don't. What the bloody hell are you trying to get across? that any game is a good game? or intends to be a good game?[/QUOTE] when his argument is literally 'all clones are worthless' then yes, showing successful or well received 'clones' would invalidate his criticism
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;42036019]so because some clones are good games, or specific versions of minecraft that are still fun, makes the entire criticism worthless? that's a stupid comment. 7 days to die is a mediocre DayZ/minecraft clone. Starforge is not a minecraft clone, is in alpha, and is pretty mediocre(I own it), no idea about make(looks interesting) I mean you get the point, just because they're being made doesn't mean they're not jumping on a bandwagon, following popular trends, or what not. Sometimes things that do that end up good. Sometimes they don't. What the bloody hell are you trying to get across? that any game is a good game? or intends to be a good game?[/QUOTE] the fact that some of these games are "minecraft" clones doesn't automatically make them awful games. [I]being an awful game[/I] makes them an awful game makes them an awful game. it seriously sounds like i'm in the late 90's right now with some of these arguments. "(shooter) is a doom clone! that's why it's so bad!"
[QUOTE=hexpunK;42036035]Looking at other games for inspiration isn't exactly copying, sure the mechanics might work out similarly, but most developers usually play with them a bit at least. Look at all the DayZ-likes out there, they all do something at least a bit different even if it is trying to cash in on the major success of DayZ itself. Most CoD-likes usually bring something sorta interesting along, as awful as Homefront was, it brought the idea of scorestreaks to the masses, something CoD now uses.[/QUOTE] I'm huge on being inspired by games, if I made a game, I would pretty much take Borderlands and some other games, splice them around and make something different out of it I'm more talking about being too close to the game you were inspired by. You just gotta... change it around you know? Best case is you try and spin it in a large way. [QUOTE=milkandcooki;42036047]the fact that some of these games are "minecraft" clones doesn't automatically make them awful games. [I]being an awful game[/I] makes them an awful game makes them an awful game. it seriously sounds like i'm in the late 90's right now with some of these arguments. "(shooter) is a doom clone! that's why it's so bad!"[/QUOTE] Being a clone automatically makes them a bad game but there are always exceptions
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;42036037]where you ignored an argument against your argument that the current trend is totally fine? [/QUOTE] jinx's entire argument is that developers and publishers should invest a lot more time into their games because it's [I]the right thing to do.[/I] most of his other posts are just dumb anecdotes or his own opinion toted as being a fact or "common sense." i have every right to ignore that part of his argument if he's refusing to listen to mine.
[QUOTE=Juniez;42036038]when his argument is literally 'all clones are worthless' then yes, it would invalidate his criticism[/QUOTE] that wasn't his criticism. His criticism was that you can't hope to make a game based on the foundations of another game and hope it will beat the original on it's own merits. Some of those clones are almost direct copy cat type things to minecraft, minecraft itself being a copycat of a game that came before it. Some take the foundations of minecraft and just add their little flairs. A lot of those games aren't doing amazingly. Oddly enough, it's the ones that add the most to the basic foundation they take from minecraft to do the best. They're not wholly copying, and they're not overly innovating but they're doing different. His argument wasn't against that. Please stop doing that. [editline]31st August 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=milkandcooki;42036061]jinx's entire argument is that developers and publishers should invest a lot more time into their games because it's [I]the right thing to do.[/I] most of his other posts are just dumb anecdotes or his own opinion toted as being a fact or "common sense." i have every right to ignore that part of his argument if he's refusing to listen to mine.[/QUOTE] jesus christ you're arrogant. read the reply I just, just wrote to you. The reply/argument that I had made against what you said was fine. My argument. My reply.
[QUOTE=J!NX;42036051]I'm huge on being inspired by games, if I made a game, I would pretty much take Borderlands and some other games, splice them around and make something different out of it I'm more talking about being too close to the game you were inspired by. [B]You just gotta... change it around you know?[/B] Best case is you try and spin it in a large way.[/QUOTE] no, I don't, and I would like you to explain to me why Call of Duty is not "too close" to its predeccessors, but 7 Days to Die is
[QUOTE=milkandcooki;42035991]There are some cases of developers pulling off good games despite having little time and funding or a shitty publisher. Fallout: New Vegas and Metro Last Light come to mind. Generally I like to believe that it's up to the developer to make a good game or not, but having a lot of funding and time to develop sure as hell helps. There are good games funded by bad or dying publishers (what I listed above) and awful games by rich publishers (like sim city 5.)[/QUOTE] Yeah, definitely you can make lemonade with a lot of lemons. And it's not like the publisher is the be-all, end-all of a video game's quality. But I think there's a lot of great dev teams that just might not be able to pull off what they want because of the publisher. SimCity 5 is a great example. I liked SC5, personally, but it's very clear that EA hamfisted various features in order to make sure Maxis developed a game which followed EA's general direction. It's definitely not the complex video game that SC 2k, 3k, and 4 were, and I think Maxis is guiltily aware of that. I think EA was caught with their hand in the cookie jar, but they still don't know that they did something wrong. Which is very bad. [QUOTE=J!NX;42036008]you can also end up publishing a bad game and still make a shitload of money from it, it really depends but generally games with a unique quality are made by devs that simply want to make a game, nothing more. Whether they want money or not doesn't matter, they put themselves into it. DNF is a good example of people wanting to put their heart into it but because of a lot of reasons the team is bad and the budget is bad and its just a downhill battle of "We have the worst luck in the world"[/QUOTE] Good point. There's definitely been some mediocre/shitty games that still sold very well despite their overall quality. Hitman Absolution was relatively mediocre and A:CM was a disaster, yet both made decent sales for their publishers. But yeah, I think you're right. Some of the best games on the market come from devs that really care about the experience they're creating. And very skilled devs can, to an extent, work around bad publishers. For instance, Rockstar is notorious for their hostile and overbearing treatment towards employees. Yet their dev teams constantly pull off amazing work (save for PC ports). It's always a complex situation, and there's no one factor that dictates whether a game is going to work (although there are certainly many litmus tests).
[QUOTE=milkandcooki;42036047]the fact that some of these games are "minecraft" clones doesn't automatically make them awful games. [I]being an awful game[/I] makes them an awful game makes them an awful game. it seriously sounds like i'm in the late 90's right now with some of these arguments. "(shooter) is a doom clone! that's why it's so bad!"[/QUOTE] would you fucking read please
[QUOTE=J!NX;42036051]I'm huge on being inspired by games, if I made a game, I would pretty much take Borderlands and some other games, splice them around and make something different out of it I'm more talking about being too close to the game you were inspired by. You just gotta... change it around you know? Best case is you try and spin it in a large way.[/QUOTE] there are games that change up what they were inspired by fairly well, like cubeworld, terraria, and starbound. there are also games that do this horribly, like the dozens of minecraft shooter games on steam greenlight. my point is that "clone games" aren't inherently bad and that they shouldn't be dismissed. if clone games weren't made, we'd have a lot less variety than we do now.
[QUOTE=milkandcooki;42035991]There are some cases of developers pulling off good games despite having little time and funding or a shitty publisher. Fallout: New Vegas and Metro Last Light come to mind. Generally I like to believe that it's up to the developer to make a good game or not, but having a lot of funding and time to develop sure as hell helps. There are good games funded by bad or dying publishers (what I listed above) and awful games by rich publishers (like sim city 5.) [/QUOTE] Also this is a [b]TERRIBLE[/b] argument as Obsidian lost out on a huge amount of pay because the game FNV didn't get a high enough metacritic score by one point. That's bullshit and you're saying that's fine? That game is great in the light of bad publishers, but those developers get no sympathy? You're the problem with the games industry more than people who are overly critical of it.
[QUOTE=Reimu;42036075] But I think there's a lot of great dev teams that just might not be able to pull off what they want because of the publisher. SimCity 5 is a great example. I liked SC5, personally, but it's very clear that EA hamfisted various features in order to make sure Maxis developed a game which followed EA's general direction. It's definitely not the complex video game that SC 2k, 3k, and 4 were, and I think Maxis is guiltily aware of that.[/QUOTE] that's not really the case, because the entire online social small-city junk was maxis' idea. ea definitely had a part in that, but not as big as some are making it out to be
[QUOTE=J!NX;42036051]Being a clone automatically makes them a bad game but there are always exceptions[/QUOTE] I've never really seen outright clones of games outside of personal projects and indie titles. Most AAA titles may look and feel quite similar to an existing title, but drawing on mechanics from an existing title isn't really all that bad. Maybe I'm not seeing these clones as much because the outright clones are so awful nobody buys them, therefore nobody sells them.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;42036062]that wasn't his criticism. His criticism was that you can't hope to make a game based on the foundations of another game and hope it will beat the original on it's own merits. Some of those clones are almost direct copy cat type things to minecraft, minecraft itself being a copycat of a game that came before it. Some take the foundations of minecraft and just add their little flairs. A lot of those games aren't doing amazingly. Oddly enough, it's the ones that add the most to the basic foundation they take from minecraft to do the best. They're not wholly copying, and they're not overly innovating but they're doing different. His argument wasn't against that. Please stop doing that..[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=J!NX;42035804]yes games should be what the devs make it to be but the fact is you need to try to be somewhat different to go anywhere[/QUOTE] there's a massive difference between "hope it will beat the original on its own merits" and "go anywhere"
[QUOTE=milkandcooki;42036098]that's not really the case, because the entire online social small-city junk was maxis' idea. ea definitely had a part in that, but not as big as some are making it out to be[/QUOTE] It's very clear to me that it was the corporate environment from EA itself that led to those ideas being implemented. Saying, "well, it really was Maxis's idea" is very misleading because that choice was obviously not made in a vacuum. It's very clear that there was corporate pressure to make changes to SimCity, even if Maxis still had a lot of control over other features. Still, I think that's one of the reasons why The Sims 4 is being independently handled by Maxis. EA is a huge lumbering corporation that tries too hard to stick their hands into dev work when it [b]doesn't belong[/b] at all. They seriously got burnt over SimCity 5, and I don't think they want to make the same mistake twice with their undeniably best selling franchise.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;42036091]Also this is a [b]TERRIBLE[/b] argument as Obsidian lost out on a huge amount of pay because the game FNV didn't get a high enough metacritic score by one point. That's bullshit and you're saying that's fine? That game is great in the light of bad publishers, but those developers get no sympathy? You're the problem with the games industry more than people who are overly critical of it.[/QUOTE] My entire post was about how awful THQ and Bethesda are, and that these great developers under them managed to make cool games despite the odds. How does them getting fucked because of some metacritic agreement go against that?
[QUOTE=milkandcooki;42036061]jinx's entire argument is that developers and publishers should invest a lot more time into their games because it's [I]the right thing to do.[/I] most of his other posts are just dumb anecdotes or his own opinion toted as being a fact or "common sense." i have every right to ignore that part of his argument if he's refusing to listen to mine.[/QUOTE] I only said IW should invest more time on CoD, and its not because its the right thing to do, its because if you want your game to really be out there you can't just "lol, its minecraft but its also dayz", or yeah, it IS a shitty game at least combine them in a smart way but people seem to completely misrepresent my point and act as arrogant and cocky as you are acting [QUOTE=Juniez;42036068]no, I don't, and I would like you to explain to me why Call of Duty is not "too close" to its predeccessors, but 7 Days to Die is[/QUOTE] How many times have I said there can be exceptions to a games fame? and Call of Duty is vastly way more well built than 7 days to die CoD has its own independant style and feel to it 7 days to die seems to try really hard to be a splice of dayz and minecraft CoD was made via inspiration 7 days to die was made via emulation there are also ALWAYS exceptions All I've seen from you is trying to dissect what I say and that's it, you don't actually seem to try to formulate an intelligent statement aside from questioning me. Not have you made any attempts to really actually listen. [QUOTE=milkandcooki;42036079]there are games that change up what they were inspired by fairly well, like cubeworld, terraria, and starbound. there are also games that do this horribly, like the dozens of minecraft shooter games on steam greenlight. my point is that "clone games" aren't inherently bad and that they shouldn't be dismissed. if clone games weren't made, we'd have a lot less variety than we do now.[/QUOTE] Well yeah, thats pretty much what I'm saying but in a different way outlast is directly based off of amnesia but I'm super excited for it because it changes it a lot if outlast was based in a castle however and pretty much was very close to amnesia and tried too hard to BE amnesia, then yeah, that's different [QUOTE=hexpunK;42036110]I've never really seen outright clones of games outside of personal projects and indie titles. Most AAA titles may look and feel quite similar to an existing title, but drawing on mechanics from an existing title isn't really all that bad. Maybe I'm not seeing these clones as much because the outright clones are so awful nobody buys them, therefore nobody sells them.[/QUOTE] which is fair enough, and can prove my point they're extremely rarely cared about, and only the ones that
[QUOTE=milkandcooki;42036142]My entire post was about how awful THQ and Bethesda are, and that these great developers under them managed to make cool games despite the odds. How does them getting fucked because of some metacritic agreement go against that?[/QUOTE] You're arguing that they made a good game under great pressure. Yes. They did. Those developers got fucked by their publishers. You're acting like this is a fine practice of the modern games industry. The industry is about the people in every way as much as it is about the games.
[QUOTE=J!NX;42036147] How many times have I said there can be exceptions to a games fame? and Call of Duty is vastly way more well built than 7 days to die CoD has its own independant style and feel to it 7 days to die seems to try really hard to be a splice of dayz and minecraft there are ALWAYS exceptions All I've seen from you is trying to dissect what I say and that's it, you don't actually seem to try to formulate an intelligent statement aside from questioning me. Not have you made any attempts to really actually listen. [/QUOTE] alright statement: there are so many exceptions that it may be safe to say that innovation and reception may not be very well linked at all and let's think about this for a moment : I can also point out every game that you've posted (half-life 2, avengers) and call them exceptions too. a bunch of variance and exceptions on both sides of the spectrum = low correlation
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;42036173]You're arguing that they made a good game under great pressure. Yes. They did. [b]Those developers got fucked by their publishers. You're acting like this is a fine practice of the modern games industry.[/b] The industry is about the people in every way as much as it is about the games.[/QUOTE] i'm not???? i was talking with reimu about the disconnect between publishers and devs [quote]Speaking of which, I feel like there's a massive public disconnect between publishers and developers when it comes to a shitty product. Shitty products aren't necessarily the dev's fault. Sometimes very skilled teams create a bad product because of the constraints given to them by the publisher. A bad publisher is almost always going to publish a bad video game, no matter how skilled the dev team.[/quote] more specifically, this part [quote]A bad publisher is almost always going to publish a bad video game, no matter how skilled the dev team[/quote] i was saying that last light and new vegas are exceptions to this statement.
What they should do is devote 10 people to the next COD and get the rest to come up with and execute a new game idea.
[QUOTE=milkandcooki;42036098]that's not really the case, because the entire online social small-city junk was maxis' idea. ea definitely had a part in that, but not as big as some are making it out to be[/QUOTE] MAXIS does not exist. Please stop acting like it is anything but a front of EA games. They have been outright owned for years and years. They have almost no original staff. They are staffed by many members of other EA studios. This is such a stupid fallacy it hurts. EA is maxis.
[QUOTE=Juniez;42036174]alright statement: there are so many exceptions that it may be safe to say that innovation and reception may not be very well linked at all[/QUOTE] Innovation of an idea is extremely important to reception but, Im' not disagreeing that you don't always have to "Stand out" to have an amazing amount of sales. After all, most of the games I've seen took an idea or a style from a previous game or genre and refined it, they made the idea better and added onto it, rather than simply emulating it. They tried to make something unique out of it. They innovated an idea and made it better. But sometimes, some people don't innovate an idea THAT much and do well. [QUOTE=Juniez;42036174]and let's think about this for a moment : I can also point out every game that you've posted (half-life 2, avengers) and call them exceptions too.[/QUOTE] that makes literally no sense they aren't exceptions, because they actually made something NEW and made a NEW style of gameplay. They didn't just recreate doom or another movie, they did something that made that form of media stand out. an exception would be a game that tries to very very closely replicate HL2 and despite copy catting still manages to succeed because of outside reasons
[QUOTE=milkandcooki;42036191]i'm not???? i was talking with reimu about the disconnect between publishers and devs more specifically, this part i was saying that last light and new vegas are exceptions to this statement.[/QUOTE] So what A good game can come out of bad publishers. It doesn't mean that's good, or sustainable as a practice, and games like that shouldn't be lauded about as a successes of the industry when really, they're failures.
[QUOTE=BFG9000;42036195]What they should do is devote 10 people to the next COD and get the rest to come up with and execute a new game idea.[/QUOTE] 10 working on an AAA game with a ~30 million dollar budget while the rest of the guys sit around coming up with ideas that will [I]not[/I] make nearly as much.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;42036173]You're arguing that they made a good game under great pressure. Yes. They did. Those developers got fucked by their publishers. You're acting like this is a fine practice of the modern games industry. The industry is about the people in every way as much as it is about the games.[/QUOTE] Plus, making a good game under pressure =/= this should be the standard. Realistically speaking, gamers that care about devs should spend their money on products that actively support their devs. Buying Fallout: New Vegas because of its content over its work conditions is like buying at Walmart while actively disagreeing with their anti-union practices. Gamers have a responsibility to think about the work conditions and process when they purchase a product, just like any other product. Otherwise, we vote with our money - and many of us are passively telling companies that we'll buy their product regardless of their work conditions, as long as it comes out looking decent enough.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;42036200]MAXIS does not exist. Please stop acting like it is anything but a front of EA games. They have been outright owned for years and years. They have almost no original staff. They are staffed by many members of other EA studios. This is such a stupid fallacy it hurts. EA is maxis.[/QUOTE] okay??? there's still a difference between EA [I]corporate[/I] and EA Maxis' [I]developers.[/I] how come nobody understands what a [I]developer[/I] is anymore? EA does not develop AND publish the game in the same office with the same staff.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.