Carmack takes aim at "snooty" indies, Condemns Call of Duty bashing - Polidicks

hey I hope you guys realise that doom was made to appeal to a large audience and make a bunch of money just like CoD is [img]http://i.imgur.com/buler.jpg[/img]

What every "cod hater" fails to understand is that cod is the next best thing ever since sliced bread. Its the thing of the season that everybody likes and wants to buy. Its the iPad/iPod/iTouch/iPhone and Activision is the Apple of gaming industry. And the 12 y olds and people who play cod are the hipsters of gaming industry (the difference being that its the opposite of being a real hipster) The other thing that these so called haters cant get in their heads is that people can have their own opinions, and said opinions arent right or wrong in this case. If they like the game, let them play the game. Its almost the same thing as if you were gay and you were enforcing people to be gay and calling them faggots because they arent . Carmack is just right. The game is good if you like it. The game isnt good if you dont like it. This is as biased as it could be. (however, the way I see it, with everything being reused AGAIN, it wont be good enough to earn my buy, besides, im broke)

The problem with CoD hate is that people expect each upcoming CoD title to be a blockbuster, one that changes the FPS scene, and of course this isn't the case. I expect an average MP-oriented FPS and it delivers.

The gamer knows what he likes and where I keep running into problems is where I only really think about PC gaming when in fact it's now a smaller percentage of the market - keep that in mind for a sec. COD and BC2 are very popular games, hell I enjoy them as much as the "360 noscope" kids that seem to dominate in them, but they are commercial games. Made by corporations that have to care about the shareholders more than the products they produce, the game developers have to work to deadlines skipping QA and details meaning the overall quality compared to games of the past is low. Older games were made by gamers themselves, people who had visions of what they wanted to see. Sure there was a company behind them but the end product was their best efforts to achieve this vision. With most games companies being big business, the only people who are making games to their vision are the Indies and the modders. Look at the credits of any recent game, see that the genuine production and vision behind is around 1/2 of the people listed, the rest are the Project management side. I can only imagine how different games would be if more people were added. But what really makes me mad is where big companies pretend to listen and "support" their customers’ ideas. Take BF3, despite what people are saying I really don't think it will be what they are claiming it to be. Especially not the "successor to BF2" kind of game I've been wishing would come out for years. Where's the mod support? Why do I have to use a terrible download system? Why does it re-use assets from BC2, which in all honest is not a true battlefield game? I know there must be people in the meetings fighting my corner, the kind of guy that will ask "why can't we add TrackIR support?" and gets shotdown because they have a deadline. If I were him I would open the door, get on the floor everybody walk the dinosaur. If you look at teams made up of modders (See Tripwire) look at the quality of product they produce, RO2 will have all of the features in a game I'm after, both the inside quality and the out of game support in terms of modding, availability and ingame content as well. Their long term free contributions to games a bonus as well. So in summary, thanks carmack for getting me riled up and taking 20 mins out of my day.

[QUOTE=DainBramageStudios;31207629]True, but that ends up diverting funds and effort away from devs who want to make something new. You can't just recycle the same formula all the time; they overstay their welcome after too many sequels are made. It sounds to me like he is denouncing innovation.[/QUOTE] but you have these same people screaming INNOVATION who want the old sonic back and rated Mario Bros Wii a 40/40

[QUOTE=Reimu;31209684]I think EA is trying too hard to make Battlefield a CoD/competition killer, instead of focusing on making a 100% solid game, tbqh.[/QUOTE] THIS. Tired of hearing about BF3 being a better game and being the cod killer and whatever, when in the end, its a case which is just as bad as cod. Everyone knows this but they prefer to hide behind the cod killing shadow made by BF3 saying that BF33 isnt linear and isnt like cod (just because it has a bunch more features then the last game and whatnot) This isnt hate. Its just stating the obvious. Hell, I wouldn't mind playing it at all, I just see too much hype over such a common looking game. Seriously, there are much better games to be released that deserve soo much more attention then these 2.

So when you buy something you automatically like it? Sure, especially because there's this preorder DLC shit trend going on when you can't even inform yourself about the game other than swallowing the publishers feature list (and I hope I won't have to tell anybody that they won't say a single negative thing about their own games). Therefore the publisher decides whether you like it or not?! Sounds good, please tell me more about what I like and what not, I want to know!

[QUOTE=Protocol7;31210530]The problem with CoD hate is that people expect each upcoming CoD title to be a blockbuster, one that changes the FPS scene, and of course this isn't the case. I expect an average MP-oriented FPS and it delivers.[/QUOTE] But with these kind of development teams and budgets, one should expect these people to churn out nothing but masterpieces. Anything less is a waste of money and time. The trick is not to give people what they want, but what they [b]need[/b]. At least development studios like Blizzard and Valve understand.

[QUOTE=dass;31210633]THIS. Tired of hearing about BF3 being a better game and being the cod killer and whatever, when in the end, its a case which is just as bad as cod.[/QUOTE] And of course, everyone is going to be disappointed because the hype can't match the product.

Honestly I agree with him 100%. I may not like call of duty, but to each their own. The incredibly pretentious indie designers are honestly annoying as fuck. I remember angry birds talking about how innovative and new it was... what the fuck? There were literally thousands of flash games made in the exact same format years before angry birds. If people want call of duty - let them have it, you don't have to play it. Doesn't mean I don't want new and interesting games, but there's no need to be smug about it.

[QUOTE=The golden;31211367]Zeus could descend from the heavens at this very second and that would still not live up to the hype created for BF3.[/QUOTE] The only thing EA could possibly do to meet the hype BF3 created is hats. It's the only way :colbert:.

[QUOTE=The golden;31209898]FP cries the blues when someone is sentenced to capital punishment by saying it's barbaric and non-civilized and praise rehabilitation. Yet if someone breaks into their house, they think they should be able to shoot the intruder dead. If you're looking for logical thought and reasoning on FP then you're looking in the wrong place. [/QUOTE] yes because fp is only one entity

does the concept of generalisations exist in finland?

[QUOTE=DainBramageStudios;31207595]So Transformers 2 is a good movie?[/QUOTE] it's not Oscar-winning material, but it's entertainment, personally I liked it because I went in expecting explosions, boobs and giant robots and it delivered, so by my terms, it's great.

Most Call of Duty games aren't that bad, the franchise is just slowly stagnating. Madden NFL 10 wasn't worst than Madden NFL 09, it was just the SAME. GOD DAMN. THING. I don't want to pay [b]sixty dollars[/b] for the same game with different makeup. CoD 4 was great because it was something new, Modern Warfare 2 had almost the exact same multiplayer with a shitty singleplayer story, Black Ops offered THE SAME MULTIPLAYER as CoD:MW2 and MW3 seems to be heading at the same direction. Watching a Micheal Bay movie is fun from time to time, but it starts to really get on my nerve when all i'm getting is just explosions and pretty again, and again, and again, and [b]again[/b]. At least battlefield is attempting to innovate, COD isn't even trying anymore.

CoD1, UO and 2 were excellent. CoD3 was great. I disliked CoD4 but I excused it because it was completely new to the series (and most other people seemed to like it). WaW sucked. MW2 was the biggest pile of dog shit I've seen. Black Ops was at WaW level (which means it sucked, but was better than MW2 at least). All three of these games were cookie-cutter. And MW2 gave me more runtime errors and CTDs than any other game I've ever played - it even did worse than Bethbryo and Quest3D (the engine Audiosurf runs on). Chances are they probably broke something in the core when they tried (and horribly failed at) putting VAC in there.

[QUOTE=lavacano;31214423]CoD3 was great.[/QUOTE] wut

I disagree. My brother was disappointed by Modern Warfare 2 and didn't think Black Ops was all that great, but he bought both games and all of the map packs for full price, and he's planning on buying the next game too. I asked him about it, and he said it wasn't because he was expecting MW3 to be any good, but because all of his friends are moving to it. I think there's a sense of completion about the whole thing- each release promises it will make the game BIGGER and BETTER and MORE COMPLETE, and people like my brother and his friends buy it because they feel everybody else is moving onto this next, big thing and they're worried they'll be left in the dust.

[QUOTE=The golden;31209898]FP cries the blues when someone is sentenced to capital punishment by saying it's barbaric and non-civilized and praise rehabilitation. Yet if someone breaks into their house, they think they should be able to shoot the intruder dead.[/QUOTE] uh that's an oversimplification of the issue and it's also completely fucking irrelevant. [quote]it's hilarious how FPers are so adamant about calling people who like alternative music, art and fashion "hipsters" but they have the exact same attitude when it comes to video games[/quote] an oversimplification as well. people on FP don't call people who are into alternative media hipsters, we call people who constantly talk about how they aren't into mainstream media hipsters. Granted there's a lot of overlap here on FP but to use that to defend carmack's statement is ad hominem and misleading.

people want more modern warfare what's so wrong about making a third game

I've never understood this hate for so-called "pretentious, elitist indie types". Fine, maybe they don't have the insight and originality that they think they have, but at least they recognize that those two things are virtues and should be sought after. I'd rather have a pretend intellectual than a genuine dumbass. [QUOTE=Mon;31224028]people want more modern warfare what's so wrong about making a third game[/QUOTE] but that's another thing, with each installment, people are getting less modern warfare, instead, the rest of it is held ransom to be bought separately(map packs, elite) on top of the 60 dollars you paid for the game in the first place. either way, the idea is stupid - games aren't a finite resource(despite the best efforts from types like EA) if you want more of a game, play said game again, and if you're bored of the game, you shouldn't be asking for more of it.

[QUOTE=LCBADs;31224406]but that's another thing, with each installment, people are getting less modern warfare, instead, the rest of it is held ransom to be bought separately(map packs, elite) on top of the 60 dollars you paid for the game in the first place. either way, the idea is stupid - games aren't a finite resource(despite the best efforts from types like EA) if you want more of a game, play said game again, and if you're bored of the game, you shouldn't be asking for more of it.[/QUOTE] don't buy it if you don't want it

[QUOTE=Mon;31224491]don't buy it if you don't want it[/QUOTE] don't you worry, I won't, though I fail to see the point of your comment.

[QUOTE=LCBADs;31224583]don't you worry, I won't, though I fail to see the point of your comment.[/QUOTE] i'm saying that you don't need to make such a big deal out of it

It's an outdated and misguided idea that popularity equals quality. I would say, in Call of Duty's case anyway, it's a mix of marketing and catering for their "fanbase" of 12 year olds, not because they are innovative or creative. Games like Call of Duty do nothing to elevate the gaming industry up to the heights of other artistic mediums, such as movies and books and whatnot, in fact it stomps it down further into the ground. If we ever want games to be taken even a little bit serious, people like Bobby "bellend" Kotick need to be stopped. And I'm not saying that Call of Duty is incapable of being entertaining, it's just so laughably mediocre and lazily put together compared to several other games. If this is fine with you; if you're fine with the industry being pulverized into some easy to digest crap-fest for loudly screaming minors, then go fuck yourself.

I've thought for awhile now that CoD gets a lot of hate because it represents change to the video game industry's focus, quality, and gameplay ideas as a whole to some people.

CoD single-handedly bumped the price of new PC games from $49.99 to $59.99. That's a good reason to hate it.

Yeah, I was just thinking a week ago how I thought $59.99 was just going to be for a little while; once 360 and PS3 were owned by a large amount of people, the price would drop back to $49.99. I miss the good days :(.

[QUOTE=Mon;31224774]i'm saying that you don't need to make such a big deal out of it[/QUOTE] I don't remember me making a big deal out of anything.

I like how in this thread it's all dumbs while in the other thread for this it's all Late and Winner ratings and one dumb rating. Then I remembered why arguing on Facepunch is futile.