All Microsoft ever did was notice how popular the PS2 was, and decided they wanted in on it. If they let Sony do their console thing, and stuck to PC gaming, they'd both be better off in their respective field of expertise. And maybe they were fine in the PS3/X360 era, but nowadays, they're just locked in an epic yet pointless power struggle. I'm not saying Microsoft makes bad consoles, nor am i hating on them, far from it. I'm just saying they shouldn't have started making them. Both companies would have left eachother in peace to focus on their respective hardware, instead of you know, this: Spoiler [video=youtube;kWSIFh8ICaA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kWSIFh8ICaA[/video]
It's not the first time we've heard something like this. It was the exact same kind of situation when Sony pushed its way into the console market seeing the success of Ninendo and other competing companies at the time. In fact, we're hearing the exat same thing about OUYA as it's trying to make a name for itself on the market now. The fact that a new company sees a potential market and makes its way into it doesn't make said company any worse. From their standpoint it's just business. The fact Microsoft made its way in and actually saw enough success to become Sony's competitor just shows that whatever it is they did, they did it right. While I do agree that there is a definate power struggle between the Xbox and the Play Station, I wouldn't call it pointless, since the result of it is better consoles on both sides. I can't see any way for the contest to have made the consoles on either side any worse of a console. Business deicision s on the part of the ompanies producing the console is different from what the console is itself. That's why I made the distinction between consoles and business decisions; one of the two can be changed at any given time, which is the result we saw here. Not one of Microsoft's greatest life choices, not by a long shot. Although, it kind of feels like Microsoft was testing the waters here, trying to see how people would react more than anything else. Still, poor planning.
I would eliminate Namco Bandai, at least the individuals in charge of making games out of licensed properties. They're good with Soul Calibur and the Tales games, but they seem incapable of making an enjoyable Naruto game....One Piece game.....Dragon Ball game....
I'm willing conceed that this is my own jonesing for a decent Spyro/Crash Bandicoot game. I seem to like franchises if they're appealing enough and Xbox doesn't seem to have any I enjoy.
I'll agree with that, save Halo and Age of Empires, Microsoft Studios hasn't published much that I've enjoyed (with the exception of the Hexic arcade game). On the other hand, they've always been fair with pricing, content, and DLCs (which I've seen become free a lot of times, after the game starts to age). Certainly Microsoft is not the crowning jewel of the gaming industry, but they're at least decent.
Sony didn't push their way in seeing the success of the nintendo. They pushed their way in after nintendo screwed them over on a deal. Nintendo made their own biggest competetor.
No one! Why get rid of a gaming company? If you don't like their games just don't buy them. Also anyone who says Capcom is a a wee bit crazy considering Pheonix Wright is Capcom!!
I'm quite fond of a few of their titles, like the Ridge Racer series, Klonoa, Katamari... I miss the time when Namco wasn't, y'know, merged with Bandai though. I mean, they brought about some amazing games, some real classics... Not so many of the Newer titles really interest me so much. Anyways, if I really had to choose... it's gotta be EA for me. Oh, generic games. - - Auto Merge - - Street Fighter and Monster Hunter too. And Devil May Cry. And Mega Man. They're pretty rad.
I have a personal hatred of Sony CEO John Smedley, and his customer service reps are worse than the cable company guys on South Park! I want to see Sony leave after selling off the rights to the PlayStation to someone else. They took money I paid them subbing for Everquest and Star Wars Galaxies and raped me with it, also John's a crook who used to steal gaming engines from indy companies after head hunting their programmers.
Instead of picking a single company to leave the gaming industry how about a single group of people- CEOs and others in a decision making position who know nothing about a video game but still get to decide what is put into a game. And maybe cut AAA game budgets from the insane $28 million down to something realistically, maybe then EA and Activision won't be one bad game away from bankruptcy and actually bring back the innovation they had in the past.
True, the production of bad games has a lot more to do with the head honchos of game companies than the dev staff that actually works on the games. If you look through the history of many games' dev processes, it'll make you weep how much awesome and innovative material gets cut from games on a regular basis, all because know-nothing CEOs are the ones who are given the final say on everything (not to mention they like to set wildly unrealistic deadlines). That reminds me, Mutahar from S.O.G. said in a recent vlog that Capcom is one company that's now, as you said, one bad game away from bankruptcy. Not sure how true that is, but as poorly as Capcom has handled things recently, I wouldn't be surprised in the least. If they do go down the drain, I seriously hope someone competent acquires the Mega Man franchise. I'd like to think Nintendo could do the Blue Bomber some justice, but that's just me.
There are a few ea games i like but i would like ea to leave not all mind you just ea sports and ea sports big
Quantic Dream. Beyond: Two Souls was insulting and Heavy Rain, while not as bad, was just a bad story mixed in with bad mechanics. I don't agree with David Cage on most ideas other than video games can be a powerful story telling medium that doesn't need to rely on shooting and violence to get points across. His methods of doing that just seem to rely on shooting and violence, his writing is terrible and cliche and in the case of Beyond kind of disturbing when you think about it. He completely ignores video games for being its own unique medium and instead would rather do everything he can to imitate film, except to make branching paths (which he barely even does). I think the worst part though is that people listen to him. Snobs will hold up his games like they are some higher form of art and just simply "better" and more "unique" than other video games, despite really just being point and click adventure games (prompt hunting in Heavy Rain and white dot hunting in Beyond).
I'll agree that Beyond was mediocre, but Heavy Rain was one of the best experiences I have ever had with anything on a gaming console. It felt like an interactive movie, where every decision you made could have a negative (Or positive) outcome on things. I understand it's not for everyone, but I thought the storytelling was innovative and genius.
EA Sport (specifically) - The rest of EA has produced some half decent stuff, it's just sad that it's so expensive and commercialised. But I really could do without the FIFA and NFL hype every fluffin' year.
Zynga, The reason why you all have countless game invites on facebook and massive micro-transactions in every f2p game.
Except that for me, it was very transparent that a good number of decisions didn't matter. The writing was also mediocre, like very mediocre. Not as bad as Beyond but still riddled with plot holes, cliches, just other non-sense. I remember several instances where the game just outright would not let me carry out the decision I had made and then when watching my friend play through it, I found that a lot of choices actually had the same exact outcome. Not to stir a debate, but the idea that the storytelling was genius or innovative really bugs me. It completely ignores that interactive fiction had been around and doing this kind of stuff for a long time except better. Even non-interactive fiction games like Deus Ex basically do everything that Heavy Rain set out to do except had a better story to tell (that actually brings up the real life topic of transhumanism) as well as being more cemented in being a game instead of desperately trying to be a movie. I can actually go on all day about why I think Heavy Rain is an absolute terrible game but I just want to finish with it's not a case of me "not getting it" or "it not being my thing". I've played games like it that I have enjoyed and I've seen a lot of games better than it. I can, and have, picked the game clean and have only found a few good things to say about it. Right now its own only redeeming quality is that it's not nearly as insulting as Beyond is.
Okay, we'll just agree to disagree. ...But without Heavy Rain we'd never have gotten this masterpiece. [video=youtube;0t0uCWjQ6Og]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0t0uCWjQ6Og[/video]
