Day 2, and i'd say so far it's been a fair success! ^_^ Good Day. I felt like whipping up a good old fashioned Topic of the Day thread. I'll change the discussion topic listed every day, so discussion will remain fresh. TOPIC OF 03/10/2011: The War in Iraq, what should be done? (Oh boy this'll be a doozy) Specific Rules of this Thread: Sensible Discussion only please. Anybody/pony can post their opinion, as long as it contains no intendingly harmful or insulting comments. Please try and base your opinion off of fact, not rumour. Keep it clean. Have Fun, if this proves popular i'll keep it running *sips tea*
Seriously though, i think the General Chat thread will overshadow this anyway since it's already more popular, and it's virtually the same thing. But i'll give it a chance at least ON TOPIC: Yearly sequels can be good sometimes, but too many sequels *cough*DevilMayCry*cough* can get boring... One good example is definetly InFamous 2.
InFamous 2 was great fun, and did really well. I guess it's based on how much effort a dev team puts into a game, and how much said game can be improved upon.
Well, the Assassin's Creed series has been doing that lately. First it was AC2, then Brotherhood, and now Revalations. The first two were fantastic, and I have a good feeling for Revalations! It's better than other yearly releases *cough* Madden *cough*
It makes me sad that there likely won't be an InFamous 3 considering the end of InFamous 2... Spoiler: InFamous 2 spoilers Unless they find some ridiculous way to keep the story going, like the Conduits didn't actually die but just ended up in coma for a while? It would ruin the story if they try something like that for the sake of another sequel...
Yearly sequels bother me. I see no reason that a game should be forced out in a year to follow the popularity of the first game. While some have been good, others fail. If the idea is solid enough and you can improve upon the original. Then by all means do it in a year. Great squeals can not be forced, look at sports games. They never improve anything other then the minor stuff and rosters.
I don't even like sports games... i mean what's the point of those? Go out and do real sports if you like sports. That's the whole freakin point of sports.
The bad ending could have a sequel but I don't want that. As for the other ending that you're talking about, I'll just say this..... SPOILERS: the lightning bolt hit the boat....hmmm....
I think I know how they will make a sequel. I'll post it when I wake up though. I'm tired and should have been asleep hours ago.
InFamous 2 had an awesome ending, but it deserves to be a trilogy. And i hope it receives the honor of making a live action movie with high-class actors and awesome special effects... I just hope that IF they manage to make another sequel, they don't go and ruin the story.
some yearly sequels such as Gears of War, are good in that they continue the story line. One game that is sort of out of whack with its sequels is Halo,which made sense in the first three because they followed the same basic story line. However when ODST and Reach came out I think Bungie went off course a little, dont get me wrong both were good games in their own right it just seems that going back in time to the fall of Reach and changing the perspective to an ODST gets off the path a little bit. Now the issue is will this so called Halo 4 be any good since Bungie has handed the project over to another company entirely, to me its just too much.
forgot to mention that Dawn of War has had pretty good yearly releases. Note: I play mainly third-first person shooters and RTS's only as they appeal to me.
I think that games should not be rushed in order to be released on a certain deadline. They should be released after however long it takes to make them. Before Fallout:NV was released, I was active on the Bethesda forums for a short time. A member started a poll thread that asked "Would you wait another "X" months for New Vegas to be released to give them extra time to fine tune and debug the game, or can you not wait and want it released now, with the bugs? " I said I'd wait. However long it took, so that when I finally got it, that it was as close to perfect as possible. Many did not share my view however.
Just think about Ocarina of Time. It took them nearly 7 years to develop and release it. And it was one of the best games ever made. EVER.
As a hilarious comparison, Duke Nukem Forever took twice as long to make.....it wasn't that well liked....
Duke Nukem, was made with the intention of making it as high-end as possible... The reason for the long wait was that they kept remaking it in a futile effort to release it as said above. Then, the original team stopped making it. And another group just walked over, finished whatever wasn't complete in the game, and then released it. ...so, it would be expected, to be on the same boat as shovelware. While we're on the subject of games, if I could direct your attention to this page: http://ps3.ign.com/articles/119/1194778p1.html
