I see, you were throwing Falchion's logic back in his face. Would I be correct in guessing that you do not agree with his implied premise on what constitutes "writing"? If so, then:
Falchion wrote:And Darksiders doesn't count as writing because it's more of a comic book than an actual game. And you and I both know it.
A book isn't writing?
I think we may need to step back and define what "writing" means if this is an actual argument you wanna make.
Hercanic wrote:Every generation of games has had its share of terrible writing, along with a few gems scattered about, and every generation henceforth will follow.
Hunter_Killers wrote:It's really not even just "today". Writing has almost always been terrible
I think we’re basically agreeing here. "Today" was in reference to Falchion and Mark:
mark_009_vn wrote:Writing in general is awful nowadays.
Falchion wrote:No, the writing in gaming world these days is virtually non-existant.
Hunter_Killers wrote:Writing has almost always been terrible and gamers keep passing it off as "it's a game" or start calling everyone entitled. I find it amusing how fast everyone is to call someone entitled because they want more than the bare minimum for the core game.
In my experiences of reading online comments about various games, I've seen my share of diatribe that I'd classify as entitlement, but unfortunately this word has also become a cop-out and used as an indiscriminate weapon of verbal shaming.
For an example of what I'd call entitlement, a fan of Dragon Age 2 wrote a lengthy letter about how "gays only represent a small percentage of the population", so therefore he, being a part of the "straight male majority", was entitled to the majority of the romance options in the game. Bioware drafted this excellent response
Hunter_Killers wrote:Same goes for the Piracy/DRM witch hunt, they want their game regardless if it has computer destroying rootkits included free of charge. I won't be surprised if Ubisoft is the next to fall.
I definitely hate
subversive DRM. We all vote with our dollar, so why support the bakery that poisons its cakes? The cake sure looks
good, and I might not even know it has been tainted if I don't stay current in community news, so this is how the bakery can get by.
Platforms like Steam, however, I can get on board with because it is upfront, respectful of me as a consumer, and offers significant compensatory benefits that are a direct result of being online, such as not needing to lug around a massive binder of CDs to install my games, effortless patching, easy grouping with friends, offline option, etc. This is markedly different from, say, Diablo III, because my singleplayer experience is never affected by unrelated internet lag.
I love Stardock's stance on DRM
. They basically state that pirates don't represent lost sales, so why punish your actual customers?
The entire industry is heading in the direction to repeat history
, games are getting extremely disposable.
I doubt we'll ever see the same total drop of 97% in sales across the entire industry. Online distribution removes the limited physical shelf-space in stores that contributed to the first crash. The industry was also in its infancy back then, barely having explored its potential. Nowadays, we are much more aware of its capabilities to elicit emotion and captivate our imaginations.
With Facebook and the Wii, we've also broadened our market coverage by a significant degree. Young or old, man or woman, parent or child, there is more and more for everyone. This is extremely important for our industry's long-term viability, that it have something for everyone. It is what marks the difference between the inception of film and comic books. You need only to contrast comic books in western culture with manga in Japanese culture to see the importance of having content for diverse interests.
What we will likely see is certain sectors of our industry sag while others blossom, leading to an overall consistent health of game sales. Such recessions will, in actuality, be opportunities
for the innovative to grab success, in much the same way that Nintendo rose to prominence after the 1983 video game crash.
Hunter_Killers wrote:Majority of the developers are getting less and less about making a game that is designed to be enjoyed for years
Yes, there is an audience that values mastery, such as eSports, that should not be ignored. There is also an audience that values exploration, craving new experiences, and for them they'd rather hop across many disposable games that don't demand a monopoly on their time. WarioWare is a microcosmic example of this.
Hunter_Killers wrote:and more about how much you can gouge your players for and then go F2P because "it's where the market is going HURR HURR!" -Every MMO that went F2P ever. Like it excuses them for the suicidal decisions they made beforehand. Sort of like catering to players that just want to unlock everything and quit, never to be seen again.
On gouging: We're seeing abuses by opportunists like Zynga, who will likely burn-out a fair percentage of the Facebook crowd with their manipulative design practices.
MMOs are a tricky subject. I do think the widespread transition to F2P that companies have been practicing has affected my perception of the value of buying any MMO. Why buy TERA, for instance, if I think it'll go F2P? Guild Wars 2, on the other hand, might be okay for me to invest in because I can look to Guild Wars 1 and see it has still never gone F2P. However, Arena.NET is more the exception, and the Premium-to-F2P cycle is feeding its own necessity. As customers lose trust in their initial payment maintaining its worth, they shy away from joining premium MMOs, and so those MMOs have no choice but to go F2P to stay afloat, thereby contributing to the very problem the company faced.
Now we're seeing what appear to be pre-planned transitions, as if the premium phase is some sort of monetary booster for the company. The problem with experimenting with the market like this is that people have memories.
IskatuMesk and Archangel:
My post was directed at the mindset Falchion and Mark put forth.
Nostalgia isn't as strong of a factor for everyone, which is why I prefaced my comment. Try my point under this light: As kids, what's a cliché? Everything is new, and as we age we are exposed to less and less new
experiences. We begin to value works that surprise us.
Archangel: Of course
execution matters, I never discounted it. Talent vs. Hack is beyond the scope of my point, and could easily take several pages of text to address. We'd be getting into defining good vs. not good, and I was not trying to make that distinction in my post.