Verno wrote on May 31, 2012, 10:18:
Nonsense, as someone who has accounts on most gaming enthusiast sites over the years, the internet in general has a lot of differing opinions and it's always been that way. People who are negative tend to be more vocal and people looking to rant about opinions they don't like tend to only focus on the negative anyway. Doom 3 wasn't very well liked in general on the forums I frequented back then either, it was an incredibly divisive game. Very few people were middle of the road, it was a love or hate thing, as many if not most internet discussions have always been.
Beamer wrote on May 31, 2012, 07:28:
Dude, just search this board for "doom" and look back to 2004 - people hated it just as much then, so stop with this "the cool thing to do is to hate it." That's almost as bad as "all the kiddies hate it" or "people like stuff dumbed down so they hate Doom 3."
It's a bad game. The people you talked to at the time liked a bad game. That happens sometimes.
Beamer wrote on May 31, 2012, 00:34:
Also, I still haven't played many games without texture pop-in (or, actually, any FPS that I can think of), nor does it matter much to me as it only happens within the first 15 seconds of a level loading. I see it as an issue, but not a big one. Would people prefer it loads levels 15 seconds longer? Or do you guys get it when you turn, like in Rage when it first launched? I've never seen texture caching issues in UE3 after the first few seconds of a level. Or, really, in anything but Rage.
Prez wrote on May 29, 2012, 23:14:
Everyone needs to be reminded that prior to the complete edition none of the Dragon Age Origins DLC was obtainable through Steam yet it remained on Steam throughout; given that their stated reason for pulling some of their games off of Steam is demonstrably false, I think it's safe to say EA is, as usual, full of shit.
Verno wrote on May 28, 2012, 09:23:
So yes, new console hardware will help alleviate the current situation but no, the high end hardware market is far from insignificant as there is much more than raw unit sales to consider. Most high end hardware stays that way a year at most before moving into the larger market at better prices anyway.
Prez wrote on May 27, 2012, 06:56:
Even extremely affordable mid-range graphics cards have the ability to render incredible images. Batman Arkham City looks fantastic on my 560ti, and it costs a about a quarter of a Geforce 690 card. You don't have to be the owner of a high end card to still be all about the eye candy.
Shataan wrote on May 26, 2012, 17:41:
Try convincing all the peeps who are buying new 680 GTXs, or the new 690s. We don`t upgrade to play games with crap visuals.
Jerykk wrote on May 25, 2012, 04:42:Your argument is made laughable when you insert your opinion as fact. For people who like that style of game, which is a ton of people, Modern Warfare is of tremendously high quality. Similar games like Medal of Honor or Breach are much worse, and sell much worse.
Medal of Honor was much worse? Really? I heard it was pretty much the same as CoD, which was its biggest problem. But if you actually enjoy pseudo-realistic military shooters with completely linear and scripted single-player campaigns, I'm pretty sure you'll enjoy MoH. Hell, if MoH was called Call of Duty: Modern Honor, it would have sold about as much as any other CoD game. Not that it sold badly or anything. 5 million units is hardly a poor showing.
Let's not fool ourselves here. CoD sells because it has CoD in the title. Just like Diablo 3 sold because it was called Diablo 3. There are better games in each of those genres but quality isn't what sells games. Hype and marketing is what sells games. If quality sold games, then every good game ever made would sell well but as history can attest to, that's not the case.
Verno wrote on May 24, 2012, 11:12:
I must have missed that news release, when was DA2 considered profitable? Or is that just an assumption because it had a shorter dev cycle? Also I think it remains to be seen just how strong the Mass Effect franchise is. Mass Effect 3 sold really well but it was the end to the trilogy and the ending was almost universally panned by both critics and fans alike.
I think Bioware as a traditional RPG studio is definitely done like dinner.
wtf_man wrote on May 24, 2012, 10:04:
In other words... EA has already started putting this game into "slum-lord mode". We saw how well that worked for Warhammer. If that $300 milllion investment number is true (not to mention what it's cost to launch and manage the game for the last 5 months) , EA seems to be cutting their losses early, on a game that underperformed BADLY (compared to investment). Meaning, they probably don't have faith that it can be turned around either, and they are seeking the easiest path to get most of their money back. (by cutting Staff and milking what they got until it's dead - just like Warhammer).
wtf_man wrote on May 23, 2012, 09:38:
How many more failures Bioware has left before they get the same treatment, I don't know... but I can't imagine they have wiggle room for too many more.
InBlack wrote on May 23, 2012, 09:57:
Ok, let me take a crack at your post here. Bullshit. See I know that word too.
Case in point? Every single Modern Warfare game since the first one. A game doesnt have to be good to sell well, it needs to be average at worst and have an expensive marketing campaign.
I dont see bad word of mouth slowing down Diablo3's sales even though its the weakest game in the series (story and atmosphere wise) and the horrific launch problems (which still continue), despite Blizzard giving refunds (amazing right?) and despite the delayed features (pvp, real money auctionhouse).
Sorry to burst your bubble bro, but quality is a dying charateristic in this industry, its sad but its true.
Cutter wrote on May 23, 2012, 05:48:
People can ignore a one-off failure, but when it starts to develop into a pattern as it is with BiowarEA then people aren't so quick to jump on-board and part with their hard-earned cash. You also have to rememember that you're talking about ever expanding budgets whilst their sales decline. And that's how the beginning of the end starts. You can bet the suits at EA are taking a long, hard look at Bioware right now trying to figure out what to do exactly.
InBlack wrote on May 23, 2012, 07:30:
Im guessing that the 'real' XCOM game is the real reason for the delay.
Management Fail is what I call it, anything other than a remake of the original was/is bound to fail. Oldschoolers will shun it for its heresy, and newschoolers are clueless as to what the fuck its supposed to be anyway.