Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
|
Posted - 2010.12.23 16:50:00 -
[31]
Edited by: Tippia on 23/12/2010 16:51:12
Originally by: Stitcher Is Deus Ex an option? because if it isn't, it freaking should be.
Depends how they define the decade: was it 2000û2009 or 2001û2010? If it's the former, then hell yes. If it's the latter then, hellà maybeà In that case, it's not a competitor in this case, and in the previous decade, I still say System Shock 2 beats it.
Of course, being grown from the same System Shock roots, it's no surprise that the two are so close to each other. DX certainly refined some of the ideas that weren't quite as polished in SS2. However, SS2 still knocks it out of the park with its setting, narrative andà
àSHODAN! ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki |
Lancezh
Gallente A.W.M
|
Posted - 2010.12.23 17:48:00 -
[32]
Best game of the Decade is hands down UFO - Enemy Unknown. There is NO debating about that... :P
|
Hesperius
Parsec Flux War.Pigs.
|
Posted - 2010.12.23 17:57:00 -
[33]
How uninformed is that website? I didn't see Fire Fall in the most anticipated game vote list.
|
Cipher Jones
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2010.12.23 20:23:00 -
[34]
Quote: I can't see EVE being the huge commercial success to justify this sort of statement.
Lol. Because obviously KIA is better than Lamborghini because they sell more cars.
IMHO Guild Wars was the game of the decade.
|
Nadarius Chrome
Celestial Horizon Corp.
|
Posted - 2010.12.23 21:17:00 -
[35]
Originally by: Lancezh Best game of the Decade is hands down UFO - Enemy Unknown. There is NO debating about that... :P
Just not this decade, since it was published in 1994. |
Dante Marcellus
Minmatar Belligerent Underpayed Tactical Team
|
Posted - 2010.12.23 21:49:00 -
[36]
Hey Cyaxares II, nobody is reading your hilariously long walls of text! <<<< PaxCorpus This wasn't the road home -- This was a road littered with questions that would inevitably lead to an answer. |
Neesa Corrinne
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
|
Posted - 2010.12.23 22:04:00 -
[37]
Having a "game of the decade" award is a terrible idea to even begin with. I guess if you're a company looking to sell more subs or more boxes, then it's a great thing to see your game with another title beside it.
Games, and the technology involved in creating spectacular ones, evolves so quickly that having an award that tries to pin down the best game in a TEN YEAR span is utterly ridiculous. How many votes would Anarchy Online receive right now? "Anarchy Online.. what's that??" I hear a lot of you thinking... well it was PC Gamer's best MMO of the year in 2001.
That's the story that is told every year. A new game comes out, it's awesome and everyone loves it.. then they find reasons to leave and find another game or go back to the one they left and it becomes a shriveled husk that makes just enough to be profitable as long as they fire or shuffle most of the developer staff off.
======================================
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
|
Posted - 2010.12.23 22:37:00 -
[38]
Originally by: Neesa Corrinne Having a "game of the decade" award is a terrible idea to even begin with. I guess if you're a company looking to sell more subs or more boxes, then it's a great thing to see your game with another title beside it.
Games, and the technology involved in creating spectacular ones, evolves so quickly that having an award that tries to pin down the best game in a TEN YEAR span is utterly ridiculous.
I don't knowà
That's the fun part of it: pointing out how little "tech" matters for actually making a game good. What has actually happened in terms of game (and gameplay) development over the last decade?
We got better graphics and world simulationsà yawn. Largely a non-factor. We occasionally saw some attempts at better AIà But are there any actually exceptional examples? We saw a couple of new control schemesà But that's all console stuff. Everyone started using QTEs and cover-based combatà àoh and (fake-)2D retro '80s gaming is back.
Throw away all that pointless stuff and we get a situation where games can actually be judged on how good games they are: are they balanced, challenging, fun, interesting, well-narrated, engaging, etc etc etc? ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki |
Neesa Corrinne
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
|
Posted - 2010.12.24 00:15:00 -
[39]
Originally by: Tippia
Originally by: Neesa Corrinne Having a "game of the decade" award is a terrible idea to even begin with. I guess if you're a company looking to sell more subs or more boxes, then it's a great thing to see your game with another title beside it.
Games, and the technology involved in creating spectacular ones, evolves so quickly that having an award that tries to pin down the best game in a TEN YEAR span is utterly ridiculous.
I don't knowà
That's the fun part of it: pointing out how little "tech" matters for actually making a game good. What has actually happened in terms of game (and gameplay) development over the last decade?
We got better graphics and world simulationsà yawn. Largely a non-factor. We occasionally saw some attempts at better AIà But are there any actually exceptional examples? We saw a couple of new control schemesà But that's all console stuff. Everyone started using QTEs and cover-based combatà àoh and (fake-)2D retro '80s gaming is back.
Throw away all that pointless stuff and we get a situation where games can actually be judged on how good games they are: are they balanced, challenging, fun, interesting, well-narrated, engaging, etc etc etc?
Well maybe a very few people strip games down the bare mechanics and then ask if they're fun, but for me the whole package IS the game.
Personally I base games on a few factors:
1) Graphics. If it doesn't wow me, then I probably won't last long. It can have the best mechanics in the world and technically be "fun", but if I'm staring at some anime elf all day long, then forget it, there's only so much of playing a cartoon I can take. Personally, I go for photorealism.
2) After graphics I look for open ended systems. Games that aren't one rails and that don't direct you down a predetermined path that everyone else is also on. For this reason, I can't play most of the "raiding" based games out there because I really don't want to be a cookie cutter character.
You may be an exception, but I believe that most people look for the total package too, and since that package changes radically many times in a single decade, I don't think it's fair to ANY game to start naming a game of the decade. I think game of the year awards are perfectly reasonable and representative of their peers, but lets face it.. which EVE are we voting for? Personally, I can't stand the EVE of today... if I even went and voted for the game of the decade and I voted for EVE, then I'd be voting for the Revelations era of EVE, not this EHP Drake blobfest that we have today.
What it boils down to, is that I think that tech matters a lot. You don't see too many people playing King's Quest V anymore, and that was an awesome game... in 1990. lol ======================================
|
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
|
Posted - 2010.12.24 00:29:00 -
[40]
Edited by: Tippia on 24/12/2010 00:30:26
Originally by: Neesa Corrinne You may be an exception, but I believe that most people look for the total package too, and since that package changes radically many times in a single decade, I don't think it's fair to ANY game to start naming a game of the decade.
And that's just it: I don't think the package changes radically many times per decade, and this decade certainly shows it.
At best, the surface changes. We get prettier graphics. Good graphics have never kept anything alive, exactly because it will always be outdone in six months, and yet we have games that have survived for far longer than thatà Quite often, they've done so without having (or maybe even due to not having?) spectacular graphics to begin with. What makes them survive is what's beneath that surface. ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki |
|
Lord Starfruit
|
Posted - 2010.12.24 15:57:00 -
[41]
looks like it is getting close more votes needed :)
|
Iraherag
|
Posted - 2010.12.24 20:26:00 -
[42]
Originally by: Dudeista
Commercial success as a criteria for what can make a MMO "good", as shown in any other field, is utterly wrong.
Don't fall for the "I'm a very special flower and the fact only 3% of the customers buy me merely proves how special and good I am" (See the analogy to the "Einstein was a genius. Einstein sucked at maths. I suck at maths and this must mean I'm a genius too"?) If someone sells more of his product than you do that's a pretty good indication of him doing something better (Yes, yes, everyone's out to be as altruistic as possible, I know)
Originally by: Dudeista
Wrong again. As a customer I personally expect Depth, choices, challenge and fun. WoW can't provide none of them, but what it has to offer is a world where we can't never lose anything. As an introduction MMO it may have some success. 10 years after meeting wow, players may seek for something else, like an EvE.
Use negation much? Let's see if we can translate that to something simpler, shall we?
"WoW can't provide none of them" So if "I can provide none of that" means "I don't have any of this" then "I can't provide none of that" should mean the opposite: "I have some of this". (The negation of "none" is not "all")
So what about "a world where we can't never lose anything" If "I can never lose anything" means "I always keep everything" then "I can't never lose anything" should mean the opposite: "I sometimes lose something" (The negation of "always" is not "never")
You know how they say "language is the vehicle of thought"? Based on your language here I'm somewhat concerned about your thoughts...
Originally by: Dudeista
None of the criteria you tried to impose was objective.
You don't think something like commercial success can be assessed in an objective manner? Number of sold copies, revenue, profit or number of employees are subjective things in your world?
|
Dudeista
|
Posted - 2010.12.25 04:13:00 -
[43]
Iraherag I really appreciate your attempt of trolling. English isn't my main language and hopefully your corrections would improve it. I won't start bragging about the languages I could use as the vehicle of my thoughts, I'm not that kind of guy.
Quote:
You don't think something like commercial success can be assessed in an objective manner?
Commercial success can be assessed in an objective manner but you can't deduce from commercial success what's "good" or "bad" in an objective manner. That's why they were asking for our opinion instead of checking objective facts. I doubt that you pick the films, clothes or music depending on the amount of their sales.
Products focus on specific targets. EVE and WOW don't focus on the same target of MMO players. WoW focus on the very new player providing an easy world where everyone is driven through the same standards, and where everyone is supposed to win no matter what they do (even losing BGs you win HKs). EVE focus on a more experienced target of MMO players providing a player-driven world where their decisions can lead them to the victory or failure. It's like comparing Karts and F1. There are way more people practicing Karts than F1. Is karts better than F1? |
Herping yourDerp
|
Posted - 2010.12.25 04:31:00 -
[44]
eve definatly.
wow hasnt changed since burning crusade
|
Dr Nefarius
|
Posted - 2010.12.25 11:31:00 -
[45]
Originally by: Cipher Jones
Quote: I can't see EVE being the huge commercial success to justify this sort of statement.
Lol. Because obviously KIA is better than Lamborghini because they sell more cars.
IMHO Guild Wars was the game of the decade.
Your statement would hold some relevance if the KIA cars and Lamborghinis where sold for the same ammount of money.
I have to say I somewhat agree with Cyaxares II, wow would have been the real winner of that poll. Not that I have ever played or will play that piece of crap. But my opinion that wow is crap is just that, my opinion. The opinion of the masses is for some reason that it's great.
I know a lot of eve fanboys can't accept it, but wow is a great success. The market does decide what sell and don't. That said if you think eve is the greatest mmo you should vote for it, as would I. But to say that it has some god-given right to win because of it is just hilarious.
|
Dudeista
|
Posted - 2010.12.25 12:26:00 -
[46]
Originally by: Dr Nefarius
I know a lot of eve fanboys can't accept it, but wow is a great success.
The poll isn't asking for the greatest success of the decade. Again this is a question which doesn't require an opinion, but just checking a fact. From the point of view of companies, farmville would beat wow in terms of revenue.
|
Dr Nefarius
|
Posted - 2010.12.25 14:15:00 -
[47]
Originally by: Dudeista
Originally by: Dr Nefarius
I know a lot of eve fanboys can't accept it, but wow is a great success.
The poll isn't asking for the greatest success of the decade. Again this is a question which doesn't require an opinion, but just checking a fact. From the point of view of companies, farmville would beat wow in terms of revenue.
Very well. I haven't tried farmville myself. Assumed it was free to play and they only got revenue from commercials. Even so I'm not sure they would beat wow in terms of revenue. wow has been up for 8 years or so I think. Not sure about farmville but don't think it had a huge playerbase for that long.
|
Barbelo Valentinian
Gallente The Scope
|
Posted - 2010.12.25 15:15:00 -
[48]
Of course it's EVE - WoW is an extraordinarily professional product, no doubt about it, but it caters to the lowest common denominator (which means that most of us like it somewhat, but it's not the best MMO for many of us).
I have to say though, I was somewhat torn, as City of Heroes holds a very dear place in my heart *****
"To wake up is to wake the world up" - D.E. Harding |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
|
Posted - 2010.12.27 19:47:00 -
[49]
Wth? 28 votes?
You'd think EVE players would be more in tune with the meta gameà ùùù ôIf you're not willing to fight for what you have in ≡v≡à you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.ö ù Karath Piki |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |