0 Members and 4 Guests are viewing this topic.
-10/20 OFF TOPIC maybe you dont understand really what happen?You compare beautiful games with the ones i said (COD, Candy Crush), you dont understand the point of what i have said. All video games are created equal. Your likes and dislikes aren't important and don't dictate what makes a "true" game, and you aren't a bigger gamer because you play old games.You compare games who was made with passion and soul, the bad games I have said are made just to make "game because they must make game" but specially to get easy money.You have no right to say what makes a "passionate and soulful" game. Do you know how much fucking work goes into creating triple A titles year after year? Do you know how many hours of sheer fucking labor get put into these things? You actually think you know whether or not these triple A game devs are passionate about their work? Oh right, you fucking DON'T. There is a different thing, between, making cheap games to get easy money and making nice games to get gamers who want some fun and usually money to help the company.There's this thing you haven't heard of -- it's called MONEY. First and foremost, video game companies are BUSINESSES. Devs aren't making games and releasing them for free for the hell of it. Every company is doing the exact same thing, whether it be King(?) with Candy Crush, or Nintendo with Mario. The only difference between these companies are how they treat public relations.Now, money stuff, it seems it starts to take over a lot of importants things like licences, videogames, moral value in videogames.Gee, maybe that's because video game companies are businesses whose sole purpose to exist is to make MONEY. And Yes, Capcom and some others companies made a lot of games like that (mario bros too) but it's was very good games for the past (8, 16, 32bits) we didnt have so much possibilities like now, and we have still a ton of good games in the past.Bull fucking shit. Yearly-released games today have just as much -- if not MORE variation per release than they did in the 80s and 90s. Besides, wouldn't it be logical to say there were more possibilities for new kinds of games years ago, more room for innovation, because of the fact that the video game market was relatively new? What do you have to say about that?Megaman wasnt a easy profit, it was just a licence who was pretty good and not cheap. They didnt have the same possibilities than now, you know, Yellow Devil.And how the fuck do you know that? If Megaman wasn't an "easy profit", how come they kept making games year after year? Seems pretty fucking lucrative to me. You have no data to back up this ridiculous claim.And now they have a lot of possibilties but they dont try to make good games because they dont want take risk, like with megaman, they prefer make only street fighter games and others things like that to be sure to win, not just money, but A LOT of money.And you know what? People keep buying them. You wanna know why? Because that's what the consumers want. For niche tastes like yours, we have indie developers.To elaborate, it's called specialization. You don't see Nintendo designing Battlefield games, and you don't see EA creating cartoon platformers. The reason behind this is that each company has something they do well, and in order to maximize profits, they stick with what's safe, they stick with what they KNOW. Big game companies do not have the job of innovating (although it CAN happen), they have the job of remaining consistent and providing a consistent product to their consumers. The job of innovation relies on indie developers -- THESE are the people who take risks in game development. Big game companies can't afford to change up their style because of the risk of losing ALL of their money, which means no more games for ungrateful people like you. And keep your insult for you, again because you dont understand the debate and the problem.No, YOU don't understand that all video games are created equally. You have ZERO respect for game devs and the companies they work for, which is absolutely fucking despicable given the fact that you call yourself a gamer. Like I said earlier, you have no room to say ANYTHING about the levels of passion found in CoD or Candy Crush developers. Your own personal bias (ie how much YOU like something) has NOTHING TO DO WITH SOMEONE ELSE'S PASSION FOR DOING SOMETHING -- THEY ARE NON SEQUITUR.Throughout this whole conversation, we could substitute video games for music, game companies for musicians/artists, call of duty for dubstep, and megaman for classic rock. Basically, by applying the same logic, you have been shitting all over someone's taste in music and the people that make it just because you don't like it.
Being passive like that wont help you to have a sens of critic.=====< Skip >=====So bikdark, you dont have any credibility and i can't take you seriously (some others people too), so yeah, i suppose it's a dead "debate", it was fun to talk english with english people like you, baaah.
I give up. Let's wait for a Rockman Xover 2 or something like that.
Well, you can have the last word, i don't care You know, i still don't like how some videogames companies ruins their licences (Xover, Sonic Boom) but i still hope for the best.
But yes, better to give up because we can't debate there without having a PERSONNAL opinion or we can look like a tyran. I like how some people there wanted the death of some mods like saxtonhale mod (or others) and defend games like candy crush or COD
I like omelettes they're really good, I ate one this morning and I was 75% in heaven.
