Actually Too Human may be a good example of a game that some just LOVE and some really HATE. Haze was boring and just crap (okay I'm sure some people liked it...).
Games, like film, or literature will have different people attracted to different types. I enjoyed Pirates of the Caribbean for fun, though it was by no means a great game. I loved MGS4 but hated some of the long-winded preachy run-on cut scenes and the stupid "oh this a blue ray disc you don't have to swap dis...
I really think this highlights a weakness in Live. In our gamercards we have categories like "family" "recreation" "hardcore" "underground" but no levels of policing or segregation if we are online. Never mind my kids hearing the crap that constantly streams from Live (especially by drunk idiots or way too serious team players), I don't like hearing it either all the time. A few "OH s**t" or whatever won't bother me, but some of the stuff o...
Hype is good for drumming up interest but then it can really lift expectations: Alone in the Dark and Haze anyone?
How much hype is from the game publishers and how much is from the fans (eg. Killzone, Halo, Resistance, Gears etc.). I do like the games that pleasantly surprise me because they weren't too hyped.
I consider myself a fairly casual gamer even though games are one of my big hobbies: I play everything from sports to shooter to hack 'n slash. I've owned most consoles since N64. But I hardly ever touch my Wii anymore...too casual. But I'm not the best at games, I never go for the highest difficulty, I don't spend hours and hours playing every day, I'm not an online fan, and have other things in my life that are way more important. So I say I'm a casual.
Yet casual also seem...
Nice to see a positive look at games instead of the doom and gloom 'games are horrible' stuff we hear more often.
What are you saying: that if you suck at gaming then tough luck? I'd think that publishers and game devs would want as many people as possible buying and enjoying their games, regardless of their gaming skill (it's money after all).
Look at MGS4: you could play it as you liked: if you were hot stuff you could go to the highest difficulty and never kill anyone but bosses, if you sucked you could go to the lower difficulty and instead of sneaking around shoot like you were in COD4...
That's the problem with N4G: people tend to read the short blurb then comment.
I think hype is what makes us change our expectations. I liked Halo 3 but didn't think it was such a big jump. I expected more because of the hype.
If I'm expecting an upgraded Res 4 in Africa, I can live with that because I enjoyed Res 4. Sure I'd love a big jump up, but I got Resident Evil Zero, 1, 2, 3, Code Veronica and none were a big jump from each other really (PS2 and Gamecube versions).
The article makes a fair point about the noobs. Just as I think the 'hardcore' who criticised Assassin's Creed for being too accessible (I think that 'easy fluid natural' control scheme was great; it was only the lack of diverse missions that let it down) we may have the opposite here where the casuals are perplexed at the 'stop and shoot' of the RE4 type controls.
An alternative control scheme for the next gen would have been ideal, as is suggested, but that doesn't look to be ...
I remember being down when the Resident Evil remake on Gamecube stuck to the same control and camera styles as the PS versions, but once I got into it again I was fine and loved the updated graphics and cinematics.
I think Resident Evil 4 was a revolutionary change at the time, but the control scheme is definitely dated now. Resident Evil 5 could very well put some people off if it keeps the same controls, but I think the game will be excellent anyway.
I still like my PS3 for some exclusive games and for blu ray, but you wonder with Xbox's price cuts if PS3 will be a money-making enterprise eventually. The PS2 had such a windfall and was so dominant a console that the key mistakes made with PS3 may never let them recover.
I think, though it is expensive to own all 3 consoles, the competition is important to keep them improving to outdo one another. If there was a monopoly, while that would be good for our money banks (and we'...
I can barely figure out my current phone....still soon maybe our most powerful portable gaming console may also be our phone, portable MP3, and portable movie player....For now I'll stick to my PSP for portable gaming.
I've played Resistance and enjoyed it actually, but it isn't the same as this...
I sometimes think fanboys are a bit like the Nasty Nazis...they only want one way of thinking...
Wow they turn up in every thread don't they?
Turning Point was a totally different game by a totally differnt developer. The Brothers In Arms series is known to be more story-driven and less run and gun with squads etc. I don't think you can compare the two.
I mean Turning Point really wasn't even WW2.
I tend to agree, but I wonder sometimes about the fact that I'm on the one hand feeling wow war is horrible and on the other feeling good when I headshot a guy. Before games were just games and you didn't have to think too hard about killing a bunch of pixels. But if games are trying to make you think seriously about the topic, then it might change that...
Don't know...anyone else think that? Especially if games keep getting more and more 'real' looking next gen?
I guess the opposite to this would be Battlefield: Bad Company which was a light take on war.
Still there is a bit of a problem: In MGS4 for example (even though it isn't a shooter), you have lots of anti-war sentiment, but the game is to a large extent about killing...for the good guys of course, but still killing.
Can a game be about the horrors of war and still base itself on killing?
Nice to see some big titles continuing to be made in Australia!
I think COD3 let you do that. Did any other games?
Though I loved MGS4, there was too much 'watch' and not enough 'play'. When I did get to play it was fantastic.