I agree with what you are saying. However, there is a difference between creating a game, movie, book, etc. and plagiarizing content from other sources and putting an afro on Goku and it being a popular public domain picture. But that's beside the point.
The issue I have is that Flappy Bird in ANY way was a good thing for the industry. What does it say about the mobile market that a boring, creatively bankrupt game with no real interesting gameplay save a skinner-box ment...
Sadly what you're saying is true; however, this article only names one Xbox One exclusive so I feel like it's kind of weak.
Titanfall looks really cool. No doubt Microsoft will spend a ton of marketing money to make it a huge hit.
The author says Flappy Bird is an honest game because it's free; but how is a game that blatantly steals assets honest? It's a clone, but that's rampant these days so it's almost acceptable.
I think the emerging mobile market is really, really bad for the industry. Sadly, it's only getting more popular.
If you want a filet for dinner but it's too expensive you can still buy a skirt steak. It's still a steak, right!
The fact is anybody who has a next gen system is going to want it to take advantage of the enormous power difference. Sure, you could make the argument that it's only $30 digital but A) you then lose all resale value and B) a lot of people still prefer physical copies.
But regardless of that, it's the precedent that's being set...
I get what you are trying to say, but if you look at Sony's history they buy studios and help those studios flourish by making what they want. If you look at Nintendo's approach, they focus on reinvention of existing IP's. Meanwhile, Microsoft has previously focused on iterating on previous IP's (they say they are changing this).
So Sony buying a studio isn't to keep a game off a competitor's platform, but to try to get a talented studio to make new IP...
The studios I'd like Sony to get that seems reasonable:
Ready at Dawn
Quantic Dream
Housemarque
Giant Sparrow
ThatGameCompany
From Software
I could probably think of some more, but those six all seem possible. If The Order 1886 does as well as Sony hopes, I fully expect them to try to buy RAD.
Next week is all about Danganronpa: Trigger Happy Havoc.
Games like this and Warframe are perfect launch games. Right now all of my close friends have PS4's, but there aren't many great games out there to play together. I'm not a huge multiplayer fan, and a couple of them don't have the time/cash to buy anything they want. The great thing is, there are free games to play together. Maybe not the best games ever, by a longshot, but until a game comes out that we all really get into (hopefully Destiny) we have a few options and I think...
Their main focus should be creating the best multiplayer possible.
That is a scary concept o.0
I wouldn't be surprised.
Well that's simple. Iwata and Nintendo are only satisfying a small segment of the most fervent Nintendo enthusiast while Sony is satisfying a fairly large segment of gamers in general. The former is perceived to have a negative future, while the latter looks positive.
Note: That does not mean that Nintendo can't have great games on the Wii U, they have and will. That doesn't mean the PS4 won't have big disappointments.
Now, the difference is K...
I'm of the mindset that I don't want a sequel (as I love the story exactly as is), but I'd pre-order the sequel at the drop of a hat.
It's going to be very, very hard for an MMO to come along and really grab a substantial percentage of the enthusiast crowd and keep them. I don't feel like this will be the game to accomplish that.
Of course, I could be wrong. I hope it's a success though.
"Game value has a direct correlation to how much time you get from playing it through and then how much re-playability the game provides."
I am talking about quality being a reasonable metric for value just as much, if not more so than the amount of gameplay offered. That is why I gave you the 5 hour and 100 hour game question. Unless I misunderstood you, you said you would opt for the much better yet shorter game, not the better (by traditional standards) value, I....
Here's the thing, if handled correctly this could have been really cool. If this had been $20 across all platforms, and had a fun/interesting boss to make it feel like a standalone product it might have set an interesting precedent.
Or, think about it like this:
A lot of DLC sadly comes out after many people have long since put the game back on their shelves or even sold it. Not only is the story slowly fading, but the familiarity with the game's cont...
The response that is getting to me right now are those saying, "Get it digital on last gen consoles!"
Why advocate a likely much inferior version of a product to justify the other version? It's not like there is the "normal" version and a super rare, ultra delux only for rich people version. No, there is the inferior, made to get as much profit as they can version and the version Kojima wants to make.
I don't think that's exactly fair. Would you rather play a 5 hour, $20 dollar game that is fantastic or play a 100 hour, $60 game that is mediocre. A lot of people say they want value, but what they are really saying is they want BOTH value and quality.
Not every game needs to give the player choice. Some stories are best told a specific way.