By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming - OPEN Letter from a FORMER Bungie VP to Bobby Kotick.....Kotick gets OWNED!

thranx said:

how was it unplayable? I had a good time playing it, it just needed a little more veriety in mission types from what I remember

The game launched with a save corrupt bug. Which they promptly fixed. But I can't update so now whenever I try to load any of my characters(3 all above 30) instead of their names they show up as "icorrupt" or something along the lines



Sig thanks to Saber! :D 

Around the Network

liked the letter. I hope bobby gets upset by this.



They really should sell just the online part of Black Ops as an option. Of course I know it would cost a standard $60 and they'd raise the price of the full game to $70



Severance said:
Boutros said:
Hynad said:
Boutros said:
disolitude said:
Boutros said:
disolitude said:
Boutros said:
disolitude said:
Boutros said:

So he praised Borderlands and ditched Call of Duty? He isn't better than Kotick.


Whats wrong with Borderlands? Name anotehr game like it...

Exactly.


Makes no sense...dude is talking about innovation no milkable franchises.

You are right, Borderlands is unique and innovative. Doesn't change the fact that the game is messy.

You are right that its messy...but doesn't change the fact its fun to play.

So is Call of Duty...

The kind of innovation Borderlands had was forgettable and I wouldn't want to see it in more games.


The kind of "innovation" Call of Duty is bringing is forgettable and seen in most games of the same type.

The Call of Duty franchise introduced many innovative elements throughout the years.

The CoD4 single player was amazing. The mutliplayer is constantly changing to improve the experience.

Call of Duty is not popular for no reasons.

Sorry, but where's the innovation part here?
you know what innovation means boutros?

You mean in the CoD4 single player for example?

Well it's not the kind of innovation that affects the gameplay or the genre. It affects the whole experience. It was the first time I played a game that recreated war in such a way. So they innovated in the storytelling and the atmosphere that you can find in a video game.

If Uncharted 2 is considered innovative then I don't see why CoD4 should be considered otherwise.



Boutros said:
 

You mean in the CoD4 single player for example?

Well it's not the kind of innovation that affects the gameplay or the genre. It affects the whole experience. It was the first time I played a game that recreated war in such a way. So they innovated in the storytelling and the atmosphere that you can find in a video game.

If Uncharted 2 is considered innovative then I don't see why CoD4 should be considered otherwise.

The only reason why Call of Duty 4 is considered be all/end all of COD games is because 80% of people who play it today discovered the series with part 4. For people like myself who have played COD 1 and 2, COD4 was pretty much COD2 with more shock and awe moments and modern setting.

Here is how you can tell if a game is fun and has real innovation. Imagine the same game with development budget cut by 1/2...and imagine how it would turn out and if it will still be fun.

Borderlands had some solid gameplay ideas which would be fun to play in a game with any kind of budget. However, take 15 million dollars out of COD4's developent, all the production, polish, scripted scenes, visuals of the SP campaign...gone... and what are you left with?  Not much...Multiplayer would still be fun, but single player would be like a rail shooter, which is what essentially COD games really are when you look at their gameplay core.



Around the Network
disolitude said:
Boutros said:
 

You mean in the CoD4 single player for example?

Well it's not the kind of innovation that affects the gameplay or the genre. It affects the whole experience. It was the first time I played a game that recreated war in such a way. So they innovated in the storytelling and the atmosphere that you can find in a video game.

If Uncharted 2 is considered innovative then I don't see why CoD4 should be considered otherwise.

The only reason why Call of Duty 4 is considered be all/end all of COD games is because 80% of people who play it today discovered the series with part 4. For people like myself who have played COD 1 and 2, COD4 was pretty much COD2 with more shock and awe moments and modern setting.

Here is how you can tell if a game is fun and has real innovation. Imagine the same game with development budget cut by 1/2...and imagine how it would turn out and if it will still be fun.

Borderlands had some solid gameplay ideas which would be fun to play in a game with any kind of budget. However, take 15 million dollars out of COD4's developent, all the production, polish, scripted scenes, visuals of the SP campaign...gone... and what are you left with?  Not much...Multiplayer would still be fun, but single player would be like a rail shooter, which is what essentially COD games really are when you look at their gameplay core.

Like I said, the gameplay is not what is innovative in the CoD4 single player. It's the cinematic feeling. I don't consider it a rail shooter. It's very story-based which might be the reason some people call it linear but I personally think this linearity is what makes the game so good.



Hynad said:
-Newcloud- said:

so bungies new game is called breach


So your next purchase is a pair of glasses.


Owned.

And damn, I love that screen shot mock up!



ha!



well the last game activison made that was innovative was Blur and that FAILED hardcore despite 300 million in advertising. really the next COD of racing yea right. 



Of Course That's Just My Opinion, I Could Be Wrong

mchaza said:

well the last game activison made that was innovative was Blur and that FAILED hardcore despite 300 million in advertising. really the next COD of racing yea right. 


blur...um 300 million?