JayWood2010 said: Kresnik said: Sly: Thieves in Time is the definition of "the middle" of the industry I've been talking about recently, reflected in its price (something I salute Sony for, hope to see more of it in the future), and I'll be supporting this. From the videos I've watched, it looks just my cup of tea. Reminding me of another era of games which I sorely miss these days. Ratchet & Mario have done their part to keep me sane, but it's always nice to have someone else along for the ride. So you salute sony for publishing mediocre games.  not saying that Sly is a bad game for having a 77 but i guess you need to start saluting games like Viva Pinata, Banjo N&B, Kameo, and plenty of other games while you are at it if this is the case.

Yeah.  Axum pretty much summed up what I meant, but just to elaborate a little further:

"The middle" of the industry (I guess I should've explained myself for people who didn't see that thread) is the area of titles that is neither AAA nor indie.  Those titles that don't require a full film-style budget, nor are made by 2-3 people by self funding.  Closer to AAA than indie, but still in-between (aka the middle).

The examples Axum listed are exactly what I was talking about, but the examples you listed I would consider "the middle" as well.  Banjo Kazooie & Viva Pinata are not titles that require massive budgets, and they're not titles that are going to sell 5m+ copies either.  And by being more realistic with such titles - i.e. selling them at a reduced price, is something that I encourage.

I just fear that games like Sly Cooper, like Viva Pinata, like Prince of Persia, are just getting closer and closer to disappearing as time goes on.  I'd hate to see a Sony who only produced Gran Turismo, God of War & Uncharted and then loads of indie titles.  

I just have two other quick points to bring up.  My first is the modern obssession with Metacritic.  Is there something inherantly wrong with producing a game which ends up with a 77 score on Metacritic?  To end up with a score in that region, it usually means that there's going to be quite a few people who thought it was 90+ game, and an equal number of people who maybe thought it was a less than 70 game.  So who is wrong here?  Is every single person who missed by the metacritic average wrong for either enjoying or disliking the game?

My second was about the games you listed.  I actually do salute Microsoft for producing Banjo Kazooie, Viva Pinata, Kameo.  Those kind of games are the type that I have been listing for years saying "When I get an Xbox 360, I will be buying Banjo, Crackdown etc." (I have Viva Pinata on PC).  My problem is MS have neglected games like this since about 2008.  Looking through a quick list of MS published games, 2008 was a really good year for that sort of stuff, and since 2008 there is literally only Crackdown 2 & Alan Wake that doesn't either fall into the AAA MS IP category (Fable, Halo, Gears, Forza) or casual titles (Kinectimals, Lips, Dance Central, Nike Training).  If they pushed more things like Viva Pinata & Banjo, then I'd have picked up a 360 a very long time ago.

Conversely, Sony's support of this not-quite-AAA title has been solid the past few years.  Off the top of my head, I've bought two Ratchet games, Starhawk, Twisted Metal, WipEout HD Fury, Modnation Racers and I'll soon buy Sly Cooper

Kresnik said: JayWood2010 said: Kresnik said: Sly: Thieves in Time is the definition of "the middle" of the industry I've been talking about recently, reflected in its price (something I salute Sony for, hope to see more of it in the future), and I'll be supporting this. From the videos I've watched, it looks just my cup of tea. Reminding me of another era of games which I sorely miss these days. Ratchet & Mario have done their part to keep me sane, but it's always nice to have someone else along for the ride. So you salute sony for publishing mediocre games.  not saying that Sly is a bad game for having a 77 but i guess you need to start saluting games like Viva Pinata, Banjo N&B, Kameo, and plenty of other games while you are at it if this is the case. Yeah.  Axum pretty much summed up what I meant, but just to elaborate a little further: "The middle" of the industry (I guess I should've explained myself for people who didn't see that thread) is the area of titles that is neither AAA nor indie.  Those titles that don't require a full film-style budget, nor are made by 2-3 people by self funding.  Closer to AAA than indie, but still in-between (aka the middle). The examples Axum listed are exactly what I was talking about, but the examples you listed I would consider "the middle" as well.  Banjo Kazooie & Viva Pinata are not titles that require massive budgets, and they're not titles that are going to sell 5m+ copies either.  And by being more realistic with such titles - i.e. selling them at a reduced price, is something that I encourage. I just fear that games like Sly Cooper, like Viva Pinata, like Prince of Persia, are just getting closer and closer to disappearing as time goes on.  I'd hate to see a Sony who only produced Gran Turismo, God of War & Uncharted and then loads of indie titles. I just have two other quick points to bring up.  My first is the modern obssession with Metacritic.  Is there something inherantly wrong with producing a game which ends up with a 77 score on Metacritic?  To end up with a score in that region, it usually means that there's going to be quite a few people who thought it was 90+ game, and an equal number of people who maybe thought it was a less than 70 game.  So who is wrong here?  Is every single person who missed by the metacritic average wrong for either enjoying or disliking the game? My second was about the games you listed.  I actually do salute Microsoft for producing Banjo Kazooie, Viva Pinata, Kameo.  Those kind of games are the type that I have been listing for years saying "When I get an Xbox 360, I will be buying Banjo, Crackdown etc." (I have Viva Pinata on Steam).  My problem is MS have neglected games like this since about 2008.  Looking through a quick list of MS published games, 2008 was a really good year for that sort of stuff, and since 2008 there is literally only Crackdown 2 & Alan Wake that doesn't either fall into the AAA MS IP category (Fable, Halo, Gears, Forza) or casual titles (Kinectimals, Lips, Dance Central, Nike Training).  If they pushed more things like Viva Pinata & Banjo, then I'd have picked up a 360 a very long time ago.

I was talking about budget in my previous comment as well but I think we have more AA games released throughout the year than AAA games.  Not from the big 3 but by EA, ACtivision, Ubisoft, and especially THQ although they are gone now.  

As far as metacritic goes and budgets I do believe prices should follow them, not necessarily gamers but developers.  I follow metacritic because if the game doesnt score well i wont buy it because $60 is a lot for a mediocre game.  AA games should be priced cheaper than AAA games.  and independent games should be cheaper than AA games.  It makes no sense for a AA game to be released for a full priced game of $60.  in this case they charged $40 which is good. but I want to see every game priced according to budgets

axumblade said: JayWood2010 said: axumblade said: JayWood2010 said: Kresnik said: Why is Sales the majority of the replies in the first 5 pages of this thread? Jesus Christ, why do you guys keep feeding him? You liven this place up Sales and it was hella quiet while you were banned recently, but please, every now and again just give it a rest. OT: Don't see how anyone could have any qualms with these review scores really. It's a shame that so many reviewers have the mentality "It sticks to the original formula, minus points!" these days, but there you go. In a vacant genre on consoles featuring the occasional Epic Mickey scoring high 50's and De Blob scoring mid 70's, I'd be happy with Sly finishing his review score where it is. Sly: Thieves in Time is the definition of "the middle" of the industry I've been talking about recently, reflected in its price (something I salute Sony for, hope to see more of it in the future), and I'll be supporting this. From the videos I've watched, it looks just my cup of tea. Reminding me of another era of games which I sorely miss these days. Ratchet & Mario have done their part to keep me sane, but it's always nice to have someone else along for the ride. So you salute sony for publishing mediocre games.  not saying that Sly is a bad game for having a 77 but i guess you need to start saluting games like Viva Pinata, Banko N&B, Kameo, and plenty of other games while you are at it if this is the case. I don't think you understand what he was meaning. He's been talking about this for a while. He said in another thread recently that most studios are going to either focus on the AAA titles or independant smaller games. There are games that people love that aren't necessarily the top rated games. Looking at series like Prince of Persia, Sly Cooper, Just Cause 2, katamari, darksiders, dead rising, and games like these that aren't necessarily considered AAA titles but are still quite enjoyable if you like the type of genre the game belongs to. AAA titles are just a definition of budgets and are unrelated to meta scores which is a mistake many people make.  I'm not completely positive on what a medium class game would be called, but I'm assuming that would be called AA which we have plenty of those released on a yearly basis.  They do get ignored in most cases because they are usually not very good and don't gain in popularity either while smaller games like Minecraft, Trials Evolution, and Joorney sometimes take off due to their brilliant gameplay or originality regardless of having a low budget.  AAA budget games usually get the most praise due to the polish they have.  In some cases no, like Crysis 2.  That is a AAA budget game that failed to meet expectations.  Now as far as AA games go or whatever they may be called I'd say has a lot of games but they still need to be profitable for a company to see them worth while.  In this case I believe that Sly 4 will make it worth while.  I still see no reason to salute somebody on making a mediocre type game.  Regardless of it being AA or not though as I'd give more praise to developers with low budget games who made a brilliant game than someone with a higher budget game that made something that was mediocre.  Sony is definitely not the only company to publish AA games either.  i would say Activision, Ubisoft, and EA have 10x more AA games than Sony so once again i dont understand the salute behind this one. From what we've been presented, Sly 4 has had a relatively low budget. The people making Sly 4 were Sanzuru, the company that was responsible for polishing The Sly Collection. They probably had a limited amount of help from Sucker Punch but I don't think that it was too much. Games like this will have people who are big fans of the series (such as people like myself). AAA is always a bad choice in statement but it's the easiest way for me to convey what I am trying to say without making it seem like I'm calling a game mediocre. The games I mentioned aren't medicore to everybody. In fact, sometimes they offer a distinct variation that certain players enjoy. Sly for example offers more stealth than your normal Mario or Ratchet game could ever hope to offer.

I explained what i meant in my previos comment but what I'm saying is if AA games are not going to be the quality of AAA games then they need to lower th price for them.  In this case they did.  It is $40 instead of $60.  What i'm basically saying is the industry does make a lot of AA games but most of the time they have them over-priced and why they get ignored.  Nobody wants to buy games that are considered mediocre for $60.  When I saymediocre that probably sounds like im saying it is a bad game and that is not what I mean by that.  II would consider 75-80 to be a good game but there is certainly a lot better games out there is all.  

Deyon said: sales2099 said: pezus said: sales2099 said: Deyon said: sales2099 said: Deyon said: But i don't like Nintendo IOS then I get it, you're joking. lol sry those are your options. Sony has LBP.....thats really about it. Or if you wanna go old school you get Banjo Kazooie/Tooie on XBLA. LBP1+2, Ratchet and Clank (amazing platformers), Sly Cooper for Sony retail platformers. Sorry, should have said Sony has LBP.....thats really about it that matters :P. Judgeing by sales and LBP sequel sales off course. Don't forget Ratchet & Clank. The first 2 games on the PS3 we're the shit back then.

A crack in time is still my favorite game this gen and tools of destruction is the reason I bought ps3.  Quest for booty is an amazing downloadable title.  The sales didn't really slump till they lost their identity and ecided to make it a move/family game and then a tower defense game. I'm hoping for a real ratchet next gen to wrap up the story then it can rest in peace just like it could have after a crack in time (the ending had me crying big time)

I used to look at Metacritic back in the day. Well the gamerankings one. It was safe bet when i had very limited amount of money as a teenager. I don't give them much credence anymore. One or  two of my friends don't get a game if it does not rate rate higher than 90% if not 85% in some cases.

They miss out on games like Binary Domain (74% meta) which i thought was rather excellent. These games are not perfect but really which ones are. There is really too much personal bias and preconceived notions when the critics review the game. It is not like i don't watch or read the reviews. Infact i end up reading quite a few as i quite enjoy the gaming news.

Some bizzare examples for reviews were Resident Evil 6 series. I mean i am not really that much into it. I just played and liked 4 but am not stuck on that. So some major websites like Gamespot gave it below 50. What does that really mean. Does that mean any game getting 55 from them is better than Resident Evil 6. This is bizzare train of thought that the industry generally as a whole follow.

Since i play much more games now than i used to back in days. I like these mid tier games quite a bit. It is good to see Sony supporting them. I would have liked to see Kameo 2 but there is probably some dude like Sales2099 sitting there and saying. No No No. What the hell am i going talk about when it sells half a million even if we make our money back and get respect from gamers.

Sales Sales Sales. When you are bored of AAA games. Just put the sales disc in and spin it around.

axumblade said: JayWood2010 said: axumblade said: From what we've been presented, Sly 4 has had a relatively low budget. The people making Sly 4 were Sanzuru, the company that was responsible for polishing The Sly Collection. They probably had a limited amount of help from Sucker Punch but I don't think that it was too much. Games like this will have people who are big fans of the series (such as people like myself). AAA is always a bad choice in statement but it's the easiest way for me to convey what I am trying to say without making it seem like I'm calling a game mediocre. The games I mentioned aren't medicore to everybody. In fact, sometimes they offer a distinct variation that certain players enjoy. Sly for example offers more stealth than your normal Mario or Ratchet game could ever hope to offer. I explained what i meant in my previos comment but what I'm saying is if AA games are not going to be the quality of AAA games then they need to lower th price for them.  In this case they did.  It is $40 instead of $60.  What i'm basically saying is the industry does make a lot of AA games but most of the time they have them over-priced and why they get ignored.  Nobody wants to buy games that are considered mediocre for $60.  When I saymediocre that probably sounds like im saying it is a bad game and that is not what I mean by that.  II would consider 75-80 to be a good game but there is certainly a lot better games out there is all.   I've always viewed games 65-85 on Metacritic as games that aren't necessarily bad but they appeal more to certain people. Katamari is a good example for me. I don't think that a katamari game has scored over an 80 since the PS2 era. But I keep buying them religiously because it's a lot of fun for me. Never going to have a big budget. Never going to fall back to an "independent" status as a game.

Yeah that makes perfect sense actually

Deyon said: This game was my last hope for the platforming genre to make a return. Damn it

you still have to play it to really know if its good or not.

Sounds exactly like what I want!!

pezus said: The dying generation syndrome. Hopefully it won't affect God of War

This!! Im positive I and GoW fans will love it, just like Halo fans loved Halo 4. But from a critical acclaim and awards standpoint: It wouldn't shock me if God of War gets similar reception. I hope I am wrong. Maybe the MP will be fresh enough to save it. Im kinda glad Sony has their main franchises being made for PS4 atm. I just hope we can get past Ascension with it being well recieved. That's kinda the last franchise that has to transcend to PS4. ( Others being UC4, GT6, KZ4 & LBP3 ).

green_sky said: I used to look at Metacritic back in the day. Well the gamerankings one. It was safe bet when i had very limited amount of money as a teenager. I don't give them much credence anymore. One or  two of my friends don't get a game if it does not rate rate higher than 90% if not 85% in some cases. They miss out on games like Binary Domain (74% meta) which i thought was rather excellent. These games are not perfect but really which ones are. There is really too much personal bias and preconceived notions when the critics review the game. It is not like i don't watch or read the reviews. Infact i end up reading quite a few as i quite enjoy the gaming news. Some bizzare examples for reviews were Resident Evil 6 series. I mean i am not really that much into it. I just played and liked 4 but am not stuck on that. So some major websites like Gamespot gave it below 50. What does that really mean. Does that mean any game getting 55 from them is better than Resident Evil 6. This is bizzare train of thought that the industry generally as a whole follow. Since i play much more games now than i used to back in days. I like these mid tier games quite a bit. It is good to see Sony supporting them. I would have liked to see Kameo 2 but there is probably some dude like Sales2099 sitting there and saying. No No No. What the hell am i going talk about when it sells half a million even if we make our money back and get respect from gamers. Sales Sales Sales. When you are bored of AAA games. Just put the sales disc in and spin it around.

Quoting because awesome post :)