SxyxS said:
well-the difference is that nintendo is paying capcom for not supporting vita with eg monster hunter or castlevania but sony isn't paying EA. |
There is a rumor, that Nintendo moneyhatted MH (rumor, not knowledge). But that wouldn't keep Capcom from releasing other games. It doesn't hold Capcom back to release on PS3 or announce games for PS4. Ignoring the Vita is alone Capcoms decision.
| cusman said: All I saw in the 17 minutes of Battlefield 4 gameplay is scripted move and shoot gameplay starting with typical military shooter non-sense story telling format of 13 minutes earlier. Now in that 13 minutes here is what happened * 3/4 team people meet up in a room and jibber jabber * Remove window boards to help 4th team mate join up as well, clearly in an Urban setting, clearly day time * Travel to Jungle on foot * Travel to Industrial area near the coast emerging from forest, maybe evening, but certainly not sunset * Lots of fire fighting, some menial vehicle use, going up a building, helicopter sequence with helicopter ally * Enemy Helicopter shows up tries to shoot at you from behind the chopper that is trying to rescue you instead of just shooting that rescue chopper. * Doesn't matter either way, in trying to kill you they managed to kill the building instead so it comes crashing down. Rescue chopper also dies. * You wake up, it's night time, cut a fallen soldiers leg Nikita style, then driving coastal highway. Is it early morning sunrise now? * Enemy chopper shows up again, this time you take it out using your grenade gun thingy * Then your car crashes in water and loop is complete. So basically F-U TIME Seriously? Very nice graphics and I really liked the ocean waves splashing water ending up on car wind shield while driving. But the rest of the games plot, story, character, etc type stuff is just worthless. Why can't they use all that technology to make a game that I might actually care about? |
I don't think any Battlfield fan actually cared for whatever story that was in that segment. Most military shooters have horrendous campaign storylines which make little to no sense. No one buys these games (Battlefield/COD) for their campaigns. The campaigns are there pretty much to serve as a tutorial to get used to the game's mechanics/controls and to have moments of awe where you stare at the screen to appreciate some crazy Micheal Bay movie like scene going down.
The reason people buy these games is to play multiplayer, which is the main attraction of BF. That is where they use the technology to mak great experiences. In the case of BF you have great graphics, destructible environments, massive warzones, fluid animation and huge player counts (PC supports 64 people at once). So really MP is what you should be judging the game on. If you don't like MP, then you should stay well clear of the franchise and look elsewhere. What they showed was pretty much like a tech demo of what the game can achieve.
kupomogli said:
Battlefield 3 is one of the best looking games on consoles and runs at a solid 30fps. It's considered open world yet it still pushes those kindis of graphics. Finally, the only major difference between the console versions of this game in comparison to the PC version running at Ultra settings is the framerate. There are minor differences that even in a side by side comparison, most people but the hardcore graphics enthusiast won't end up noticing. Framerate and screen tearing are major differences and those are noticeable on the console side, where as the console version has 30fps, which is easy to notice compared to the silky smooth 60+fps on the PC, and only the consoles have screen tearing, which mostly is below the overscan so most people won't notice it at all. Ultra on PC does sport better lighting and particle effects, but the difference is so marginal that most people won't ever notice. So considering they can keep a good stable framerate in an open world game with very little pop in(or none) and some of the best graphics on consoles, your theory that DICE is not a good console developer sucks. As an open world game, even the 360 version without the texture pack installed is both looks and runs better than a lot of games released this gen. Here's a PS3 vs Ultra settings comparison. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TZ41dOMd-GU Here's another PS3 vs PC comparison. I'm sure you guys know what one I'm talking about. Best joke comparison ever. |
You misunderstand. The only game I've ever owned that required me to install a texture pack is Garry's Mod.
This is one of my "what is this industry coming to?" moments.
3DS Friend Code: 0645 - 5827 - 5788
WayForward Kickstarter is best kickstarter: http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1236620800/shantae-half-genie-hero
OMG another generic FPS isn't coming to Wii U, whatever will it do?? Guess its more Call of Duty for Wii U owners, Activision is happy today.
bananaking21 said:
nintendo has never, and if they keep creating games like they do now, will never, make games amazing games like red dead redemption, halo, bioshock, GTA, mass effect, battlefield, metal gear, uncharted or god of war to name a few. keep downplaying everything thats not nintendo and keep dreaming them as the amazing "so much better than anyone else" developers that you think they are. but just know who ever does this, i feel bad for, because boy are they mising out on a lot of awesome games |
As a Nintendo fan myslef, I can totally agree with you on this one. A lot of people dismiss 3rd party games. Sadly Rayman will also be dismissed because of the delay.
I myself sure was pissed off that it was delayed. But that is because the Wii U has ports only so was desperate for a new game onthe system. After the dissapointment I do intend to get the game, bnot because it is 3rd party but if you played the demo it is actually a FUN well executed game that works with the touch pad very well.
I also erge other Wii U users to get over it and get the game. After all most said I hope Ubisoft annoucenet some of the other big third party games like Watch Dgos and Splinter Cell. Indeed they have, so the way I see it they realise that there is a core Nintendo base that care about core games. It is time to let your wallets talk and not your mouths talk about buying Z Y OR Z and then not following through.
Saying all this I do believe relationships between EA and Nintendo is screwed atm because why would EA praise the Wii U so much at E3 then go cold turkey? Just makes no sense to me. After all 3rd party games should be able to sell systems (like they do for Micrososft and Sony). But sadly we back to that original loop where Nintendo fans don't buy any of those games.
Cobretti2 said:
I myself sure was pissed off that it was delayed. But that is because the Wii U has ports only so was desperate for a new game onthe system. After the dissapointment I do intend to get the game, bnot because it is 3rd party but if you played the demo it is actually a FUN well executed game that works with the touch pad very well. I also erge other Wii U users to get over it and get the game. After all most said I hope Ubisoft annoucenet some of the other big third party games like Watch Dgos and Splinter Cell. Indeed they have, so the way I see it they realise that there is a core Nintendo base that care about core games. It is time to let your wallets talk and not your mouths talk about buying Z Y OR Z and then not following through. Saying all this I do believe relationships between EA and Nintendo is screwed atm because why would EA praise the Wii U so much at E3 then go cold turkey? Just makes no sense to me. After all 3rd party games should be able to sell systems (like they do for Micrososft and Sony). But sadly we back to that original loop where Nintendo fans don't buy any of those games. |
the sad thing though, is if they dont buy rayman, and the sales are low, they would pretty much be justifying ubisofts delay of the game. i really understand how fans can be pist at ubisoft, but they are essentially the biggest 3rd party publisher that is backing up the WiiU, they should suck it up and buy their games if they like them so they can keep giving the WiiU more good games.
there is something definitely weird with EA/nintendo, but some people are just taking it way out of proportion IMO. wherever money is to be made EA has been there, so it wont just stop because of a stupid fued or failed bussines proposal, those happen all the time. the WiiU doesnt seem that interesting or that profitable (or at all profitable) for 3rd party games like battlefield, and thats the main reason its not releasing
| bananaking21 said:
the sad thing though, is if they dont buy rayman, and the sales are low, they would pretty much be justifying ubisofts delay of the game. i really understand how fans can be pist at ubisoft, but they are essentially the biggest 3rd party publisher that is backing up the WiiU, they should suck it up and buy their games if they like them so they can keep giving the WiiU more good games. there is something definitely weird with EA/nintendo, but some people are just taking it way out of proportion IMO. wherever money is to be made EA has been there, so it wont just stop because of a stupid fued or failed bussines proposal, those happen all the time. the WiiU doesnt seem that interesting or that profitable (or at all profitable) for 3rd party games like battlefield, and thats the main reason its not releasing |
Oh I'm going to get it all right. When it's $20.
The 1 good thing to come out of all this hate is that I know it's going to not meet expectations.
(Yeah I'm part of the problem.)
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/profile/92109/nintendopie/ Nintendopie Was obviously right and I was obviously wrong. I will forever be a lesser being than them. (6/16/13)
No third party support and no first party support. Is Nintendo aware they are in the videogame business?
| Mensrea said: I honestly don't get why everyone is mad about the Wii U not getting multiplats. Would it be nice? Sure, but ultimately it won't look as good as it's counterparts, so why wouldn't you just play those games on those systems? I can understand it if you only have Wii U, but that's an increasingly rare thing these days. So I really don't care about this. |
Yeah, I mean, why would Nintendo gamers want access to a diverse library of games that other consoles have? They should just be happy with their Mario and Zelda games once every couple of years... starving kids in Africa don't even GET Mario and Zelda games!
On 2/24/13, MB1025 said:
You know I was always wondering why no one ever used the dollar sign for $ony, but then I realized they have no money so it would be pointless.
CGI-Quality said:
Battlefield and "generic" never belong in the same sentence. Still, it's comments like these that keep everyone else pointing and laughing at a chunk of Nintendo's fanbase. |
I'll admit we share a certain myopia regarding shooty gun kill games, thinking that they're all much the same, from Mass Effect to Battlefield, Uncharted to CoD. They certainly all give off the same vibe to those who don't bother to play them...
Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2026 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
