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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - From Software to open new studio, opens next month, begins operations next January

Tagged games:

beeje13 on 13 September 2015
RolStoppable said:
fatslob-:O said:
It's as I feared ...

They are going to keep milking the sh!t out of the idea behind Demon's Souls ...

I am disappoint, I don't understand why hardcore gamers are praising them for been like how Ubisoft handles AC or Activision handling COD ...

Here's how the hardcore cycle works:

1. "This game/series is good! It deserves to sell a lot."
2. Game/series is a breakout hit. - "It's still good. Well deserved."
3. Sequels release, IP is mainstream now. - "The developers sold out. This isn't good anymore."
4. The hardcore move on to another game that gives them the feeling that they know better than the mainstream.

Suppose that Souls games sell 5m+ copies with each installment. The hardcore would change their tune. It's the paradox of wanting the games that they like to become popular, only to move away from them once they are popular. Or to be more accurate, they still buy the games, but they don't admit that they are buying them anymore.


It's weirdly funny how accurate that is. It's just hipster mentality really.

However does GTA suffer from this? I don't really here complaints about the series.



PS, PS2, Gameboy Advance, PS3, PSP, PS4, Xbox One

Around the Network
UltimateGamerConsole on 13 September 2015
beeje13 said:
RolStoppable said:

Here's how the hardcore cycle works:

1. "This game/series is good! It deserves to sell a lot."
2. Game/series is a breakout hit. - "It's still good. Well deserved."
3. Sequels release, IP is mainstream now. - "The developers sold out. This isn't good anymore."
4. The hardcore move on to another game that gives them the feeling that they know better than the mainstream.

Suppose that Souls games sell 5m+ copies with each installment. The hardcore would change their tune. It's the paradox of wanting the games that they like to become popular, only to move away from them once they are popular. Or to be more accurate, they still buy the games, but they don't admit that they are buying them anymore.


It's weirdly funny how accurate that is. It's just hipster mentality really.

However does GTA suffer from this? I don't really here complaints about the series.

GTA isn't an annual or bi-annual franchise and GTA V's DLC's are all free so I guess that's why they aren't criticised. Also I would say GTA is the best ever "milked" franchise if it is one.



Michelasso on 13 September 2015
fatslob-:O said:
Ruler said:

you never played both type of games to have an perspective unlike me. And like i said why does it matter to you, you dont have access to Bloodborne so the time period between Dark Souls 2 and 3 is 2 years instead annualized for you?

You should be glad that you get to play soon Dark Souls 3, no? Reading articles at gamespot doesnt give you the feel for playing Bloodborne, playing Bloodborne only does.

I am not a customer of From Software as I loathe all of their games but that doesn't change the fact that their annually drawing upon their own customer base ... 

So why are you even here? I hate FPS but I don't go to the CoD threads to say how much that and other FPS franchises are milking their customers.

Demon's Souls (and then Dark Souls and Bloodborne) became popular because they are the first action RPGs that actually play as action RPGs are intended to. Full customization of the builds and realistic movements (assuming magic and else were possible, sure). There are people (like me, but I have read others feel the same) that after finishing one of those games don't feel like playing anything else, because any other game just feels bland, shallow. Then if you want to make me sleep after a D* Souls game just give me Skyrim or the like with its most awful and boring RPG combat system ever.

In any case a bi-yearly release, especially for an RPG which always introduces new monsters and environments isn't really milking. AC is milking. COD is milking. Forza is somehow milking. Racing sims after all they are more or less all the same, as they can't be otherwise given the strict constraints. Cars are cars and many circuits didn't change in many years. Still, talking about new iterations of RPG games, they are not much different from the expansions and updates on MMORPGs. And even if it is milking it doesn't matter. The developers are right doing so, because it means there is a demand. Just look at COD. All saying COD is declining while in reality it has the most sold game on XBone, the second on PS4.



Kagerow on 13 September 2015
UltimateGamerConsole said:
beeje13 said:


It's weirdly funny how accurate that is. It's just hipster mentality really.

However does GTA suffer from this? I don't really here complaints about the series.

GTA isn't an annual or bi-annual franchise and GTA V's DLC's are all free so I guess that's why they aren't criticised. Also I would say GTA is the best ever "milked" franchise if it is one.


Because they didn't made any particular mistake with franchise yet. They precisely improved what they had to improve on each time without doing something stupid enough to ruin the game.

People wouldn't be complaining about Mario if Nintendo continously improved New Super Mario series, but after first DS one, there wasn't any noticeable improvement on neither Wii or Wii U version, which broke the 'immersion' of continuing franchise. This also damaged 3D game line, where people would have accepted 3D World as a new attempt to combine 2D and 3D element to that game influenced by those annoying 2D series.

The fact that Galaxy was too good didn't helped any.



michael_stutzer on 13 September 2015
fatslob-:O said:
Hynad said:

They're making different titles from a game genre they excel at. They're not milking anything. 3 games in a franchise in 6 years isn't milking. They're called sequels, and there's a market for those. Dark Souls 3 will be the last game in that series, and Miyazaki is moving on to something else after that.

You don't like their games. That's fine. They're not for everyone. Why not move on to something else, instead of downplaying something you clearly have no first hand knowledge of?

That is a lie when these games have their clear intended audience ... 

So I'm not allowed to downplay anything like almost all of us have been doing at the start of this community ? 

If you have a bone to pick with then just come out with it ... 

It seems like your full stop button is stuck. Get it fixed.



Around the Network
UltimateGamerConsole on 13 September 2015
Kagerow said:
UltimateGamerConsole said:

GTA isn't an annual or bi-annual franchise and GTA V's DLC's are all free so I guess that's why they aren't criticised. Also I would say GTA is the best ever "milked" franchise if it is one.


Because they didn't made any particular mistake with franchise yet. They precisely improved what they had to improve on each time without doing something stupid enough to ruin the game.

People wouldn't be complaining about Mario if Nintendo continously improved New Super Mario series, but after first DS one, there wasn't any noticeable improvement on neither Wii or Wii U version, which broke the 'immersion' of continuing franchise. This also damaged 3D game line, where people would have accepted 3D World as a new attempt to combine 2D and 3D element to that game influenced by those annoying 2D series.

The fact that Galaxy was too good didn't helped any.

Rockstar has changed GTA completely. They don't rely on minute changes between sequels. Each of their games since GTA San Andreas feels vastly diferent, even the handheld ones, till Vice City Stories they were imroving the GTA III formula by strides, but after that the next game changed the ballpark completely. GTA V feels extremely diferent to the rest of the franchise.



Ruler on 13 September 2015
Hynad said:
fatslob-:O said:

And a customer base can't grow or shrink ? 

Just because they succeeded in getting you doesn't mean that their not taking advantage of their customers ...


Yes. They are taking advantage of their customers by releasing games they want to play.

That's so totally lame of them.

I have to question your motivation to come here and downplay the studio in this way. Especially considering the fact you admit you don't even play their games, and also considering the nature of the OP, in which it is stated the new studio will focus on creating CG assets. What you've done so far is derail the thread into a meaningless bashing session, and I can't help but question your agenda here.

this



Why i left PC gaming

 

(2015) Question for PS4 owners: if the situation would be reverse? would you still play on PS4?

(2015) The "I don't care PS4 is the most powerful console" thread

Kagerow on 13 September 2015
UltimateGamerConsole said:
Kagerow said:


Because they didn't made any particular mistake with franchise yet. They precisely improved what they had to improve on each time without doing something stupid enough to ruin the game.

People wouldn't be complaining about Mario if Nintendo continously improved New Super Mario series, but after first DS one, there wasn't any noticeable improvement on neither Wii or Wii U version, which broke the 'immersion' of continuing franchise. This also damaged 3D game line, where people would have accepted 3D World as a new attempt to combine 2D and 3D element to that game influenced by those annoying 2D series.

The fact that Galaxy was too good didn't helped any.

Rockstar has changed GTA completely. They don't rely on minute changes between sequels. Each of their games since GTA San Andreas feels vastly diferent, even the handheld ones, till Vice City Stories they were imroving the GTA III formula by strides, but after that the next game changed the ballpark completely. GTA V feels extremely diferent to the rest of the franchise.


Their formula is same, and you are arguing 64 -> Sunshine -> Galaxy -> 3D World is a 'Minute Change'? Is people complaining about Zelda and 3D Mario because they don't change enough? Well, I guess they do. But no most franchise never have 'Minute Changes' outside of New Super Mario series. Not even Call of Duty. (If they changed it for positive, that is.)

All their game since GTA 3 feels very similar, except handheld one. If it wasn't, it would not be a GTA. This 'ID' is important because it allows us to determine what the game will be, and what to expect even before game releases. Because of this, when the game does not meet the expectation, it hurts reputation of said franchise and possibly the future games to be released in that franchise. AKA Assassin's Creed.

Again, I don't find serialization bad. Bad game is a bad game because they are bad game. Of course, this is simply my opinion on this matter.



UltimateGamerConsole on 14 September 2015
Kagerow said:
UltimateGamerConsole said:

Rockstar has changed GTA completely. They don't rely on minute changes between sequels. Each of their games since GTA San Andreas feels vastly diferent, even the handheld ones, till Vice City Stories they were imroving the GTA III formula by strides, but after that the next game changed the ballpark completely. GTA V feels extremely diferent to the rest of the franchise.


Their formula is same, and you are arguing 64 -> Sunshine -> Galaxy -> 3D World is a 'Minute Change'? Is people complaining about Zelda and 3D Mario because they don't change enough? Well, I guess they do. But no most franchise never have 'Minute Changes' outside of New Super Mario series. Not even Call of Duty. (If they changed it for positive, that is.)

All their game since GTA 3 feels very similar, except handheld one. If it wasn't, it would not be a GTA. This 'ID' is important because it allows us to determine what the game will be, and what to expect even before game releases. Because of this, when the game does not meet the expectation, it hurts reputation of said franchise and possibly the future games to be released in that franchise. AKA Assassin's Creed.

Again, I don't find serialization bad. Bad game is a bad game because they are bad game. Of course, this is simply my opinion on this matter.

I never said 3D Mario games have minute changes.

As for GTA being the same, its obvious as hell you've not played GTA IV or V, its anything but similar to GTA III. The only thing that's certain is that you'll have an open-world, driving and shooting, but everything around it has changed completely. That AC comparison is laughable, AC hasn't evolved since AC II except AC IV BF, GTA is in a completely different ballpark when it comes to shaking things up.



Kagerow on 14 September 2015
UltimateGamerConsole said:
Kagerow said:


Their formula is same, and you are arguing 64 -> Sunshine -> Galaxy -> 3D World is a 'Minute Change'? Is people complaining about Zelda and 3D Mario because they don't change enough? Well, I guess they do. But no most franchise never have 'Minute Changes' outside of New Super Mario series. Not even Call of Duty. (If they changed it for positive, that is.)

All their game since GTA 3 feels very similar, except handheld one. If it wasn't, it would not be a GTA. This 'ID' is important because it allows us to determine what the game will be, and what to expect even before game releases. Because of this, when the game does not meet the expectation, it hurts reputation of said franchise and possibly the future games to be released in that franchise. AKA Assassin's Creed.

Again, I don't find serialization bad. Bad game is a bad game because they are bad game. Of course, this is simply my opinion on this matter.

I never said 3D Mario games have minute changes.

As for GTA being the same, its obvious as hell you've not played GTA IV or V, its anything but similar to GTA III. The only thing that's certain is that you'll have an open-world, driving and shooting, but everything around it has changed completely. That AC comparison is laughable, AC hasn't evolved since AC II except AC IV BF, GTA is in a completely different ballpark when it comes to shaking things up.

I have played all of them. And outside of some game that changed the game negatively for some random reason (AC:Brotherhood, AC:III) their fundamental formula has stayed same and improved upon it.

'Similar' and 'Same' is not a same word. Do not spin the topic in your favor. The fact that GTA made amazing game doesn't magically change its core design nor the nature of sequel. Ultimately, what matters is which one is the better game. GTA wins there because of its finess, not because it changes things around.

Also, what did you thought when I said 'improvement'?