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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Who do you believe is the most over rated developer?

Words Of Wisdom on 24 April 2008
naznatips said:

I'm still waiting for you to justify your totally bullshit declaration that the Craft games are the same. If you really think that, you either know nothing about RTS games, or you haven't played them and are making up BS. Either way, my respect for you is dwindling by the minute as you continue a discussion you clearly aren't prepared for. I warned you not to continue this discussion.


Why? Because the engine under the hood for War3 is likely an upgraded version of the originals? Do you really think Blizzard is in the business of rebuilding on its own technology here and is reinventing the wheel for all their RTS games? I'm not saying the games are clones of one another, I'm saying a majority of the code running underhood the hood is common between the various games. You do not reinvent the wheel to change a tire. If Blizzard had released Starcraft 2 right after War3 you'd likely have seen more sophisticated hero/item handling abilities in Starcraft 2 as well (we may still see them yet).

When you build a smooth running engine for a game (especially one that ran as beautifully as those did), you do not simply throw it away and start over if you intend to build a game of close to the exact same nature. The Infinity Engine didn't simply go away when Bioware was done with the original Baldur's Gate. It went on to power Baldur's Gate 2 which is a huge step up in gameplay from the original in almost every way... yet still the same underlying core engine.

And I'm getting tired of your insults Naznatips. They violate rule 8 of the Forum Rules as well.



Around the Network
naznatips on 24 April 2008
Words Of Wisdom said:
naznatips said:

I'm still waiting for you to justify your totally bullshit declaration that the Craft games are the same. If you really think that, you either know nothing about RTS games, or you haven't played them and are making up BS. Either way, my respect for you is dwindling by the minute as you continue a discussion you clearly aren't prepared for. I warned you not to continue this discussion.


Why? Because the engine under the hood for War3 is likely an upgraded version of the originals? Do you really think Blizzard is in the business of rebuilding on its own technology here and is reinventing the wheel for all their RTS games? I'm not saying the games are clones of one another, I'm saying a majority of the code running underhood the hood is common between the various games. You do not reinvent the wheel to change a tire. If Blizzard had released Starcraft 2 right after War3 you'd likely have seen more sophisticated hero/item handling abilities in Starcraft 2 as well (we may still see them yet).

When you build a smooth running engine for a game (especially one that ran as beautifully as those did), you do not simply throw it away and start over if you intend to build a game of close to the exact same nature. The Infinity Engine didn't simply go away when Bioware was done with the original Baldur's Gate. It went on to power Baldur's Gate 2 which is a huge step up in gameplay from the original in almost every way... yet still the same underlying core engine.

And I'm getting tired of your insults Naznatips. They violate rule 8 of the Forum Rules as well.


Yeah, you've lost this argument in quite a grand way.

First of all, you're deflecting. Your original point certainly had nothing to do with engines. Second of all, even your new point is completely wrong.

Starcraft was a 2D RTS running on a completely different engine than Warcraft 3 (a 3D RTS). Starcraft 2 had an entirely new engine developed for it. To see some stuff on how their new engine works check out the Protoss demo on Gametrailers. Heroes and items are not in Starcraft 2, as is confirmed by the developers. For an interview about the gameplay and how different it is check here. For a summary of some key differences check here.

Also, I'm not insulting you, just your points, and you arguing about something you had no knowledge of in the first place. I really hate when people argue for the sake of arguing, and I will shred even people I like (like you) when they do this.

In summary:

You are wrong that they play the same, and you are wrong that they run on the same engines. Blizzard is a high-quality developer that is devoted to making each experience unique, and they build every game from the ground up because of this.



TheBigFatJ on 24 April 2008
Rath said:

R* is over-rated. Their name exists purely on GTA fame and I personally think that game was more fun in 2D.

Rare is over-rated. They are still existing purely on the fact that they were good, not that they are good.

Emphasis mine.



Words Of Wisdom on 24 April 2008
naznatips said:

Yeah, you've lost this argument in quite a grand way.

First of all, you're deflecting. Your original point certainly had nothing to do with engines. Second of all, even your new point is completely wrong.

Starcraft was a 2D RTS running on a completely different engine than Warcraft 3 (a 3D RTS). Starcraft 2 had an entirely new engine developed for it. To see some stuff on how their new engine works check out the Protoss demo on Gametrailers. Heroes and items are not in Starcraft 2, as is confirmed by the developers. For an interview about the gameplay and how different it is check here. For a summary of some key differences check here.

Also, I'm not insulting you, just your points, and you arguing about something you had no knowledge of in the first place. I really hate when people argue for the sake of arguing, and I will shred even people I like (like you) when they do this.

In summary:

You are wrong that they play the same, and you are wrong that they run on the same engines. Blizzard is a high-quality developer that is devoted to making each experience unique, and they build every game from the ground up because of this.


My original point is 100% to do with engines. And I have mentioned Starcraft 2 only in passing (check above for the if it had been released after War3 catch). It's been almost 10 years since the last Starcraft, do you really think I'm suggesting they use that engine for the new one? Or do think it's more likely I was suggesting that had they chosen to do Starcraft 2 after War3 that they would have borrowed on what they built for War3? Stop trying to "win this argument" for a second and think about it logically. Do you really think so little of me that you believe I would take such a ludicrous position?

I also don't think it's fair of you to suddenly say "Oh I thought you were arguing this so you must arguing that and now you're deflecting so I win. Haha." That's not fair at all. You misunderstood what I was saying from the start and now you're playing it off as me changing my position but I'm not.

Come on Naz, I have more respect for you than that. Show me the same.



Jhriad on 24 April 2008

Nintendo

"Ok guys, we need a new title.  Any ideas?"

*looks around the room*

"Well the last game did well how about we add a few new characters, change the moves up a bit, and to top it off a new level or two?"

GENIUS!

 

Seriously, how can these story deprived, samey copies of prior generation titles NOT earn any developer the 'overrated' title? 



Around the Network
Words Of Wisdom on 24 April 2008
Jhriad said:

Nintendo Sonic Team

"Ok guys, we need a new title. Any ideas?"

*looks around the room*

"Well the last game did well how about we add a few new characters, change the moves up a bit, and to top it off a new level or two?"

GENIUS!

 

Seriously, how can these story deprived, samey copies of prior generation titles NOT earn any developer the 'overrated' title?


Fixed.



Griffin on 24 April 2008
naznatips said:
 


You clearly know nothing about these games, and I highly recommend you don't continue talking about them lest you go the way of Griffin.


WTF is this suppose to mean, i gave full detail of the games i played and gave proof that i own that Zelda game.



Rath on 24 April 2008
Jhriad said:

Nintendo

"Ok guys, we need a new title. Any ideas?"

*looks around the room*

"Well the last game did well how about we add a few new characters, change the moves up a bit, and to top it off a new level or two?"

GENIUS!

 

Seriously, how can these story deprived, samey copies of prior generation titles NOT earn any developer the 'overrated' title?


 Because they are very very fun?



HappySqurriel on 24 April 2008
Jhriad said:

Nintendo

"Ok guys, we need a new title.  Any ideas?"

*looks around the room*

"Well the last game did well how about we add a few new characters, change the moves up a bit, and to top it off a new level or two?"

GENIUS!

 

Seriously, how can these story deprived, samey copies of prior generation titles NOT earn any developer the 'overrated' title? 

How is Nintendo releasing a sequel to a game like Mario Kart any different from Sony releasing a sequel to a game like Gran Turismo? How about Super Smash Bros. compared to Tekken or Soul Calibur? Metroid Prime compared to Halo?



Staude on 24 April 2008
DMeisterJ said:
waron said:
DMeisterJ said:
waron said:
epic as a developer they didn't make even one good game since jazz jackrabbit.
bethesda because The Elder Scrolls series(without oblivion) and Echelon they didn't make any other good game.

Five or six million Gears owners disagree

OT:

I have lots!

Square Enix: You're not that good. You can't keep people waiting forever for a game. Losers

BioWare: Seems like their games get a pass just because they have a good storyline. Mass Effect takes for-fucking-ever to load textures, but the game still has a metacritic of 91. Have you seen the textures load on that game? Not saying it wasn't awesome, but it's all the time. And KOTOR too. That game had a slipshod frame-rate that was forgiven. And then, every game is this whole Light/Dark; Renegade/Paragon thing, and no one cares that it's the same good/evil thing every game.

Bethesda: I loved Oblivion, but the game is overrated. The storyline is weak, as is the gameplay, the leveling up is crap too. The only reason I completed oblivion was because I had nothing else to play when the game came out.

And Bungie: Yes marathon was awesome, but Halo 2 and 3 were some of the most overrated FPSs in the history of the world, and have done nothing else beside bring some really good matchmaking to the 360.

/end rant.


yeah and most of them were buying gears because it was first huge game for xbox 360 and it was an online fps and those games are always selling like hotcakes on xbox no matter what.


Or, because it's a critically (and commercially) acclaimed game that breathed (sp?) new life into the shooter genre, introducing a system of cover that has changed the way we play games today...


By that you mean "killswitch" right ?... because as far as i'm aware, that was the game to introduce the famous coversystem now used in every tps (and fps O.o) game.

 

 

I think that bungie is overrated. The guys who made oblivion, and .. well i would say EA.. but they just overrates themselves. (no one else does :P)

 

oh.. and nintendo.. way overrated. 



Check out my game about moles ^