surf dtoid with 
Rising (10+)
People you follow
send message
follow
followers
People play the games they like to play. You may enjoy looking for "underground and obscure" games as do many others... myself I enjoy a well balanced, team-oriented online shooter game.
To be honest, I think Destructoid (and many other sites) are very good about promoting and talking about smaller games that aren't as well advertised. Trine was a game I'm keeping my eye on because of a pre-view here on Destructoid, and just reading other gamers reviews of games often piques my interest in games I havent' heard of.
For the most part I enjoy the larger triple A titles. I like good graphics, I like the continued support, I like online play. Smaller titles are often poorly supported and suffer in various ways often making them glitchy and barely playable. Sacred 2 was done by a smaller studio (who've since gone out of business) and the game is fun... but definitely doesn't show the quality levels of those "hyped" games.
There are games for all types of gamers... people hype the games they like or the games they think they will like.
To be honest, I think Destructoid (and many other sites) are very good about promoting and talking about smaller games that aren't as well advertised. Trine was a game I'm keeping my eye on because of a pre-view here on Destructoid, and just reading other gamers reviews of games often piques my interest in games I havent' heard of.
For the most part I enjoy the larger triple A titles. I like good graphics, I like the continued support, I like online play. Smaller titles are often poorly supported and suffer in various ways often making them glitchy and barely playable. Sacred 2 was done by a smaller studio (who've since gone out of business) and the game is fun... but definitely doesn't show the quality levels of those "hyped" games.
There are games for all types of gamers... people hype the games they like or the games they think they will like.
Ok, good blog, but a mistake. Why do you call Fallout 3 an FPS? Yes, it can be played in a first person view, and has guns, but, in no way, can it be considered a FPS. Rather it can be called a First person RPG. In fact, you can completely disregard the First person view and play it from the perspective of third person, as I have. Yes you can shoot stuff in it, but by conventional standards, the core game play of F3 is not of a FPS, rather a RPG. You explore the wasteland, and if you want, rarely kill in the game. Whereas most, if not all, FPS's require you to shoot and kill stuff, usually everything in sight.
I am nitpicking here, and I apologise for it, but lumping F3 with games which are paint by numbers FPS's irks me.
I do agree big budget games get overly hype, but it is a part of the industry, big publishers buy and dominate ad space on websites and print media. However, with the net, you can seek info on a relatively unknown game if you wish.
I too will miss MW2, simply because I have done it all before on COD4 and see no real incentive to shell out so much for a game with, at best, a few updates. It has the same basic mechanics, and though the multi is as every bit as awesome as 4's, it simply does not catch my interest. Rather, games like Uncharted 2 and the new R+C look to expand on what made them so successful whilst pushing a lot of new stuff to the forefront. I find them to be better value for money than a straight up shooter, IMHO.
I am nitpicking here, and I apologise for it, but lumping F3 with games which are paint by numbers FPS's irks me.
I do agree big budget games get overly hype, but it is a part of the industry, big publishers buy and dominate ad space on websites and print media. However, with the net, you can seek info on a relatively unknown game if you wish.
I too will miss MW2, simply because I have done it all before on COD4 and see no real incentive to shell out so much for a game with, at best, a few updates. It has the same basic mechanics, and though the multi is as every bit as awesome as 4's, it simply does not catch my interest. Rather, games like Uncharted 2 and the new R+C look to expand on what made them so successful whilst pushing a lot of new stuff to the forefront. I find them to be better value for money than a straight up shooter, IMHO.
I did a c-blog on this similar subject not long ago and I’m unable to agree with most of your points. This sounds like “why ain’t people playing games their not interested in?”
FPSs get so much attention because it’s one of the genres that the majority of gamers like. Shooting people has a much higher appeal than many other genres out there to the average gamer. It’s not like everything else is completely ignored. Action games and RPGs are right up there as well.
Sure most gaming websites hype up the big games simply because that’s what many gamers want to hear about. Much more people were interested in hearing about the latest Halo 3 ODST news than Wii Sports Resort news. Innovation isn’t dead; it just mostly exists in Indie games like those on XBLA or retail on the DS. However, some retail 360/PS3/PC games have attempted this as well, like last year’s Mirror’s Edge. Not all sequels just have slight changes. Some change more than others, but there is a risk in changing it too much. If a series is long running, it’s harder to expand upon it without changing a lot about it. Change isn’t always bad, but change isn’t always good either.
Games based off of older IPs are not always great, yes, but they tend to be hyped up for various reasons, like having a good track record. They had to start off as new IPs at some point and win over the attention of gamers. It’s not like reviewers don’t call out a game for being poor, even if it’s part of a long running IP.
Okay, so you’re now saying games that attempt to do something different is a gimmick? In your view, what is the difference between innovation and gimmicks?
People will play what they like, so at the end of the day, are they really at fault for ignoring the smaller companies and playing what they want?
FPSs get so much attention because it’s one of the genres that the majority of gamers like. Shooting people has a much higher appeal than many other genres out there to the average gamer. It’s not like everything else is completely ignored. Action games and RPGs are right up there as well.
Sure most gaming websites hype up the big games simply because that’s what many gamers want to hear about. Much more people were interested in hearing about the latest Halo 3 ODST news than Wii Sports Resort news. Innovation isn’t dead; it just mostly exists in Indie games like those on XBLA or retail on the DS. However, some retail 360/PS3/PC games have attempted this as well, like last year’s Mirror’s Edge. Not all sequels just have slight changes. Some change more than others, but there is a risk in changing it too much. If a series is long running, it’s harder to expand upon it without changing a lot about it. Change isn’t always bad, but change isn’t always good either.
Games based off of older IPs are not always great, yes, but they tend to be hyped up for various reasons, like having a good track record. They had to start off as new IPs at some point and win over the attention of gamers. It’s not like reviewers don’t call out a game for being poor, even if it’s part of a long running IP.
Okay, so you’re now saying games that attempt to do something different is a gimmick? In your view, what is the difference between innovation and gimmicks?
People will play what they like, so at the end of the day, are they really at fault for ignoring the smaller companies and playing what they want?
the holy grail of fps are gone to sands of time. dues ex has to be the greatest fps ever made, it blows hl2 away. and that's only because jc denton has a voice and a decision to make.
but i blame it on the websites previewing a game talking about how this mechanic is gonna be great but when the review comes in, guess what, its shit. gaming website talk bad about the previews, they get black listed and loss advertising money and future previews. they all suck the big nipple of capitalism and bribery. another reason why journalism and games don't go well.
but i blame it on the websites previewing a game talking about how this mechanic is gonna be great but when the review comes in, guess what, its shit. gaming website talk bad about the previews, they get black listed and loss advertising money and future previews. they all suck the big nipple of capitalism and bribery. another reason why journalism and games don't go well.
YES! Hype for the underdog is good. I'm sure plenty of people will actually enjoy Way of the Samurai 3 (Did you know its coming out on October 13th for PS3 AND 360?), but there just isn't alot of press/hype/attention going around for it. I'm always happy to see people say they had no idea the series existed until I mentioned it: sometimes, you just don't know what you like yet.
But, so far as gimmick hype, I think that's healthy! Granted Scribblenauts is running on some pretty straight forward flaws (D-Pad support just seems like a no brainer, and implying a need for springshoes/jetpack/wings for a bunch of levels feels like a mistep-necessary or not). But the gimmick is exciting, and pretty worthy of the hype. Its gimmicks like that get people thinking about new things to do with game development.
But, as always, its good to remember that a solid game needs to be wrapped around that gimmick, or vice verse
But, so far as gimmick hype, I think that's healthy! Granted Scribblenauts is running on some pretty straight forward flaws (D-Pad support just seems like a no brainer, and implying a need for springshoes/jetpack/wings for a bunch of levels feels like a mistep-necessary or not). But the gimmick is exciting, and pretty worthy of the hype. Its gimmicks like that get people thinking about new things to do with game development.
But, as always, its good to remember that a solid game needs to be wrapped around that gimmick, or vice verse
@RBinator
"This sounds like “why ain’t people playing games their not interested in?"
That's not what I was saying at all. How can you not be interested in a game when you don't know about it? Can you tell me that before Tubatic started raving about Way Of The Samurai 3 that you knew about it? How About Demon's Souls? Did you know about the King's Field Games? Bushido Blade? Die By The Sword? I'd be surprised if you did know about any of those games.
@Mushman
I still call fallout an FPS. The leveling system didn't have the same impact as it did on Oblivion. You Could be level 12 and beat the game. You could choose a whole bunch of perks that didn't help at all and still rape Deathclaws as long as you aimed for the legs. And the melee weapons were very limited compared to what they were in Oblivion. Where's my 4 others pecial sword moves? I get what your saying but Fallout 3 is an FPS, just like Borderlands and just like Call Of Duty. Fallout and 2 had were much better games in the RPG department.
"This sounds like “why ain’t people playing games their not interested in?"
That's not what I was saying at all. How can you not be interested in a game when you don't know about it? Can you tell me that before Tubatic started raving about Way Of The Samurai 3 that you knew about it? How About Demon's Souls? Did you know about the King's Field Games? Bushido Blade? Die By The Sword? I'd be surprised if you did know about any of those games.
@Mushman
I still call fallout an FPS. The leveling system didn't have the same impact as it did on Oblivion. You Could be level 12 and beat the game. You could choose a whole bunch of perks that didn't help at all and still rape Deathclaws as long as you aimed for the legs. And the melee weapons were very limited compared to what they were in Oblivion. Where's my 4 others pecial sword moves? I get what your saying but Fallout 3 is an FPS, just like Borderlands and just like Call Of Duty. Fallout and 2 had were much better games in the RPG department.
