For a while, I held off on getting Ghostbusters. It had gotten middle of the road reviews, nobody had anything spectacular to say about it and nobody I knew played it (or was going to). All I kept hearing was the terms"generic shooter" being thrown around in each review.
But that got me thinking - what's wrong with that? It's become almost a reaction to think of "generic" as not up to par. You hear it every day. You'd rather eat Cheerios than "generic brand" Toasted Oats. Even if the game is a generic shooter, it doesn't mean it doesn't have polish. Sure, Ghostbusters had it's flaws. But you know what? I had fun. Something kept pulling me back to the game, something kept me saying "Just one more level". The game isn't terribly long or even original, but it certainly doesn't lack in entertainment.
It seems that every new game that comes out that doesn't have some sort of gimmick or "revolutionary" new feature gets labeled with "generic". But certain days, I don't have to have to think more than I have to. Perhaps I just want to go out and shoot some ghosts, or henchmen, or whatever it is in that game. I purchased Red Faction: Guerilla at the same time as Ghostbusters and I've put RF:G in the Xbox exactly twice. For a total of 20 minutes. I'm just not grabbed by the game although every review I've seen has made me think that it was the second coming of Jesus. Yes, blowing shit up and letting it crumble to the ground is fun, but it feels like I'm playing GTA on Mars.
There needs to be a little more care in labeling something as generic, as it can really hide a game that is fun.
Red Faction Guerrilla is GTA on Mars (with more destruction). Lots of previews and reviews either gave that impression or outright said it. Who the fuck said Ghostbusters is generic?
A bunch of Ghostbuster reviews and commentary has been peppered with "If you're not a fan of the IP/If you look past the Ghostbuster's license...its a generic shooter"
Which I guess is a little silly. Strip away the awesome flavor content of any game and you have a generic X. /shrug
Generic means it's generic and not special. So it's not a special shooter according to whoever said it. If you like Ghostbusters, that has nothing to do with whether or not the gameplay is generic.
That's one of the things I love about halo, because in all reality it's just a really generic shooter, and sometimes I just want to run around and shoot other people without all kinds of silly gimmicks. There is all kinds of room for experimentation in other games, but if there are some games that just do the basics well, then I am happy.
Nothing is wrong with a generic shooter if you have the money to buy the game and nothing else to do with said money. There are a ton of games for people to buy at any given moment and its hard to tell which ones are worth your money. Of course the question of "worth" can be answered in myriad ways depending on your financial situation, genre preferences, age or anything else that the game developers would use to put you into a demographic.
I think that when reviewing a game the editors will say something is generic to give you a warning: This is a good game, its enjoyable but its not a fantastically amazing must-buy game.
I love Ghostbusters and I want to play the game but my wife won't let me buy games willie-nillie anymore now that we're planning a family. I'll probably end up renting or borrowing it from a friend if I can convince them to buy it. It's unfortunate but I just can't buy everything that tickles my fancy.
So while I don't disagree with you, thebojangles, I think its still fair for editors to say a game is generic even if it is a fun and solid game.
Destructoid is an open discussion community. You don't need to "audition" to post a comment - just speak your mind. We respect differing opinions on the site, so have at it. Be smart, funny, insightful, clueless, or cute -- but back it up with substance. Keep your cool, keep it fun. We only ask that you act respectfully and above all: don't be a troll and ruin it for everyone else. Don't bring down gamers or we'll, you know, gently shoot you in the face and stuff you into a flaming mailbox. Each comment is your opportuntity to make this community awesomer. Is that even a word?
Avoiding the banhammer only requires common sense: spamming, trolling, racism, NSFW stuff, and other forms of sucking will not be tolerated. If anyone is griefing please report abuse. Be good. Don't suck!
Destructoid is an independently-run publication forged by our love of video games and the gaming community's need of accountable enthusiast press living the dream since March 16, 2006
thebojangles's blog
follow this blog
subscribe via RSS
send message
invite to meetup+play
Something generic, by definition, has been seen before. If you do something a lot, it'll get boring, so a generic game is probably boring.
Thus, Ghostbusters is not generic.
Red Faction Guerrilla is GTA on Mars (with more destruction). Lots of previews and reviews either gave that impression or outright said it. Who the fuck said Ghostbusters is generic?
A bunch of Ghostbuster reviews and commentary has been peppered with "If you're not a fan of the IP/If you look past the Ghostbuster's license...its a generic shooter"
Which I guess is a little silly. Strip away the awesome flavor content of any game and you have a generic X. /shrug
My bad, I just googled "GTA on Mars" and it's almost 100% forums rather than major media.
generic
No need to put one game down to lift another up now....
Generic means it's generic and not special. So it's not a special shooter according to whoever said it. If you like Ghostbusters, that has nothing to do with whether or not the gameplay is generic.
Also generic.
penis/
That's one of the things I love about halo, because in all reality it's just a really generic shooter, and sometimes I just want to run around and shoot other people without all kinds of silly gimmicks. There is all kinds of room for experimentation in other games, but if there are some games that just do the basics well, then I am happy.
ummm RedFaction kills GhostBusters buddy....
This is a very generic blog.
Nothing is wrong with a generic shooter if you have the money to buy the game and nothing else to do with said money. There are a ton of games for people to buy at any given moment and its hard to tell which ones are worth your money. Of course the question of "worth" can be answered in myriad ways depending on your financial situation, genre preferences, age or anything else that the game developers would use to put you into a demographic.
I think that when reviewing a game the editors will say something is generic to give you a warning: This is a good game, its enjoyable but its not a fantastically amazing must-buy game.
I love Ghostbusters and I want to play the game but my wife won't let me buy games willie-nillie anymore now that we're planning a family. I'll probably end up renting or borrowing it from a friend if I can convince them to buy it. It's unfortunate but I just can't buy everything that tickles my fancy.
So while I don't disagree with you, thebojangles, I think its still fair for editors to say a game is generic even if it is a fun and solid game.