View Full Version : There's a four letter difference between....


admin
06-26-2007, 08:28 AM
There's a four letter difference between Craptacular and Spectacular

So Mitch Gitelman, FASA Studio Manager is mad as hell that people don't give Shadowrun the praise it deserves. Why should I care? Most people play games for entertainment purposes... if people aren't entertained, then shouldn't that be the end of it? I mean really, if you have to sit people down and say "Look, you're obviously not getting it, this is a gaming masterpiece... Look at it again. LOOK AT IT! YOU! IT! LOOK!" then maybe the problem is more deep seated than we originally thought. For clarity's sake, Mitch Gitelman never actually said those words, but that's the feeling I get whenever I read he or someone like him telling us how awesome Shadowrun or some other game is and that I should really put in the work to learning how to play it so I can get up to speed and *gasp* have some fun. By the way, I do this other thing in the daytime that's actually CALLED work. I don't want to work some more just so I might have some fun. I'll probably just pick up one of the other dozens of games out now that starts being fun right away with no work on my part. That's the kind of entertainment I prefer.

I remember growing up with videogames (I'm of the age such that I grew up with most videogames... I had an Atari 2600 when it was new if that gives you the appropriate timeframe here) and they were almost always fun or not fun. Hits were defined by whether you and everybody that played them couldn't STOP playing them... you'd get instantly (or almost instantly) hooked. But what we didn't have were the people that wrote the games telling us we really need to play it some certain way, or for some certain length of time before we'd learn to enjoy them. I'm noticing more and more that some games just don't have that instant appeal for the mass market and developers and marketing folks are resorting to telling us how and why to play and it's starting to seem like flat out desperation. Look at Viva Pinata. The game looks like it's aimed at 5-6 year olds, but can you find me a 5-6 year old that can even comprehend what in the hell the game is about? My 10 year old son loves it (which amazes me -- the other day he told his mom that two ladybugs were romancing in the grass... thanks Rare!) but then again none of his friends like it, they think it's boring. The people that like the game seem to be adults. Adults that can put up with the kiddy graphics to get to the gameplay underneath. The folks at Microsoft keep harping that Viva Pinata is a great, great game. To some it may be, but why isn't the game itself speaking to people saying "I'm great! Play me once and you'll never want to stop!" because I think that would be more convincing to the dollar spending public. If your looks appeal to one group but by design you're intended for another group, well... when people do that, there's a strong possibility Eddie Murphy might "give them a ride home". Look it up kids, Google's great for that stuff. Is that the hidden message Rare wants to be sending out with their romancing game? I doubt it. Pick a target audience and focus both the gameplay and style to the SAME target, Rare.

The one area I can remotely cut this trend some slack is the simulation racer, such as Gran Turismo, F1, or Forza Motorsport. I realize they're trying to relatively accurately portray what it's like to drive race cars at high speed and regardless of how I think they should react, there are some fairly quantitative factors and rules of physics that come into play that can more and more effectively simulate the task. That being said, the marketing folks need to learn that racing game fans aren't necessarily sim-racing fans. I love me some Burnout and MotorStorm... but will happily pass on Gran Turismo HD and Forza 2. I found it funny what a big attention getting painting your car was in Forza 2. I noticed a few people that flat out admitted they couldn't race worth a damn but boy they sure painted up some neat cars!

I'll be the first to admit that there have been games that I was sure I wouldn't like that I actually ended up loving, but I could usually tell I was wrong almost instantly after I'd start playing. If people can't see the fun and worth of playing a particular game first hand, you've already lost that round as a game developer. Unfortunately, today's battlefield for consumer dollars means you've got to offer more, you've got to be better, and most importantly, you've got to have a FUN game. Back to Shadowrun and Mitch Gitelman's complaints... he thinks his game is getting shafted by mid-70's review scores. I'm sorry Mitch. Reviews are reviews are reviews. One or two here or there might be out of line, but when they all group together fairly closely, you've just got to live with it. Your "spectacular" is a lot closer to the reviewers' "craptacular" than you'd like to admit. I fully feel your pain over working for years on a game and experiencing the joy of releasing your baby only to have people pelt it with rotten fruit and call it names. But you've got to realize that in this fickle world we live in, your "day job" needs to lead to our "entertainment" or we don't give a crap about you. Not you personally, but you the anonymous game designer. I don't care that I didn't give your game the time it deserved. Your game didn't give me the entertainment I deserved, so we're even.


-Sean

Captiosus
06-26-2007, 09:14 AM
God, could Mitch whine any more in that article?

I have Shadowrun for Vista and I have to admit that I'm somewhat addicted to it. At times it's fun, but it hasn't stopped me from being critical of the game. Since it's 9AM and I'm barely waking up, I'm just going to copy and paste what I wrote at the 2old2play forums.

$59.99/$49.99 for this game is way too steep. With no single player, to justify a full retail price, it should have a lot more depth to multiplayer besides 9 maps, 3 gametypes and the same standard magics and techs available to everyone.

To draw a comparison, we have to look at another game that sells, strictly, on multiplayer. I like to compare it to Unreal Tournament 2004. They both have a similar premise of futuristic FPS combat with the only real difference being the magic aspect (though you can sort of compensate for that through UT's game modifiers).

UT2K4 has 10 gametypes and about 25 to 30 maps out of the box. That's 3 times more than Shadowrun has in both areas.

Furthermore, Unreal Tournament 2004 had a "single player" mode which, like Shadowrun, were nothing but bot matches. However, they were designed to be easily playable and give you a minor sense of accomplishment if you couldn't play online. I can't comprehend why something of this nature couldn't have been included in Shadowrun. It wouldn't have required a huge team to design some story, just some kind of RNA Corp./Lineage ladder where you had to retrieve artifacts or suppress the "insurgency".

Sure, I'm having fun playing the game, but I got it free. I don't think I'd feel the same way if I had to shell out 60 dollars for it. It just lacks long lasting appeal and I'm also unimpressed by the fact that this game will only have any longevity by requiring owners to spend more money on it to get new map packs via Microsoft Points.

I won't even get into how long I sit here and wait for a match or how long I sit there waiting for the game to sync when new players join *grumble*.

In my opinion, this title is the epitome of a bargain bin title and should have started at 29.99 PC/39.99 console.

That really summarizes most of my complaints.
Within a span of 5 days, I have:
- Played every map so much that I know them all down to the texture.
- Played every race and used every spell to the point where I know what spells/tech are best for each race on each side on each map.

Sorry to tell MS/FASA this, but there is a huge difference between mouse/keyboard users and controller players. Can you spot the mouse and keyboard user in this list? I can. (http://members.cox.net/vreynauld/scoreboard_shadowrun.jpg) When using spray based weapons in Shadowrun, the micro-precision of the mouse destroys the X360 controller users, no matter what "adjustments" FASA claims they made.

FASA/MS claims they have data which shows stat tracking promotes cheating. Let's see it. Seriously. I want to see it. The fact that I can't even see my own overall stats is ludicrous. We know the game has to track stats for matchmaking and for achievements, so why not let me see MY OWN FREAKING STATS? I truly believe they don't because this game was clearly rushed to market to try to fill the void between H3 Beta an H3 Release and because they knew if they put stats accessible to everyone it would show how "TrueSkill" matchmaking is just a bunch of theoretical bullshit that doesn't work in this game.

Finally, and not elaborated much in my rant above, the netcode in this game REALLY freggin sucks. It's not fun to be in the middle of a match (which you had to wait 5+ minutes staring at a "searching" screen to get into), have 2 or 3 new players join a game, then jam up the game at the syncing screen for 5-10 minutes (http://members.cox.net/vreynauld/shadowcrap.jpg). This usually causes everyone to leave the game, including the host, which instantly drops the game and screws any achievements you might have earned (because SR doesn't award ANY achievements until after a complete game). The achievements part isn't as much of a concern because I honestly don't care about achievements, but it's still shoddy game design.

60 dollars? Hell no. 30? Maybe.
Free from Circuit City's promotion last week? Now that's a good price.

RokkaMan
06-26-2007, 09:29 AM
Shadowrun can suck me. The one thing they're tying to worm out of is the one thing that it all boils down to; lack of single player. Any defense they put up automatically falls flat on it's face when you realize that even Unreal Tournament 3 is going to have a real, story-filled single player campaign.

I've played it on the 360, and it's also one of the most unbalanced multiplayer games I have ever played. First of all, the ability to teleport has to be one of the gayest, lamest abilities to give to the noobs that like to worm out of dying. Also, I don't care what they have to say about it, sniping with a controller at a moving target is impossible. I've played my fair share of console and PC FPS's, and there is no way in hell I can stand a chance against a PC mouse-and-keyboard wielding sniper.

Basicially, it's a crappy game. "Craptacular?". No, I'd say it's "shitsational"


Nice forums, by the way ;D

Captiosus
06-27-2007, 04:02 PM
Sorry to revisit this topic but I just need to rant.

The more I play Shadowrun, the angrier I get at the game, the angrier I get at FASA, and the more I realize that, while generally they're not the best source of information, the reviews of this game were pretty damn accurate.

You know, I've played FPS games since they were invented. When some of them started migrating to online only, I was kind of sad but the developers, mainly Epic and iD, did a damn fine job of making a highly replayable online FPS experience. I could waste my life away behind Unreal Tournament (the original) and not see the same map twice in a day.

Fast forward to Shadowrun.. Within an hour or two, I'm pretty damn bored by the game. The vast majority of the people are playing Elves and you've probably seen the same map at least twice. Pathetic. I feel like online-only FPS's just went back 10 years.

And people defend this crap? Go to the Shadowrun forums and there are fanboys all over the place saying anyone complaining about content or price is an "idiot". I'm an idiot because I've grown up with FPS's and, as an online FPS, Shadowrun flat out sucks compared to just about anything that came before it and will come after it. There is nothing there to keep people interested. The novelty of the magic/tech/race system wears off fast. And then it's just the same boring, symmetrical, maps over and over and over again.

A fool and their money are soon parted, so I can't wait to laugh at these fanboys when they pay 800-1200 MS points for content packs which still won't even give the game as much staying power as games like Unreal Tournament had out of the box.

Sorry, I'm ranting. I'm just aggravated to no end that some people have lived such a sheltered life to think that this game is worth the highest retail price point and paid content downloads. Grrr.

Altered_Weapon
07-03-2007, 05:07 PM
I like the game. That being said I bought it after I fixed my lawnmower and figured the $56 I spent on it was well worth the not spending $400 or more on the next lawnmower I'm going to buy. I really like the magic elements and only play with people I know. I knew full well there was no singleplayer experience in the game and although it could've been priced at least $10 less I can look past it. I don't think it's craptacular and I don't think that it is spectacular, it is what it is. I don't think that the elements that they have put in the game are something that takes a single game or two to get used to. I really had to put a little time into playing the first night I had it (after I got the f***ing update to finally download). I think the most fun I had was when I played with people on my friends list. I really don't like making new friend over XBL and people you know through forums or real life make it easier to communicate with. Of course I have been playing Forza 2 almost exclusively, so maybe the game does suck and my opinion is just me trying to see both sides. Who knows, and who cares.

admin
07-05-2007, 09:22 AM
I like the game. That being said I bought it after I fixed my lawnmower and figured the $56 I spent on it was well worth the not spending $400 or more on the next lawnmower I'm going to buy. I really like the magic elements and only play with people I know. I knew full well there was no singleplayer experience in the game and although it could've been priced at least $10 less I can look past it. I don't think it's craptacular and I don't think that it is spectacular, it is what it is. I don't think that the elements that they have put in the game are something that takes a single game or two to get used to. I really had to put a little time into playing the first night I had it (after I got the f***ing update to finally download). I think the most fun I had was when I played with people on my friends list. I really don't like making new friend over XBL and people you know through forums or real life make it easier to communicate with. Of course I have been playing Forza 2 almost exclusively, so maybe the game does suck and my opinion is just me trying to see both sides. Who knows, and who cares.

Amen... to all of that.... except the mowing the lawn part.... I hate mowing the lawn.

Altered_Weapon
07-06-2007, 04:31 PM
Amen... to all of that.... except the mowing the lawn part.... I hate mowing the lawn.


Why am I the only one that likes mowing my yard? I don't even have a riding mower. Of course I like having the neighbors envy my grass. fun stuff.

Captiosus
07-08-2007, 12:01 PM
Amen... to all of that.... except the mowing the lawn part.... I hate mowing the lawn.


Why am I the only one that likes mowing my yard? I don't even have a riding mower. Of course I like having the neighbors envy my grass. fun stuff.

I wouldn't mind mowing my lawn if I didn't have horrid grass and tree pollen allergies. To mow my yard, I have to go outside looking like Michael Jackson in full long sleeve shirts, long slacks (tucked in) and a mask - in the middle of July or August, urgh!

Back in the day before my allergies ramped up, I loved mowing the grass.. I used to love the smell of freshly cut grass. Now it nearly hospitalizes me, wtf. Life is cruel!

Altered_Weapon
07-13-2007, 04:48 PM
To mow my yard, I have to go outside looking like Michael Jackson in full long sleeve shirts, long slacks (tucked in) and a mask - in the middle of July or August, urgh!

You should buy a monkey and have him mow your lawn for you.