Maverick wrote:uhh, actvision also does it but WORSE. COD? SAME GAME. the gameplay hasn't changed since Modern Warfare. And GH? Dead. Why? Oversaturation. these publishers need to realize that we(mainly smart PC gamers not little kiddie console "gamers") want innovation and some VARIETY in games. Thats why I love PR. you can do SO many things, and EVERY game is different(unless you play the same maps over and over)
Yes this is true, but activision actually did little tiny things to make COD fun, and in the end, I do find COD just plain wicked fun. I can play Zombies for hours, on the otherhand, talking about NfS, it always just ends up being a regurgitated game claiming "The Most Realistic Driving" when its not, its arcadish and stupid, the only ones I really liked stopped at Most Wanted and Carbon. As far as Madden, well Madden is a whole nother beast, you see this is there trick. They take about four or five features out every 2 years or 3 years, then they add them in 5 years later with a different name and the same look, 5 features. Or it ends up being some inconsiquential feature, I mean Madden 12 is 'supposed' to have "Suprise Onside Kicks". Really? Thats their big feature this year?? Thats whats supposed to keep everyone playing, thank you, but Ill take my 60$ elsewhere EA. I mean they havent even gotten the animations to look great yet either, theyve had over 10 years and about 3 or 4 as the ONLY NFL franchise out there and they cant even get fluid and good animations (Balls passing through defenders hands, recievers having the ball go straight through them, weird tackles, etc. etc.)
Pudgeinabf2 wrote:You're also talking about the company responsible for:
Deadspace 2's horrible marketing campaign
Dante's Inferno (everything)
Bad Company 1&2&expansion (ok this fail is mostly down too DICE codifying bf2)
Dragon Age 2
Crysis 2 (for existing)
EA isn't responsible for alot except throwing money at developers and setting the direction for the game (IE make me a fast paced explosive shooter rivaling CODX). And marketing....god i hate their marketing campaigns.
But in the end if any game fails, its ultimately the developers fault, from what I've seen and played of PR (about 60hrs now), they should be fine. Just if some corporate bigwig is telling you to add anything (like a child murder scene or something) for "shock value" or some other reason...don't for gods sake do it, stick up to them, remind them why they hired you, and release the game when its ready the way you want it.
And presuming you stick to the same naming scheme (taliban, real battlefields etc.), stick to your guns when some dumbass reporter comes gunning for you, don't back down like....oh dear EA and medal of honour did....We know you're not dishonouring soldiers, you know it, don't let another reporter brand us with idiotic labels.
EDIT
Just case in point of EA pushing games out before they're ready. Crysis 2, the PC forums exploded with rage (most of it pointless), but the truth was the game wasn't ready to be released. First impressions are forever, a buggy first day is incomprehensibly worse than a 2 month delay. Hell people have been waiting years for diablo3, spit, polish and beta's from a faithful community help create an awesome game.
Also I love PR:BF2, I wish I'd found it years ago. (Ironically the only good thing I got out of bc2 was buying bf2 out of sheer disgust, and from there found PR.)
Exactly, although, out of all of those, Id have to say I found BF BC2 a fairly fun game, the same with the first BF BC, the first was definately not as CODish as some might think, it leaned more toward PR with squads and huge maps and such.
karambaitos wrote:and red alert 3 , C&C, medal of honor 2010 ect.
Again, save redalert 3 and onward, the generals series was pretty solid, plenty of mods out for it now. Backwards from Generals is RA2 which I believe is where EA took control, that was good too and backwards from that were fine games.