@buttslamify I think that's the sort of point this article is making. What does it mean to "have your finger on the video game pulse"? Does it mean you have to agree with the general populace and blindly praise things you see as flaws just because everyone else thinks you should like it? And even if what you say is true, why is it bad for someone to hold a contrasting opinion? In the end, opinions are just information left to you to process. What happens when you take away those contrasting opinions and leave yourself with a world full of people who only agree with each other? Oh yeah... Mark said it... Mediocrity.
@rileypoole1234 @Hey_Jay Wow. The Lee chase was the one giving people problems? Getting 100% Sync in the Hickey chase was the far bigger pain for me as it seemed to be almost solely based on luck. Spent a solid hour trying to get Connor to do something more than either shove the guards I was trying to kill or twirl his tomahawk at them.
Connor: "Look... Look. Look what I can do!" *twirl twirl twirl* Game: "Optional objective, failed."
@el3m2tigre Even if they did, it was stupid to announce a game they weren't even going to work on for half a decade. Like Last Guardian. Developers need to stop announcing titles unless they have at least an initial build. Then, we might actually see people hitting their release dates instead of the average "delays to make sure you have a top quality product" that last anywhere from six months to two years.
@andrewwittmaier I'm all for taking the time and effort to make a quality product, but I also think it's outright stupid to announce a title that's nowhere near ready, for which you have a glimmer of an idea and a few art department renderings, and then expect people not to be annoyed when you take half a decade to actually give them any information. "It's gonna be awesome and amazing!... Eventually... we think... maybe..."
@yavihah @keech No, Yavihah... just... no. If your sole purpose is to make money, then you can toss all your creativity in a bag and bury it in a back corner because you don't really need it. But artists don't create for profit. A real writer doesn't write books to be the next Stephen King, but because they have a story in their head that is alive and present in their lives as a member of their own family. It is something that must be done and whether it was loved or hated, it is their own. And the thing is that the greatest innovators did not do what they did for profit. They did it because they were artists. The value may have been given after the fact, but this argument is so important because we cannot, no matter what, begin to sacrifice creativity for profit. It leaves us with a world devoid of innovation because the masses are not capable of making those leaps. It's the role of brilliant individuals who push the boundaries of what is expected. Even if it fails dramatically or if people look at it and shake their heads going, "Nope... don't like that", it has still given the world a different perspective and someone else might take the token of brilliance within that failed creation and make it even better. That is what this article is arguing, that we cannot afford to allow the masses to alter those brilliant bits just because they don't get it. Profit be damned in the face of ten years of Call of Duty: Are we not freaking done with this yet? Give me the abrupt but intensely emotional and poignant ending of Mass Effect 3 over that any day. Creative people will create whether they're getting paid for it or not. If they're really good and really lucky, they might find an audience. But they do that audience a massive disservice if they refuse to push themselves to grow out of fear of losing profit. And in the end, even if they do change themselves, sell their artistic soul, then the work they create loses the brilliance of the passionate mind it once had behind it. I don't want that to happen. I pray that video games continue to evolve and become a part of the artistic pantheon of film, music, art, theater, and television, an accepted and widely recognized medium that produces just as much artistic beauty as any other. But it will never get there if we continue to treat the medium as just another toy that has to be changed if it doesn't do what we want it to.
I also don't understand why people are so upset about the idea of offering an option in a game. It's not as though having the choice to skip action sequences means you have to do it. It just means you CAN if you want to. How can it be a bad thing to give gamers even more freedom to play a game exactly how they want to?
Mirha77's comments