View Full Version : GameTrailers fucks up GOTY 2008
Obeliskos
23rd December 2008, 06:06
A historical moment - GameTrailers making a sucky GOTY list. (http://www.gametrailers.com/player/43834.html) Truly groundbreaking and new.
Megamickel
23rd December 2008, 12:24
How is this a shitty list? These were the only good games for PS2 this year. Granted, I'm pissed that the faggots picked Rock Band 2 over GH:WT - RB2 wasn't as good of a game. I'm also pissed Persona 4 made the list, that game was a waste of time
Then again I can't sit through TBRPGs anymore, not after having played games like Oblivion, so maybe I am predisposed to dislike it.
ToxicShock
23rd December 2008, 18:32
More like game developers fucked up GOTY 2008
+Why would you ever listen to gametrailers.
Nunu
23rd December 2008, 20:31
its true, even funny people like yahtzee don't have an opinion you should care about. only rely on things you hear from people you know.
ToxicShock
23rd December 2008, 20:46
True.
In my case though, I don't trust the "people I know" for shit. 2 out of 4 of the people I asked got Left4Dead on 360 cuz they "can't imagine playing shooters on pc." The only people I ever trust for gaming opinions now are my brothers. I've very much considered doing some type of webcast with the bunch of us together cuz, as I've always said, ask all of us something and one is bound to know it. But then again, that's kinda compromising of integrity cuz it's against my whole stance of "no one knows your preferences but you"
Lucas
23rd December 2008, 20:53
they "can't imagine playing shooters on pc."
http://i263.photobucket.com/albums/ii157/LineMarvelsLucas/Jokes/Epic_Fail.gif
ToxicShock
23rd December 2008, 20:56
I can kinda understand it, if you've become so retardedly desensitized to being a stereotypical casual college gamer that you play all games dual analog to the point where you don't know anything else, but jesus christ man, try evolving to understand the purity of simplicity! What the fuck is wrong with point and shoot with a mouse?
Newbie
23rd December 2008, 20:58
I usually play my shooters on a console, but I ran the demo of left 4 dead on my laptop too as a personal challenge. I'm going to try and get some shooters for that now too, because it was amusing and I'm on my computer more often.
ToxicShock
23rd December 2008, 21:00
I usually play my shooters on a console, but I ran the demo of left 4 dead on my laptop too as a personal challenge. I'm going to try and get some shooters for that now too, because it was amusing and I'm on my computer more often.
See? Adopt, adapt, improve
Obeliskos
23rd December 2008, 22:25
I'm also pissed Persona 4 made the list, that game was a waste of time
EXTERMINATE EXTERMINATE EXTERMINATE
I'm not angry at their opinions, I'm angry that they stuck a multi-console, mediocre sequel (and I use that term loosely in this case) to a mediocre game BASED off another mediocre game.
Fucking Rock Band (and Guitar Hero) always gets too much credit. It's a glorified rock band simulator and it gets too much fucking attention. Persona 4 is so much more than that, and over 75% of the people in my state probably don't even know about it and don't have the time to listen to me talk about it, because they're too busy TRYIN 2 BEET A SONG ON EXPERRRRRT LULZ
Lucas
23rd December 2008, 22:28
Fucking Rock Band and Guitar Hero always gets too much credit. It's a glorified rock band simulator and it gets too much fucking attention.
http://i263.photobucket.com/albums/ii157/LineMarvelsLucas/Jokes/Win20button.jpg
Momiji
24th December 2008, 06:13
EXTERMINATE EXTERMINATE EXTERMINATE
I'm not angry at their opinions, I'm angry that they stuck a multi-console, mediocre sequel (and I use that term loosely in this case) to a mediocre game BASED off another mediocre game.
Fucking Rock Band (and Guitar Hero) always gets too much credit. It's a glorified rock band simulator and it gets too much fucking attention. Persona 4 is so much more than that, and over 75% of the people in my state probably don't even know about it and don't have the time to listen to me talk about it, because they're too busy TRYIN 2 BEET A SONG ON EXPERRRRRT LULZ
Either that or trying to beat Halo 3 on Legendary.
Sinfulwolf
24th December 2008, 07:25
I used to really enjoy shooters on PC, then my PC got dated. I still enjoy them (DooM3 kicked much more ass on PC then XBox, and Return to Castle Wolfenstien was awesome too), but I also enjoy the console controllers for shooters. That's my personal opinion, I enjoy it.
I am going to get Left 4 Dead for Xbox 360, for a few reasons. A) my computer ain't that fucking good. B) My TV is a much more impressive screen than my monitor C) My Xbox is set up in a much nicer spot, where I can more easily hang out with my brother or Sly while I play, instead of locking myself in the office. D) Should the computer be required for anything other than my personal entertainment I don't have to get off.
So... PCs are fun, but so are consoles...
I got off topic
gameguru777
24th December 2008, 08:28
No matter what a reviewer says or does it will never, EVER make everybody happy. This list is a great example. Some people may look at the list and say. "WTF! HOW THE HELL DID (insert game name here) GET THAT HIGH ON THE LIST!!!" And some will say "I FUCKIN' LOVE THAT GAME! IT DESERVED THAT SPOT! I'M GONNA GO EAT ME SOME HAMBURGERS!!!" (disregard that comment about the hamburgers... got the late night munchies...)
Point being that not every list or review will make everybody happy. There will always be some fan boy that will be angry that "Final Fantasy whatever" is not on a top five games of all time list. Likewise someone will be angry that a gramer game is on the list. (If you do not know what a gramer is, please take a moment to watch the delightful series of "Nametags"... seriously, its like "Scrubs", meets "The Office", with video games thrown in the mix.)
The most common solution I have heard to the problem is "Well, don't listen to reviewers because they can't tell you what you personally like." Afterward I walk up to said idiot and smack them on the back of the head! Alright, so it is a bit true, everyone has their own tastes and so forth, but there is something else in the mix that people who say that do not take into account: Truly BAD games.
Reading game reviews is a GOOD thing, because it tells you what is good about the game, and what sucks about the game and gives you a good idea of if you should purchase that game. Seriously, do you have around $50 dollars to buy a game that you will not know if you even like (renting works, but not if you are a PC gamer...) Lastly, what is dangerous about listening to game reviewers is if you listen to only one. Yahtzee for example is great and hilarious. However only a fool would believe EVERY WORD HE SAYS to reflect how they feel about every game. Read several different reviews (there are websites for that, it takes about 15 min. to find all you want to know about a game.) and form an educated opinion about how much you personally will enjoy a game before you buy it... maybe then terrible games will not make as much money and some developers will put more effort into their games... and maybe hell will freeze over...
And about the whole PC vs. Console thing, here is my two cents. All you PC exclusive gamers who think themselves as Super beings because you use a keyboard instead of a controller... think about this. PC gaming was built on point and click adventures which then died out so the PC turned to having vast amounts of FPS games. That is still true to today. Most of the games for PC that are not FPS seem to be taking a page from console games, only the consoles seem to do it better. In fact, most of the AMAZING PC games that everyone is hyped up about is also out on a console... only nobody had to upgrade their systems to play it on full settings.
(Dear god, I really did type a lot... just had to vent a bit... sorry)
Lucas
24th December 2008, 10:22
My pick for game of the year is Ninjabread Man. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ninjabread_Man)
On the PC vs. Console issue, some games simply play better on PC (Half-Life 2, Doom, TF2) and certain games play better on consoles (Halo series, Timesplitters series, Metroid Prime series). I'd rather get a game life Left 4 Dead for my PC, but it isn't strong enough so I'll have to get it for my 360 if I want it.
For me personal preference takes a backseat to practicality. I'd rather be able to play Bioshock on my 360 with good controls and damn good graphics rather than play it on my PC looking like shit with a ton of lag just to have excellent controls.
ToxicShock
24th December 2008, 11:34
I never said anything besides shooters for the PC v 360 thing. And I can only imagine games that weren't available to both being "better on a console." I don't hate console fps's and it's not the fact it's on PC I like it. I'll maintain that the best shooter ever was Goldeneye for the N64 which me and my friends still get together nearly every weekend for to have Goldeneye parties with his big screen. I like console fps's but if it's a game that's available for both, I can't imagine doing it console and liking it as much. Those two friends who got left4dead on their xbox instead of pc? I still go over to their houses and play it there with them, I was just speaking matter or preference.
And no, I think gaming preferences are so diverse that anything short of superman64 can be liked by anyone, and say fuckall to reviewers. Sure, chances are higher of disliking it, but if I take into account every time some game gets a 9.8 out of 10 from every reviewer and it bores me with it's lack of story or frustrates me with it's mechanical problems then who the hell is to say I won't like what they hate?
Sinfulwolf
24th December 2008, 15:57
The one thing that PC will always kick console ass at... RTS... boo yah! Go Dawn of War and Company of Heroes and Starcraft... and many more...
ToxicShock
24th December 2008, 16:53
Raised on Command and Conquer
I know he didn't even look like him but every time I think of seth, I imagine him as Steve Buscemi... just cuz I think that would have worked better
Sinfulwolf
24th December 2008, 17:06
Never been a huge fan of C&C... oh well, they were still fun.
gameguru777
25th December 2008, 01:32
The one thing that PC will always kick console ass at... RTS... boo yah! Go Dawn of War and Company of Heroes and Starcraft... and many more...
... I can't really argue with that...
But yeah the whole thing about PC's was not a shot at anyone in particular. I have a few friends who trash talk consoles because they are PC gamers... There are people like that who only like PC's, that was to them...
lurker
25th December 2008, 01:37
The one thing that PC will always kick console ass at... RTS... boo yah! Go Dawn of War and Company of Heroes and Starcraft... and many more...
Fuck yeah! RTS and RPG are some of my favorite sorta games, and I've been getting proficiant on the mapmaking for WC3 recently. Custom models are so fun to play with ^,^
aika
25th December 2008, 01:59
...there are people that prefer playing FPS on a console?
Am I missing something?
I always assumed it was general acceptance that it was easier to handle a mouse than an analog stick. If there's someone behind you and you want to turn around quickly, mouse >>>>>>>> dual analog
Sinfulwolf
25th December 2008, 02:13
Sorry Aika, that is not necessarily true. Especially if you turn the sensitivity up on your analog sticks. Not only that, I actually found it harder to turn around quickly with the mouse because of the mouse pad, whilst the analog stick had no such restriction.
Newbie
25th December 2008, 02:34
I've found that the mousepad is the bane of pc gamers, and they almost always prefer using a mouse proper.
Kusanagi
25th December 2008, 03:24
I think she meant an actual pad you put under a mouse, not a touchpad like on laptops. Though I agree that it's hard to play with a touchpad :p
Diagasvesle
25th December 2008, 03:35
Console vs pc? Well, I would have to say the ps3 is a pc. Because right now I am using it to type up this post, odd.
Sinfulwolf
25th December 2008, 09:30
I did mean a pad that you put under a mouse. I'd hate to play with a touchpad.
And a PS3 dosn't really count as a PC... its still technically a console. Even if you can go online and such.
Kusanagi
26th December 2008, 15:24
If being able to get online and post made something a PC, my PSP would be a PC. A shitty PC that can't play flash over 1MB, and can only play movies in MP4 format, or w/e it is.
Megamickel
30th December 2008, 11:58
I'm primarily a PC gamer simply by necessity - I have a PC, and I DON'T have money for a decent console. Hell, my PS2 was free.
aika
2nd January 2009, 16:05
I actually found it harder to turn around quickly with the mouse because of the mouse pad, whilst the analog stick had no such restriction.
Laser mouse + my desk without a pad.
Sinfulwolf
3rd January 2009, 15:02
When I was still an avid PC gamer Aika, Laser mouses were an expensive and luxurious thing to be had.
Psycho
6th January 2009, 07:42
In my case though, I don't trust the "people I know" for shit. 2 out of 4 of the people I asked got Left4Dead on 360 cuz they "can't imagine playing shooters on pc."
They are stupid in that sense, but I can understand the sentiment. If you arn't used to FPS on a PC, you shouldn't try L4D. I've played it in both, and prefer the console. Really, I never understood the huge discrepansies people talk about when comparing a mouse to a controller. If you're good with a console, you'll do just fine. The only time I actualy wish I had a mouse are sometimes when using scopes, but that's rare.
Also, I find controllers less restricting. If you wanna stand up or sit in a different way, you can.
Also, my PC would have a heart attack with L4D, so there's that.
The one thing that PC will always kick console ass at... RTS... boo yah! Go Dawn of War and Company of Heroes and Starcraft... and many more...
Hell to the fucking yeah! I love Relic, and I hate Blizzard (Please, don't argue this. Not in the 'I am rigth' sense, more like 'I don't feel like having this debate rigth now...') COH has stolen so much of my time, and DOW 2 looks great.
But hey, Halo Wars migth change that. From what I've seen, enficise migth.
Sinfulwolf
6th January 2009, 10:41
Sorry Psycho, but I'm not entirely sure that Halo Wars will change that. But time will tell right?
And I am curious as to why you hate Blizzard? Is it their artwork (which I disagree with. Too cartoony for my tastes, though the cinematics are great), their constant knack for pushing games back? Or is it something else involving gameplay (which I assume it is)? Just curious is all, don't hear of too many people who don't like Blizzard.
As for trusting people I know on games, I'm confident. When I talk to most of my gamer friends about various games, we discuss good and bad points without resorting to "OHMIGOD! SO GOOD! BUY NOW" or "STUPID SHIT! HALO IS BETTER!" (no comments on the Halo thing. That argument is in the Overated games thread), and so our opinions may differ but we are still able to discuss games are various levels and get new insights to them through story, graphics, gameplay, audio, animation, etc.
Psycho
7th January 2009, 05:06
Yeah, I don't like Blizzards gameplay. It's very much a personal kind of hate, and also how people rave them. I understand they're good, I won't deny that. I do think people blow them out of proportions though.
Yes, SC is super balanced, but that means shit to me. It came out 10 years ago, that really doesn't hold it's weigth now. Yes SC is a competitive E-sport, but it's pretty much the only REAL competive RTS E-sport anyways.
Yes WC3 has thousands of players even today, but I bet at least half of that is just custom games, and not so much love for the game itself. I love the custom games there, but not much else.
Also, I just don't like they're gameplay. It feels too same-y. I mean, look at the races in both SC and WC3, they share too many of the god-damn same qualities and mechanics. I know Blizzard is good, I just don't think they're as good as everyone thinks they are.
Also, I feel SC2 is a slap on the face. I mean, they're gonna make a sequel to the 'most acclaimed RTS' and they don't do much with it. I understand they can't change a lot, but if they weren't gonna change that much begin with, why bother? It's already 'perfect' as is, how do you expand it?
You don't really, save for adding a 4th race. But hey, FUCK IT, let's just tinker around with the races a lot!
Diablo 3 however, that actually looks like a fucking sequel.
BTW, I know Relic has plenty of flaws, but I had tons more fun with their games than Blizzard ones.
PS: I also want to stab anyone that defends SC against WH40K. You say tomato, I say LOOK AT THEM! HOW DO YOU NOT REALISE WHAT THEY DID?!?!
Not that i like WH40K much anymore.
Nunu
7th January 2009, 23:34
You are aware that starcraft was originally a warhammer 40k game, only games workshop pulled out half way through cos they thought it would flop.
Blizzard games are good for their extreme amount of resources that they can afford to spend making their games as good as possible. A good example of this is that they hire cinematographers to help make their cut scenes.
Psycho
8th January 2009, 07:50
You are aware that starcraft was originally a warhammer 40k game, only games workshop pulled out half way through cos they thought it would flop.
You know what? I'm not a total hater, and from playing WH40K for a while, that sounds like something GW would do. The pricks.
You got a link so i can read up and get the rigth info? Cause I actually hadn't heard that before.
And hey, I'm not saying Blizzard is bad. I PERSONALLY can't tolerate them. THATS JUST ME!
I just don't think they're the gods a lot of people make em up to be.
Nunu
8th January 2009, 08:46
my e-detective skills have only turned up one forum post suggesting the history as such:
Even though its not official, what apparently happened is that back in the days, Blizzard wanted to make a Warhammer-based strategy game and word goes they actually got the rights. Unfortunately, Games Workshop decided to pull the plug of this project for undisclosed reasons. However blizzard did not quit so easily. since they were kind of a small company back in the days, they decided trashing the project in which they had worked so hard would be a complete waste of resources, so instead they changed most copyrighted names and brands on the material they already had, created some different assets, and thus Warcraft was born.
Starcraft is a completely different matter because it was created years later. Most of SC races are inspired in one or more W40k races, while still keeping certain key differences along with a completely different story background. The ironic thing is, SC was originally intended to be a Star Wars game, but since acquiring the Lucasarts rights would be severely expensive, Blizzard once more decided to create something more of their own. While SC is still massively inspired by w40k, it can still mantain a certain originality of its own, so no, SC isnt a ripoff of W40k.
i wasn't far off really but in the end it doesn't really matter.
vBulletin® v3.7.4, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.