Ben-DutkaBasically, the results of last week's poll results just don't prove anything about how PlayStation 3 owners view Crysis 2 .
Some say the game is awesome and the PS3 version is great as well, others say it just doesn't matter 'cuz they obviously aren't interested in the genre in question. There's just no definitive answer, despite our very positive review. But that's to be expected; those familiar with our readership will know we have an abnormal assortment of gamers. There are plenty of FPS fans, yes, but then again, there are plenty who simply despise shooters. Then there are those who have no strong feelings on the subject at all; they'd just rather play something like Dragon Age II or a more cerebral adventure more suited to their tastes. Even so, we continue to recommend Crytek's newest accomplishment due to the length and quality of the campaign, the refreshing nature of the multiplayer, and that uber-sweet twist to a basic shooter structure: the Nanosuit.
For this week's poll, we'd like to know what you think about Activision owning five of the top ten best-selling games of all time. When we heard the news , we were reminded once again that Activision had been close to folding less than 20 years ago…and now, just look. The question is, do you believe Call of Duty and Guitar Hero deserve to be viewed as industry leaders…?
Related Game(s): Crysis 2
Crysis 2 really does deserve your money. I just started today and played for about an hour and a half. I can see where people can be annoyed by the slow start to it, but I'm really enjoying it. Instead of the non-stop action of most shooters I feel like I can just slow down and catch my breath while walking around the environment experimenting with different play mechanics.
Guitar Hero no way, as for COD, maybe COD4 but otherwise no.
Well, I can already see how this poll is going to play out.
Personally I loved CoD4 but after that I wavered and CoD lost my favor. As for Guitar Hero, I was never really a fan of the rhythmic games, fun at parties but outside those they weren't that amazing.
CoD does not deserve to be one of the industry leaders. It's a shame that millions of people buy the same flawed game year after year. I just hope that Battlefield 3 gets the attention it deserves.
The pic is from the first Crysis. Just in case you didnt notice, Ben (i'm sure you know, i just have to point it out).
I love Crysis 2. Its not near as open and free-roaming as Crysis, but it has much more story and is put together very well. I think it is tied with Assassins Creed 2 for the best multi-plat game this generation.
That's a tough award to give out. AC2 was a nice showpiece, as was Batman:AA, but DS2 would not let me go. C:LOS and Darksiders both shined in different ways. I personally thought the Orange Box was a terrific deal despite the alleged substandard ps3 port. Of course, although many will disagree with me, I think GTA4 and Liberty City Stories were more fun than Red Dead Redemption, even though that was no slouch either. And it's strange how many didn't notice NGS and NGS2. But yes, C2 is definitely the most impressive multiplatform shooter thus far.
Why does the first answer on the poll refer to quality when the question you're asking is whether or not they deserve to be viewed as industry leaders? "popularity doesn't mean quality" is hardly the way to answer that question.
GH is an industry leader because it showed, more than any other game, that playing music can be fun for anyone. Due to its leadership in our industry, many a copy-cat has come along.
CoD is an industry leader in online multiplayer. With its no-hassle, jump-in-and-play online component, its simple and fluent controls and its action heavy maps, there is barely a game out there that can compare.
They're both industry leaders. It has nothing to do with popularity or quality, although they both have those too.
I take it as asking if a game series of questionable quality that is way behind the cutting edge of gaming technology deserves to be seen as an industry leader regardless of sales.
ur poll is incredibly rigged on this one. ur asking if CoD deserves praise to a community that doesn't think CoD deserves praise.
its like asking Jews if Adolf Hitler deserved the praise he got.
Bro, I mean this in the best way possible, but your logic is severely flawed. No one in their right minds would say that Hitler did anything remotely good. You can't compare video games to a sociopathic dictator.
To be fair there are a crap ton of members who read here and never post anything, so they could theoretically vote in favor of the CoD.
What an utterly offensive analogy.
i can see what your trying to say man but not the best analogy
Last edited by Godslim on 3/28/2011 7:25:09 AM
I call that an "anfailogy".
Flame bait or lack of tact.
I am one of the ones who reads regularly and doesn't post often and I gave my vote to cod. I really enjoy those games. Good call World
I went with "they deserve those sales"!
Simply put, they obviously know their market and how to pander to the majority of gamers whims. If they weren't successful at what they do, then they wouldn't hold such an accolade.
This doesn't mean we need to like the games they produce; we are all individuals with our likes and dislikes, but you can't take Activision's success away from them. They know what strings to pull, what moves to make and the market has responded.
Admittedly this success does not mean it will last forever. The world changes, habits change, genre's change and evolve… everything is in emotion. What would be utterly astounding is if Activision can claim the same accolade in 5 or ten years time. If they can, it means ultimately, they are the best in the business, they can read the market and keep shoving crap down peoples throat that tastes good… and, in the end… it looks good to their shareholders… in this economy, it is all about profit and keeping your shareholders happy… that is what matters in the end.
To do this, it still means you have to make compelling titles that sell, bubble-gum games that can be played quickly and then spat out. Real; consumable products that are consumed by the millions through addictive game mechanics and low barriers to entry…
We will see how long it lasts… but like M$ or Apple, they know what they are doing it seems… for now anyways…
Q!
"play.experience.enjoy"
Last edited by Qubex on 3/27/2011 9:55:07 PM
I'd agree with all that, just not the "played quickly and spat out" part. If anything, both the GH and CoD franchises have put out games that people sink hundreds upon hundreds of hours into. There's no spitting them out after only a short while.
When it comes to CoD, I actually believe that is a huge reason for the large sales numbers. Its got a lot of good things going for it, but most of all, it's worth the asking price due to the large amount of gaming you can get out of it.
They get spit out as soon as the next re-skin is out though.
Admittedly this success does not mean it will last forever…..true see eventually they will have to reboot cod as gamers will start to think its basically the same game
case u didn't notice, most people who game are casual gamers. CoD is a great game for casual and hardcore gamers alike. so its a natural choice for people who just wanna have some pure simple fun with friends.
seems to me that if you have no friends in real life to play CoD with, you probably won't like it. so my advice?
get some friends.
…wait, how does that answer the question?
uh… what? Wouldn't more friends mean more social time and less game time?
Only time I play multiplayer games is when playing with friends who don't live anywhere near me.
I believe that COD and GH do, but to an extent. GH2 was the peak of the quality of that franchise; the review scores prove it. It was only until GH3, and the rest that released after that entry came along that gamers and hardcore fans alike starting thinking "why did they release these as full retail products, and not as DLC or downloadable game titles, to avoid making more and more plastic guitar instruments?".
As for COD, I found MW (or COD4) to be the peak of the franchise from a quality and innovative standpoint (on a side note WaW is my personal favourite, as unlike many I was never really exposed to WW2 games as often and as the PSXExtreme team have stated a couple of times, WaW is the last great WW2 game created).
It was only until MW2 released that the series exascerbated all the negativity and hate towards Activision (not to mention the product itself, as although a lot of it was immature and biased, there was at the very least some truth to many of the complaints) and even more so for Black Ops (it was buggy and was too dependent on the basics of MW2's design for multi and single player [although from a sales standpoint, "if it ain't broke, why fix it" right?] despite the fact that Black Ops introduced a few nifty well done innovations such as wager actions and split-screen online).
Put simply, if each successive entry in both of those franchises released 2-3 years apart from one another, the quality of the GH and COD series would either go up or maintain itself.
Last edited by Victor321 on 3/27/2011 10:11:46 PM
Crysis 2 looks good. Don't plan on getting it, but if Shift 2 sucks…I'll just trade it in for Crysis 2 at Best Buy!
crysis 2 is good game, people should just try it out to see if they like it or not. imo its a B+ game, difficulty in sp wasn't that hard. i beat it on the first try on the hardest difficulty. i died couple times, who doesn't but it really wasn't that hard once you knew what to do which was mainly just cloak and walk around everything. cause most of time it was just be tactical don't kill anybody really just avoid making any sound go to the objective.
once i beat it, played the mp than got bored after awhile went back playing my other games.
i wish there was just more things to do being a game that was huge for its sandbox style in the first crysis. it felt not to linear but than it did at times in crysis 2. it would of been cool to have that huge open areas like crysis was than i think it would be a game i keep playing more. games that have that open sandbox style feeling like fallout or red dead, gta allow to do so much in it, kept me to go back and do different things, crysis 2 just sorta failed and took out that feeling that was crysis 1.
CoD doesn't deserve it because it's mediocre in every area except that it's fun with friends. An industry leader should be high-end and fun with friends. In other words Uncharted 2 (and presumably 3) should have those sales because it accomplishes all that and a bag of chips. But if you want to whittle it down to FPS that's gonna be tough because so far nobody seems to be able to make a game that is equally fantastic from SP to MP in the basic review breakdown structure.
I hate to be the graphics guy again, but pop in Crysis 2 for a multiplat example,then pop in Black Ops. The CoD comes up very Dreamcasty.
GH deserves the death it got because they refused to do much with it except pump out sequels and squeeze money from the same product.
problem with Uncharted not selling as well is its a singleplayer game which is amazing but most gamers like playing together and cod is a good one to do it on and because it established a name after cod4 everyone will buy it……but activision have seen this and know they dont have to change the game much
Uncharted 2's multiplayer is pretty solid.
i really dissagree with activision having 5 top games for me they only deserve it as far as sales is concerned. as far as longevity in a franchise, they lack. They're biggest problem to me is there tendency to oversaturate a market with the same product year after year guitar hero and call of duty were innovated when they first came out sure but they were never updated to keep up with other genre contenders. looking at what battlefield 3 is doing, activision will be obsolete by fall especially if they are openly intending to recycle the games original programming. To me a franchise like Ubisoft (AC series) or insomniac (R&C) just name a few are the ones that deserve to be commended for doing whatever it took to keep a game fresh. For me, i have played and owned every console ratchet and it never got old. games that dont wither with age are the greatest the industry has to offer. (I played black ops the other day and left feeling a bit suicidal lol. activision better do something miraculous because that game is just soooooo cheap and outdated)
Well all the stuff discussed after Crysis 2 came out, I can say has actually changed my vote on it. I figured that since I hate fps so much it wouldn't matter, but it seems to have a lot of opposites from most shooters.
Long campaign, multiple play style options, etc, ect.
So I have changed my view to, when I can get it for less than $20 I might get some enjoyment out of it and I'll give it a whirl.
As for Cod and GH, most people know what I think, there are a lot of spoiled children playing video games these days. I'm sorry, but if the average gamer was over the age of 22 and was smarter than Mr. Ed, those games wouldn't have sold as well.
I'm not saying everyone who likes them is a child or lacking in intelligence, I'm saying the average person probably is though. I'll agree that an intelligent adult can enjoy them, but if you look at the audience, they are not the majority.
Well although I agree the average COD player is younger. I have to disagree that on the theory that they wouldn't have sold as well. MW was a very very good game. Just on the name alone MW2, even black ops sold very well but was mediocre compared to what else is out their now; KZ2, 3, Crysis 2, MAG… I could probably go on. But the reason I say it is mediocre despite the time I've had with it because I do like the games and I'm 25 and would like to think I have some what of a brain 😉 is because all these other games are pushing the genre. Doing something different. While COD has been theoretically the same, being the safe sure bet. They need to do something to garner the attention of the people who have lost interest otherwise they'll start seeing decline! At least I would think.
Last edited by bigrailer19 on 3/28/2011 1:16:52 AM
Ithink they both deserve it… I think that the GH games for certain have run their course, but COD desperately needs a makeover. Keep the gameplay and mechanics, ok I can liv with that, it works for COD. But you gotta stop releasing the same game, even I'll admit it, and I'm a big fan of the franchise.
Back to the topic though, GH did something great, theirs no question it deserves everything it's gotten, and now it's time has run out. COD also did something amazing when MW released and garnered aot of attention or what ot achieved as an FPS! But more importantly I think it started on the right track, and obviously pulled gamers in. But unfortunately they've played it safe with COD since and stuck with the same tried and true formula. I think because of that the time for COD should run out. It prolly won't, but really if MW3 doesn't have something that pushes the franchise further, or sets it apart from the others well then what it receives from here on out, I don't think it deserves! Games can't become revolutionary doing the same thing over year after year!
Last edited by bigrailer19 on 3/28/2011 1:05:52 AM
Right and Black Ops is actually a downgrade from Modern Warfare 2. Blacks Ops atually went backwards as far as the campaign went. Even though I'm not a fan of CoD, I thought MW2's campaign was solid minus the tacky story. But black ops was a mess and the graphics…what happened. CoD deserves the sells…its started a popular trend, a culture. It's the new GTA. Even non-gamers know what Call of Duty is.
Last edited by FM23 on 3/28/2011 3:16:50 AM
agree bigrailer i love cod4 and mw2 but hate w@w and bo……my problem is i think cod needs a new engine now and a revamp its getting very samey now
Sorry iPhone double posted!
Last edited by bigrailer19 on 3/28/2011 1:14:37 AM
some?
lowest score the game has gotten is a 8 and thats some?
just finished it last night, and i can honestly say it has the best ending in a video game ever!
for once a ending leaves me feeling satisfied, not hanging off the edge of a cliff like GOW3, or left dazed wondering WTFs the rest of the game like homefront or KZ3!
enjoyed it so much i went out and bought the PC version since the DX11 patch is coming out tomorrow.
first game i have dived straight back into after finishing it since infamous!
So you bought the same game again…Whoa, can you take me out to dinner sometime? GOWIII did have a WTF ending and KZ3 had a terrible ending…very anticlimatic ending.
Haven't played it but will pick Crysis 2 up next month.
As for Activision, I've said it many times before, it's all about marketing and advertising.
Not to mention CoD and GH aren't crappy franchise, they're good but not S grade.
In fact, I watched every trailer of Black Ops prior to the release and I admit those were cool and if I never knew CoD, I'd be convinced for a purchase by those trailers.
Especially that "There's A Soldier In All Of Us" commercial.
It literally showed that everyone can play CoD and it's true though, CoD is one of the simplest FPS to pick up and play without any complication.
Though despite what I said, based on quality CoD is not even in my top 5.
And do I think it deserve the all the success?
No, Activision doesn't strive to push the video game industry forward and I don't think they deserve the success CoD has been raking in.
But then again, who am I to judge the taste and opinion of 20 million people out there?
They might not deserve those sales based on quality and technical progression, but they put alot of effort into marketing CoD making it popular. They also introduced this MP sensation. Even though I never like GH, I knew alot of people who played it just to have fun just like with the Wii. GH was different when it first hit and CoD created the defining characteristic of this generation. Activision deserves it. Remember, most of these companies ripped off their ideas to enhance their draw in value. Prime example is KZ3.
Yes, other publishers can learn a thing or two fro Activision in terms of marketing.
But while early CoD are good, they're making little progress in recent time, that's why the Activision hate comes around.
"Activision hate comes around. " problem with that is only the more into games people will care……the casual gamer which i think is a lot of cod players simly dont care about the publisher and just wanna play the game
crysis 2 is great game. almost finished with the single player campign. finally a fps that does not end in under 5hrs like kz3 or homefront. i hope that starts a trend, and also hope the cryengine becomes the engine of choice on multiplats. time for the aging unreal engine to go.
cod is good at being a close quarter run and gun shooter that caters to the twitch gamer. i'm not so sure there are many casual gamers playing it. in fact, most are hardcore gamers. does it deserve the the ridiculous sales it gets? probably not. it'll still get those sales regardless of what i think, though.
Last edited by Excelsior1 on 3/28/2011 6:56:12 AM
dont agree with u on cod man its a fast game and there are many casual gamers playing it way more than hardcore…..i think cod4 and mw2 deserved its sales( cod4 more tho due to it being amazing) but now its getting boring
well that's fair. that's why i said i'm not so sure. maybe we shoulld call them casual hardcore cod players? does a casual gamer line up at midnight, and make cod set all those records in sales?
Last edited by Excelsior1 on 3/28/2011 7:27:25 AM
does a casual gamer line up at midnight, and make cod set all those records in sales?
not really but a casual gamer will maybe just preorder a game because he wants to play it with his friends……i dunno i think cod has turned alot of casual gamers into cod hardcore players tho
Last edited by Godslim on 3/28/2011 7:29:55 AM
This game has caught my attention, along with 3 of my friends. We should be awaiting good times beginning from next week.
Honestly, too bad Socom 4 & MK9 comes out in about 3 weeks.
Crysis is a fantastic game. I only play shooters (aside from Uncharted and Infamous)- and this one is a must buy.
Is COD the industry leader? you bet your ass it is. I know on this forum everyone falls over themselves to protest how much they hate COD more than everyone else and would never buy (zzzzzzzzzzzzz) but the fact remains COD4, 6 and 7 were the best games each year and 5 was not bad. The tight controls and instant action make the COD series irreplaceable. I love BCBF2,MOH,KZ (and now Crysis) – but COD rules hands down. My buddies (we are all auld yins in our late 30's) play COD more than anything else – If you don't have time to devote to 'thinking/strategy' games and want a quick blast of mindless fun when the wife gives you a few minutes peace – COD is without equal.
I think that's the problem I have with most shooters. They are mindless. I enjoy playing a few online games with friends, but if I'm not mentally stimulated somehow, I find the game boring. I think that's what I like about Co-op online play or challenges in online games.
I'm in my 30's and don't have time to put long hours into games anymore either, but for the short amount of time that I do have, I'd like to enjoy it. That's why when I look at shooters to buy, I look for a great single player campaign first and if the multiplayer is good that's just an extra bonus. Which is also the reason that there are no Call of Duties sitting on my shelf.
The games I've enjoyed so far that I've invested a lot of hours into online are short compared to my list of games I actually own that are online capable. The ones that I have enjoyed the most are the ones with the Co-operative play like Uncharted 2 and Red Dead Redemption Co-op missions. The Burnout Challenges was another one. And of course the ranked games in Socom: Confrontation. It's a different game when you've only got one life to play with per round.
The rest of the run and gun respawn games don't stay in my system for very long because I find them un-inspiring and dull. Sure there's lots action going on onscreen, but the recipe for most online shooters is the same as the back of a shampoo bottle. Rinse, Lather, Repeat….over and over, and myself, I don't find that very stimulating.
But that's my personal opinion, and I've kind of been a late adopter of the FPS genre, so obviously not everyone will agree. (By the looks of FPS sales records, not many will agree. Lol)
Last edited by CH1N00K on 3/28/2011 11:14:00 AM
…cause alot r still leveling/ranking up in the COD games.
Not me. There's pretty much no benefit beyond the first prestige. I've been sitting at top level at prestige level 1 forever. Not going to prestige again. Why would I when I just keep owning where I am? And there's no benefit to continue leveling. What… an extra class every two prestiges? A new lame picture for my emblem?
no thanks. Haven't touched CoD in over a month now.