 |
||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| Re: Kotaku explores "cheap" by Ice Cream Jonsey 12/30/2010, 12:34pm PST | ||||
 |
 |
|||
Worm wrote: I understand that it's easy to blame pieces of shit on Xbox Gold Live and the PS3 Network. Mostly because they ARE pieces of shit. It's easy to assign extra this shit to them. And it can be sad when you see a game that initially seems to be perfectly balanced, only to experience its ruin when someone "breaks" the game by thinking up new stuff that the more-casual player and designer didn't anticipate. But who is left to fix it? Red Dead Redemption had a good portion of its staff downsized after it shipped. Rockstar made more money than they could have dreamed on it. I presume there will be a sequel. They don't want you playing the first one in multiplayer when you could be playing the sequel. So the publisher not only macheted through staff that could fix the multiplayer imbalance, but have motivation to make you stop playing after a while. I don't know anything about Call of Duty, because I think playing video games that limit you to realistic weapons are stupid. I do recall that there are several Call of Duty games. So while they aren't necessarily going, "Great work guys, here's your bonus: you're fired" I don't see why they would care about an imbalance either. They could fix it in the sequel. A balanced multiplayer game is only going to come about through luck, a really, really experienced designer, or an artist that is doing this on his or her own. To blame the players that are acting like babies, because they are acting like babies is to blame an actual baby for doing so, as well. People DO do that, but the ones that don't are simply smart enough to not write for fucking Gawker. the dark and gritty...Ice Cream Jonsey! |
||||
 |
 |
|||
|
Kotaku explores "cheap" by 12/30/2010, 11:13am PST  Re: Kotaku explores "cheap" by 12/30/2010, 12:34pm PST The worst sin in FPS is rewarding the winner outside of the scoreboard by 12/30/2010, 8:16pm PST |
