And tomorrow marks the day the next Call of Duty will be unveiled... great.
Quote from name:isolatedpurity
I've always wondered what the fascination was with people who play sports games. After getting one football game, I don't really see such a huge reason to buy 5 more after that. I suppose if they were a huge football fan, they would want the latests "stats" for their team or whatever. Still seems pointless. If a company wanted to rival EA, I suppose they would just make a game that downloads a patch to enable the next years stats / teams. But I also suppose EA has some exclusive deal with the leagues?
It's really silly how much crap they put out, but if people are buying it, whatever. I just wish rpg and rpg-like games were just as popular. Imagining a game like STALKER with a lot more resources behind it for production... that would be quite a game.
Blizz, eh... they definitely seem to be moving to a like direction, however they just don't spew out crap. As far as I see, they still try pretty damn hard to make a game impressive. I wish they would deviate from their formulas and do something a bit more daring though.
I always wonder that too. And sport games date back from the 90s, or even 80s. Though I do remember that the 1997 version of an NBA game was a great improvement over the 1996 version because it was 3D. It does sicken me how they release it every year, and the EA servers that shut down will be used on the newer sport games.
I would prefer the idea of patching, especially when there are little changes in newer games. Even if it's a slight graphic improvement, patches can easily provide better textures. The Seasons and player roster changes of course, but it doesn't mean they can't patch it for games.
EA probably does have some exclusive deal with the leagues, and the players of the sports have an interest of being in the front cover of the "new sport game". RPG games do have its popularity in East Asia and South East Asia. I always wanted role playing games to be just as popular as shooters in North America and Europe. But of course they require more resources and time management, unlike linear shooters that generally do not take as much effort. And a game similar to STALKER would be Metro 2033, which is made by people who came from the same developers from STALKER.
Blizzard never really failed in my eyes, unless in some exceptions on WoW in other point of views. However, I do like the quality and time put in the CGI, gameplay, map editor, Battle.net 2.0 and so on in StarCraft II. The entire Terran campaign can last just as long of a Terran, Zerg and Protoss campaign combined from StarCraft 1, which I like. The only problems I have is that there are three separate campaigns, each in its own $50 (or $60) price, and their intention of pricing multiplayer maps. Most likely I'd buy both Zerg and Protoss campaigns because I'm into single player, story, and of course Blizzard's cinematic cutscenes.
None.