HotChops

And screwed up as it sounds, box art and marketing can play a big role in buying decisions. I chose not to buy Bad Company 1 in part because of the box art. Of course that wasn't the only factor in the decision, but I felt like the box summed up everything I didn't like about the premise of the game -- a funny, silly war game. Of course, BC2 is really no different, and while I still dislike the single player campaign's premise, I realize now that it has little to do with the multiplayer. But that just shows how the cover can make or break a buying decision for someone.

I'd describe myself as a bit of minimalist too. First, I'll point out that out of all the MGS covers, I like this one best. which is all the more ironic considering I just got done replaying and quitting the game in frustration. I think Just Cause 2 has decent artwork. I like how the building is blended with his silhouette. And even though it's a pathetic attempt to snag the dollars of Modern Warfare 2 fans, I like Bad Company 2's cover.

There you go. Come on nerds! Crack that code! I can't believe it's been a couple hours and they haven't figured it out yet! Yeah but I saw that and that so doesn't count! I subscribe to Game Informer. Hopefully there'll be some screenshots. If they aren't available at that time, I'll scan and post them.

There you go. Come on nerds! Crack that code! I can't believe it's been a couple hours and they haven't figured it out yet!

Twin Snakes had mostly bad controls because of the GCN's horrible button layout. And it's funny to dislike Twin Snakes because it has over-the-top cutscenes because that's the Metal Gear franchise in a nutshell -- on the surface it seems like a serious, realistic game, but then out comes the bisexual vampires and obese villains on roller skates. I liked the original PS Metal Gear Solid because the music was cooler, the controls were better suited to the old PS controller, and ultimately MGS on the PS had style. Seriously. I hate on the MG series quite a bit nowadays, but the original MGS was so awesome during it's day. I was a N64 owner at the time, and MGS really made me want a Playstation.

I don't like the box art for ME2 because it screams "GUNS AND WAR!!11!!" whereas the first game's cover said, "Check me out. I'm a badass space opera. Explore me."

I think the Portal 2 box art is great. How would you do it? And MvC3 could be better, but I don't think it's that bad.

I don't understand the appeal of hooking a PC up to a TV. 23 inch monitor that I sit 2.5 feet away from beats out a 50 inch TV that I sit 10-15 feet from. I even have my 360 and PS3 hooked up to a monitor instead of a TV, though that is partly so I'm not always hogging the TV. I've played PC games heavily on my PC, and I've played 360 games heavily on my couch. I prefer the couch. See, in the old days when I was confined to one room PC gaming was a more viable option. Now I live in a house, so the PC is in the office and the game systems are in the living room. One is for work, the other is for entertainment. I don't mix those two.

I gotta say, if I didn't already have a 360 and shitload of XBL friends, I would consider getting a high powered PC, hook it up to my living room TV, buy a 360-PC controller and Steam the crap out of some games. Steam has had hella great prices lately.

Xbox 360. I've owned a lot of systems, but I haven't loved one this much since the SNES. Microsoft just gets me. They seem to cater heavily to my demographic, which is great because -- I'm sorry -- I'm soooo sick of Japanese developed games. Don't get me wrong. I grew up with nothing but Japanese games, systems and anime, but now that the west has a strong offering I just can't go back. Final Fantasy XIII, Bayonetta, Resident Evil 5, Lost Planet -- I play ten minutes of them and I want to throw the disc out the window. I could go the rest of my life without J-pop, whiney teenage voice actors, gratuitous kung fu or swordplay, bassackwards controls, and what I detect to be a preachy writing. I haven't been very happy with Microsoft lately though. They don't seem very interested in my demographic these days. They got my money, now they want the CC numbers of my mom and my sister in law.

that's funny because I just got done playing the X-Men Origins: Wolverine demo I thought Far Cry 2 would have a really cool health system because you'd have to mend your own wounds. But then it turned out to just be a set of healing animations, albeit very cool ones. I think it would be badass if you actually applied a tourniquet or set a broken bone and then you had to hobble around for the rest of the mission.

I like big fans. Notable examples would be Half Life 1 and Psi-Ops, where not only can you get sucked into the fans, but NPCs can too! if someone can find a couple good fan death videos on youtube, I'd appreciate. Damn internet; it's so hard to find what you're looking for these days b/c there's a million fucking entries. apparently "fan death" is a fucking band or something.

I don't mind paying $60 when the game is worth it. I think Mass Effect 2 is easily worth that when you take into account how massive it is. and I think part of the reason N64 games were so expensive was the cart format. It's not so much the exact price point that I'm getting hung up on. It's the packaging of less and then selling the missing parts for extra.

Next time I'll just go Publishers make me :angry:

I really don't think it's that simple. Most of what I mentioned applies to every game out there. At this point, I feel like I'm choosing which game/publisher to get milked by. It's like the Xbox 360. I haven't been too happy with Microsoft lately. I'm really annoyed by the increase in the cost of Xbox Live. But what am I supposed to do? Sell my Xbox 360 and all my games for half their worth and apply it toward a Playstation 3? And then what? Repurchase all my favorite games and replay them since I lost my save files? Try to convince my dozen friends to all do the same and switch to Playstation 3 so we can play together? Hell, even if I did do all of that -- even if me and all of my friends did that -- it still wouldn't put a dent in Microsoft's profits. It wouldn't be a large enough defection to make them reconsider their pricing structure. Thus, the only people who lose are us.

As I mentioned in the other thread, this is not about piracy. This is about the role that publishers play in the market and how much power they should wield. It's okay to mention piracy, but if you want to debate that topic specifically, keep it in the other thread. I've got a lot to say about publishers, so I'll try to add lots of markup to keep it readable. Also note that when I say publishers, I'm mostly referring to Electronic Arts, Activision-Blizzard, and Ubisoft. Also note that some of my complaints are platform specific or are based partially on conjecture. This is a thoughtful rant, not a newspaper exposé. Publishers play an important role in games. Without the massive budgets at their disposal, the size, scope and detail that exists in the best games would not be possible. But how much power should be given to publishers? How much should publishers be able to dictate the terms of the "contract" that exists between them, the developers, the retailers and consumers? I believe that publishers have far too much power and influence the game industry today. - Publishers charge too much for games: The price charged for games is not commensurate with their actual value. Do annually-released games like Madden NFL or Call of Duty really merit a $60 price tag? Are motion-controlled games that are really just compilations of minigames worth full price? - Publishers purposely withhold parts of games in order to nickel-and-dime them out later as DLC: This is arguably the most blatant offense to date, and yet it often goes ignored by gamers. A clear example is Battlefield: Bad Company 2's multiplayer maps. Every map pack that has been released for this game has simply been a re-arrangement of pre-existing maps; maps that already existed on the disc. All it takes to make these maps is a few mouse clicks and a weekend of test play and balancing. Despite this, EA markets their maps as being "new" and a better value than Call of Duty's map packs. Likewise, blissfully ignorant consumers think they're getting some kind of deal because they're "VIP owners" and they're not paying for the maps when in actuality they're simply getting what should be theirs to begin with. Another example is Rockstar withholding horse racing and poker playing from Red Dead Redemption's multiplayer in the original game package. Before RDR released, a Kotakuite asked a representative of Rockstar if the game would include these modes. The representative dodged the question and acted as if the idea had never occurred to the company. I believe that Rockstar knew that online poker would be in high demand, and left it out intentionally. Another example is Mass Effect 2. Those who purchased the game new gained access to Zaheed and his loyalty mission on launch day. This is a part of the game that should have been accessible to anyone who purchased it -- new or otherwise. There is also strong evidence that indicates Kasumi and her loyalty mission were available from day 1 too, but again were withheld and sold to the consumer later. - Publishers have made paid DLC mandatory: Previously in online shooters like Call of Duty, extra maps were an optional. They existed to enhance the game, but not restrict it for those who chose not to buy it. This is no longer the case. Take Transformers: War for Cyberton for example: Since it's release, two maps packs totaling $20 have released. These maps are now a part of the total map cycle. If you don't have these map packs, it's nearly impossible to play the game online because you'll either try to join a game and be denied, or you'll play a match and then be kicked before the next one can begin. Activision and High Moon studios do nothing to make this easier. There's no way to see what map will load ahead of time, nor is there a way to choose which map you begin with, and when booted, the player is taken all the way back to the game's main title screen rather than the multiplayer menu. I've experienced similar complications on Battlefield: Bad Company 2. Some friends have one map pack, but not another. Playing together has become a complicated mess and we can't seem to play for half an hour before one of us encounters a map he doesn't own. And now companies like EA are charging for special weapons, abilities and perks in shooters like Bad Company 2 and Madden NFL. These extras once existed more for aesthetic purposes, and wouldn't interfere with the balance of the game. That is no longer the case. Some weapons are drastically better, creating a fundamental shift in the game. This means that the best players are no longer the best based on merit or skill, but how much disposable income they have to burn. Furthermore, when one particular weapon or skill becomes indispensable, then everyone has to buy it not so that they can be better than others, but just so they can compete on the same level! - Publishers are actively limiting consumers' options: Used game retailers like Gamestop don't give players much for their old games, but at least they provide a way to earn back some of the investment put into games. Not only are publishers like EA trying to remove used games as an option with their "Online Pass," but they eagerly hope for a distribution model under their direct control that removes game discs. While the disc medium may seem archaic, consumers should reconsider the value they offer. Without a disc, you can never sell the game. You're forced to live with your purchase forever. Furthermore, the lack of a physical medium pushes the definitions of "ownership" more into the realm of temporary licensing. Thus, one day you may not even be able to play your game anymore simply because the publisher doesn't support it or it went out of business. The existence of game rentals may also disappear without a disc. Like many gamers, I don't care much for Gamestop. However, if it weren't for the option to buy used merchandise and sell back old games I wouldn't have been able to afford any of the games I purchased this year. Likewise, used games providers are one of the important checks and balances within the industry. EA acts like their online pass is critical to their profit model, but that's an exaggeration. Used game sales barely put a dent in EA's profits. EA can survive without the Online Pass -- Gamestop cannot. Again, consumers need to examine what's at stake. One company faces a minor cut in profits, the other is struggling just to survive. - Publishers are holding developers hostage: Many people will point to new games purchases as a way of supporting developers. That would be true except for one problem; the money isn't getting to the developers. Both Activision and Rockstar worked their respective developers to death making Call of Duty and Red Dead Redemption. Then once the games came out and made astronomical profits, the publishers fired or laid off most of the developers in order to avoid paying royalties. Thanks to NDAs and other fine print, we're kept in the dark regarding how bad the working conditions are for developers, but one message from developers continues to be the same: "Either we take the abuse or we lose our jobs." In the case of Rockstar San Diego, it appears that they took the abuse, created the best game of the year, and still were fired. Publishers are also stifling the creativity of developers. Again and again, new and progressive are passed in favor of traditional and safe. Nearly every title has multiplayer now. There is strong evidence that EA pushed Bioware to scale back the sexuality in Mass Effect 2, and that they interfered with the production and creative direction of Medal of Honor. Publishers are also moving into motion-controlled gaming in full force. But rather than investing in motion controlled gaming; pushing them beyond the last gen graphics and mini game simplicity of Wii Sports, they instead seem to be interested in cloning Wii games. This might be acceptable if their products were priced at $30 or $40, but they charge anywhere from $60 to $100. - Publishers are more concerned with the next product than supporting existing products: This one is all about EA. Bad Company 2 is riddled with bugs and glitches. For more than six months there has been a bug that causes the win/lose screen to be in error more than half the time! How difficult is it to fix this? It should be a simple if/then statement in the code. And where does one go to complain about these problems. If you go to the Battlefield website there isn't a "Help" or "Contact Us" link anywhere on the damn page! I found a link to the support chat on the game's forums. This wasn't provided by a moderator or EA employee, it was provided by a simple user! It took me an hour to get through to a chat rep and when I did, the experience was so laughably bad that it warrants it's own thread. Needless to say, they did not fix my problem and when I asked for an email to customer service, they told me there was only a phone or chat support line. Likewise, the simple bugs and glitches that plagued Bad Company 2 nine months ago continue to exist today. What else have I missed? What ways have you been screwed over? How did things get to be this way? How do we stop this? Will the consumer ever get back the power we once yielded? Will digital distribution help or hurt?

Whatever's clever, Trevor. If you don't post something, I definitely will later this afternoon. I'm going to go jog and nap first. Nice to know that the subject's been brought up before. okay, screw the nap. I'm working on the thread now.

Whatever's clever, Trevor. If you don't post something, I definitely will later this afternoon. I'm going to go jog and nap first. Nice to know that the subject's been brought up before.

How about Sony, Apple and auto vehicles? Everyone's trying to get their money, screw the customer one way or another, doesn't mean we should steal a car because we're angry at the way they do business. If you don't like it, go find another company that does satisfies you. I mean really, Steam gives you the lowest prices online, PC gamers have options and it doesn't required stealing, not to mention used games for consoles users. We have options. You've mixed up the topics. I didn't say that dissatisfied consumers should steal, pirate, copy or whatever anything. I simply said that big publishers possess too much power. I don't want to go into it too much here b/c I think it's a separate topic, but I don't think there are a lot of options out there for the consumer. Right now, I think the free market system is broken. Again, I'm not saying that pirating is right. I'm saying that I think there are bigger problems and more culpable parties who need to be focused on. For example, right now on this esteemed board we have a topic about piracy. What we do not have is a thread about the corrupted role of big publishers, which is IMO a far greater threat to the game industry right now. I'd like to make that thread, but I'm afraid doing so right now would just drag the piracy debate into it. So, I probably will post it later...maybe

For me it's the escape, the fantasy, the immersion into another time and place. You see, my life sucks; my real life that is. So I really love pretending I'm someone else. I don't care about cranking up the challenge level, pursuing achievements, getting unlockables, or obtaining %100 completion (although I do go for these things sometimes.) I'm the kind of guy who will walk his character through a town instead of running and jumping like a madman. I don't fast travel. I buy/rent rooms every night. I go out of my way to watch sunsets. I actually talk to my TV while I'm playing sometimes (dorky and pathetic, I know.) Even when I play Battlefield, I pretend I'm a soldier. I use real military tactics and speak in real military lingo to my friends -- much to their amusement and annoyance I think. (I also think it serves a practical purpose. Military jargon is less ambiguous and faster to communicate.... that is unless you have to take the time to explain to your friends what AO or CAS means... ) That's why I'm going to jump into RDR again in a minute. There's no career or traffic to worry about in New Austin. There's just my horse and my sidearm. I can't wait until video games plug straight into your brain like in the Matrix and I can ditch my life completely for something that isn't real.

It's too early in the morning for me to comment in-depth, but I will say something regarding the allegiances of people in this matter: In the product purchase cycle, there are a number of involved parties -- the publisher, the developer, the retailer, the consumer, and pirates. Personally, I think it's important to maintain a balance between these groups. Slowly over the years, I've seen the power shift significantly away from the developers and consumers over to the big publishers. This is wrong in my opinion and I think it has badly damaged the game industry and free-market capitalism in general. It's surprising to me how much some people stand up for publishers against pirates, and I think that's the wrong choice. I'm not really a big fan of pirating and I don't do it myself, but I feel like the last people the consumer should be showing loyalty to right now are the publishers. It's kind of a separate topic, but I could go on for hours about all the things I think publishers have done wrong lately. You don't have to like pirates, but you definitely shouldn't like the bigger publishers. To anyone who stands up for Electronic Arts or Activisision in these matters I ask, "Do you really think they would do the same for you? Do you really think that pirates or used game retailers are to blame for the high prices of games, the online passes and the excessive and overpriced DLC? If the publishers removed those entities tomorrow night do you think anything would change? Do you honestly believe they'd lower prices?"

There's like three races between the two of those games. Is that really so bad? And I also think that they are appropriate given the gameplay.