Splinter Cell boss: "You have to revert back to what you know does work."
I do not expect perfection. That is something not even obtainable. I expect quality. Truly innovative games are seldom in last decade. You know what really keeps people stoked, something new. Not too many people get all worked up over a 10 year old bashed up sedan with new shiny 20" wheels. The industries biggest issue right now is hanging on to what sells instead of taking chances on the new ideas I know are out there. The industry is full of bright minded creative people. Unfortunately, Corporate greed has wrenched its sweaty pale hands around those who make the whole thing possible and rules this industry also.
And instantly we have the "I never once thought that!" group that comes in whenever someone tries to correctly generalize gamer flaws. If gamers like innovation so much, why was Black Ops 2's setting met with such harsh skepticism? If gamers like innovation so much, why is every character redesign cause gamers to send death threats to developers? If gamers love innovation so much, why do they tell developers to remake old sequels rather than make new ips? Gamers hate the unknown. They are more confortable with what has already been done well because we as a species gravitate towards what is familiar more than an unknown that could possibly fail. This is the way it has always been ever since gaming set it's foot in the ground last generation. That's when the big names like GTA, Call of duty, Mario, Halo, God of War, and Final Fantasy defined their respective genres and now we just say "we want more of that!" instead of welcoming newer ips from a genre we may not have even heard of yet. This is why devs have dropped so many promising titles this generation. They see them as a bad investment because of the way gamers at large think.
redesigning a character is not innovation. Changing the genre of a established franchise is not innovation. Changing stuff that works for stuff that doesn't like FF13 did is not innovation. Innovation is not just change for the sake of it but change that brings new stuff that works, otherwise, those are called gimmicks. Why do we want remakes? Because it'll probably be better than the next cookie cutter game that they'll release.
It's new and bold. That should be praised on its own merits because it helps fight back gaming as a generic commodity. We need more creativity and not more generic shooters and stagnating franchises. It doesn't always work out, but sometimes it is better than being handed the same thing in a different package over and over again. I realize the issue isn't that simple, but I'm just offering another legitimate perspective here.
@Wishing - Innovation is bringing change. That is all. It doesn't have to work or be successful to make it innovative.
Last I checked, people are in love with all the new IP's coming out and getting established. One of the hottest games coming out is Boarderlands 2.... COD is getting hate because it has haters, period. Its not the fans hating it, its the "anti-cod" scrubs hating it. People hate DMC because they took a badass character and made him into an annoying little punk....People hate a lot of "innovative" shooters because all the developers did was dumb it down and make it play like COD. Remember when Splinter Cell adverts showed off sneaking around in unique ways and it competed with Metal Gear? Then jump to todays Splinter Cell and he is in the middle of a friggin gun fight and the game feels like Ghost Recon.... It's annoying. Innovative is NOT being like someone else and instead offering a new experience, rather it be through story or gameplay.
@ Axonometri "Not too many people get all worked up over a 10 year old bashed up sedan with new shiny 20" wheels." dude you're gonna piss off the mexicans haha just joking around!
we can never have perfection, just take chances if these devs have a great idea for a new game they shouldnt be afraid to throw it out there. give me a fun quality game, and you'll get my money.
Lies, the way people tear through RE6 you'd think they didn't want the series to progress.
If you think an established horror series becoming more and more "pew pew pew" is equivalent to "progress"....
Jade making a stupid comment? I'm in shock! /s Expecting a decent product, and only new 'innovations' that actually work well (and reflect the quality of the rest of the product)....does NOT "limit innovation" I'm absolutely sick of these pubs/devs that can't take criticism. As soon as they're criticized, they demonize customers and cry about how modest expectations are 'killing' them. God forbid they make a product for the people buying it.
@Axonometri "You know what really keeps people stoked, something new" Yeah, tell that to the flamboyant fanboys who heard that SC:Conviction is introducing new M&E mechanics, B&W stealth indication etc. and is getting rid of carrying bodies around...
The industry's biggest problem is that gamers don't buy innovative games, they keep buying the same type of games. If the "same rehashes" didn't sell, the corps wouldn't make them. Blame gamers more than anything, they vote for what they want with their dollars.
i dont expect perfection, i just want a good game that stays true to the roots of the series, nothing is perfect, though i do see a lot of gamers that want everything in a game theyre way and if its not they completly wright it off.
It is true though, aside a few, we need innovation. I like series. I always look forward to what will be next. Don't you want to see and experience something new after... 15 games of the same thing though?
Nope. If they want to create a new IP, then fine. But I don't want my favorite horror series to turn into a shooter. I don't want my favorite platform to become primarily a racer. Changing genres doesn't equate to innovation. It's that simple.
I just want my Classic Splinter Cell as opposed to this Action Shooter with stealth elements we've been given.
Amen to that.
Well too bad because games like call of duty have proven action sells better! It's a sad time for stealth fans....it's neglect I tell you!!! I want my real Sam fisher back!
You can innovate...make a new IP. Don't take a perfectly good series and changing everything but the name....looking at you Capcom as well.
I really can't take Jade seriously after she said controlers were a huge barrier in the gaming industry...
Yes, don't be bold, just stagnate.
I am still ticked about no M. Ironside, so I will be skipping this game, but they sure are marketing it to death already and they ignore the voice acting flub every chance they get.
Once again another studio exec/developer blames the gamers for lack of innovation in gaming. Just admit it, the only reason we don't have innovation is because shareholders want maximum profit and are too scared to take potential risks.
You do know that "maximum profit" is determined based on consumer demand, though, right? It is at least partially the fault of the overall consumer base for creating record breaking sales on games that don't innovate as much as others. Especially big name sequels that come out every year.
The word "perfection" doesn't exist in videogames I'm afraid, there's "great" "superb" and "fantastic." Now she could mean the "Perfect" experience. Just like how the uncharted series provides the "Perfect" experience. Meaning it provides a great blend of gameplay and cinematics.
Hate her if you want but she is right. It is just the way the industry is now. They are not really allowed much room to "innovate" a series due to what gamers "expect" to be in it. They have a little room to move around, buy typically they are kept to a set standard of what the game should be. Not many developers are allowed the created freedom like Quadic Dreams is.
well, if they make a new IP, gamers dont have expectation because they dont know what the game is. So they can innovate all they want but they dont for a lot of developpers. So thats bullsh*t... they can innovate but they dont want to because of money, not because of gamers.
Well is that not how gamers talk? games that make money we send the message "we like this, we want more of this." if a game doesn't sell well, we send the message "I'm not interested in this." game companies need to make money, so they arnt going to make things the marketplace cant sell.
No shadows,no Ironside,no buy.
I expect perfection... in nothing.
perfection? Thats impossible. I think people just expect good games thats all. Who is she speaking of behalf of? I bet some idiot wrote that speech for her.
No, we just expect competence and even that's a problem for Ubisoft.
People expect value for their money. If you try new things, great, but don't skimp out on anything for the sake of trying something new, and don't blame people when they dislike your game because you cut corners and then you say "well they just don't like change." Change is good, but it has to be the right change and it has to be done well. DmC for example is the way you DON'T want to go. Mortal Kombat is the RIGHT way to go. Show that you have respect for the people who are paying for your bills, and we in turn will gladly open our wallets to buy your games.
@DragonKnight He says: People expect value for their money. If you try new things, great, but don't skimp out on anything for the sake of trying something new, and don't blame people when they dislike your game because you cut corners and then you say "well they just don't like change." Change is good, but it has to be the right change and it has to be done well. DmC for example is the way you DON'T want to go. Mortal Kombat is the RIGHT way to go. Show that you have respect for the people who are paying for your bills, and we in turn will gladly open our wallets to buy your games. I say: I agree 10000%, The Industry is just full of professional Liars, making excuses for all there bad games they produce, just like in everything in Life these days: ITS the Consumer's fault, thats what they want people to believe. The fix is in.
Nope, two year development cycles and sequelitis are limiting innovation. Don't put the onus on the consumers: it is YOU, the publishers, that stifle creativity and innovation by demanding unreasonable revenue and profits. You expect every game to compete with COD in terms of sales, which forces developers to attempt to emulate their model for success. And if the game doesn't sell over 2-3 million, the studio is axed and the IP is left to die, or be rebooted 2 years later by a studio that had nothing to do with the original.
Bubble for you sir. Exactly the problem. I am thankful for my unfanboyish mindframe and dictate to myself how I would like a sequel or reboot on a case by case basis. Prototypeknuckles said it right, we generally want to see the roots of the franchise along with innovation or just something fresh. Like AC3. Its a fresh character and an amazing time in our nations history. AC3 is staying true, but keeping it fresh. DmC is so different. You dont change the look of your main protagonist or his voice(SC's M. Ironside). Its a death sentence, even in the realm of movies. You dont do that, Script writing 101 ppl. Even the mighty COD is falling from grace. MW3 is a buggy mess. It sold great, but its overall viewed as worse then MW2 and Blops. Check any forum board and this reconfirms it. Why do ppl still play it you ask. Becuz its enjoyable. Its not perfect either, but they are aspects ppl enjoy. I have long since traded MW3 becuz I dont enjoy the casual catering. But ppl do. Every franchise should formulate their own model and stick with it, the same way ppl stick to playing games they dont quite always agree with. If every buyer can show some conviction by supporting an "unperfect" game, the devs should show the same conviction when making them. Shout out to Borderlands 2, 9-18-12 Baby!!!
Awwww, she has such a pretty face, but she needs to keep that pretty mouth shut.
I know one way to keep it shut. If u know what I mean
I know exactly what you mean, but how do we know she even likes donuts?
.. Duct tape.
Jade Raymond is irrelevant
Don't care about perfection SC = Stealthy espionage game not the action cover shooter I saw @ E3. That is where the devs lose me. When I buy a game with a certain name I expect certain core mechanics to stay the same with some new variations / nuances added in. When there is such a drastic change in the core game play / mechanics it should have a new name altogether and be a new IP imho. I feel the same about the DS as a 3rd person cover shooter, I wonder if they gave the lead character some steroids to make him look more like a GeOW character too.
She's right.... Countless articles on here have posters pointing out the most minute detail when it isn't correct. Sports gamers are bad...headbands don't lean the right way or this tattoo is too big on his arm. The debacle about DmC...because a developer is making their vision of a character people are going ape sh$t because he doesn't move fast enough or his humor isn't just like the old Dante. Despite it looking like a good game people want to point this out despite it looking like a good game. Assassins Creed looks phenomenal but some complain about the previews not showing certain people being killed. As soon as a developer wants to try a new IP the media immediately compares it to said other game and then pick apart why it doesn't look good enough or its a fail. All these doom articles about why the WiiU will fail, Sony failing. The fanboys stating how they only support one console and the other sucks. Even though the other console has spectacular games people refuse to play just because of some warped loyalty towards a brand. Gamers think these sites don't have an influence on creativity. They look at forums and see what gamers don't like and criticize and stay away. I've noticed, and its sad, that gamers seem to be more negative towards our favorite hobby. We do limit what developers are willing to take a leap on with our constant bashing of the smallest thing. If we aren't willing to support mistakes for innovation then, as a business, they won't take that chance. A wrong decision could cripple a studio so why risk it? Case in point....she's getting bashed for stating what she believes is wrong because you don't agree. No objectivity here.
Clarification one: People aren't bashing on DmC because of the 60fps thing, they started bashing on it because its a radical, unnecessary, departure from the original series.With FUs from both Capcom and NT in response to fan complaints not helping, while the 60fps became another log on the fire because it had been initially promised. Clarification two: Jade Raymond doesn't get much respect from gamers, because she's not talking to us: she's talking to the casual crowd who also could care less about what she has to say. Also doesn't help when she says something about needed holodecks when they cant get current motion controls working right. Also, people were complaining about Assassin Creed not being "innovative" because they were almost putting them out on a six month basis. Literally milking the franchise while changing nothing.
With DmC....people seem to fail to realize that its a totally didn't developer working on the game so I'd expect someones vision to differ from those original games. Its like having defensive coordinators who prefer the 3\4 over the 4\3. Its different because different people are making it but they still seem to be putting a quality product on the table. Now if the original developers went and did this then if totally understand where everyone is coming from. I'd wonder WTF are they doing. But i guess that's whet i have a little objectivity because its a different developer. That's my overall point....even though it looks like a good game people are bashing DmC because these new guys are putting their vision out there instead trying to appease old fans. I get that, but they aren't the old visionaries so i can't hold that against NT especially when it looks like a quality product. I know you'll disagree but I'm not bashing you guys for that stance...but i wanted to make that point of Raymond. Its clear in the DmC up roar...its hard to try something new when so many people want the old. Just think about that : Jade says its hard to innovate because people want the tried and truesothat's what developers do....they go with the proven. NT is getting bashed for trying to innovate a loved franchise.
Even when a coach comes in to change from a 3-4 to a 4-3, y'know.. They don't come in and re-work the entire defense, just the scheme! The new developers came in and just gave the whole thing a face lift.
Heck, its hard to innovate because everyone is looking for the "next thing" instead of refining the tech that's been here. If a company like Ubisoft wants to be innovative they need to either focus on PCs with bleeding edge specs or their own console system. However since they bit*h about wanting to make money more than complaining about having to work with what they have to work with - then they need to work with it! Wring out all that they can from systems they really have hardly touched.
i think her games are far from being perfect.
I agree. I have played less then perfect games all my life and enjoyed many of them. I was the guy who actually finished E.T. for Atari.Motorstorm Pacific Rift had a few flaws but I loved it, greatest off road game I have ever played.Perfection is for idiots. Half the time when people insist a game is perfect it just means that it has flaws that you insist on ignoring or are completely blind to. You know how many times I listened to a critic talk about how perfect a game was only to play it and wonder if it the same game? New Super Mario for the DS got high scores and it was one of the worst Marios I have ever played. Obviously perfection is a word people don't seem to understand what it actually means.
I expect DRM from Ubisoft, not perfection. However, some developers do seem to get ''free pass'' in the industry.
Let's pretend for a minute that a "perfect" game is possible. If so, wouldn't it have to innovate slightly to reach that status?
i just play the game for what it is
I don't expect Perfection from you.
I forgot all about splintercell.
You mean the kind of innovation approached with the new Splinter Cell? More like limits "broader appeal and accessibility". It sounds like EA is rubbing off Jade. If solidifying core gaming in a traditional context is what you call perfection, perfection it is then.
Just make another Chaos Theory already!! That was the best splinter cell game ever.
Well, I like mine Bug Free (SKYRIM PS3 Version), is that too much to ask? It's like any other medium, you either like or don't, but at least enjoy the experience without hassle (YES, i am talking about the various Bugs in SKYRIM).
I agree, but why not let Splinter Cell be Splinter Cell? Honestly pretty much everything at Ubisoft has turned into the same thing. A "futuristic" environment that either 1 has "futuristic" tools for the story telling (Assassins Creed) or 2 has "futuristic" warfare......I was so pumped for Rainbow Six, but when they showed it off it felt like Ghost Recon....then they show off Splinter Cell and that too feels like Ghost Recon. Even Endwar or whatever it was was influenced by Ghost Recon, and that jet game they had was even "futuristic" in some areas.....Think outside the box and let each game have its own identity.....
Oh yes, the developer's failure to root out bugs in their software (and our sightings of such bugs) are definitely the cause for a lack of innovation. No wonder independent development is rising. So dependent they, the big names, on multi-million dollar game developments that they are under the pressure of us and their publisher to get shit done. I'd say THAT is what stops innovation. "The release date sticks, or you are fired."
perfection all i saw so far is a sam fisher wannabe cqc snake. sry but i remain with the king wich is ofc meta gear solid
N4G is a community of gamers posting and discussing the latest game news. It’s part of NewsBoiler, a network of social news sites covering today’s pop culture.