I wouldn't of minded a sequel after Max Payne 2 but I wanted a sequel that expanded on the character development in MP2.
Instead we got Max Payne 3 which was basicaly Die Hard the Video Game...fair enough it had pretty graphics, nice tec behind it, lovely animations but thats what you would see in a next gen Max Payne game anyway, for a Max Payne game it sucked. Rockstar should of left it alone untill Remedy would pick it back up one day.
I mean all that character development that happened in MP2, the relationship between Mona and Max for example and how she managed to help him move on from the tragedies in his life...it seemed by the end (going by the ending where Mona survived) Max was closer to being at peace then he had ever been after his Wife and child died. MP3 came around though and destroyed that...made him into a worse off drug addict and more like an alchoholic with nothing to live for...I mean they could change it since it wasn't really estbalished but why didn't have Mona in the story again, why did they seem to go with the ending which killed off a strong female character...something which is quite rare these days in video games. Those levels in New York were amazing, the whole reason he left New York could of easily been made into the plot of the third game if they stayed in New York...I mean Max Payne wouldn't of ran, he would of stayed and hit back, they even made it so Max had been sacked from the Police Force something which I liked about his character...the vengeful, justice seeking cop/detective.
I think the game got the benefit of the doubt though because it was Rockstar...it was a good game just not a good Max Payne game. I honestly believe MP3 started out as a new IP but then when Rockstar learnt they could make a Max Payne game they changed the new IP set in Brazil with a bald character into Max Payne 3.
I completely agree, you echo many issues I had with Max Payne 3 myself in my review. It wasn't Max Payne. It was a Rockstar game, and that's why it got overloaded with praise, especially since Max Payne is 10 years into the past and most probably didn't even play those games before playing Max Payne 3.
Max Payne 3 for me had no relevant story (it was rather pointless), no profound meaning, and no characterisation, use of setting, great writing or anything. It was just an action shooter.
It took a dump over the profound and incredible ending of Max Payne 2. It wasn't just about moving on, which was fantastic enough. It was also that he had his revenge, and it actually was liberating. It didn't leave him empty and broken and with nothing left. He finally found peace in Mona and after avenging his family.
Max Payne 3 tried to finish off with a similar conclusion of finding contentment, but it was cliched, purposeless, and had no context, not to mention was done infinitely better in Max Payne 2.
Aside from the great gunplay (despite its issues of repetitiveness, clunky mechanics with the last stand and Max taking too long to get back up or falling out of bullet time if making contact with an object) and fantastic graphics, it was nothing more than a shooter. I also disliked how the game forced you to play it like a cover shooter, despite that being nothing like the original two games.
God of War? Really? The game hasn't even been released yet and its already a failure? Even though I only play PS3, I don't really want to see Halo go away. I think Bungie did a job with the series and I believe 343 won't drop the ball. I am also pretty interested in this new Tomb Raider game. But whatever I guess.
I'm a big fan of God of War. I think you're slightly misunderstanding though. I'm not calling Ascension a failure, I'm saying it's a little disappointing that they didn't be bold and new with the franchise, like maybe create a new world, character and setting, take it to Norse Mythology or something of the sorts.
We've already had two prequels to God of War and the main series ended. So I'm not against the game, it will probably be good, but it would have been nice to see something else done with it.
This isn't about franchises going away. It's about them staying fresh and new things being done with them.
I'm also interested in the new Tomb Raider, and I was very careful to detail that I hope it's good, but I'm a bit wary of it based on its history, for what comes after a reboot.
Switching from Greek to Norse mythology makes no sense for the God of War universe. That sounds like something someone on N4G has said before and others are just repeating it without thinking. It would have to be an entirely new franchise.
As far as I'm aware, they're adding new gameplay elements and changing up some the core mechanics. Director Todd Papy explained some of these. It looks to have the bigger leap/change of all the GOW games so far IMO. Maybe we'll see something different next gen, but for now, I'm highly anticipating this game.
As NathanExplosion said, God of War: Ascension is the biggest change out of all the God of War games yet. The game looks so fresh with the new art-style, locations, enemies, gameplay mechanics, multiplayer and it has a new composer.
What you're describing is called a new IP, why would Sony scrap one of the most popular and beloved characters in gaming history, change the fantastic Greek Mythology inspired story when God of War is by far the most critically acclaimed and best selling series in the genre of all time? And this is the first time Sony Santa Monica has ever made a God of War prequel, the other 2 (whilst being fantastic in their own right) are just spin-offs made by Ready at Dawn.
People aren't getting bored of the games which is why God of War III is the most successful game in the genre ever critically and commercially, why would anyone think it's a good business decision to abandon what millions of fans love? Tody_ZA, you're two sandwich's short of a lunch box, let's hope you never have to make an important business decision.
Games like Bionic Commando and Dead to Rights seem more fitting here...
GOW is a huge seller, Duke Nukem was in development hell for years and it wasn't like they released anything in between...and most of all Halo is going to be one of the top games this year, so I have to consider this list to be a joke at best.
This list is dumb. No offense to this author because its his opinion but a majority of people on this site would definitely disagree with him like myself
Yeah, I have to disagree with some of the list too, particularly with Halo. Halo 4 IS a reinvention of the Halo franchise by a completely new developer. Not to mention, the new Tomb Raider game is also a complete reinvention.
I don't get the call to end series anyway. If the series is still around, obviously there are people who still enjoy it. No one is forced to play them. I think it's just people who never liked the games and are sick of hearing about them because they are more popular than other games they feel deserve more attention.
Because there's zero point talking about Call of Duty anymore. It's long reached past its fanbase split.
Either you're sick of it and long stopped playing it or you love it. I'm part of the former group. It stopped innovating after CoD4. WaW popularised zombie mode, but after that the rest is tiring to talk about.
So after that I don't pay attention to it anymore. It's one of, if not the most financially successful game around at the moment, so we'll have to live with it. It won't change until more gamers are over it.
100°
90°
40°
150°
Ad 
20°
20°
30°
10°
20°
40°
Instead we got Max Payne 3 which was basicaly Die Hard the Video Game...fair enough it had pretty graphics, nice tec behind it, lovely animations but thats what you would see in a next gen Max Payne game anyway, for a Max Payne game it sucked. Rockstar should of left it alone untill Remedy would pick it back up one day.
I mean all that character development that happened in MP2, the relationship between Mona and Max for example and how she managed to help him move on from the tragedies in his life...it seemed by the end (going by the ending where Mona survived) Max was closer to being at peace then he had ever been after his Wife and child died. MP3 came around though and destroyed that...made him into a worse off drug addict and more like an alchoholic with nothing to live for...I mean they could change it since it wasn't really estbalished but why didn't have Mona in the story again, why did they seem to go with the ending which killed off a strong female character...something which is quite rare these days in video games. Those levels in New York were amazing, the whole reason he left New York could of easily been made into the plot of the third game if they stayed in New York...I mean Max Payne wouldn't of ran, he would of stayed and hit back, they even made it so Max had been sacked from the Police Force something which I liked about his character...the vengeful, justice seeking cop/detective.
I think the game got the benefit of the doubt though because it was Rockstar...it was a good game just not a good Max Payne game. I honestly believe MP3 started out as a new IP but then when Rockstar learnt they could make a Max Payne game they changed the new IP set in Brazil with a bald character into Max Payne 3.
I completely agree, you echo many issues I had with Max Payne 3 myself in my review. It wasn't Max Payne. It was a Rockstar game, and that's why it got overloaded with praise, especially since Max Payne is 10 years into the past and most probably didn't even play those games before playing Max Payne 3.
Max Payne 3 for me had no relevant story (it was rather pointless), no profound meaning, and no characterisation, use of setting, great writing or anything. It was just an action shooter.
It took a dump over the profound and incredible ending of Max Payne 2. It wasn't just about moving on, which was fantastic enough. It was also that he had his revenge, and it actually was liberating. It didn't leave him empty and broken and with nothing left. He finally found peace in Mona and after avenging his family.
Max Payne 3 tried to finish off with a similar conclusion of finding contentment, but it was cliched, purposeless, and had no context, not to mention was done infinitely better in Max Payne 2.
Aside from the great gunplay (despite its issues of repetitiveness, clunky mechanics with the last stand and Max taking too long to get back up or falling out of bullet time if making contact with an object) and fantastic graphics, it was nothing more than a shooter. I also disliked how the game forced you to play it like a cover shooter, despite that being nothing like the original two games.
None of these Ips should be dead all of them had great games in the past and the future is looking bright of them.
God of War and Halo never did changed much but the quality was always pretty high.
We've already had two prequels to God of War and the main series ended. So I'm not against the game, it will probably be good, but it would have been nice to see something else done with it.
This isn't about franchises going away. It's about them staying fresh and new things being done with them.
I'm also interested in the new Tomb Raider, and I was very careful to detail that I hope it's good, but I'm a bit wary of it based on its history, for what comes after a reboot.
It would have to be an entirely new franchise.
As far as I'm aware, they're adding new gameplay elements and changing up some the core mechanics. Director Todd Papy explained some of these. It looks to have the bigger leap/change of all the GOW games so far IMO.
Maybe we'll see something different next gen, but for now, I'm highly anticipating this game.
What you're describing is called a new IP, why would Sony scrap one of the most popular and beloved characters in gaming history, change the fantastic Greek Mythology inspired story when God of War is by far the most critically acclaimed and best selling series in the genre of all time? And this is the first time Sony Santa Monica has ever made a God of War prequel, the other 2 (whilst being fantastic in their own right) are just spin-offs made by Ready at Dawn.
People aren't getting bored of the games which is why God of War III is the most successful game in the genre ever critically and commercially, why would anyone think it's a good business decision to abandon what millions of fans love? Tody_ZA, you're two sandwich's short of a lunch box, let's hope you never have to make an important business decision.
GOW is a huge seller, Duke Nukem was in development hell for years and it wasn't like they released anything in between...and most of all Halo is going to be one of the top games this year, so I have to consider this list to be a joke at best.
I don't get the call to end series anyway. If the series is still around, obviously there are people who still enjoy it. No one is forced to play them. I think it's just people who never liked the games and are sick of hearing about them because they are more popular than other games they feel deserve more attention.
Either you're sick of it and long stopped playing it or you love it. I'm part of the former group. It stopped innovating after CoD4. WaW popularised zombie mode, but after that the rest is tiring to talk about.
I wrote a whole piece on CoD at the beginning of this year: http://egamer.co.za/2012/01...
So after that I don't pay attention to it anymore. It's one of, if not the most financially successful game around at the moment, so we'll have to live with it. It won't change until more gamers are over it.