Boycotting $10 gameloft games etc

I agree with most of this. I'm more apt to feel ripped off by a state of the art game that plays like absolute crap, has poor writing, and lasts only a couple of hours.

I've been gaming since I was 14, and I'm 45 now, so that's a lot of games, consoles, and whatnot. And in all that time, I can only thing of one instance when a game actually outpaced the technology, and that was the original Quake. It was the first game, to my memory, that required a Pentium chip to run it, and the Pentiums were just barely on the market. Other than that, with each new processor update, graphics card update, etc, the software always took time to catch up. It's been no different with the consoles, and handhelds. Hell, 90% of the games for the PS3 don't utilize everything its capable of.

My point is, no one is saying state of the art games shouldn't be released, but to expect everything to be that way is ridiculous and short sighted. It's those millions of games being sold to older devices that allows the research, development and funding for the state of the art games.

And if AcidShaman thinks it takes no time at all to throw together a cutting edge game, he needs to talk to some developers. Impatience is no excuse for ignorance.

Here's an example from my own field: writing/publishing. I wrote a novella last year, and submitted it to a publisher, who accepted it in December of last year, and due for publication in early 2011. Well, why does it take so long? Publishing takes time. There's edits, reedits, beta reads, printing and scheduling to consider. From my own publishing aspect, I've got a collection of weird western stories due out by Christmas that I've worked on for almost a year. There was gathering stories, aceepting and rejecting them, editing, getting artwork, paying writers, formatting, etc. Things take time.

This attitude of Acidshamans, this petulant demand for isntant gratification is not only unrealistic, it does a disservice to the devs who are working hard to bring him what he wants.

And 10-1 once these high end games come out, he'll be the first to bitch about how the gameplay sucks, etc etc.

finally, AcidShaman, simply because Steve Jobs says its a gaming platform doesn't make it one. I can call my cat a tiger, too, doesn't mean she is.

 

Well said.

 

+1 Summed up my opinion perfectly! Minus the publishing, can't really talk about that as I'm no writer!

 

Stalker?

 

If your going to boycot them its not going to be a problem for you

 

what? aren't every gameloft game $0.99 only?

 

I think this is the first time I wrote that.

How is this thread still going.

 

I think acidshaman's biggest problem was his assumption that the quality of a game is based purely on graphics and technology being pushed. This has very rarely, if ever, been the case. At most perhaps, they're slightly appealing to gaming/tech nerds who just want to know what's possible, but a great game can come from anywhere and neither of the above are requirements for making one.

 

I actually agree with acidshaman slightly, but he's an idiot.
Games will eventually improve and only support newer devices. It's starting to happen.
However acidshamans problem was this-
1. He said that every gameloft game was 10 bucks, using Gangstar: MV as an example. It's only 6.99.
2. He said he bought G:MV, said it was crap, then later said he was being sarcastic.
3. Said he had an iPhone 4, then later admitted that he doesn't even have one.
4. Everything he said was worded completely wrong. Really hard to understand.
5. He's ignorant.

End of discussion. Games take time. Gangstar has been in development for 9 months to a year. iPhone 4 wasn't out.

 

Acidshaman is a buffoon. Every point he has raised has been debunked. If you dont want a game, then dont buy it. I have never once bought a Gameloft game, and I have no remorse about. You said you are "going public", which means what? Hold the press! Gameloft sells what you consider a $10 for $6.99, but they are only worth $4.99! You are a babbling self absorbed maroon that just wants to see threads revolve around your ill logic. Seriously, if you have an issue with the iDevice then pack your bags and hit the bricks. Play DS and PSP instead, they are "very successful", if you dont mind me quoting you.

By the way, iPhone 4 was NOT made with gamers in mind, nor is it remotely considered a gamer device. Had you mentioned the new iPod Touch, then you would have been more accurate. Take your disinformation and disgruntled logic and jump ship to the android forums pal.

 

lol
I have certainly bought all gameloft games for 99 cents. And at the risk of sounding snobbish, practically anything is worth more than that.

 

Idiot

 

There was a post from a gamer of long time status, posted earlier and that publishing and development take time.

I agree wholeheartedly.

Where I disagree with this instance, is that Steve jobs threw apple and ios devices into the gaming league, earlier this month. While I realize this is a rather short time, the A4 processor has been around in my hands at least, as a consumer, since April 3.

There is no reason. That the iPad has to run an equivalent of older gen tech for gaming. Even the games created for the iPad specifically. Yes the iPhone and iPod touch have a larger user base, but with equivalent tech now in the consumer hands since June and this month respectively. One cannot say they have not had a heads up or an inclination as to how to build games for new tech, as we all saw the chips being phased into other devices.

And as consumers, we must understand that the top tier developers knew this information internally in advance.

If the xbox 360 were launching, or any other system for that matter we all understand that development kits and tech are given to the capable developers to have the games ready by launch.

You cannot argue any longer that these devices offer no competition to the Ds and Psp, as Apple would now otherwise argue that they do.

I prefer the innovative ways in which games are played on the screen. I like many of the concepts.

Where I digress even further on point, is that Gameloft, whom is under the Ubisoft umbrella: same founders, heads and CEOs.

They both develop and publish their own games, they are not a third or second party unto themselves. They are like Bethesda/Zenimax, a developer and publisher.

What I would like Gameloft to do, is utilize their Ubisoft unreal license/leverage and if they have to, delay big titles to utilize the tech, because unfortunately, epic citadel raised a bar. They put that tech demo in our hands and we know it works and looks as good as even the upcoming 3ds.

So far gameloft games to not disappoint I feel they need a refresh because, graphically they look like end of cycle ps1/launch ps2 titles and we know the devices can do more.

If improvement means phase out older ios device support, well than I'm all for it. If you argue otherwise, that would be like owning a ps3 but because more people own a ps2, then all the games on your great system with the bells and whistles, would be made for the catering to backward compatability and didn't use any of the new tech, you'd feel screwed because of the legion of people who didn't or don't upgrade the system for whatever reason they have.

For those that argue that these aren't gaming machines, again with the devices being capable now of being such for a broad audience that point could be moot. As well, home consoles have web and netflix and movies on demand and Facebook and music and many other things not associated with consoles prior, are they no longer consoles any more because they can be used for more than gaming?

Gameloft needs to delay big tier games and get with the program. If people see what they can do without the a4 then maybe more people will upgrade. It's the people who don't people others will pay for high end games that hold the AppStore back. It's the people who don't believe there's a market who hold the AppStore back. It's the people who don't want better experiences who settle for shovel ware who hold the AppStore back. It's gameloft letting you accept that they can do no better who hold the AppStore back.

It's people who expect better than the quo who move the AppStore forward. It's people who accept more from games and understand the possibilities that move the AppStore forward and it's the people ready to dive in and give support to apples new platforms and the developers, those truly willing to shell out for the experiences on a console who will move the AppStore forward.

The wii sold more this gen for the experiences, but the market accepts shovel ware. That's why that system doesn't get the big guns of the other two consoles games. If that market would rise up and support those games for the gamer, you'd see a very different wii lineup today. I feel the AppStore and their developers can do better and if we want the landscape to mirror Sony or the 360 or ds the consumer can change that by heavily rewarding the games that mirror those experiences. It will only be then that we see a disruption and better games.

So it does come down to people maybe not buying the generic gameloft game until they raise the standards, too. Give them the message that you demand the games that you'd gladly pay to play. That use the best tech and give great core experiences. That the AppStore has a place for the indie like crescent moon and a place for the top tier like ea of gameloft. Much like the 360 has their lineup and the arcade lineup.

 

Yeah, but he's not the racist one is he?

 

Rather than bashing Gameloft solely, maybe you should take every developer to task for not utilizing the tech available. Surely Gameloft will not make or break the app store on its own. While you understand tech certainly, you have no concept of business, and what it takes to make one successful. If Gameloft were interested in being the purveyors of cutting edge games, they certainly would have started to head in that direction. They're not, though. They found a niche that works exceedingly well for them. Ever hear the old expression, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it."? Why would any company limit themselves from 100million potential sales to 5 million?

As far as the iPad being out since April; that's five months. I remember reading threads and comments from developers who hadn't gotten the software needed/required to program for the ipad as close as a week to its release, so whose fault is that? Not the developers.

Another issue to consider: while the Citadel demo is certainly pretty, start putting in NPC's, game mechanics, and everything else needed to make a game, then average in memory needs and exactly how much that will drain the battery and its a balancing act. What good is a cutting edge game if it drains your battery in 45 minutes? That definitely won't cut it for a phone, and would make it highly inconvenient for a Touch. Apple does a disservice to its customers by not using better, longer lasting batteries (though I understand that it also helps to sell products since you can't replace the damn things).

A basic understanding of the time it takes it to develop a game from thought to release is required. Five months is simply not enough time to make the type of complex game you desire.

Common sense should dictate that simply because the technology is available, it takes time, and that while there may not be the orgasm inducing eye candy you and AS desire, it will show up, and will have as long a shelf life as the older generations of hardware.

Early technology adopters always seem to be the ones crying the loudest for things that will be available, while the rest of us enjoy what's there.

 

While you make reasonable points, The argument still remains and I agree to disagree.

Gameloft is not the only developer guilty of traveling behind the curve. Squaresoft/enix was just as guilty with chaos rings. Look at the pixelated backgrounds in the HD version. Capcom and their heinous catastrophe that is resident evil 4, while certainly cribbing the name, they could have easily porter the ps2/gamecube versions to the AppStore and been successful with it. Electronic arts, while guilty actually made a very beautiful game with mirrors edge, so they are partially absolved.

I take the most offense with Gameloft because they tend to copy the experiences of console titles. They also are the portable arm of Ubisoft. They have an ability to use the unreal tech and show us something better, than they've given.

Look, console delays happen all the time, see Red Dead Redemption, or Ubisofts own Splinter Cell Conviction. How much more impressed would the target audience have been if they had said "we're going to delay Modern Combat 2, in order to polish the title, to utilize the unreal 3 engine or an updated engine." ?

I am certain people would certainly applaud that type of move and in the end people would gladly be happy to wait. I understand tech takes time, etc, however, with call of duty releasing annually alongside Assassins creed I find that the time to develop would be less than anticipated.

Epic games developed epic citadel in under 8 weeks. We cannot say for certain that gameloft, who is a subsidiary sister company of ubisoft, who is licensed the unreal 3 engine and is a big player in the video game space had no prior licensee talks with epic about this prior to the september conference. I am fairly certain they knew well ahead of the announcement about the ability to render games with that engine.

The point is, Rein and Capps mentioned right after the conference that they had been in talks prior to licensees of their engine to release the kits to existing parties who currently utilize the engine. The best speculative guess is game loft as the hinted party develops and self publishes.

If that speculation is correct then there is no reason that any party using it already in development with the engine could not have announced otherwise and delay titles to utilize the tech.

Early adopters are on the short end of the tech stick, however as an early adopter our foray plays out better for those who wait until later to buy in.

I still feel that as A4 is integrated and the processor plays out better, that old devices should have games that scale themselves down, much like a pc would with graphics settings, and the new devices run the bells and whistles. That to me is a price they pay for not seeing a value in new tech.

Regardless, the games I feel would still run fine with characters, etc. If a psp, or upcoming 3ds which seems on par with the a4 can run wonderful intensive experiences, then I see no reason these games should suffer mediocrity.

As for battery life my ipad gets a solid 10-12 hours of life regardless of browsing or gaming. Far longer when solely playing music, on a tip to Portland, I had a full charge with still 100% after nearly 3.5-4hrs.

Gaming is a love of mine and I should not have to look toward a less convenient interesting platform to meet my needs, like ds or psp. There is no reason that apples new ios devices cannot deliver just as good as those other 2.