-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
New SSX: Deadly Descents news from Official Xbox Magazine (WoW on a snowboard!!!)
- Thread starter gondee
- Start date
AceBandage
Banned
MYE said:
Wii games are colorful and fun.
360/PS3 games are dark and boring.
That's what I got out of it, anyway.
charlequin
Banned
soultron said:
Well, except for the post a bit upthread detailing how this game was specifically made on the cheap and is repeatedly having to justify its own existence to EA higher-ups who don't want to revisit the series at all.
charlequin
Banned
hey_it's_that_dog said:
Right, exactly. The biggest problem here is that that the original SSX games were skill-intensive score-attack/time-attack games that rewarded players for the development of mastery, while the new game is rolling in mechanics from other games and genres (level gimmicks, RPG advancement) that de-emphasize that personal skill improvement.
Ugh, Ubisoft already tried this two years ago:
- Realistic social online "experience" for 360 and PS3
- Lighthearted, cartoony and somehow "whacky" version for Wii
Guess which one got positive reviews, became a million seller and got a sequel and a spin-off that have performed fairly good, and which one floped hard and barely made it past "mediocre" on most reviews.
Some people just never learn.
*hugs SSX3 and SSX On Tour games*
- Realistic social online "experience" for 360 and PS3
- Lighthearted, cartoony and somehow "whacky" version for Wii
Guess which one got positive reviews, became a million seller and got a sequel and a spin-off that have performed fairly good, and which one floped hard and barely made it past "mediocre" on most reviews.
Some people just never learn.
*hugs SSX3 and SSX On Tour games*
Neuromancer
Member
Yeah I guess you're right. I find it hard to believe they won't be using the shoulder buttons for grabs, or anything else though.hey_it's_that_dog said:
The more I take in the complaints in this and every other thread, I really have to wonder whether people realistically think a more traditional SSX game (more along the lines of Tricky/3) would actually sell better than this. Personally I doubt that it would.
SolidSnakex
Member
Zeliard said:
EA has actually been really good this generation at not releasing bad games. The one issue here is that the lead designer of one of their not so good games (Facebreaker) is the creative director on this game.
Net_Wrecker
Member
Neuromancer said:
You know what sells new IPs, comebacks, or reboots? Word of mouth. If a new SSX was released that was more like a "traditional" Tricky/SSX3 and a demo came out that got all the old fans excited, new fans excited, and had great word of mouth, it would sell. Put EA marketing machine behind it, and there's no doubt I think.
Now, unless Deadly Descents is EXTREMELY well received, and has a Skate-esque demo that blows everyone away, the word of mouth from the old school SSX fanbase is going to crap all over this release. This game NEEDS to be GREAT.
starchild excalibur
Member
I used to be in the camp defending this and saying "wait and see", but this news has me really fucking bummed out.
hey_it's_that_dog
benevolent sexism
Neuromancer said:
I agree that this new direction will probably sell better to a wider audience. I still want a game that appeals to me and is designed for people who appreciated the original series. And I think that smart people could make a new SSX that does both. But my faith may be misplaced.
I missed that post. Whoops.charlequin said:
More DD Benefit-Of-The-Doubt-Force stuff below.
EDIT: I read it. I still don't know what to make of it. Gondee knows people and has sources, but it's not like this game is going to be made on On Tour's budget -- even if it's relative and adjusted for today's dev costs. If they had to try that hard to push for approval from EA top brass, why wouldn't they just pitch it as an XBLA/PSN/Steam release if they knew there were going to be tight budget constraints? This seems like it will be positioned as one of EA's major releases for the year it comes out, so I think the budget (and the product itself) will be reflective of that.
The sad thing is that we will never see the budget figures. And my original point was more to the notion that if this game was released without the SSX name it would've been a blip on the sales radar like Stoked was. EA is a much larger publisher than Destineer (Stoked publisher) and they won't let it happen. Again, it's not the game most people are asking for, but that doesn't mean it won't be enjoyable (in a different sense from trad-SSX games) or that it won't sell. EA made their staff adjust the pitch so it will sell, and I doubt it will make it past Riccetello if it's a turd, quality-wise. Whether or not it playing more or less to the mainstream makes it a turd is purely subjective.
I don't personally think it will be canceled. I'm simply reiterating what other people "in the vicinity" have surmised about the future of the game. They could be wrong. But if you're looking for a reason why they're going this direction, your answer is that it was a challenge getting it made in the first place. I think Todd Batty would love to do a full-blown revamp in the spirit of the last SSX games, but the execs at EA have repeatedly shown they don't have faith in that direction for the franchise. His trashing the old games and talking up the new stuff is more about pleasing the execs and confirming he's committed to the new direction. I think he's glad they got the game off the ground to begin with.
The stuff about the team being smaller in order for the game to be made makes sense when you look at it. The first thing Batty said in his interview with EGM (and reiterated here) is how they don't have the manpower to put one person on a track for a year - and yet that's what they did with the first 3 games. Those people were called world-builders. This time around, they have a program doing the bulk of the work for them on that, to save money, time and resources. Limitations like this, coupled with play elements that are dictated by marketing leads to games like SSX On Tour. I can't remember how many times guys like Steve Anthony were mentioning during SSXOT's development how they had to sacrifice what they could include based on limitations on budget and manpower.
Just for the sake of argument then, if Mountain Man helps free up time for the smaller staff, wouldn't that be well and good? It has already been mentioned that the "paths" themselves will be tuned and decorated by environment and art staffers once the data has been exported from MM.
And with the series now ditching the Tokyo Megaplex design aesthetic, which was probably time consuming in and of itself, I think MM could lend to a more efficient environment and art work allowance.
Is it mostly your own connections to EA that afford you this insider knowledge, or is it actually in the article? I'd be surprised it if was in the article because it seems like PR handlers wouldn't let the responses fly, given the self-depreciative slant they seem to have in relation to OT and, now, the development of DD.
Thanks for your response, by the way. Very interesting insight into things.
And with the series now ditching the Tokyo Megaplex design aesthetic, which was probably time consuming in and of itself, I think MM could lend to a more efficient environment and art work allowance.
Is it mostly your own connections to EA that afford you this insider knowledge, or is it actually in the article? I'd be surprised it if was in the article because it seems like PR handlers wouldn't let the responses fly, given the self-depreciative slant they seem to have in relation to OT and, now, the development of DD.
Thanks for your response, by the way. Very interesting insight into things.
They don't come out and say "we are limited on budget and manpower", no. But I've learned over the course of years of talking with the developers post-game and also reading into comments what to discern. In this case I heard about the state of the "latest" team before they announced SSX
D. And when Batty first mentions Mountain Man in the EGM article, he is directly saying it was created to bridge the gap between what it would take to make an SSX game the old way (the first 3 games' worldbuilder method) and what EA would commit to the game this time around. When they pretty much say that they had to build mountain man in order to get the game approved, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see the state of things. However, it's not the tech itself that is the problem. Had they built mountain man alone as a start I say good for them. It just shows the lack of confidence in the SSX series that required them to build Mountain Man, which leads to the absurd reliance on marketing to decide what the game features that is the real problem. Thus we get SSX: Call Of Duty instead of a formal SSX game that everyone that I"ve seen wants, and that has sold well based on the first 3 games of the series.
Peter Moore was asked before SSXDD was announced about the future of an SSX game. He mentions "Well, the one that everyone talks about is SSX Tricky." Then, the very next day after SSX
D was announced and the entire internet (including GAF) was throwing fits, he released a statement about how the SSX series needed a gritty reboot and how awesome SSXDD was. You have to remember, the game is still in its infancy, with more than year of development left. They're pushing what's in the game based on focus groups and marketing trends, not what a passionate developer (like Steve Rechtshaffner and Larry LaPierre of the first 3 games) would put in the game based on their love for the series.No problem. I'm glad everyone feels roughly the same way I do - and I am glad to put my unique perspective on the overall process that might help people understand where the direction is coming from. Everyone was up in arms after SSXDD was announced, but I wasn't. I expected it - signs had been pointing to this very thing for a very long time.
Net_Wrecker
Member
gondee said:Peter Moore was asked before SSXDD was announced about the future of an SSX game. He mentions "Well, the one that everyone talks about is SSX Tricky." Then, the very next day after SSX
What gets me is the fact that in ONE article, they managed to completely crap on Tokyo Megaplex, SXX Tricky, SSX3, and the Wii all while continuously saying they haven't forgotten about those hardcore SSX fans who have been asking for a proper sequel for years now.
The series didn't NEED a gritty reboot either, they must have pressured the hell out of Moore to say that. I completely understand their attempt to appeal to the "lol brah so hardcore" crowd of 2011, but there ARE ways to do that without losing the SOUL of SSX. Little stuff like losing the fireworks, the neon, the track markings, UBER tricks, and possibly even the personalities of the characters is just going too far. SSX3 was already fairly toned down from SSX Tricky, so I don't understand why they took it even further with Deadly Descents to the point where people are comparing the trailer to Call of Duty.
Net_Wrecker
Member
StuBurns said:
You honestly think he meant it like that?
It's more of a "Eww, that looks like a Wii game, can't have that on PS360."
I don't think they had to pressure him at all. I think he's part of the problem. He's always got this smarmy look on his face when talking about SSX. Most of the denials about a new SSX these last few years have come from him - everyone else is willing to say "you never know, it's a popular series with a big fanbase". You can tell he doesn't get it, that he doesn't understand the series and doesn't see the point in the classic formula. He probably one of a few responsible for the direction this is going, and they'll be the first ones to say that SSX has no audience if the new game doesn't sell. I think he released his statement the weekend after SSXDD premiered because he was surprised by the uproar.
Net_Wrecker
Member
gondee said:
Blah
I wish that Valve somehow got the rights to SSX, brought in the team from the first 3 games, injected the game with personality, and went to work. That's the only way I see the SSX sequel I want ever coming out.
Keyser Soze
Member
After a nights rest, I have to admit, I still fucking hate this piece of shit.
Yes, they deserve to die, and I hope they burn in hell.
Yes, they deserve to die, and I hope they burn in hell.
gun_hammer
Neo Member
They could have avoided all of this if they didn't call it or associate it with SSX.
Fortinbras
Member
I can't eat as much as I'd like to vomit. This shit is ridiculous.
Fortinbras
Member
Actually I really like EA in this generation.
They brought us Dead Space and Mirror's Edge.
They brought us Dead Space and Mirror's Edge.
I AM JOHN!
Banned
I want to die.Nirolak said:
EYEL1NER
Member
I didn't read the actual article too much, I saw the pics when I was flipping through the magazine, groaned audibly, then continued to flip, but when I get home I'm gonna read it now. People see SSX and think it's a Wii games? Fuck this guy...gondee said:
The only thing I read in the OP that sounds remotely cool is the Google Earth type interface for selecting your mountains and paths.
I <3 Memes
Member
Nirolak said:Danger Boards
Chopper chase sequence. What do you want to bet that the helicopter is shooting at you? It would go along with the other mountains "dangerous challenges". ie., avalanche, freezing cold if you dont stay in the sunlight, the other mountain that you have to race down or you black out due to lack of oxygen.
Keyser Soze
Member
I <3 Memes said:
I am pretty sure all this was in the first press release, and I wept as I read it.
Although, at that point, I still had faith in the game, and had some hope left until this Fucksy opened the hole in his face and spoke.
Neuromancer
Member
I'll take that bet.I <3 Memes said:
SolidSnakex
Member
I AM JOHN!
Banned
You would.Neuromancer said:
somesayyea
Member
all of this sounds horrible
DXB-KNIGHT
Member
Its COD ON ICE
everything about this just doesn't sound like ssx. even if it's a great game, they've changed so much and really just shit on everything that ssx is. ssx is not reality. ssx has giant neon snowflakes in the air that multiply your score.
i won't dismiss the game, but it shouldn't even be called ssx at this point. they better make a real ssx game after this one.
tricks being done on the analog stick is barfworthy.
i won't dismiss the game, but it shouldn't even be called ssx at this point. they better make a real ssx game after this one.
tricks being done on the analog stick is barfworthy.
Anticitizen One
Banned
We must stand united and make sure not a single copy of this game is sold
Neuromancer
Member
Sorry bud. This game actually looks all right to me.Anticitizen One said:
That said if they decided to scale back and go back to their roots more, that'd be fine with me too. I'm easy like Sunday morning.
I AM JOHN!
Banned
Why did you remind me of this game's existence? Whyyyyyy?