Ninja Scooter
Member
Watch it end up being LA Niore 2
Why is it Rod Ferguson is always the one who's sent to whip troubled games into shape?
I don't know how to read Twitter. Am I supposed to go from the bottom up? That's what it looks like from the ellipses.
Note: Read from bottom to top:
Why is it Rod Ferguson is always the one who's sent to whip troubled games into shape?
Dev from generic actiony-shooty series patching up another generic actiony-shooty series entry so it's not entirely unexpected. He'll push it out the door at the very least.
Why is it Rod Ferguson is always the one who's sent to whip troubled games into shape?
Dev from generic actiony-shooty series patching up another generic actiony-shooty series entry so it's not entirely unexpected. He'll push it out the door at the very least.
On PS1 it wasn't.GTA has never been a huge draw.
Bioshock Infinite was a generic actiony-shooty game?
The gameplay and some aspects of the game's structure certainly were generic, yes. Showed obvious signs of development hell hastily covered up by the metaphysical/sci-fi conceits of the story. A notable example I recall is when you're in Finkton going through the same map backwards (now with ugly grey and brown war color palette!).
Laaaazy.
Because his name sounds like Ron Swanson . . . the manly man of get things done.Why is it Rod Ferguson is always the one who's sent to whip troubled games into shape?
My apologies. I didn't realize the words 'never' and 'on PS1' meant the same thing.On PS1 it wasn't.
Ah . . . so maybe they should have rebranded GTA after the mediocre PS1 games instead of making it a better game like they did and then they might have had a big success (which they did).So my point was while I was recommend they rebrand, GTA didn't, and eventually became successful.
"Undercooked" is a good word. It just didn't feel finished to me, despite taking forever to come out.
The overworld looked nice but there was really nothing to do in it.And collecting cars was pointless because the game narrative meant your stash got wiped out repeatedly.
Also, it seemed to introduce characters and then never revisit them for some reason. Like, "Oh here's a weapons guy with an eyepatch! Welp, that's the last you'll see of him". The first game built up a cast that you got familiar with.
Definitely, one of last gens bigger disappointments for me. Not that it was a bad game by any stretch, but I was so hyped because I loved the first one so much. I should've learned by now.
Yeah there was a lot of things they introduced like they were setting it up for side mission type stuff and then nothing came of it, or what did felt like it was not what was originally planned.
The entire prison term part of the game was horribly rushed. Most of the last few chapters were very fast paced, rushing you to the end, and quite a few chapters just felt like they could have used some more time. What was there was a ton of fun. The driving and gunplay is my favorite in an open world game. It was all so meaty and well done.
They said they forwent side missions and stuff because they didn't want to cheapen the main story which was their focus with goofy games and stuff like GTA has, but anyone with a brain could figure out they could have achieved secondary missions and other activities that fit the narrative tone and style to help expand the world and characters in support of the main story and not in contrast to it. You could immediately tell they did everything to just get the main campaign done well enough and ship out the game.
After probably 5 years of development they were told "get us something to sell," and that's what they delivered. I still think it was worth the 50 or whatever it was, but it was definitely all that it could have been, should have been, or likely what they planned it to be.
He said in an interview with GameSpot that Gears 5's combat, which sometimes lets you approach combat in different ways and choose when to initiate, was inspired by BioShock Infinite.
Yeah well without Vávra Mafia sucked ass....