To the Call of Duty players ruining this game..here's your wake up call..

Coronation Street and Eastenders are two of the most watched TV programmes in the UK but that doesn't mean they're good quality does it?

And you seem to forget how a valid argument works. Refer to the links below.

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/bandwagon

http://www.logicallyfallacious.com/index.php/logical-fallacies/23-appeal-to-common-belief

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentum_ad_populum

I consider myself a hardcore gamer. I like sim games, strategy games, RPGs, etc. There is no shortage of hardcore games out there. In fact, i think there is even more than ever before. For every D3 that has comes out, there is a Path of Exile. Without the casual crowd, there would simply be no D3- not two games like PoE.


another example X3 is one of the only space sims out now, with a sequel coming in the next few months to a year. Space sims don't have main appeal right now, there is no watering down of the genre. If a popular space sim does come out thats wildly popular and spawns a bunch of clones, X3 will still be X3 and it will still be one of the few "true" space sims out. It would be wrong for space sims fans to start crying and say "oh without Space sim Duty there would be so many good space sims out". Wrong, without the popular space sim game, there would probably be just less space sims. Now of course there may be some influences, but not as great as some make it out to be.

My argument is that CoD doesnt affect the number of hardcore games that come out or the number of people who will be into them. Arma3 is still coming out, and i cant imagine it would've come out any faster or with better funding if gaming was still niche.

Michael Bay doesn't negatively affect a movie like Hurt Locker coming out, nor does it affect the number of people who will enjoy it and go see it. Michael Bay movies exist because people enjoy them, the same people who would never even go to the theatres to see your favorite artsy movie. So you lose nothing.

I'm not grateful for those games either. I just dont care about them. I still find great games all the time despite these games being popular. It feels no different than 10-15 years ago when i had to hunt for a good game. I don't remember it being any easier to find something good.

When I played quake 3 and UT, I had to warmup before jumping into ranked matches. I wanted to make sure my aim and practiced movement patterns were fluid around the maps. I've played many games since then and I can't think of one that I felt the need to do a warmup session. Games are being dumbed down across the board. My point is the CoD series has contributed to this but is taking the most heat because of their success.

If you liked X3 then your going to love this new space sim coming out in a couple of years.....http://www.robertsspaceindustries.com/

What do you expect from a gamer group whose average age is 12 years old?

Not true at all. Games were not a "niche" hobby back then, and it would not be like that now. There would naturally be more gamers as we now have an older generation that grew up playing games, and the use of computers and the internet has become even more common.

I find myself playing more and more older games instead of newly released games as the older ones are more fun.
After wow i havent found a single new mmorpg that is worth my time. EVE online is still the only fun mmorpg out there.

You lose credibility in your first sentence.

Killing Floor (complete with completely repetitous gameplay, lazy "weapon purchases" system, arbitrary leveling, a 1980s style never-changing boss [boss- really?], and predictable level endings) is roach gameplay that betrays the neat graphical presentation and zed-time idea.

Red Orchestra 2 was compeltely unoriginal, shamed the original title, and brought "realistic" gameplay to a whole new low.

The only thing Tripwire could teach anyone about game design is how to "play ball" with larger marketers.

I can agree with you up to a point, however, the success of CoD and it's ilk do tend to make devs and publishers lazy and just aim to produce a game with the formula that will sell. Look at the "streamlining" that happened for instance between Dragon Age:Origins and Dragon Age 2. in an effort to go for greater sales and appeal to a wider audience DA2 was "dumbed down" considerably in comparison to it's predecessor. This resulted in, possibly, more sales for Bioware/EA but also a much poorer gaming experience for PC owners that enjoyed DA:O's complexity.

So the result of a success such as CoD can mean that there is more development money available for games it can also mean that the developers produce games with less and less originality and complexity just to appeal to the widest market possible. While companies such as Egosoft will continue to produce they "heavy weight" space sim, the existance of Freelancer (very "consolised" from the Privateer games it developed from) will not change what they do, but it may have been one of the reasons Chris Roberts has only just take an interest in the genre again.

what older games are you playing?

Ok Phyr, point out the direct causation of popularity to game quaility. Go on, we'll wait.

Someone is going to need to explain to me what CoD has to do with PS2. Is this an attempt by the people who exploit overpowered (and soon to be nerfed) things to insult people who just want a balanced game?

After initially reading the first paragraph in the OP I laughed when I read 'Gibson laid out a detailed criticism about the way Call of Duty “takes individual skill out of the equation.” ' and then looked at the OP's Avatar only to see a Vanu character.

I LOL'd so hard! Individual Skill & Vanu stop it your making me hurt. We all know Vanu get the easiest weaponry & vehicles in the game and he's concerned about the way games are being created to cater for the COD player!

ROFL!

interistingly enough in germany the hurtlocker was a big flop, seen by just 70 000 people and shown only in arthouse cinemas...

but yes, this is a good analogy: michael bay movie == cod, hurtlocker == ro

Try reading it. If you still feel that is what it is talking about, try reading it again. If that fails we can explain it.

Been following Star Citizen I see there that is going to shape up to be a really solid game experience and to top it off it will be for top end PC to see cutting edge graphics and very immersive persistant gameplay I'm looking forward to that game very much

I'm not entirely sure the hardcore/casual distinction at play here really works. Mostly because I think classifying CoD as a 'causal' game is a bit of a cop out. I would rather hold all games to the same standard. Indeed a simple game with simple rules, can still within it have complex behavior (indeed conways game of life, damn well proves this) and involving game play. Simply going 'oh CoD is a casual game not hardcore'. Doesn't excuse it being a rail shooter aimed at instant gratification.

And that causal games necessarily have to be 'simplistic' or 'content poor'. For example, I would define them instead as something its easier to dip in and out of and does not require an invement of time per play session in excess of 15 minutes, theres also then no reason why a game cannot be 'causal and hardcore' as it were.

Indeed. I'd go as far as to say arguably 'freelancer' was a causal game, with relatively simple rules and controls, yet could be as involving as you really wanted it to be (while we are on space games). Now if you can bracket off 'game' from 'sim' thats another matter. Here however, I'd only say that a indepth game (which I personally like) doesn't need to force all aspects of a complex simulation down your throught at once.

Finally, this 'honeypot' theory of gaming you seem to advancaing, might have worked back in the day when it was largely about buying a CD at a game shop (though arguably games journalism was a hell of a lot better back then and made an effort to present people with what was worth buying). Then maybe that made sense. In a modern world of Steam though. Its largely irrelevant. Every game has nearly equal access to the market. The problem is ******** marketing (and some terrible journalism barely deserving the name, journaltisment even), pre-existing paradigms and the nonsense notion of a triple AAA game. That in order to have market niehce and make money, the say minecrafts of this world, certaintly do not need the calls of duties.

What does playing Vanu have to do with anything ? I play with my NC toon occasionaly on Mattherson when I get bored of Indarside on Connery. Hell, I played Vanu and NC in PS1, if anything I always thought the TR was the go to faction for newbies and derpzergs.

Ditto. Its a shame that in an age where we should be playing amazingly complex games, instead we are playing games that are less deep than we had in the 90's. The only ones worth playing to me are indy games. PS2 started strong but is getting watered down to a mediocricy of sorts.