VSD Arcade Podcast #14 - We <3 Kinect Edition (now on iTunes)

[Twigg4075]

So I'm curious, without listening to the podcast, why is DNF not a $60 game? It's an interesting concept that I thought JMS broke down quite well. I don't know who brought it up, but I'm curious as to the reasoning behind the notion. (I don't really listen to podcasts anymore because my new commute to school is about 4 minutes, so please excuse me for asking this).

Check my post above.

And take it with grain of salt because I'm basing that off of the myriad reviews I have read and haven't had any hands on with the game myself.

[Twigg4075]

"I hear they're developing the newest Kingdom Hearts on the Leapster."

"It's the perfect demographic for that baby game."

LMAO.

[SethMode]

Check my post above.

And take it with grain of slat because I'm basing that off of the myriad reviews I have read and haven't had any hands on with the game myself.

I would play it. I thought the same thing too, but when I finally went and played it, I kept and open mind and realized that it was apparent that a lot of those points came from jaded game reviewers. The rest should be read by both Brnt and you.

Is it perfect? No. Is it being overly hated? Most definitely. Giantbomb being one of them. It is not a great game, by any means. But it is a fun game, despite what they say and the load times don't seem nearly as long when you aren't watching a video (I watched that quick look too and didn't want to play it, but in the end it really wasn't that bad of a load time).

And the broken, buggy, and 12 years too late thing is lame Brnt, particularly since it's based off of a quick look by GB. Play the game. I would not call it broken, nor particularly buggy (although that has become a word that varies depending on the person). And 12 years too late with the writing? Come on. It is intended to be that way, quite obviously. I know the guy's at GB want some post modern bullshit Duke Nukem thing, but who cares? That doesn't mean it isn't worth $60.

(all of that said, I am playing the game and while I enjoy it, I would not pay $60 for it -- but that isn't the same thing as saying that it shouldn't be sold for $60)

EDIT - Sorry if there is some confusion is my post -- I tried to edit it after the fact but I got really mixed up between what Brnt was saying and what Twigg was saying. Just FYI. Either way, bother are coming from the same perspective so, I feel like there is no harm done.

[Garrett67]

In the weather community, since we write weather so much, we simply use WX to replace weather.

I don't know how to say this without sounding totally gay, but your accent is awesome. It reminds me of summers when I was younger. My mom's side of the family all live in and around Waldorf/Baltimore and I used to spend every summer up there. I can still remember going to Ocean City as a kid.

I have no problem sounding gay. Twigg is a sexy chunk of man meat and I love him.

and although being a flight enthusiast, I know what WX is, I can't see your name without seeing 'heels woman' .

[Twigg4075]

I would play it. I thought the same thing too, but when I finally went and played it, I kept and open mind and realized that it was apparent that a lot of those points came from jaded game reviewers.

Is it perfect? No. Is it being overly hated? Most definitely. Giantbomb being one of them. It is not a great game, by any means. But it is a fun game, despite what they say and the load times don't seem nearly as long when you aren't watching a video (I watched that quick look too and didn't want to play it, but in the end it really wasn't that bad of a load time).

And the broken, buggy, and 12 years too late thing is lame Twigg, particularly since it's based off of a quick look by GB. Play the game. I would not call it broken, nor particularly buggy (although that has become a word that varies depending on the person). And 12 years too late with the writing? Come on. It is intended to be that way, quite obviously. I know the guy's at GB want some post modern bullshit Duke Nukem thing, but who cares? That doesn't mean it isn't worth $60.

(all of that said, I am playing the game and while I enjoy it, I would not pay $60 for it -- but that isn't the same thing as saying that it shouldn't be sold for $60)

Oh, I'm definitely going to get it at some point. I would love to find a great deal on the Balls of Steel Edition actually.

My point was that there really wasn't any way that Gearbox was going to appease pro reviewers likle Giant Bomb. But you're kind of fucking over your loyal fanbase, people that enhjoyed the Brothers in Arms and Borderlands games, when you release a game that you know is mediocre at best at full price. I just think they could've retained a lot more respect if they would've said "We know this is an old ass game that has been in devleopment for nearly a liftime. And while we still think it's a great game that Duke fans will enjoy we are giving it a $40 price tag." That would've been great as far as good will is concerned.

But on the flip side I also know the stigma of "budget" games (it's also pretty sad that in this generation a $40 or $50 game is considered "budget", but that's for another thread entirely). It seems yo immediately turn off a lot of less informed consumers when you price a game lower than "normal" because they automatically think it's crap or shoevelware.

I don't think JMS's argument about being able to buy Mass Effect for $15 hold any weight. If you wait long enough you can find any game, great or otherwise, for dirt cheap. I'm specifically referring to brand new games.

Gearbox was in a tough position and now doubt probably one of the most unique situations in gaming probably in the last 20 years. It was probably a no-win either way. I just think things may have been a bit more favorable for them had they released it at $40 and said "We know it's a 90's game, which is why we're only charging a 90's price."

[Twigg4075]

For what it's worth, I've enjoyed the podcasts.

I'm genuinely glad.

Would we like to have 50+ listeners from this site (and possibly many more now that we're on iTunes)? Of course. But, I know I speak for the whole crew when saying that we all love games and gaming. We wouldn't do this if we didn't. We all take time out of our schedules (some more than others-basically every one but me ;)) just to talk about games because it's a fun thing to do. We aren't getting paid for it. The only "payment" is the hopes that a few people listen and like what they hear.

[jms493]

My stand is a game sucks or is great no matter the price tag.

Value for your money....different topic. Angry Birds beats everything...fucking game is free on andriod...lol

[Twigg4075]

My stand is a game sucks or is great no matter the price tag.

Value for your money....different topic. Angry Birds beats everything...fucking game is free on andriod...lol

Agreed but I think that is a different argument than what I was trying to make.

I think Angry Birds is grossly over rated and even though I got it for free as well (and all the expansions) I haven't played it in ages.

But I don't like playing any games on my phone.

[SethMode]

Twigg, the way that I think that Gearbox won was: they put one mediocre game out as DNF. It still will sell. Not they own the title. Now, hopefully, they can make the most of that. I have faith. And considering I like the game for the most part...

Also, Angry Birds sucks. Someone could pay me to play it and I would not enjoy the experience.

[BrntO4Life]

I would play it. I thought the same thing too, but when I finally went and played it, I kept and open mind and realized that it was apparent that a lot of those points came from jaded game reviewers. The rest should be read by both Brnt and you.

Is it perfect? No. Is it being overly hated? Most definitely. Giantbomb being one of them. It is not a great game, by any means. But it is a fun game, despite what they say and the load times don't seem nearly as long when you aren't watching a video (I watched that quick look too and didn't want to play it, but in the end it really wasn't that bad of a load time).

And the broken, buggy, and 12 years too late thing is lame Brnt, particularly since it's based off of a quick look by GB. Play the game. I would not call it broken, nor particularly buggy (although that has become a word that varies depending on the person). And 12 years too late with the writing? Come on. It is intended to be that way, quite obviously. I know the guy's at GB want some post modern bullshit Duke Nukem thing, but who cares? That doesn't mean it isn't worth $60.

(all of that said, I am playing the game and while I enjoy it, I would not pay $60 for it -- but that isn't the same thing as saying that it shouldn't be sold for $60)

EDIT - Sorry if there is some confusion is my post -- I tried to edit it after the fact but I got really mixed up between what Brnt was saying and what Twigg was saying. Just FYI. Either way, bother are coming from the same perspective so, I feel like there is no harm done.

Maybe I will play it down the line, but I can infer from the Quick Look that it's far behind the times gameplay-wise as an FPS and I never found Duke to be that funny.

And, frankly, I don't even listen to the GB guys during a Quick Look. I find them annoying, so I just play music while I watch. I was judging Duke based solely on what I saw in the video, not what I heard (or didn't hear).

[SethMode]

Maybe I will play it down the line, but I can infer from the Quick Look that it's far behind the times gameplay-wise as an FPS and I never found Duke to be that funny.

And, frankly, I don't even listen to the GB guys during a Quick Look. I find them annoying, so I just play music while I watch. I was judging Duke based solely on what I saw in the video, not what I heard (or didn't hear).

I dunno man...it's a weird quick look. It isn't THAT behind the times, to be honest. I'd like to know what it is BEHIND as well, because it was clunky at times but that was it. Granted, I'm not a big FPS guy, but still, I don't think that there are many games that are much better than this (outside of graphically).

Humor-wise, I don't really get why you would approach the game at all then, if you don't find Duke funny. 3D wasn't a great game, it was an above average Doom clone that went all Army of Darkness and had a horrible B movie hero. That is all this game is doing, only intensified. I can appreciate not liking the humor, but I would think for a lot of people the humor/history would be why you would play the game in the first place. Which is why I can't understand totally why you would feel the need to state any kind of opinion about DNF considering it seems like you wouldn't have liked it regardless of what the Quicklook on GB said.

EDIT -- Just as a further point, there was an MS update when I played the game and I've yet to have any bugs, so...yeah. Perhaps a lot of those from the QL were fixed. Don't know for sure.

[Garrett67]

Agreed but I think that is a different argument that what I was trying to make.

I think Angry Birds is grossly over rated and even though I got it for free as well (and all the expansions) I haven't played it in ages.

But I don't like playing any games on my phone.

I think you can play angry birds in Google Chrome now. I don't play it much but I do know that once you get in a few levels, its hard as Hell!

[JayDizzle]

I'm glad this thread went from BEEF to decent, if not solid discussion.

[jms493]

You can say for all the companies that release Movie games as well. The developers all know they suck but they all release for $50-60. Iron man 1 and 2, Thor, ect, ect. Most people dont know and just buy.

[jms493]

If consumers actually grow a brain one day, retail stores would be in trouble.