Why would anyone know who the lead designer of Gears of War is?

Yeah, that's kind of an annoying comment by Blez.

That is a really weird answer for what console he uses.

That is a really weird answer for what console he uses.

Not really. I think he just doesn't want to be hunted down and bugged, so he'd rather not answer.

Why would anyone know who the lead designer of Gears of War is?

He's a legitimate video game celebrity. He's not the Bill James of video game nerds, but he's at least a Thorn or Palmer.

I used to play video and computer games all the time and the only designer I knew was Sid Meier and the only reason I knew his name is because he put it on the title. I think the vast majority of people that play video games could only name one person related to video games and that is John Maddon And pretty much nobody, besides his mother, is going to be able to answer the "you know who my brother is" cold like that even if the guy asking it is Frank Meier.

Why would anyone know who the lead designer of Gears of War is?

FWIW, I read that more as the set-up to telling Beane, not that he would expect Beane to know.

I used to play video games all the time and the names I knew were Kojima and Miyamotu

The only video game designer I can name is my cousin, and I don't even know what games he's worked on.

He's not a designer, but didn't plenty of people know who John Carmack was?

Beane always skips the Vietnam stages. His Playstation don't work in the sh?t.

I know the name Ken Levine, because BioShock was extraordinary and I can hardly wait for Infinite.

I've been a slightly above casual gamer my entire life. Kojima and Notch (don't even know his real name) are the only names I know of anyone that is in the creation process of video games. I guess Curt Schilling is another, but that's kind of different.

I'm fairly familiar with development studios and/or publishers though which is probably more important than individual designers.

Good god, y'all.

Is it just me, or are there an extreme number of quality-to-potentially great games coming out this holiday season? I know every year there are a lot, but nothing quite this big. I don't know how many gamers we have around here (My time to play is not nearly as much as I would like), but I'd like to see this thread be hijacked into a game review thread for some of those titles. Since my time, and to a lesser extent disposable income, is limited, I'd like to have a wide range of opinions and information as to what games to pick up.

I rented Dead Island for a week. It's fun, but I'm not sure how much it will be over an extended playthru. After a week's worth of trying it out, it seems it could end up being a soulless boring game or a really enjoyable experience. I loved borderlands, actually I still play that one occasionally, and it never got boring to me. Dead Island seems different though, it's almost like it was forced at times. I guess deep down I don't want to play a zombie/horror game where you have to worry so much about looting, upgrading gear, leveling up, scalable enemy levels, etc.

Been playing Demon's souls for the 1st time ever the past week. What a ####### awesome game. I'm thinking of dropping it and going to pick up Dark Souls to experience more of a "live community".

Anyone tried id's new shooter, Rage, yet?

he's at least a Thorn or Palmer.

Who?

Well I had a female friend that worked in video once, but it was kind of on the down low in the home movies category...

The graphics were amazing though!

I'm pretty involved in game culture and I can only name a handful: Sid Meier, Suda51, Peter Molyneux and Tim Schafer and a handful of non-designers (e.x. Gabe Newell). I don't know the names of any of the designers for my favorite games.

didn't plenty of people know who John Carmack was?

John Romero as well.

knowing who writes the video game programs? ARE YOU KIDDING ME????

sigh

sometimes with youse geek/nerds honestly i feel like the (only one) Black sperm in that woody allen movie about all you everwanted to know about sex - like WHAT am i doing here?

except it is really tough to imagine myself as a sperm you know what i'm saying

TB: You know who my brother is, right?

BB: Dude, I only know who you are because you keep sexting me. That's really got to stop man.

Off the top of my head I can name Miyamoto, Kojima, Meier, Will Wright, Miles Jacobson and Fredrik Wester.

I loved borderlands, actually I still play that one occasionally, and it never got boring to me. Dead Island seems different though, it's almost like it was forced at times.

My pals and I loved Borderlands also, and completed it and all the DLC. We got Dead Island because it was supposed to be "Borderlands with zombies." First off, as I'm sure you know, we basically had to wait three weeks to play because the initial release was FUBAR until the (second) patch came out. Since then, it's been fun, but the game is a little samey. It doesn't have humor like Borderlands; the skills seem to be unexciting, +5% health regen this and +10% damage that; and we've only seen a couple different types of enemies. I suppose it's survival horror, so it's not supposed to be funny, and it wouldn't make any sense if you had skills such as "turn into a phoenix and burninate everything around you."¹ Still, I dunno.

We are only maybe 15% through the game (it certainly is a long game!) Right now, we are basically swinging sticks, with maybe some nails on the end if you're lucky. So it seems very possible that once you get better weapons and skills, it gets more interesting with more variety. Again, it's still fun multiplayer, but other than the sheer amount of content, I dunno if I'm going to end up feeling I got way more than my money's worth like I did with Borderlands.

¹ Of course, if realism is the goal, one could very fairly ask why a zombie in a bikini is carrying around $12, or why you then need to pay that money to an empty workbench in order to fix your weapons.

Cannot believe i didnt realize Blez and CliffyB were related. Knowing or not knowing video game designers is largely a function of the games you play; most RPG players know the various Square Enix guys, and people into the console wars tend to know the devs of their side's biggest projects, but nobody cares who the individual dudes working on Starcraft or WoW are.

¹ Of course, if realism is the goal, one could very fairly ask why a zombie in a bikini is carrying around $12, or why you then need to pay that money to an empty workbench in order to fix your weapons.

This drove me crazy playing the game. Not the fact that zombies had money, but why the #### am I worried about picking up cash? There was a zombie outbreak on a tropical island, no communications, and no way off the island. I could care less about collecting cash. That's a perfect example of the game feeling forced.

We are only maybe 15% through the game (it certainly is a long game!) Right now, we are basically swinging sticks, with maybe some nails on the end if you're lucky. So it seems very possible that once you get better weapons and skills, it gets more interesting with more variety.


I think I was ~10% through when I took it back, and yes all I had was sticks, bats, crowbars, etc. The one thing that drove me crazy was I'd find a "uncommon" strong stick, upgrade it twice, add some nails to it and then 30 min later I would find another weapon that was already better than my upgraded strong stick. Made it completely worthless for me to upgrade any weapons. Maybe that doesn't happen as much as you progress and the level curve spikes. Since borderlands didn't have the weapon upgrade/repair concept, the constant looting for weapons worked better. I wish there was no upgrade/repair of weapons (which would also reduce the need for in-game currency), but your weapons still degraded in quality (at a much slower pace obviously). That would make it a lot more fun of a survival adventure, having to decide when to bring out the badass crowbar, and when to just use a pipewrench.

Again, it's still fun multiplayer, but other than the sheer amount of content, I dunno if I'm going to end up feeling I got way more than my money's worth like I did with Borderlands.


I didn't get to try the multiplayer because of the buggy launch. Despite all of the things I hate about it, I still had some fun playing it. I definitely don't think it's worth $60, but I imagine it will be reduced a lot around Christmas, and I might pick it up then. Depends on how large my back log has grown by that point.

Not sure if you're a fan of Tom Bissell's game reviews he's doing on Grantland, but he had a great take on Dead Island. I think he hit on a lot of the points I disliked about the game, though his opinion of hate was a lot stronger than mine.

I know who Warren Robinett is.

Dead Island, on the 360 anyways, is a fantastic game. Especially the further along you get. Having the 360 version MAY or MAY NOT make a difference, but all the "bugs" I have heard about don't seem prevelent in the 360 version, only the PS3 version (at least AFAIK). I am at almost 20% through and their is quite a bit of fun to be had, if you know where to find it. The online multiplayer is nice, but I agree that has some flaws that could be addressed. All in all, well worth the money. The replay value is insane, as there are 4 different stories to play through which will vary depending on how much you assist the other survivors.

P.S. I haven't seen it for $60 or so since the first week of it's release, it's been as low as $45 New on Amazon as recently as a few days ago.

Beane didn't have to know the names of video game designers. He hired DePo to know that for him.

TB: Well, you're a conservative guy who is into punk rock. I gotta say, I don't know too many of those.

BB: That means nobody can nail me down (laughs). I have a lot of friends and a lot of interests and I find it very stimulating to be interested by a lot of things. When you go on the road, one of our well-known players used to have trouble sleeping and I used to tell him, "What do you mean you have trouble sleeping? There are so many great books to read. Get yourself a great book." You know, there's not enough time in the world to read all the great books that are out there, and all the things that are out there to read and to be interested in and he wasn't quite buying that.

TB: Wasn't a big reader?

BB: Yeah, he immediately informed me that he had read two books and said that he really wasn't that into reading. So I realized I was going nowhere with that one. I think what I was doing was just...

TB: It was (Nick) Swisher, wasn't it?

BB: No, it wasn't Nick. Good guess, but it wasn't him.

Cute.

I think I was ~10% through when I took it back, and yes all I had was sticks, bats, crowbars, etc. The one thing that drove me crazy was I'd find a "uncommon" strong stick, upgrade it twice, add some nails to it and then 30 min later I would find another weapon that was already better than my upgraded strong stick. Made it completely worthless for me to upgrade any weapons. Maybe that doesn't happen as much as you progress and the level curve spikes. Since borderlands didn't have the weapon upgrade/repair concept, the constant looting for weapons worked better. I wish there was no upgrade/repair of weapons (which would also reduce the need for in-game currency), but your weapons still degraded in quality (at a much slower pace obviously). That would make it a lot more fun of a survival adventure, having to decide when to bring out the badass crowbar, and when to just use a pipewrench.

I think the frustrations you are getting are from HOW you are going through the game. At 10% I was picking up really cool stuff like Axes, Machetes, etc. How/when you upgrade, the side quests.....your level of enjoyment seems to hinge on these aspects f the game that most seem to be overlooking. Is it due to a rush to finish the game quickly? If so, take your time. You'll find it's quite enjoyable with the right approach.

I think the frustrations you are getting are from HOW you are going through the game. At 10% I was picking up really cool stuff like Axes, Machetes, etc. How/when you upgrade, the side quests.....your level of enjoyment seems to hinge on these aspects f the game that most seem to be overlooking. Is it due to a rush to finish the game quickly? If so, take your time. You'll find it's quite enjoyable with the right approach.

I was doing primarily side quests and just random personal adventures into the environment. It was not enjoyable to drop $x into a weapon then 20 minutes later find a weapon far greater, and have that repeat itself over and over and over. Plus it was mildly aggravating having to constantly repair weapons, the better the weapon the more the cost. There was no "oh #### there are a bunch of zombies I have to run", or "I've been playing for 5 hours and I've found one healing item". Survival was all tied to money and managing your weapon's level/condition, and to me I'm not sure how that works in a zombie game.

I'm replaying Final Fantasy VIII.

but nobody cares who the individual dudes working on Starcraft or WoW are.

I could name a few...but I couldn't name console guys these days. I don't even remember the last time I played a console game and my most recent system is still the PS2.

I was doing primarily side quests and just random personal adventures into the environment. It was not enjoyable to drop $x into a weapon then 20 minutes later find a weapon far greater, and have that repeat itself over and over and over. Plus it was mildly aggravating having to constantly repair weapons, the better the weapon the more the cost. There was no "oh #### there are a bunch of zombies I have to run", or "I've been playing for 5 hours and I've found one healing item". Survival was all tied to money and managing your weapon's level/condition, and to me I'm not sure how that works in a zombie game.

Right, but then you take the then obsolete item and sell it for more money....there are several places to do this. You get a decent return on your investment. Don't just "drop" the useless item. Sell it. I get the point that money really ought to be obsolete as far as the theme of the game goes, but it makes sense as a way to be able to upgrade continiously. Part of the game is knowing WHEN to upgrade or not. You can tell because if you are doing the quests in a somewhat coherent order (there is an order), you'll get weapons about a level or two before you can even use them. This gives you an idea of which of your weapons will be obsolete soon if you compare the ratings. Sell the worthless weapons and acquire new, more powerful ones. Basically, I found it is essential to focus on the "Survival" upgrades to eliminate some of the frustrations you speak of. It increases money earned, gives you lockpicking abilities (finding better weapons, sooner) and the ability to carry more in your inventory. Once you get access to Axes and the like, decapitating the bastards is an awful lot of fun....then the Molotov Cocktails come into play and it's LOADS of fun.

Once you get access to Axes and the like, decapitating the bastards is an awful lot of fun....then the Molotov Cocktails come into play and it's LOADS of fun.

I agree with that. Even though I was the "blunt weapon" character, I still carried around a machete just to remove heads/limbs on one swing. My favorite thing to do was to surgically remove both arms on a thug and watch him fall over trying to headbutt me. I love the analog controls for combat, made the game that much more engaging.

I don't even remember the last time I played a console game and my most recent system is still the PS2.

There are so many great games for the PS2. I still have mine (it does lock up from time to time), and couldn't imagine getting rid of it.

I do have PS3. Even post-patch, there are still some problems with people getting kicked and crashes. (Cars seem to be the primary cause of crashes. There was one fun moment where the driver of the car leveled up just as the car ran into the side of the road. The car proceeded to make like Chitty Chitty Bang Bang, flying off the road, flying off the edge of the cliff that the road was on, flying over the island, and presumably flying all the way into the great wide open until we reset the game.) Those things are annoying, and I still want them patched, but at least you can work around them. The really important thing is whether game-destroying things such as saved games getting zapped are a thing of the past. None yet for me, but then again, I've only had one gaming session since the patch.

I did read the Grantland review, and didn't really agree with it. I thought some of his criticisms (weird inventory system, not being able to drown yourself swimming) were technically correct, and yet wouldn't make the game any better if they were changed. His larger point seems to be about the skills and D&D-style damage. The thing there is that, if anything, the game errs on the side of being too stripped down as it is. Sure seems to me that taking away skills and damage would leave you with a game that literally consists of "here's a stick, let's count how many zombies you can kill before they kill you." The only thing that he identified that bothered me was the "money" aspect. It really makes no sense, and I feel like it would have been easy to get to the same goal with a different, more logical mechanism.

(PN: Lockpicking is worth it? I keep reading otherwise :) Haven't tried it myself, for that reason.)

Re: how geeky it is to know who wrote a video game: Lemme just quickly note that ever since the Internet and whatever the hell else, all "behind-the-scenes" people in entertainment are much more household names than they used to be. Television/movie screenwriters, TV showrunners, comic book writers, video game producers, baseball general managers... they're all much bigger celebrities than they were a couple of decades ago. And it makes perfect sense, since, y'know, they all have extremely important jobs in their fields. So if you care about that field, you want to know about them, and maybe follow particular ones whom you think do good work.

I know who Warren Robinett is.

I like you.

I like you.

Thanks. I burned many, many hours on that game.

I don't console much nowadays. My kids do (they've got a PS3 and a 360, as well as older consoles), but I have trouble finding the time. I tend to stick to PC gaming (I can even play while we're watching some mediocre cop show), and I tend to stick to games that aren't real-time so that I can pause and take care of whatever I need to take care of. (I love my wife dearly, but one thing I'll never get her to accept is, "Can you hang on a minute? I just need to finish this battle.")

My major exception to that is Star Trek Online, which is threatening to consume my life in a fairly unhealthy fashion. But I mostly solo, so I can still bail if I need to take care of something for work or home.

And of course, I play Out of the Park Baseball. Wish I could take my record as Cubs GM and somehow upload it to Tom Ricketts so he'll consider me.

His larger point seems to be about the skills and D&D-style damage. The thing there is that, if anything, the game errs on the side of being too stripped down as it is. Sure seems to me that taking away skills and damage would leave you with a game that literally consists of "here's a stick, let's count how many zombies you can kill before they can kill you".

I don't know if I would say it's stripped down, I mean the zombies have levels, and randomized loot, and there are different classes of zombies. When you think about it, that's robust for zombies. I guess it could be stripped down compared to an Elder Scrolls type of game.

I think the point of the game should be to survive and explore (more correctly in the reverse order), not to level up nor to kill an arbitrary number of enemies. I do enjoy RPGSs, ones that can engage me beyond just trying to increase my level. That's why I can't get into MMOs. I've tried a few and everyone of them boil down to reach level 30 so you can reach 31, repeat!. Outside of the awesome combat gameplay, Dead Island feels a lot like those number grinding RPGs/MMOs.

I didn't hate the game, I was extremely uninterested & mildly disappointed after I started playing it though. I would like to give it another chance sometime. I have a PS3 also DA, I might hit you up if I ever do pick it back up. Maybe some co-op would help.

I'm replaying Final Fantasy VIII.

Weird, I'm replaying FF VII. Might do VIII after, if nothing better has popped up to waste my time on by then...

I do enjoy RPGSs, ones that can engage me beyond just trying to increase my level. That's why I can't get into MMOs.

I'm far from an MMO expert, but I totally get where you're coming from. Thing is, MMOs often end up catering to different types of players.

When I play STO, I almost always play solo. I play story missions. These started out fairly simple but have gotten more sophisticated, with some eschewing combat altogether for diplomacy or other things. One in particular involves solving a murder mystery.

Of course, the vast majority still involve combat, because that's what the majority of players still want to do. And that's cool; starship combat is a blast.

Anyway, my point is that MMOs don't have to be grindfests. Good MMOs should be working to continually add interesting stuff to do to reduce/eliminate the grind.

On the other hand, I have little or no interest in PvP, which is what a lot of players live for, so maybe you can't go by me.

I'm replaying Final Fantasy VIII.

What one was VIII again? I seem to remember one of them sucked really bad in that SNES-PS range.

IX was the pretty crappy one, IMO. That was the one with the medieval leanings in the environment and the really weird characters that supported the hero. I never got very far.

VIII was the storyline about the group of orphans trained to be fighters. The storyline is absolutely epic, but a glitch in the replayability is that you can't skip through the movie scenes that advance the plot. It's especially annoying since this time around, I'm playing with a walk-thru and trying to complete all the side quests, and when I forget something, I have to go back to a previously saved game and sit through them yet again.

I didn't play a lot of FF games, I watched my brother play them religiously. After doing some research, I remembered I played through VII, and parts of VIII and IX, while watching parts of all 3 of them. I also tried X and X-2 later on the PS2 and disliked them completely.

I liked the GFs in VIII, but could not stand the characters and didn't care for the spell cards. My memories of IX are hazey and incomplete.

Elder Scrolls

Speaking of...I am very excited for Skyrim. Love those games. Don't really care about the main quest, I just like getting to a point where I am omnipotent.

I do enjoy RPGSs, ones that can engage me beyond just trying to increase my level. That's why I can't get into MMOs.

I prefer RPGs because I just don't want to have to deal with others. At times I don't mind the interaction, but I play games for my own personal time, I don't want that messed with by someone trolling.

I've only played one Final Fantasy and that was FF XII. It was interesting but I do remember simply sitting in the desert killing rats for hours to level up.

I prefer RPGs because I just don't want to have to deal with others. At times I don't mind the interaction, but I play games for my own personal time, I don't want that messed with by someone trolling.

I think many MMOs will more or less allow this. I know I play STO for hours on end unmolested. I can interact with others if I want, and every once in a great while I will get a team or fleet (a.k.a. guild) invite, but I just ignore them.

Except when teaming with my kids, I pretty much treat STO as a solo RTS/RPG game.

It was interesting but I do remember simply sitting in the desert killing rats for hours to level up.

That's kind of the flaw with all of those games, right?

I lost interest in Final Fantasy when they stopped making the characters adorable.

Speaking of...I am very excited for Skyrim. Love those games. Don't really care about the main quest, I just like getting to a point where I am omnipotent.

This is actually one thing I dislike about RPGs (though on the whole I love them and am looking forward to Skyrim as well. Or rather, looking forward to when I can buy a used copy for $10). I'd like a game where as your character develops along certain lines, others are shut off from him/her. It's kind of boring just being super man. Of course, you can just do this yourself. I've played a characters in Oblivion where I won't allow him to use weapons, or another one never used magic (aside from heals). But it would be cool to have a game where time spent learning spells is time not spent maintaining your body, or a brawler wears his body down as the game progresses. I actually haven't played a lot of modern RPGs aside from Elder Scrolls stuff so maybe there are games like this.

This is actually one thing I dislike about RPGs (though on the whole I love them and am looking forward to Skyrim as well. Or rather, looking forward to when I can buy a used copy for $10). I'd like a game where as your character develops along certain lines, others are shut off from him/her. It's kind of boring just being super man. Of course, you can just do this yourself. I've played a characters in Oblivion where I won't allow him to use weapons, or another one never used magic (aside from heals). But it would be cool to have a game where time spent learning spells is time not spent maintaining your body, or a brawler wears his body down as the game progresses. I actually haven't played a lot of modern RPGs aside from Elder Scrolls stuff so maybe there are games like this.

I get where you are coming from, and I agree, but I am a completionist - I must finish all the quests (except for the main, because everything else must be done first damnit) - so that tends to lead towards domination. At the start when I am really into the game I tend to focus on one or two of the 'guild' lines (fighter and thief or assassin typically) so those associated skills tend to advance ahead of the others. By the time I get to the, say, mage quests I just bash my way through.

I have tried to play with self-limited roles, just so hard to willingly gimp myself. And as a fairly athletic, fairly intelligent RPG gamer in high school I guess I got a little annoyed with all the typical game archetypes - skinny mage, strong but dumb fighter, small thief, etc. I prefer a nice bow to snipe someone from at far, toss a fireball as they charge and then crush them with a sword as they get close.

Of course, the vast majority still involve combat, because that's what the majority of players still want to do. And that's cool; starship combat is a blast.

Prepares to wax enthusiastic about EVE Online...

On the other hand, I have little or no interest in PvP, which is what a lot of players live for, so maybe you can't go by me.

Nevermind.

actually haven't played a lot of modern RPGs aside from Elder Scrolls stuff so maybe there are games like this.

Elder Scrolls games are probably some of the worst RPG offenders in terms of allowing players to turn their character into an omnipotent superman. Morrowind and Oblivion in particular require purposeful acts of will to avoid doing just that... you pretty much have to intentionally limit yourself as you describe above.