Console gamers literally are too dumb to play this kind of game.

[QUOTE="lawlessx"]well..he/she wasn't exactly wrong with the statement. The game he described sounded alot like the old school rainbow six games and the SWAT series..games that in this day and age would do horrible on consoles because of the punishing trial and error.turtlethetaffer

I tihnk a more accurate statement would be that "console gamers don't like something that complex." Saying they're too dumb to figure it out is jsut low.

[QUOTE="razgriz_101"]

[QUOTE="Jankarcop"]

With comments like these, no wonder Publishers thinks console gamers are as smart as a loaf of bread.

Try reading the article, champ.

bleehum

its the general attitude how PC gamers somehow think they are more superior and somehow are more brainy because they game on PC. Thatss why people rag on the few PC gamers on here your no better than anyone sit down just because you've thrown more cash at something doesnt make you any more of a gamer, games are becoming more streamlined in favour of acessibility its a massive market and publishers want to tap in and reap big profits, people think gaming should just be for them and forget bout the big picture and PC gamers are especially bad for this on this board.

and my care cup is empty.

We scots have a nice little sayin called sook me.

EDIT: and as we see make a good point, and you get bashed. typical SW.

[QUOTE="AdrianWerner"]

[QUOTE="ZombieKiller7"]

Apparently I had a PhD a decade or so ago, to enable me to play SWAT and Ghost Recon, Island Thunder etc.

Here's a hint : those games weren't that hard

About the same as R6Vegas 1 & 2 really

I probably died more to lambent doggies in Gears 2 than I did in SWAT

Brilliant move insulting possible fans. Really, brilliant.

ZombieKiller7

wtf you babbling about, dirtbag.

Explain yourself or get off my nuts.

[QUOTE="AdrianWerner"]

[QUOTE="ZombieKiller7"]

Apparently I had a PhD a decade or so ago, to enable me to play SWAT and Ghost Recon, Island Thunder etc.

Here's a hint : those games weren't that hard

About the same as R6Vegas 1 & 2 really

I probably died more to lambent doggies in Gears 2 than I did in SWAT

Brilliant move insulting possible fans. Really, brilliant.

ZombieKiller7

wtf you babbling about, dirtbag.

Explain yourself or get off my nuts.

And explain myself? Well..the fact that you couldn't be bothered to read anything besides thread's title before you responded to the thread doesn't say much good about you.

Can't blame the publisher I guess then. If people like you can't even read few sentences in a thread how are you supposed to last few minutes doing pre-mission planning in RainbowSix.

If you read the article you would have known that it wasn't the developer that made the statement,but a publisher he pitched the game to. Also for you to say the new vegas series is the same as the old school ghost recon and SWAT games is hilarious lawlessx

The developer claims a publisher said this, but won't name them.

Most likely the developer was thinking out loud (and attributing his offensive comment to faceless "publisher") or a publisher actually said that and they shared a brofist and a nod.

Either way it's demeaning.

Secondly, I've played the Ghost Recon series in its entirety, and also the final SWAT game.

SWAT was almost a carbon copy of R6 Vegas (with the difference that you can arrest people and no cover mechanics) and R6 Vegas was much better. I wish they'd make more of these games, as I'm a big fan.

Ghost Recon was frustrating due to not being able to save during critical points, it was not "hard" by any stretch.

Quit trying to make yourselves feel l33t with obscure references to older games.

It's like "We used to climb the hill both ways to get a bucket of water." My answer to that is I've been there, it wasn't bad, and stfu.

dirtbad..lmao....you're really giving console gamers a bad name.

And explain myself? Well..the fact that you couldn't be bothered to read anything besides thread's title before you responded to the thread doesn't say much good about you.

Can't blame the publisher I guess then. If people like you can't even read few sentences in a thread how are you supposed to last few minutes doing pre-mission planning in RainbowSix.

AdrianWerner

No, you ASSUMED I didn't read the article.

I read the article, came to my own conclusions, and therefor I'm stupid.

I'm not here to take abuse from you or anybody else.

And furthermore f*ck you.

[QUOTE="AdrianWerner"]

dirtbad..lmao....you're really giving console gamers a bad name.

And explain myself? Well..the fact that you couldn't be bothered to read anything besides thread's title before you responded to the thread doesn't say much good about you.

Can't blame the publisher I guess then. If people like you can't even read few sentences in a thread how are you supposed to last few minutes doing pre-mission planning in RainbowSix.

ZombieKiller7

No, you ASSUMED I didn't read the article.

I read the article, came to my own conclusions, and therefor I'm stupid.

I'm not here to take abuse from you or anybody else.

And furthermore f*ck you.

yeah and your conclusion is that the developer is either full of crap because he didn't name the publisher or that they had a "brofist" moment. :roll:lawlessx

That is what I think, yes.

If I'm wrong forgive me, but that's what I think.

I hope I'm wrong.

[QUOTE="AdrianWerner"]

dirtbad..lmao....you're really giving console gamers a bad name.

And explain myself? Well..the fact that you couldn't be bothered to read anything besides thread's title before you responded to the thread doesn't say much good about you.

Can't blame the publisher I guess then. If people like you can't even read few sentences in a thread how are you supposed to last few minutes doing pre-mission planning in RainbowSix.

ZombieKiller7

No, you ASSUMED I didn't read the article.

I read the article, came to my own conclusions, and therefor I'm stupid.

I'm not here to take abuse from you or anybody else.

And furthermore f*ck you.

What an idiot. If I were to win the lottery or something, I'd buy back the Crash Bandicoot license from Activision and give it to Naughty Dog.
That's a proven franchise and a much safer investment.

Go on. You're just proving the publishers' point and further justifying the negative view a lot of pcgamers have about console gamers.

AdrianWerner

I don't know why you would have negative views of anybody for using a particular piece of equipment.

[QUOTE="AdrianWerner"]

Go on. You're just proving the publishers' point and further justifying the negative view a lot of pcgamers have about console gamers.

ZombieKiller7

I don't know why you would have negative views of anybody for using a particular piece of equipment.

That publisher is an utter moron.

[QUOTE="Majistrate"]

[QUOTE="Aljosa23"]

LOL what a moron.

I pity you if you think playing overly complicated, boring video games is a clear indicator of intelligence.

Aljosa23

I used to play Rainbow Six on original xbox all the time, I thought it was one of the more popular shooters actually. Guess I'm wrong.

funny how pc fanboys actually agree with this, based off the examples given.

most people wont play a tactical game because they won't have fun with it, not because they don't understand. Nobody playing mario will sit there and think "I wish i could play that flight sim over this, but I don't understand how"

[QUOTE="AcidSoldner"]

The game was successful enough that they released Rogue Spear on the Dreamcast later in the same year.AdrianWerner

So? It wasn't as successful as PC version and nowhere near as successful as later dumbed down versions of RainbowSix for consoles were

"Dumbed down" is a pretty strong word for making something more accessible and what will ultimatley appeal to more people. The Rainbow Six series did loose on the realism but the amount of people (both, console and PC gamers) enjoying the newer, more arcade-oriented entries in the series I believe surpassed the amount of those who want a purely realism-based shooter. Yes, there is a shortage of realism-based tactical shooters but if they sold in millions I'm pretty sure the publishers would show interest too. Also, if they're making a niche-oriented game they shouldn't complain about the lack of potential costumers. Besides, why not reach out to the "core" fanbase to try and fund the project? I am sure making community-based products is the way to go for such titles.

[QUOTE="ZombieKiller7"]

[QUOTE="AdrianWerner"]

Go on. You're just proving the publishers' point and further justifying the negative view a lot of pcgamers have about console gamers.

AdrianWerner

I don't know why you would have negative views of anybody for using a particular piece of equipment.

Here's a recap of this thread

Me : [opinion about topic]

You : You're stupid blah blah

Me : wtf? screw you

You : blah blah

Me : blah blah

You : I can fully understand how people can have terrible opinion of you after reading your posts.

I'm not the one that treats people like garbage over video games.

R6 Vegas had SWAT 4 +

- Cover

- Multiple entry

- Rappel

- Breaching

- Smoke/Thermal goggles

SWAT 4 is R6 Vegas +

- Arrests

- 2 teams

- More realistic story

Very shortsighted to say one was more "dumbed down."

I'd like to see more tactical games in general, I love this genre.

The logic of the "more they dumbed it down, the more it selled" in itself is a "dumb" logic. Maybe it was due to the fact that--as each game gets released, it gets more fans to buy the next one--this sounds more logical. Even if they kept it at the same real "tactical" level, it would still sell more than their previous one. No one looks at a game and says "OMG this looks dumbed-down, I'm going to buy it."

I wouldn't be suprised it a publisher did say that "console gamers" are "dumb". Hell, I feel as though they do treat "console" gamers that way. Look at ME and DA, hell look at GR and R6 now. I play on consoles and PC, to that fact I did play R6:RS, GR (original), its expansions GR: DS/IT. I've played a demo of SWAT whatever the number was. I do have to say, the cinematic experience is fine. However, the original games with a more tactical feel and realism were the better games. It sure needs an update in terms of realism and tactical use but if those factors were refined to this day instead of the cinematic COD feel, shooter games now would be far so much more fun to play.

I have a feeling he's lying to get some attention.

[QUOTE="turtlethetaffer"]

[QUOTE="lawlessx"]well..he/she wasn't exactly wrong with the statement. The game he described sounded alot like the old school rainbow six games and the SWAT series..games that in this day and age would do horrible on consoles because of the punishing trial and error.Midnightshade29

I tihnk a more accurate statement would be that "console gamers don't like something that complex." Saying they're too dumb to figure it out is jsut low.

I disagree with the notion that those genres died out because of "new generation of console gamers".

First of all those genres were never really strongly present on the consoles and secondly the interest for those genres has dropped among PC gamers as well.

There may be a vocal fanbase of those forgotten genres but the truth is that it's not worth funding them when even the fans don't buy them.

There is a reason why companies like Looking Glass (Thief, Flight Unlimited) tanked.

People don't buy old-school games even on PC.

I mean why isn't there Wasteland 2 two decades ago? Why now?

What happened to Bard's Tale?

What happened to Ultima? (and Lord British?)

Why no SWAT 5?

I could go on and on.

Tastes changed.

Not because of consoles but because of...us.

The people changed.

Why did I game for 30 years on computers, then suddenly pick up a 360.

Because it looked fun.

"Console gamers literally are too dumb to play this kind of game." What a kind publisher.

http://kotaku.com/5893236/christian-allen-wants-your-money-to-make-a-great-old+school-shooter-that-publishers-dont-think-you-want

Christian Allen wants to make a Tactical Shooter using Kickstarter.

SAGE_OF_FIRE

That publisher is an utter moron.

freedomfreak

That publisher wasn't exactly wrong when sayin gthat.

I hope Allen he gets his funding though.

Jankarcop

Yeah, the publisher was 100% wrong. 14 & 15yrs old gamers have been playing shooters since Castle Wolfenstein, Doom and Golden Eye. We've played Metal Gear Solid, Rainbow Six, and many of the other tactical shooting games. The genre is a niche market though like tactical rpgs and point/click adventures. Just because the fan base isn't huge doesn't mean the other gamers don't know how to play those games.

In anycase, I wish Allen the best of luck. I won't be supporting the game, as I'm not much into that genre. I will support the Wasteland 2 project however, especially since I missed out on the Double Fine project one.

Allen's project is already up to $53,000 with So only $150K to go in 15 days.

"Dumbed down" is a pretty strong word for making something more accessible and what will ultimatley appeal to more people.

nameless12345

even back when rainbow six first started and ghost recon those were for like casual adult gamers.

one of the only decent shooters is that one quake rip off hexius some bs made with cryengine 3 was at their gdc engine demostration.

R6 Vegas had SWAT 4 +

- Cover

- Multiple entry

- Rappel

- Breaching

- Smoke/Thermal goggles

SWAT 4 is R6 Vegas +

- Arrests

- 2 teams

- More realistic story

Very shortsighted to say one was more "dumbed down."

I'd like to see more tactical games in general, I love this genre.

ZombieKiller7

And SWAT 4 didn just have "morea realistic story" ..it was realistic on it's own, while Vegas wasn't.

Vegas is SWAT 4 plus

- removed any realism

- extremely limited team controls

- soundproof walls (which make the whole hostage thing a farce)

- regenerating health

- removed allmost all options for team load out

- ressurecting soldiers (lol)

- magically put boxes with ammo and weapons, which killed any weaponry management gameplay

Simply put, SWAT 4 is tactical shooter, Vegas is an arcade shooter with some very light tactical elements throw in.

People don't buy old-school games even on PC.

ZombieKiller7

all the sims were for casual adults like airplane flight sim etc lol.

No one looks at a game and says "OMG this looks dumbed-down, I'm going to buy it."

cdragon_88

Publishers are doing their research. Console gamers cleary want simplier games and publihers are there to deliver.

real gamers in 90s played quakeand unreal not dumbass tactical shooters.

good quake players are tactical actually lol.

wewantdoom4now

Quake was based on reflexes, not so much on thinking, Rainbow Six was the opossite of that. Both were hardcore, just hardcore for vastly different audiences.

real gamers in 90s played quakeand unreal not dumbass tactical shooters.

wewantdoom4now

Good quake players use strategy lol like if ur far away they will use railgun....upclose they will switch to chaingun or shotgun or rockets..

Plus they try to use platforming to gain advantage over you.

[QUOTE="ZombieKiller7"]

R6 Vegas had SWAT 4 +

- Cover

- Multiple entry

- Rappel

- Breaching

- Smoke/Thermal goggles

SWAT 4 is R6 Vegas +

- Arrests

- 2 teams

- More realistic story

Very shortsighted to say one was more "dumbed down."

I'd like to see more tactical games in general, I love this genre.

AdrianWerner

And SWAT 4 didn just have "morea realistic story" ..it was realistic on it's own, while Vegas wasn't.

Vegas is SWAT 4 plus

- removed any realism

- extremely limited team controls

- soundproof walls (which make the whole hostage thing a farce)

- regenerating health

- removed allmost all options for team load out

- ressurecting soldiers (lol)

- magically put boxes with ammo and weapons, which killed any weaponry management gameplay

Simply put, SWAT 4 is tactical shooter, Vegas is an arcade shooter with some very light tactical elements throw in.

But there is one thing you're missing here - no matter how they try, no tactical shooter will ever be as realistic as for example some combat flight sims are because it's impossible to simulate humans as accurate as combat vehicles. Even the Arma series is compromised here (for example you don't bleed out if you get shot like you would in reality).

A believable tactical shooter will be possible only when the wound system will be fully simulating real wounds and when we'll be fully immersed in the game:

Untill then we will only have solid substitutes.

[QUOTE="wewantdoom4now"]

real gamers in 90s played quakeand unreal not dumbass tactical shooters.

AdrianWerner

I have noticed that no matter what anyone says you come back with "actually NO"..or something along those lines..Has anyone ever said anything you agreed with?lol

I forgot to add that you're playing driving sims with a wheel and flight sims with a joystick (and you can also buy a simulator chair if you're rich) while you're playing tactical shooters with a mouse and keyboard or a gamepad which is NOT realistic. To properly simulate combat environments and get fully immersed you'd need something like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nQR49JGySTM

But there is one thing you're missing here - no matter how they try, no tactical shooter will ever be as realistic as for example some combat flight sims are because it's impossible to simulate humans as accurate as combat vehicles. Even the Arma series is compromised here (for example you don't bleed out if you get shot like you would in reality).

nameless12345

I have noticed that no matter what anyone says you come back with "actually NO"..or something along those lines..Has anyone ever said anything you agreed with?lol

VanDammFan