Nintendo EAD surely. Rockstar are up there too. ND aren't up to their level yet (plus they made Jak II). Everything else (PS1 onwards) has been decent to great.
Which developer has the best track record in all of gaming?
@SolidGame_basic said:
@jg4xchamp said:
While I want Nintendo to do new things, there is a difference in value here.
You are valuing just straight up "new ip"
I like new ideas, and if we're being perfectly honest the things Uncharted and The Last of Us do from purely narrative and universe standpoint is generic. One is ripping Indiana Jones, and the other is taking every story beat from The Road and Children of Men. Even from a gameplay perspective both games don't do anything actually new, it's more about grand execution. Now does that mean those games suck? No, on the contrary I quite like The Last of Us and Uncharted 2, I find them to be great. Jak 1 I think is pretty good. Jak 2 is okay, Jak 3 blows chunks, and Crash sucked, period. But that's another argument for a different day.
Now with Nintendo while recently they haven't been creative, it is ridiculous to ignore their pedigree. Super Mario Bros and the Legend of Zelda were trend setters, and actively unique and different, ditto for something like Pikmin. They don't flex those creative muscles enough, but when they do they actually make it count. And when you throw in just the sheer excellent games under that umbrella from Yoshi's Island, Mario world, Galaxy, Link to the Past to Link Between Worlds, to stuff they did with Starfox and the first 2 Pikmin games (I don't like 3, that game blows), then yeah it's a pretty bitchin resume.
Discrediting their past dominance for recent conservative behavior would be underselling a certified legendary development house.
The suck dick as a console manufacturer, but as a straight development studio? Nintendo EAD is a beast.
It's very hard to do new IPs. Doesn't matter if the ideas were taken from somewhere. Naughty Dog has consistently produced new IPs every generation and succeeded. Nintendo just banks off the same old franchises. Also, Nintendo recently has sunk. Their IPs clearly don't have the weight that they used to. Look at how bad the Wii U is doing.
lol why would I care about how well they sell? Call of Duty sells and League of Legends has the most players? Are they the best? Are they the 1-2 in gaming right now? is Wii Sports greatest games of all time.
Mario Galaxy 2 was fucking excellent, and 3D World was good. Link Between Worlds was last year and great. Their IP's are still fantastic, sales dominant? eh, but their pedigree is that they were trend setters. Naughty Dog can't lay claim to that, ever. Certainly their games haven't sold as much as Nintendo's best so I really don't see where you're going to go with that train of thought.
Naughty Dog's ability to make a new ip each generation isn't all that impressive when they don't do anything actually creative in the first place. They are a studio that take existing ideas, and execute them very well.
@jg4xchamp said:
@SolidGame_basic said:
@jg4xchamp said:
While I want Nintendo to do new things, there is a difference in value here.
You are valuing just straight up "new ip"
I like new ideas, and if we're being perfectly honest the things Uncharted and The Last of Us do from purely narrative and universe standpoint is generic. One is ripping Indiana Jones, and the other is taking every story beat from The Road and Children of Men. Even from a gameplay perspective both games don't do anything actually new, it's more about grand execution. Now does that mean those games suck? No, on the contrary I quite like The Last of Us and Uncharted 2, I find them to be great. Jak 1 I think is pretty good. Jak 2 is okay, Jak 3 blows chunks, and Crash sucked, period. But that's another argument for a different day.
Now with Nintendo while recently they haven't been creative, it is ridiculous to ignore their pedigree. Super Mario Bros and the Legend of Zelda were trend setters, and actively unique and different, ditto for something like Pikmin. They don't flex those creative muscles enough, but when they do they actually make it count. And when you throw in just the sheer excellent games under that umbrella from Yoshi's Island, Mario world, Galaxy, Link to the Past to Link Between Worlds, to stuff they did with Starfox and the first 2 Pikmin games (I don't like 3, that game blows), then yeah it's a pretty bitchin resume.
Discrediting their past dominance for recent conservative behavior would be underselling a certified legendary development house.
The suck dick as a console manufacturer, but as a straight development studio? Nintendo EAD is a beast.
It's very hard to do new IPs. Doesn't matter if the ideas were taken from somewhere. Naughty Dog has consistently produced new IPs every generation and succeeded. Nintendo just banks off the same old franchises. Also, Nintendo recently has sunk. Their IPs clearly don't have the weight that they used to. Look at how bad the Wii U is doing.
lol why would I care about how well they sell? Call of Duty sells and League of Legends has the most players? Are they the best? Are they the 1-2 in gaming right now? is Wii Sports greatest games of all time.
Mario Galaxy 2 was fucking excellent, and 3D World was good. Link Between Worlds was last year and great. Their IP's are still fantastic, sales dominant? eh, but their pedigree is that they were trend setters. Naughty Dog can't lay claim to that, ever. Certainly their games haven't sold as much as Nintendo's best so I really don't see where you're going to go with that train of thought.
Naughty Dog's ability to make a new ip each generation isn't all that impressive when they don't do anything actually creative in the first place. They are a studio that take existing ideas, and execute them very well.
not exactly the point I was making. people are tired of the same old Nintendo franchises. the nintendo generation is getting older and their kids have better games to play, like uncharted and the last of us. and don't try to downplay naughty dog's talent. for years people were saying survival horror was a dead genre (pun intended). the last of us for ps3 sold something like 8 million copies and the ps4 version will sell something like 2-3 million at least. and they are influencing the industry. you will see more games like this now. and uncharted is influential too, MS had to steal tomb raider to be competitive
The only actual answer here is Nintendo, anybody with any perspective or appreciation of gaming history will agree to that. This is a company with enormous development chops and pedigree, as well as one that has routinely taken risks, one that has managed to keep its franchises relevant over a period of decades, and one that sets trends with its games. Nintendo as a console maker may often come into question, but their ability as a game maker is uncontested and unparalleled.
TC, you're pimping out Naughty Dog so hard, come talk to me when they have covered even half the range of genres Nintendo has, even half as well. Game development pedigree is defined by versatility, and no development house is as versatile as Nintendo.
@charizard1605 said:
The only actual answer here is Nintendo, anybody with any perspective or appreciation of gaming history will agree to that. This is a company with enormous development chops and pedigree, as well as one that has routinely taken risks, one that has managed to keep its franchises relevant over a period of decades, and one that sets trends with its games. Nintendo as a console maker may often come into question, but their ability as a game maker is uncontested and unparalleled.
TC, you're pumping out Naughty Dog so hard, come talk to me when they have covered even half the range of genres Nintendo has, even half as well. Game development pedigree is defined by versatility, and no development house is as versatile as Nintendo.
yeah, but what about all those GOTY awards :P
@SolidGame_basic said:
@jg4xchamp said:
lol why would I care about how well they sell? Call of Duty sells and League of Legends has the most players? Are they the best? Are they the 1-2 in gaming right now? is Wii Sports greatest games of all time.
Mario Galaxy 2 was fucking excellent, and 3D World was good. Link Between Worlds was last year and great. Their IP's are still fantastic, sales dominant? eh, but their pedigree is that they were trend setters. Naughty Dog can't lay claim to that, ever. Certainly their games haven't sold as much as Nintendo's best so I really don't see where you're going to go with that train of thought.
Naughty Dog's ability to make a new ip each generation isn't all that impressive when they don't do anything actually creative in the first place. They are a studio that take existing ideas, and execute them very well.
not exactly the point I was making. people are tired of the same old Nintendo franchises. the nintendo generation is getting older and their kids have better games to play, like uncharted and the last of us. and don't try to downplay naughty dog's talent. for years people were saying survival horror was a dead genre (pun intended). the last of us for ps3 sold something like 8 million copies and the ps4 version will sell something like 2-3 million at least. and they are influencing the industry. you will see more games like this now. and uncharted is influential too, MS had to steal tomb raider to be competitive
I'm not downplaying shit, I'm calling a spade a spade.
Is Naughty Dog terrific? sure. Creative and a trend setter? no. Survival horror never died, Condemned was 06, Condemned 2 was 08, Siren Blood Curse was a thing, and Amnesia, Outlast, Penumbra, and a shit load of PC games have existed in the last 4-5 years. It's become a more niche genre on PC, but that's horror in general. Even in Films it's not a blockbuster type genre. But the notion that survival horror was a dead genre, was in fact pure ignorance. There were plenty of survival horror games coming out, the market shifted.
Tomb Raider being stolen from MS isn't the same as laying down the ground work on how to make platformers and action adventure games like what Mario and Zelda did. They aren't comparable mate. And some people are tired of the same old Nintendo, but there are plenty that still support their shit, and in spite of the fact that they make consoles with poor libraries and weak hardware. They dominate an entire market purely on their own ips (Handheld space), Sony couldn't muscle their way in with their ips.
And "better games to play" that's entirely debatable on which games are better. You are trying to downplay them based on your lack of interest, and their lack of sales as if that overrules their pedigree, their impact on the industry (which the two are not close, Nintendo and Naughty Dog are not in the same league in terms of impact), and the quality of their games now. My Naughty Dog knock, is honestly cold hard truth to anyone that knows shit about film and literature or gaming history at this point. They are a talented studio, but not one that has made anything unique or a trend setter. Pretending otherwise is being ignorant of this medium's history at this point.
Cinematic games existed before Naughty Dog
Games with survival elements existed before Naughty Dog
Games with a "you can attack this a couple different ways" existed before Naughty Dog, and were done on a grander scale than what Naughty Dog did.
Company policies = CDproject RED
Games in general = idk every company has games i dont like
@lostrib said:
@charizard1605 said:
The only actual answer here is Nintendo, anybody with any perspective or appreciation of gaming history will agree to that. This is a company with enormous development chops and pedigree, as well as one that has routinely taken risks, one that has managed to keep its franchises relevant over a period of decades, and one that sets trends with its games. Nintendo as a console maker may often come into question, but their ability as a game maker is uncontested and unparalleled.
TC, you're pumping out Naughty Dog so hard, come talk to me when they have covered even half the range of genres Nintendo has, even half as well. Game development pedigree is defined by versatility, and no development house is as versatile as Nintendo.
yeah, but what about all those GOTY awards :P
No developer has ever won as many GotYs as Nintendo has done either, simply because of how many GotY games Nintendo has actually made. I mean, Nintendo has an enormous advantage and pedigree stretching back to nearly thirty years. They practically invented (not literally invented, but for all purposes, let's say they did) multiple genres and kinds of games. They have covered literally every genre I can think of, from platformers and racers and fighting games to action adventures to strategy, puzzle games, role playing games. Really, the only thing they haven't actually attempted is a modern shooter (as far as old time shooters go, I think the 2D Metroid games qualify), but that's one genre out of, I don't know, how many?
It's actually a little unfair to the other companies, because none of them have been around for as long as Nintendo, and none of them have certainly set as many trends as Nintendo, and therefore none of them have as much pedigree as Nintendo. Any such discussion, Nintendo wins it outright. The only way it doesn't, really, is if Nintendo is excluded from the discussion (maybe for the reasons specified above) outright, but then that in itself is telling of their mammoth influence on the industry.
Nintendo
Naughty Dog
Bungie
Rockstar Games
Sony Santa Monica
Kojima
MM
Polyphony
These are the ones I can think of off the top of my head.
@SecretPolice said:
I would have said Bungie but that was before Density. :P
I suppose R* Turn 10 has been masterful as well.
Turn 10 has one good franchise which they crank out on a near yearly basis with barely any changes. They're Microsoft's Polyphony, only Forza isn't nearly as pretty as Gran Turismo.
I'm going with Rockstar, Insomniac (borderline...), Sid Meier, Naughty Dog, Sony Santa Monica, Valve, and Nintendo.
Rockstar and in particular Rockstar North.
Out of Valve, Rockstar, Bioware & Bungie (up to Destiny) for me.
@jg4xchamp said:
@SolidGame_basic said:
@jg4xchamp said:
lol why would I care about how well they sell? Call of Duty sells and League of Legends has the most players? Are they the best? Are they the 1-2 in gaming right now? is Wii Sports greatest games of all time.
Mario Galaxy 2 was fucking excellent, and 3D World was good. Link Between Worlds was last year and great. Their IP's are still fantastic, sales dominant? eh, but their pedigree is that they were trend setters. Naughty Dog can't lay claim to that, ever. Certainly their games haven't sold as much as Nintendo's best so I really don't see where you're going to go with that train of thought.
Naughty Dog's ability to make a new ip each generation isn't all that impressive when they don't do anything actually creative in the first place. They are a studio that take existing ideas, and execute them very well.
not exactly the point I was making. people are tired of the same old Nintendo franchises. the nintendo generation is getting older and their kids have better games to play, like uncharted and the last of us. and don't try to downplay naughty dog's talent. for years people were saying survival horror was a dead genre (pun intended). the last of us for ps3 sold something like 8 million copies and the ps4 version will sell something like 2-3 million at least. and they are influencing the industry. you will see more games like this now. and uncharted is influential too, MS had to steal tomb raider to be competitive
I'm not downplaying shit, I'm calling a spade a spade.
Is Naughty Dog terrific? sure. Creative and a trend setter? no. Survival horror never died, Condemned was 06, Condemned 2 was 08, Siren Blood Curse was a thing, and Amnesia, Outlast, Penumbra, and a shit load of PC games have existed in the last 4-5 years. It's become a more niche genre on PC, but that's horror in general. Even in Films it's not a blockbuster type genre. But the notion that survival horror was a dead genre, was in fact pure ignorance. There were plenty of survival horror games coming out, the market shifted.
Tomb Raider being stolen from MS isn't the same as laying down the ground work on how to make platformers and action adventure games like what Mario and Zelda did. They aren't comparable mate. And some people are tired of the same old Nintendo, but there are plenty that still support their shit, and in spite of the fact that they make consoles with poor libraries and weak hardware. They dominate an entire market purely on their own ips (Handheld space), Sony couldn't muscle their way in with their ips.
And "better games to play" that's entirely debatable on which games are better. You are trying to downplay them based on your lack of interest, and their lack of sales as if that overrules their pedigree, their impact on the industry (which the two are not close, Nintendo and Naughty Dog are not in the same league in terms of impact), and the quality of their games now. My Naughty Dog knock, is honestly cold hard truth to anyone that knows shit about film and literature or gaming history at this point. They are a talented studio, but not one that has made anything unique or a trend setter. Pretending otherwise is being ignorant of this medium's history at this point.
Cinematic games existed before Naughty Dog
Games with survival elements existed before Naughty Dog
Games with a "you can attack this a couple different ways" existed before Naughty Dog, and were done on a grander scale than what Naughty Dog did.
This thread is about who has a better track record. Not who is more influential. There aren't many devs in the business that can replicate Naughty Dog's success with creating new franchises and then creating sequels for those franchises. Crash Bandicoot is iconic. Jak & Daxter and loved by many to this day (people still asking for a new one). Uncharted is a block adventure franchise. Last of Us just tore down the house. What new IPs did Nintendo create the last 4 gens? How successful were they?
@SolidGame_basic said:
@jg4xchamp said:
@SolidGame_basic said:
@jg4xchamp said:
lol why would I care about how well they sell? Call of Duty sells and League of Legends has the most players? Are they the best? Are they the 1-2 in gaming right now? is Wii Sports greatest games of all time.
Mario Galaxy 2 was fucking excellent, and 3D World was good. Link Between Worlds was last year and great. Their IP's are still fantastic, sales dominant? eh, but their pedigree is that they were trend setters. Naughty Dog can't lay claim to that, ever. Certainly their games haven't sold as much as Nintendo's best so I really don't see where you're going to go with that train of thought.
Naughty Dog's ability to make a new ip each generation isn't all that impressive when they don't do anything actually creative in the first place. They are a studio that take existing ideas, and execute them very well.
not exactly the point I was making. people are tired of the same old Nintendo franchises. the nintendo generation is getting older and their kids have better games to play, like uncharted and the last of us. and don't try to downplay naughty dog's talent. for years people were saying survival horror was a dead genre (pun intended). the last of us for ps3 sold something like 8 million copies and the ps4 version will sell something like 2-3 million at least. and they are influencing the industry. you will see more games like this now. and uncharted is influential too, MS had to steal tomb raider to be competitive
I'm not downplaying shit, I'm calling a spade a spade.
Is Naughty Dog terrific? sure. Creative and a trend setter? no. Survival horror never died, Condemned was 06, Condemned 2 was 08, Siren Blood Curse was a thing, and Amnesia, Outlast, Penumbra, and a shit load of PC games have existed in the last 4-5 years. It's become a more niche genre on PC, but that's horror in general. Even in Films it's not a blockbuster type genre. But the notion that survival horror was a dead genre, was in fact pure ignorance. There were plenty of survival horror games coming out, the market shifted.
Tomb Raider being stolen from MS isn't the same as laying down the ground work on how to make platformers and action adventure games like what Mario and Zelda did. They aren't comparable mate. And some people are tired of the same old Nintendo, but there are plenty that still support their shit, and in spite of the fact that they make consoles with poor libraries and weak hardware. They dominate an entire market purely on their own ips (Handheld space), Sony couldn't muscle their way in with their ips.
And "better games to play" that's entirely debatable on which games are better. You are trying to downplay them based on your lack of interest, and their lack of sales as if that overrules their pedigree, their impact on the industry (which the two are not close, Nintendo and Naughty Dog are not in the same league in terms of impact), and the quality of their games now. My Naughty Dog knock, is honestly cold hard truth to anyone that knows shit about film and literature or gaming history at this point. They are a talented studio, but not one that has made anything unique or a trend setter. Pretending otherwise is being ignorant of this medium's history at this point.
Cinematic games existed before Naughty Dog
Games with survival elements existed before Naughty Dog
Games with a "you can attack this a couple different ways" existed before Naughty Dog, and were done on a grander scale than what Naughty Dog did.
This thread is about who has a better track record. Not who is more influential. There aren't many devs in the business that can replicate Naughty Dog's success with creating new franchises and then creating sequels for those franchises. Crash Bandicoot is iconic. Jak & Daxter and loved by many to this day (people still asking for a new one). Uncharted is a block adventure franchise. Last of Us just tore down the house. What new IPs did Nintendo create the last 4 gens? How successful were they?
Block adventure, the best kind of adventure!
Who cares how many new IPs they've created as long as they have a good track record
Nintendo, as much as I hate to admit it. They are the only ones who have been making great games for almost 40 years and show no signs of stopping.
In my humble opinion it has to be Bioware. They have been around a long time and continued to make awesome games.
Probably Valve or Naughty Dog.
@The_Last_Ride said:
In my humble opinion it has to be Bioware. They have been around a long time and continued to make awesome games.
because you prefaced it with "my humble opinion" I respect that
Rockstar North (including the previous names), Valve and Naughty Dog (Sony years onwards) if we are talking about production value and gameplay. Those are the only companies that can continuously put out good stuff that does not disappoint or fall too far below the hype.
Blizzard, Bethesda, Bungie, Square Enix, Ubisoft, EA all all guilty of hyping their stuff and failing.
@lostrib said:
@SolidGame_basic said:
This thread is about who has a better track record. Not who is more influential. There aren't many devs in the business that can replicate Naughty Dog's success with creating new franchises and then creating sequels for those franchises. Crash Bandicoot is iconic. Jak & Daxter and loved by many to this day (people still asking for a new one). Uncharted is a block adventure franchise. Last of Us just tore down the house. What new IPs did Nintendo create the last 4 gens? How successful were they?
Block adventure, the best kind of adventure!
Who cares how many new IPs they've created as long as they have a good track record
Even so, it's a self defeating argument on his part. Nintendo has created more IPs, bigger IPs and at their worst they provide the same amount of innovation from sequel to sequel as ND. At their best they destroy NDs efforts at keeping an IP fresh over the years.
This dude just keeps shifting goal posts all over the place, I wonder what the next stipulation to his "argument" will be.
EAD for sure.
@SolidGame_basic said:
Jak & Daxter and loved by many to this day (people still asking for a new one).
I hope you're not trying to compare Naughty Dog sequel begging to Nintendo sequel begging. Please tell me you're not this out of touch.
@SolidGame_basic said:
@jg4xchamp said:
I'm not downplaying shit, I'm calling a spade a spade.
Is Naughty Dog terrific? sure. Creative and a trend setter? no. Survival horror never died, Condemned was 06, Condemned 2 was 08, Siren Blood Curse was a thing, and Amnesia, Outlast, Penumbra, and a shit load of PC games have existed in the last 4-5 years. It's become a more niche genre on PC, but that's horror in general. Even in Films it's not a blockbuster type genre. But the notion that survival horror was a dead genre, was in fact pure ignorance. There were plenty of survival horror games coming out, the market shifted.
Tomb Raider being stolen from MS isn't the same as laying down the ground work on how to make platformers and action adventure games like what Mario and Zelda did. They aren't comparable mate. And some people are tired of the same old Nintendo, but there are plenty that still support their shit, and in spite of the fact that they make consoles with poor libraries and weak hardware. They dominate an entire market purely on their own ips (Handheld space), Sony couldn't muscle their way in with their ips.
And "better games to play" that's entirely debatable on which games are better. You are trying to downplay them based on your lack of interest, and their lack of sales as if that overrules their pedigree, their impact on the industry (which the two are not close, Nintendo and Naughty Dog are not in the same league in terms of impact), and the quality of their games now. My Naughty Dog knock, is honestly cold hard truth to anyone that knows shit about film and literature or gaming history at this point. They are a talented studio, but not one that has made anything unique or a trend setter. Pretending otherwise is being ignorant of this medium's history at this point.
Cinematic games existed before Naughty Dog
Games with survival elements existed before Naughty Dog
Games with a "you can attack this a couple different ways" existed before Naughty Dog, and were done on a grander scale than what Naughty Dog did.
This thread is about who has a better track record. Not who is more influential. There aren't many devs in the business that can replicate Naughty Dog's success with creating new franchises and then creating sequels for those franchises. Crash Bandicoot is iconic. Jak & Daxter and loved by many to this day (people still asking for a new one). Uncharted is a block adventure franchise. Last of Us just tore down the house. What new IPs did Nintendo create the last 4 gens? How successful were they?
Pikmin, Smash Bros, Animal Crossing, Nintendogs, Waverace
in the last 4 gens(N64 to now), new ips, all of them sans Pikmin and Waverace have outsold a disgusting majority of the games Naughty Dog has made. All of them sans Animal Crossing (85+)have averaged a triple A rating in their run before on metacritic.And during Naughty Dog's run Nintendo has made landmark titles like Mario 64, Ocarina of Time, in between making excellent stuff like Majora's Mask, Mario Galaxy, and Link Between Worlds.
Nintendo's track record stretches for decades mate, just because you want to dismiss it, and are ignorant to other games because you don't like them, wouldn't invalidate Nintendo's excellent track record. They've been excellent in terms of making games since the 80s, they have genre defining games on their resume, they have GOTY winners on their resume, they have big sellers on their resume, and they have icons on their resume. Naughty Dog's resume on the flip side doesn't have all of that. Some of it, but not all of it. Thems the breaks kiddo, gaming existed before the PS1 era, you should look it up.
@SolidGame_basic: In their first twenty years, Nintendo launched 25 new IPs successfully across all genres. How many have Naughty Dog launched in their first twenty years? Hint: it's less than a fifth of what Nintendo managed.
@ConanTheStoner said:
Even so, it's a self defeating argument on his part. Nintendo has created more IPs, bigger IPs and at their worst they provide the same amount of innovation from sequel to sequel as ND. At their best they destroy NDs efforts at keeping an IP fresh over the years.
This dude just keeps shifting goal posts all over the place, I wonder what the next stipulation to his "argument" will be.
lol right?
Only thing more nauseating is where I've had to be positive about Nintendo for an extensive stretch. That's not going to help my Bingo game.
@hernandezzzz said:
@ConanTheStoner said:
This dude just keeps shifting goal posts all over the place, I wonder what the next stipulation to his "argument" will be.
You realize that this is all a matter of opinion, right? There is no right or wrong answer here.
Take me, for example, I think most of the stuff Nintendo puts out these days is greatly overrated. I found New Super Mario Bros, Pikmin 3 and 3D World to be really underwhelming and maybe even a step back from their predecessors. There just wasn't enough innovation in any of those titles to keep me interested for long.
I swear, Nintendo fans are the worst...
Of course it's a matter of opinion, though opinions can be backed with some good supporting information.
That said, I'm not sure if you understand what shifting goal posts means. The guy keeps trying to support his opinion with an argument and when said argument works against him he clings onto another. It's pretty damn annoying and just makes for poor discussion/debate.
Also I'm just a fan gaming in general, so you can shove that assumption right up your own ass, thank you.
@ConanTheStoner said:
Also I'm just a fan gaming in general, so you can shove that assumption right up your own ass, thank you.
Why do you care so much that I think you're a Nintendrone? No need to be mad... you're putting too much weight on my opinion, imho.
PS: Why the **** is my previous post gone? I just refreshed the page, I didn't delete it...
Outside the obvious (but boring) answer that is Nintendo, I will have to go with Blizzard and Valve, for not only releasing genre defining games, but also them being the type of juggernaut company that can release games when they feel the game is ready. Not because a publisher is breathing down their neck. Many of the other developers mentioned in this thread really haven't been around for that long, or only started making quality AAA games since the PS2 and PS3 era.
Blizzard: WarCraft franchise, StarCraft franchise, Diablo franchise, World of Warcraft
Valve: Half-Life franchise ,Counter-Strike franchise, Team Fortress franchise, Portal franchise, Left 4 Dead franchise, and a truckload of unofficial mods made possible by using Valve engines. Some of them even so good that Valve bought the rights to them, and developed a franchise out of them (Counter-Strike, Left 4 Dead, Team Fortress, Day of Defeat, Portal and some lesser known mods)
The fact that both Blizzard and Valve has a track record of releasing games that still gets played by many people over a decade after release is a testament to the quality. Games like World of WarCraft which still has a playerbase 10 times greater than the second most subscribed MMO is pretty impressive. And let's not forget games like StarCraft which almost became a national sport in Korea. Then we have Counter-Strike which obviously needs no introduction. In the early 2000s, everyone played it, even if you werent that much into FPS games.
Both Valve and Blizzard also created 2 of the most loved and played e-sport games, Counter-Strike and StarCraft. WarCraft 3 could be included here, but it wasn't as popular as StarCraft, atleast in the e-sport world.
@hernandezzzz said:
@ConanTheStoner said:
Also I'm just a fan gaming in general, so you can shove that assumption right up your own ass, thank you.
Why do you care so much that I think you're a Nintendrone? No need to be mad... you're putting too much weight on my opinion, imho.
PS: Why the **** is my previous post gone? I just refreshed the page, I didn't delete it...
I don't really care and I'm not mad. Just responding to your post in the fashion that I usually would. Nothing personal broseph. :P
As for the PS? Glitchspot.
WESTWOOD!!!! (RIP)
@jg4xchamp said:
@SolidGame_basic said:
@jg4xchamp said:
I'm not downplaying shit, I'm calling a spade a spade.
Is Naughty Dog terrific? sure. Creative and a trend setter? no. Survival horror never died, Condemned was 06, Condemned 2 was 08, Siren Blood Curse was a thing, and Amnesia, Outlast, Penumbra, and a shit load of PC games have existed in the last 4-5 years. It's become a more niche genre on PC, but that's horror in general. Even in Films it's not a blockbuster type genre. But the notion that survival horror was a dead genre, was in fact pure ignorance. There were plenty of survival horror games coming out, the market shifted.
Tomb Raider being stolen from MS isn't the same as laying down the ground work on how to make platformers and action adventure games like what Mario and Zelda did. They aren't comparable mate. And some people are tired of the same old Nintendo, but there are plenty that still support their shit, and in spite of the fact that they make consoles with poor libraries and weak hardware. They dominate an entire market purely on their own ips (Handheld space), Sony couldn't muscle their way in with their ips.
And "better games to play" that's entirely debatable on which games are better. You are trying to downplay them based on your lack of interest, and their lack of sales as if that overrules their pedigree, their impact on the industry (which the two are not close, Nintendo and Naughty Dog are not in the same league in terms of impact), and the quality of their games now. My Naughty Dog knock, is honestly cold hard truth to anyone that knows shit about film and literature or gaming history at this point. They are a talented studio, but not one that has made anything unique or a trend setter. Pretending otherwise is being ignorant of this medium's history at this point.
Cinematic games existed before Naughty Dog
Games with survival elements existed before Naughty Dog
Games with a "you can attack this a couple different ways" existed before Naughty Dog, and were done on a grander scale than what Naughty Dog did.
This thread is about who has a better track record. Not who is more influential. There aren't many devs in the business that can replicate Naughty Dog's success with creating new franchises and then creating sequels for those franchises. Crash Bandicoot is iconic. Jak & Daxter and loved by many to this day (people still asking for a new one). Uncharted is a block adventure franchise. Last of Us just tore down the house. What new IPs did Nintendo create the last 4 gens? How successful were they?
Pikmin, Smash Bros, Animal Crossing, Nintendogs, Waverace
in the last 4 gens(N64 to now), new ips, all of them sans Pikmin and Waverace have outsold a disgusting majority of the games Naughty Dog has made. All of them sans Animal Crossing (85+)have averaged a triple A rating in their run before on metacritic.And during Naughty Dog's run Nintendo has made landmark titles like Mario 64, Ocarina of Time, in between making excellent stuff like Majora's Mask, Mario Galaxy, and Link Between Worlds.
Nintendo's track record stretches for decades mate, just because you want to dismiss it, and are ignorant to other games because you don't like them, wouldn't invalidate Nintendo's excellent track record. They've been excellent in terms of making games since the 80s, they have genre defining games on their resume, they have GOTY winners on their resume, they have big sellers on their resume, and they have icons on their resume. Naughty Dog's resume on the flip side doesn't have all of that. Some of it, but not all of it. Thems the breaks kiddo, gaming existed before the PS1 era, you should look it up.
yet another Nintendo person clinging to the past. and you just proved it - all of those IPs aren't even recent.
Pikmin - created during gamecube era (2001)
Smash Bros - created during n64 era (1999)
Animal Crossing - gamecube era (2001)
Nintendogs - you're really using this as an example, LOL - created in 2005
Waverace- Gameboy era (1992)
now do us all a favor and quit making excuses for Nintendo. I've been gaming for quite a while (my account is 3 years older than yours, kiddo)
@SolidGame_basic So this topic is no longer about developer track record? It's now about who created IPs you personally enjoyed starting last gen?
Nice.
Have fun @jg4xchamp (kiddo lol)
@ConanTheStoner said:
@SolidGame_basic So this topic is no longer about developer track record? It's now about who created IPs you personally enjoyed starting last gen?
Nice.
Have fun @jg4xchamp (kiddo lol)
actually this thread is about how amazing you are. you just didn't read the comments ;)
@SolidGame_basic:
@SolidGame_basic said:
yet another Nintendo person clinging to the past. and you just proved it - all of those IPs aren't even recent.
Pikmin - created during gamecube era (2001)
Smash Bros - created during n64 era (1999)
Animal Crossing - gamecube era (2001)
Nintendogs - you're really using this as an example, LOL - created in 2005
Waverace- Gameboy era (1992)
now do us all a favor and quit making excuses for Nintendo. I've been gaming for quite a while (my account is 3 years older than yours, kiddo)
You said last 4 gens, I provided you the last 4 generations of Nintendo's consoles and handhelds. So why move goal posts? I responded to what you wrote.
You asked for track record: and their track record is amazing, because of not just the iconic franchises, not just what they did in the 80s, but the fact that they have stayed excellent in the 90s, in the 00s, and in the 10s so far considering 3D World and Link Between Worlds aren't too shabby. At no point did I deny Nintendo can do way more given the talent under their umbrella, nor the notion that they have been conservative in recent years, but you keep trying to dismiss their entire resume for the sake of what...the WiiU? Because is Naughty Dog getting the rub for Last of Us and Uncharted, or their whole thing? because while they were making Crash and Jak? They were getting outclassed by Nintendo's best, as they made more IPs, more GOTY contenders, had bigger sellers during that time span, and all that jazz.
"bu bu their IPs aren't relevant" brb their big popular stuff still outsells majority of what Naughty Dog does
"bu what about the new stuff they did in the last 4 gens" I give you a list of games they've done in the last 4 gens, all of which are successful and highly praised, and you tried to dismiss one, because the game doesn't appeal to you.
"bu bu bu you're ignoring their recent short comings" Have I? because I wrote the following "Now with Nintendo while recently they haven't been creative, it is ridiculous to ignore their pedigree."
Now either you don't know what Track record means, in which class I will gladly enlighten you, because for all my hubris, my biggest sin is that I actually attempt to fix stupid people like you who try me with sorry ass attempts at debating like this.
Track Record: the things that someone or something has done or achieved in the past regarded especially as a way to judge what that person or thing is likely to do in the future
Now if you want to just get to the nitty gritty and say you don't like Nintendo games, and that's why you don't care for their track record, more power to you. You would have saved us some time, and saved yourself from the constant goal post moving. But don't give me some half-assed attempts at criticisms or reasons you believe x is better than y, when those same reasons work better in my favor. Learn 2 debate please.
Oh and "yet another Nintendo person clinging to the past"
Suck it Shinobi, put that on my bingo board.
Nintendo
Followed by Rockstar and Kojima Productions
@jg4xchamp said:
@SolidGame_basic said:
yet another Nintendo person clinging to the past. and you just proved it - all of those IPs aren't even recent.
Pikmin - created during gamecube era (2001)
Smash Bros - created during n64 era (1999)
Animal Crossing - gamecube era (2001)
Nintendogs - you're really using this as an example, LOL - created in 2005
Waverace- Gameboy era (1992)
now do us all a favor and quit making excuses for Nintendo. I've been gaming for quite a while (my account is 3 years older than yours, kiddo)
You said last 4 gens, I provided you the last 4 generations of Nintendo's consoles and handhelds. So why move goal posts? I responded to what you wrote.
You asked for track record: and their track record is amazing, because of not just the iconic franchises, not just what they did in the 80s, but the fact that they have stayed excellent in the 90s, in the 00s, and in the 10s so far considering 3D World and Link Between Worlds aren't too shabby. At no point did I deny Nintendo can do way more given the talent under their umbrella, nor the notion that they have been conservative in recent years, but you keep trying to dismiss their entire resume for the sake of what...the WiiU? Because is Naughty Dog getting the rub for Last of Us and Uncharted, or their whole thing? because while they were making Crash and Jak? They were getting outclassed by Nintendo's best, as they made more IPs, more GOTY contenders, had bigger sellers during that time span, and all that jazz.
"bu bu their IPs aren't relevant" brb their big popular stuff still outsells majority of what Naughty Dog does
"bu what about the new stuff they did in the last 4 gens" I give you a list of games they've done in the last 4 gens, all of which are successful and highly praised, and you tried to dismiss one, because the game doesn't appeal to you.
"bu bu bu you're ignoring their recent short comings" Have I? because I wrote the following "Now with Nintendo while recently they haven't been creative, it is ridiculous to ignore their pedigree."
Now either you don't know what Track record means, in which class I will gladly enlighten you, because for all my hubris, my biggest sin is that I actually attempt to fix stupid people like you who try me with sorry ass attempts at debating like this.
Track Record: the things that someone or something has done or achieved in the past regarded especially as a way to judge what that person or thing is likely to do in the future
Now if you want to just get to the nitty gritty and say you don't like Nintendo games, and that's why you don't care for their track record, more power to you. You would have saved us some time, and saved yourself from the constant goal post moving. But don't give me some half-assed attempts at criticisms or reasons you believe x is better than y, when those same reasons work better in my favor. Learn 2 debate please.
Oh and "yet another Nintendo person clinging to the past"
Suck it Shinobi, put that on my bingo board.
ok, I'll spell it out then. Nintendo rehashes the same franchises over and over and over again. In my "humble opinion" I would rather have Naughty Dog make my next game, then Nintendo. Why? because they've proven without doubt, in recent times, that they can stay relevant in today's world. Nintendo has not really shown that in my opinion. they cling way too much to their old ways. just because the media says I must like Super Mario 3D World doesn't mean I have to give a shit or think it's good. I had the game. it falls way short of Galaxy. turning into cat suits is for 10 year olds. thanks.
@SolidGame_basic said:
@jg4xchamp said:
You said last 4 gens, I provided you the last 4 generations of Nintendo's consoles and handhelds. So why move goal posts? I responded to what you wrote.
You asked for track record: and their track record is amazing, because of not just the iconic franchises, not just what they did in the 80s, but the fact that they have stayed excellent in the 90s, in the 00s, and in the 10s so far considering 3D World and Link Between Worlds aren't too shabby. At no point did I deny Nintendo can do way more given the talent under their umbrella, nor the notion that they have been conservative in recent years, but you keep trying to dismiss their entire resume for the sake of what...the WiiU? Because is Naughty Dog getting the rub for Last of Us and Uncharted, or their whole thing? because while they were making Crash and Jak? They were getting outclassed by Nintendo's best, as they made more IPs, more GOTY contenders, had bigger sellers during that time span, and all that jazz.
"bu bu their IPs aren't relevant" brb their big popular stuff still outsells majority of what Naughty Dog does
"bu what about the new stuff they did in the last 4 gens" I give you a list of games they've done in the last 4 gens, all of which are successful and highly praised, and you tried to dismiss one, because the game doesn't appeal to you.
"bu bu bu you're ignoring their recent short comings" Have I? because I wrote the following "Now with Nintendo while recently they haven't been creative, it is ridiculous to ignore their pedigree."
Now either you don't know what Track record means, in which class I will gladly enlighten you, because for all my hubris, my biggest sin is that I actually attempt to fix stupid people like you who try me with sorry ass attempts at debating like this.
Track Record: the things that someone or something has done or achieved in the past regarded especially as a way to judge what that person or thing is likely to do in the future
Now if you want to just get to the nitty gritty and say you don't like Nintendo games, and that's why you don't care for their track record, more power to you. You would have saved us some time, and saved yourself from the constant goal post moving. But don't give me some half-assed attempts at criticisms or reasons you believe x is better than y, when those same reasons work better in my favor. Learn 2 debate please.
Oh and "yet another Nintendo person clinging to the past"
Suck it Shinobi, put that on my bingo board.
ok, I'll spell it out then. Nintendo rehashes the same franchises over and over and over again. In my "humble opinion" I would rather have Naughty Dog make my next game, then Nintendo. Why? because they've proven without doubt, in recent times, that they can stay relevant in today's world. Nintendo has not really shown that in my opinion. they cling way too much to their old ways. just because the media says I must like Super Mario 3D World doesn't mean I have to give a shit or think it's good. I had the game. it falls way short of Galaxy. turning into cat suits is for 10 year olds. thanks.
See that's better, I can respect "I don't like them" more as an argument, then some half-assed attempt at a criticism that fails when looked at by any objective measure.
I had to Google both of those names because that's the kind of sports fan I am.
Kind of sad as all of my jobs this past year have been hand-egg related.
This thread is a glorious example of goalpost shifting, holy shit.
@jg4xchamp said:
@SolidGame_basic said:
@jg4xchamp said:
You said last 4 gens, I provided you the last 4 generations of Nintendo's consoles and handhelds. So why move goal posts? I responded to what you wrote.
You asked for track record: and their track record is amazing, because of not just the iconic franchises, not just what they did in the 80s, but the fact that they have stayed excellent in the 90s, in the 00s, and in the 10s so far considering 3D World and Link Between Worlds aren't too shabby. At no point did I deny Nintendo can do way more given the talent under their umbrella, nor the notion that they have been conservative in recent years, but you keep trying to dismiss their entire resume for the sake of what...the WiiU? Because is Naughty Dog getting the rub for Last of Us and Uncharted, or their whole thing? because while they were making Crash and Jak? They were getting outclassed by Nintendo's best, as they made more IPs, more GOTY contenders, had bigger sellers during that time span, and all that jazz.
"bu bu their IPs aren't relevant" brb their big popular stuff still outsells majority of what Naughty Dog does
"bu what about the new stuff they did in the last 4 gens" I give you a list of games they've done in the last 4 gens, all of which are successful and highly praised, and you tried to dismiss one, because the game doesn't appeal to you.
"bu bu bu you're ignoring their recent short comings" Have I? because I wrote the following "Now with Nintendo while recently they haven't been creative, it is ridiculous to ignore their pedigree."
Now either you don't know what Track record means, in which class I will gladly enlighten you, because for all my hubris, my biggest sin is that I actually attempt to fix stupid people like you who try me with sorry ass attempts at debating like this.
Track Record: the things that someone or something has done or achieved in the past regarded especially as a way to judge what that person or thing is likely to do in the future
Now if you want to just get to the nitty gritty and say you don't like Nintendo games, and that's why you don't care for their track record, more power to you. You would have saved us some time, and saved yourself from the constant goal post moving. But don't give me some half-assed attempts at criticisms or reasons you believe x is better than y, when those same reasons work better in my favor. Learn 2 debate please.
Oh and "yet another Nintendo person clinging to the past"
Suck it Shinobi, put that on my bingo board.
ok, I'll spell it out then. Nintendo rehashes the same franchises over and over and over again. In my "humble opinion" I would rather have Naughty Dog make my next game, then Nintendo. Why? because they've proven without doubt, in recent times, that they can stay relevant in today's world. Nintendo has not really shown that in my opinion. they cling way too much to their old ways. just because the media says I must like Super Mario 3D World doesn't mean I have to give a shit or think it's good. I had the game. it falls way short of Galaxy. turning into cat suits is for 10 year olds. thanks.
See that's better, I can respect "I don't like them" more as an argument, then some half-assed attempt at a criticism that fails when looked at by any objective measure.
I don't hate Nintendo. we need Nintendo to succeed. I'm saying their track record (more recently) sucks because they rehash and don't take enough risks. that is a valid criticism. everyone knows Nintendo needs to change. Super Mario 3D World wasn't really a system seller. Mario Kart 8 didn't really boost Wii U sales either. are you really going to say Nintendo is so damn awesome right now? like, what was the point of bringing Pikmin back? it didn't sell shit 10 years ago either. Donkey Kong - let's make the same game with HD graphics. that's a real seller.
Yeah, what can I say bro. I had an extreme obsession with basketball in the 90s, but that's about it. I shame the Egyptian side of my family for not giving a twat about soccer, then the Murica side because of football. Currently living in North Alabama too, I should at least learn to fake it.
@charizard1605 said:
This thread is a glorious example of goalpost shifting, holy shit.
actually it's a great example of people not understanding a question.
Rockstar without a shadow of a doubt
Team ICO would be it after two fantastic masterpieces but TLG
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment