Bulletstorm, anyone interested?

Plague_Injected said:
Don't feed the troll.
Click to expand...

It's called debating. And I thought my post made a lot of sense. I don't actually see anybody refuting what I wrote, other than to repeat what they wrote earlier, which was obviously nonsense.

But wow, I'm picking up a bad vibe here about this title - amazing the way gamers will sometimes bury a game before its release. Maybe give it a chance, eh? I mean, it hasn't even been released yet.
 
CliffyB-PC-Whiners.jpg
 
I left this for Cliff on twitter

@therealcliffyb PC gamers are grumpy huh? Your nothing but an asshole. Dont forget PCers made you who u are Remember Unreal? Thats right.
 
I would guess there are many many more pirated PC games than console games. I can understand the frustration from all sides, I can't STAND DRM on the games I spend my hard earned money on but at the same time it's BS that these companies spend how many millions of dollars developing games only to have thieves steal it from them. I think it's a giant dick move to not offer PC gamers a demo but offer it to PS3/360.

On that note, will I still buy it? Maybe. Lack of a demo shows me how much "support" the PC will get and that tells me my hard earned dollars would likely be better spent on a different game. There are plenty that are coming out this year. Sure this game looks cool but as with Aion (I've been playing WoW since launch) the lack of a demo steers me away from the game.

I'll likely download the demo on my PS3 though to try it out, maybe. I hate console controllers for FPS games.. ugh.
 
jiminator said:
CliffyB-PC-Whiners.jpg
Click to expand...

This is extremely ironic.

Gamers are the biggest complainers on the internet. I can't think of any other group of people who complain so bitterly about their own hobby. I'm not giving this Cliff guy a pass, but seriously... there's some irony here, no doubt about it.
 
WabeWalker said:
I can't think of any other group of people who complain so bitterly about their own hobby.
Click to expand...
You'd find some if you actually visited any non-gaming forums. People complain about everything. It's in our nature. If it wasn't gaming, it would be something else.
 
WabeWalker said:
It's called debating. And I thought my post made a lot of sense. I don't actually see anybody refuting what I wrote, other than to repeat what they wrote earlier, which was obviously nonsense.

But wow, I'm picking up a bad vibe here about this title - amazing the way gamers will sometimes bury a game before its release. Maybe give it a chance, eh? I mean, it hasn't even been released yet.
Click to expand...

1) Aside from my whinging about no PC demo, I've made positive posts about Bulletstorm.

2) You continually take the most inflammatory position on any issue, and use hostile and insulting language and tone in expressing it. You did it with flair in your "MOH is on sale" thread and in regards to buying games at launch versus on sale - on both occasions, your posts were deleted on these very grounds. You are not simply "debating"; that requires levels of civility. You have valid and interesting points but they are obscured by insults and hostility towards those who you are disagreeing with.

3) Your post is ambiguous at best. You first begin by citing Gamespot as a reputable, independent source of quality assessment, and then procede to argue about how it's not independent or reliable due to the "Gerstmann incident".
 
Okay, strike Gamespot from my list, then.

You're right, they've already proven (through Kane & Lynch) that they will take part in a marketing campaign, and that they will allow their reviews to be contaminated.

I guess I still read their stuff though because I like to believe that what happened with Kane & Lynch wouldn't happen again. They did lose a lot of credibility with gamers over that incident though - and that just underscores my point, really: namely, that gamers do know the difference between independent reporting, and marketing. The two absolutely are not the same thing. When people realized that the Gerstmann review had been pulled because his score was too low for the marketers of that game they went ballistic.

In my mind I can even picture that phone call. Marketers are some of the strangest people in business. It's astonishing how often a marketer will blame a product's poor sales on the marketing campaign, rather than on the quality of the product itself (in publishing, I see this all the time... just constantly). In the gaming business marketers hate seeing low scores, because they equate low scores with low sales. Their reasoning is twisted: they believe that a higher score translates to higher sales, and that spending money in order to obtain a higher score is a perfectly viable solution.

The marketer who phoned Gamespot would've said that they had spent tons of money at Gamespot advertising Kane & Lynch, so why in the name of god was Gamespot sabotaging them with a low review score? These people only care about the numbers. What they don't care about is quality - and don't even bother mentioning integrity, because they believe that integrity comes from being a good salesperson, not from delivering a good product... in other words, they believe that they do have integrity when in reality they have no understanding of its true meaning.

In any case, reporting about an upcoming game, as an independant source (such as PC Gamer), is hardly tantamount to participating in the game's marketing campaign, and that's precisely the argument that's being advanced by some people here.
 
WabeWalker said:
Okay, strike Gamespot from my list, then.

You're right, they've already proven (through Kane & Lynch) that they will take part in a marketing campaign, and that they will allow their reviews to be contaminated.

I guess I still read their stuff though because I like to believe that what happened with Kane & Lynch wouldn't happen again. They did lose a lot of credibility with gamers over that incident though - and that just underscores my point, really: namely, that gamers do know the difference between independent reporting, and marketing. The two absolutely are not the same thing. When people realized that the Gerstmann review had been pulled because his score was too low for the marketers of that game they went ballistic.

In my mind I can even picture that phone call. Marketers are some of the strangest people in business. It's astonishing how often a marketer will blame a product's poor sales on the marketing campaign, rather than on the quality of the product itself (in publishing, I see this all the time... just constantly). In the gaming business marketers hate seeing low scores, because they equate low scores with low sales. Their reasoning is twisted: they believe that a higher score translates to higher sales, and that spending money in order to obtain a higher score is a perfectly viable solution.

The marketer who phoned Gamespot would've said that they had spent tons of money at Gamespot advertising Kane & Lynch, so why in the name of god was Gamespot sabotaging them with a low review score? These people only care about the numbers. What they don't care about is quality - and don't even bother mentioning integrity, because they believe that integrity comes from being a good salesperson, not from delivering a good product... in other words, they believe that they do have integrity when in reality they have no understanding of its true meaning.

In any case, reporting about an upcoming game, as an independant source (such as PC Gamer), is hardly tantamount to participating in the game's marketing campaign, and that's precisely the argument that's being advanced by some people here.
Click to expand...

What I've gathered from the situation is that Gertsman was going to be fired no matter what. His bosses simply didn't like him and he had a lot of enemies at CNET. He also wasn't great at running the site, which I assume is one of the reasons he doesn't run Giant Bomb even though he was one of the people that created it.
 
Derangel said:
What I've gathered from the situation is that Gertsman was going to be fired no matter what. His bosses simply didn't like him and he had a lot of enemies at CNET. He also wasn't great at running the site, which I assume is one of the reasons he doesn't run Giant Bomb even though he was one of the people that created it.
Click to expand...

But that doesn't justify Gamespot pulling the review, and replacing it with a review that had a higher score. They shouldn't have done that.
 
Is there much of a plot for this? Borderlands failed to grip me for that reason. I like a strong narrative, and a tight story arch.
 
WabeWalker said:
Is there much of a plot for this? Borderlands failed to grip me for that reason. I like a strong narrative, and a tight story arch.
Click to expand...

Seems to follow Painkiller in that it focuses on gameplay and will likely have little more than a token-gesture plot that's primary purpose is to link levels and objectives together. I doubt a game that has the line "pull up your skirt, and strap that dildo on!" is going to have a serious or integral story.

There are plenty of games that do story well, so I'm not complaining. Bulletstorm looks to be simple and pure shoot 'em up action.
 
Wow, that is pretty much Bleszinski saying "Fuck You" to the lot of us.

*Sigh* Will be bargain-binning this now.
 
sorry guys, the dude may be an idiot but i'll still pick it up because this is a PCF game and PK was one of my all time favorite games.
 
WabeWalker said:
This is extremely ironic.

Gamers are the biggest complainers on the internet. I can't think of any other group of people who complain so bitterly about their own hobby. I'm not giving this Cliff guy a pass, but seriously... there's some irony here, no doubt about it.
Click to expand...

Only irony is that the PC gaming community is what gave him his start and fame. I dont care if there is no PC demo, just don't be a dick about it. If it were made by Epic I would never pick it up. I love PCF though, but damn you CliffyB *shakes fist*
 
Dextar said:
I would guess there are many many more pirated PC games than console games.
Click to expand...

The percentage of the PC gamers to PC pirates is way higher than console gamers to console pirates. (we're talking traditional mainstream games here)

However there are way more console gamers to begin with, which means the total overall pirated games is actually pretty close nowadays.

Piracy is on the rise on the consoles. The scene rips pretty much every console release there is, just as with PCs. Private trackers which limit releases to scene rips only and don't allow duplicate uploads provide good numbers to show that actually there are comparable numbers for both PC and console games. Things differ a bit in the public domain, but then when it comes to piracy the public domain stuff always lags behind.

I had a quick check and for more traditional console games like Dead rising 2, the number of downloads is higher than the PC version, by a lot, about 250% more.
 
Yeah I noticed I started an uproar with all the twitter comments & my various other posts everywhere else but Will us as Gamers be listened to. Nope
 
Last edited:
Was thinking about getting this, but since Epic can't seem to muzzle their anti-PC bias these days, I think I'll wait if it gets good reviews until it's a cheap. I'd rather support developers who care about the platform... like Valve with Portal 2.
 
Epic don't make games, they make engines. The UT series has always really been a staple to sell the engine and the fact that it's also a game is kind of a side note, the UT games themselves are just multiplayer only shooters which are built in order to boast engine quality and the sort of assets you can use in unreal powered games.

Crysis built by Crytek kind of feels like the same thing, the original FarCry did actually start life as a tech demo, so the engine has it's roots there. You can tell that Crysis is really just a tech demo at heart with a sort of game wrapped around that, SPORE have very much the same feel and again it was a clever engine adapted to be a game.

And for what it's worth the unreal authoring tools are state of the art, nothing even comes close to how good they are, something like Hammer isn't in the same league. Epic should stick to improving the UDK and leave the game development to a studio with less emo attitude towards the PC platform :)
 
Cliffy B has turned into a real Queen. He is still mad that we didn't like UT3. When ego overshadows talent, we don't respond well. I hope People Can Fly did a good job and are rewarded, but Epic is "sleeping on the couch" until they can release something that doesn't suck and isn't purely for consoles.
 
Demo is out tomorrow on the consoles for those of you have that might have one.

Release date is February 22 for the game.


Again, a needless shame the PC isn't getting a demo as well. This isn't the only game this is happening with. It's an overall trend that doesn't sit well with me at all.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qh4Jx6D90L4

I have a PS3 so I'll take a stab at it and if it's really good on the PS3 then I know the PC version will kick ass. I hope it's a good game despite CliffyB.
 
hrm, gotta love how ea has changed their preorder prices for all PC games to 59.95. I mean I love PCF, but this will be another game I pass on for now.
 
jiminator said:
hrm, gotta love how ea has changed their preorder prices for all PC games to 59.95. I mean I love PCF, but this will be another game I pass on for now.
Click to expand...
$60 price tag is especially lame for digital distribution. Dead Space 2 and Bulletstorm will both be games I purchase during sales.
 
Yeah they raised the price 10 dollars. EA, PCF, EPIC can all kiss my ass. For mainly an Online game only im NOT paying 65 damn dollars. Show me a steam sale at 50-75% off & we will talk
 
Looks like $60 is going to be standard price of admission for PC games very very soon :(

Playing the 360 demo at the moment. Fun, but nothing special and not as good as Painkiller.
 
Krieger91 said:
I recently took up some interest in wanting to play this title, anyone looking forward to the pc release of this? I hope it turns out to be a great multiplayer fps, kinda lacking that super crazy action fps like the old UTs were.
Click to expand...

I really miss tele-fragging.

This game does look pretty cool, though. I hope there's a demo released.
 
well, the 360 demo was..........short. Took about 5 minutes to play through it. Based on the demo I doubt I'll be buying this game till its on sale
 
I thought I was going to enjoy the 360 demo but I just can't play fast enough with a gamepad so I'd lasso a guy, kick him, and then start aiming all wild with the !@#ING thumbstick and miss most of the shots, heh.

It seems fun. I'm sure I'll like it on PC but I'll still wait for the price to come down.
 
I was looking forward to this insane shooter, but since Breach, Homefront, Crysis 2, Duke Nukem, some console releases like Killzone 3 and LA Noire are coming out soon, I think I am going to wait.
 
I played the demo on a 360. It is about 10 minutes long. Fun, but really skimpy demo.
 
Yea the demo convinced me not to buy it at full price. Fun game, but I can see it getting old pretty quick.
 
spindoctor said:
Yea the demo convinced me not to buy it at full price. Fun game, but I can see it getting old pretty quick.
Click to expand...

I think I'm in the same boat.


Tried the demo out on the PS3. Did ok with the controls considering so I'm used to KBM and I know I'd play considerably better with KBM but that besides the point.

I liked what I saw for the most part but I wonder how much staying power this has and if this is the kind of game that I'd play in short bursts in between other games or what. I'm not sure I'm fully sold on it but it was a fun, quick, run and gun kind of experience with a little bit of "cousin to Borderlands" feel going for it.
 
Regardless of Epics dismal support for PC or Cliff's comments you guys need to realize that People Can Fly are developing this game, I was fucking stoked for this before Epic even came into the picture. You're not really doing anything but hurting a small dev team that has a chance to make huge waves.

Cliff's an ignorant asshole and Epic's poster child but that does not mean I won't buy their games if they are good. I think it's silly to write off a whole teams worth of effort and work just because some douche at the top makes some snide comments.

That's sort of like the people who don't buy Apple because they have disdain for Steve Jobs even though it's a team of briliant engineers actually making the devices as "magical" as they are.

If the game is good buy the game and support PCF, if the game is bad do not buy it but please don't write this off based on "morals".

Also, steam has a great demo function I don't understand why more dev's don't fucking utlilize that.
 
Supporting PCF is good, but most of those developers were paid, they're done now. Will they get money from sales? Royalties? Any difference from whether we purchase now or wait for $30, $20 sales? They might get paid more for a sequel or another project, but profits will probably trickle up.

And while this looks fun and worthwhile, it doesn't look like a gamechanger from UT3's looks and Borderlands+more sadism and slow-mo.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top