Games you expect to see every year
Some game series have a game for you every year, for example CoD and Assassin's Creed are known for that and usually don't disappoint (depends who you ask though). But is it really a good thing that you get a game every year or is it better to work a bit longer on a game?
Games that come out every year aren't good?
It's easy to say that but when I look at game series like CoD and Assassin's Creed then I can say that's not entirely true. Sure some CoD games aren't good or at least not as much fun as I would like them to be, but does that automaticly make them bad? For example CoD Ghosts was a bit different, I wasn't super exciting about everything but I did like that Infinity Ward introduced female soldiers in multiplayer and a new mode called Extinction. Maybe not everyone likes that but it was fun to play. Female soldiers are now standard in every CoD multiplayer game since, so they definitely started with something good there! But CoD Advanced Warfare was a bit different for me, sure I like the new moves but if most people online still camp and dropshot then those new moves are just not that interesting anymore. Black Ops 3 is a good game and I really enjoy playing it! Ok it's not perfect but when I look at CoD games it's defintely a step in the right direction. Maybe you think that's just because Treyarch had three years to work on this game but when I look at Black Ops 2 then I still say that's a good game. I guess some people are just a bit better at making good games, even when they just get a year to make it. Ubisoft is also known for making games of the same series every year and get a lot of hate for that, but excluding Assassin's Creed Unity I'd say that they did a good job so far and let's not forget that together with AC Unity you also got Assassin's Creed Rogue and that game is pretty good! It's easy to hate but if you look at the games then they're not bad, maybe not the best but definitely not bad!
It's better that games get more time for development?
I think it is, because the more time you get the more chance a game has to amaze you. Just look at Dragon Age Inquisition or Fallout 4, these games weren't developed in a year and they're absolutely amazing and my favourite games of 2014 and 2015. But it seems that CoD is trying to improve things as well by giving developers more time to work on their game, so the two year cycle is now a three year cycle for developers and Treyarch can now work three years on their next game and so can Infinity Ward and Sledgehammer on their CoD games. Which is a good thing in my opinion. Even Ubisoft has decided to give their next Assassin's Creed game some more time, which means that there isn't an Assassin's Creed game for 2016. Eventhough Assassin's Creed Syndicate was a succes they decided to put more time into their next game and I actually like that, it's about quality and not quantity when it comes to making good games!
Games that come out every year aren't good?
It's easy to say that but when I look at game series like CoD and Assassin's Creed then I can say that's not entirely true. Sure some CoD games aren't good or at least not as much fun as I would like them to be, but does that automaticly make them bad? For example CoD Ghosts was a bit different, I wasn't super exciting about everything but I did like that Infinity Ward introduced female soldiers in multiplayer and a new mode called Extinction. Maybe not everyone likes that but it was fun to play. Female soldiers are now standard in every CoD multiplayer game since, so they definitely started with something good there! But CoD Advanced Warfare was a bit different for me, sure I like the new moves but if most people online still camp and dropshot then those new moves are just not that interesting anymore. Black Ops 3 is a good game and I really enjoy playing it! Ok it's not perfect but when I look at CoD games it's defintely a step in the right direction. Maybe you think that's just because Treyarch had three years to work on this game but when I look at Black Ops 2 then I still say that's a good game. I guess some people are just a bit better at making good games, even when they just get a year to make it. Ubisoft is also known for making games of the same series every year and get a lot of hate for that, but excluding Assassin's Creed Unity I'd say that they did a good job so far and let's not forget that together with AC Unity you also got Assassin's Creed Rogue and that game is pretty good! It's easy to hate but if you look at the games then they're not bad, maybe not the best but definitely not bad!
It's better that games get more time for development?
I think it is, because the more time you get the more chance a game has to amaze you. Just look at Dragon Age Inquisition or Fallout 4, these games weren't developed in a year and they're absolutely amazing and my favourite games of 2014 and 2015. But it seems that CoD is trying to improve things as well by giving developers more time to work on their game, so the two year cycle is now a three year cycle for developers and Treyarch can now work three years on their next game and so can Infinity Ward and Sledgehammer on their CoD games. Which is a good thing in my opinion. Even Ubisoft has decided to give their next Assassin's Creed game some more time, which means that there isn't an Assassin's Creed game for 2016. Eventhough Assassin's Creed Syndicate was a succes they decided to put more time into their next game and I actually like that, it's about quality and not quantity when it comes to making good games!
Reacties
Een reactie posten