🚀 go-pugleaf

yc...@mhoro.cc.columbia.edu (Yung Jin Chew) writes:
>In article <39knho$a...@harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au>,
>GM Enierga <gme...@lindblat.cc.monash.edu.au> wrote:
>>	Which means that Origin is gone but in name, isn't it?  How else can
>>you account for a company with such a great track record and whose almost
>>EVERY game being a great piece of gaming to have become such a poor example of
>>what NOT to do when making a game?

>This shows typically "gloss-coloured" sentimentalist thinking.  Do you
>even remember some   of the  not-so-good games  that   Origin wants to
>forget as quickly  as  possible?  How about  "worlds of  Ultima"?

	Those were great games, and as you have no doubt read, I am not the
only one of that opinion - if you disliked them then that is your perogative.
	To be perfectly honest, I cannot think of ANY games before the end of
U7 made by Origin which were BAD.  And this goes as far back when Origin
first started with Ultima 1.  That is why I am SO disappointed with what Origin
has become.


>The point is that Origin isn't this  wonderful gaming company  gone astray
>like  you put it...  they've  had their ups and downs  and I sincerely
>doubt that they would  sink 4 million dollars  into a project like WC3
>without some guarantee  that they'll make a  profit.

	Don't be too sure.  I disliked Doom, but loved UW's.  I liked WC1 to
WC2 SO2, but if WC3 turns out to be a fiasco like Privateer (no decent story)
then I will not like it.  I doubt people liked the WC series for their "action"
ALONE.
	And something else to consider: Hollywood has some influence over this.
Now, crossing a little out of Game entertainment, I'll give you this scenario
which happens to be true: In general, 90% of all hollywood movies are hyped
garbage.  Action is done better by the Hong-Kong cinema; Stories with wonderful
twists by japanese manga phenomenon; European cinema has generally more "whole
good movies" than Hollywood will ever hope to achieve.  Even some of the
independent US film-making scene produces better stuff than Hollywood.
Admitedly, Hollywood does some of the best promos for any movie - I really
believe they can make "Dark Star" seem the greatest space opera ever by their
promos alone.  Also I will admit that Hollywood has THE best SFX and sets in
the world.
	So what is my point? The reason Hollywood movies are so "garbage" is
because of the huge dependency on formula, and formula gets so boring.  Name me
one movie that the good guy will not triumph and will not get the girl - 9
times out of 10 this happens in movies... it is just so predictable.  In
relation to games and particularly WC3, I am afraid that Hollywood's influence
will affect it: great graphics and sound, but actual story sucks (like
Privateer) - and that because of the huge budget poured into this, so it MUST
succeed.  So it will become a "formula" game, because it is the sure thing.
And as someone in this newsgroup once wrote, "people WILL buy shit".
	Unfortunate, but true.
	One last thing: do not assume that just because so much money has gone
into it, it will be great... back to movies, Cleopatra was the biggest flop ever
, I believe... and a LOT of money went into that.  In the same token, I am not
judging WC3 yet, because I have not seen it.  All I am doing is voicing my
fears and hopes.  And I really do doubt there is ANYONE out there who can tell
me one way or the other which way the game will go BEFORE it is released.


  And I think that
>they know that that insurance has to be good  gameplay.   They CAN NOT
>afford  to   lose at  this  point --  they  would inevitably go out of
>business.  I too have faith that WC3 will be a good game.

	Of course they will.  To all cynics and conspiracy fans: maybe that was
EA's goal from the very start. ;-)

						- Falcon