Jump to content
GuyWhoPostsThings

UPDATE: Eurogamer says it's cancelled. ORIGINAL: Scalebound? Scalebinned? Scalebound removed from Xbox websites, rumors that it's in trouble

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, crispy4000 said:

 

They made a Game of the Year contender in 2014.  I still think it's ridiculous to think that was lightning in a bottle and that they couldn't replicate that again with proper funding/development time.

 

What they're going to have to prove, sadly, is that they can stomach the impending layoffs that are likely to result from the Scalebound cancellation.

 

I didn't say it was lightning in a bottle. They were a good developer. Whether they still are is up for debate, to me at least. I think you could make the argument that a lot of developers could make a game of the year game with enough time and enough funding - the key is to make it work with what you're given (at least to a degree). PlatinumGames hasn't lately. You can disagree, and that's okay. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Greatoneshere said:

 

I didn't say it was lightning in a bottle. They were a good developer. Whether they still are is up for debate, to me at least. You can disagree, and that's okay. 

 

I just don't think 2 years and 4 months is enough time to make the call that they're a bad developer now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, crispy4000 said:

 

I just don't think 2 years and 4 months is enough time to make the call that they're a bad developer now.

 

When you've made 5 garbage games since I think it should make one hesitate at least. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Greatoneshere said:

 

When you've made 5 garbage games since I think it should make one hesitate at least. 

 

We're going in circles.  And it's funny that you count Star Fox Guard in there too, as if Nintendo didn't design the thing.  It's a pack-in game too. :|

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, crispy4000 said:

 

We're going in circles.  And it's funny that you count Star Fox Guard in there too, as if Nintendo didn't design the thing.

 

Yes, we are going in circles, which is why I said essentially that we can agree to disagree earlier. All is well. Scalebound is cancelled either way. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a family member who worked on big-box licensed games for a while.  So I know the drill for why these games come out rushed and underfunded.  Not that you need a first hand source to confirm it; it should be pretty obvious given how most licensed games turn out.

 

So yeah, I personally don't judge how bad a developer is because of a bad licensed game they made.  If that's all they do, that's another story... maybe.  It's usually meant to be a stepping stone to bigger, better things.  And there's little doubt that Platinum took on those projects as such.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, crispy4000 said:

I have a family member who worked on big-box licensed games for a while.  So I know the drill for why these games come out rushed and underfunded.  Not that you need a first hand source to confirm it; it should be pretty obvious given how most licensed games turn out historically.

 

So yeah, I personally don't judge how bad a developer is because of a bad licensed game they made.  If that's all they do, that's another story... maybe.  It's usually meant to be a stepping stone to bigger, better things.  And there's little doubt that Platinum took on those projects as such.

 

 

That developer knows the deal when they take on those projects, and agree to put their name on it.  You can't just wave that off as, it's not their fault.  Maybe they did it for a few quick paydays to help fund other things, but when they put their names on these things, they have to accept the fact their pedigree and reputation can be helped or hurt by them.

 

I personally don't even think I've played a Platinum game.  Would've been nice if they could've delivered on this, but I have plenty else to play so no biggie.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Greatoneshere said:

 

I don't disagree but first of all he didn't direct Bayonetta 2, he was a "supervisor" and he did the "story". Secondly, The Wonderful 101 was okay to me, not great. I agree he is/was quite a talent, but I don't think between PlatinumGames' recent track record and the fact he hasn't released a game where he was the director since The Wonderful 101 in 2013 that I do think there is cause for concern and that PlatinumGames should no longer be held in such high regard.

Game cycles are typically 3-4 years so I don't find it bizarre that he hasn't released a game since then. Heck Tarantino takes just as long to release a movie and he doesn't need to create art assets and systems from scratch. I think you are being overly harsh in this instance. 

 

Also you are crazy if you are at all hinting that PlatinumGames had a huge say in Star Fox. Those are Miyamoto games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, JPSoccer4 said:

 

 

That developer knows the deal when they take on those projects, and agree to put their name on it.  You can't just wave that off as, it's not their fault.  Maybe they did it for a few quick paydays to help fund other things, but when they put their names on these things, they have to accept the fact their pedigree and reputation can be helped or hurt by them.

 

I personally don't even think I've played a Platinum game.  Would've been nice if they could've delivered on this, but I have plenty else to play so no biggie.  

Those are the "pay the bills" games with probably a more restrictive partner than Microsoft. If you want to hold those games against them, that's up to you. It is no different than when a quality actor takes the big pay day film that will be total

garbage. I don't think any less of the actor. It's just business. 

 

I do think PG has suffered since Mikami has left. I wonder if Mikami and Kamiya worked closely together on each other's project and provide valuable insight and advice. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, JPSoccer4 said:

That developer knows the deal when they take on those projects, and agree to put their name on it.  You can't just wave that off as, it's not their fault.  Maybe they did it for a few quick paydays to help fund other things, but when they put their names on these things, they have to accept the fact their pedigree and reputation can be helped or hurt by them.

 

Quick paydays likely needed to stay solvent while funding other projects.  Even last gen, they were notorious for releasing sleepers that flopped at retail.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, crispy4000 said:

 

Quick paydays likely needed to stay solvent while funding other projects.  Even last gen, they were notorious for releasing sleepers that flopped at retail.

 

I really hope Bayo gets a 2nd chance on the Switch. And if Bayo 3 gets made I am adding that to my list of proof that god loves us and wants us to be happy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, crispy4000 said:

 

The latter could simply be due to gif compression.  The idea of Platinum making an RPG with a (semi-)open world had me excited.  And I thought the villiage looks fantastic.  Tree huts, waterfalls, some big giant glowing rock in the center, etc.  Looks like a place I'd want to go explore.

 

Both gifs gave me Skies of Arcadia vibes.  There aren't many RPGs today that do that for me.

 

Skies of Arcadia vibes? I mean, there's similar locales in Xenosaga and Final Fantasy XIV as well as XV, and none of those games even come close to matching SoA for me. And since this is Platinum Games, I know for a fact that even if it looked like something out of SoA, it would not bring the same feelings. They make action games. This one seemed no different. I don't know how to phrase it, but I just can't see Platinum bringing me anything other than pure action that I'd care about, y'know? I think back of every game of theirs I've ever played and it's always just the combat, combat, combat. This one didn't even appear to have that. And some floating islands and crystals and shit isn't enough of a deep delve into the world to convince me of anything other than standard JRPG fantasy tropes.

 

And no, that wasn't gif compression, I'm no graphic designer, but I've seen similar effects in cheap games when characters and such get close to the camera. It reflects them over a huge area of the water because that's how the reflection tech is coded. It always looks so bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Xbob42 said:

 

Skies of Arcadia vibes? I mean, there's similar locales in Xenosaga and Final Fantasy XIV as well as XV, and none of those games even come close to matching SoA for me. And since this is Platinum Games, I know for a fact that even if it looked like something out of SoA, it would not bring the same feelings. They make action games. This one seemed no different. I don't know how to phrase it, but I just can't see Platinum bringing me anything other than pure action that I'd care about, y'know? I think back of every game of theirs I've ever played and it's always just the combat, combat, combat. This one didn't even appear to have that. And some floating islands and crystals and shit isn't enough of a deep delve into the world to convince me of anything other than standard JRPG fantasy tropes.


I'm cool with Platinum making an action RPG, because how many straight up action games have they made?  This was supposed to be taking what they already had core competency in and applying it to something a little different in scope.  Okami wasn't just a straight up action game either.  I have no misgivings about Kamiya wanting to branch out again.

 

Never played Xenosaga and haven't played XV yet (currently lost by the post office.... that's another story).  Regardless of what this game would be or not, the town looks fantastic to me, and a place I'd be interested in running around in.  You disagree, I think that's all there is to that.

 

4 hours ago, Xbob42 said:

 

And no, that wasn't gif compression, I'm no graphic designer, but I've seen similar effects in cheap games when characters and such get close to the camera. It reflects them over a huge area of the water because that's how the reflection tech is coded. It always looks so bad.


But this isn't close to the camera.  It's pulled out to an extreme.  If you were right, and this is a big if, there's no way it would have stayed in the final game.  And needless to say, this wasn't a cheap game.

 

4 hours ago, Keyser_Soze said:

Crispy, you can't beat @Greatoneshere. It's impossible, like your first game of Blitzball.

 

Never was looking to "beat" him, just express my thoughts about why Platinum Games still matters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Greatoneshere really hates Platinum Games it seems. Like, did they fuck his mom or something? I don't care for their games, but they aren't bad devs. Maybe he is still salty that Bayo 2 was Wii U only, ignoring that was the only way it would exist. 

 

MadWorld, Bayonetta 1&2, Vanquish, Metal Gear Rising: Revengeance, and The Wonderful 101 are actually good games. Sure that is only six, and the other seven aren't as good, but let's look at them. Star Fox isn't their fault. Nintendo is to blame with their backwards ways. Infinite Space sits at a 75 metascore with a 9.0 user score and Anarchy Reigns is at 71 with a 8.2 user score. Ignoring the user score both games can be given a C grade. So while they aren't great, they aren't bad. The same goes with Transformers. It sits at the 70+ range as well. 

 

So that only leaves TMNT and Korra as their only actually bad games. Only 2 out of 11 (doesn not include Star Fox) games are bad and have an actual failing grade. With both below 60 they both fail. And if you want to include Star Fox. SF guard passes at 74 score and SF: Z is a 69. Even though that would still count as a passing grade, let's just say it isn't. So 3/13 games are bad. 

 

So, 10 games that range from low 70 to mid 80. Guess you can't call them great, but they aren't bad. Nier: Automata also comes out this year, and that is looking to be a decent game as well, most likely in the 80 range like MGR.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, markot said:

SF is cancer. Like totally. But I think the blame falls on Nintendo for insisting on the stupid controls.

No, even with better controls, it would still be shit because Star Fox games have all been bad. They were cool when we were kids, but they've never been anything worthy of praise. They're just bad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Xbob42 said:

No, even with better controls, it would still be shit because Star Fox games have all been bad. They were cool when we were kids, but they've never been anything worthy of praise. They're just bad.

 

hqdefault.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The best game in the series was only considered good because of its novel psuedo-3D tech that couldn't salvage its pedestrian gameplay and ridiculously short length, offering little to no replayability.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Xbob42 said:

The best game in the series was only considered good because of its novel psuedo-3D tech that couldn't salvage its pedestrian gameplay and ridiculously short length, offering little to no replayability.

 

Image result for yoda gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Bacon said:

@Greatoneshere really hates Platinum Games it seems. Like, did they fuck his mom or something? I don't care for their games, but they aren't bad devs. Maybe he is still salty that Bayo 2 was Wii U only, ignoring that was the only way it would exist. 

 

MadWorld, Bayonetta 1&2, Vanquish, Metal Gear Rising: Revengeance, and The Wonderful 101 are actually good games. Sure that is only six, and the other seven aren't as good, but let's look at them. Star Fox isn't their fault. Nintendo is to blame with their backwards ways. Infinite Space sits at a 75 metascore with a 9.0 user score and Anarchy Reigns is at 71 with a 8.2 user score. Ignoring the user score both games can be given a C grade. So while they aren't great, they aren't bad. The same goes with Transformers. It sits at the 70+ range as well. 

 

So that only leaves TMNT and Korra as their only actually bad games. Only 2 out of 11 (doesn not include Star Fox) games are bad and have an actual failing grade. With both below 60 they both fail. And if you want to include Star Fox. SF guard passes at 74 score and SF: Z is a 69. Even though that would still count as a passing grade, let's just say it isn't. So 3/13 games are bad. 

 

So, 10 games that range from low 70 to mid 80. Guess you can't call them great, but they aren't bad. Nier: Automata also comes out this year, and that is looking to be a decent game as well, most likely in the 80 range like MGR.

 

I don't hate PlatinumGames, I just don't understand why they are still held with such reverence. That was really it. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Star Fox 64 was amazing, had tons of replay value due to the medal unlocks, and is probably the most Sega arcade-like game Nintendo ever made.

 

Oh, but Xbob42 is talking about Starfox SNES being the best... lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×