trusting gear box? [Archive]

PresidentSkroob

01-10-2005, 12:16 AM

im not shure if this game will be so great, i mean i never liked gear box after they ruend halo for pc, and i cant believe they released 007 nightfire, that game SUCKED, didnt have anygood code in it at ALL. so what im saying, that there past games havent been the best, they consider them selves to be in id, valve (yes i knw valve sux), and crytek, and bungie but they are not. hmm do u guys trust GB wit this project, or would u rather have another developer?

PresidentSkroob

01-10-2005, 12:16 AM

angel_682

01-10-2005, 03:20 AM

gb doesnt suck , they never made a game fully alone , they just helpt other developers.This game is made by gb and i trust them , this game is gonna own

jd-scrubs

01-10-2005, 04:04 AM

I trust em, well they are the first company to put this much effort into a WWII shooter, and im sure the results will back that up.

Valve do not suck http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif their great, gooo Gabe Newell http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif

Bia_Fan

01-10-2005, 04:39 AM

Dont know how you can say that after seeing all of the videos and screenshots, its more than evident this game is good and that gearbox have done a great job. Its sad that you put them down after all the work they have done to give us such a game.

PresidentSkroob

01-10-2005, 06:48 AM

well shure BG games look good, but theres alwase little bugs. and valve suckes, they riped off nvidia users.

njcl

01-10-2005, 07:02 AM

well if you have played halflifes opposing forces you will know that gearbox can make a excellent squad/solder game,i found the battles with monsters with my AI buddies to be superb and man so very funny,its an excellent game and bodes well for BIA

Colin_Campbell

01-10-2005, 11:42 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by PresidentSkroob:
im not shure if this game will be so great, i mean i never liked gear box after they ruend halo for pc, and i cant believe they released 007 nightfire, that game SUCKED, didnt have anygood code in it at ALL. so what im saying, that there past games havent been the best, they consider them selves to be in id, valve (yes i knw valve sux), and crytek, and bungie but they are not. hmm do u guys trust GB wit this project, or would u rather have another developer? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Wow, what a prediction. They consider themselves to be an iD, crytek or valve? Thats news to me! I mean, hell! I got a Christmas card from them, among other things and never knew about it till they arrived in my mailbox. Odd, for a company thats so cocky and big to worry about the small people. Gearbox is an independantly funded developer with 40-50 full time workers.

I wouldn't rather have any other developer, I think other developers have had their chance to develop realistic shooters, and most if not all of them miserably failed. If we had another developer, BiA would be another Call of Duty or Medal of Honor. You're completely forgetting this is a Gearbox project, not an Ubisoft project. Brothers in Arms is owned, operated, and made by Gearbox. If it was another developer, theres no way Brothers in Arms would be what it is today.

That being said, you're also completely wrong about Gearbox ruining HaloPC. The game got caught up in a quagmire of politics. A lot of people are wrongly placing the blame on Gearbox for HaloPC, when they were subcontracted for the work and had ZERO decision making power in the process. And with Bungie busy ruining Halo's gameplay with Halo2, the game saw very little support in the way of patches. This is not because Gearbox didn't want to help out, they developed HaloCE in their free time and made it a free download. It was completely free (outside of needing HaloPC) and was developed in the developers free time.

Gearbox has been a company caught up in the politics of the gaming industry. They're finally making their own game, they don't need to worry about Microsoft or Bungie not wanting to support this game, no, its up to them this time.

They have no past games, technically. Every one of their games has been a subcontracted development. Brothers in Arms is their first inhouse project they have control over, and I think the quality of developer that Gearbox is shows through with BiA.

If you want to judge solely Gearbox, judge them by how they have and will handle BiA, not how other companies controlled them during the development of other games.

mn9500

01-10-2005, 12:20 PM

Brothers in Arms will make Gearbox one of the best game developers of all time!

TennesseeTitans

01-10-2005, 01:27 PM

Gearbox is one of the most talented and capable companies in the videogame industry.

Goose64

01-10-2005, 01:51 PM

Although this is my first post, I have been watching for some time.

This game is very different to others! Gearbox have obviously spent a lot of mioney on research and accuracy. It must be assumed that the same attenition to detail will be applied throughout the game.

Gearbox have my full confidence and I believe that if the game plays anywhere near there level of communtiy support it will be phenominal.

Thanks,
Goose.

KG2323

01-10-2005, 02:37 PM

gearbox is making this game perfect and they jus came out wit other games to get its name out

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/icon_twisted.gif u r going to buy and like this game

njcl

01-10-2005, 02:48 PM

we seem to have a lot of bia experts here who have already decide its worthy to be thrown into the bin or those who think it will be game of 2005,i myself just hope its a great title and iv read some gameplay reaction from my fav uk pc mag and they seem to like it,anyway lets not speculate but just hope and wait/p.s i dont inc colin in my last paragraph

Colin_Campbell

01-10-2005, 03:49 PM

Its no problem if people think it will suck, or think its going to be G.O.T.Y. The only problem with such a stance, as with any stance, is if they don't back it up properly. The issue with the game now, at least from what I can see, is there are a lot of people hating on the prone and leaning/MP in the game, yet they don't know enough about the dynamics of the game. They want a different SP from Call of Duty, and the same MP. Seems stupid.

Anyway, with the map editor being what it is, you can see why I've been so confident about getting the modding capabilities of BiA. And if they don't like MP, deathmatch is going to be in the game very soon after release, by modders, if not by Gearbox. I really think people need to chill a bit about the multiplayer.

Edit: Notice how I didn't say what map editor it was... duh duh duhhhhhhhh... I'll just try and add to the suspense a little.

PresidentSkroob

01-10-2005, 04:01 PM

well i hope gearbox acually does a good job with this game, i distrust them because of my past experiances wit there games. and also they didnt do halo well at all, its unmoddable, horrable net code, and very bad preformance on the best pcs.

Colin_Campbell

01-10-2005, 04:06 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by PresidentSkroob:
well i hope gearbox acually does a good job with this game, i distrust them because of my past experiances wit there games. and also they didnt do halo well at all, its unmoddable, horrable net code, and very bad preformance on the best pcs. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

It was a game designed for the Xbox architecture, its not an easy thing to port a game from a closed architecture such as the Xbox to an open architecture like the PC, given HaloPC's one year development time.

Gearbox Dev's post about HaloPC Performance (http://gbxforums.gearboxsoftware.com/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=Halo&Number=403603&Forum=f1&Words=&Searchpage=0&Limit=25&Main=403603&Search=true&where=bodysub&Name=10&daterange=1&newerval=1&newertype=y&olderval=&oldertype=&bodyprev=#Post403603)

PresidentSkroob

01-10-2005, 04:09 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by Colin_Campbell:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by PresidentSkroob:
well i hope gearbox acually does a good job with this game, i distrust them because of my past experiances wit there games. and also they didnt do halo well at all, its unmoddable, horrable net code, and very bad preformance on the best pcs. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

It was a game designed for the Xbox architecture, its not an easy thing to port a game from a closed architecture such as the Xbox to an open architecture like the PC, given HaloPC's one year development time.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

well how do explian grand theft auto 3 and vice city for the pc?, san andreas for the pc will be out in june btw.

Colin_Campbell

01-10-2005, 04:10 PM

Much longer development times and much less friction between code. All of the GTA games were coded with a port to the PC in mind *outside of GTAIII). Halo was not.

PresidentSkroob

01-10-2005, 04:17 PM

hmm i gess, but still, the x box is like a computor with a skimed version of a win os, it shouldent be that hard to make a quality port.

njcl

01-10-2005, 04:27 PM

the overated MGS was ported to PC and died the proverbial death

Colin_Campbell

01-11-2005, 12:42 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote">quote:<HR>Originally posted by PresidentSkroob:
hmm i gess, but still, the x box is like a computor with a skimed version of a win os, it shouldent be that hard to make a quality port. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not when you need to totally rewrite the entire shaders system and have to use 100% shaders because of Microsoft politics. Look at the URL I posted, and read it.