(no subject)

[symbioidlj]

I call bullshit on this

Nintendo, I can see being first, and Blizzard should be in the top 3, indeed.

But... While Call of Duty may be great games (I have to admit, I've never played them, but I'm very interested in CoD4), the fact is, Infinity Ward, so far, is a one trick pony. Maybe they pull that trick off very well. And, well, I suppose it's not fair to say variety is important, then that implies that small devs who don't have resources can't compete on greatness. But Blizzard has a (generally) proven track record for a variety of game types. Platform, racers, RTS, MMORPG, Action-RPG. Now, have they floundered on some of those? Sure... Diablo 2, while certainly innovative above Diablo, had a weak ending, but the talent tree system lives on in WoW (I don't recall if the original Diablo had a tree, I don't think it did).

They dropped the ball on Warcraft adventures and Ghost, but otherwise, I think they did alright. Sorry Inifinity Ward, I don't think you deserve to be there.

Comments

[vesicular.livejournal.com]

Neversoft doesn't deserve to be even mentioned in that list at all.

[vesicular.livejournal.com]

Also, I think Intelligent Systems and Treasure should be on that list, but they're rather small companies.

[pope-guilty.livejournal.com]

The Call of Duty games elevate Infinity Ward over a legendary publisher whose every release is an instant classic, the publisher that doesn't so much own as dominate the MMORPG market, a publisher so respected and loved that they can delay their games for ages while they polish them to a mirror shine?

Yeah, I don't buy it.