Please go out of business THQ

#61BabaBzaaPosted 12/3/2012 9:52:09 PM
THQ Man. Punching someone into submission has never been so satisfying before or since.
---
Super Saiyan Cyber Ninja Pikachu Holding a Death Note.
#62R1KM4NPosted 12/3/2012 10:27:53 PM
I don't wish THQ would go under, but I sure would like a different developer/publisher in charge of WWE games. I don't think they could get worse. So if anything we will get the same or maybe something better.

Won't know unless someone gets the opportunity.
---
Sent from my iPhone via PowerFAQs 1.10
#63Minion3Posted 12/3/2012 10:32:24 PM
From: R1KM4N | Posted: 12/4/2012 12:27:53 AM | #062
I don't think they could get worse.


I'm more worried about a new WWE game that is likeTNA Impact or that Lucha Libre game...
---
Beings that are born of dreams must return to them...
The power of Lavos can make hopes and dreams come true.
#64Omega_PyroPosted 12/3/2012 10:57:25 PM
I only have to say this. If you're truely disappointeed in the games then don't buy them. If enough people stop buying them, the company will see this. They can then change it without people losing their jobs.

You said you could wait.

People losing their jobs has nothing to do with having major changes to a game.

Money = Control. They make money, they make the samething. They lose money, they try something new.
---
"My plans are always practical! It's the laws of physics that get in the way of my success." - Red Mage
#65lowuwPosted 12/3/2012 11:13:36 PM
I think wwe 13 is a great game and can't wait to see what Thq has planned for wwe 14.
#66kayoticdreamzPosted 12/4/2012 12:24:05 AM
Double_Arm_DDT posted...
TC got owned pretty hard.


no TC is dead on actually

MikeH7186 posted...
It's very simple, as I've stated numerous times. When a company fails to meet standards, it deserves to go out of business. Lives are ruined, families suffer. This is a daily occurrence that perhaps I am desensitized to, but it is a part of business and life. You seem to think that I hope for their families to suffer, be malnourished, homeless, etc. No, that is not the case. However I do not feel bad for the inevitable heartache and suffering they are bound to incur as a result of poor business. Anyone working for THQ should be aware for quite some time now that their job is in trouble at best. It's not like their failure is a sudden realization. It's been ongoing for years. It was expected. And it will happen.


THIS

Slayer_22 posted...
kayoticdreamz posted...
Slayer_22 posted...
MikeH7186 posted...



I can accept that, Everyone can. But to wish it upon someone is pretty ****ed up no matter how much you want or don't want something. There's a HUGE difference between accepting that lives are ruined, and wishing that lives are ruined. You're on the wishing side,.

so you prefer the people that make muskets stay in business rather than they be replaced by the machine gun makers is basically what you are saying

congrats you fail at business 101 and logic 101 and capitalism 101


You're so cool. I said I can accept it just fine. I don't wish for ANYONE to lose their jobs, though.


apparently you cant if you dont wish bad companies to go under and as a result their employees to get fired you dont accept bad companies going under a bad company dieing is a very very good thing

see as ive stated previously people get to hung up on the OMG people are going to get fired aspect and completely ignore there is usually a damn good reason a company goes bankrupt because society currently mostly has this nobody should be allowed to fail mentality which is a terrible terrible approach to life
#67VegaGF1012Posted 12/4/2012 1:09:05 AM
Tunnel vision. Thats what most people who disagree with the OP suffer from. With the WWE games being the only recent ( Day of Reckoning was from 2005) wrestling game released most "defenders" of the WWE games can't draw innovative ideas or picture wrestling games to be anything else then the crap we are getting now. When only having the WWE games to compare stuff with it can actually be said the series is improving.

But does that mean that this is the best wrestling game that can be made today? Not in a long shot . And most people will not get to this conclusion on there own, seeing is there IS no other wrestling game to give them the insentive on how a wrestling game can be made different. Wich is the definition of having a monopoly.

To many WWE 13 feels like a good game. If you put on your "Tunnel vision" then i guess it is. But im looking around. Also to other games, other genre and the progress they have made. In new game mechanics or just the importance of the online components and i look at WWE games and over the past 6 years WWE games have been on the "NEXT Gen console" ( wich it doesnt look like btw) it feels the series is standing still compared to all the innovations going on everywhere else.

You people are satisfied with the fact that a game that has been on the next gen console for 6 years ONLY since WWE 12 is fully utilizing it ? Smackdown vs Raw all the way up to 2011 was released on the Ps2 aswell. To me that explains allot on why the game has only made minimal changes up till WWE 12, where they introduced the predator technology.

THQ/Yukes had there changes,and yeah they are impoving. But its atleast 4 years to late, and they should feel the consequences of it.
#68CrusnikCainPosted 12/4/2012 1:17:21 AM
I couldn't careless ether way
---
Gamer Tag : CrusnikCain
#69paullondon1985Posted 12/4/2012 1:39:37 AM
VegaGF1012 posted...
Tunnel vision. Thats what most people who disagree with the OP suffer from. With the WWE games being the only recent ( Day of Reckoning was from 2005) wrestling game released most "defenders" of the WWE games can't draw innovative ideas or picture wrestling games to be anything else then the crap we are getting now. When only having the WWE games to compare stuff with it can actually be said the series is improving.

But does that mean that this is the best wrestling game that can be made today? Not in a long shot . And most people will not get to this conclusion on there own, seeing is there IS no other wrestling game to give them the insentive on how a wrestling game can be made different. Wich is the definition of having a monopoly.

To many WWE 13 feels like a good game. If you put on your "Tunnel vision" then i guess it is. But im looking around. Also to other games, other genre and the progress they have made. In new game mechanics or just the importance of the online components and i look at WWE games and over the past 6 years WWE games have been on the "NEXT Gen console" ( wich it doesnt look like btw) it feels the series is standing still compared to all the innovations going on everywhere else.

You people are satisfied with the fact that a game that has been on the next gen console for 6 years ONLY since WWE 12 is fully utilizing it ? Smackdown vs Raw all the way up to 2011 was released on the Ps2 aswell. To me that explains allot on why the game has only made minimal changes up till WWE 12, where they introduced the predator technology.

THQ/Yukes had there changes,and yeah they are impoving. But its atleast 4 years to late, and they should feel the consequences of it.


Very well done on making your self sound like a fool. People are not saying that the game is as good as it could be, far from it. People are defending the staff from THQ saying that we do not desire every one to lose their jobs like the topic creator stated he does with the title "Please go out of business THQ".

And to touch on another point, THQ do not have a monopoly on the Professional Wrestling gaming market. They have not forcible taken over the market, they were selected by the WWE to Publish their video games. Just because TNA has yet to have had a credible game released is not THQs fault.

monopoly
mo·nop·o·ly
noun, plural mo·nop·o·lies.
1. exclusive control of a commodity or service in a particular market, or a control that makes possible the manipulation of prices. Compare duopoly, oligopoly.
2. an exclusive privilege to carry on a business, traffic, or service, granted by a government.
3. the exclusive possession or control of something.
4. something that is the subject of such control, as a commodity or service.
5. a company or group that has such control.

THQ have none of the above. Any other Publisher/Devloper have the opputunity to produce a Wrestling game and have, Rumble Roses, AAA, TNA, Fire Pro and so on.
---
Not changing this sig till Daniel Puder comes back. (started 04/07/05)
#70IntrepidTykePosted 12/4/2012 2:10:37 AM
They do have somewhat a monopoly since they have the WWE license. That's like saying EA doesn't have a monopoly with NFL games. I'm not sure that you understand the definition of monopoly now.

Regardless, THQ has terrible practices which I'm glad is leading them to their demise. Charging for on-disc content, online access, etc. Capcom is worse, but at least they can create quality products.
More topics from this board...
First Match-WWE Universebaclibra2419/2 3:30PM