*

Offline Rushy

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 8127
    • View Profile
Re: Now Playing (the Video Game Version)
« Reply #500 on: March 16, 2015, 08:41:56 PM »
The setting is one of the few things that most reviewers apparently liked.

They just feel bad for it and threw it a bone.

*

Offline Ghost Spaghetti

  • *
  • Posts: 908
  • Don't look in that mirror. It's absolutely furious
    • View Profile
Re: Now Playing (the Video Game Version)
« Reply #501 on: March 16, 2015, 09:39:52 PM »
I've recently started playing through the Assassin's Creed series, to see if they're as good as I remember them being.

Are they?

The lustre has faded slightly. I'm noticing more problems that I glossed over the first time around. That isn't to say they're not good games, just not the masterpieces I remember.

Ghost of V

Re: Now Playing (the Video Game Version)
« Reply #502 on: March 16, 2015, 09:52:52 PM »
I've recently started playing through the Assassin's Creed series, to see if they're as good as I remember them being.

Are they?

The lustre has faded slightly. I'm noticing more problems that I glossed over the first time around. That isn't to say they're not good games, just not the masterpieces I remember.

I think the main problem with AC is the controls. I couldn't enjoy the games mostly because of that reason. They're not intuitive and they are hard to get used to. I have heard good things about Assassin's Creed: Black Flag, though. Have you played that one?

*

Offline Ghost Spaghetti

  • *
  • Posts: 908
  • Don't look in that mirror. It's absolutely furious
    • View Profile
Re: Now Playing (the Video Game Version)
« Reply #503 on: March 17, 2015, 07:47:32 AM »
Yeah, the biggest problem with AC4 was the story. Instead of playing as Desmond, you play from the first person perspective as an anonymous office worker in Abstergo's video game department making a game about piracy from the genetic memory of Desmond. The character in the animus is thoroughly unlikeable, too. I don't mind playing as a bad guy (the start of AC3 is brilliant in that regard), but AC4 ties itself up in knots trying to make you out to be good.

The game itself is a lot of fun. Exploring the West Indies as the captain of a pirate ship is reminiscent of Wind Waker in creating the illusion of freedom. I enjoyed it much more when I was simply exploring the world, being a pirate and discovering secrets.

Saddam Hussein

Re: Now Playing (the Video Game Version)
« Reply #504 on: March 18, 2015, 05:56:21 PM »
I've played through Tomb Raider, the 2013 reboot of the series.  It wasn't awful, but it could have been much, much better.  The focus on combat rather than exploration and puzzle-solving feels very out of place for the series, the story is about as generic and predictable as they come, while also being full of plot holes and annoying characters, and the QTEs suck.  Why do games still even have QTEs, anyway?  Nobody likes them, and they're never good.  Well, with the exception of maybe this one:


Ghost of V

Re: Now Playing (the Video Game Version)
« Reply #505 on: March 18, 2015, 05:58:06 PM »
Why do games still even have QTEs, anyway?

I'm guessing you're not a big fan of God of War.

*

Offline Rushy

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 8127
    • View Profile
Re: Now Playing (the Video Game Version)
« Reply #506 on: March 18, 2015, 07:08:15 PM »
I liked the newer Tomb Raider's QTEs because if you failed them you got a pretty gruesome death scene... or if you failed the rapey one you apparently get raped. I remember them getting a lot of shit for that.

Saddam Hussein

Re: Now Playing (the Video Game Version)
« Reply #507 on: March 19, 2015, 02:11:58 AM »
The rapey dude strangles you if you mess up that one.

Ghost of V

Re: Now Playing (the Video Game Version)
« Reply #508 on: March 19, 2015, 02:15:41 AM »
With so much edge I'm surprised this game didn't get more critical acclaim.

*

Offline Rushy

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 8127
    • View Profile
Re: Now Playing (the Video Game Version)
« Reply #509 on: March 19, 2015, 02:19:41 AM »
The rapey dude strangles you if you mess up that one.

I think that was adjusted to be that way later in order to claim it isn't rapey. "See? He was just goin' for a good ol' fashion stranglin'"

*

Offline Particle Person

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 2986
  • born 2 b b&
    • View Profile
Re: Now Playing (the Video Game Version)
« Reply #510 on: March 19, 2015, 02:32:38 AM »
Yeah, originally full penetration was depicted.
Your mom is when your mom and you arent your mom.

*

Offline Rushy

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 8127
    • View Profile
Re: Now Playing (the Video Game Version)
« Reply #511 on: March 19, 2015, 02:40:01 AM »
Yeah, originally full penetration was depicted.

All the more incentive not to fail the quicktime event. But no, I meant I thought the original sort of just cut out with more rapey-ness and then the strangling was added on later.

Yaakov ben Avraham

Re: Now Playing (the Video Game Version)
« Reply #512 on: March 19, 2015, 04:42:31 AM »
Cool. A thread dedicated to VIDEO GAMES! How awesome is that? I'm trying to stay a lot more diplomatic since I got back. Anyway, that's beside the point. I'm what you might call a techno dinosaur. I still play NDS, because I am blind in one eye and can't see N3DS in 3D. I just see double. So I haven't bought the damned thing yet. I want to, and just play in 2D mode, but its too expensive to justify when one and one's wife are just getting by check-to-check.

So recently I traded in some old games and got four new ones. Star Wars, the Force Unleashed I and II, Call of Duty Black Ops, and Warhammer Squad Command. I haven't gotten to the last three yet. I tend to have a bit of OCD-ness about the way I play games, and that means I play one until I beat it, and I play it obsessively.

I really like the first Star Wars game with one exception. It is so EFFING LINEAR! I think there are only two or three points in which you can make a choice what to do or not do. And the game will end one of two ways. Otherwise, it is rollicking good fun. Anyway, have any of you played this game? I have also managed to acquire the cheat codes for it, which are very helpful as well. Let me know what you think of it. I'm curious as to what all of you think about something that is NOT effing religious or political.
« Last Edit: March 19, 2015, 05:05:23 AM by Yaakov ben Avraham »

*

Offline Ghost Spaghetti

  • *
  • Posts: 908
  • Don't look in that mirror. It's absolutely furious
    • View Profile
Re: Now Playing (the Video Game Version)
« Reply #513 on: March 19, 2015, 09:01:02 AM »
Oh good. Yaakov's back. Be still my beating heart...

Yaakov ben Avraham

Re: Now Playing (the Video Game Version)
« Reply #514 on: March 19, 2015, 10:50:19 AM »
Oh good. Yaakov's back. Be still my beating heart...

Hey, Ghost. What's going down?

*

Offline Ghost Spaghetti

  • *
  • Posts: 908
  • Don't look in that mirror. It's absolutely furious
    • View Profile
Re: Now Playing (the Video Game Version)
« Reply #515 on: March 19, 2015, 11:16:36 AM »
Oh good. Yaakov's back. Be still my beating heart...

Hey, Ghost. What's going down?

The quality of posts on this site...

Saddam Hussein

Re: Now Playing (the Video Game Version)
« Reply #516 on: March 21, 2015, 06:20:16 AM »
Now I've played through BioShock Infinite.  It was okay, but I can't say that I agree with the absurd amount of praise it's gotten.  First of all, there's the story - they clearly put a lot of effort into it, and there are some interesting ideas in there, which just makes it all the more frustrating that they screwed up so many of the more basic elements of storytelling.  A lot's been made of the ending, and while there are some people out there who insist that it does totally make sense and here's a lengthy analysis of the lore that proves it, I think the mere fact that the ending was so controversial in the first place is ample evidence that the writers screwed it up.  The game is a self-contained medium, and it should be able to explain itself in a satisfactory matter, not rely on a bunch of people writing essays on the Internet to justify what it portrayed.

I'm quite surprised that no reviewers seem to have taken issue with how incredibly generic Boring Booker DeWitt was.  You'd think that a story that was this praised would have a protagonist who was at least somewhat interesting, but no, they just decided to go with every single cliché they possibly could.  He has a stock design, a stock voice, a stock personality, a stock tragic backstory, stock alcoholism, stock everything.  I honestly thought that there would be something clever that justified this, like an elaborate deconstruction of the typical homogeneous FPS hero or something, but they just played it painfully straight the entire way through (with the obvious exception of the dumb ending).  He is literally every single FPS hero ever.  I don't understand how such clearly ambitious writers could have been so lazy when it came to the hero.

In fact, the only thing that's more uninspired than Booker is the gameplay itself.  This is a run and gun shooter, nothing more.  Pour bullets into every enemy until they're dead.  Move on to the next zone.  Repeat.  That's it.  That's the game.  There's no strategy.  There's no planning.  There's no using your head.  You just make sure you're loaded up on ammo and fill up the bullet sponges that all come blindly charging at you.  The skylines, the vigors, and the tears are cool, but most of the fighting still has to be done with your boring old guns.  It's so strange.  I almost feel like half of the dev team was trying to make this unique, creative adventure game, but the other half were trying to make a Halo clone, and then they mashed all their work together and came up with this.

*

Offline Crudblud

  • *
  • Posts: 1973
  • A Moist Delectable Gentleman
    • View Profile
Re: Now Playing (the Video Game Version)
« Reply #517 on: March 21, 2015, 07:09:29 AM »
Now I've played through BioShock Infinite.  It was okay, but I can't say that I agree with the absurd amount of praise it's gotten.  First of all, there's the story - they clearly put a lot of effort into it, and there are some interesting ideas in there, which just makes it all the more frustrating that they screwed up so many of the more basic elements of storytelling.  A lot's been made of the ending, and while there are some people out there who insist that it does totally make sense and here's a lengthy analysis of the lore that proves it, I think the mere fact that the ending was so controversial in the first place is ample evidence that the writers screwed it up.  The game is a self-contained medium, and it should be able to explain itself in a satisfactory matter, not rely on a bunch of people writing essays on the Internet to justify what it portrayed.

How does its ending being controversial equate to them having screwed it up?

I'm quite surprised that no reviewers seem to have taken issue with how incredibly generic Boring Booker DeWitt was.  You'd think that a story that was this praised would have a protagonist who was at least somewhat interesting, but no, they just decided to go with every single cliché they possibly could.  He has a stock design, a stock voice, a stock personality, a stock tragic backstory, stock alcoholism, stock everything.  I honestly thought that there would be something clever that justified this, like an elaborate deconstruction of the typical homogeneous FPS hero or something, but they just played it painfully straight the entire way through (with the obvious exception of the dumb ending).  He is literally every single FPS hero ever.  I don't understand how such clearly ambitious writers could have been so lazy when it came to the hero.

To me it was pretty obvious that Booker was supposed to be a classic hardboiled type, though obviously more action-oriented than a Sam Spade as necessitated by the nature of the game. He fits the mould, and even shares a few biographical notes with Dashiell Hammett, an alcoholic and former Pinkerton agent.

In fact, the only thing that's more uninspired than Booker is the gameplay itself.  This is a run and gun shooter, nothing more.  Pour bullets into every enemy until they're dead.  Move on to the next zone.  Repeat.  That's it.  That's the game.  There's no strategy.  There's no planning.  There's no using your head.  You just make sure you're loaded up on ammo and fill up the bullet sponges that all come blindly charging at you.  The skylines, the vigors, and the tears are cool, but most of the fighting still has to be done with your boring old guns.  It's so strange.  I almost feel like half of the dev team was trying to make this unique, creative adventure game, but the other half were trying to make a Halo clone, and then they mashed all their work together and came up with this.

I essentially agree with this.

Re: Now Playing (the Video Game Version)
« Reply #518 on: March 21, 2015, 12:04:49 PM »
Ludonarrative dissonance.

*

Offline Rushy

  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 8127
    • View Profile
Re: Now Playing (the Video Game Version)
« Reply #519 on: March 22, 2015, 03:10:15 AM »
I started playing Cities: Skylines as it seemed like a decent game for $30. I'm very impressed with the overall gameplay. Although it is lacking in some details, it feels well polished and runs smoothly. The most interesting thing about the game so far is that the water on the map is dynamic. You can build water uptakes, dams, and sewage outtakes that all dynamically affect the flow and location of the water on the map. You can pump lakes dry to provide more land or dam up rivers to give you more water and electricity. Definitely a very interesting addition to the gameplay. Other than that, it is a fairly generic city builder.

Just have to be sure to save before placing a dam. The game doesn't have a geographic altitude map, so it is guesswork as to where the excess water will end up. I inadvertently turned a town of 11,000 into a lake.
« Last Edit: March 22, 2015, 03:12:40 AM by Irushwithscvs »