blame space
Banned
EmCee that says so much more about you than it says about the non people it creates
Raise the flame shield: Your "controversial" gaming opinion.
- Thread starter Laughing Banana
- Start date
blame space
Banned
well that's certainly an opinion.
EmCeeGramr
Member
i have spoken with these people (and i will readily admit my hyperbole but still)
blame space
Banned
portal 2 was about the co op
whalleywhat
Member
Placeholder voice actor was better.
Haunted
Member
NaughtyCalibur
Member
Skyrim really doesn't deserve GOTY 2011, and I'm a huge Elder Scrolls fan. I'm not going to sit here and say that Oblivion is better, because it's definitely not, but at the time of its release Oblivion was a pretty huge leap fowards from Morrowind in many technical ways that I can understand it getting a lot of praise at the time.
But Skyrim is just not that good. Technical issues aside: the writing is weak, your companion is little more than a meat shield and item mule, the quest lines are surprisingly linear for an open world game, and the choices you make have little weight to them. Good game, but not even close to GOTY. Sorry.
But Skyrim is just not that good. Technical issues aside: the writing is weak, your companion is little more than a meat shield and item mule, the quest lines are surprisingly linear for an open world game, and the choices you make have little weight to them. Good game, but not even close to GOTY. Sorry.
EmCeeGramr
Member
portal 1 is great, but valve have admitted the only reason it's so short and moves you along so fast and barely explores its gameplay ideas is because they had no idea how people would react to the concept, with is also why they packed it in with TF2 and Episode 2. the implication being if they knew it would be a super popular game they would have made it longer and given the player a lot more concepts and maybe a more involved story (like portal 2)
Coalission
Banned
I think the only reason people still like Zelda games is nostalgia, the series doesn't hold up anymore.
Portal 1 took the "hand holding while slowly introducing new concepts" part of a puzzle game, the part that ramps up the player's skill set to participate in complex, satisfying puzzles, and made that the only part of the game.
Thank god that there was a mapping community that picked up the baton and ran with it, and thank god that Valve made Portal into a full fledged game with Portal 2. But Portal 1's single player was, as a puzzle game, disappointing.
Thank god that there was a mapping community that picked up the baton and ran with it, and thank god that Valve made Portal into a full fledged game with Portal 2. But Portal 1's single player was, as a puzzle game, disappointing.
blame space
Banned
portal is not a "puzzle game".
Finaika
Member
This. Treasure is so overated.
The Portal series are puzzle games. By Valve's own words:
By Wikipedia's definition:
And it won or was honored for Best Puzzle Game by IGN, Gamespy, and Gamespot.
Joeshabadoo
Member
As a massive fan of the SSX franchise, Blur is the best of the bunch. The control scheme creates one of the most unforgiving but intensely satisfying learning curves in all of gaming. Carving via nunchuck tilt makes even the slalom events extremely fun, and the platinum medals represent insane levels of challenge. The art style aint bad either.
blame space
Banned
so you've established that "puzzle" is as useful as "shooter" when it comes to a genre description.
Rahxephon91
Banned
If Portal isn't a puzzle game what is it? I'd play it if it wasn't actually a puzzle game.
blame space
Banned
it's a first-person game that rewards you for shooting your gun in the right place at the right time.
I think the technical issues alone should prohibit Skyrim from consideration for all awards.
Game fans really do equate quality with game length. And it's one of the more stupid notions we've held on to.
Except that's a vague description for the game. And if you were to say that as a way to describe the game to someone who never seen it before, they would think you were being obtuse.
whalleywhat
Member
lmao
blame space
Banned
YOU DON'T SAY
EDIT: this is killing me.
THEY.. Who have never played the game.. Would think I was being obtuse!
blame space
Banned
can someone tell me what a "puzzle" game entails?
JaseMath
Member
Puzzles, mazes and other brain teasers?
EmCeeGramr
Member
A game in which central mechanics consist of a situation and goal is presented to you, but the exact means of attaining that goal are obscured, and the player must solve the conundrum by logic, experimentation, and observation. Usually consists of multiple steps.
blame space
Banned
this is almost every game
Lumpy Onion
Member
Hell yeah it is! Ten years from now it will still look fantastic too.
That's not true. There are many games in what the player must do in order to progress is made completely explicit and in which the challenge is entirely in execution.
EmCeeGramr
Member
While typing that I thought of that, but then realized it's not really true.
In COD or many other FPSs, you know exactly what to do: shoot the mans until they don't move no mo'. In an action game (either a fast paced action game or something slower like Zelda), it's similar: kill the bad guys. Platformers: jump on the things and get to the goal. Racing games: go faster than other vroom-vrooms.
When something in a game deviates from that and introduces a logic problem (like in Zelda or Half-Life, for example), we call that situation a "puzzle." If a game consists primarily (or exclusively) of these things, then it makes perfect sense to call it a "puzzle game."
A crude explanation but it's logically sound, I think.
If Portal was some obscure indie game, and someone asked you what it was and you described it by that. They would only know that it's a first person game, with a gun.
harriet the spy
Member
Deus Ex, while being very advanced for its time, is now relatively overrated, especially with regards to its incredibly dumb story.
I like Resident Evil 4, but I slightly preferred RE5 in coop, and still have to read an intelligent argument about why RE4 is so largely superior - they are very similar games imo (switching button roles, 'foreshadowing' bosses, and the 'atmosphere from playing alone' do not count as intelligent arguments).
I am not a big fan of Zeldas after (and including) Ocarina of Time. I can't really explain why.
Killzone 1 was a lot more fun than Killzone 2. Resistance 2 was not bad at all.
I like Resident Evil 4, but I slightly preferred RE5 in coop, and still have to read an intelligent argument about why RE4 is so largely superior - they are very similar games imo (switching button roles, 'foreshadowing' bosses, and the 'atmosphere from playing alone' do not count as intelligent arguments).
I am not a big fan of Zeldas after (and including) Ocarina of Time. I can't really explain why.
Killzone 1 was a lot more fun than Killzone 2. Resistance 2 was not bad at all.
EmCeeGramr
Member
Why not?
harriet the spy
Member
- Button assignment is completely arbitrary and has no bearing on the quality of the game. Sure, it *is* a dumb decision, but it does not make the game intrinsically worse. Someone who would play RE5 before RE4 could be similarly irked at the fact that the buttons are 'reversed' in RE4.
- If foreshadowing bosses is what turns the game of the century into an unbelievable turd, I am not sure what constitutes a great game.
- I guess that generally, I think RE4 is a good game because it has great game mechanics. The atmosphere, while entertaining, made me laugh more than anything, and I have a hard time believing people should pay that much attention to those silly little 'sets'.
I'll give it one thing: it has better level design than RE5. But certainly not to the point of dropping the quality as GAF likes to pretend it did.
EmCeeGramr
Member
RE5 feels really bolted together, and stuff like lack of care surrounding bosses, level design, and atmosphere all work together to bring the entire experience down because it doesn't feel like the same level of craftsmanship was involved (probably due to Mikami's departure).
RE4 feels perfectly balanced, cohesive, filled with imagination and detail, balances tense atmosphere, silly action, and hilarious goofiness with ease, and it feels like that team considered every aspect both individually and as a whole.
No one's "pretending" anything.
RE4 feels perfectly balanced, cohesive, filled with imagination and detail, balances tense atmosphere, silly action, and hilarious goofiness with ease, and it feels like that team considered every aspect both individually and as a whole.
No one's "pretending" anything.
Dead Space, for example. Isaac, go to X and press the action button while standing next to Y and then we'll tell you about Z, but not until then.
And that doesn't even cover games like COD where there's a dot over the head of the guy you're supposed to follow. Nothing really to solve on the player's part.
Leave_Scars
Banned
Well, based on that GOTY thread this view of mine belongs here... Portal 2 wasn't very good at all. It rarely made me laugh, I especially hated Steve Merchant's role in it. All the puzzles were far too easy and while it had a better narrative flow than the first the actual gameplay had no flow what-so-ever, awkwardly broken up by elevators. It doesn't feel like a complete experience to me because to me a complete 50-60 dollar game package doesn't have to do with length it has to do with variety of things done, as in more things than just solving puzzles.
harriet the spy
Member
So basically RE5 'feels wrong' and RE4 'feels right'. Gotcha.
EmCeeGramr
Member
Well other than concrete arguments like inferior level, enemy, and encounter design, gimped single-player, poor atmosphere, terribad story that's meant to be totally serious and requires RE backstory knowledge, dumb inventory system made to compromise with the co-op focused design, and an awful last third, yeah, your inaccurate statement is totally correct.
harriet the spy
Member
You didn't mention half of this in your post, so my statement about your initial post was still correct.
Both games have incredibly bad stories, I am not sure where RE5 is in any worse here.
The only RE I played are RE4 and RE5 (in that order). Both stories were dumb and didn't improve the experience in any way. Mildly inferior level design, i'll give you that. Enemy and encounter design essentially follow the same rulebook. Bar the regenerator, I can't recall any great 'enemy design' RE4 had that RE5 didn't have.
RE4 is also *slightly* more humorous.
Your comments about inferior SP and inventory don't apply to what I said, since I specifically compared the enjoyment to be had in RE5 coop vs RE4 single player. They are not exactly the same thing, but I am comparing the best RE5 has to offer to the best RE4 has to offer.THe inventory system worked perfectly in that regard.
I wouldn't say perfectly.
Unless I'm crazy, isn't it impossible to swap items with your co-op partner in between levels? You know, when you'd want to buy new guns and get rid of something you don't need to make room in your inventory.
At least in single player, you can put any item into storage or another player's inventory by moving it with X (on 360).
Flying_Phoenix
Banned
People actually liked Resident Evil 5?