-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
I know this thread hasn't been tried before. Take your pick: Wanda or Zelda?
- Thread starter Speevy
- Start date
Ninja Scooter
Member
i will love them both equally, but secretly prefer one and never admit to it (kinda like how my parents treated me and my brothers)
cubicle47b
Member
If I had to make a choice at this point I'd choose Zelda. The formula may be stale but the dungeon designs and combat are always solid and that's what truly matters.
Wanda is a complete unknown at this point. It looks unbelievably cool, sure, but none of us have played it to know whether it is a compelling gameplay experience or not. I'm a little wary after ICO (a good puzzle game with amazing art that I couldn't replay because of the annoying combat).
Wanda is a complete unknown at this point. It looks unbelievably cool, sure, but none of us have played it to know whether it is a compelling gameplay experience or not. I'm a little wary after ICO (a good puzzle game with amazing art that I couldn't replay because of the annoying combat).
Mike Works
Member
I dunno, I'd have to see Wanda's face first. Zelda's got the figure, but I kind of like the rugged spirit that Wanda seems to exhibit. Really hot.
Speevy said:
The thing is, you have already admitted that you have little experience outside the realm of Nintendo. That is the problem with arguments of this type...
I was once involved in an argument regarding Metal Gear Solid 2 with the poster known as cybamerc. It wasn't until we had already gone back and forth a few times before it was revealed that he had NEVER ACTUALLY SEEN the game before, let alone played it. The entire argument essentially required that one had actually played the game prior to the discussion, yet he attempted to insult things that he could not possibly have known.
This happens all too often these days. How can one make a convincing case for something without experience? I appreciate that you were straight up about the fact that the only non-Nintendo system you have ever owned was XBOX, though, but that doesn't change the fact that you are attempting to critique something you have yet to experience for yourself.
How can you say this?
While the world is certainly smaller, ICO's castle is more cohesive than most games around these days. It is not simply a collection of individual "sets". Had you actually played the game prior to this discussion, you would never have made such a silly point and would have likely moved in a different direction with your argument.
The thing is, you may not agree with my posts, but I will never ever talk about something I lack experience in. I own and have played through the various Zelda games (favorites being Zelda 3, Link's Awakening, and the two Capcom GBC titles). I do not believe it is right to truly critique something if you have not actually had experience with it.
If two people were involved in an argument regarding a work of literature and only one of the two had actually read the book in question, who would you say has more credibility in this case?
Why is it that you always attempt to generalize unless specifically proven otherwise? This I do not understand. You have attempted to make assumptions about my tastes time and again based solely on minimal information provided. That statement is not true at all.
Your tone also seems to imply that I do not like Zelda games. I really do like them (why else would I continue to play through each one?). I simply do not understand what it is that has made them so incredibly popular...
I just don't appreciate it when somebody fires off a negative comment at something they have yet to try (and is available FOR them to try). Without experience, you make it seem as if this topic was truly created with an agenda. I can't say one way or the other, but it certainly comes off in that way...
dark10x said:
You're right. I have not played ICO. But from numerous discussions, I gather that ICO is a unique game, an "anti-Zelda" if you will in which you travel from area to area with interesting and dynamic story-driven gameplay. If that's a bad thing to assume from what I know of the game, then I'm sorry. The same is true regarding my generalization of you. I think you're an experienced gamer obviously, much moreso than myself, and I value your input. But your input is not the only one I value, which is why I am baffled that you can't see what has made Zelda so incredibly popular. If you've played them, I can't make it any clearer for you. I can only ask you to look at the evidence, the developer, the acclaim, the sales, the whole mystique behind it all. Such things are true of ICO as well, though less so in the realm of sales.
Simply put, I have a profound respect for reputation. Zelda has that. Team ICO has started to build that. I will say that if both games are only as good as their trailers indicate, Wanda is probably better. But trailers rarely tell the whole story. I apologize for presuming too much about ICO, but I just think it looks like a great game. And part of that great game is a castle-based PoP: SoT-like (which I've played) exploration into new rooms with new challenges. (though I'm guessing ICO's challenges aren't around kiilling hordes of undead things
)Anyway, I don't even have a PS2. If I did, you better believe I would have played ICO already. I might just buy one down the road for games like this. I'm just not into the GTA/MGS/FF fare, which is why I have the other two systems instead.
Speevy said:You're right. I have not played ICO. But from numerous discussions, I gather that ICO is a unique game, an "anti-Zelda" if you will in which you travel from area to area with interesting and dynamic story-driven gameplay. If that's a bad thing to assume from what I know of the game, then I'm sorry. The same is true regarding my generalization of you. I think you're an experienced gamer obviously, much moreso than myself, and I value your input. But your input is not the only one I value, which is why I am baffled that you can't see what has made Zelda so incredibly popular. If you've played them, I can't make it any clearer for you. I can only ask you to look at the evidence, the developer, the acclaim, the sales, the whole mystique behind it all. Such things are true of ICO as well, though less so in the realm of sales.
Simply put, I have a profound respect for reputation. Zelda has that. Team ICO has started to build that. I will say that if both games are only as good as their trailers indicate, Wanda is probably better. But trailers rarely tell the whole story. I apologize for presuming too much about ICO, but I just think it looks like a great game. And part of that great game is a castle-based PoP: SoT-like (which I've played) exploration into new rooms with new challenges. (though I'm guessing ICO's challenges aren't around kiilling hordes of undead things
Anyway, I don't even have a PS2. If I did, you better believe I would have played ICO already. I might just buy one down the road for games like this. I'm just not into the GTA/MGS/FF fare, which is why I have the other two systems instead.
ICO, suprisingly enough, is not particularly story driven. There is very little in the way of plot, but what is there is very special. The game is almost entirely focused on gameplay...
Well, I suppose I was a bit unclear with the statement regarding its popularity...
I DO understand why the games are popular from a gameplay standpoint (though, oddly enough, the best Zelda games in my opinion...excluding Zelda 3...seem to be the least popular), but what I do not understand is why the characters and world of Zelda have become so treasured. There is nothing particularly special about them, outside of their association with a great game series, yet people are always going on at length about the wonders of "Link". I have about as much devotion to Link as I do for the L-shaped Tetris block.
I DO feel that some people have unfairly ignored other high quality games made up of similar gameplay, however. Have you heard of "Alundra"? The reason I have pushed this game before is that I felt that it was built nearly as well as the best Zelda adventures (and was much more challenging to boot) yet recieved virtually no attention.
I guess this is starting to touch on the reason why I often seem rather negative on all issues "Nintendo". As you might have guessed, I play many Nintendo games and do often enjoy them. My problem is that I often feel that the truly diehard Nintendo fans become so caught up in the whole Nintendo mythos that they regularly overlook and underappreciate other high quality games in favor of Nintendo's offerings. I just feel that, in many situations, Nintendo fans will speak poorly of other games due to lack of experience and an unwillingness to really try something that isn't Nintendo.
One thing that does bother me about your post, however, is that you have made another seemingly incorrect judgment...
While it may not seem so, the PS2 offers more unique and original content than you could ever imagine. One of the reasons I have become of fan of the system is that, on the surface it appears to offer only a selection of hyped mega-titles (many of which are quite good) but if you look under the hood, you'll find an incredibly high number of underappreciated, niche games.
BTW, I must give props to olimario here...
At one time, I fully believed that he was a Nintendo fan who was simply unwilling to give anything "non-Nintendo" a chance. However, as you might have noticed, he has played and loved ICO (among other titles). While he may remain primarily a fan of Nintendo, I am happy to see that he has given other systems and games a fair chance. I am really not against any particularly company, but I am against those who refuse to broaden their horizons while simultaneously insulting that which they have no experience in. I simply have a hard time accepting an opinion based on nothing...
MaddenNFL64
Member
Just heard of this Wanda game, so i'll go with Zelda since I know what that is .
.I think I've broadened my horizons over the course of this generation, though my case involves the Xbox and games like Star Wars KOTOR, Halo, and Morrowind. And I do indeed realize that the PS2 has gotten better in its selection of titles. The reason some people may not look "under the hood" is a general shift from Eastern to Western games, which will probably continue in the future. But I think the PS2 is a great platform as far as software goes, though I believe Sony does little to promote the true gems and depends on the casual gamers to sell the system. (perhaps some of the reason why this same group may have now shifted to the Xbox in favor of the inevitable mega-hit Halo 2)
The PS2 just has so many games that you really have to know what you're looking for to find such "gems". Research helps too.
The PS2 just has so many games that you really have to know what you're looking for to find such "gems". Research helps too.
Date of Lies
Banned
dark10x said:I DO understand why the games are popular from a gameplay standpoint (though, oddly enough, the best Zelda games in my opinion...excluding Zelda 3...seem to be the least popular), but what I do not understand is why the characters and world of Zelda have become so treasured. There is nothing particularly special about them, outside of their association with a great game series, yet people are always going on at length about the wonders of "Link". I have about as much devotion to Link as I do for the L-shaped Tetris block.
That is way too subjectif for me to even begin to argue over. Let me put it this way: what is so special about ICO? The story of a young boy that rescues a girl? Where have I heard that before? But you said it yourself, the story wasn't a big part in ICO and therefor, that wasn't what made the game "special" (in your logic). I would say that the predominant theme in both games are similar (boy saves girl), while the setting is vastly different, you might prefer one setting, but that doesn't make it better.
If you are comparing gameplay, the one thing they have in comon is puzzles, since there's no exploration or solid fighting* in ICO. So are you saying that ICO has better puzzles than the whole Zelda series? The Zelda series that despite it's many episodes, still brings new and interesting puzzles to the table to keep even gamers that played every Zelda game since the first interested? With what right do you say that there is nothing special about the Zelda series but there is in ICO? Because Nintendo made more games in the series? I'm sorry, but I think the difference between every Zelda game is obvious enough for me not to have to tell you that there is very fresh artistic input in each one of them. Even the much hated Wind Waker *gasp* pushed things in a new direction, both estheticaly and gameplay-wise. Even the Ocarina of Time and Majora's Mask that use the same damn engine are different enough for people to tell you they hated one but loved the other. It's more than "LINK HAS A NU ITAM!!!" and you'd be blind not to admit it.
I personally am not talking about the fans of the games, but the games themselves. And yes, I've played Alundra on top of ICO and it doesn't have some things that I like about Zelda, but it has other things that make it very interesting, including a nice story and solid art style, but I would never label it a "Zelda Killer" because, not only is that retarded but when I play the game I didn't get flashes of "OMG, this owns (is better than) Zelda, Nintendo fans are so stupid for not playing this," I saw it as a different game that had more incommon with Secret of Mana than with Zelda (in my opinion), I thought of it more linear than Zelda games with less room for exploration. The puzzles were vastly different than the puzzles in Zelda games, in fact, some of them were more like riddles, extremely annoying ones, that halted my progression all throught the game. Zelda's puzzles usually offer a more logical evolution and don't force you into things that are drastically different than what you've seen before (in the game), they are more "friendly." In Zelda games, you usually face the problem of "I KNOW the answer is in this room, starring me straight in the eyes" (ICO is like this too), but in Alundra you're like "OK, Where the hell do I even start?" This is why I am amazed by the fact that Nintendo can pump out new, innovative and simple (in execution) puzzles with every new Zelda.
Don't get me wrong, I loved both ICO and Alundra (god knows how long I spent looking for the sequel) but to say that they have something special and Zelda does not (anymore)?
*: In my opinion, ICO had "fighting" but it wasn't the same type of fighting Zelda series has, although I really liked what it had to offer (chasing away the monsters and so on), but it was more about "protecting" and not "defeating", which is very interesting in it's on regard, but can't be compared to the fighting in Zelda, in general. However, the fighting that did occur between ICO and the last boss I found to be less engaging and interesting than just about any boss fight in any Zelda game.
I take it you haven't played Majora's Mask?dark10x said:I DO understand why the games are popular from a gameplay standpoint (though, oddly enough, the best Zelda games in my opinion...excluding Zelda 3...seem to be the least popular), but what I do not understand is why the characters and world of Zelda have become so treasured. There is nothing particularly special about them, outside of their association with a great game series, yet people are always going on at length about the wonders of "Link". I have about as much devotion to Link as I do for the L-shaped Tetris block.
No attention in the mainstream sure, but Alundra's pretty loved in gaming circles. Not quite as good as it's spiritual predecessor but a bit better than it's spiritual successor, neither of which get nearly as much attention as it does.dark10x said:
firex said:
I think Link should have a kind of rubix cube and he has to slide it so that a picture forms and every side represents a different world! When he has all the worlds, the cube pops open and a mushroom will fall out. WHen he eats the mushroom he enters the dark psychedelic world of his mind and has six more worlds to explore!
The Legend of Zelda: riddle of the rubix
The Legend of Zelda: cube of worlds
The Legend of Zelda: cubed
I am going to buy and enjoy both.
To hell with sales/reviews/fanboys!! Why does everything have to be a competition? Who gives a damn if a game scores 7.5/8.5/9.5? Is a score going to tell you what you should play and enjoy? Is a game that sells a million copies better than a game that sells 100,000 copies?
I know that it's too much to ask that the fanboyism dies off, because it's a natural extension of the "system wars" dating as far back as the Genesis/Snes era. Instead of bashing a system that isn't particularly liked, we all need to accept that there are many different tastes out there, and not everyone conforms to the standard.
I really would like to see a one-platform industry to match the dvd/cd industry. Buy whichever brandname player you want but have access to all the games available. The games would probably end up being cheaper, and the quality of the games as the developers challenge each other would be much higher.
To hell with sales/reviews/fanboys!! Why does everything have to be a competition? Who gives a damn if a game scores 7.5/8.5/9.5? Is a score going to tell you what you should play and enjoy? Is a game that sells a million copies better than a game that sells 100,000 copies?
I know that it's too much to ask that the fanboyism dies off, because it's a natural extension of the "system wars" dating as far back as the Genesis/Snes era. Instead of bashing a system that isn't particularly liked, we all need to accept that there are many different tastes out there, and not everyone conforms to the standard.
I really would like to see a one-platform industry to match the dvd/cd industry. Buy whichever brandname player you want but have access to all the games available. The games would probably end up being cheaper, and the quality of the games as the developers challenge each other would be much higher.
kitchenmotors
Banned
I happen to think that the Zelda formula and Ico have a lot in common. Both provide an experience and adventure like no other in a very minimalist sort of way. I personally can't wait to play both of them.
I think the assumption that Nintendo fans don't give niche and under rated games on other systems a chance is a rather low blow. I happen to think that most Nintendo fans (myself included) are drawn towards these types of games.
I'm rather offended that someone's bias can decide what is art and what is not. This is the reason why the music industry puts shit on a platter and gives it a Grammy. Fuck that and fuck the people who think this. I love ICO and always use it as an example to show off a video game that I feel shines in beauty, but I feel Wind Waker can be used in the same way. Art can be subtle and beautiful and it can be complex and distinct. Just because someone doesn't like something or doesn't feel it's good enough doesn't mean it's not art.
Keep up the fight, Dark10x! I'm sure your quota for the day is filled!
I think the assumption that Nintendo fans don't give niche and under rated games on other systems a chance is a rather low blow. I happen to think that most Nintendo fans (myself included) are drawn towards these types of games.
I'm rather offended that someone's bias can decide what is art and what is not. This is the reason why the music industry puts shit on a platter and gives it a Grammy. Fuck that and fuck the people who think this. I love ICO and always use it as an example to show off a video game that I feel shines in beauty, but I feel Wind Waker can be used in the same way. Art can be subtle and beautiful and it can be complex and distinct. Just because someone doesn't like something or doesn't feel it's good enough doesn't mean it's not art.
Keep up the fight, Dark10x! I'm sure your quota for the day is filled!
shpankey
not an idiot
i think both will of course be absolutely amazing, but if I was forced to pick, I'd go with Wanda, only because Ico just left me with emotions I have never ever felt when playing a video game (nor anything else in life actually). it was an experience that the English language does not aptly allow me to describe... so I will stop trying.
Wanda
Wanda
SantaC
Member
jarrod said:That Nintendo fans are bad?
No slight against Dark, he's one of the better posters around here but there's a pretty clear pattern as well...
I seriously think that the GC, PS2 and Xbox fanbase in this forum are all about equal, so don't get some of the anti-nintendo claims. As a Nintendo fan, I do ENJOY games on other platforms as well.
Bluemercury
Member
dark10x said:
So you're saying that you're betting on Wanda because of what ICO gave you from a game experience viewpoint, so it means that you know what to expect from Wanda, am i right?So if this game was, lets say ICO2 would your arguments for putting Zelda in 2nd would also apply?i mean Wanda might just end being ICO2 with a different name, and after reading your comments regarding the Zelda series it seems that you also have not played all of them, ICO was a fine game, no doubt about it and yes i have finished in 7/8 hours i think. But it simply cant compete with the 2 N64 games, specially where it counts Gameplay, sure ICO might be a very emotion based game, but i pay my 40/45$(in this case) to be entertained for quite some time, because 7 hours is a very small amount of time to pay 40, for example Majora's mask is a game where you really see time passing by, i have sured lost quite some time with this game, and you're not gonna tell me that this game is the type of game you know what to expect, the three day system is really different from anything out there and its a hard game, which guarantee's gameplay and an extensive experience. ICO is very good but it relies more on the visual and artistic points than gameplay, i actually ended up doing much more different things in any Zelda than in ICO......
Brofist
Member
I've read them Speevy ol pal, this topic still sucks and I'll tell you why.
You haven't played ICO, and have no intention of playing Wanda, this lowers the integrity of this topic. ...then you try to mask that fact by calling for legitimate discussion....which you can't even contribute to because of your lack of knowledge on ICO and lack of interest in either ICO or Wanda. So what you did here is set up a free for all.
Going so far as asking which will sell more only furthers the point that this topic was meant for baiting people. Like that shit isn't obvious.
Wanda is newer on the radar than Zelda...and there is a lot of new press on it at TGS. Don't worry though. Zelda will sell in the millions..probably get a nice average mid 9s score on most websites/magazine reviews, and the world will be right once again for all the lil Nintendo fanboys.
You haven't played ICO, and have no intention of playing Wanda, this lowers the integrity of this topic. ...then you try to mask that fact by calling for legitimate discussion....which you can't even contribute to because of your lack of knowledge on ICO and lack of interest in either ICO or Wanda. So what you did here is set up a free for all.
Going so far as asking which will sell more only furthers the point that this topic was meant for baiting people. Like that shit isn't obvious.
Wanda is newer on the radar than Zelda...and there is a lot of new press on it at TGS. Don't worry though. Zelda will sell in the millions..probably get a nice average mid 9s score on most websites/magazine reviews, and the world will be right once again for all the lil Nintendo fanboys.
Bluemercury said:
First of all, I'm rather bothered that so many people are taking my posts so personally here. I should not have expected it, but they really were intended solely for ol' Speev here. Perhaps a PM would have been better? :\
Let me get this one straight...
My anticipation for a game is generally based on the experience I might have had with a previous title from a specific team. Completely original titles from teams I am not familiar with are different, though, and I approach them differently...but in most cases, the history of a development team plays a big role in my level of anticipation. Ninja Gaiden, for example, is my current GOTY (though that could very well change). Prior to release, however, I had virtually no interest in the game. DOA2 was a massive disappointment for me and I honestly had no interest in DOA3 or XBV. Team Ninja meant nothing to me and I held that against them...
However, the final product ended up being truly amazing. As a result, I now find myself very interested in other non-DOA Team Ninja titles. ICO was a great experience for me and one of my favorite titles to come down the pipeline this generation. It was also a complete suprise. As a result, I am now very interested in anything the team might create.
----------------
The only Zelda game that I truly have not played much of at all is Zelda II for the NES (as well as those awful CDI ripoffs). Majora's Mask is something I did forget, though. THAT was very unique and special and seemed to cater to a different crowd than those who loved OoT (as almost EVERY Zelda fan I personally know really didn't care for Majora's Mask). Perhaps I am wrong, but this new Zelda does not appear to be heading in a direction such as that.
Zelda 3, Link's Awakening, the two Oracle games, and Majora's Mask are the best games in the series IMO. Minish Cap actually looks fantastic as well and I find myself far more interested in it than in the newer GC Zelda.
Ocarina of Time was a solid game, but there were points in the game where I honestly was having no fun (Jabu Jabu's belly, for instance, was just an AWFUL dungeon). Wind Waker was pretty good, I suppose, but there was far too much in the way of filler content.
In general, though, it just seemed like most Zelda games have been following a rather standard formula. You always expect a series of dungeons with puzzles and a boss, some type of unique overworld, and very similar gameplay. Of course, this is always executed very well...so it remains enjoyable.
Oh well, I'd rather not continue on with any additional details. I will simply say that enjoy playing Zelda games, but there is something about them that just doesn't click with me.
I think part of it has to do with past experience, as dark10x says. For me, I've been a Nintendo fan for... 16 years running. Link's Awakening was my first Zelda game, it's my favorite 2D Zelda, and I think it's one of the best crafted games of all time. I was 8 when I played and beat it, so it left a huge impression on me. When I learned that the series was going to be made in 3D, the first game since LA, I eagerly awaited the title. Finally Ocarina of Time was released and I became a huge fan of the series in general, went back to catch up with previous installments I missed, and was there for any future installments.
When ICO came along, I heard so many good things about it. I decided to give it a rental when my sister and I bought the PS2. After about 2-3 hours, we got bored of the title and sent it back to the store. A couple months ago, I bought the game again, since my sister was semi-interested, and it was $10 new. Still, I cannot get into the game. After reading how it is some religious experience for people, I cannot understand this feeling.
If I had picked it up without expecting much at the store, I'm sure I might've enjoyed it much, much more. By the time I was able to play ICO, it felt like all the fun and wonder had been sucked out of it by everyone who had discovered it first (which is why discovering it in Pikmin 2 without reading anyone's impressions on what I had particularly found made that game so much more enjoyable).
When I see ICO, and I see Wanda, both games look gorgeous. I love their style. However, whenever I see a Zelda game, I feel so much more- that I'll be able to relive some of my childhood, to capture the same feelings I had when I first played Link's Awakening or Ocarina of Time.
Not to say it's impossible any will be better (like Superman 64 vs. Super Mario Bros., different genres, but one is just BETTER than the other), but in this case it boils down to personal preference. I'd like to think both are equals, but I'll be looking more forward to The Legend of Zelda always.
When ICO came along, I heard so many good things about it. I decided to give it a rental when my sister and I bought the PS2. After about 2-3 hours, we got bored of the title and sent it back to the store. A couple months ago, I bought the game again, since my sister was semi-interested, and it was $10 new. Still, I cannot get into the game. After reading how it is some religious experience for people, I cannot understand this feeling.
If I had picked it up without expecting much at the store, I'm sure I might've enjoyed it much, much more. By the time I was able to play ICO, it felt like all the fun and wonder had been sucked out of it by everyone who had discovered it first (which is why discovering it in Pikmin 2 without reading anyone's impressions on what I had particularly found made that game so much more enjoyable).
When I see ICO, and I see Wanda, both games look gorgeous. I love their style. However, whenever I see a Zelda game, I feel so much more- that I'll be able to relive some of my childhood, to capture the same feelings I had when I first played Link's Awakening or Ocarina of Time.
Not to say it's impossible any will be better (like Superman 64 vs. Super Mario Bros., different genres, but one is just BETTER than the other), but in this case it boils down to personal preference. I'd like to think both are equals, but I'll be looking more forward to The Legend of Zelda always.
Funnily enough, I have the same experiences as AniHawk except my first Zelda game was A Link to the Past and I could literally not drop it, probably the very few of games that I can safely say are among my favourites.
I've tried and tried to get into ICO but I just can't.. of course having no knowledge of it's "greatness" might have helped but so far it just isn't working for me. I did a whole media block on FF9 years ago, finally got around to playing it and enjoying it immensely which is strange since it seems to be even below FF8's standards on some fans' opinions.
However I will say that as jaw-dropping as the dynamics and size ratio of Wanda looks, I am more anticipating the new Zelda because essentially I know it will play good no matter what. Of course I'll buy both, no question about it.. just at this current moment in time where basically only a few short trailers and pics stand between them and essentially not much info on both titles, it's a little hard to really define which you'd rather play without succumbing to the fanboyism that be.
I've tried and tried to get into ICO but I just can't.. of course having no knowledge of it's "greatness" might have helped but so far it just isn't working for me. I did a whole media block on FF9 years ago, finally got around to playing it and enjoying it immensely which is strange since it seems to be even below FF8's standards on some fans' opinions.
However I will say that as jaw-dropping as the dynamics and size ratio of Wanda looks, I am more anticipating the new Zelda because essentially I know it will play good no matter what. Of course I'll buy both, no question about it.. just at this current moment in time where basically only a few short trailers and pics stand between them and essentially not much info on both titles, it's a little hard to really define which you'd rather play without succumbing to the fanboyism that be.
