Truant said:
I think you're confusing my opinion about the story, and my bullshit theory as to why the story wasn't presented well enough within the game. You cannot say that my opinion is inacurate. That is a logical fallacy.
For clarification, you're absolutely right. It was your bullshit theory that was inaccurate - and that's what I addressed in my posts. Your opinion is your opinion dude, and if your opinion is that the story/dialog/whatever didn't do it for you, then it just didn't.
Truant said:
Back to the discussion, here are some simple points that I felt could have been done way better.
Characters - While I understand that these are just your basic Gears of War type grunts, they could have been introduced better, and for all intents and purposes; be even more stereotypical for the simple sake of getting more personality into the game. There is a lot of cursing in the game, and it feels incredibly forced.
I can't really speak intelligently of the character design, as I wasn't part of that process.
[QUOTE = Truant]Sev does have his moments of exposition towards the middle and end of the game, but it comes off as really abrupt. I think it would have been smarter to focus exclusively on one type of presentation. As a player, you get confused. One moment, you're Sev, you're in the action. The next moment, you're still Sev, but the game is controlling you. Suddenly, you see Sev being all emotional in front of the camera. I think the benefits of focusing excusively on one style would outweigh the negatives.[/QUOTE]
You might be right there, but then again - maybe that would strip Sev's humanity from him, leaving him literally nothing more than bald, angry Spacemarine.
Truant said:
Motivation - I never really got why the ISA decided to capture Visari instead of just killing him. To prevent Martyrdom? I have no idea. Visari isn't really present in the game as much as I would like. Half-Life 2 and Bioshock are brilliant examples of constantly reminding you of what and why you are after, be that the Citadel, Dr. Breen, or Andrew Ryan.
They had their orders - orders that didn't necessarily make sense to them. Why were they trying to capture Visari? Because those were the orders given by the Vektan council and passed on to them by their Commanding Officer, Colonel Templar. Why did the Council want him alive? Well - why did the US not put a bullet in Hussein in Iraq? A hung criminal inspires fewer jihad than a martyr shot during a battle.
Truant said:
I don't want to spoil anything here, but the biggest problem here is that the game never explains why stuff happens. It just does. Go here, find that, go here, rescue this. I acknowledge that some stuff are better explained than other, but I never got the feeling of natural progression that I get from similar games.
I'd really want to play the final game from end to end before I commented on this, as the Game story wasn't really part of my responsibility, either.
Truant said:
Can you bring some insight into this, and if I'm just plainly not paying attention to what's going on? Did you guys ever think this would be an issue to the average gamer? I mean, my guess would be 'no', but to see the care and love being put into other aspects of the game makes me a little bitter as I love a good narrative experience.
I'm sorry I'm not the font of knowledge on this, I'd really like to sit down and study the thing from end to end, experiencing it as a gamer before I commented in detail. It's safe to say that this was cared about, both by Sony and Guerrilla - certainly part of the reason I was given free rein to work on the Backstory for so long was because they wanted to show that the universe of Killzone had a lot of thought behind it.