Results 1 to 20 of 42
20-12-2011, 11:56 PM #1
Say Something Good About Games You Don't Care For
Touted by folks as devolution of the genre due to catering to console monkeys' tastes. Personally, I thought it was a average game that became wildly popular primarily because it was sold to people who didn't have experience with FPSs except crappy ports from the PC that don't really work with controllers.
It's an FPS that played well on consoles. The slower pace, the weapon balance, everything was cleverly designed made the genre viable for millions of players. If the entire point of gaming is "fun" and "entertainment," Halo is a smashing success, and the product of several innovative elements in order to port not just the game but the game type across mediums. Likewise, the best part of Goldeneye wasn't the balance (it wasn't) but the fact that if you're sitting on a couch with three friends, you can screw each other over with glee.
In that stead, what they accomplished is a feat, considering how entire genres simply don't translate. RTSs or, worse, their wargame grandfathers? Pah! G'luck with that. Hell, fighting games! There've always been a few fighting games on the PC, but of all the AAA games I purchased, I regret most of all Street Fighter 4. Why? Oh, plenty of reasons: It's not really meant to be played on a keyboard, its combo scheme is more arcane than most physics textbooks, but most of all, it didn't come packaged with a smelly Chinese teenager waiting for you to put your quarter in. Likewise, you can imagine how Super Smash Bros just isn't right for the PC.
Now, there's still the argument that it made all subsequent FPSs cater to an audience that isn't us PC fanatics, but I don't see it that way. I see games that are console FPSs and games that are PC FPSs, and while the line blurs sometimes, I haven't really lost anything.
Modern Warfare, you could say, was a console FPS in that it held your hand every step of the way, had tiny multiplayer maps and "screw your friends" style win streaks. But I liked Modern Warfare. I didn't like MW2 and onwards, but I didn't buy them and, despite that, I've never really been at a loss for FPSs in the meanwhile. By contrast, I don't see how any console player could get into BF3: The maps are huge, the vehicles require specific playstyles and counters, and the gameplay, while still frenetic, is simply of a different pace than the pick-up-and-play deathmatches in MW3.
Meanwhile, there's still UT3 and, soon, Tribes! Serious Sam and Hard Reset. The world continues ever onward.
21-12-2011, 12:24 AM #2
Far cry 2 - its got lovely sunsets, and the idea of driving a car in them is nice. also sometimes, sometimes you can see the brilliance of it. i think its one of those games that gives you to much freedom. Yes a game can give you to much freedom. you see the human brain can't deal with that level of freedom, it wants rules that bind it, otherwise it will limit yourself by doing the same thing over and over again. it wasn't the game that was repetitive and boring. it was your human nature seeing a tactic that worked and doing the same thing over and over again. far cry 2 is not for humans, its for people who have evolved and can go through every mission in a different way. It is the first game that is made by and for a higher being, and we should strive for it!
21-12-2011, 12:27 AM #3
Sins of a Solar Empire - It's damn pretty. I mean seriously, it's a lot of fun to just WATCH that game, and it runs remarkably well (and looks remarkably good) even on aging hardware.
21-12-2011, 12:28 AM #4
I have a hard enough time saying something good about games I do care for.
Republic the Revolution had a very pretty city, even though it was entirely unused?
21-12-2011, 12:34 AM #5
21-12-2011, 12:37 AM #6
Duke Nukem Forever wasn't really that bad, and it wasn't that far away from how Duke acted in Duke Nukem 3D. Duke was already filled with cringe-worthy humour but it was used sparingly due to tech limitations at the time. Of course given a larger scope it was going to get worse... and if you'd been following the Duke games since then it was easy to see how DNF was going to be utterly tasteless. It did have significant flaws but the universal condemnation seemed to be more "It's DNF, it took ages to come out, therefore everything must instantly be shit about this game."
The Witcher at least remembered how long RPGs are supposed to be. Which is about as much praise as I can bring myself to find.
Also, the games by Tale of Tales... okay, now I'm just trolling, sorry.
21-12-2011, 01:01 AM #7
- Join Date
- Jun 2011
I'm actually with Nalano: Despite it cementing some unfortunate design trends that haven't quite worked on the PC side of the genre, the original Halo is actually a really bloody good game. I enjoyed it immensely when it first came out and for a ten year old game it still stands up very well. I don't know how much I'd enjoy it on a PC, but on the big black Box of Exes, it was a jolly fun time.
On topic: Battlefield 3 has an incredible engine behind it and I desperately want to see this new version of Frostbite put to further use. Preferably a use involving Mirrors and Edges and the number 2. It's astonishingly good looking. The sound designers at DICE are a seriously talented bunch- the vwip of a near-miss in one of the demo videos was something that properly amazed me. If it wasn't for the too-linear, enforced-pacing single player campaign I'd honestly be all over that shit.
Last edited by Icarus; 21-12-2011 at 01:05 AM.
21-12-2011, 01:05 AM #8
21-12-2011, 02:33 AM #9
Pro Evolution Soccer xxxx - this is actually a really solid game with gorgeous graphics, a very interesting physics engine and tons and tons of attributes and stats. Indeed, these foot-to-ball games of running and shooting (balls (of steel)) may just be considered to be fighting games with RPG-statistics.
I also have the budding feeling that soccer-games of any kind and shape are doing the same things for gaming that the porn-industry did for the internet. ... Wait, is this still positive?
21-12-2011, 02:37 AM #10
- Join Date
- Jun 2011
World of Warcraft:
You know, I actually quite want to like it. I've given it a couple of tries, but the bland, weightless combat and the unfocused class design has sent me back to City of Heroes and Lord of the Rings Online respectively.
However, it's clearly a wonderful, astonishing achievement, and I can see why one might give it a very great deal of your time. It's beautiful. I like its clean, colourful aesthetic. I love the way the terrain rolls and ungulates. I love the mossy elven forests with the huge trees, and the lakes, and the barren shorelines. Every place drips atmosphere.
There's so much to do, as well. Heaps of quests, some of which can be pretty neat. Dungeons. Pleasantly compulsive gathering and crafting. Exploring. Even just hanging out and chatting, or watching the crazy, bright, colourful world pass by.
I never understand why people can be so down on WoW. I don't want to play it, but I remain in awe of what Blizzard have created.
21-12-2011, 03:03 AM #11
It's difficult to express properly, but the games socio-economic design causes players to form quick and very long lasting relationships. The tenuous nature of your units makes every conflict compelling, and as a result major wars between large groups are all the more dramatic. I've stated many times previously, Eve is often more fascinating to read about then to actually play. The complex economic and military strategies, political subterfuge, and teeth cutting close battles make for superb story telling. The almost vertical learning curve and sheer complexity of game play has personally turned me off of it - nonetheless I think the gaming industry needs Eve, and is better for its presence.All times I have enjoyed greatly, have suffered greatly, both with those that loved me, and alone.
21-12-2011, 04:31 AM #12
Death from Above was a nice change of pace in CoD4.
21-12-2011, 08:54 AM #13
- Join Date
- Aug 2011
22-12-2011, 10:35 AM #14
Crysis has a lot of polygons being thrown around which is great for the quantity over quality people. At least a lot of them are green and blue which makes a change for the grey state of affairs of other lesser first person-shooters.
22-12-2011, 10:59 AM #15
Morrowind had a rather captivating looking world.
22-12-2011, 11:07 AM #16
- Join Date
- Dec 2011
World in Conflict looked pretty enough, had some kickass cutscenes (the ekranoplan assault on Norway is pure awesomeness) and even played nearly decent in single player. Too bad normal gameplay was just flinging hordes of tanks forward.
22-12-2011, 11:16 AM #17Crysis has a lot of polygons being thrown around which is great for the quantity over quality people. At least a lot of them are green and blue which makes a change for the grey state of affairs of other lesser first person-shooters.
Why do people keep saying this, there is an actually really good openish type FPS behind those pretty graphics.
22-12-2011, 11:21 AM #18
It might but I'll never know because I just can't be bothered to care enough to play it.
22-12-2011, 11:57 AM #19
I may not particularly care for Skyrim and all the unfunny jokes it spawned, but it's nice to see that open world games which don't hold your hand at every possible turn can still be popular.
22-12-2011, 12:21 PM #20
I am the Milk Man. My milk is delicious.