-
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.
The Zero Punctuation Thread
- Thread starter Shard
- Start date
jim-jam bongs
Member
Watching it now, but it seems to be a recurring theme in the OT for people who played SR2 to be disappointed in the sequel. I'm glad I played it first, it's a phenomenal game in its own right but it never feels good to see a bunch of stuff you enjoyed from a previous game totally removed in the sequel.
One of the best missions
deckers.die
I don't see what's the problem with the game's pacing, since you can pace it hower you like and are not forced to go through a boring ass part where you can't do shit, everytime you start a new game/character (GTA).
But i agree that activities as missions, was a lazy shot, although they are all at the beginning, pretty much.
I think SR2 did some things better (one of which was the customization) but the production value was far to low for me to enjoy the simple gameplay.
Shooting and driving was so crappy, that no matter what, i couldn't enjoy it as much as Third.
Now, the driving mechanics are not great still (even though better) but the shooting/combat in general is far superior, so a similar mission structure, is automatically superior to actually play, in SR3.
My 2 cents, ofcourse.
I think the biggest drawback of the game, so far, is the stupid ass DLC policy.
SapientWolf
Trucker Sexologist
I read in an interview that some devs went through player data and found that a surprising number of people barely even bother to do the story missions in sandbox games, so giving players a lot of toys at the start was probably a smart move.
I've never ever heard two worse ways to gauge the quality of videogames sheesh. I'm sure you're joking but you never know.
XiaNaphryz
LATIN, MATRIPEDICABUS, DO YOU SPEAK IT
The main thing people are progressing towards in SR3 are the no damage upgrades anyway. At which point it won't matter what weapons you use really. It makes the side activities a ton easier.
Upgrading the weapons isn't cheap either, armor piercing or exploding rounds are definitely worth getting even if you just focus on pistols. Getting the rocket launcher upgraded all the way to get lock-on targeting or putting a grenade launcher on the rifle can be fun as well.
Well, at least you have no qualms with Dina.
No idea, but if he is/they are
a) A group of people showing the game in the worst light possible
or
b) Someone whose whole shtick is to rip games apart and overtly blow up any single flaw it has and totally disregard anything else in the name of satire/parody/entertainment/whatever
then I guess I have qualms with our bro Dina as well.
As if I'm on the same stage as both GB and Yathzee. Too much honor, my dear messageboard friend.
edit: again with the mentioning of little me. whatdidido
jim-jam bongs
Member
I think the premise that wackiness needs to be juxtaposed against some gravity is usually true, but it never bothered me in SR3 because they just keep going bigger and bigger all the way up the end of the game. Also, it's not like they never play it straight; Shaundi is in mourning over Johnny for the entire game, and one of the endings is pretty dark.
There also his bit about the
driving around a tiger
Plus given the two endings the analysis he made only to throw out at the end really might be true.
PetriP-TNT
Member
This review reminded me why I disliked SR2 so much. I just didn't think that slinging shit was that fun after first minute or two.
Professor Genki is also introduced this way. You get a call from Pierce. Except if you did the first Professor Genki before that mission, the game skips it.
I guess that's the alternative explanation then, because I never got that message.
... This probably justifies a barebones replay whenever I attempt with a female character.
Yeah, it depends on the game, definitely. But the post we were talking about said every game of the sort should be like this.
krameriffic
Member
Yahtzee lukewarm towards the sequel to a good game? Man, that has only happened with pretty much every sequel he has reviewed except for Assassins Creed 2.
R_thanatos
Member
It might be good for st row but this should nothappen in others open world games.
SapientWolf
Trucker Sexologist
Assassin's Creed 1 was not a good game.
Nah, it was pretty good. I played the PC version though.
IMO the Assassins Creed games didn't really improve that much, the core is still the same thing, they just added more fluff around it with every game.
Alx
Member
From the beginning I thought that AC was a game with huge potential, but suffering from big flaws. The sequels mainly removed the flaws and revealed the potential. So the core is the same indeed, the developers only managed to make it more enjoyable.
Freeza Under The Shower
Member
Perhaps, but it had class in its story that the sequels then pissed on.
Truth. It also escalated nicely into a great climax, where the subsequent ones have just rushed into unsatisfying cliffhangers.
Also, this SR3 review still makes me mad. The economy scales enough that it goes from crazy to batshit crazy along a solid arc. It's not as binary as Yahtzee makes it seem.
More like they added better fluff. The first game had plenty of padding, but it only came in 3 varieties (or 6 for PC). Whoever thought of repeating virtually identical quest sets over and over and over again two dozen times should have been fired. Any developer with an actual budget has no excuse for that kind of laziness. At least following AC games were not mindnumbingly repetitive, and they vastly improved the game design even if they were mechanically similar.
I will agree that it had the best story in the series so far, though.
And on that topic, Yahtzee reviews Assassin's Creed Revelations.
Ether_Snake
å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®
I can't watch the video because the fucking WoW advertising fucks everything up and the video won't load.
Zomba13
Member
!!!Massive Brotherhood end Spoiler in there!!
Pretty much spot on with AC:R though. Still a good game though.
Correct. It was a great game.
Lostconfused
Member
No.
The core of the game is not at all the same. Assassin's Creed 1 is a linear objective based game. All the sequels are sandbox games. So whatever potential that was revealed in 2 was not there in 1 in the first place. The essence of the game is not the same, and whether it's more or less enjoyable is not really comparable because both games are entertaining for entirely different reasons.
If you like mindless repetition!
Alx
Member
What I call "the core of the game" is the game mechanics : running around on the roofs of different cities, climbing, fighting guards, hiding or running away from them, murdering people by silently stabbing them... Those are the base of the gameplay since the first episode, and didn't change much.
What changed from episode 1 to sequels, and turned it into a sandbox, was giving more variety of purposes to those acts. Missions, guilds, things to do with your money, ... but you're still pushing the same buttons to trigger the same kind of moves.
D
Deleted member 10571
Unconfirmed Member
Yup. I actually liked it way more than the following episodes.
Lostconfused
Member
The Technomancer
card-carrying scientician
Oh god...this is going to hurt...
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/zero-punctuation/5148-The-Legend-of-Zelda-Skyward-Sword
EDIT: Yup, knew it, looks like he got the timing of the combat wrong and wrote it up to inaccuracy. I knew that was going to bite Nintendo in the ass
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/zero-punctuation/5148-The-Legend-of-Zelda-Skyward-Sword
EDIT: Yup, knew it, looks like he got the timing of the combat wrong and wrote it up to inaccuracy. I knew that was going to bite Nintendo in the ass
HiddenAway
Member
Any major spoilers in the review? I'd love to see it but haven't started on the game yet...
Well that review was pretty fun and most of his criticism are fair (seriously fuck that water dragon lady!). But Phantom Hourglass and Spirit Track were worse than this for me.
The img seems to imply he thinks Okami is a better Zelda game than the Zelda games, so his opinion is invalidated for me, as I think Okami is a pretty mediocre zelda
The img seems to imply he thinks Okami is a better Zelda game than the Zelda games, so his opinion is invalidated for me, as I think Okami is a pretty mediocre zelda
Criminal Upper
Banned
Jesus Christ. Yahtzee has never given motion control any sort of fair chance. Why did I expect any different with one of the few games that makes a solid case for them?
smh
smh
Exterminieren
Banned
Some legitimate-ish points in there, but, as is normal for Yahtzee, they're overstressed. And, of course, the motion controls could have been the finest, most intuitive controls ever crafted for a game (they aren't, but whatever), Yahtzee would have still disliked them.
He's a funny, acerbic guy, and I have a certain amount of respect for his opinions, but it can never be claimed that Yahtzee is a fair critic of games.
He's a funny, acerbic guy, and I have a certain amount of respect for his opinions, but it can never be claimed that Yahtzee is a fair critic of games.
Kai Dracon
Writing a dinosaur space opera symphony
Guy I know who met Yahtzee at a press event a few years ago said Yahtzee basically admitted that he's 100% bullshit and just a character whose opinions are crafted to create comedic controversy. He made the guy sound kind of nihilistic though, as if he doesn't really like most games one way or the other, and wouldn't actually be a good judge/reviewer for a straight review.
In other words, Yahtzee would be the perfect hip, detached, jerk for a generation of hip, detached jerks on the internet - perfect fit! (Note: I'm not saying he's unfunny.)
Exterminieren
Banned
I'd argue he's a far better comedian than a game reviewer- the phony Duke Nukem Forever review proves that. I mean, I watch ZP every week, but I wouldn't even consider taking his opinions on gaming into account for a purchase.
He models himself on Charlie Brooker, but I feel that he misses the obvious love for the medium that Brooker has which makes his rants all the more potent.
He models himself on Charlie Brooker, but I feel that he misses the obvious love for the medium that Brooker has which makes his rants all the more potent.
elrechazado
Banned
Are you honestly telling me you've not ever read this thread?
IrrelevantNotch
Banned
Oh fanboys, your tears are delicious