Duh
-
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.
Raise the flame shield: Your "controversial" gaming opinion.
- Thread starter Laughing Banana
- Start date
Why do people keep saying DR2 had tank controls? The movement and camera worked like Assassin's Creed or Demon's Souls with a melee weapon or item, and like any other third person shooter with a ranged weapon and the aim/throw button held down. Neither of those qualifies as tank controls. At all.
So your favorite game is... Killzone 2?
Context, as usual, matters in these type of debates. For cases like ME1 and DR1, all that matters (in the context of a X360 v. PS3 debate) is that those game(s) cannot be played on the competing console. Doesn't really matter if said game(s) are exclusive to a console, or not.
But this is just rehashing tired, old ( from 2008 :lol ) debates anyways. Both of those games have superior sequels that should be played over their prequels any day of the week. DR1 is still enjoyable, but I wouldn't even recommend ME1 at this point.
SM64 was great for its time. Heck, I even got all 120 stars back in the day. Loved the game. Loved it. But I believe it's been surpassed a few times now. Mario Galaxy is like SM64 on crack
Is it controversial to not like games in first person perspective? Because that's me. I rarely play games of this type, the exceptions being those which manage to engage me in very unique ways, either through story or gameplay. Metroid Prime and Portal are some notable examples.
I kind of understand the premise of the FP game; like, it's supposed to be more immersive, or something, right? You "become" the character. Part of the problem for me is I never get that link. Rather than feel like a character in the game, I see a disembodied arm, often holding a gun, shooting everything in sight -- in an FPS, at least. Not only do I feel detached from the arm, but the experience. I would never want to actually shoot hordes of enemies in real life, so why would I want to feel a direct mechanical connection to a character doing that in a game? It may not surprise people that I'm not a big fan of shooters in general, but at least in third person shooters that awkward disconnect isn't an issue. Here is a character: he's not me, but I'm directing his actions. I can deal with that.
Recently while playing Portal 2 this issue was exacerbated to some degree. I realized that I am not a person in the game -- merely a point object with a Portal gun. What do I see when I look down? No legs, no feet, just floor. This is not immersive to me; it's quite the opposite, really.
I do wonder if anyone else feels similarly. I'm sure it's not a common sentiment, given the popularity of the first person game today.
I kind of understand the premise of the FP game; like, it's supposed to be more immersive, or something, right? You "become" the character. Part of the problem for me is I never get that link. Rather than feel like a character in the game, I see a disembodied arm, often holding a gun, shooting everything in sight -- in an FPS, at least. Not only do I feel detached from the arm, but the experience. I would never want to actually shoot hordes of enemies in real life, so why would I want to feel a direct mechanical connection to a character doing that in a game? It may not surprise people that I'm not a big fan of shooters in general, but at least in third person shooters that awkward disconnect isn't an issue. Here is a character: he's not me, but I'm directing his actions. I can deal with that.
Recently while playing Portal 2 this issue was exacerbated to some degree. I realized that I am not a person in the game -- merely a point object with a Portal gun. What do I see when I look down? No legs, no feet, just floor. This is not immersive to me; it's quite the opposite, really.
I do wonder if anyone else feels similarly. I'm sure it's not a common sentiment, given the popularity of the first person game today.
joeygreco1985
Member
Ah heres one I forgot to say earlier:
Minecraft is terrible and extremely overrated. I've played it on PC as well as the mobile version, and I never understood the appeal. No fun. Looks atrocious. Boring. I always looked at Minecraft as the game people flock to for "street cred" in the gaming world.
Minecraft is terrible and extremely overrated. I've played it on PC as well as the mobile version, and I never understood the appeal. No fun. Looks atrocious. Boring. I always looked at Minecraft as the game people flock to for "street cred" in the gaming world.
Yeah people build pyramids and 1:1 Star Trek ships in that game for "street cred" sounds credible.
MR BLACKMAGIK
Member
The Call of Duty franchise is ruining gaming.
It is mind blowing how much these games sell year after year. Don't get me wrong I don't hate them but to me it's a rental, a decent game, nothing special. Most shooters now a days feel the need to copy CoD style with perks, ranking, and a 5 hour singleplayer. Not trying to offend anyone, but I just really don't understand the undying love for this game.
It is mind blowing how much these games sell year after year. Don't get me wrong I don't hate them but to me it's a rental, a decent game, nothing special. Most shooters now a days feel the need to copy CoD style with perks, ranking, and a 5 hour singleplayer. Not trying to offend anyone, but I just really don't understand the undying love for this game.
Which other games let me explore procedurally generated 3D worlds? I'd love to play them.
invaderzim69
Member
Luigi's mansion for the gamecube is better than what his brother in the red came out with in the last couple of years.
Luigi needs his own game on the Wii U.
Luigi needs his own game on the Wii U.
Cerebral Assassin
Member
Is this just wishing that Sammy didn't "ruin" Sega, or something else.
Sony showed them that only appealing to gamers wasn't the smartest way to make money(as the GC proved).
The Call of Duty multiplayer array is eminently superb. That's the explanation.
I will personally consider it because I'd rather not remember that... lol
Only people hating on Minecraft are those that don't see the appeal, obviously. It's very taste-oriented, like how I hate beer but love liquor. If you're not the building type (or like looking at that kind of stuff), Minecraft certainly won't appeal to you because it has nothing else to offer.
I would say the bigger problem is rank grinding in games like Call of Duty really hurting FPS games because when you have teammates who only focus on getting the next rank instead of enjoying the game, that can be a problem. Arbitrary, I suppose, but I find it an issue.
This man knows what's up.
BUCKFUSH187
Member
Indie games fucking suck.
TaroYamada
Member
That's eloquent. Really though, you probably have only even played a few if you feel that way.
@ Sony being the worst thing to happen to the gaming industry: MS and Sony entering the console manufacturing scene is in my opinion the worst thing to happen to this industry. I noticed some people were inquiring why that guy said that a few pages back, I've said it earlier in the thread too, but I agree with his position.
That is very rarely the discussion, the more common discussion is exclusives. Games like Mass Effect, or the first Gears of War, or Alan Wake, cannot be counted as exclusives. I think this is basically what the others are attempting to get at.
I was one of the two who inquired, but we didn't get a response. I honestly don't know why would someone consider Sony entering the gaming industry, as one of the worst things to ever happen to it.
I can understand someone disliking their focus, agenda or games, but to see people saying something that strong when they have been offering so many games from so many genres, and when they are basically the only company right now still trying to release as much games as possible, it kinda bums me out.
Right. It comes down to can I play it on just that 1 console or not? And with quite a few 360 games the answer is no. You can't say that about any of Sony's games, they're only on their console.
Not to mention, if it wasn't for Sony or MS, the gaming industry wouldn't have grown to such a monumental size as it has and helped make it such a huge part of our culture. I mean, me not liking someone with the way they took a company in the wrong direction is one thing, but saying MS and Sony are the worst things to happen to the industry is just plain ludicrous.
I shall buy it with with my 401(k) money.
Riposte
Member
What exactly is the advantage procedurally generated worlds have over hand-crafted ones? Because "level design" is kind of a big deal in videogames with levels. Here is my controversial opinion: "Random" world design is inferior, if not outright bad in most cases, and developers who have to resort to it (unsurprisingly this will be "indie" devs) should be criticized for it.
Anyway, Minecraft is indeed a piece of shit, but being able to build your dream clubhouse with friends over the internet is an undeniably awesome concept. It just needs to be used in something that isn't a garbage abortive game. Points for being a sub-culture phenomenon though (that makes it artz, right?)... god bless people making money on YouTube with bandwagoning.
BrLvgThrChmstry
Banned
I applaud this man. Seriously. Minecraft sucks. Other than that... I feel like this generation was a complete bust (with very few exceptions of course).
TaroYamada
Member
Yeah, I've had this discussion with some of my 360 fanboy friends, and they never want to count PC. It's borderline delusional, you don't get to redefine the word 'exclusive' to fit your argument. Period.
Currently, out of the big three, I agree. I think MS seems like they don't care, Nintendo usually comes across as lazy to me in terms of how much content they are bringing, and Sony does seem to try. Still, I think Sony/MS entering is the worst thing to ever happen in the home console industry, it kicked off the "Let's sell consoles at a loss" strategy, which they could only do because they had other revenue streams, things like that made it more difficult for SEGA and Nintendo to compete. In Microsoft's case they charge for online, their build quality is less than reliable to put it politely (some may argue that Sony's included in this too), and Xbox has taken their attention (and the attention of many western developer's) away from Windows which is a superior gaming format for the types of games they are creating. I also believe that one of the many reasons developers are struggling with development costs is Microsoft and Sony have propelled console gaming too quickly from a tech standpoint to a point that most 3rd party developers weren't ready for, killing a massive amount of developers.
On a moral side I also hate how everything, not just in the gaming industry, is being concentrated more and more into bigger and bigger conglomerates, like Google buying out Motorola, or AT&T and T-Mobile (even though it didn't go through), or Comcast and NBC. I don't like it. I like smaller companies that focus on specific industries. That's purely a moral reason for why I dislike Sony and MS in gaming, I've been a Nintendo fanboy in my early years, a Sony fanboy in my later, but going forward I would never purchase a non-Nintendo system. Excluding PCs.
Moral of the story? If I had it my way Sega and Nintendo would be the console manufacturers right now. Microsoft would be making games on PC still, and Sony would be a third party like their days as Psygnosis/Imagesoft. Reality? I don't and never will have it my way.
I don't care about that growth, that growth has largely brought me games I don't care about like COD, Madden, or GTA. I also don't care that gaming has entered the mainstream, I was never offended that people considered it childish or nerdy. Sometimes even I think it's childish, I just don't give a sh!t.
Notch banged Riposte's mom, so don't worry about it.
Flying_Phoenix
Banned
Americans ruined console gaming.
Empyrean Heaven
Member
Alright, here goes.
*sigh*
I honestly don't think Nintendo is going to be a console manufacturer for much longer.
Everything is working against them. Cellphone games are only going to get bigger and bigger, especially with the continued rise of Apple into the tens of billions. Their mindshare is at an all-time low. And while the 3DS is selling well, it took a massive price cut to do so, one where Nintendo isn't even breaking even. And to make matters worse - I'm sorry, I don't care how big of a company you are, and how much resources you have, you don't just shrug off a billion dollar loss. Unless the Wii U is a huge, Wii in December 2006-level hit, I think this time next year, Nintendo's shareholders will have enough, get Iwata canned, and put someone in to make investors happy and change around the business model, shutting down Wii U and 3DS production and moving into game development for the next gen of consoles.
*sigh*
I honestly don't think Nintendo is going to be a console manufacturer for much longer.
Everything is working against them. Cellphone games are only going to get bigger and bigger, especially with the continued rise of Apple into the tens of billions. Their mindshare is at an all-time low. And while the 3DS is selling well, it took a massive price cut to do so, one where Nintendo isn't even breaking even. And to make matters worse - I'm sorry, I don't care how big of a company you are, and how much resources you have, you don't just shrug off a billion dollar loss. Unless the Wii U is a huge, Wii in December 2006-level hit, I think this time next year, Nintendo's shareholders will have enough, get Iwata canned, and put someone in to make investors happy and change around the business model, shutting down Wii U and 3DS production and moving into game development for the next gen of consoles.
Well, with all due respect, no one said you had to play those games. There are plenty of companies out there looking to innovate and create remarkably unique experiences, such as Double Fine and thatgamecompany, and those companies came about because of that growth in the industry. Sure, I don't like it when companies make games that appeal directly and blatantly to the mainstream, but there are options...
TaroYamada
Member
I never said I did play those games or that anyone pressured me to, don't put words in my mouth, I said the growth has not brought me games I care about. As such it hasn't positively effected me as a gamer in my opinion. Furthermore, I entirely disagree that Double Fine exists because of that 'growth'. None of their games have been particular hits and their market is primarily core gamers, not the mainstream market. They tried to change that with Brutal Legend, it failed, they may have succeeded in gaining some mainstream success with the Sesame Street title.
The sales figures haven't really been reported as far as what I've heard, so I don't know. Regardless the majority of their catalog has definitely sold primarily to the core audience.
Well, what I meant is that there studios that do not cater to the mainstream (and thank god for that), not that Double Fine did anything of the sort in a meaningful way, and were lifted up by Sony and Microsoft with those other contracts that let them have an outlet. Granted, I wish there was only a singular platform and its name was Steam, but I digress. lol
You really can't see potential issues in leaving the entire layout of a 3D action game up to algorithms?
holy shit
there are now TWO lakes near where I start
holy shit
I'd like to know the games that were any decent that actually had this problem you speak of. I think it's great depending on the genre. It does wonders for roguelike games like Dungeons of Dredmor, as well as titles like Diablo II and Torchlight. I don't think they have to "resort" to something when it significantly enhances the experience. The only time it would be an issue is if you either had to backtrack or something. Other than that, I find it exhilarating, and find it hard to believe anyone would find it inferior.
TaroYamada
Member
I agree with the Minecraft is a snorefest crowd. My friend loves it, I liked it for 9 hours, I regret ever introducing him to it.
But we all can, by playing the game Minecraft. People seem to love the concept and the game is a critical and commercial miracle.
Scratch that.
AcceptableGhost
Member
There is a big difference between the games you listed and Minecraft. In Roguelikes the levels get progressivley harder with algorithms based around offering harder and more outright dangerous floors. Diablo is similar in that regard but also has some gameplay elements specific to certain floors (in D1 the last area has no doors etc). Torchlight is like Diablo but actually did something kind of smart. The levels are based on tiny little sections of area that are hand crafted that are then stitched together randomly (so the game feels like less of a horrific random jigsaw maze like roguelikes/diablo).
Minecraft is literally just an algorithm that spits out terrain with minimal regard to any sort of game design. Although even in those games listed I would still say that random generation is a negative. I hate the dungeons in D1/D2, instead of feeling "new every time" they feel all the same because they feel the same wherever you are. I don't really like Roguelikes because they are games designed around being hard (which implies skill) but your run will be different everytime. When I put the same amount of effort into two runthroughs and get two completely different results, I am turned off from the game instantly. The object of skill based play is to remove all random elements but roguelikes are the exact opposite.
As far as dungeon crawlers go, randomly generated terrain is bad generally (a vestigial tail left over from roguelikes). Torchlight's method is decent but straight up hand made levels are how it should be done. The replayability does not come from terrain in those games, it comes from basically just collecting stuff. Horrific unmemorable level design does not add to that. So yes basically, randomly generated level design is never a good idea.
Edit: Also in general games that rely a lot on "grinding" (repetitive actions to get in-game power) and games that rely heavily on randomly generated anything are all pretty much "lesser games" to me. Neat time wasters, but not very good games.
perfectnight
Banned
Fighting games are the best thing gaming has to offer.
Q
qizah
Unconfirmed Member
I never liked the PSP and I don't think I'm going to end up liking the Vita. I never, ever will understand the mentality of playing a console on the go portable experience.
I also really don't understand Sony post-PS2 era. I don't understand what they're trying to do, they have no strategy and seem to just be doing what everyone else is doing but do it on an equal or worse scale, without differentiating themselves from the competitors (Microsoft has Live and Kinect, Nintendo had Motion Gaming and strong first party titles, Sony has ... blu-ray?).
I also agree about Sony's first party IP strategy being the worst this gen, because none of their titles sell as well as they should and a lot seem like they just take the best ideas of other games and mash them together to make a generic title.
I probably come off as a Sony hater, but I actually love my PS1 and PS2, I just don't understand that company this gen at all.
I also really don't understand Sony post-PS2 era. I don't understand what they're trying to do, they have no strategy and seem to just be doing what everyone else is doing but do it on an equal or worse scale, without differentiating themselves from the competitors (Microsoft has Live and Kinect, Nintendo had Motion Gaming and strong first party titles, Sony has ... blu-ray?).
I also agree about Sony's first party IP strategy being the worst this gen, because none of their titles sell as well as they should and a lot seem like they just take the best ideas of other games and mash them together to make a generic title.
I probably come off as a Sony hater, but I actually love my PS1 and PS2, I just don't understand that company this gen at all.
AcceptableGhost
Member
Hate to break it to you, but the 3DS is basically just a "console on the go" portable experience as well. There is basically no game on the 3DS I wouldn't rather play on my TV.
TaroYamada
Member
Gran Turismo is one of the highest selling video game franchises ever. Also the most recent figure I saw on Gears of War was the entire series has sold 16-17 million so far, vs. Uncharted's 13 million. That's a difference but stating that Uncharted isn't a mega-ton in the same league is incorrect imho.
Yeah I agree, not a fan of the moving away from a primarily 2D library thing with this gen of handhelds. The focus on 2D differentiated them from consoles.
I personally feel that these companies need to stop trying to pack console experiences into their handhelds. If I wanted to play a big, story-driven game, why would I want to do it on a device with a much smaller screen than my HDTV, and smaller speakers than my home theater set? However, there are certain games that do appeal to me that are on handhelds, such as Mario Kart, Lumines, Monster Hunter, Gravity Daze...
Petrichor said:
If we were talking strictly sales numbers, sure, Nintendo has them all beat. However, if you look at Sony's first party lineup, you have Naughty Dog's Uncharted series, God of War, MLB The Show (huge fan), Gran Turismo, inFamous and Sly Cooper, Killzone, LittleBigPlanet, Demons Souls, Twisted Metal... Sure, it's a matter of perception, but ya gotta give them a little more credit than that!
I see where you're coming from, but in the case of Sony, I don't know what "selling at a loss" has to do with them being the worst thing that ever happened to the industry when they brought great franchises to it. They entered the industry with a great interest in offering as much quality games as possible. They clearly didn't get into it for a quick buck.
Fortunately for them, and for many of us, they offered a pretty cool affordable console with a nice variety of games. Sega had the brand strength to keep up, but they couldn't and I don't think the blame is on anybody, but themselves. Nintendo ended up doing just fine, only that they ended up catering the casual market first and their long time fans second. That could be one of the worst things that has ever happened to the gaming industry, but that's another "tiresome" topic.
Also, Sony and MS have opened the doors for many small creative independent companies that are developing/have developed great games that you would normally only find on PC.
I think catering to the casual market is far worse than Sony and MS joining the consoles gaming industry. That's just me though.
I don't know what you didn't understand about that discussion. It was about two publishers, not platforms. It's completely irrelevant. Mass Effect could be on PS3 and that wouldn't have made any difference to it being published by MS.
It could have been comparing Blizzard and Valve, or Activision and EA, the platform makes no difference to which is the better publisher.
And, no, not all Sony published games are PS3 exclusive.
If Uncharted has sold that many copies, why did Uncharted 2 only sell 500k in October 2009 NPD? Why did Uncharted 3 only sell ~1million last year? (Especially in an industry where the sales of every other major game appear to be severely front-loaded) Those shipped numbers are heavily inflated estimates of overall sellthrough imo, likely because of aggressive bundling on sony's part.
AppleSmack
Banned
I think CoD has some of the best FPS campaigns out there. Not sure if controversial though.
joeygreco1985
Member
What good are procedurally generated 3D worlds when they look like crap and the underlying gameplay bores me to tears?
Riposte
Member
I would prefer one good play than a near infinite amount of bad ones. There are so many good games in the world (some of which complex enough to take a long time to master) and so many good players to compete against I don't see the need for a game to have "infinite replayability". The really good ones happen to be easy to replay nevertheless.
EDIT: I like playing certain games on portables. Mainly SRPGs/small scale tactics games (e.g. Fire Emblem), puzzle games (e.g. Ghost Trick), and adventure games (e.g. 999). I guess I should note I prefer playing on a monitor more than a TV, so screens right up in my face. (I also like what the smaller screen does for sprite graphics. High-res sprites are pretty much out of the question.)