Support NeoGAF

[Speevy]

IAWTP


I mean hell people, why do you love these games so much? I'll never, ever, understand it. Clunky, sparse, repetitive, boring games. Maybe if they combined Ico, SotC and whatever he's making next into one game, they'd finally have something worth paying money for.

Before someone says "you're just butthurt because he bad mouthed galaxy!11!!" i've been saying this ever since I tried playing those two games about 3-4 months ago.

We don't have to explain anything to you. You're in the tiny, tiny minority.

 

[MvmntInGrn]

Didn't sound like he had no fun with SMG, just saw some missed opportunity.

Its just an opinion, the sun will rise tomorrow people. :lol Personally this didn't strike me when I played through SMG but guess what? Thats ok and I still have plenty of respect for him and his opinion.

 

[legend166]

We don't have to explain anything to you. You're in the tiny, tiny minority.

I know I am, and honestly, it's just the strangest feeling. It's just one of those things I cannot fathom.

 

[Oblivion]

I actually have to admit i hoped Ueda was a little more humble... apparently not; oh well, Miyamoto isn't either, a lot of times.

Miyamoto's actually one of the most humble people in the industry. Given his position and stature, that makes it even more amazing.

 

[Poimandres]

If you're going to criticize SMG- citing a "lack of fun" seems like a poor angle considering most find it thoroughly enjoyable to play...

Also, while Ico and SOC are great games they don't strike me as nearly as "fun" as SMG...

 

[I'm an expert]

I know I am, and honestly, it's just the strangest feeling. It's just one of those things I cannot fathom.

Don't worry it may be a tiny minority here on GAF but I wouldn't be surprised if most people who bought SotC on the OMGZ hype train were disappointed with it afterwards. I'm right there with you.

 

[MvmntInGrn]

If you're going to criticize SMG- citing a "lack of fun" seems like a poor angle considering most find it thoroughly enjoyable to play...

Also, while Ico and SOC are great games they don't strike me as nearly as "fun" as SMG...

*gasp* You have your own tastes!?

Amazing.

 

[Speevy]

I know I am, and honestly, it's just the strangest feeling. It's just one of those things I cannot fathom.

Think of it like this. I love the film The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford. But some people will say that movie is boring, and I understand this.

If you start to think of ICO/SOTC in terms of the emotional/thematic value it might hold for some people, the obvious quality of art and animation, and the grandeur of the production. Or in ICO's case, you might consider the inventiveness of the puzzles. In SOTC's case, consider the uniqueness of what you're doing, if nothing else.

If you can't begrudgingly put yourself in the head-space of someone who enjoys these games, that's okay. But don't rain on others' parades.

 

[yoopoo]

And since SOTC has been called interactive poetry, we've come full circle.

Holy humpty dumpty...this has got to be the cheesiest quote ever about any video game :lol

 

[Salmonax]

Don't worry it may be a tiny minority here on GAF but I wouldn't be surprised if most people who bought SotC on the OMGZ hype train were disappointed with it afterwards. I'm right there with you.

Me too, for what it's worth. We should start a support group.

 

[Zeliard]

Ueda's criticism of his fellow game designers' work is amusing to me, but it's even more amusing when he says he hopes people will come back and play his games far into the future and have fun. Shadow of the Colossus was a clunky piece of brown shit that is forever handicapped by its technological limitations and will not age well.

This is such a myopic view. Its "technological limitations" are only going to become more trivial as time goes on. Those are the sort of things that fade away with time, while the aspects of the game that made it stand out are what will last - the story, the characters, the art, the world. Nobody's going to play this game 20 years from now and think "oh god, the framerate", particularly when so few current console games hold up on the technical end (how many sub-HD, sub-30 FPS games have we had?)

I'd place my bets on games like ICO and Shadow of the Colossus standing the test of time to a much greater degree than most other games.

Ueda's original comments aren't deserving of such a reaction, either. He didn't say that Mario Galaxy isn't a good game - he simply said he doesn't think it was as good as it could have been. What's the problem?

 

[Wizpig]

Miyamoto's actually one of the most humble people in the industry. Given his position and stature, that makes it even more amazing.

Yes, but you know, that Halo statement... and when he criticized DKC back then... oh and don't forget when he criticized F-Zero GX; things like that
He's still awesome.

 

[Speevy]

Here's a thought guys.

Most games have you shooting everything that moves.

ICO/SOTC are weird compared to what you're accustomed to, and not everyone is going to love it.

 

[BobsRevenge]

It's because this guy hasn't made a game that's half as good as Galaxy.

I'm ashamed to share half my name with you. :|

 

[Kandrick]

Here's a thought guys.

Most games have you shooting everything that moves.

ICO/SOTC are weird compared to what you're accustomed to, and not everyone is going to love it.

So people that dont like Ico or Sotc, ( and there are alot ) are just dumb people that only play FPS games ?

 

[Narcosis]

Jesus, this is almost as bad as an Itagaki thread.

Itagaki interviews are fun though because you know he's trying to stir a few pots and people fall for it every time.

 

[Future]

I know I am, and honestly, it's just the strangest feeling. It's just one of those things I cannot fathom.

You're not in the minority. These games are only popular in hardcore circles. And even then, its usually just a loud vocal majority within that circle.

People tend to appreciate how this dude tries to do more with his games than the norm. I appreciate it too. But usually fun mechanics and tight control is what makes games last forever, beyond the initial experience. Uedas games have failed in this regard

 

[MvmntInGrn]

So people that dont like Ico or Sotc, ( and there are alot ) are just dumb people that only play FPS games ?

Talk about reading what you wish was there. :lol Not saying I agree with Speevy but damn. :lol

 

[Speevy]

So people that dont like Ico or Sotc, ( and there are alot ) are just dumb people that only play FPS games ?

I literally just slapped my head, I'll have you know.

No, that's not what I meant. What I meant was SOTC/ICO are a very deliberate departure from the other games on the market.

I mean think of it in terms of most games being about an abundance of everything. More guns, more players, more customization, more action, better presentation.

Ueda's games keep the high production values but scale back everything else to the point where you're just a man against colossus, boy against a castle/puzzles, or against nature.

All I'm trying to say is that ICO/SOTC aren't the games we're accustomed to seeing.

 

[legend166]

Think of it like this. I love the film The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford. But some people will say that movie is boring, and I understand this.

If you start to think of ICO/SOTC in terms of the emotional/thematic value it might hold for some people, the obvious quality of art and animation, and the grandeur of the production. Or in ICO's case, you might consider the inventiveness of the puzzles. In SOTC's case, consider the uniqueness of what you're doing, if nothing else.

If you can't begrudgingly put yourself in the head-space of someone who enjoys these games, that's okay. But don't rain on others' parades.

You see, I can do that for many, many things though. I can't think of any right now (haha) but I completely understand it.

But I just can't do it for those games. Where people see amazing atmosphere and great story telling, I see a boring, sparse world with a story that is so vague and 'open to interpretation' because they couldn't think of anything decent. Where people see innovate gameplay, I see amazingly dud mechanics.

It could very well be that I only played both games this year. I played Ico, and didn't like it. The combat was really frustrating, and I didn't make any connection to the characters or story. I was really disappointed. I had no preconceptions going into these games, so it's not like I wanted to hate them. People told me to play SoTC, because it's much more accessible, whatever. I was really excited for it. I loved the big bosses in TP, SMG, and so on.

But once again, I got a boring, sparse world with such little content. The game wasn't hard, it was just frustrating. I was disappointed with the size of the colossi. I was disapointed with how straight forward it was, despite people saying how it was essentially a puzzle game. Being thrown around whilst trying to hold on was cool for the first couple of bosses, but became incredibly irritating further on. Having to ride between them was just boring. The world wasn't interesting to look out. It was brown and washed out.

Like I said though, it might be that I played these games well after their time. That's perfectly understandable. But people hold them up as some timeless works of art, and I'll just never understand it.

 

[Oblivion]

Yes, but you know, that Halo statement... and when he criticized DKC back then... oh and don't forget when he criticized F-Zero GX; things like that
He's still awesome.

For the Halo thing, I don't think he was trying to boast saying that he could make a game as good, or better, or successful as Halo. For F-zero I think he was just stating his disappointment with its sales (since it did bomb, sadly).

You're right about the DKC thing, though since that was genuinely a dick move.

He did apologize for that later, for the record.

 

[AAK]

I <3 GAF.

 

[Yagharek]

I dont take too much out of it. Both Ueda and Miyamoto have a good reputation for great games (one obviously having a longer reputation). The key here is that Ueda is saying he wasnt that impressed by what I assume is the Megaleg boss. Or perhaps the Toy Time Galaxy robot. I thought they were fun levels, but they werent the focus of the game as were the Collossi. The focus of SMG is pure platforming, which can include expressive jumping in insane levels like the Battlerock Barrage, or Luigi's Purple Coins. The focus of SOTC is wildly different.

I really hope this hasnt gone into a shitfight over which game is better, but I know it probably has done.

I agree with him on GTA4 though.

 

[Poimandres]

*gasp* You have your own tastes!?

Amazing.

What do you expect but people expressing their opinions in a topic like this? Really?

How about we make a poll to see which of the games mentioned in this topic people find the most fun?

 

[~Devil Trigger~]

:lol @ thread anyways

I agree to a degree with Ueda about GTA4, I thought the details of the game were FAR more impressive then the gameplay itself(which IMO was VERY boring)


and I did'nt play enough of Galaxy to comment on it.

 

[Zeliard]

You're not in the minority. These games are only popular in hardcore circles. And even then, its usually just a loud vocal majority within that circle.

People tend to appreciate how this dude tries to do more with his games than the norm. I appreciate it too. But usually fun mechanics and tight control is what makes games last forever, beyond the initial experience. Uedas games have failed in this regard

What do you think makes FFVII more popular, its battle system or Sephiroth and Aeris? The experience beyond the core mechanics of a game is huge to many people. Most, probably.

What will stand the test of time more, the first Assassin's Creed or Shadow of the Colossus? One of those had virtually flawless core gameplay mechanics, after all.

 

[AltogetherAndrews]

These games are only popular in hardcore circles. And even then, its usually just a loud vocal majority within that circle.

Bullshit. These are some of the most talked about games in enthusiast circles; people who really like games, but would never go on, say, message board rave and rant benders about them. I guess that means that real gamers really like them for the games that they are, as opposed to the hyperbole-spitting message board crowd who adore them for every other reason.

So people that dont like Ico or Sotc, ( and there are alot ) are just dumb people that only play FPS games ?

Pretty much. Fucking sickos everywhere.

 

[MvmntInGrn]

What do you expect but people expressing their opinions in a topic like this? Really?

How about we make a poll to see which of the games mentioned in this topic people find the most fun?

Sorry should have read "He has his own tastes" really. More referring to this:

If you're going to criticize SMG- citing a "lack of fun" seems like a poor angle considering most find it thoroughly enjoyable to play...

Poor angle makes no sense here, he has his own tastes and just because the majority likes it (me included) dosen't mean much. Its an opinion, no "poor angle" about it.

 

[Speevy]

You're not in the minority.

UNIVERSAL ACCLAIM, both have been called by countless outlets landmarks in game design.

You want quotes?

 

[Kandrick]

UNIVERSAL ACCLAIM, both have been called by countless outlets landmarks in game design.

You want quotes?

If you only take quotes about the ones that praise it, its easy. I could probably dig some quotes of people saying Too Human was good.

 

[Zeliard]

If you only take quotes about the ones that praise it, its easy. I could probably dig some quotes of people saying Too Human was good.

What do you think the "universal" in "universal acclaim" means?

 

[AltogetherAndrews]

If you only take quotes about the ones that praise it, its easy. I could probably dig some quotes of people saying Too Human was good.

You're so fucking stupid.

 

[Kandrick]

You're so fucking stupid.

Oh personal insults now :lol

Shows your level.

 

[Speevy]

If you only take quotes about the ones that praise it, its easy. I could probably dig some quotes of people saying Too Human was good.

Everyone praised it. They're both rated above 91%. If they were films, that's a best picture nominee. What more do you want?

 

[legend166]

UNIVERSAL ACCLAIM, both have been called by countless outlets landmarks in game design.

You want quotes?

'Universal acclaim' doesn't mean much an industry that is as enclosed as this one. It's literally saying the game got great scores from all those 20-30 year olds who live out in California!

Edit: You talked about films, but it's completely different. Universal critical acclaim in films means it's liked by the 70 year old Jewish guy from Chicago, the 22 year old girl from Germany, and the 44 year old mother from Sydney. Video game critics are such a focused niche, it's hard to use the term 'universal acclaim'. That's a topic for another day, though.

 

[AAK]

You're so fucking stupid.

Thread was entertaining until this.

'Universal acclaim' doesn't mean much an industry that is as enclosed as this one. It's literally saying the game got great scores from all those 20-30 year olds who live out in California!

Sorry but your argument is a double edged sword. If you go by that logic, every game that gets 90%+ doesn't merit that score since they too are reviewed by the same "20-30 year olds who live out in California"!

 

[AltogetherAndrews]

Oh personal insults now :lol

Shows your level.

You've authored two deeply idiotic posts in a row. It's not an insult, it is an observation.

 

[Mr. Wonderful]

OMG HE CRITICIZED SOME POPULAR GAMES WHAT AN ARROGANT PRICK OMG

YES I AGREE. IF A POPULAR GAME IS NOT GIVEN A 10/10 THAT CRITIC HAS LOST ALL INTEGRITY.

 

[Averon]

If anyone ever says GAF is better than GameFaq, point to this thread. Bunch of pathetic console warriors and man-children :lol

 

[Speevy]

You see, I can do that for many, many things though. I can't think of any right now (haha) but I completely understand it.

But I just can't do it for those games. Where people see amazing atmosphere and great story telling, I see a boring, sparse world with a story that is so vague and 'open to interpretation' because they couldn't think of anything decent. Where people see innovate gameplay, I see amazingly dud mechanics.

It could very well be that I only played both games this year. I played Ico, and didn't like it. The combat was really frustrating, and I didn't make any connection to the characters or story. I was really disappointed. I had no preconceptions going into these games, so it's not like I wanted to hate them. People told me to play SoTC, because it's much more accessible, whatever. I was really excited for it. I loved the big bosses in TP, SMG, and so on.

But once again, I got a boring, sparse world with such little content. The game wasn't hard, it was just frustrating. I was disappointed with the size of the colossi. I was disapointed with how straight forward it was, despite people saying how it was essentially a puzzle game. Being thrown around whilst trying to hold on was cool for the first couple of bosses, but became incredibly irritating further on. Having to ride between them was just boring. The world wasn't interesting to look out. It was brown and washed out.

Like I said though, it might be that I played these games well after their time. That's perfectly understandable. But people hold them up as some timeless works of art, and I'll just never understand it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ZZ37BmPzTE (MAJOR SPOILERS)

There it is. If you still don't get it, I can't help you.

 

[MvmntInGrn]

Thread was entertaining until this.

Joke post? Its gets better here.

 

[Zeliard]

'Universal acclaim' doesn't mean much an industry that is as enclosed as this one. It's literally saying the game got great scores from all those 20-30 year olds who live out in California!

What the hell are you talking about? Edge and Eurogamer operate out of California? Games(tm)? IGN AU and UK? Metacritic score pages are always filled with publications that are based out of the U.S.

 

[JoJo13]

If you only take quotes about the ones that praise it, its easy. I could probably dig some quotes of people saying Too Human was good.

:lol

Yeah, SoTC is totally Too Human

 

[Mr. Wonderful]

Bigger picture: How much did Miyamoto actually have to do with Galaxy?

 

[sonicmj1]

If you only take quotes about the ones that praise it, its easy. I could probably dig some quotes of people saying Too Human was good.

Definitely an imperfect example here, but Shadow of the Colossus's lowest review score on Gamerankings was a seven out of ten, and only four of the 96 reviews recorded there scored it below an eight.

In terms of personal experience, nearly everyone I know who has played the game has enjoyed it, with the possible exception of one friend who got stuck on the fourth colossus and never progressed further.

It's fine not to like it, but I'm not sure where you're drawing your conclusion that most people didn't enjoy the game.

 

[Poimandres]

Sorry should have read "He has his own tastes" really. More referring to this:

Poor angle makes no sense here, he has his own tastes and just because the majority likes it (me included) dosen't mean much. Its an opinion, no "poor angle" about it.

Alright, let's play! It is a "poor angle" in my opinion considering SMG is extremelly "fun" in the opinion of most. In this context "poor angle" essentially means "disagreeable perspective" on the matter.

Not that his opinion is invalid or anything.

EDIT: Also... all this universal acclaim talk.... what about GTAIV? Universal acclaim is a measure of the quality of ICO and SotC but not GTAIV?

 

[JoJo13]

Bigger picture: How much did Miyamoto actually have to do with Galaxy?

For whatever reason, I've come to believe he was more involved in Wii Fit/Wii Music moreso than he was Mario or Zelda these days, but I could be wrong.

 

[Calcaneus]

He's allowed to not like games, you know?

Who am I kidding, some of you probably don't.

 

[Mr. Wonderful]

For whatever reason, I've come to believe he was more involved in Wii Fit/Wii Music moreso than he was Mario or Zelda these days, but I could be wrong.

...That's what I think too.

 

[legend166]

Thread was entertaining until this.



Sorry but your argument is a double edged sword. If you go by that logic, every game that gets 90%+ doesn't merit that score since they too are reviewed by the same "20-30 year olds who live out in California"!

Well, I don't give a damn about review scores, but my argument isn't that games do or do not deserve a score, rather that the phrase 'universal acclaim' means nothing when the critics are such a niche.

What the hell are you talking about? Edge and Eurogamer operate out of California? Games(tm)? IGN AU and UK? Metacritic score pages are always filled with publications that are based out of the U.S.

Well, the California part was a bit facetious, but even those publications are mainly written by, and marketed towards, males ages 18-35.

Look, this is a dumb argument. All I was saying is that 'universal acclaim' is a pointless measure of how wide the appreciation for a video game is, considering how narrow the demographics are for video game critics, let alone the amount of group think in that area. I'm not saying that SotC isn't loved amongst the 'hardcore' gamer set, because it clearly is. In fact, that's what baffles me so much