More_Badass
Member
What makes you think it's not genuine?
-
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.
Tom Chick's (Quarter to Three) Top 10 Lists for 2016
- Thread starter sonicmj1
- Start date
Lactose_Intolerant
Member
Civ VI is decent if you use mods but you can't really grade a game based on the community fixing the game.
This is for multiplayer, the ai is useless in this game except for barbarians. They don't care about losing units unlike the civs. This makes them not useless.
This is for multiplayer, the ai is useless in this game except for barbarians. They don't care about losing units unlike the civs. This makes them not useless.
StereoVsn
Member
I thought Civ VI was very well received? Or is this the case for SP being alright but MO sucking?
Conkerkid11
Member
Yikes, those are some terrible lists.
I've not played civ vi so can't speak about it nor have I read any reviews. But it's very typical for big name strategy games to wow the generalist enthusiast press while falling very flat with those who focus primarily on strategy games. The two groups are looking for very different things.
Messofanego
Banned
I should finish Quadrilateral Cowboy, but it didn't grab me so much when I first played it. I've played a couple hours of Oxenfree, and so far really loving the conversation/interrupt system, writing, radio, mystery, and voice acting.
Bronetta
Ask me about the moon landing or the temperature at which jet fuel burns. You may be surprised at what you learn.
Youre damn well right Blizzard does things better than anyone else.
They didnt invent RTS but became the kings of it
They didnt invent ARPGs but became the kings of it (with Diablo 2 that is)
They didnt invent MMOs but became the kings of it
They didnt invent card games but became the kings of it
They didnt invent hero shooters but became the kings of it
Blizzard stays slaying.
They didnt invent RTS but became the kings of it
They didnt invent ARPGs but became the kings of it (with Diablo 2 that is)
They didnt invent MMOs but became the kings of it
They didnt invent card games but became the kings of it
They didnt invent hero shooters but became the kings of it
Blizzard stays slaying.
decoyplatypus
Member
Ah. I should admit I am an infrequent Quarter to Three reader (only check in when a big strategy game comes out), so I was unaware of his relationship with Stardock and actually don't know how he plays it on the site.
Civ 6 did well with press and early adopters for several reasons. First, and perhaps most obviously, it's still a Civ game, so underneath all the controversial points it's got a super--addictive design that appeals to a broad sweep of players. Second, unlike Civ 5, it did not remove a bunch of popular features from the previous game. Third, the big new features--unpacked cities, splitting the tech tree, policy cards--either work or at least don't obviously ruin the game. So it was pretty well set up for a positive initial reception. Negative opinions were more likely to emerge once everyone had played a half-dozen games and really developed a feel for what systems were broken and how much it affected their enjoyment game-to-game.* But I don't think the consensus now is against the game or anything like that. People mostly seem pleased, hopeful that DLC will address big, systemic issues as it has with previous Civs.
And there were always going to be grumblers like Tom (and I) who hated a lot of Civ 5's mechanics and resent Civ 6 for retaining too many of them.
Coriolanus
Banned
out of curiosity, when did that happen?
Basileus777
Member
1998 with StarCraft.
Coriolanus
Banned
was considered a very good rts at the time, and nothing more. Do keep in mind that myth II: soulblighter came out in that very same year.
fwiw, you'd have a better argument with brood war. And even then, compared to what bungie was putting out... blizz was simply not up to the task.
Now, if the argument were "which made the most dosh"? sure. blizz. no question about it.
i mean, i feel that when people say that blizz did great at RTS's, it is with that image that "oh, it was mad popular in korea, so it mustve been big here too" and.. it wasn't. Partially because, back then, the RTS scene was absurdly competitive Like, seriously.. You have Total Annihilation the year before, AoEII the year after. Homeworld shortly after that. Dune 2000, Tiberian Sun, Battlezone, all around that same period. There was never a period where one could point to blizzard's game and say "that there is the best god damn rts out there". Certainly not in the same way one could with D2. Starcraft's boom was quite delayed.
Heck, i'd readily say that wc3 is a better product.
fwiw, you'd have a better argument with brood war. And even then, compared to what bungie was putting out... blizz was simply not up to the task.
Now, if the argument were "which made the most dosh"? sure. blizz. no question about it.
i mean, i feel that when people say that blizz did great at RTS's, it is with that image that "oh, it was mad popular in korea, so it mustve been big here too" and.. it wasn't. Partially because, back then, the RTS scene was absurdly competitive Like, seriously.. You have Total Annihilation the year before, AoEII the year after. Homeworld shortly after that. Dune 2000, Tiberian Sun, Battlezone, all around that same period. There was never a period where one could point to blizzard's game and say "that there is the best god damn rts out there". Certainly not in the same way one could with D2. Starcraft's boom was quite delayed.
Heck, i'd readily say that wc3 is a better product.
Lord of Ostia
Member
Love his comments about No Man's Sky and Odin Sphere. Don't agree with all his choices, but it sure is an interesting set of lists.
You're kidding me with this.
I noticed you tiptoed around MOBAs lol.
dragonfart28
Banned
I was laughing until I saw Civ 6, then I was like
Out of those games the only one that maintain its popularity as well is AoE II.
Homefront the revolution on most surprising LMAO
Edit:
Also that Overwatch and CIV VI Burn
Also steep as most surprising hahahaha
Please, it's most unsurprisingly terrible and not the SSX we all wanted
Coriolanus
Banned
evidently. And?
To speed up the argument: if your argument is that starcraft is king because it is popular, that would be a logical fallacy.
Id rather go by how much it impacted the industry it was a part of. Wow reshaped how mmos were made for years and years. Hearthstone provided a new model of CCG gaming. Diablo defined expectations for what a collectathon ARPG should be. Starcraft... had no such impact.
Yeah, sorry but no.
Starcraft was, from release, the strongest RTS there was. Sure, other games had their fans, but starcraft was so clearly ahead of the curve in so many, many ways.
1) It had an honest to go decent storyline, with varied missions and a cast people cared about.
2) Three totally asymmetrical races. Can't understate how big a thing that was at the time.
3) Easily the best online framework for games with battlenet.
Starcraft, and then Brood War, were undeniably the best RTs games made during the RTS heyday. I know that pisses a lot of people off, but the games durability, insane fanbase, massive steps forward for the genre and the fact it basically gave birth to modern esports are all huge things other games never offered.
Coriolanus
Banned
1. Command and Conquer, Dune II
2. Dune II (which came out in 92, mind). The idea that three-way asymmetry was something new in an rts in 98 is... interesting, i'll give you that.
3. Battle.net in 98 was many things, but the best online framework was not one of them.
Also, what steps forward?. What mechanics did it introduce that were widely adopted and emulated? (and by the gods, i hope you arent thinking of the zerg creep)
seriously, the clearest evidence that SC wasn't like the other blizzard hits is the fact that it wasn't massively copied. Every other blizzard hit certainly was. Starcraft wasn't. The groundwork was Dune 2, and it remained Dune 2.
His opinion about Stellaris is a bit harsh... that said, I agree that it's the most bland Paradox game right now.
They are pretty casual. They are both entry-level games within their genres. Europa Universalis IV, Crusader Kings 2, Hearts of Iron, Endless Legend, Age of Wonders, etc. are all more complex and less 'casual' than Civ and Stellaris.
They are pretty casual. They are both entry-level games within their genres. Europa Universalis IV, Crusader Kings 2, Hearts of Iron, Endless Legend, Age of Wonders, etc. are all more complex and less 'casual' than Civ and Stellaris.
Basileus777
Member
Why would that be a logical fallacy? This entire argument started with the claim that Blizzard didn't invent the RTS genre but became the king of it anyway. It's about Blizzard as refiners who made the games that reached the heights of popularity rather than about innovation.
LucidMomentum
Member
Just Another M M O
Coriolanus
Banned
because that's what appeals to popularity are.
If your argument is that they refined the genre, please explain how. What were the improvements they introduced that were widely adopted? The mere fact that it (eventually) acquired a vast fanbase does not support that premisse.
That they made a very popular (or even *the* most popular) rts isn't being contested. What is being contested is that it had the same sort of impact in the industry as their other titles.
Like most comedy this was about 30% funny to me, so, some laughs to be had in there. Not bad Tom!
Think some of these zingers just needed a little less text and a little more subtlety and the jokes would have landed better, just comes off across a little "my first funny list" in places; in others he sticks the landing real good. Maybe just bit off more than he could chew though? One less list and he could've polished up this set better I think.
Putting OTC maybe a bit of a no-no, being that he is close with the developer of that game, but I suppose this is like comedians getting away with racism?
Pretty bold making fun of that cancer game!
Think some of these zingers just needed a little less text and a little more subtlety and the jokes would have landed better, just comes off across a little "my first funny list" in places; in others he sticks the landing real good. Maybe just bit off more than he could chew though? One less list and he could've polished up this set better I think.
Putting OTC maybe a bit of a no-no, being that he is close with the developer of that game, but I suppose this is like comedians getting away with racism?
Pretty bold making fun of that cancer game!
Basileus777
Member
How does this apply here at all? Bringing up popularity and success is not a logical fallacy when discussing genre kingship. You're making some strange leaps.
Purple Cheeto
Member
Homefront the revolution on most surprising LMAO
Edit:
Also that Overwatch and CIV VI Burn
Blizzard is the Fisher Price of Game Devs for a reason.
EdwardTeach
Member
Tom Chick loves strategy games.
EdwardTeach
Member
He is not employed by Stardock.
Bandersnatch1
Member
He wrote two reviews for the early/final builds, but he was hired to write them for Square Enix's Internal use under the terms of an NDA, so the reviews belong to them.
You can read some of his thoughts though in this thread.
SuperSonic1305
Member
The performance.
JasonUresti
Member
Like most comedy this was about 30% funny to me, so, some laughs to be had in there. Not bad Tom!
Think some of these zingers just needed a little less text and a little more subtlety and the jokes would have landed better, just comes off across a little "my first funny list" in places; in others he sticks the landing real good. Maybe just bit off more than he could chew though? One less list and he could've polished up this set better I think.
Putting OTC maybe a bit of a no-no, being that he is close with the developer of that game, but I suppose this is like comedians getting away with racism?
Pretty bold making fun of that cancer game!
This post was bad comedy. Tom's lists are what they always are, his feelings on the games he played this year without any moronic plays at selecting the "objectively" best games of the year or influenced by ad dollars or community pressure. Disagree if you want, but the childish and dismissive attitudes towards his writing and picks is shameful. If his stuff is so "LOL obviously joke/clickbait" then it should be easy to refute and punch holes in it.
How you could read that as making fun of the "cancer" game is baffling. He clearly wasnt, and Chick having himself battled cancer in the past couple years would know first hand how tough a fight that is.
demosthenes
Member
This is a good post.
Rentahamster
Rodent Whores
Damnnnn, that description of Civ 6 :lol
XCOM is really great though, so I'm glad.
XCOM is really great though, so I'm glad.
mobilesworking
Member
At the very least you can say his lists are comprehensive and highlight at least one or two games that people are unaware existed. Makes me interested to try Forced Showdown.
Grim Dawn being surprisingly good is also a good pick. Although I don't exactly agree with his reasoning, I do think that having a handcrafted world (or at least portions of it) does add something to GD that other hack & slashes miss lately. Now, if it could only stop taking itself so seriously it might actually be worth a second playthrough.
Grim Dawn being surprisingly good is also a good pick. Although I don't exactly agree with his reasoning, I do think that having a handcrafted world (or at least portions of it) does add something to GD that other hack & slashes miss lately. Now, if it could only stop taking itself so seriously it might actually be worth a second playthrough.
No. Tom Chick, unlike what I have seen from Mr. White, is able to write compelling reasons for why he feels the way he does about a game. It's why his reviews are always worth a read.
I don't agree with him at times but I always find his reasoning interesting.
Edit:
See this thread that someone linked is a perfect micro-example of what I mean:
You can see why he feels the way he does about the game and even if your opinion is at odds with his, his likes/dislikes are consistent and well reasoned. His full length reviews go into much more than this quick forum post, though.Tom Chick said:
hosannainexcelsis
Member
Tom Chick's reviews don't feel divorced from reality the way White's reviews do.
purpletentacle
Member
Totally agree with him on Overwatch and Rise of the Tomb Raider.
Nice to know there is someone else out there who shares my unpopular opinion on those titles.
Nice to know there is someone else out there who shares my unpopular opinion on those titles.
capitalCORN
Member
Some people don't seem to know who Tom Chick is, which is a minority in this thread. I'm pleasantly surprised! Way to go GAF!
cr_blah_blah
Member
They're not exactly unique feelings. Not liking a popular thing is anything but special on the internet, especially gaming forums. A quick search and you'll find the exact threads right here you're looking for if you're searching for like minded people.