next »

[jamesprimate]

I'm just glad it isn't potato salad. Seriously, now. What ever came of that?

surprisingly, from what i read it turned out really well and the dude raised an additional $20k for charity. Who could have guessed? http://kotaku.com/the-potato-salad-kickstarter-festival-actually-happened-1640680938

 

[Manuel Magalhães]

That's because Pokemon is in its roots an RPG. The foundation of RPGs have battle systems and Pokemon expanded on that idea by giving you hundreds of characters to fight with.
I also like to think that the reason the narrative turned out to be "you catch them all" is because they had to market the game to kids. Another kid catching monsters and letting them fight is a bit more relatable than you just being multiple monsters at once. The narrative never really delves into the system behind Pokemon wildlife but that might be because the game hasn't fundamentally changed its narrative since the Gameboy days, back when it wasn't feasible.

I agree with your points.
I think the idea of having a lot of Pokémon would be less violent if they chose to be with you, not the other way around. It would be hella cool. But I don't disagree with you on the idea of having a lot of characters to play with being attractive.
I wish the fighting had a better purpose rather than "Hey, you stumbled here, let's fight!" or "I'll put my Pokémon fighting because I want to be the Pokémon Master...", though. Like you said, a more complex narrative wasn't feasible for the Game Boy, but it would be nice if the games nowadays had a new narrative.

[citizen5]

I might be unpopular for saying this but... Bioshock.

The intro sequence is admittedly brilliant, but I found the combat dull, and I always find that way of story-telling (npc logs) to be slightly contrived.

Maybe the intro set the bar too high for me. Perhaps I should give it another go!

[Manuel Magalhães]

I feel the setting is outstanding, but it does falls short in combat.

[s0]

It's not exactly the same as Princessa described, although it's similar, but I find Pokémon kinda problematic in that regard. Pokémon get hurt in order to catch them, making them prisoners inside PokéBalls, and then the player makes them battle for fun or profit.

that why u play shin megami tensei where u bribe demons to ally with you. ethical as FUCK

[RichSG]

I might be unpopular for saying this but... Bioshock.

The intro sequence is admittedly brilliant, but I found the combat dull, and I always find that way of story-telling (npc logs) to be slightly contrived.

Maybe the intro set the bar too high for me. Perhaps I should give it another go!

I wouldn't disagree. I didn't actually finish bioshock. I thought the story/atmosphere was really good but found the combat a bit dull. I thought bioshock 2 wasn't great either, tbh. But I fear I may be in the minority about that! I just didn't like that it tried to be really realistic (ie: with a living, breathing city etc) and yet still had really gamey elements, like picking up those f***** coins everywhere. Reminded me of games of old where'd you have to go down every corridor looking for ammo/loot etc.

[s0]

yall shoudl play system shock 2

[Raptor85]

EVERYONE shoudl play system shock 2

fixed

seriously though, it's an amazing game, and the steam version even has 2 player co-op added which i have to say is pretty awesome.

[jamesprimate]

oh man, i am setting myself up for some flame here, but i think the half-life series is realllllllly overrated. i hated it. i hate gordon freeman. i hate the idiotic crate puzzles and the weak space zombie nonsense and the terrible driving and the creepy hero worship and mowing down endless boring faceless enemies over and over and over. i played straight through, got to the end, set the controller down and said to myself out-loud "i just wasted XX hours of my life"

not portal though, portal was great even if you can beat it in one sitting. them being sort of bundled together kind of makes it all even out? i assume they looked at the engine and made half-life for *those people* and portal for *these people*. I accept that, and respect valve for the depth of that insight.

[gimymblert]

You can dislike something and appreciate the achievement it brought to video games however ...

[jamesprimate]

totally true. though that poses an interesting question: is a game its engine? does praise of cryengine make crysis a good game? half-life and counter-strike (and portal) were big steps forward no doubt, with a revolutionary engine that made it all possible, i just think half life/2 *specifically* is bad. my opinion is utterly completely meaningless, but in this case id be like "yo this engine is really great, good job GoldSrc / Source tool maker team! Creative team? ehhh...."

is there something beyond that that im missing about the half-life worship? its entirely possible that im just missing the point. i DO *want* to understand. Ive forced myself to play through, so might as well get opinions.

[s0]

half life 1 is pretty much the foundation for modern singleplayer shooters. even 17 years later most of them still use HL's basic format.

i liked HL2 a lot when it came out, but it really didn't do anything that groundbreaking aside from maybe the physics puzzles. physics engines weren't exactly new but hl2 was the first "big" game to use one extensively. the gravity gun was HUGE back then (you can pick up and throw any object, so cool!!) but its impact is somewhat diminished now that every fantasy and scifi game has a "telekinesis" ability that does the same thing.

other than that it's a very well made linear cinematic FPS but i don't think the linear cinematic shooter genre would be much different if it had never been made.

p.s. i think two things that are "overrated" about half life in general are gordon freeman (silent protagonists were a very common trope already) and the cutscene crap. i still don't understand why the ability to walk around during story sequences is such a big deal.

[JobLeonard]

I dunno, at the very least the part where you are still in control of the camera makes a huge difference for me.

Not being fully in control is one thing - real life is like that too sometimes. But not being able to control where I look? That's changing the perception from you being the character to watching through another characters eyes.

[s0]

ya but the thing i don't really feel like "i" am gordon regardless. i don't really feel like game characters represent "me" in general but this is maybe getting a little 2subjective to properly discuss.

[gimymblert]

HL1 didn't have that impact on me because I felt duke nukem already had the cinematic/scripted sequence, doom had the "living enemy" (with infighting), golden eye had the realism (gun that don't float, localized damage, scripted cinematic, realistic physics) ... Later perfect dark introduced gadget ... if anything golden eye is closer to teh modern shooter formula EXCEPT for exploration and civil casualty.

So it's impact is much more about the PC niche who didn't have access to a 64 to get a fix on realistic shooter.

[s0]

if anything golden eye is closer to teh modern shooter formula EXCEPT for exploration and civil casualty.

half life is EXACTLY the modern shooter formula tho

[Türbo Bröther]

I dunno, at the very least the part where you are still in control of the camera makes a huge difference for me.

Not being fully in control is one thing - real life is like that too sometimes. But not being able to control where I look? That's changing the perception from you being the character to watching through another characters eyes.

Pretty much. Not getting taken out of your zone to watch a scene that advances the plot was a pretty big deal at the time. Plus if you got bored with someone talking you could always shoot them in the face and it wouldn't penalise you for it, I think the only instance is near the end with the scientist who opens the portal to Zen but you had to keep him alive anyway.

[gimymblert]

if anything golden eye is closer to teh modern shooter formula EXCEPT for exploration and civil casualty.

half life is EXACTLY the modern shooter formula tho

But golden eye had scope and proto ironsight, HL you must ADD to get the modern shooter, golden eye you must SUBSTRACT In fact the linear level of golden eye ARE the modern shooter (complete with need to take cover, even though cover where a bit more dynamic with doors)

[quan]

System Shock 2 is fuckin' coooool. I love the stress of deciding which upgrade to put your modules into, a bad decision can really screw you over. I got the feeling maybe the devs put bad skill upgrades in the game on purpose? idk love that game

[s0]

one of the devs (maybe even ken levine himself) admitted the stat system is kinda broken and they didn't have the time to balance it like they wanted to.

the game makes up for it with amazing atmosphere and level design tho. it's still creepy and intense even today (i played it after bioshack)