Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

[Chat] of the Lich King. You can get rep with walrus people.

NocturneNocturne Registered User regular
edited November 2008 in Debate and/or Discourse
This is a failure because I'm at work right now and this blocks any access to most other sites.

Here is where a youtube of the chitty chitty bang bang song would go.

Someone feel free to give me a link that I can add to this OP.

I DIDN'T MEAN TO WIN.

But this shit was awesome.

Nocturne on
«13456751

Posts

  • JamesKeenanJamesKeenan Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    as a gaymo I can't imagine anything less thrilling than hot lesbian sex

    oh boy

    you get to lick a vagina

    Lick it? Pfft.

    You outright bury your face in it. Rawrblgblrblgblrbgblrlgblrblrbglbrglrblrbglrlbrg

  • JamesKeenanJamesKeenan Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    So. I am just saying that when a person spends shorter amounts of time on the less important aspects of a project I do not take offense.

    I'm not taking offense exactly. I'm arguing a silly point of logic.

  • PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    I like the gunplay in fall out 3, because if blowing an enemies head into shiny bits with a bolt action rifle is wrong. I don't wannabe right.

    Also fuck game trilogies, jesus tell one story good and then we'll talk about a sequel you assholes.

  • Casual EddyCasual Eddy Fighting the War on String Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    Podly wrote: »
    as a gaymo I can't imagine anything less thrilling than not being able to establish a phallic signifier

    what... does this mean?

    75trafim7bi2.png
  • PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    Podly wrote: »
    as a gaymo I can't imagine anything less thrilling than not being able to establish a phallic signifier

    what... does this mean?

    He said you worship the cock?

  • PodlyPodly good moleman to youRegistered User regular
    edited November 2008
    Ego certe laboro hic et laboro in meipsoL factus sum mihi terra difficultatis et sudoris nimii. "Assuredly I labor here and I labor within myself: I have become to myself a land of trouble and inordinate sweat."

    follow my music twitter soundcloud tumblr
    hlB028K.png?1
  • JamesKeenanJamesKeenan Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    Drez wrote: »
    I like you, JK, but I think you'd have to be so fucking stupid to think you were going to get good gunplay out of Mirror's Edge. I mean I didn't even know guns were in the game at all until I played the demo. And then 80% of the demo is basically constructed around telling you "hey, you should run" and "sticking around to shoot people is fucking dumb you fucking dumb dumbfuck."

    So really, I think any complaints about Mirror's Edge's gameplay are completely baseless. If you were required to duke it out with 120 guards at the end of the game with guns or something, that's one thing. But I'm assuming that's not the case here. So, being a mere "option" without forcing you to putz around with the gunplay, there is no valid complaint.


    This isn't an excuse for it to be bad though. Guns are weak? They slow you down too much? Maybe there's even no reloading because you can't pick-up clips? Those are fine design choices. Bad design, however, is not nothing.

    I remember Assassin's Creed. Complaining that the combat was poorly implemented was a valid complaint, even though the game was very much billed as a game of stealth and exploration. And I loved Assassin's Creed.

  • durandal4532durandal4532 Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    Preacher wrote: »
    I like the gunplay in fall out 3, because if blowing an enemies head into shiny bits with a bolt action rifle is wrong. I don't wannabe right.

    Also fuck game trilogies, jesus tell one story good and then we'll talk about a sequel you assholes.
    The trilogy thing definitely pisses me off.

    I get the impression the idea is that if the game fails, you've hedged your bet, and if it succeeds you'll get triple the cash. Only, in neither of those cases do I get any benefit.

  • PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    Yeah AC had some very cool looking combat animations, just the combat itself was fairly bland.

  • PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    Preacher wrote: »
    I like the gunplay in fall out 3, because if blowing an enemies head into shiny bits with a bolt action rifle is wrong. I don't wannabe right.

    Also fuck game trilogies, jesus tell one story good and then we'll talk about a sequel you assholes.
    The trilogy thing definitely pisses me off.

    I get the impression the idea is that if the game fails, you've hedged your bet, and if it succeeds you'll get triple the cash. Only, in neither of those cases do I get any benefit.

    Yeah that's the way I see it, if its a bad game or doesn't sell well, I never get a full story. If it's a decent game I get one story spread across 3 60 dollar chunks.

  • DerrickDerrick Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    What does parkour mean? I looked it up, and it doesn't seem to jive with how you guys are using it.

    "The welfare of each of us is dependent fundamentally upon the welfare of all of us."
    Spoiler:
    -Theodore Roosevelt
  • JamesKeenanJamesKeenan Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    Preacher wrote: »
    Yeah AC had some very cool looking combat animations, just the combat itself was fairly bland.

    And it forced you into a large battle at the end. That was bad. Not that you could do it. But that you had to. If the game had you storming a castle, where the combat was an option, but sneaking was as well, it would have been infinitely fucking better. I even might have done it both ways. But the lack of choice? Especially when it was a lack of choice that forced you into a gameplay element that felt lacking, and was the exact opposite of what was initially billed?

    Tsk tsk.

  • PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    Derrick wrote: »
    What does parkour mean? I looked it up, and it doesn't seem to jive with how you guys are using it.

    Think of moving around in AC, leaping from building to building not following a street path.

  • JamesKeenanJamesKeenan Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    Derrick wrote: »
    What does parkour mean? I looked it up, and it doesn't seem to jive with how you guys are using it.

    The city exploration, building hopping, climbing, etc.

    The game was built around the idea of running rather than gunning. But you still can gun. Guns are still part of the game. There are pages in the Mirror's Edge design document dedicated to guns.

    And those pages were scribbled by a drunk guy with his non-dominant hand.

  • PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    Preacher wrote: »
    Yeah AC had some very cool looking combat animations, just the combat itself was fairly bland.

    And it forced you into a large battle at the end. That was bad. Not that you could do it. But that you had to. If the game had you storming a castle, where the combat was an option, but sneaking was as well, it would have been infinitely fucking better. I even might have done it both ways. But the lack of choice? Especially when it was a lack of choice that forced you into a gameplay element that felt lacking, and was the exact opposite of what was initially billed?

    Tsk tsk.

    Or like the gunplay in condemned 2. Man that game started out mediocre and ended poor. Dark is a visual choice, unable to see for shit is bad design.

  • JamesKeenanJamesKeenan Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    Preacher wrote: »
    Yeah that's the way I see it, if its a bad game or doesn't sell well, I never get a full story.

    Advent Rising
    Preacher wrote: »
    If it's a decent game I get one story spread across 3 60 dollar chunks.

    Erm... Halo? I can't think of another successful trilogy.

  • JamesKeenanJamesKeenan Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    Preacher wrote: »
    Or like the gunplay in condemned 2. Man that game started out mediocre and ended poor. Dark is a visual choice, unable to see for shit is bad design.

    What do you want, Pony-Land bright hallways? Effervescent fountains of rainbow hues?

    Dark is the focus!

  • JamesKeenanJamesKeenan Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    Oboro wrote: »
    Man, I want to go back to bed, but waking up when it's nighttime fully-rested would break my circadian rhythm. :|

    And yet your rhythm is supposed to have been composed by Philip Glass.

    So screw it.

  • PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    Preacher wrote: »
    Yeah that's the way I see it, if its a bad game or doesn't sell well, I never get a full story.

    Advent Rising
    Preacher wrote: »
    If it's a decent game I get one story spread across 3 60 dollar chunks.

    Erm... Halo? I can't think of another successful trilogy.

    And even then story wasn't a selling point in halo. I think we've reverted to 80s game design in a way. Gameplay is becoming more important then telling a coherent story.

  • ElendilElendil Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    We totally should have gone with Podly's Frankenstein [chat]

    Per3th.jpg
  • PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    Preacher wrote: »
    Or like the gunplay in condemned 2. Man that game started out mediocre and ended poor. Dark is a visual choice, unable to see for shit is bad design.

    What do you want, Pony-Land bright hallways? Effervescent fountains of rainbow hues?

    Dark is the focus!

    Being able to see would have been nice. Oh and a non retarded story I mean come on what the fuck was that shit?

  • OboroOboro __BANNED USERS
    edited November 2008
    Oboro wrote: »
    Man, I want to go back to bed, but waking up when it's nighttime fully-rested would break my circadian rhythm. :|

    And yet your rhythm is supposed to have been composed by Philip Glass.

    So screw it.
    I traded it in, I have one from Steven Reich now!

    It loops a lot. :(

    words
  • JamesKeenanJamesKeenan Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    Preacher wrote: »
    Look than, what makes you think any girl that Keenan would stick his love sausage into could get any kind of hot lesbian sex?

    All any lesbian needs is a good deep dicking. By proxy, of course, lesbians are intuitively, subconsciously attracted to wherever my penis has been.
    Thanatos wrote: »
    Imagine you are a chick who can have hot, lesbian sex anytime you want to, Preacher.

    How good of a person would it take for you to give that up? Exactly. And I don't think JamesKeenan is Jesus squared.

    I'm Jesus cubed.

  • OboroOboro __BANNED USERS
    edited November 2008
    uh jamesk, jesus^3 may be less than jesus^2 :V

    words
  • PodlyPodly good moleman to youRegistered User regular
    edited November 2008
    Podly wrote: »
    as a gaymo I can't imagine anything less thrilling than not being able to establish a phallic signifier

    what... does this mean?

    Basically, Lacan says that society is obsessed with the phallus not just because it's a penis, but that men have a drive to establish a system of binary signifier's to state purpose. E.g., men view sex as penis/orafice, climax, and purely genital based, whereas women tend to view it as experiential, corporeal, and enduring.

    follow my music twitter soundcloud tumblr
    hlB028K.png?1
  • Casual EddyCasual Eddy Fighting the War on String Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    Damnit I think I just like cocks podly

    and just about everything about dudes

    75trafim7bi2.png
  • JamesKeenanJamesKeenan Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    Preacher wrote: »
    And even then story wasn't a selling point in halo.

    Halo was like a modern version of 80's movies. An over-the-top, cheesy consumable story of overall average quality.

    I admit to liking it a bit.

  • PodlyPodly good moleman to youRegistered User regular
    edited November 2008
    Elendil wrote: »
    We totally should have gone with Podly's Frankenstein [chat]

    Wittgenstein

    follow my music twitter soundcloud tumblr
    hlB028K.png?1
  • DeShadowCDeShadowC Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    Preacher wrote: »
    Look than, what makes you think any girl that Keenan would stick his love sausage into could get any kind of hot lesbian sex?

    All any lesbian needs is a good deep dicking. By proxy, of course, lesbians are intuitively, subconsciously attracted to wherever my penis has been.

    So what you're saying is, girls go lesbo after dating you?

  • SarksusSarksus Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    What about the gunplay in Mirror's Edge makes it bad?

    There is a difference between implementing a feature poorly, and giving a gun poor accuracy or limited ammunition on purpose in order to deemphasize the role they play in the game. Which is this situation most similar to?

  • ElendilElendil Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    Podly wrote: »
    Elendil wrote: »
    We totally should have gone with Podly's Frankenstein [chat]

    Wittgenstein
    Sure, Pods

    Whatever you say

    Per3th.jpg
  • DrezDrez Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    Drez wrote: »
    I like you, JK, but I think you'd have to be so fucking stupid to think you were going to get good gunplay out of Mirror's Edge. I mean I didn't even know guns were in the game at all until I played the demo. And then 80% of the demo is basically constructed around telling you "hey, you should run" and "sticking around to shoot people is fucking dumb you fucking dumb dumbfuck."

    So really, I think any complaints about Mirror's Edge's gameplay are completely baseless. If you were required to duke it out with 120 guards at the end of the game with guns or something, that's one thing. But I'm assuming that's not the case here. So, being a mere "option" without forcing you to putz around with the gunplay, there is no valid complaint.


    This isn't an excuse for it to be bad though. Guns are weak? They slow you down too much? Maybe there's even no reloading because you can't pick-up clips? Those are fine design choices. Bad design, however, is not nothing.

    I remember Assassin's Creed. Complaining that the combat was poorly implemented was a valid complaint, even though the game was very much billed as a game of stealth and exploration. And I loved Assassin's Creed.


    I disagree with you, and I'll explain why.

    Have you played No More Heroes? I think No More Heroes was an excellent game with one massive, obnoxious flaw. The "sandboxy" world that forced you to motorcycle from mission to mission was a glitchy, annoying piece of shit. Someone made the argument that Suda51, the developer, made it like this as a commentary on shitty, sparse overworlds like this.

    I argued back that I didn't really care because I was forced to traverse this glitchfest to play the other parts of the game.

    Now, as to Mirror's Edge, I conclude the exact opposite, because you are not forced to use gunplay at all. The game actively tries to dissuade you from engaging in gunplay. I think it is not only alright, but perhaps even smart, to make the gunplay bad so as to dissuade you from engaging in it. The developers do not want the game to be thought of as an FPS. The gunplay is not required to experience the entire game except, I assume, in very limited doses. Therefore, why is it not completely valid to push gamers away from it, if the thrust of the game is to be a runner. That is the entire point of the game. To be a runner. Not a shooter. So I think it is entirely valid to make the gunplay bad on purpose. I'm not sure that's what they did (i.e. if they did it on purpose rather than it being bad design), but I support that decision if that's what they did. And if it's just bad design, then I have no problem with that either, considering the nature of the game.

    What you have to remember is that game design, even now, consists mainly of relating abstract relationships to the gamer. Take hit-points for example. Do hit-points make any sense to you? They are an abstract relating the concept of "health" to a player, while elevating the player slightly from his frail "get-hit-with-a-sword-once-and-die" reality so as to provide an entertaining experience. And so a game like Mirror's Edge which is meant to provide a "free running" interactive experience for the player is wholly right to dissuade the player from using gunplay.

    However, the reason gunplay was not entirely excised, I imagine, is because that would not make sense either. What you have to understand about Mirror's Edge is the "us-versus-them" theme. There is a clear demarcation between the player's organization and the enemy corporates you encounter, and the guns serve to illustrate that in a very basic, familiar way. You don't have a gun, by default. Your entire philosophy is designed around getting from point A to point B in the quickest, least bloody way possible. The inclusion of guns, though, forces the player to realize that he is up against a different type of philosophy. This philosophy is the antagonist in the game.

    So they put in some parkourish stuff on disarming enemies, because it is thematically consistent. And, yes, you can fire these guns. But I think they were smart to make it so players would not want to hold a gun. The game is about running, escaping, not shooting.

    steam_sig.png
  • PreacherPreacher Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    Preacher wrote: »
    And even then story wasn't a selling point in halo.

    Halo was like a modern version of 80's movies. An over-the-top, cheesy consumable story of overall average quality.

    I admit to liking it a bit.

    I dunno, it was kind of a mishmash for me. I think MC was just the most boring character so the story didn't sell me.

  • JamesKeenanJamesKeenan Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    Sarksus wrote: »
    What about the gunplay in Mirror's Edge makes it bad?

    There is a difference between implementing a feature poorly, and giving a gun poor accuracy or limited ammunition on purpose in order to deemphasize the role they play in the game. Which is this situation most similar to?

    I was afraid someone would bring this up.

    Honestly?

    I don't know. I haven't played Mirror's Edge. I'm going on second-hand accounts here.

    My one saving throw was that I wasn't really arguing the specifics of the gameplay implementation, but the theory that if it's not the focus, it doesn't have to be good.

    Was my throw successful?

  • DrezDrez Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    Preacher wrote: »
    And even then story wasn't a selling point in halo. I think we've reverted to 80s game design in a way. Gameplay is becoming more important then telling a coherent story.

    A lot of people say this, but considering the Legendary Edition came with the videos from the first two games "remastered" on a DVD, as well as the existence of all the Halo books and shit like that out there suggests that many people were interested in its shitty story.

    steam_sig.png
  • SarksusSarksus Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    Sarksus wrote: »
    What about the gunplay in Mirror's Edge makes it bad?

    There is a difference between implementing a feature poorly, and giving a gun poor accuracy or limited ammunition on purpose in order to deemphasize the role they play in the game. Which is this situation most similar to?

    I was afraid someone would bring this up.

    Honestly?

    I don't know. I haven't played Mirror's Edge. I'm going on second-hand accounts here.

    My one saving throw was that I wasn't really arguing the specifics of the gameplay implementation, but the theory that if it's not the focus, it doesn't have to be good.

    Was my throw successful?

    Nope. Critical failure. Every bone in every finger twists and breaks as you type and you die from blood loss.

    People are saying the gunplay is bad, but how is it bad? This is important. I mean someone might be angry because you only get one clip of ammunition, but that is a legitimate restriction placed on guns by the developers.

  • ElendilElendil Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    What is a super good FPS for the 360

    Per3th.jpg
  • DeShadowCDeShadowC Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    Drez wrote: »
    Preacher wrote: »
    And even then story wasn't a selling point in halo. I think we've reverted to 80s game design in a way. Gameplay is becoming more important then telling a coherent story.

    A lot of people say this, but considering the Legendary Edition came with the videos from the first two games "remastered" on a DVD, as well as the existence of all the Halo books and shit like that out there suggests that many people were interested in its shitty story.

    Or people just like buying the more expensive editions.

  • SarksusSarksus Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    Elendil wrote: »
    What is a super good FPS for the 360

    Does not compute.

  • durandal4532durandal4532 Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    Elendil wrote: »
    What is a super good FPS for the 360
    Call of Duty 4.

    The single player is Call of Duty-ish. Which is to say ancient conventions and pretty terrible and frusturating but also nice looking.

    The multi-player was a stroke of genius.

«13456751
This discussion has been closed.