Guild Wars, felt too much like a Korean MMO with very little real substance. I think mainly it's just the emphasis on pvp that puts me off these types of games.
I'll also try to explain the appeal of this game somewhat. Basically, if you look at it less like an MMORPG and more like a customizeable card game you begin to see how it can be fun. It does have very pretty scenery, but that's not the point. The point is collecting skills and developing strategies using them. I do find the PvP game inscrutable and frustrating, and the original prophecies campaign was pretty dragged-out, but Nightfall looks to have improved the PvE quite a bit, and in general I would say the feel of combat in GW is a lot better than WoW. (So sick of getting interrupted while casting spells by one little nick from a kobold...)
It's true maybe this kind of gameplay could be done better, but I for one enjoy playing GW. Even when it's repetitive.
Guild Wars, felt too much like a Korean MMO with very little real substance. I think mainly it's just the emphasis on pvp that puts me off these types of games.
I'll also try to explain the appeal of this game somewhat. Basically, if you look at it less like an MMORPG and more like a customizeable card game you begin to see how it can be fun. It does have very pretty scenery, but that's not the point. The point is collecting skills and developing strategies using them. I do find the PvP game inscrutable and frustrating, but Nightfall looks to have improved the PvE quite a bit, and in general I would say the feel of combat in GW is a lot better than WoW. (So sick of getting interrupted while casting spells by one little nick from a kobold...)
It's true maybe this kind of gameplay could be done better, but I for one enjoy playing GW. Even when it's repetitive.
Actually, the PvP on GW is even more like a card game. Once you get the synergy between powers down and develop a coherent strategy it's wonderful to watch it develop. I remember being on the KCHS teams where it was like 75% Rangers and seeing opposing teams completely flounder when they saw the strategy in action. Fun times.
Guild Wars, felt too much like a Korean MMO with very little real substance. I think mainly it's just the emphasis on pvp that puts me off these types of games.
I'll also try to explain the appeal of this game somewhat. Basically, if you look at it less like an MMORPG and more like a customizeable card game you begin to see how it can be fun. It does have very pretty scenery, but that's not the point. The point is collecting skills and developing strategies using them. I do find the PvP game inscrutable and frustrating, but Nightfall looks to have improved the PvE quite a bit, and in general I would say the feel of combat in GW is a lot better than WoW. (So sick of getting interrupted while casting spells by one little nick from a kobold...)
It's true maybe this kind of gameplay could be done better, but I for one enjoy playing GW. Even when it's repetitive.
Yeah, what I like about GW - though I don't play it much anymore - is that it's very, very strategic. You aren't grinding out levels, you're acquiring skills and you can try to combine them to adopt different strategies.
I think it's pretty different and cool in that respect. It's like Final Fantasy XI, with the dual-classing stuff, but without all the annoying bullshit Final Fantasy XI brings, and with less template-like carbon copy characters running around the game world.
Playing with the KCHS way back when (well over a year ago now, I guess) was a lot of fun.
Drez on
Switch: SW-7690-2320-9238Steam/PSN/Xbox: Drezdar
0
RoshinMy backlog can be seen from spaceSwedenRegistered Userregular
Half-Life 1. I am a proud owner and lover of HL2, but I never played HL1 when it came out, and going back and playing it now... is not particularly enjoyable. I actually did get kinda far, but gave up when I couldn't figure out what to do with this monster in kind of a cylindrical room. Very very irritating when I can't figure out where to go next, which happens a lot.
I guess this is why adventure games died out.
You got to Blast Pit and no, that's not very far into the game. The fact that the monster is actually sitting in the blast pit underneath a giant rocket should you give you some clues.
The biggest thing I didn't get is Zelda. I played the one on the SNES, and it was kind of fun at times, but I never really got into it. And I played the N64 one for like an hour before being bored of it too.
I can attest to this as well. I've played ALL the Zeldas, sincerely wanting to like them, but meh.. I just can't. I even bought TP for my wii, and playing it is very arduous that I have to stop after about 20 minutes or so. Guess what I'll be trading when wario ware comes out?
You fail at life.
Rohan on
...and I thought of how all those people died, and what a good death that is. That nobody can blame you for it, because everyone else died along with you, and it is the fault of none, save those who did the killing.
Well for Half Life 1, I found it very fun until I started fighting marines. Then it just got retarded. What's this? I have to shot them twice at point blank in the head with the shotgun to kill them, but they can kill me in three seconds?
Half Life 2 had MUCH better balance with the combine.
Gran Turismo is just boring for me. Never got why anyone liked it. And I love cars in RL.
Final Fantasy. The ultimate example of something I'll never understand how anyone could get enjoyment from. I've played several, to see if I'd like it at any point in the series. It always just bored the shit out of me.
WoW. Again, I tried this at a friend's house. It just isn't fun at all for me.
Dragon Quest 8. Don't understand why everyone jizzed all over it, it's basically all the contrived gameplay mechanics RPGs had to impose 20 years ago due to hardware limitations, but with prettier graphics. Completely backwards. Boring as hell.
Quake 3, as mentioned, like UT but with quality replaced by shittiness.
ICO. Looks pretty, but the gameplay was pretty boring. Kept waiting for it to get better, but it never really picked up. I really, really wanted to like it, but it just felt like a second-rate Zelda knock-off to me. I wasn't charmed by the princess, she was just... vacant. But I loved Shadow of the Colossus, so you figure that one out.
Half-Life 1. I am a proud owner and lover of HL2, but I never played HL1 when it came out, and going back and playing it now... is not particularly enjoyable. I actually did get kinda far, but gave up when I couldn't figure out what to do with this monster in kind of a cylindrical room. Very very irritating when I can't figure out where to go next, which happens a lot.
I guess this is why adventure games died out.
You got to Blast Pit and no, that's not very far into the game. The fact that the monster is actually sitting in the blast pit underneath a giant rocket should you give you some clues.
Heh, at least it felt like I'd been playing for a long time. But you can't blame me for not looking up. It's psychologically the last place you think to look.
I'm sorry. I like Zombies and the shooting thereof, and I generally don't mind survival horror even if it is a little formulaic. But I just never got into the early ones. I just didn't particularly give a shit about the characters, and honestly found watching them die again and again quite entertaining.
And I have a thing about being utterly powerless in games. I mean, I've no problem about being outmatched, but if I'm dead when a zombie so much as sneezes at me, I'm less interested.
I've yet to try Resi 4 though.
RE4 is a really good game, the first RE i've actually played. Thoroughly enjoyed it.
For a polar-opposite zombie experience, Dead Rising. It's a far, far more accurate recreation of zombie films that any other game i've seen. They're slow, they're weak and can be killed or avoided easily, they're dumb, there aren't a thousand different mutated versions, but they're everywhere. The number of times i've watched zombie films and you see someone get too confident and just get themselves killed by being a complete moron, the same thing will happen to you in DR. Really, you don't have to kill that many zombies at all to get around, but you find yourself getting caught out through your own negligence.
It's awesome.
ICO. Looks pretty, but the gameplay was pretty boring. Kept waiting for it to get better, but it never really picked up. I really, really wanted to like it, but it just felt like a second-rate Zelda knock-off to me. I wasn't charmed by the princess, she was just... vacant. But I loved Shadow of the Colossus, so you figure that one out.
Not that hard; SotC rarely draws your attention to the girl, so it's easy enough to imagine people who just want to play it as an interesting third-person actioner can just forget about the story and go "Whoo, fuck yeah!" every time a colossus comes down.
Makes me cry inside, but it's easy enough to imagine. :P
Eight Rooks on
<AtlusParker> Sorry I'm playing Pokemon and vomiting at the same time so I'm not following the conversation in a linear fashion.
I'll throw my hat into the Dragon Quest VIII ring as well.
I loved the gameplay.
I enjoyed the VA.
The art design and music made me happy.
I hated being constantly poor and having to rely moreso on the Alchemy Pot than things I could find out in the wild/dungeons.
I also hated the fact that, when I got to Dhoulmagus, I was so completely royally fucked in levels, that even after ~2 hours of levelling, I was still getting pummeled.
Halo - I love FPS games, but not on consoles. Dual analog sticks is not something *anyone* in their right mind would come up with for a control scheme for a shooter. But still, I figured there must be something special about it, but, it was just more of the same game I've been playing since Doom. I tried really hard to get in to it as my friends would constantly have Halo parties...but it was just no fun to me. I had the same sort of game on my computer with superior controls and *free* online play. Pointless.
DDR - Yeah, I'm really uncoordinated, but it's still pretty boring to play, and even more boring to watch. Especially if the person is really good, because then they look like they're having no fun at all, just doing the same dance they've practiced a thousand times. It's like memorizing a long speech...you can work on it for a while, and get it perfect, but in the end it's all just really long words said quickly. No one cares.
I loved Metroid Prime..and I didn't "buy in to the hype" because I hadn't heard about it before I played it (and consequently didn't leave my dorm for days)...it was very different from other console FPSes I'd played. However Metroid Prime 2 was a disappointment because every single puzzle was the same light/dark mechanic over and over again.
Finally...the Final Fantasies. I...I just never could sit through them. I do like to watch other people play though. It's got a good storyline, but it's too hard to focus on the story when you're (or at least I'm) playing. Watching someone else play, though, is like reading a nice novel.
jonxp on
Every time you write parallel fifths, Bach kills a kitten.
3DS Friend Code: 2707-1614-5576 PAX Prime 2014 Buttoneering!
ICO. Looks pretty, but the gameplay was pretty boring. Kept waiting for it to get better, but it never really picked up. I really, really wanted to like it, but it just felt like a second-rate Zelda knock-off to me. I wasn't charmed by the princess, she was just... vacant. But I loved Shadow of the Colossus, so you figure that one out.
Not that hard; SotC rarely draws your attention to the girl, so it's easy enough to imagine people who just want to play it as an interesting third-person actioner can just forget about the story and go "Whoo, fuck yeah!" every time a colossus comes down.
Makes me cry inside, but it's easy enough to imagine. :P
No but see I actually loved the atmosphere and sense of history of the game's world as well. I basically loved every single thing about the game, even riding around exploring the world, even though there was basically nothing. Of course the fights were totally awesome and the main attraction, but the run up to said fights and the solitude of the landscape (something ICO had as well) made it all the more potent. But for some reason ICO just depressed me more than anything, and SotC filled me with a sense of wonder. Though the ending was pretty depressing
ICO. Looks pretty, but the gameplay was pretty boring. Kept waiting for it to get better, but it never really picked up. I really, really wanted to like it, but it just felt like a second-rate Zelda knock-off to me. I wasn't charmed by the princess, she was just... vacant. But I loved Shadow of the Colossus, so you figure that one out.
Not that hard; SotC rarely draws your attention to the girl, so it's easy enough to imagine people who just want to play it as an interesting third-person actioner can just forget about the story and go "Whoo, fuck yeah!" every time a colossus comes down.
Makes me cry inside, but it's easy enough to imagine. :P
No but see I actually loved the atmosphere and sense of history of the game's world as well. I basically loved every single thing about the game, even riding around exploring the world, even though there was basically nothing. Of course the fights were totally awesome and the main attraction, but the run up to said fights and the solitude of the landscape (something ICO had as well) made it all the more potent. But for some reason ICO just depressed me more than anything, and SotC filled me with a sense of wonder. Though the ending was pretty depressing
Oh. Well, uh... you're weird. :P
Sorry, I got nuthin'. :oops:
I guess they are very different games - SotC does put a lot of emphasis on the game mechanics, the actual play, whereas ICO is an empty world you're just running around trying to find a way out of and none of the puzzles in your way are fantastically taxing or anything.
Eight Rooks on
<AtlusParker> Sorry I'm playing Pokemon and vomiting at the same time so I'm not following the conversation in a linear fashion.
ICO. Looks pretty, but the gameplay was pretty boring. Kept waiting for it to get better, but it never really picked up. I really, really wanted to like it, but it just felt like a second-rate Zelda knock-off to me. I wasn't charmed by the princess, she was just... vacant. But I loved Shadow of the Colossus, so you figure that one out.
Not that hard; SotC rarely draws your attention to the girl, so it's easy enough to imagine people who just want to play it as an interesting third-person actioner can just forget about the story and go "Whoo, fuck yeah!" every time a colossus comes down.
Makes me cry inside, but it's easy enough to imagine. :P
No but see I actually loved the atmosphere and sense of history of the game's world as well. I basically loved every single thing about the game, even riding around exploring the world, even though there was basically nothing. Of course the fights were totally awesome and the main attraction, but the run up to said fights and the solitude of the landscape (something ICO had as well) made it all the more potent. But for some reason ICO just depressed me more than anything, and SotC filled me with a sense of wonder. Though the ending was pretty depressing
Oh. Well, uh... you're weird. :P
Sorry, I got nuthin'. :oops:
I guess they are very different games - SotC does put a lot of emphasis on the game mechanics, the actual play, whereas ICO is an empty world you're just running around trying to find a way out of and none of the puzzles in your way are fantastically taxing or anything.
i had a problem with that as well..its like SoTC is a game with beautiful art and Ico is like a digital art gallery...with no game. Sure its beautiful, but if thats what i was looking for i'd go to an actual art gallery
Some people like playing a game for the experience. :P You know, not to be tearing your hair out every five minutes, to enjoy the sense of immersion, to be part of the story, to take on puzzles and whatnot you think there's a pretty good chance you can get past first thing?
Seriously, I do think a significant portion of "I just don't get it" stems from people unwilling to accept this... which I don't get myself. Right back to the first Command & Conquer, I realised inside a few hours it was a pretty shitty game - no AI to speak of, no strategy, every mission finished just by clicking as fast as possible, tank rush tank rush lol... but did I stop playing it, throw my hands up and go "I just don't get it"? Christ, no. It had flame tanks! And commandos! And FMV! And Kane! Etc., etc. Fair enough, some people just aren't happy unless they're being tested to the extreme every second... but honestly, deep deep down, that's what I don't get. Not really. :P
There are other factors, I'm sure, but I think that's a fairly significant one.
Eight Rooks on
<AtlusParker> Sorry I'm playing Pokemon and vomiting at the same time so I'm not following the conversation in a linear fashion.
Has anyone said Starcraft? I'm too lazy to read through the thread to find and rape this person. Don't say it.
However, Warcraft 3 was like drinking chunky monkey spunk. It was bad, for you primate lovers. There was no sense of accomplishment in raiding and killing one or maybe two of the enemy's peon line.. as it wasn't that bad to lose that and come back and still win, and you couldn't destroy any buildings without specific base-destroying units which nullified any sort of "Oh you're creeping? How about no!?" punishments.
The game was just shite, as far as RTS games go. Sure they tried something new (focusing on hero classes instead of massing units), and it sounded like it was going to be awesome. But no. Just no.
It's interesting to see a few negative remarks about Majora's Mask as I thought I was the only one. I'm still playing it though, gotta finish.
I'll also throw my disinterest onto the Halo pile too. I've played both and I think they are solid shooters with some nice shiny graphics but that's all. not bad, nothing great, just solid.
I didn't like Halo or Halo 2 that much. They weren't bad, but not great either. Mediocre. Extremely polished, but still mediocre. They just didn't grab me like they grabbed everyone else on the planet. Kinda wish they did though, I wanted to play what everyone else was playing
edit: I'm thinking really hard as to what other games I don't get...and the Halo's are the only ones. I think I would "get" the halo games if they weren't more popular than the bible. I think that pretty much because they have a status level of "whatever system Halo is on is the one I buy regardless of any other factor", I just don't understand it. I did beat Halo 2 co-op with a friend. was a good time definitely I just could not fathom paying more than 10-20 bucks for that game ever. I mean, obviously I wouldn't have to *now* but I mean at launch too. I never felt it was a $50 game. If the reaction to Halo and Halo 2 weren't so unbelievably extreme I'd have been able to "get" them just a little better.
I can't really get into Devil May Cry 3. It's an absolutely awesome engine, with really fun combat and acrobatics, but they try to make it difficult in all the wrong ways. Instead of smart enemies with tricky patterns, they just make them take really long to kill; and instead of consistently kicking your ass, it just waits until the bosses to maul you so that you can (in most cases) start the whole level over again. It's like synthetic challenge--difficulty from concentrate. It seems like the greatest thing ever at first, but the redundancy can really wear it down. It's especially painful because I really enjoy playing the game--but not the same long portions, over and over again.
well, that's really the inherant problem with games like DMC or NG. You end up having a difficulty extended simple because save points are so few and far between. you kick the computers ass with normal enemies after you learn their stuff and then you get to a boss and then get pounded into oblivion only to start over. If you can take the repition of doing the same level over and over until you learn how it all works out, it's very rewarding and becomes one of the best games ever. I agree though, the "getting to that point" kinda sucks
Well I'm gonna weigh in again and remark that Halo has extremely well-balanced, deliberate, and strategic gameplay with certain highly satisfying actions that are possible to seal the deal. And dammit, I really do love vehicles. Especially the type that two people can get in.
And to 4rch3nemy, well I said the Blizzard RTS paradigm, but I emphatically excluded SC. And you're damn right about WC3. I did enjoy the single player campaigns a great deal though.
I'm gonna add something else to my mega-post of last page:
Fire Emblem: Path of Radiance. Granted, I've never tried any other Fire Emblem game due to lack of a GBA, but while I found the gameplay enjoyable (if the inventory system a bit obtuse) in Path of Radiance, everything else was the epitomy of bland boredom. Honestly, if they were going to have 3D graphics that boring looking, they should have gone with sprites. In fact if the game were a sprite game, and the conversations took place not with the huge (and horrendously goofy) slide-in/out portraits, but just with the sprites a la Chrono Trigger, it would have been a lot better I think. To say nothing of boring seen-it character design featuring 100% characters that I don't give a damn about or outright don't like (along with a classic case of a guy who would have been a fuck of a lot cooler as a girl), a relentlessly bland and boring story, and the worst game dialogue writing I've ever seen. (I can't freaking believe how long you have to press A through some of the "story" only to find out that nothing you give a shit about happened.)
Seriously, the dialogue is so over-long and uncondensed it's like reading the most boring fantasy novel ever and every now and then you get to play a battle. The writers seem to have forgotten that video games have historically adopted a very compact style for a reason. I know someone's going to tell me I can turn the dialogue sections off, but the fact is I much prefer to play a video game with a story to drive me through it. The gameplay on its own isn't enough to carry me through this particular game.
So yeah. People got pissed at me in the last thread where I mentioned my dislike of that game, but my roommate will at least back me up in regards to my opinion about the story and presentation thereof, and I'm interested to see if anyone else feels the same. I would reiterate that I found the gameplay enjoyable.
well, that's really the inherant problem with games like DMC or NG. You end up having a difficulty extended simple because save points are so few and far between. you kick the computers ass with normal enemies after you learn their stuff and then you get to a boss and then get pounded into oblivion only to start over. If you can take the repition of doing the same level over and over until you learn how it all works out, it's very rewarding and becomes one of the best games ever. I agree though, the "getting to that point" kinda sucks
I think many of the criticisms he was specifically making didn't apply to DMC1.
well, that's really the inherant problem with games like DMC or NG. You end up having a difficulty extended simple because save points are so few and far between. you kick the computers ass with normal enemies after you learn their stuff and then you get to a boss and then get pounded into oblivion only to start over. If you can take the repition of doing the same level over and over until you learn how it all works out, it's very rewarding and becomes one of the best games ever. I agree though, the "getting to that point" kinda sucks
I think many of the criticisms he was specifically making didn't apply to DMC1.
I actually remember playing through most, if not all of, DMC1 a long time ago, so I guess not.
well, that's really the inherant problem with games like DMC or NG. You end up having a difficulty extended simple because save points are so few and far between. you kick the computers ass with normal enemies after you learn their stuff and then you get to a boss and then get pounded into oblivion only to start over. If you can take the repition of doing the same level over and over until you learn how it all works out, it's very rewarding and becomes one of the best games ever. I agree though, the "getting to that point" kinda sucks
I think many of the criticisms he was specifically making didn't apply to DMC1.
I actually remember playing through most, if not all of, DMC1 a long time ago, so I guess not.
DMC 1 still has some of the most individually detailed enemies I've seen in a game, and some of them were harder than half the bosses.
What's the appeal? Okay, Nintendo can make a good platformer, but I just can't comprehend the appeal of the character or his lame-ass cohorts at all.
Characters become appealing when associated with something good. Usually, to normal people, being fun is all a video game really needs. And Mario isn't exactly something that tries to be captvating. So if "Nintendo can make a good platformer" than the stuff in that platformer becomes an associate of quality.
Deus Ex.
I'm not debating in any way that it's a good game, or even a great one, but it isn't the second-coming malarkey many people here make it out to be. Combat and AI are far too weak for that.
I was going to say Double Dragon 3 as the leading fan site for the series says it's better than 2 but I checked and it seems everyone else thinks it's too damn hard to be good.
Too bad because the sprites and animation are better.
Edit: Final Fantasy Tactics.
I suppose if I had an eternity to live I could get into it. I barely finish regular RPGs so I can't be bothered to invest more in this time sink.
...yeah the character is kinda ... well, he's a character. However, like Blitz Rawket said: You associate a quality game with the imagery in it.
Yoshi is an exception though.. he kicks some serious ass.
A simple "people are stupid" would've sufficed, though.
To me, all the Mario imagery actually detracts from the game. But, obviously, I'm the exception in the case. I think you're both right: most people don't care one way or another. Still, say something bad about Mario on this board, and it's like going into a church and slandering Jesus. It's sad how people don't seperate Mario the shitty character from Mario the good platformer that could just as easily not feature a shitty character.
...yeah the character is kinda ... well, he's a character. However, like Blitz Rawket said: You associate a quality game with the imagery in it.
Yoshi is an exception though.. he kicks some serious ass.
A simple "people are stupid" would've sufficed, though.
To me, all the Mario imagery actually detracts from the game. But, obviously, I'm the exception in the case. I think you're both right: most people don't care one way or another. Still, say something bad about Mario on this board, and it's like going into a church and slandering Jesus.
It's a reaction to the fact that say something bad about Mario on many other boards, and it's like going into a church and slandering Satan.
...yeah the character is kinda ... well, he's a character. However, like Blitz Rawket said: You associate a quality game with the imagery in it.
Yoshi is an exception though.. he kicks some serious ass.
A simple "people are stupid" would've sufficed, though.
To me, all the Mario imagery actually detracts from the game. But, obviously, I'm the exception in the case. I think you're both right: most people don't care one way or another. Still, say something bad about Mario on this board, and it's like going into a church and slandering Jesus. It's sad how people don't seperate Mario the shitty character from Mario the good platformer that could just as easily not feature a shitty character.
I don't see what's so shitty about him. He's a cartoon. What would you have done better?
...yeah the character is kinda ... well, he's a character. However, like Blitz Rawket said: You associate a quality game with the imagery in it.
Yoshi is an exception though.. he kicks some serious ass.
A simple "people are stupid" would've sufficed, though.
To me, all the Mario imagery actually detracts from the game. But, obviously, I'm the exception in the case. I think you're both right: most people don't care one way or another. Still, say something bad about Mario on this board, and it's like going into a church and slandering Jesus. It's sad how people don't seperate Mario the shitty character from Mario the good platformer that could just as easily not feature a shitty character.
I don't see what's so shitty about him. He's a cartoon. What would you have done better?
Make his shirt black and give him a kickass heavy metal soundtrack and a giant sword and when he attacks a gooma blood flies EVERYWHERE and you can see its bones and brain and stuff and Princess Peach wears lingerie.
...yeah the character is kinda ... well, he's a character. However, like Blitz Rawket said: You associate a quality game with the imagery in it.
Yoshi is an exception though.. he kicks some serious ass.
A simple "people are stupid" would've sufficed, though.
To me, all the Mario imagery actually detracts from the game. But, obviously, I'm the exception in the case. I think you're both right: most people don't care one way or another. Still, say something bad about Mario on this board, and it's like going into a church and slandering Jesus. It's sad how people don't seperate Mario the shitty character from Mario the good platformer that could just as easily not feature a shitty character.
I don't see what's so shitty about him. He's a cartoon. What would you have done better?
So are Ratchet & Clank and Jak & Daxter, and I love those two franchises.
Maybe some personality, some character development... I dunno. A faux-Italian plumber jumping around an LSD-inspired world isn't exactly the greatest material to start with, though.
...yeah the character is kinda ... well, he's a character. However, like Blitz Rawket said: You associate a quality game with the imagery in it.
Yoshi is an exception though.. he kicks some serious ass.
A simple "people are stupid" would've sufficed, though.
To me, all the Mario imagery actually detracts from the game. But, obviously, I'm the exception in the case. I think you're both right: most people don't care one way or another. Still, say something bad about Mario on this board, and it's like going into a church and slandering Jesus. It's sad how people don't seperate Mario the shitty character from Mario the good platformer that could just as easily not feature a shitty character.
I don't see what's so shitty about him. He's a cartoon. What would you have done better?
So are Ratchet & Clank and Jak & Daxter, and I love those two franchises.
Maybe some personality, some character development... I dunno. A faux-Italian plumber jumping around an LSD-inspired world isn't exactly the greatest material to start with, though.
...or some sort of continuity, at least. A story deeper than "Collect the coins and save the princess. For the 814th time."
Mario games have even less to do with other Mario games than the Final Fantasies do with each other. It's like Nintendo makes a platformer, then just tells the art department to crap rainbows, mushrooms and plumbers all over it.
...yeah the character is kinda ... well, he's a character. However, like Blitz Rawket said: You associate a quality game with the imagery in it.
Yoshi is an exception though.. he kicks some serious ass.
A simple "people are stupid" would've sufficed, though.
To me, all the Mario imagery actually detracts from the game. But, obviously, I'm the exception in the case. I think you're both right: most people don't care one way or another. Still, say something bad about Mario on this board, and it's like going into a church and slandering Jesus. It's sad how people don't seperate Mario the shitty character from Mario the good platformer that could just as easily not feature a shitty character.
I don't see what's so shitty about him. He's a cartoon. What would you have done better?
So are Ratchet & Clank and Jak & Daxter, and I love those two franchises.
Maybe some personality, some character development... I dunno. A faux-Italian plumber jumping around an LSD-inspired world isn't exactly the greatest material to start with, though.
...Character development?
...Character development.
Character development.
He needs a backstory.
Like he just got out of rehab and the mushroom Kingdom is a hallcination brought on by withdrawl or something.
Posts
I'll also try to explain the appeal of this game somewhat. Basically, if you look at it less like an MMORPG and more like a customizeable card game you begin to see how it can be fun. It does have very pretty scenery, but that's not the point. The point is collecting skills and developing strategies using them. I do find the PvP game inscrutable and frustrating, and the original prophecies campaign was pretty dragged-out, but Nightfall looks to have improved the PvE quite a bit, and in general I would say the feel of combat in GW is a lot better than WoW. (So sick of getting interrupted while casting spells by one little nick from a kobold...)
It's true maybe this kind of gameplay could be done better, but I for one enjoy playing GW. Even when it's repetitive.
Holy shit is that game crap. I cannot fathom why anyone likes it.
Actually, the PvP on GW is even more like a card game. Once you get the synergy between powers down and develop a coherent strategy it's wonderful to watch it develop. I remember being on the KCHS teams where it was like 75% Rangers and seeing opposing teams completely flounder when they saw the strategy in action. Fun times.
Yeah, what I like about GW - though I don't play it much anymore - is that it's very, very strategic. You aren't grinding out levels, you're acquiring skills and you can try to combine them to adopt different strategies.
I think it's pretty different and cool in that respect. It's like Final Fantasy XI, with the dual-classing stuff, but without all the annoying bullshit Final Fantasy XI brings, and with less template-like carbon copy characters running around the game world.
Playing with the KCHS way back when (well over a year ago now, I guess) was a lot of fun.
I guess this is why adventure games died out.
You got to Blast Pit and no, that's not very far into the game. The fact that the monster is actually sitting in the blast pit underneath a giant rocket should you give you some clues.
You fail at life.
Nothing's forgotten, nothing is ever forgotten
Half Life 2 had MUCH better balance with the combine.
Gran Turismo is just boring for me. Never got why anyone liked it. And I love cars in RL.
Final Fantasy. The ultimate example of something I'll never understand how anyone could get enjoyment from. I've played several, to see if I'd like it at any point in the series. It always just bored the shit out of me.
WoW. Again, I tried this at a friend's house. It just isn't fun at all for me.
Quake 3, as mentioned, like UT but with quality replaced by shittiness.
ICO. Looks pretty, but the gameplay was pretty boring. Kept waiting for it to get better, but it never really picked up. I really, really wanted to like it, but it just felt like a second-rate Zelda knock-off to me. I wasn't charmed by the princess, she was just... vacant. But I loved Shadow of the Colossus, so you figure that one out.
Heh, at least it felt like I'd been playing for a long time. But you can't blame me for not looking up. It's psychologically the last place you think to look.
For a polar-opposite zombie experience, Dead Rising. It's a far, far more accurate recreation of zombie films that any other game i've seen. They're slow, they're weak and can be killed or avoided easily, they're dumb, there aren't a thousand different mutated versions, but they're everywhere. The number of times i've watched zombie films and you see someone get too confident and just get themselves killed by being a complete moron, the same thing will happen to you in DR. Really, you don't have to kill that many zombies at all to get around, but you find yourself getting caught out through your own negligence.
It's awesome.
Not that hard; SotC rarely draws your attention to the girl, so it's easy enough to imagine people who just want to play it as an interesting third-person actioner can just forget about the story and go "Whoo, fuck yeah!" every time a colossus comes down.
Makes me cry inside, but it's easy enough to imagine. :P
Read my book. (It has a robot in it.)
I loved the gameplay.
I enjoyed the VA.
The art design and music made me happy.
I hated being constantly poor and having to rely moreso on the Alchemy Pot than things I could find out in the wild/dungeons.
I also hated the fact that, when I got to Dhoulmagus, I was so completely royally fucked in levels, that even after ~2 hours of levelling, I was still getting pummeled.
It's not fun having to grind.
Halo - I love FPS games, but not on consoles. Dual analog sticks is not something *anyone* in their right mind would come up with for a control scheme for a shooter. But still, I figured there must be something special about it, but, it was just more of the same game I've been playing since Doom. I tried really hard to get in to it as my friends would constantly have Halo parties...but it was just no fun to me. I had the same sort of game on my computer with superior controls and *free* online play. Pointless.
DDR - Yeah, I'm really uncoordinated, but it's still pretty boring to play, and even more boring to watch. Especially if the person is really good, because then they look like they're having no fun at all, just doing the same dance they've practiced a thousand times. It's like memorizing a long speech...you can work on it for a while, and get it perfect, but in the end it's all just really long words said quickly. No one cares.
I loved Metroid Prime..and I didn't "buy in to the hype" because I hadn't heard about it before I played it (and consequently didn't leave my dorm for days)...it was very different from other console FPSes I'd played. However Metroid Prime 2 was a disappointment because every single puzzle was the same light/dark mechanic over and over again.
Finally...the Final Fantasies. I...I just never could sit through them. I do like to watch other people play though. It's got a good storyline, but it's too hard to focus on the story when you're (or at least I'm) playing. Watching someone else play, though, is like reading a nice novel.
3DS Friend Code: 2707-1614-5576
PAX Prime 2014 Buttoneering!
I could name them, but I really don't want to anger fans of those games.
Oh. Well, uh... you're weird. :P
Sorry, I got nuthin'. :oops:
I guess they are very different games - SotC does put a lot of emphasis on the game mechanics, the actual play, whereas ICO is an empty world you're just running around trying to find a way out of and none of the puzzles in your way are fantastically taxing or anything.
Read my book. (It has a robot in it.)
Seriously, I do think a significant portion of "I just don't get it" stems from people unwilling to accept this... which I don't get myself. Right back to the first Command & Conquer, I realised inside a few hours it was a pretty shitty game - no AI to speak of, no strategy, every mission finished just by clicking as fast as possible, tank rush tank rush lol... but did I stop playing it, throw my hands up and go "I just don't get it"? Christ, no. It had flame tanks! And commandos! And FMV! And Kane! Etc., etc. Fair enough, some people just aren't happy unless they're being tested to the extreme every second... but honestly, deep deep down, that's what I don't get. Not really. :P
There are other factors, I'm sure, but I think that's a fairly significant one.
Read my book. (It has a robot in it.)
Has anyone said Starcraft? I'm too lazy to read through the thread to find and rape this person. Don't say it.
However, Warcraft 3 was like drinking chunky monkey spunk. It was bad, for you primate lovers. There was no sense of accomplishment in raiding and killing one or maybe two of the enemy's peon line.. as it wasn't that bad to lose that and come back and still win, and you couldn't destroy any buildings without specific base-destroying units which nullified any sort of "Oh you're creeping? How about no!?" punishments.
The game was just shite, as far as RTS games go. Sure they tried something new (focusing on hero classes instead of massing units), and it sounded like it was going to be awesome. But no. Just no.
Oh and whoever said Madden. 8)
I'll also throw my disinterest onto the Halo pile too. I've played both and I think they are solid shooters with some nice shiny graphics but that's all. not bad, nothing great, just solid.
edit: I'm thinking really hard as to what other games I don't get...and the Halo's are the only ones. I think I would "get" the halo games if they weren't more popular than the bible. I think that pretty much because they have a status level of "whatever system Halo is on is the one I buy regardless of any other factor", I just don't understand it. I did beat Halo 2 co-op with a friend. was a good time definitely I just could not fathom paying more than 10-20 bucks for that game ever. I mean, obviously I wouldn't have to *now* but I mean at launch too. I never felt it was a $50 game. If the reaction to Halo and Halo 2 weren't so unbelievably extreme I'd have been able to "get" them just a little better.
And to 4rch3nemy, well I said the Blizzard RTS paradigm, but I emphatically excluded SC.
I'm gonna add something else to my mega-post of last page:
Fire Emblem: Path of Radiance. Granted, I've never tried any other Fire Emblem game due to lack of a GBA, but while I found the gameplay enjoyable (if the inventory system a bit obtuse) in Path of Radiance, everything else was the epitomy of bland boredom. Honestly, if they were going to have 3D graphics that boring looking, they should have gone with sprites. In fact if the game were a sprite game, and the conversations took place not with the huge (and horrendously goofy) slide-in/out portraits, but just with the sprites a la Chrono Trigger, it would have been a lot better I think. To say nothing of boring seen-it character design featuring 100% characters that I don't give a damn about or outright don't like (along with a classic case of a guy who would have been a fuck of a lot cooler as a girl), a relentlessly bland and boring story, and the worst game dialogue writing I've ever seen. (I can't freaking believe how long you have to press A through some of the "story" only to find out that nothing you give a shit about happened.)
Seriously, the dialogue is so over-long and uncondensed it's like reading the most boring fantasy novel ever and every now and then you get to play a battle. The writers seem to have forgotten that video games have historically adopted a very compact style for a reason. I know someone's going to tell me I can turn the dialogue sections off, but the fact is I much prefer to play a video game with a story to drive me through it. The gameplay on its own isn't enough to carry me through this particular game.
So yeah. People got pissed at me in the last thread where I mentioned my dislike of that game, but my roommate will at least back me up in regards to my opinion about the story and presentation thereof, and I'm interested to see if anyone else feels the same. I would reiterate that I found the gameplay enjoyable.
Mario games.
What's the appeal? Okay, Nintendo can make a good platformer, but I just can't comprehend the appeal of the character or his lame-ass cohorts at all.
I'm not debating in any way that it's a good game, or even a great one, but it isn't the second-coming malarkey many people here make it out to be. Combat and AI are far too weak for that.
...yeah the character is kinda ... well, he's a character. However, like Blitz Rawket said: You associate a quality game with the imagery in it.
Yoshi is an exception though.. he kicks some serious ass.
Too bad because the sprites and animation are better.
Edit: Final Fantasy Tactics.
I suppose if I had an eternity to live I could get into it. I barely finish regular RPGs so I can't be bothered to invest more in this time sink.
To me, all the Mario imagery actually detracts from the game. But, obviously, I'm the exception in the case. I think you're both right: most people don't care one way or another. Still, say something bad about Mario on this board, and it's like going into a church and slandering Jesus. It's sad how people don't seperate Mario the shitty character from Mario the good platformer that could just as easily not feature a shitty character.
It's a reaction to the fact that say something bad about Mario on many other boards, and it's like going into a church and slandering Satan.
Make his shirt black and give him a kickass heavy metal soundtrack and a giant sword and when he attacks a gooma blood flies EVERYWHERE and you can see its bones and brain and stuff and Princess Peach wears lingerie.
:P
Maybe some personality, some character development... I dunno. A faux-Italian plumber jumping around an LSD-inspired world isn't exactly the greatest material to start with, though.
...Character development.
Character development.
Mario games have even less to do with other Mario games than the Final Fantasies do with each other. It's like Nintendo makes a platformer, then just tells the art department to crap rainbows, mushrooms and plumbers all over it.
Like he just got out of rehab and the mushroom Kingdom is a hallcination brought on by withdrawl or something.
Princess Peach is a prostitute.