Non-interactive.. as opposed to like the ground and walls in other games that are completely interactive?
And it's not the only fancy environment in the game, but as the hub, it's kind of what they obviously put a lot of effort into, yeah.
I don't recall saying non-interactive, I said "may as well be pre-rendered"
i am aware they are not designed like FF7.
Jade Empire's settlements felt like they could conceivably be places inhabited by people, in addition to being pretty, and bearing a pretty unique art style for the time.
I do not feel that statement describes Mass Effect.
KOTOR had similar problems for some of its planets, but the fact that it had a better Star Wars story than the (prequel) films and most of the EU made up for it.
I was picking up DW's comment about it being non-interactive, whatever he actually means by that.
As for the believability of the places.. I didn't have the same problem you did. I generally felt things seemed pretty solid. I admit I'd have liked to see more of the Citadel, get down into some of the other areas you get to see where there's going to be a whole lot more people and activity, but I didn't find it lacking as a result.
You made a whole lot of assumptions there. Where did I say anything about stories having to conform to a certain criteria in order to be considered good?
Well, wouldn't they have to? You said that no example of game storytelling has ever come close to the quality of movies. I argue that several games already have, but never based solely on any virtue we associate with the medium of film.
I could care less about any criteria. I only care about whether the story is enjoyable or if it makes me feel profoundly about something. MGS4's story was not enjoyable and the only thing it made me feel profoundly was "wow, this story is convoluted and stupid."
Which is fine, but I don't think the perceived quality of the story has anything to do with videogame standards.
I don't quite understand your point. Care to elaborate?
Kojima's story is touted as story telling masterpiece by videogame journalists. How does the perceived quality of the story NOT have anything to do with videogame standards?
Face it. The good writers are writing books or movies because that's where the audience and money are. Videogames don't hire great writers for their games because frankly, they are spending most of their money on programming the thing and can't afford good writing. That means they either hire subpar writers, or they get their game designers (aka, not good story tellers) to create the story. The money problem also extends to the quality of acting you see in videogames.
There are exceptions to the rule. David Hayter is a pretty good voice actor, especially in comparison to other videogame voice actors because they don't write 15 minute convoluted monologues for him to spout. They keep his lines restricted to simple questions and responses, and it works.
Svevin on
0
SirUltimosDon't talk, Rusty. Just paint.Registered Userregular
I was originally very disappointed in Civ 4. It's not that I found the game to be bad, it's just that the pace was much different than that of Civ 2, which I poured countless hours into. Now, though, I've learned to adapt and find it hard to play Civ 2, since I'm so used to Civ 4's pacing and extras.
Even compared to 3, the pacing was different. And while I eventually got used to the difference between 3 and 2, I never really liked the difference between 4 and 3. Also, 4 has worse graphics than 3.
But whatever, 4's still fun.
I never played 3, so 2 to 4 was a huge jump. Nowadays I can't even imagine playing Civ without Beyond the Sword.
WW > TP > OoT. That's the final word, I will brook no argument.
Also, I was reminded reading this page of another opinion I'm sure will get me spit on.
Disappointing game? Grim Fandango. I like the setting, I like the characters, I thought it was funny. But the story and puzzles are basically nonsense in a lot of areas. And the control was crap. Keep adventure games mouse driven, I'm not shooting shells out of Manny's mouth.
Kojima's story is touted as story telling masterpiece by videogame journalists. How does the perceived quality of the story NOT have anything to do with videogame standards?
Give me the names of these journalists or at least the institutions for which they work, so that I may avoid them in the future.
The thing is that video game writing never matches up to that in more literary endeavors when enountered on literature's terms. There are marvelously told stories in games, but they're almost always minimalist - exposition is kept to a bare minimum, a huge amount is left to the imagination. Look at Silent Hill 2 and Killer7, my personal gold standard for this sort of thing. In order to make writing in games both plentiful and well-done you've almost got to bloat it to the point where it subverts the rest of the game, like in Planescape: Torment.
Anyone who says the MGS series is well-written has produce for a brain. This is not to be contested. For some reason the stuff peripheral to the plot tends to be a barrel of fun, but the story itself is worthwhile through the cinematography and not much else.
Not in any sense of the word. Not in terms of graphics (still Wind Waker), sound (I think we can all agree the OoT soundtrack is still the most amazing one), gameplay (Phantom Hourglass and Four Swords Adventures have the best/most fun gameplay in the series), or story (Majora's Mask > all). So there is nothing left where it could conceivably the best in. Controls and fluidity of the animation, perhaps, but that is to be expected since it is the most recent along with PH, which also has perfect controls. So that is merely due to technical progress of the gaming industry as a whole. Seriously, TP is a good game but extremely mediocre compared to the revolutions (excusez le mot) that came before it.
I mean, seriously. They do something different that isn't space marines in triple-thick body armour, and the environments are brilliantly made.
[IMG]http://www.frictionlessinsight.com/revpics2/MassEffect/MassEffectC.jpg[MG]
Environments may as well have been pre-rendered. What's supposed to be an intergalactic advanced city is nothing more than a bunch of connected corridors with pretty setpieces. And most of the rest of the game is set in barren terrain.[/img]
They are wearing space suits. Space suits aren't supposed to look like world of warcraft armor. And most of the design in the game is supposed to look like classic sci-fi.
Not in any sense of the word. Not in terms of graphics (still Wind Waker), sound (I think we can all agree the OoT soundtrack is still the most amazing one), gameplay (Phantom Hourglass and Four Swords Adventures have the best/most fun gameplay in the series), or story (Majora's Mask > all). So there is nothing left where it could conceivably the best in. Controls and fluidity of the animation, perhaps, but that is to be expected since it is the most recent along with PH, which also has perfect controls. So that is merely due to technical progress of the gaming industry as a whole. Seriously, TP is a good game but extremely mediocre compared to the revolutions (excusez le mot) that came before it.
I agree with this completely.
Wait a tick, you'd initially said that you were willing to just say he had horrible taste in games and be done with it!
Have malevolent cephalopods reprogrammed your brain for nefarious but ultimately pointless purposes?
I mean, seriously. They do something different that isn't space marines in triple-thick body armour, and the environments are brilliantly made.
[IMG]http://www.frictionlessinsight.com/revpics2/MassEffect/MassEffectC.jpg[MG]
Environments may as well have been pre-rendered. What's supposed to be an intergalactic advanced city is nothing more than a bunch of connected corridors with pretty setpieces. And most of the rest of the game is set in barren terrain.[/img]
They are wearing space suits. Space suits aren't supposed to look like world of warcraft armor. And most of the design in the game is supposed to look like classic sci-fi.
Not in any sense of the word. Not in terms of graphics (still Wind Waker), sound (I think we can all agree the OoT soundtrack is still the most amazing one), gameplay (Phantom Hourglass and Four Swords Adventures have the best/most fun gameplay in the series), or story (Majora's Mask > all). So there is nothing left where it could conceivably the best in. Controls and fluidity of the animation, perhaps, but that is to be expected since it is the most recent along with PH, which also has perfect controls. So that is merely due to technical progress of the gaming industry as a whole. Seriously, TP is a good game but extremely mediocre compared to the revolutions (excusez le mot) that came before it.
I agree with this completely.
Wait a tick, you'd initially said that you were willing to just say he had horrible taste in games and be done with it!
Have malevolent cephalopods reprogrammed your brain for nefarious but ultimately pointless purposes?
Tube said he didn't want bashing in this thread. Didn't want to rock the boat.
Kojima's story is touted as story telling masterpiece by videogame journalists. How does the perceived quality of the story NOT have anything to do with videogame standards?
Give me the names of these journalists or at least the institutions for which they work, so that I may avoid them in the future.
The thing is that video game writing never matches up to that in more literary endeavors when enountered on literature's terms. There are marvelously told stories in games, but they're almost always minimalist - exposition is kept to a bare minimum, a huge amount is left to the imagination. Look at Silent Hill 2 and Killer7, my personal gold standard for this sort of thing. In order to make writing in games both plentiful and well-done you've almost got to bloat it to the point where it subverts the rest of the game, like in Planescape: Torment.
Anyone who says the MGS series is well-written has produce for a brain. This is not to be contested. For some reason the stuff peripheral to the plot tends to be a barrel of fun, but the story itself is worthwhile through the cinematography and not much else.
I agree that taking a minimalist approach can lead to a pretty good story in games. Ico is one of my favorite games of all time. I think the lack of good voice acting and the inability of today's technology to convey realistic emotion (even with graphics being as good as they are, it's not quite there yet) are the reasons. When it comes to good story in games, less is more.
Do I really have to find the specific reviews that thought MGS4's story was good?
I mean, seriously. They do something different that isn't space marines in triple-thick body armour, and the environments are brilliantly made.
[IMG]http://www.frictionlessinsight.com/revpics2/MassEffect/MassEffectC.jpg[MG]
Environments may as well have been pre-rendered. What's supposed to be an intergalactic advanced city is nothing more than a bunch of connected corridors with pretty setpieces. And most of the rest of the game is set in barren terrain.[/img]
They are wearing space suits. Space suits aren't supposed to look like world of warcraft armor. And most of the design in the game is supposed to look like classic sci-fi.
Kojima's story is touted as story telling masterpiece by videogame journalists. How does the perceived quality of the story NOT have anything to do with videogame standards?
Give me the names of these journalists or at least the institutions for which they work, so that I may avoid them in the future.
The thing is that video game writing never matches up to that in more literary endeavors when enountered on literature's terms. There are marvelously told stories in games, but they're almost always minimalist - exposition is kept to a bare minimum, a huge amount is left to the imagination. Look at Silent Hill 2 and Killer7, my personal gold standard for this sort of thing. In order to make writing in games both plentiful and well-done you've almost got to bloat it to the point where it subverts the rest of the game, like in Planescape: Torment.
Anyone who says the MGS series is well-written has produce for a brain. This is not to be contested. For some reason the stuff peripheral to the plot tends to be a barrel of fun, but the story itself is worthwhile through the cinematography and not much else.
I agree that taking a minimalist approach can lead to a pretty good story in games. Ico is one of my favorite games of all time. I think the lack of good voice acting and the inability of today's technology to convey realistic emotion (even with graphics being as good as they are, it's not quite there yet) are the reasons. When it comes to good story in games, less is more.
Do I really have to find the specific reviews that thought MGS4's story was good?
I'd appreciate a few examples, at least. Most of the reviews I read said that the story was good for fans of the series, which is pretty backhanded as far as praise goes.
I mean, seriously. They do something different that isn't space marines in triple-thick body armour, and the environments are brilliantly made.
[IMG]http://www.frictionlessinsight.com/revpics2/MassEffect/MassEffectC.jpg[MG]
Environments may as well have been pre-rendered. What's supposed to be an intergalactic advanced city is nothing more than a bunch of connected corridors with pretty setpieces. And most of the rest of the game is set in barren terrain.[/img]
They are wearing space suits. Space suits aren't supposed to look like world of warcraft armor. And most of the design in the game is supposed to look like classic sci-fi.
You said Mass Effect wasn't space marines in thick armor. I posted a pic of the space green beret in triple thick armor.
When it was first announced and I saw people complaining that even the heavy armour (which you posted, which is only for the Soldier class who's specialised in it) wasn't big enough, I'd say it's not the best example. It's far, far more minimal than what you see in most other games, and works very well with the rest of the game's aesthetic.
Kojima's story is touted as story telling masterpiece by videogame journalists. How does the perceived quality of the story NOT have anything to do with videogame standards?
Give me the names of these journalists or at least the institutions for which they work, so that I may avoid them in the future.
The thing is that video game writing never matches up to that in more literary endeavors when enountered on literature's terms. There are marvelously told stories in games, but they're almost always minimalist - exposition is kept to a bare minimum, a huge amount is left to the imagination. Look at Silent Hill 2 and Killer7, my personal gold standard for this sort of thing. In order to make writing in games both plentiful and well-done you've almost got to bloat it to the point where it subverts the rest of the game, like in Planescape: Torment.
Anyone who says the MGS series is well-written has produce for a brain. This is not to be contested. For some reason the stuff peripheral to the plot tends to be a barrel of fun, but the story itself is worthwhile through the cinematography and not much else.
I agree that taking a minimalist approach can lead to a pretty good story in games. Ico is one of my favorite games of all time. I think the lack of good voice acting and the inability of today's technology to convey realistic emotion (even with graphics being as good as they are, it's not quite there yet) are the reasons. When it comes to good story in games, less is more.
Do I really have to find the specific reviews that thought MGS4's story was good?
I'd appreciate a few examples, at least. Most of the reviews I read said that the story was good for fans of the series, which is pretty backhanded as far as praise goes.
The very first review I looked at on gamerankings.com from PSX Extreme had this quote:
"you won't find top-notch story-telling or craftsmanship like this in any other game"
Kojima's story is touted as story telling masterpiece by videogame journalists. How does the perceived quality of the story NOT have anything to do with videogame standards?
Because anyone judging it as a storytelling masterpiece based solely on the merit of the plot is also missing the point. MGS's story is convoluted and nonsensical, and, specifically, in MGS 4 they stumbled over their own established plot points constantly in order to resolve everything. But it resides in a very interesting situation; MGS 4 is the culmination of twenty years of history, and is in and of itself not only a commentary on the evolution of Metal Gear, but on gaming itself.
I'd argue that it is one of the few gaming series to really embrace subtext, but you also need a specific mindset to appreciate it. On that level it fails in a broader sense, but on the other hand it is an extremely daring game. Think about it; the style is very unique and recognizable, but it is still ripe with incredibly surreal and absurd nonsense, and very intentionally so. I fully believe that if Kojima were a movie director, he'd pull the exact same type of shit.
And I have to respect it on that front. You can call the plot a steaming turd of shit all you want, but the way it is constructed within the context of gaming is much more interesting than Raiden coming to terms with his cybernetic body or whatever. All this interferes with the gameplay itself, which, I assume, is the primary reason everyone is harping on it, but I do appreciate the game for how it deals with its own history, and in the way it actively subverts storytelling conventions. I maintain that you can legitimately call the game a parody of itself.
The whole thing is reminiscent of the story behind Thomas Harris writing Hannibal. I don't know if you're familiar with that whole debacle.
Cherrn on
All creature will die and all the things will be broken. That's the law of samurai.
Gears of War is great, but the writing hurts my head and makes me ashamed to be spending 8 hours with it.
Mass Effect- Bleh. KOTOR and Jade Empire had great art styles implemented into their environments (JE moreso, but that was a shorter game) This just looks and feels like one long tech demo with a story slapped on.
Assassin's Creed- This is a great game for the first 2 hours. But then those 2 hours kept repeating themselves and there's nothing to speak of in the cities except those panoramic kodak moments. I actually didn't mind the guitar hero combat so much, it's just that the game recycled content way too much.
Dead Rising- Never mind the save system, it just sounded way better on paper.
Oh wow you reminded me what a disappointment Jade Empire was.
The setting was fantastic.
The characters and the gameplay engine?
Not so much.
Combat was an absolute bore. I liked how your party members added to your stats. But all it was was fast attack until they press block and then heavy attack.
MGS is just ridiculous. You can argue about it all you want, but it's really over-the-top. I can't take it seriously even if it's meant to be serious.
It is and it isn't. MGS 3 probably did the best job of being serious, but even then you had stuff like bee man and photosynthetic centenarian. It is the uniqueness and extreme personality of the series that is especially appealing to me. For better or worse, we'll probably never see a series like Metal Gear again once it's over.
Cherrn on
All creature will die and all the things will be broken. That's the law of samurai.
The very first review I looked at on gamerankings.com from PSX Extreme had this quote:
"you won't find top-notch story-telling or craftsmanship like this in any other game"
I didn't like Mass Effect at all. Story didn't grip me and combat was a snooze.
I am one of the strange people who loved Assassin's Creed, however. Reading a review that told me to turn of the games entire UI I think really helped in that regard. Also taking tycho's advice and doing all of the side missions. Using my information to figure out how to kill each boss before he could see me was very enjoyable. I found combat fun, but then again I made sure to keep switching up my weapons.
So, I guess what I'm trying to say is that Assassin's Creed is rather quite good if you try to meet the game half-way.
MGS is just ridiculous. You can argue about it all you want, but it's really over-the-top. I can't take it seriously even if it's meant to be serious.
It is and it isn't. MGS 3 probably did the best job of being serious, but even then you had stuff like bee man and photosynthetic centenarian. It is the uniqueness and extreme personality of the series that is especially appealing to me. For better or worse, we'll probably never see a series like Metal Gear again once it's over.
It's a patently Japanese-trying-to-be-American military story. Some times you're like, "Hey, this shit is deep" and then a guy who controls bees and only screams, "THE PAIN!" attacks you
Yes people get annoyed when games forget the game part.
nobody wants to read a novel's worth of crap on their tv
I don't know, planescape was pretty boss.
I actually miss the more in depth dialogue you used to get before voice acting made every line cost money. Compare and contrast: dialogue in Morrowind to dialogue in Oblivion.
MGS is just ridiculous. You can argue about it all you want, but it's really over-the-top. I can't take it seriously even if it's meant to be serious.
It is and it isn't. MGS 3 probably did the best job of being serious, but even then you had stuff like bee man and photosynthetic centenarian. It is the uniqueness and extreme personality of the series that is especially appealing to me. For better or worse, we'll probably never see a series like Metal Gear again once it's over.
It's a patently Japanese-trying-to-be-American military story. Some times you're like, "Hey, this shit is deep" and then a guy who controls bees and only screams, "THE PAIN!" attacks you
Do people really think "Hey, this shit is deep" while playing an MGS game?
MGS is just ridiculous. You can argue about it all you want, but it's really over-the-top. I can't take it seriously even if it's meant to be serious.
It is and it isn't. MGS 3 probably did the best job of being serious, but even then you had stuff like bee man and photosynthetic centenarian. It is the uniqueness and extreme personality of the series that is especially appealing to me. For better or worse, we'll probably never see a series like Metal Gear again once it's over.
It's a patently Japanese-trying-to-be-American military story. Some times you're like, "Hey, this shit is deep" and then a guy who controls bees and only screams, "THE PAIN!" attacks you
Do people really think "Hey, this shit is deep" while playing an MGS game?
Funnily enough, people are entitled to think what the fuck they want, even if you don't agree pancake. So just fucking leave it now.
Everyone gets it, MGS sucks, its bad storytelling at its worst, the characters, graphics and everything about it is shit and you should feel shitty for liking it. Point made.
Yes people get annoyed when games forget the game part.
nobody wants to read a novel's worth of crap on their tv
I don't know, planescape was pretty boss.
I actually miss the more in depth dialogue you used to get before voice acting made every line cost money. Compare and contrast: dialogue in Morrowind to dialogue in Oblivion.
Yes people get annoyed when games forget the game part.
nobody wants to read a novel's worth of crap on their tv
I don't know, planescape was pretty boss.
I actually miss the more in depth dialogue you used to get before voice acting made every line cost money. Compare and contrast: dialogue in Morrowind to dialogue in Oblivion.
Oh heck just look at Baldur's Gate 2. The Wikiquote page alone looks like a Best-Of collection from the entire fantasy genre.
MGS is just ridiculous. You can argue about it all you want, but it's really over-the-top. I can't take it seriously even if it's meant to be serious.
It is and it isn't. MGS 3 probably did the best job of being serious, but even then you had stuff like bee man and photosynthetic centenarian. It is the uniqueness and extreme personality of the series that is especially appealing to me. For better or worse, we'll probably never see a series like Metal Gear again once it's over.
It's a patently Japanese-trying-to-be-American military story. Some times you're like, "Hey, this shit is deep" and then a guy who controls bees and only screams, "THE PAIN!" attacks you
Do people really think "Hey, this shit is deep" while playing an MGS game?
The opening of MGS3 is pretty impressive and realistic. There's a realistic political conflict going on, and then all of the sudden you're fighting the X-Men and trying to cope with your crush on the lady from The Terminator
But listen, I love MGS3. I love all of the MG games. It's just that, for a first-time player, some of the over-the-top stuff really caught me off guard in MGS.
Yes people get annoyed when games forget the game part.
nobody wants to read a novel's worth of crap on their tv
I don't know, planescape was pretty boss.
I actually miss the more in depth dialogue you used to get before voice acting made every line cost money. Compare and contrast: dialogue in Morrowind to dialogue in Oblivion.
Oh heck just look at Baldur's Gate 2. The Wikiquote page alone looks like a Best-Of collection from the entire fantasy genre.
BG 2 also has the best gameplay in its genre. Yeah, the entirety of the RPG genre. So its not sacrificing one to get the other.
DisruptorX2 on
0
INeedNoSaltwith blood on my teethRegistered Userregular
Yes people get annoyed when games forget the game part.
nobody wants to read a novel's worth of crap on their tv
I don't know, planescape was pretty boss.
I actually miss the more in depth dialogue you used to get before voice acting made every line cost money. Compare and contrast: dialogue in Morrowind to dialogue in Oblivion.
That's difficult, though. The 'dialogue' in either game was pretty terrible. In Morrowind, it wasn't even dialogue, NPCs were essentially just big signposts.
Yes people get annoyed when games forget the game part.
nobody wants to read a novel's worth of crap on their tv
I don't know, planescape was pretty boss.
I actually miss the more in depth dialogue you used to get before voice acting made every line cost money. Compare and contrast: dialogue in Morrowind to dialogue in Oblivion.
Oh heck just look at Baldur's Gate 2. The Wikiquote page alone looks like a Best-Of collection from the entire fantasy genre.
BG 2 also has the best gameplay in its genre. Yeah, the entirety of the RPG genre. So its not sacrificing one to get the other.
No, but the developers had to sacrifice their lives. If you asked anyone that worked on it, the end result was great, but actually making the game was hell.
Every line of dialogue still did cost something, just not as much.
I've always felt like the biggest hurdle gaming had when it came to storytelling is the fact that games inherently depend greatly on the player. Movies, books, those mediums tell or show you exactly what's happening. Also, movie and literature literacy is quite different from games. It's so much more difficult to analyze a game due to how much input the player has in how things turn out, ie. pacing, skill level, all that.
I don't think people can or should be expected to be able to essentially tell themselves the story and be able to decipher the author's true intents.
Also, gaming is so much more of a visceral experience. No one is really going to care about a game with a fantastic story if the gameplay is shitty because the gameplay determines how well the story is told. That's why story has, and likely always will, come second to gameplay. It'd be nice if that could change but it's gonna take a long time before games as a whole becomes a recognized medium for story telling.
I've always felt like the biggest hurdle gaming had when it came to storytelling is the fact that games inherently depend greatly on the player. Movies, books, those mediums tell or show you exactly what's happening. Also, movie and literature literacy is quite different from games. It's so much more difficult to analyze a game due to how much input the player has in how things turn out, ie. pacing, skill level, all that.
I don't think people can or should be expected to be able to essentially tell themselves the story and be able to decipher the author's true intents.
Also, gaming is so much more of a visceral experience. No one is really going to care about a game with a fantastic story if the gameplay is shitty because the gameplay determines how well the story is told. That's why story has, and likely always will, come second to gameplay. It'd be nice if that could change but it's gonna take a long time before games as a whole becomes a recognized medium for story telling.
This is true, and I am in fact currently writing an essay on this topic, which is why I'm discussing it here instead of writing the fucking thing.
I do believe there's an incredible potential for interactive storytelling (see: Hamlet on the Holodeck), but there needs to be more coexistence between the narrative and the gameplay for this to occur. Metal Gear, for all the things it does wrong, is still a significant step on this ladder.
Cherrn on
All creature will die and all the things will be broken. That's the law of samurai.
Posts
Edit- Oh, and the animation is shit. The player character moves like a fucking pansy.
And it's not the only fancy environment in the game, but as the hub, it's kind of what they obviously put a lot of effort into, yeah.
I don't recall saying non-interactive, I said "may as well be pre-rendered"
i am aware they are not designed like FF7.
Jade Empire's settlements felt like they could conceivably be places inhabited by people, in addition to being pretty, and bearing a pretty unique art style for the time.
I do not feel that statement describes Mass Effect.
KOTOR had similar problems for some of its planets, but the fact that it had a better Star Wars story than the (prequel) films and most of the EU made up for it.
As for the believability of the places.. I didn't have the same problem you did. I generally felt things seemed pretty solid. I admit I'd have liked to see more of the Citadel, get down into some of the other areas you get to see where there's going to be a whole lot more people and activity, but I didn't find it lacking as a result.
I don't quite understand your point. Care to elaborate?
Kojima's story is touted as story telling masterpiece by videogame journalists. How does the perceived quality of the story NOT have anything to do with videogame standards?
Face it. The good writers are writing books or movies because that's where the audience and money are. Videogames don't hire great writers for their games because frankly, they are spending most of their money on programming the thing and can't afford good writing. That means they either hire subpar writers, or they get their game designers (aka, not good story tellers) to create the story. The money problem also extends to the quality of acting you see in videogames.
There are exceptions to the rule. David Hayter is a pretty good voice actor, especially in comparison to other videogame voice actors because they don't write 15 minute convoluted monologues for him to spout. They keep his lines restricted to simple questions and responses, and it works.
I never played 3, so 2 to 4 was a huge jump. Nowadays I can't even imagine playing Civ without Beyond the Sword.
That reminds me a lot of FF8, for some reason.
Also, I was reminded reading this page of another opinion I'm sure will get me spit on.
Disappointing game? Grim Fandango. I like the setting, I like the characters, I thought it was funny. But the story and puzzles are basically nonsense in a lot of areas. And the control was crap. Keep adventure games mouse driven, I'm not shooting shells out of Manny's mouth.
Give me the names of these journalists or at least the institutions for which they work, so that I may avoid them in the future.
The thing is that video game writing never matches up to that in more literary endeavors when enountered on literature's terms. There are marvelously told stories in games, but they're almost always minimalist - exposition is kept to a bare minimum, a huge amount is left to the imagination. Look at Silent Hill 2 and Killer7, my personal gold standard for this sort of thing. In order to make writing in games both plentiful and well-done you've almost got to bloat it to the point where it subverts the rest of the game, like in Planescape: Torment.
Anyone who says the MGS series is well-written has produce for a brain. This is not to be contested. For some reason the stuff peripheral to the plot tends to be a barrel of fun, but the story itself is worthwhile through the cinematography and not much else.
I agree with this completely.
They are wearing space suits. Space suits aren't supposed to look like world of warcraft armor. And most of the design in the game is supposed to look like classic sci-fi.
Wait a tick, you'd initially said that you were willing to just say he had horrible taste in games and be done with it!
Have malevolent cephalopods reprogrammed your brain for nefarious but ultimately pointless purposes?
So generic
http://www.fodos.net/keywords/2001_A_Space_Odyssey/2001_A_Space_Odyssey_1.jpg
Tube said he didn't want bashing in this thread. Didn't want to rock the boat.
I agree that taking a minimalist approach can lead to a pretty good story in games. Ico is one of my favorite games of all time. I think the lack of good voice acting and the inability of today's technology to convey realistic emotion (even with graphics being as good as they are, it's not quite there yet) are the reasons. When it comes to good story in games, less is more.
Do I really have to find the specific reviews that thought MGS4's story was good?
You said Mass Effect wasn't space marines in thick armor. I posted a pic of the space green beret in triple thick armor.
I'd appreciate a few examples, at least. Most of the reviews I read said that the story was good for fans of the series, which is pretty backhanded as far as praise goes.
Look at the earlier Silent Hill games for example.
When it was first announced and I saw people complaining that even the heavy armour (which you posted, which is only for the Soldier class who's specialised in it) wasn't big enough, I'd say it's not the best example. It's far, far more minimal than what you see in most other games, and works very well with the rest of the game's aesthetic.
The very first review I looked at on gamerankings.com from PSX Extreme had this quote:
"you won't find top-notch story-telling or craftsmanship like this in any other game"
Because anyone judging it as a storytelling masterpiece based solely on the merit of the plot is also missing the point. MGS's story is convoluted and nonsensical, and, specifically, in MGS 4 they stumbled over their own established plot points constantly in order to resolve everything. But it resides in a very interesting situation; MGS 4 is the culmination of twenty years of history, and is in and of itself not only a commentary on the evolution of Metal Gear, but on gaming itself.
I'd argue that it is one of the few gaming series to really embrace subtext, but you also need a specific mindset to appreciate it. On that level it fails in a broader sense, but on the other hand it is an extremely daring game. Think about it; the style is very unique and recognizable, but it is still ripe with incredibly surreal and absurd nonsense, and very intentionally so. I fully believe that if Kojima were a movie director, he'd pull the exact same type of shit.
And I have to respect it on that front. You can call the plot a steaming turd of shit all you want, but the way it is constructed within the context of gaming is much more interesting than Raiden coming to terms with his cybernetic body or whatever. All this interferes with the gameplay itself, which, I assume, is the primary reason everyone is harping on it, but I do appreciate the game for how it deals with its own history, and in the way it actively subverts storytelling conventions. I maintain that you can legitimately call the game a parody of itself.
The whole thing is reminiscent of the story behind Thomas Harris writing Hannibal. I don't know if you're familiar with that whole debacle.
nobody wants to read a novel's worth of crap on their tv
Oh wow you reminded me what a disappointment Jade Empire was.
The setting was fantastic.
The characters and the gameplay engine?
Not so much.
Combat was an absolute bore. I liked how your party members added to your stats. But all it was was fast attack until they press block and then heavy attack.
Satans..... hints.....
It is and it isn't. MGS 3 probably did the best job of being serious, but even then you had stuff like bee man and photosynthetic centenarian. It is the uniqueness and extreme personality of the series that is especially appealing to me. For better or worse, we'll probably never see a series like Metal Gear again once it's over.
PSX EXTREME BAD REVIEWERS
Say it with me! Pick up a sign!
I am one of the strange people who loved Assassin's Creed, however. Reading a review that told me to turn of the games entire UI I think really helped in that regard. Also taking tycho's advice and doing all of the side missions. Using my information to figure out how to kill each boss before he could see me was very enjoyable. I found combat fun, but then again I made sure to keep switching up my weapons.
So, I guess what I'm trying to say is that Assassin's Creed is rather quite good if you try to meet the game half-way.
It's a patently Japanese-trying-to-be-American military story. Some times you're like, "Hey, this shit is deep" and then a guy who controls bees and only screams, "THE PAIN!" attacks you
I don't know, planescape was pretty boss.
I actually miss the more in depth dialogue you used to get before voice acting made every line cost money. Compare and contrast: dialogue in Morrowind to dialogue in Oblivion.
Do people really think "Hey, this shit is deep" while playing an MGS game?
Funnily enough, people are entitled to think what the fuck they want, even if you don't agree pancake. So just fucking leave it now.
Everyone gets it, MGS sucks, its bad storytelling at its worst, the characters, graphics and everything about it is shit and you should feel shitty for liking it. Point made.
BG2 had the best voice acting ever to this day
Oh heck just look at Baldur's Gate 2. The Wikiquote page alone looks like a Best-Of collection from the entire fantasy genre.
The opening of MGS3 is pretty impressive and realistic. There's a realistic political conflict going on, and then all of the sudden you're fighting the X-Men and trying to cope with your crush on the lady from The Terminator
But listen, I love MGS3. I love all of the MG games. It's just that, for a first-time player, some of the over-the-top stuff really caught me off guard in MGS.
BG 2 also has the best gameplay in its genre. Yeah, the entirety of the RPG genre. So its not sacrificing one to get the other.
That's difficult, though. The 'dialogue' in either game was pretty terrible. In Morrowind, it wasn't even dialogue, NPCs were essentially just big signposts.
Oblivion was just bland, I guess.
Fallout 3 was a fair bit better in that regard.
No, but the developers had to sacrifice their lives. If you asked anyone that worked on it, the end result was great, but actually making the game was hell.
Every line of dialogue still did cost something, just not as much.
I don't think people can or should be expected to be able to essentially tell themselves the story and be able to decipher the author's true intents.
Also, gaming is so much more of a visceral experience. No one is really going to care about a game with a fantastic story if the gameplay is shitty because the gameplay determines how well the story is told. That's why story has, and likely always will, come second to gameplay. It'd be nice if that could change but it's gonna take a long time before games as a whole becomes a recognized medium for story telling.
This is true, and I am in fact currently writing an essay on this topic, which is why I'm discussing it here instead of writing the fucking thing.
I do believe there's an incredible potential for interactive storytelling (see: Hamlet on the Holodeck), but there needs to be more coexistence between the narrative and the gameplay for this to occur. Metal Gear, for all the things it does wrong, is still a significant step on this ladder.
When you press ALT+F4