Discussion in 'Gaming' started by Servo, Jul 28, 2010.
^Meh, I don't really care. I never felt the need to lose my temper here.
Having a negative opinion of video games in a video game forum isn't against the rules and isn't automatically trolling.
You've honestly read his comments in this thread, and seriously believe that's all there is to it?
Putting aside the fact that he practically called me a whining CoD/GTA player, which is mild flaming at best, the obvious baiting aimed at Hermiod should earn him a warning, or at the very least, a friendly.
There's nothing particularly immature about the Halo games themselves. It's the people on Xbox Live that give the series a bad rep.
The single player storylines are probably more intelligent than anything on TV or at the movie theatre since the series started. Ditto for GTA.
Of course, that's more of a commentary on how pathetic TV and movies have been for the last several years than a ringing endorsement.
Can we stop involving me in the moderating issues here, please? I don't need people attributing complaints to me, thanks all the same.
-Brett- - I agree, Halo, Mass Effect, Half-Life etc all have great stories that are a lot better than we see on TV or film these days.
To clarify, I've nothing against 'adolescent' games per se, anyone unable to enjoy a work lacking higher pretensions probably needs to remove the stick from their ass.
But the thing is, when you encounter a film rated 'for adults only', unless it's porn it's usually the case that film features content deemed unacceptable for younger audiences, but it's rarely defined by that content; rather the content is employed because it contributes to the story the filmmakers are trying to tell.
In gaming that's rarely the case: the blood, language, and hookers are ends unto themselves, they're the selling points. And then this 'I'm a man's man' voiceover comes on and boastfully informs us that the game is rated "M for Mature". In truth it's usually anything but; it's a 12yr-old's idea of maturity: 'boobies, teehee'. And each time I hear it it highlights to me just how far the industry has to go.
I'm more suspicious than most about the idea of games emulating narrative film, but there's certainly a place for such titles. If only more games had ambitions beyond Star Wars.
And now for something even more tangential to the OP: it occurs to me that you might want to check out Bioshock 2 if you haven't already, Hermiod. Amongst other things it offers a positive and surprisingly nuanced tale of fatherhood.
Bioshock 2 is a pale imitation of the first game. I finished it in a day. Waste of money. Except I got it for free in a promotion.
Definitely agree with you on that. A cheap cash in on an unexpected hit, and took an atmospheric original and made a generic copy.
Talking about good stories in games, Bioshock is the opposite: not a terrific story but such a fantabulous setting it's crying out for big screen treatment (with a good story).
Suit yourself; I think it's rather better than the first.
- Far superior combat and supporting gameplay systems.
- Sophia Lamb is a far more interesting antagonist than Andrew Ryan.
- Unlike BS1 it actually used the underwater environment of Rapture, on occasion to truly spectacular effect.
- Better (although still not entirely satisfying) moral choice systems and endgame.
- The only thing it's missing is anything on the level of 'would you kindly', but the Little Sister sequence is ample compensation.
A disembodied voice for the most part, directing the first person. It was diverting and, y'know, an actual vital part of the story in the first game. The second one was just a loony woman shouting at him at stages in the game.
The rights for a Bioshock movie had been bought, if I remember correctly.
I personally thought the first Bioshock was a decent game, bit of a let down on the moral choice front and story because it basically made no differences if you were mostly good or mostly bad, it only dealt with absolutes.
The second game was a cheap imitation with the antagonists political and societal views reversed, and the story wasn't really any better, just focused differently.
The opening sequence of the original game was so filmic in quality that it just sucked me in. I also loved the art deco feel to the city. It was gorgeous.
Bioshock's isn't a trick that could be pulled twice, nor is it something that could translate to film. So I'm not sure why you even bothered to play BS2 or advocate a film version if that's all you got out of the game. Hey, I watch Glee and I can't stand most of the music, I know how that works.
I'm currently in the process of splicing together an audio file spanning all of BS2's diaries and shout-outs; 11,000 audio files to sort through and place in narrative order. No chance I'll be doing the same for the original game, it's not nearly as interesting. Hell, I think Ryan is more interesting in BS2 than he is in BS1.
I won't disagree with you there. I would love for them to do a current generation remake of System Shock 2, that game had just as much atmosphere 10 years before Bioshock and I'd argue it was a better game.
You're funny. Some games have truly excellent follow-ons. All you have to do is mention Half Life 2 and your joke is fully revealed. Not sure what the Glee joke is about though. The music is the best bit.
Yeah, in fact there's a lot of bad games that have had better sequels than the originals, because sometimes they do learn from the mistakes they made on the original.
Blah. I'm a Sue Sylvester fan, and although I'm tiring of her now, other characters (like Brittany) are stepping in to pick up the comedic slack. The series also uses some interesting stylistic tricks, albeit less so in the more recent episodes. I guess they've run out of verve and are just settling in for the slog now.
And that was certainly the case with Bioshock 2. In Bioshock, water was entirely aesthetic. You're in an underwater city, but you might as well be in New York for all the difference it made. Bioshock 2, in contrast, makes much better use of the game's unique environment, through from relatively minor touches like the airlocks to major sequences like the flood. Bioshock's Rapture was merely a sketch, Bioshock 2 was the realisation.
And of course that's just one of the several ways in which the game improves on its predecessor. It's quicker to list the ways in which didn't. In addition to 'would you kindly', there's nothing in BS2 as gorgeous as Arcadia from BS1. Of course Arcadia was home to one of the most annoying fetch quests in the game ... something else which BS2 improved upon. It's interesting that both games fall apart at the end; albeit BS2 simply stretched things out too long whereas BS1 slapped you in the face with a giant boss.
Go on, indulge us.
Separate names with a comma.