E3 2017 thread of dreams and kebabbage.
-
It didn't have bad gameplay. But the answer to your question is yes. See EGttR, and Virginia.retroking1981 wrote:
So something can have bad gameplay and get critical acclaim?Andy wrote:
Um... for the narrative?retroking1981 wrote:Also is the gameplay isn't particularly good why did it get such high ratings?
It's time to accept that the medium is broader than the bit that you like. -
retroking1981 wrote:
So something can have bad gameplay and get critical acclaim?Andy wrote:
Um... for the narrative?retroking1981 wrote:Also is the gameplay isn't particularly good why did it get such high ratings?
Yes because gaming isn't defined by one thing. -
Dark Soldier wrote:There's no room for narrative in gaming. None whatsoever. Lets go back to the days of 3 buttons and parallax scrolling.
Reminds me of my misspent youth in the arcades. Tbh, games now are just amazing. As a kid it was SF2, Final Fight, Double Dragon etc in the arcades. That's not where I am in gaming anymore.
-
Dark Soldier wrote:retroking1981 wrote:
So something can have bad gameplay and get critical acclaim?Andy wrote:
Um... for the narrative?retroking1981 wrote:Also is the gameplay isn't particularly good why did it get such high ratings?
Yes because gaming isn't defined by one thing.
But gameplay is surely the most important?
オレノナハ エラー ダ -
Actually, in that respect, TLoU is a good example. I enjoyed it for the story. I thought the gameplay was great, but not so much that I wanted to play through it again, at least not straight away. Some people hated the gameplay, but thought the story was excellent, and so well told, they didn't mind the lesser gameplay. Others loved the gameplay enough to play through repeatedly on increasing difficulty, learning all the tricks and nuances of the combat.
Different people like different things, and take different things from their games. -
Of course I can see the 'gameplay is king' point of view, but The Last of Us taught me that that isn't always the case. It's probably a very rare phenomenon, but sometimes it's okay to have things that way around.Get schwifty. -
I don't know what to tell you. Gaming has evolved in all sorts of ways. Some you'll like, some you won't.retroking1981 wrote:Has the industry really evolved into narrative above gameplay? Gameplay is what makes gaming, it's something books or movies can never match. -
I didn't like The Last of Us much though.
-
retroking1981 wrote:
But gameplay is surely the most important?Dark Soldier wrote:
Yes because gaming isn't defined by one thing.retroking1981 wrote:
So something can have bad gameplay and get critical acclaim?Andy wrote:
Um... for the narrative?retroking1981 wrote:Also is the gameplay isn't particularly good why did it get such high ratings?
To me, like you, yes. To many many others, no. See how popular shitey JRPGs are throughout the spectrum of gamers, where its all dating/ridculous fantasy mcguffin plots. There's still an absolute fuckton for me to like, as there would be for yourself mate if you didn't compare all to the 'golden years' -
Moot_Geeza wrote:The skinheads have taken Madonna hostage!Reg Peak wrote:Propah stories!
HEY! CAM ON!
What I realised about Breath of the Wild in contrast to those annoying-at-times pixel-pushers is that its difficulty was tacked on, not baked into its design. If you've been to the cells in Hyrule Castle...
Spoiler: -
The Last of Us is very likely the only game ever to inspire me to play through to the end that had a style of play that wasn't for me. And then I played through it again.Get schwifty.
-
What is Gameplay? Does a text adventure game have gameplay? A game like digital: a love story is something impossible in film but managed to make me feel something interesting because it was perfunctorily interactive. It also had a win condition and rules so was undoubtedly a game.
-
Why I oughtta... I'll see you in the metaverse.Dark Soldier wrote:See how popular shitey JRPGs are throughout the spectrum of gamers, where its all dating/ridculous fantasy mcguffin plots. -
I respect those games, I just know I'll never, ever enjoy one.
-
Diluted Dante wrote:
Erm, what?Escape wrote:RoboCod's easy, mate!
Extendable neck!
FranticPea wrote:Expect alot of arguing as the ship sails in circles as half the crew drink too much grog and play their accordions.
Can G throw the accordions into the sea by mistake?
Andy wrote:It's a game with a prescribed narrative, and the devs felt that sequence was important to the narrative.
So let the convo continue as the characters leave, don't trap them in a gamefare system. I've suffered the old locked-passage-opens-after-you've-checked-and-discounted-it a lot, and all you need to do is move your so-important dialogue to a place where players can option it, or — if you really must — to a cutscene.
This whole you're-in-control-but-forced-so-not-really-in-control needs to do one.
Deus Ex: Human Revolution immediately annoyed me with Badman Gruff as its protag. I've said a few times that I'd have written a 75-year-old retired man as its lead. Not even a Gran Torino man, just a regular science duffer. The sort of guy who spends most of his time Quad Cowboying and risks getting arrested for trying to buy a gun if he's not smart.
We could have some interesting stories, but nothing comes close yet. Films are regarded as a tier above games for writing, but they're almost as woeful these days. I don't want any more diet versions of disappointment. -
Has anyone flounced yet?Come with g if you want to live... -
Escape wrote:...all you need to do is move your so-important dialogue to a place where players can option it, or — if you really must — to a cutscene.
The first part is easier said than done; see the criticism Gears had for walk-and-talk sections. It's maybe not perfect, yet, but I'm happy for developers to explore the blurring of the line, since 'this bit is gameplay, now this bit is narrative' approaches are also criticised. There's a difference in the player engagement when it's not just a set cutscene playing out in front of us. -
Retro is trying to get out the door, but still has to listen to some more conversation before the button prompt will show....g.man wrote:Has anyone flounced yet?"Like i said, context is missing."
http://ssgg.uk -
Andy wrote:See EGttR, and Virginia
Roujin played Virginia for me. Not Pounder's best.
Andy wrote:There's a difference in the player engagement when it's not just a set cutscene playing out in front of us.
So long as you avoid forced-walk and other such annoyances, there are multiple points in most games where the player has enough time for a few optional replies during normal traversal. Uncharted 2 had automated snippets of chat during regular play.
retroking1981 wrote:Also is the gameplay isn't particularly good why did it get such high ratings?
Because too many writers are hard for games becoming a venerated medium, their desire to belong to an artistic circle that's so incompatible it makes their endeavours pointless. No-one ever walked out of an arcade in the '80s because games weren't respected by Turner Prizers.
You can get that kind of shallow backpatting in the art world if that's what you're after; don't drag games there. They really are just simple playthings, and there's absolutely nothing wrong with that.
RamSteelwood wrote:
Retro is trying to get out the door, but still has to listen to some more conversation before the button prompt will show....Has anyone flounced yet?
Haha! -
No, games can be simple playthings. They can also be something else.
-
Only if you perceive them to be; not because you're told that they are. Not because they were designed to impress in accordance with artistic standards.
(Not that that precludes them from greatness, it's just prone to shaping their downfall. Build the story and visuals around the gameplay, always.)
mistercrayon wrote:What is Gameplay?
I'm sat in a Ferrari, but it won't let me drive until I've selected a radio station! -
Escape, sounding like a Gamergate lunatic. I shouldn't be surprised, but it's not the kind of thing I expect to read here.
-
Gamergate's a strange old jump.
-
My flounce shall be pixel-perfect, just like the good old days!
Y'know, once I've found the door. -
1. Games
2. The reactions to games
3. Games being released -
retroking1981 wrote:Dark Soldier wrote:retroking1981 wrote:
So something can have bad gameplay and get critical acclaim?Andy wrote:
Um... for the narrative?retroking1981 wrote:Also is the gameplay isn't particularly good why did it get such high ratings?
Yes because gaming isn't defined by one thing.
But gameplay is surely the most important?
Are movies defined by their emotion quotent? The more you engage with a movie the better it is? -
1. Sega to show something good
2. More push up to win shite
3. Konami to show something goodオレノナハ エラー ダ
Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Categories
- All Discussions2,712
- Games1,876
- Off topic836