Pile O' Shame - The Bear and Badger

Dubs

No, all games should be pure mechanics, no story or anything, that stuff is a threat to the medium. A medium that we, as Gamers, are duty bound to protect.

But srsly TLoU is actually pretty good, certainly the best at doing that kind of thing (ie: 3rd person punchy sneaky shooty plus not-terrible voice work). Still made me lol for the wrong reasons at times but that'll be ignored because it's easier innit.

Moot_Geeza

OK, I take it back now that I've been corrected by the masses. TLoU would be a great game - GOTY in fact - if you took away the story and character interaction. It's a moot point though, aha.

Play it for yourself Retro - after struggling with it for a while I thought it turned into a great experience, and they absolutely nailed the ending. I don't enjoy survival horror/stealth type games, and yet I got to the credits on TLoU. It was clearly doing something right, but for me it wasn't the sneaking, combat, puzzles or pressing triangle on every drawer and cabinet that kept me playing.

JonB

krs wrote:

Rules, rules, rules. Games can be anything they like. Restrictions won't benefit anyone.

Games can't be tomatoes, and if they were they wouldn't be worth playing, so restrictions are fine.

Diluted Dante

But are tomatoes games?

JonB

Are tomatoes art?

dynamiteReady

Yossarian wrote:

Half Life 2 was piss-poor.

ARGH!!!

Yossarian wrote:

I generally agree with the 'games are about the gameplay' argument. Having said that, I loved The Walking Dead, and that was as much down to the story as the gameplay, although the two slotted together so well that it's kind of hard to know where one ends and the other begins.

ARRRRGGGGGHHHH!!!

...

Just kidding (about TWD at least), I mean there's me spuffing loads over P4G...
It's essentially the same *ahem* game...

So how do I justify my willingness to play one and not the other?

Should I even bother trying to explain?...

dynamiteReady

JonB wrote:

krs wrote:

Rules, rules, rules. Games can be anything they like. Restrictions won't benefit anyone.

Games can't be tomatoes, and if they were they wouldn't be worth playing, so restrictions are fine.

Wait... This sounds a lot like the argument I once created a thread for...

b0r1s

Yossarian wrote:

I still want a film to be a good film whatever the genre or subject matter.

Not quite as simple as that though is it?

Predator? I love it. Watch it objectively and it's not great.

hylian_elf

Some of the worst acting and dialogue ever. But I still love it.

WorKid

Commando epitomizes that.

hylian_elf

JonB wrote:

krs wrote:

Rules, rules, rules. Games can be anything they like. Restrictions won't benefit anyone.

Games can't be tomatoes, and if they were they wouldn't be worth playing, so restrictions are fine.

The problem is that games where "gameplay is king" and that adhere to this notion of restrictions (on what games are/can be) are predominantly devoid of emotional feedback and thematic depth, or being more than just a (big boy's) toy. I like to see games try harder to engage with players on more than just a 'play' level, more than just pew pew and slash slash. There's a place for that and I love Halo and Bayonetta, but there's as much of a place for the likes of Proteus.

JonB

Yes, but what about tomatoes?

dynamiteReady

hylian_elf wrote:

Rules, rules, rules. Games can be anything they like. Restrictions won't benefit anyone.

Games can't be tomatoes, and if they were they wouldn't be worth playing, so restrictions are fine.

The problem is that games where "gameplay is king" and that adhere to this notion of restrictions (on what games are/can be) are predominantly devoid of emotional feedback and thematic depth, or being more than just a (big boy's) toy. I like to see games try harder to engage with players on more than just a 'play' level, more than just pew pew and slash slash. There's a place for that and I love Halo and Bayonetta, but there's as much of a place for the likes of Proteus.

Or like Papers Please, which just happens to have the most stringent and austere ruleset one can imagine, but appears to be extremely emphatic?

I mean let's face it, Papers Please is an "artsy" game, but it's definitely also a "gamers" game.

It's no paragon of "sandbox" technology though, but it presents a better sandbox than the likes of TWD... The point that I'm trying to make, is that all games trade on rules. We appreciate those rules all the more, if we have a chance to exploit them. To do that, you need a flexible ruleset.

TWD doesn't have a flexible ruleset to exploit. Just multiple choices.
That's why it's a bone of contention.

FFS... Even Who Want's to Be A Millionaire has an exploitable ruleset, remember that Sergeant Major prick?

monkey

The rule I have about games is that they shouldn't be crap. So they can do or try whatever they want, but if it's crap, or looks crap, I probably don't want to play it or probably won't like it.

Moot_Geeza

JonB wrote:

Yes, but what about tomatoes?

You say Attack of the Killer Tomatoes, I say Ready, Aim, Tomahtoes.

retroking1981

hylian_elf wrote:

"Software-on-a-games-console of the year" then. I note your point, but I just look at it differently and cannot agree. So we agree to disagree then, yeah?
I can write lots and lots about games and movies and blurring lines and all that jazz, but I'm not one to write much. I just don't think it has to be one or the other, games can successfully mix the two and I think Last of Us is the bestest one to do that.

I mean. The gameplay in Half Life 2 wasn't exactly amazing, but see how much praise that gets! The shooting is rubbish compared to Halo. (I love them both almost equally.)

cool

retroking1981

Dubs wrote:

No, all games should be pure mechanics, no story or anything, that stuff is a threat to the medium. A medium that we, as Gamers, are duty bound to protect.

This is kinda how I feel, I've no problem with games pushing stories so long as its not at the expense of our beloved gameplay.

I'm open minded and will play The Last of Us, I mean I played Heavy Rain so TLoU is a no brainer.

retroking1981

Moot_Geeza wrote:

OK, I take it back now that I've been corrected by the masses. TLoU would be a great game - GOTY in fact - if you took away the story and character interaction. It's a moot point though, aha.

Play it for yourself Retro -after struggling with it for a while I thought it turned into a great experience, and they absolutely nailed the ending. I don't enjoy survival horror/stealth type games, and yet I got to the credits on TLoU. It was clearly doing something right, but for me it wasn't the sneaking, combat, puzzles or pressing triangle on every drawer and cabinet that kept me playing.

Fuck sake moot stop saying stuff like this!

Moot_Geeza

It took me well over two months to get 8 hours in. I finished it within a couple of days after I got to the halfway point. It was second on my GOTY list, of the three games I played, despite the fact that I enjoyed the gunplay in Tomb Raider more (my third choice). I gave it an [8]. It was good. I'd give Ms. 'Splosion Man an [8], but I'd put it higher on a list of favourite games last gen. Everyone enjoys different types of gameplay, and there were aspects of TLoL that I wasn't keen on.

Bump this convo when you finish it. If I had to bet on it (knowing your taste in games), I'd say you'll like it, you'll be glad you played it, but you won't love it and won't rate it as highly as Uncharted. I reckon you'll consider a [7] but go for an [8].

stonechalice

Diluted Dante wrote:

I got maybe 10 mins into HL2. I'm thinking Bodycount will be the first I attack. Quite short and I won't care about doing everything.

Do yourself a favour and don't bother with Bodycount. Awful game. Bin it.

Diluted Dante

There is a reason for it though, my old housemate was a tester on it. I know how bad it is.

stonechalice

Ah righto. Good luck with that. I've been meaning to play Xenoblade Chronicles for years now. Feeling like I've missed the boat with it a bit. Worth the investment of time? Bear in mind I've not even put it in the machine yet...

JonB

It divides opinion (what doesn't?).

Personally I found it rather dull after a while. It's a nice environment, but feels too much like work.

GooberTheHat

Made a start on Dark Soul.

Rev

Awesome.

b0r1s

GooberTheHat wrote:

Made a start on Dark Soul.

There goes your life

stonechalice

GooberTheHat wrote:

Made a start on Dark Soul.

Much progress made? Or did you get owned repeatedly by hollow soldiers in the Burg? I'll be about tonight if you need a little jolly cooperation!

b0r1s

The fucking Burg!!

The fire bombs, the Knights with shields, and whatever you do... don't go down those stairs!! Ahhh!!!

But then you level up and sail through the fuckers :-)

hylian_elf

I've made a start on El Shaddai. Nice to look at so far. Combat is simplistic right now but will hopefully pick up. Only played about 40 minutes so far cos time constraints. Maybe another 30 minutes tonight if I'm lucky.

GooberTheHat

stonechalice wrote:

GooberTheHat wrote:

Made a start on Dark Soul.

Much progress made? Or did you get owned repeatedly by hollow soldiers in the Burg? I'll be about tonight if you need a little jolly cooperation!

Cheers for the offer, I'm only getting to put about 30 minutes in here or there so can't commit to any co op just yet but I'll let you know when I've got a bit more time. Is the burg the bit up the stairs with all the little stone buildings? I'm not doing to bad up there.

Howdy, Stranger!

Categories