Monster Hunter Tri

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 . . . 24 NEXT
 

Now, generally I'm not the sort of person who likes to cheaply strawman their enemies by repeating their sentences back to them in a high-pitched mocking tone of voice, but here's a brief summary of my email inbox after the Monster Hunter Tri review: "Mneh mneh mneh. You didn't play it long enough. Mneh mneh mneh. Metacritic said it was good. Mneh mneh mneh. I just did one in my pants. Mneh."

I won't bother quoting specific examples, suffice to say there were a lot of them. The main thrust of the argument was that Monster Hunter Tri totally gets good once you've gotten past the tutorial, which takes about ten hours of gameplay.

Ten hours. Do you people listen to yourselves? Maybe if I had your kind of wealthy, privileged lifestyle and could spend most of my days idly playing Wii by the pool as a team of oiled bodybuilders fanned me with palm fronds, but some of us have jobs to do. Articles to write. Other, better games to review. Fun Space Games to avoid working on. As I've said time and again, "it gets better later" as an excuse does not wash for me. Even if the game is 50 percent poo and 50 percent mind-blowing envelope-pushing extravaganza, that's still mediocre on average.

I would like people to have a look at the above paragraphs.

Now I'm going to highlight the important parts.

(((repeating their sentences back to them)))(((You didn't play it long enough)))(((The main thrust of the argument was that Monster Hunter Tri totally gets good once you've gotten past the tutorial, which takes about ten hours of gameplay.)))(((Ten hours. Do you people listen to yourselves?)))

The implication is A) Yahtzee didn't get by the tutorial, ergo B) the 10 statement was based on second hand information obtained via E-Mails from fans of the game i.e. You, as in the group you are a part of.

I don't mind that you bashing Yahtzee, but in annoys me to see people complain as a group about a misconception that they themselves provided.

ReverseEngineered:
*slow clap* I totally agree, Yahtzee. The game shouldn't start getting good 10 hours in. Would you have sex with a cheese grater if somebody promised it "gets good" 10 minutes in? I don't think so. It's the same excuse as, "She's nice once you get to know her." It's another way of saying, "She's a bitch and has no social skills, but she isn't half as mean to her friends."

A good game should be good from beginning to end. The tutorial shouldn't be terrible, nor should it be 10 hours long (if it takes 10 hours to explain how to play the game, it is either too complicated or you need to learn how to explain things better).

I swear that some of the people defending these games are suffering from Stockholm syndrome. They paid so much for their games that they have to see them through to the end, and once they get past the 10 hour mark, even the slightest improvement seems like a blessing, because they've become accustomed to such horrible gameplay the rest of the way through. It isn't fun or entertaining, it's servitude. They play the game because they have to in order to justify the time, money, and effort they have already invested in it.

PS: I haven't tried Monster Hunter Tri, nor do I intend to. If it really does take 10 hours to get "good", it isn't worth my time.

Okay, guys, the tutorial isn't 10 hours long, he was exaggerating, all of you need to realise that in all of Yahtzee's reviews, he EXAGGERATES. kthxbai.
Edit: Yes I probably mispelled Exhaggerate or however ou spell it.

Nazrel:
ergo B) the 10 statement was based on second hand information obtained via E-Mails from fans of the game i.e. You, as in the group you are a part of.

I don't mind that you bashing Yahtzee, but in annoys me to see people complain as a group about a misconception that they themselves provided.

1) Groups are not perfectly contiguous entities. See Association Fallacy.

2) The 10-hour figure was not given to him by fans of the game. It was given most commonly as a Strawman Fallacy argument by detractors of the game, superimposed over the tutorial remarks made by fans of the game.

Do you understand?

Carnagath:
Blah blah blah, MH3 does not have a 10 hour tutorial. It has a 90 minute tutorial, unless you linger on, doing things that are unnecessary forever. Do them for a bit, explore a bit, then move on. Do you need a manual to play this game, someone to hold your hand? You don't like some elements of it, sure, I accept that, but saying it has a 10 hour tutorial is like reviewing WoW and spending your first 10 hours picking herbs and then saying "In this game you do nothing but pick herbs for the first 10 hours". That's pretty silly.

Also, WELL UP YOURS TOO, PRICK!

Hearing "It has a 90 minute tutorial, not a 10 hour one" is like hearing "You aren't raped by several hairy men, there's only one". It's not really making the situation sound particularly more appealing

mike1921:

Hearing "It has a 90 minute tutorial, not a 10 hour one" is like hearing "You aren't raped by several hairy men, there's only one". It's not really making the situation sound particularly more appealing

This is actually acceptable game pacing for people who play games that aren't cinema-like twitch experiences, such as RPGs.

You can't judge all games by the same parameters of pacing, as such.

He's still completely missing that the point of the game was the unique online multiplayer hunting game on a platform where online multiplayer can rarely ever be found.

The reason why you're restricted to one weapon is the different hunters that come along with you are expected to fill the other niches. The small sword and shield guy is essentially the tank that keeps the monster good and distracted so the guys with the big-ponderous weapons or ranged weapons can lay on the DPS.

Basically, single player mode is one giant practice mode that doubles as a means to level-up your hunter offline. The tutorial isn't a 10 hour grind. The single player mode is one giant, flexible tutorial you can drop out of whenever you feel confident enough to play the real game by going online.

That the single player mode may pass as a whole game in and of itself is part of the genius of the series. Sure, if you want to grind alone and pass on most of the game, you can, and still feel relatively as though you paid for a complete game.

Lt Blasphemer:
He reviewed Dragon age without finishing it and he said he wasn't sick of it.

in fairness dragon age took me 75 hours to finish. he also had a review to write and a video to make, he didnt have time for the whole game.

I can't help but laugh at the mindless drones posting here.

I also can't help but laugh at this:

The last mission I played was one that had me hunting and killing some giant version of the velociraptor lads.

This shows that he barely even played it for an hour. Must be so nice to be ignorant.

really didnt play it right, why on earth would you use the wiimote when you have a classic controller? and seriously you only got to the bigger jaggi thing, thats pretty early in the game, seriously it only sounds like you played it for a few hours, I hate to say it given your tender tummy but you should have gone online, just join a random game and at least seen how a fight against a real monster goes, hell, you probably could have gotten ppl to just fight it as you watched if you were so inclined

golbleen:

mike1921:

Hearing "It has a 90 minute tutorial, not a 10 hour one" is like hearing "You aren't raped by several hairy men, there's only one". It's not really making the situation sound particularly more appealing

This is actually acceptable game pacing for people who play games that aren't cinema-like twitch experiences, such as RPGs.

You can't judge all games by the same parameters of pacing, as such.

i disagree. i hate tutorials and i play alot of rpgs. if i have to stick to a tutorial that long i quit, unless its actually an interesting tutorial.

Weapon wear and repair was thought up by morons for moorons. if you enjoy it in a game, guess which group you are in? The rates are abritrary at best and malicious at worst. They are simply mechanics to reduce player resources and prolong the game by making you do chores. Take a solid metal hammer and start hitting an anvil. Count how many hits it takes to break the hammer. For best results, hold your breath while you count. Light your house on fire and see if you can break the hammer before it burns down around you.

10 hour tutorial? WTF? it doesn't take that long to be certified a fucking medic in AA and in that game you actually learn something useful

Normalgamer:

ReverseEngineered:
*slow clap* I totally agree, Yahtzee. The game shouldn't start getting good 10 hours in. Would you have sex with a cheese grater if somebody promised it "gets good" 10 minutes in? I don't think so. It's the same excuse as, "She's nice once you get to know her." It's another way of saying, "She's a bitch and has no social skills, but she isn't half as mean to her friends."

A good game should be good from beginning to end. The tutorial shouldn't be terrible, nor should it be 10 hours long (if it takes 10 hours to explain how to play the game, it is either too complicated or you need to learn how to explain things better).

I swear that some of the people defending these games are suffering from Stockholm syndrome. They paid so much for their games that they have to see them through to the end, and once they get past the 10 hour mark, even the slightest improvement seems like a blessing, because they've become accustomed to such horrible gameplay the rest of the way through. It isn't fun or entertaining, it's servitude. They play the game because they have to in order to justify the time, money, and effort they have already invested in it.

PS: I haven't tried Monster Hunter Tri, nor do I intend to. If it really does take 10 hours to get "good", it isn't worth my time.

Okay, guys, the tutorial isn't 10 hours long, he was exaggerating, all of you need to realise that in all of Yahtzee's reviews, he EXAGGERATES. kthxbai.
Edit: Yes I probably mispelled Exhaggerate or however ou spell it.

exaggerate. you had it right the first time.

mike1921:

Carnagath:
Blah blah blah, MH3 does not have a 10 hour tutorial. It has a 90 minute tutorial, unless you linger on, doing things that are unnecessary forever. Do them for a bit, explore a bit, then move on. Do you need a manual to play this game, someone to hold your hand? You don't like some elements of it, sure, I accept that, but saying it has a 10 hour tutorial is like reviewing WoW and spending your first 10 hours picking herbs and then saying "In this game you do nothing but pick herbs for the first 10 hours". That's pretty silly.

Also, WELL UP YOURS TOO, PRICK!

Hearing "It has a 90 minute tutorial, not a 10 hour one" is like hearing "You aren't raped by several hairy men, there's only one". It's not really making the situation sound particularly more appealing

A) It isn't a tutorial, just some quickinfo which you can skip by bashing the A-Button.
B) You haven't played the game, ergo you can't evaluate how the experience at the beginning of the game is.

golbleen:

mike1921:

Hearing "It has a 90 minute tutorial, not a 10 hour one" is like hearing "You aren't raped by several hairy men, there's only one". It's not really making the situation sound particularly more appealing

This is actually acceptable game pacing for people who play games that aren't cinema-like twitch experiences, such as RPGs.

You can't judge all games by the same parameters of pacing, as such.

...Wait, in what genre of games is a 90 minute tutorial acceptable? In WRPGs they last...Maybe an hour at most? MAYBE. in JRPGs they're about the same, probably a little less. In RTSes, it depends on how the game splits up the tutorial (My favorite RTSes tend to have tutorials where the basic shit that is common to all RTSes like how to select units is seperate from the rest) but, either you don't have to do it or it's 30 minutes at the most. In FPSes, Action Games, Sports games, They're incredibly short . So, please, let me know what genre this is acceptable in.

Mindmaker:

mike1921:

Carnagath:
Blah blah blah, MH3 does not have a 10 hour tutorial. It has a 90 minute tutorial, unless you linger on, doing things that are unnecessary forever. Do them for a bit, explore a bit, then move on. Do you need a manual to play this game, someone to hold your hand? You don't like some elements of it, sure, I accept that, but saying it has a 10 hour tutorial is like reviewing WoW and spending your first 10 hours picking herbs and then saying "In this game you do nothing but pick herbs for the first 10 hours". That's pretty silly.

Also, WELL UP YOURS TOO, PRICK!

Hearing "It has a 90 minute tutorial, not a 10 hour one" is like hearing "You aren't raped by several hairy men, there's only one". It's not really making the situation sound particularly more appealing

A) It isn't a tutorial, just some quickinfo which you can skip by bashing the A-Button.
B) You haven't played the game, ergo you can't evaluate how the experience at the beginning of the game is.

A) Alright, I'm fucking tired of this. In the last thread I had a person who claims to like the game but played the older ones (and thus doesn't need the tutorial) complaining about how it's not skippable. Why can't the game's fans be somewhere within the realm of consistant when discussing a game?
B) I don't need to play an hour long tutorial to know it's ridiculous.

golbleen:

Kavachi:

*applause* Well that is some nice back-up you got there. But let's go even further back. Why did Yahtzee actually put this in his Extra Punctuation? Because you guys attacked his opinion. So, he is present, else he would never made that XP.

Right. So why do Yahtzee's fans need to continue defending him? It's clear he could continue this dialogue as long as he wanted, without your help.

Kavachi:

Also, if you did like the game, why would you "attack", like you call it, Yahtzee's opinion.

Because it's based off of false and misconstrued facts.

Kavachi:

The main thing I hear you MH3 fans scream is that we should just fuck off if we don't like the game, but who actually started if Yahtzee's opinion was attacked? Right, you and the rest of those MH3 fans.

The main thing I hear from you Yahtzee fans is the Strawman Fallacy, which happens to be why this section of your post is wrong. Please stop using it and we can continue an intelligent dialogue at a future date.

Kavachi:

Also, I do have my own opinion, but as many times, Yahtzee knows to hit it right on the spot, so I don't defend HIS opinion, I just tell you guys what I'm thinking, and that's indeed very similair to Yahtzee's opinion.

This is a similar phenomenon to how horoscopes profit off of their followers; the psychological effect known as confirmation bias. Effectively, your mind analyzes his opinion but only grasps the vague key points he mentions that agree with yours, therefore projecting yourself onto him in a sort of idealization and discarding matter his review produces that doesn't fit into this 'right on the spot' opinion that you 'share.'

It is impossible for your opinion and Mr. Croshaw's opinion on any single given subject matter to be perfectly contiguous. Multiple slight or even major deviations are bound to exist out of the billions of people in the world that exist, with various points and counterpoints all weighted differently, creating incongruities.

Basically, MHtri fans don't care about your opinion. They care about Yahtzee's, because he has a public speaking medium that others project onto in doubt, giving him a by-and-large somewhat dangerous amount of control over the gaming medium, if left uncriticized.

Cute, giving an answer to every single sentence I posted. All right, you can do that, if that is how you want to play you're "intellectual", how you call it, discussion.

However you also start to put things kinda out of context, which is pretty weak.

But because you did that you started to contradict earlier statements you made with your other statements. For example you said how I'm defending Yahtzee's opinion by sharing my own. This would point out that my opinion is the same as Yahtzee's. However somewhere near the end you got all psycological on me and told me that my opinion could never be the same as Yahtzee's. Are you starting to see the error in you're way of arguing?
Also, about what you said in him being inacurate with false facts; you can say all you want, but the things he said are true. The only thing that he just over-exxagurated way too much is the tutorial time. However a tutorial one hour or even more long (this statement has been taken from earlier posts) is still ridiculous. He was trying to prove a point.
When you plead to me to stop using a specific argument using an invalid argument yourself. This is kind of hypocritical to do. Just saying.
I don't mean to offend you in any way, however I don't like it when you start putting things out of context. I hope you won't take it that hard.

P.S. Did you graduate in Psycology? Because that part about confirmation bias is pretty interesting. But personally I believe I'm not projecting myself onto him, I still think we just share opinions on those main points you spoke about, and indeed I do not agree on him on the more sophisticated things.

P.P.S. About me being a Yahtzee fanboy: Yeah, he's pretty funny and most things he say are true, however I do take consideration that he is almost never positive about something. However in this instance I think he is right.

It does tend to amaze me how often people say 'This game is amazing because MetaCritic said so.'

I created a post where I took issue with Kratos in GoW 3...not GoW 1, not GoW 2, not GoW: CoO. I wrote that Kratos was not a badass, but simply a jerk and a bully. And MAN did I get flamed for saying that. It got to a point where whoever was in charge took the thread down. And I don't believe that they took it down because there were some harsh disagreements (its not like harsh disagreements are abnormal in a forum). I'm pretty sure they took it down because a couple days later, Yahtzee posted an Extra Punctuation article that said pretty much the exact same thing.

And why are people writing to Yahtzee to say 'you got it wrong, its a good game' anyway? This is one man's opinion. It's not like there's any evidence of an agenda with his critiques, like he was one of those conservative movie critics who saw 'An American Carol' and said 'Well, its not funny, but I hate Hollywood so I'm giving it a thumbs up.'

BTW, if you think I'm lying about that last sentence, look at rottentomatoes. :-D

Krimson Kun:
I got to point where Yahtzee is talking about(fighting the Great Jaggi) in about an hour of gameplay, and it took me about 15 minutes to kill the thing. Since I've played other Monster Hunters, that gives me the advantage of knowing what to do, but still by hour 2~3 I was fighting things that scared the shit out of me even though I've played other MHs.
Well, I've enjoyed this game, and I'm just sorry that Yahtzee felt like the game was kicking him in the nuts over and over and over.

I was new to MH too, and at first I had the exact same problems as Yahtzee, but I stuck to MY rule: if at first I don't succeed, try again, but now differently.

I thought I was doing pretty good, my annoyances at some time in where:
-Restriction to 1 weapon, I'd like to have a Bowgun and SnS with me.
-Restricted to 10 honey, the stuff you pretty much burn all the time, whilst getting megapotions.
-Great Jaggi is too strong.

After some questing, I got my Switch axe and my farm upgraded. Now all my troubles are gone. I've always been jumpy around big bosses, especially in the field, when gathering, not carrying a lot of potions or demondrugs. Now I don't care, and actually chased one. When it was dead I couldn't believe I had done that. I'm up against a Barroth next, and hell, I've been looking forward to fighting a monster 10x my size! That's a freaking first!

I'm pretty glad Yahtzee cleared stuff up. He played, didn't like it. Fine, your choice, but he gave it a go.

I always refrain from making posts in Yahtzee's threads personal, but I must give you (Benjamin Yahtzee Godzilla Croshaw that is) credit for being more fair than I thought.

deckai:

Kavachi:

Also, I do have my own opinion, but as many times, Yahtzee knows to hit it right on the spot, so I don't defend HIS opinion, I just tell you guys what I'm thinking, and that's indeed very similair to Yahtzee's opinion.

Wait, how is it possible to have a opinion on a game you havn't played?

At best you can have a opinion on other opinions...

Alright, good point. I did not play the game, however I did see things at my friends, saw gameplay movies and plenty of reviews to form my an opinion of my own. The reason for this is because I was curious before and thought it would be pretty awesome, but after seeing all that stuff it just doesn't really do it for me, and the things I saw at me friend's made it worse. Yahtzee pointed out the things that I already had noticed about the game.

Cya

mike1921:

golbleen:

mike1921:

Hearing "It has a 90 minute tutorial, not a 10 hour one" is like hearing "You aren't raped by several hairy men, there's only one". It's not really making the situation sound particularly more appealing

This is actually acceptable game pacing for people who play games that aren't cinema-like twitch experiences, such as RPGs.

You can't judge all games by the same parameters of pacing, as such.

...Wait, in what genre of games is a 90 minute tutorial acceptable? In WRPGs they last...Maybe an hour at most? MAYBE. in JRPGs they're about the same, probably a little less. In RTSes, it depends on how the game splits up the tutorial (My favorite RTSes tend to have tutorials where the basic shit that is common to all RTSes like how to select units is seperate from the rest) but, either you don't have to do it or it's 30 minutes at the most. In FPSes, Action Games, Sports games, They're incredibly short . So, please, let me know what genre this is acceptable in.

Maybe whe should have pointed that out earlier.
By using the term tutorial we were speaking in figures.

It's like in anf FPS which presents you a new feature in the fifth mission and gives you some quickinfo about it.

Your not getting lectured.
Just bash A until the quickinfo goes away, if you know it already or just dont care.

joshthor:

Normalgamer:

ReverseEngineered:
*slow clap* I totally agree, Yahtzee. The game shouldn't start getting good 10 hours in. Would you have sex with a cheese grater if somebody promised it "gets good" 10 minutes in? I don't think so. It's the same excuse as, "She's nice once you get to know her." It's another way of saying, "She's a bitch and has no social skills, but she isn't half as mean to her friends."

A good game should be good from beginning to end. The tutorial shouldn't be terrible, nor should it be 10 hours long (if it takes 10 hours to explain how to play the game, it is either too complicated or you need to learn how to explain things better).

I swear that some of the people defending these games are suffering from Stockholm syndrome. They paid so much for their games that they have to see them through to the end, and once they get past the 10 hour mark, even the slightest improvement seems like a blessing, because they've become accustomed to such horrible gameplay the rest of the way through. It isn't fun or entertaining, it's servitude. They play the game because they have to in order to justify the time, money, and effort they have already invested in it.

PS: I haven't tried Monster Hunter Tri, nor do I intend to. If it really does take 10 hours to get "good", it isn't worth my time.

Okay, guys, the tutorial isn't 10 hours long, he was exaggerating, all of you need to realise that in all of Yahtzee's reviews, he EXAGGERATES. kthxbai.
Edit: Yes I probably mispelled Exhaggerate or however ou spell it.

exaggerate. you had it right the first time.

Really? I always want to pronounce it with an H, perhaps it's my accent.

Normalgamer:

joshthor:

Normalgamer:

ReverseEngineered:
*slow clap* I totally agree, Yahtzee. The game shouldn't start getting good 10 hours in. Would you have sex with a cheese grater if somebody promised it "gets good" 10 minutes in? I don't think so. It's the same excuse as, "She's nice once you get to know her." It's another way of saying, "She's a bitch and has no social skills, but she isn't half as mean to her friends."

A good game should be good from beginning to end. The tutorial shouldn't be terrible, nor should it be 10 hours long (if it takes 10 hours to explain how to play the game, it is either too complicated or you need to learn how to explain things better).

I swear that some of the people defending these games are suffering from Stockholm syndrome. They paid so much for their games that they have to see them through to the end, and once they get past the 10 hour mark, even the slightest improvement seems like a blessing, because they've become accustomed to such horrible gameplay the rest of the way through. It isn't fun or entertaining, it's servitude. They play the game because they have to in order to justify the time, money, and effort they have already invested in it.

PS: I haven't tried Monster Hunter Tri, nor do I intend to. If it really does take 10 hours to get "good", it isn't worth my time.

Okay, guys, the tutorial isn't 10 hours long, he was exaggerating, all of you need to realise that in all of Yahtzee's reviews, he EXAGGERATES. kthxbai.
Edit: Yes I probably mispelled Exhaggerate or however ou spell it.

exaggerate. you had it right the first time.

Really? I always want to pronounce it with an H, perhaps it's my accent.

perhaps. i say it exadgurate. i needed to go through my spellchecker.

Mindmaker:

mike1921:

golbleen:

mike1921:

Hearing "It has a 90 minute tutorial, not a 10 hour one" is like hearing "You aren't raped by several hairy men, there's only one". It's not really making the situation sound particularly more appealing

This is actually acceptable game pacing for people who play games that aren't cinema-like twitch experiences, such as RPGs.

You can't judge all games by the same parameters of pacing, as such.

...Wait, in what genre of games is a 90 minute tutorial acceptable? In WRPGs they last...Maybe an hour at most? MAYBE. in JRPGs they're about the same, probably a little less. In RTSes, it depends on how the game splits up the tutorial (My favorite RTSes tend to have tutorials where the basic shit that is common to all RTSes like how to select units is seperate from the rest) but, either you don't have to do it or it's 30 minutes at the most. In FPSes, Action Games, Sports games, They're incredibly short . So, please, let me know what genre this is acceptable in.

Maybe whe should have pointed that out earlier.
By using the term tutorial we were speaking in figures.

It's like in anf FPS which presents you a new feature in the fifth mission and gives you some quickinfo about it.

Your not getting lectured.
Just bash A until the quickinfo goes away, if you know it already or just dont care.

Is the fifth mission forcing you to do shit that you will never be forced to do again so you learn how to do it? Because that's how it was explained to me, if it does, I don't care if I have to read the quickinfo, the mission is still part of a tutorial.

As I've stated before, my problem with the video is that he didn't review the actual game.
Everything was a series of his over-done tropes bordering on cliches.
I was looking forward to a proper nip picking and what I got was Yahtzee whining about his job.
You might have jumped the shark with this one, maybe stick with your booze+gaming thing, at least someone will be entertained there.

Also, when people say "tutorial", they mean the 1 star quests. None of which has the "Press the A button to swing your sword!" crap.

Quest 1: Gather mushrooms. Learn to gather.
Quest 2: Kill raptors. Learn to hit stuff that hits back.
Quest 3: Kill water herbivores. Learn to swim.
Quest 4: Kill water lizards. Learn to kill stuff in water. Also plot related.

That's all 1 star stuff. The other 3 quests in there are optional.

Quest 5: Kill a Great Jaggi. Fight and kill a boss monster.
Quest 6: Capture a Great Jaggi. Learn how to beat down and capture a monster before you kill it.

That's 2 stars. By 3 stars you'll have met at least 4 boss monsters and they just keep getting bigger and scarier. Yeah, if you can't handle trying the same monster a few times to learn how he moves or where to hit him, then maybe this game isn't for you.

Urf:
I like MH3 and was looking forward to a good bashing of it.
Instead I got "I couldn't be bothered to play for 2 hours".
I don't believe you played to the boss before the review else you would have added it to the review (and subsequently made it worthwhile). The bosses are the meat and potatoes of the game, not including it made it boring, whiny and disappointing. I wasn't expecting you to like MH3 (I am no where near that thick), I was expecting a fun ripping of the game. Instead we got Yahtzee hates MMOs and Japan (STOP THE PRESSES!).

you know what? go watch EVERY SINGLE ZP and take every little statement into account.

also, he was basically saying CRAP = BAD. its not he couldn't be bother, its that the game was a fungal piece of shit and he wanted to stop because it was agonizing him.

pretty much like when I played Haven: Call of the king...

10 hours is far too long. Seriously what is there to tell you 10 hours into the bloody game?

Here are two lines that just reminded me of why Yahtzee continues to piss me off:

Do you people listen to yourselves? Maybe if I had your kind of wealthy, privileged lifestyle and could spend most of my days idly playing Wii by the pool as a team of oiled bodybuilders fanned me with palm fronds, but some of us have jobs to do. Articles to write. Other, better games to review. Fun Space Games to avoid working on.

There you go. That was your bonus review expansion pack. Up yours, Monster Hunter Tri fans. Up yours with blobs of Icy Hot on the end.

Wow. What an arrogant son of a bitch you've become Yahtzee. Do you honestly think all of us live that kind of lifestyle? I work just as long a job as you and I still find time to play through games that suffer the same problem you're giving a pissy fit about. And your little rant on why you hate Tri doesn't justify the need to insult the console it's on yet a-fucking-gain. I said it before, and I'll say it again: there are some genres or at least games that Yahtzee should just fucking ignore and shut his mouth on. Call me when he pulls the Wii's sensor bar out of his ass because it's clear that's the only stick up there that makes him say this shit.

Sure is agree with yAHtzhee in here.

It's a good game, get over yourselves

Urf:
As I've stated before, my problem with the video is that he didn't review the actual game.
...
I was looking forward to a proper nip picking and what I got was Yahtzee whining about his job.
.

AGAIN YOU ARENT PAYING ATTENTION.

yes, he reviewed the actual damn game. he played and found it to be a tedious crapathon

also, that was 100% nit picking of the game, what the hell are you reading?

Do all modern RPGs need a ten hour intro section before the game gets "good"? First FFXIII now this. Remember Kingdom Hearts II? Remember that absolutely annoying three-hour nonsense fest as Roxas at the beginning? Do you like that? Well, imagine playing a game, but with an intro THREE TIMES that length. Amazing.

Zero Punctuation is to game reviews, what the Daily Show is to journalism.

Its entertaining, occasionally brings up some interesting commentary on things, but ultimately is for laughs before its for any sort of true criticism of games.

The only thing that bothers me about it in general, is sometimes I find myself wondering if Yahtzee actually takes himself seriously, or understands that this is the nature of what he produces. I'd like to think its the latter, but occasionally he makes me wonder.

The gets good further in thing isn't new. And TEN HOURS? For a glorified make-fun game ala pokemon for grownups? or the offline MMORPG-style (really existed before but came into its own there) That's short. That's pretty good actually. I get that it doesn't make it easy and it is *hard* for nonfans and non-familiar with this mechanic inside and out style. Admittedly this is an issue. The whole 'no bridging mechanism but an extra $20-$30 for a guide" or having a watercooler or list of fans, which is what these games intend to facilitate without making Azeroth. So much familiarity (note no matter how arcane Ben rarely runs into this problem with PC games or PC Game originating features he tries and practically zooms by them without comment) or based off of things you're familiar with or can fake through.

See as this is the third installment and its a hardcore monster safari simulator I'm surprised Mr. Croshaw reviewed it. Same as Sims or SimCity or Spore. It just isn't for critical analysis for faults. Its like antfarms, plant raising, or as he points out Harvest Moon its something you do to do it because you enjoy it. It seems fake for a guy who well is part of an arcane insider community already.

Simultaneously I don't think convincing him he's wrong will help yourself, him, or the game. MH3 is selling well, its not in any danger from bad press that breaks down to 'why fantastic life simulators likethis don't work for me.' But its also offering nothing that new or concrete. Overall it felt a fair review. A newbie jumping into an arcane system who honestly felt he wasn't getting anything he couldn't get elsewhere (like, again, World of Warcraft's fetching for quest items system. I get if you've been doing it for years as a bar from the fun 'serious' quest and 'epic' gear and all the parts of WoW you want or like there will be negativity about the activity. For me the concept sounds FUN in and of itself.)

A good tutorial is a part of the game and fun. GTA had a good habit of doing this up until IV, but even then some of the tut missions are integral to the story even though they are teaching you how to do things. A 90 minute collection of fetch quests sounds like a root canal in terms of possible enjoyment. I don't play WoW because I am not spending FFX like amounts of time running backward and forward collecting gizzards just so I can get to the levels required to actually destroy things properly.

MH Tri sounds like it's really not my cup of tea, or jaffa cake, or any other tea time treat, the days of games grabbing you from the get go seems to be long gone. FFXIII with it's interminably bad pacing, and no after 25+ hours it's still not good enough to forgive it's many many flaws. GTAIV with it's flaccid plot. Best game I've played recently is Arkham Asylum where I didn't even notice I was playing the tutorial, the game had hooked me enough not to notice by that point. More good games like that would be nice. Hook then teach, don't teach then hook.

Kai XIII:
Sure is agree with yAHtzhee in here.

It's a good game, get over yourselves

Yes, how dare we agree with yahtzee that a game you like sucks. Obviously if you say it's a good game it must be, all mighty person with 10 posts.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 . . . 24 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here