Jimquisition: Joy Begets Anger

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 NEXT
 

Britpoint:

"I'm not going to bash you because you like a game. But I am going to bash you because you don't like the *right* games."

For the record, I loved the original Fallout games AND Fallout 3. So there you go, I'm not some ignorant modern gamer not demanding enough from my games. I played and liked the old stuff, I played and liked the new stuff. You gonna get pissed at me for that?

I'm sorry you didn't enjoy Fallout 3. It's a shame, it would have been nice if you didn't feel let down by it. But the fact that I didn't happen to feel let down by it is not something for you to get angry at me about. Am I supposed to just ignore the fact that I enjoy a game and hate on the developer as some sort of show of camaraderie to the section of the fanbase that didn't experience the same level of enjoyment as me? Is that the only thing I can do to stop you being mad?

If so, then you need to have a good long look at yourself in the mirror. If you didn't like Fallout 3? Fine. You wanna resent someone for that? Fine. But, and this is Jim's point, resent the guys that chose to make it that way, not the guys who happened to like what came out.

Your FYP is clever, but it's not on point. My genuine dissatisfaction with Jim on this point is that I find it dissapointing that he doesn't hold games to higher standards in general. I like him a lot and I like his episodes a lot, so naturally I hold him to a high standard and I get annoyed when he says things I don't agree with, such as being one-sided and blatantly accusing people of being idiots and whatnot.

In regards to Fallout 3 I'm not pissed at you for liking it. In fact, I like "Fallout 3 the shooter and loot simulator", but not "Fallout 3 the successor to the previous CRPG's". I like Fallout fans, I don't like Fallout 3 entry fans.
Let me be clear; Your admission of liking the previous games already sets you apart, in my eyes, from the people that I'm angry at, one of which is a friend of mine. He doesn't like them, because they're not shooters and are graphically outdated.

So, while I'd never comment on your appreciation of the game, I would comment on people who say it's a better game or the right way to go, in part because I feel threatened, but also because I feel they're doing a gigantic disservice to the rest of us by promoting a game that in essence isn't "Fallout".
Something as simple as changing the title from being a misleading successor to something else would've made a difference.

I don't expect anything of you personally, just like I hope you don't expect me to give up being unreasonably mad at people on the internet, since that's one of my favourite pastimes.

I hope that explains the difference and I do understand your point of redirecting my rage. I'm just.. not gonna do it. Because reasons.

Floppertje:
How do you have an investment in something you dislike?

Not to answer on behalf of someone else, but I think you misunderstood him.
You can be invested in something you dislike, if it's part of something you otherwise enjoy, like the Star Trek reboot. I like Star Trek, but I hate the new movies since they're very different from what I enjoy about the shows and previous movies.
If you like the new movies(and especially if you're not familiar with or enjoy the old stuff), then I'd feel threatened by your praise of said movies and the direction they take.

At least I think that's what he means.

My god did I hate when the whole DMC ordeal came up, a classmate of mine wouldn't shut the fuck up about how "those" guys were ruinning the franchise and changing a "super cool" character into an "emo child" and how awful they were to even put a scene in which they mocked the lack of white hair.

And then he had to take different classes because he screwed up, and I LOVED that day.

Floppertje:

MeChaNiZ3D:
snip

How do you have an investment in something you dislike? Do people come over to your house and beat you up unless you play ME3's ending over and over again? are you really complaining about how there's too much of something you don't like, don't buy and that has no influence on you? Do you somehow expect IW, Treyarch or DICE to say 'you know what? everyone's doing MMS, we'll just make a fantasy rpg instead. that's not going to happen. and you know what? If DICE hadn't been so successful with BF, they wouldn't be making Battlefront. I've been dreaming of a new Battlefront ever since my ps2 died! So yes, I'm glad BF exists, I'm glad people enjoy it and even though I dislike the games themselves, I'm glad that because of them I'm getting something I DO want.

I'm saying investment as in I was a fan of the ME series and hated the ending and the last game by extension. Had I not played the series at all, not invested any time or effort in the characters, plot, whatever, then I would feel much less justified in not liking the ending, if indeed I even formed an opinion about it. In other words, it's not disliking a series, or a genre, it's disliking the changes or development of something you do like. And in that sense it is necessary to voice your opinion, because you are the target market, you are the one being affected, your opinion actually does matter to the developer, or if it doesn't, you should be trying to make it that way.

In contrast, I have never played any Devil May Cry games, ever, and think DMC looks like it has Bayonetta/God of War/Ninja Gaiden-like frenetic action gameplay, which appeals to me. However, I am not invested in the series, and don't proclaim to know what the fans of the series before DMC think or feel when they express their hate. And nor should the developer care that I am indifferent or think it looks fun, because I won't be buying it. I am not the target market and my opinion shouldn't matter, especially not before the opinions of the people who have followed the series, whether they like the most recent one or not.

As for your line about physical violence, I hope you're not trying to suggest that since it's 'just a video game' it doesn't matter. That my wellbeing isn't affected by video games. Because it is. Video games are a hobby of mine. What doesn't matter to you can matter to me a great deal. If I'm reading too much into that, I apologise and move on, but I do hate that line of argument.

As to large companies changing genres based on the flavour of the month, don't be ridiculous. I don't expect the industry stalwarts with repeatedly successful series to change anything. But when a new developer, or even a new IP, has the choice between weapon wheels, a seperate co-op storyline, singleplayer experience only, freeform classes, realistic aesthetic and weapons, etc. and 2 weapon swap, no co-op, online multiplayer focus/inclusion, structured classes, individual aesthetic and imaginative weapons, etc., the general landscape of opinions might have something to do with their decision - especially for large risk-averse companies. Note that I mixed those up, some of those ideas I like and some I do not on both sides, some are ambivalent. But when someone says anything against something I like, or equally important, in favour of something I do not, that can be an influence.

I will reiterate: If I am not affected by what I dislike, if it poses no threat to something I like, I have no problem with it. However, often I am not talking about a series I don't like interfering with one I do - more commonly it is changes within a series I like. So if someone likes those changes, and is visible about it, the devs may consider that. And moreover, they're also disliking the alternative, which is what I like, in many cases.

A good example, I think, is DLC. I hate DLC in many forms. Be it on-disc, day-one, version-exclusive, booster packs, poorly made, previously included content, or any number of other things. DLC is an issue that is pervasive in gaming. If DLC is doing well in some series, other series may (and have) attempt similar things themselves. In this case, practically any case of DLC I disagree with has the potential to hurt series I like.

I'm going on a bit. Basically, I don't get Jim's saying that there are people who hate other people just for liking something they dislike. I am not one of those people. I am definitely not one to rage or to harrass. But I do feel my input is required, for my own selfish reasons of wanting games I like to become better for me rather than worse, in cases where I am invested. Where I am the fan of the series. Where what I like has been changed, and the change praised by someone, that is disliking what I like as well as the inverse. It's all the same, and I have the obligation to push for what I want in a game because the companies making the games I have been playing want a good, clear image of what their players want in subsequent games, and it's partially my job, if I want games that I will like, to present that.

To call a game I don't enjoy, enjoyable, may cause those like me, who wouldn't enjoy it, to waste money on it instead of games more to their taste.

It is therefore understandable to be angered by people drowning out criticism of games while singing their virtues to the heavens.

This is no excuse though, to start on personal insults, even if you're genuinely angered, and not merely looking for any "excuse" to put someone down, indeed, such tomfoolery simply wastes time and space which could otherwise be used to point out why you didn't enjoy the games, while making people less receptive to your opinion.

Therefore before posting, it is wise to take a moment to make sure you're calm, and proof-read ones' entry.

Haha man welcome to the internet. What you talk about has been here way longer than video games and it is not exclusive to games and it will not go away. Just ask some metalheads what do they think about mainstream music or tell them that you think Metallica is a great band, depending on who you will ask you may be in for a treat. Not all metalheads are like that same as not all gamers or ME fans will shit on you for liking ME3 ending.

deathbydeath:
Is this what's happening here:

1. GamersTM: "We're dicks!"
2. Sterling: "GamersTM are dicks, and so I'm going to make you stop being dicks by being dicks to you until your dickishness goes away!"
3. ???
4. Problem Solved.

Bad Jim, that is not how you solve problems. Dicks breed only dicks, and you aren't helping.

Besides, fanboyish praise can lead to terrible things. Human Revolution was a decent game, but a shitty Deus Ex game. It had no subtleties from the first two, had no clue what DX was even about, and mistook saying "human augmentation" over and over for actually saying something about human augmentation. People ignored these flaws, though, and instead praised the game universally (except for the outsourced boss fights, of course). Now we have Thief 4. Same with Mass Effect 2. The story was undeniably shit, but people ignored that and got Mass Effect 3 in return.

True, you can like whatever you want, and I adore plenty of terrible/flawed things (KotOR 2 comes to mind). However, praising or rewarding a game for doing something terrible is only going to sow terribleness for the future.

I don't know where you made the mental leap you did to condense the point of his video into those 4 bullets. I think a better list would be.

1. Some Gamers are jerks when you like what they don't.
2. This behavior can be viewed as irrational and, regardless, pretty rude and unnecessary.
3. Soooo, don't be a dick and hate on people for liking something.

EDIT: And I don't think he even once condemed criticism. He just said you don't need to verbally attack someone for liking something.

Have a problem with people liking Deus Ex? Fair enough, explain your issues with the game. Don't just say "Everyone who likes Deus Ex: HR is a moron who couldn't tell a DX game from a pile of garbage."

Also HR was awesome.

Grabehn:
My god did I hate when the whole DMC ordeal came up, a classmate of mine wouldn't shut the fuck up about how "those" guys were ruinning the franchise and changing a "super cool" character into an "emo child" and how awful they were to even put a scene in which they mocked the lack of white hair.

And then he had to take different classes because he screwed up, and I LOVED that day.

There was a lot of hate like that, but there were also legitimate complaints because it turned from... well, Devil May Cry, with frenetic, tight action and a high skill ceiling into something more akin to God of War or Lords of Shadow with floaty single button combat. The change from the skill rating system being based around constantly changing up your combos and technique to damage based, where you can get SSS rank from using the heavy attack four times in a row or just mashing the shoot button after launching an enemy was pretty negatively viewed too.

And when these complaints arose, developer and by extension journalistic response was "Shut up guys, we get it you don't like the hair." Which was dickish and incredibly condescending.

DmC is a competent western action game, with the exception of the bugged final boss fight but it's not something that lives up to the gameplay standards of the brand. And new Dante isn't emo, he's an asshole, there's a difference and that kid should learn it.

MeChaNiZ3D:
[
In contrast, I have never played any Devil May Cry games, ever, and think DMC looks like it has Bayonetta/God of War/Ninja Gaiden-like frenetic action gameplay, which appeals to me.

Those games aren't the same genre though. DMC(1, 3 and 4) Bayonetta, and maybe Ninja Gaiden are stylish action games (also known as CUHRAAAAZEEE Games) while God of War is a hack and slash more in the vein of Dynasty Warriors with a bunch of window dressing to make people think they aren't playing Dynasty Warriors... and everyone totally bought it. And DmC is in the latter category.

No, I can understand why someone liking something you hate can make you mad. There are a number of games I absolutely despise and if someone told me they liked them, well, I'd tell them to fuck off too. It's not that I want them to not be happy, but more I cannot fathom why they would find enjoyment in something (that in my opinion) is shit. And by doing so I will look at them just as poorly. Is that fair or mature, probably not, but that's just how it is. And honestly I don't that is necessarily a bad thing, it just needs to be kept to an appropriate level. Maybe not look to them for advice on games to buy but certainly not make death threats or shit.

There was an excellent example of this very recently, in our very own Escapist, that i'm intrigued as to why Jim didn't mention. The "Papers, Please Vs The Last of Us" debacle for the game of the year award.

While many people loved both games, people were so focused on their hatred for Papers, Please, that they started bashing it over and over again, claiming to have registered specifically to vote AGAINST it. Now, i'm 100% ok with fans voting, or registering to vote for their favourite game, but i think it says something about our community as gamers, that a game can win, not out of love, but out of hate for the "enemy".

That's very very grim....

Your own gaming experience is not the same as others, this is something we learn to accept.

Regardless of acceptance however is knowing how to behave on the internet. Something people do not seem to know how to do. There is a difference between firmly explaining a person is wrong, not even in a polite way and sending them threatening and abusive messages. Like the stupidly insane backlash from the cod devs for altering gun behavior slightly.

Cybylt:
And new Dante isn't emo, he's an asshole, there's a difference and that kid should learn it.

He is neither. That bugs me the most: How is he an asshole? I have played through the game, I don't remember anything that is worth that title.

i think jims message holds no thruth unless he starts rating games as either "i liked it" or "i didnt like it".

if a professional game reviewer however gives those games a "score" that gives us the impression that a somewhat objective standart is applied, which i dare say is the reason people bother to read such things in the first place. if the the outcome of such a review is, that a game whos obvious flaws are either unmentioned or credited but do not influence the rating at all, then people are in my opionion right to ask if the reviewer is doing his job properly.

a game reviewers word holds some weigth, simply because the score he gives a game tends do influence sales. so, if you like bad stuff, please do. but dont go around giving flawed work high marks on a scale that you know your readership considers at least semi objective simply because some aspect of it struck your fancy. that is not what i consider good critique.

if you get some backlash for that, please suck it up. youve just partaken in an act that is percived as to having encouraged the games industry to produce more product with the same flaws youve so generously overlooked, because obviously people let stuff like this fly. that is an injustice and justifiable reason for outcry. anger is in this scenario a reasonable and absolutely healthy resonpse. because you are percived to partake in the destruction of something, that is valued by others.

so no jim, im not with you on this one. sorry.

Loki_The_Good:

Vault Citizen:
Quick question Jim, how do you and your wife know that Mr. Dafoe actually signed that?

Does a video about crapping on people's happiness and this is the first comment. .... I am actually speechless. Is this some sort of metajoke that just flew over my head? I really really want that to be the case. Just ... Dah Blah Gah EEEEAAAAHHHHHH

Thank you for giving me the benefit of the doubt but sadly it wasn't deserved. I'm not going to try to make an excuse for my post, I'm just going to raise my hand and say "I admit that was a stupid thing to post and I'm sorry to Jim"

TheKasp:

Cybylt:
And new Dante isn't emo, he's an asshole, there's a difference and that kid should learn it.

He is neither. That bugs me the most: How is he an asshole? I have played through the game, I don't remember anything that is worth that title.

The guy knocks out a bouncer and writes "Fuck You" as his name on the guest list with this quip as if he's done something exceptionally witty. His conversation with the bosses(oddly enough that Succubus one was supposed to be a very different dialogue and much less profane in the original script) particularly mocking Mundus for the whole dead baby thing. How is he not an asshole?

His whole character arc was about him being a generic selfish douchebag of the "I don't need anybody's help and I don't help anybody" variety, something he even points out early on in the game; to becoming less of a selfish douchebag by being presented some amount of responsibility for himself and those around him and through a love interest.

I'm not saying you can't like him or anything, but he's definitely an asshole, or an asshole with heroic traits, whether or not you go by start of the game or end of the game Dante.

Eh, I'm definitely one of those who were, at least mildly, surprised people could really say dmc: DMC was a great game. My friend rented it, said it's a fun game, good for him. I played the demo and found it entirely far too easy to get into even just the A-S rank, not to mention the SS or SSS rank, for combat or stages in general. Dialogue was far to... trying, to me at least. And frankly it just felt slower overall.

I did tell him though I'd give the game a shake if it ever went completely free to play, and lo and behold it will be on the PS3. Even Fable 3 was worth at least trying to ensure my hatred of it was real, and I was happy to report that after an hour of dealing with it's nonsensical concept of 'fixing' menu systems among other things, that said hatred is quite strong still for it. As is my love of The Lost Chapters on PC.

And I remember seeing those posts begging to have DA 2's score changed! Again, I wasn't a big fan of the game, after having played plenty enough of Origins it's just too far tonally different. At least it was a let down in comparison to dmc;DMC for me, and I can at least stomach the floaty, painfully dull flashy mob-wave combat, the stereotypical JRPG protagonist Fenris (god why does he have that name...?!), the pitifully written and shadow of his former self Anders. Though the fact that they decided they would only have one healer in the whole bloody game has rubbed me wrong the entire game, seeing as I hate even having Anders around now. Hopefully they'll bring back class freedom for Inquisition, but that's another game where I'll likely be waiting for a sharp price drop (as I did for ME 3) before even bothering to look at it.

ME 3? Eh. You can say screw it to the Prothean DLC, The Leviathan DLC as well seeing as it has no real bearing on the end anyways (you'd think a bunch of giant space squids who could one shot reaper ships would be much more useful), and the whole "points instead of show" concept they had was just all let downs. It would of been much more interesting had they treated it like ME 2's final run, where if you had or didn't have something you'd see it visually as well as be affected by it. I agree with the reviewers though, grudgingly, that it's an almost amazing ride up until that end.

And that Citadel DLC? Priceless...! Ignore the relatively few weaker bits, and it's pure hundred percent gold! And the best parts...?

Multiplayer was surprisingly solid as well. Though that might just be because I got lucky with my free beginner packs and scored a Talon Mercenary. Homing Crossbow darts as the 'melee' or 'melee charged' attack that scale with melee damage? My. God... I never used B so much in a game.

Caius:
There was an excellent example of this very recently, in our very own Escapist, that i'm intrigued as to why Jim didn't mention. The "Papers, Please Vs The Last of Us" debacle for the game of the year award.

While many people loved both games, people were so focused on their hatred for Papers, Please, that they started bashing it over and over again, claiming to have registered specifically to vote AGAINST it. Now, i'm 100% ok with fans voting, or registering to vote for their favourite game, but i think it says something about our community as gamers, that a game can win, not out of love, but out of hate for the "enemy".

That's very very grim....

That kind of reminds me of last year when ME3 won GOTY against all logic. I was... less than pleased with the outcome, being a vocal detractor of the game.

I'm still not convinced that it wasn't people voting for it out of spite to the people who hated the ending. Me? I hated all of it, so that stung even worse.

Rakschas:
i think jims message holds no thruth unless he starts rating games as either "i liked it" or "i didnt like it".

if a professional game reviewer however gives those games a "score" that gives us the impression that a somewhat objective standart is applied, which i dare say is the reason people bother to read such things in the first place. if the the outcome of such a review is, that a game whos obvious flaws are either unmentioned or credited but do not influence the rating at all, then people are in my opionion right to ask if the reviewer is doing his job properly.

a game reviewers word holds some weigth, simply because the score he gives a game tends do influence sales. so, if you like bad stuff, please do. but dont go around giving flawed work high marks on a scale that you know your readership considers at least semi objective simply because some aspect of it struck your fancy. that is not what i consider good critique.

if you get some backlash for that, please suck it up. youve just partaken in an act that is percived as to having encouraged the games industry to produce more product with the same flaws youve so generously overlooked, because obviously people let stuff like this fly. that is an injustice and justifiable reason for outcry. anger is in this scenario a reasonable and absolutely healthy resonpse. because you are percived to partake in the destruction of something, that is valued by others.

so no jim, im not with you on this one. sorry.

This right here sums it all up.

I tend not to buy new games anymore, mostly because I've shot myself in the foot more than once in doing. I've read reviews about a game and gathered a bit of information first, only to find that they left out what was wrong with it. Dragon Age 2 is an example of this because as much as I liked the game, it was seriously flawed and no-one bothered to say that.

On the other hand I bought Bioshock Infinity, even though the people around me were slamming it before it was released. I traded in a bunch of old games and got a new copy of it at a decent price; I didn't regret. I went into the game with the knowledge that it as seen as 'pretentious arty crap' and I was ready for it to be such. As far as I can see it is a fun game and I didn't waste the money spent on it.

Jim, you have a point about this, but I think in the case of reviewers you might be wrong. If professional reviewers keep praising the games they think they should or just ignoring flaws in games they like, then they will probably lose trust. Like I said part of the reason I hardly bother with buying games new anymore is that I don't want to have risk over 40 on something I might be misinformed about.

It's okay to love or hate something, but you should be able to label the good and bad bits when it's your job.

EDIT:
However everyone has the right to like or dislike something. The outrage at regular people having an opinion at something is frankly disgusting.

"I'm not happy, therefore no one should be happy!" That seems to be the general mindset of our species these days. :(

Bors Mistral:

Then, he goes on to do a TW2 review, and that's a game superior to DA2 in almost everything, and gives it a 30% lower score? I worked as a game reviewer from 2000 to 2007 and in examining some 60+ games I know that it's hard not to let your personal preferences influence you. However, especially when handing scores to games in the same genre that are released relatively close to one another, you should be able to stop, have a look, and see that something is wrong with your grading.

Eh, there are plenty of arguments to be made, depending on your personal tastes, that the games are actually equally good, or poor, or that would put DA2 on top.

Bors Mistral:

erttheking:
I'm sorry, the Witcher 2 is better than Dragon Age 2? Please explain to me how that is anything more than your personal opinion.

This might get a bit off topic but OK, I'll bite. It's been a while since I played them, so just a few basic things:

- TW2 has some of the most impressive visuals on release, and it still holds excellent over two years later. In comparison DA2 looks like a drab mix of brown and grey. (objective)

- TW2 has beautiful, interesting, varied and well designed environments. After a few hours in DA2, most locations look like I've already visited them. Let's not even start on recycled dungeons. Same about characters, and the way they move and visually interact. (objective)

- TW2 also gets an edge in musical score, sound effects and, I dare say, voice work. (some question of taste, but mostly objective)

- Combat in DA2 is almost MMO-like. Mim-maxing your characters often plays a greater role than tactics. Combat in TW2 rewards good reflexes and planning. You can't gulp down potions during combat. On higher difficulties (end even on "normal"), you talk to characters, read books, follow clues and prepare accordingly for major encounters. (subjective, I guess - some people like MMO-style combat better, after all)

- Some of the menu design and interface (items and character equipment icons, I'm looking at you!) in DA2 is a freaking disgrace. Some usability aspects of TW2's interface also leave a bit to be desired, but at least the UI works better and looks like a work of art. (objective)

- Both games set to depict a dark, mature setting. TW2 does it much better, with a world that is so lovingly crafted it could come to life (subjective, I agree, personal preference and all that)

- Both games tout player choice as a major theme. In TW2 the illusion never fails. DA2 offers you "choice" and seems to like to go in your face for a "fate is cruel, what you did didn't matter in the end". However, it often comes off as "we didn't bother to make the story reflect your choices, you'll take it as is". (subjective, I guess, some could end up liking DA2's storytelling and never question it)

On appearance - TW2 has more realistic style, sure. And if that's your preference then fair enough, but if it's not someone's preference, there's nothing wrong with rating the game accordingly.

On the choice element, I think there's a fair argument to be made that while you have the ability to make much larger changes to the world in TW2, but Geralt is always Geralt. In DA2, Kirkwall is always Kirkwall, but Hawke's personality changes. Whether you care more about the malleability of world or the character is subjective.

I've seen people complain about the simplicity of the DA2 inventory and about complain about the unwieldiness of the TW2 inventory. Neither was perfect in my mind, but to say one was clearly better than the other comes down to which type frustrates you more - and that's a personal preference.

Personally, I don't see a clear winner between the two - I enjoyed both, but I don't find it so difficult to understand why you might prefer one or why Tito would rank the other higher. As long as a reviewer (or commenter) is clear about why they like/dislike what they do, they're not wrong to rank it accordingly.

I get the same type of attitude when I mention I play Senran Kagura. I hear people throwing tantrums over games with fanservice existing. Get the same attitude with JRPGs.

chikusho:

Thanatos2k:

Unfortunately, so many people in the world merge the statements and only ever advocate one thing:

1. Because I liked it, it's a good game.
2. Because I don't like it, it's a bad game.

Wrong. WRONG! People need to divorce their personal feelings from objectively looking at what a game is.

Your enjoyment of a game is closely tied to its quality.

But is that even necessarily true? Is your enjoyment of a movie closely tied to its quality? Because I know a hell of a lot of bad movies I loved.

I don't get how you're conflating people being upset because someone liked something with people being upset because a reviewer recommended something highly. These are different things. Why do you score your reviews if your readers aren't meant to be able to check out the scores real quick and, if your opinions have meshed with theirs in the past, take that as a sign they probably would enjoy this game if they purchased it?
I'm not going to be pissed at someone if they like a game I didn't, but I'll be upset if they review it as a perfect Citizen Kane of all time and then I spend sixty bones based on that to find out that the actual gameplay is less fun than any previous title in the series.

Jim, you cruel and heartless son of a bitch.
How dare you to hurt Miniaturefantasywillemdefoe so badly?
It isn't his fault he isn't real.
He have feelings too, dammit.
Stop hurting people around you!

Amaror:

But, while visuals are a matter of opinion, i just can't see how anyone can call DA 2 the best - looking game of the year were Crysis 3 and the Witcher 2 were released.

Greg Tito complained that the tutorial in Witcher 2 didnt tell him to keep away from fire, no seriously he barely (as in he does say, but not alot at all) mentions lack of diversity of environments or lack of customization for party characters in DA2 but he does mention that one of the failures of the Witcher 2 tutorial (the original tutorial could have been better) didnt mention that being in fire might be bad for your health, and he uses video footage of the bit where the dragon attacks Foltest's seiging army. I dont really trust his ability to make sense.

Thanatos2k:

chikusho:

Thanatos2k:

Unfortunately, so many people in the world merge the statements and only ever advocate one thing:

1. Because I liked it, it's a good game.
2. Because I don't like it, it's a bad game.

Wrong. WRONG! People need to divorce their personal feelings from objectively looking at what a game is.

Your enjoyment of a game is closely tied to its quality.

But is that even necessarily true? Is your enjoyment of a movie closely tied to its quality? Because I know a hell of a lot of bad movies I loved.

And there are a hell of a lot of movies of very high (objectively measurable) quality that are awful.

If you love these bad movies, they inhibit qualities that are successful in being enjoyable to you.

I'm Firetamer13 and this is my favorite video on the Escapist.

The message was sound, the side bits were hilarious, and it inspired rage in the comments.

Well done Jim...well bloody done.

spartandude:

Amaror:

But, while visuals are a matter of opinion, i just can't see how anyone can call DA 2 the best - looking game of the year were Crysis 3 and the Witcher 2 were released.

Greg Tito complained that the tutorial in Witcher 2 didnt tell him to keep away from fire, no seriously he barely (as in he does say, but not alot at all) mentions lack of diversity of environments or lack of customization for party characters in DA2 but he does mention that one of the failures of the Witcher 2 tutorial (the original tutorial could have been better) didnt mention that being in fire might be bad for your health, and he uses video footage of the bit where the dragon attacks Foltest's seiging army. I dont really trust his ability to make sense.

i wager in retrospect greg too will not look at this as the strongest point in his career.

i would call this a major fuck up, but then again i am excitable when it comes to the witcher franchise.

spartandude:

Amaror:

But, while visuals are a matter of opinion, i just can't see how anyone can call DA 2 the best - looking game of the year were Crysis 3 and the Witcher 2 were released.

Snip

That can't possibly be real. That's too silly to be real...

Foltest and his company even shout "STAY OUT OF THE FIRE" and "BEWARE THE DRAGON'S FLAMES!" On top of that it's a freaking dragon breathing fire at you, that should sound off some bells for your personal safety.

Bors Mistral:

erttheking:
I'm sorry, the Witcher 2 is better than Dragon Age 2? Please explain to me how that is anything more than your personal opinion.

More snips to cut down on the bulky text wall building here

I'm not sure objective means what you think it means, because everything you put your little (objective) tag under are subjective things. Like calling something a work of art, that is most definitely subjective.

I do agree with you though, Witcher 2 is the better game and I'm someone who was pleasantly surprised with DA2 after seeing all the hate it got, and I have a hard time believing there are people who think DA2 is the superior title unless they quit in the prologue because it was too hard for them.

DA 2 does have rather drab and barren scenery, which is pretty weird since there's like five maps in that game. Kirkwall, the sewers/basement(that is actually one continuous map with each "location" simply being a different piece of it blocked by closed doors or some scenery object, same goes for the caves in the Wounded Coast and the mountain) Wounded Coast, that mountain with the Dalish, and then the Dwarven Ruins.

And speaking of Kirkwall, that city is a huge example of Bioware's failings with "Show, don't tell" they TELL you all this change is happening, they TELL you the city is flooded with refugees and then stabilized, and they TELL you that the city is undergoing various construction efforts throughout the nine years Hawke is there but you never see any change at all, they barely even bothering moving around NPCs.

As for the aesthetic direction, I don't think DA2 knows where it's going. It looks like they wanted to go stylized but didn't commit to it, and as a result you have stuff like the suddenly cartoonish darkspawn next to characters who look like the lower res versions of the DAO models.

However, I think Dragon Age has the better voice work, particularly from Fenris and Varric while the Witcher's sole decent actor is from sweet, gritty Geralt.

Hallowed Lady:

Rakschas:
Same here.

Again Snippy

I guess this may be seen as some kind of promotion for someone off-site, but whatever, it's relevant. You might enjoy Classic Game Room, maybe not Undertow so much but definitely the stuff Mark makes, mostly because of their format and his own style.

Rather than pick apart the negative, he'll note the high marks of the game, because he likes to remain positive as "there is someone who this appeals to." They'll mention similar titles in a "if you liked that, you'll probably like this" way and the whole time just showing gameplay to let the viewer form their own opinions on it. There's also no scoring system whatsoever.

Use a "compatibility recommendation system" like criticker and listal and never see reviews u don't agree with. If they worked.

AtheistConservative:
Sorry to break up the circle jerk, but it's time for the cold tyranny of economics to step in. Each year/dev cycle there's only so much money that will go into game development. How this limited resource is divvied up, ultimately controls the content available to us, the consumers. How publishers choose where to put their money is based on what sold well previously, and then looking at all the current project pitches and picking the most similar ones. So every time someone buys a crappy game, they are encouraging the publisher to make another crappy game. They are condoning it's flaws. Likewise, every time a reviewer gives a high rating to a terrible game, they are encouraging people to buy it, as well as concealing it's flaws.

This is the problem. That, and that I want to be able to rely on professional reviewers to give a balanced opinion of a game. Total Biscuit was the only person I've read who I feel really gave a balanced account of both "Bioshock Infinite"'s strengths - and it definitely had them, I know I've kinda crapped on the game here but I still think it's fundamentally a decent one, albeit flawed - and its weaknesses. And Total Biscuit, as he's pointed out countless times in his videos, isn't a professional games reviewer.

ran88dom99:
Use a "compatibility recommendation system" like criticker and listal and never see reviews u don't agree with. If they worked.

Indeed, heaven forfend one should ever be exposed to something different to what they already like.

And (not directed at ran88dom99) can we please drop the "objective review" bollocks?
An "objective review" can only state facts.

TF2 is free. There are 9 classes, many maps and lots of hats. It takes up about 10 gig of hard disk space.

Boring and sounds like it was written by a 5 year old. Yes, obviously reviewers should give you the objective facts (especially around game-breaking bugs) but EVERYTHING else, from the graphics to the potential number of hours of gameplay is subjective.

Wait....people didn't like The Saboteur?

Cybylt:
I do agree with you though, Witcher 2 is the better game and I'm someone who was pleasantly surprised with DA2 after seeing all the hate it got, and I have a hard time believing there are people who think DA2 is the superior title unless they quit in the prologue because it was too hard for them.

What's so challenging about believing that other people judge games based on a different set of criteria? And what's wrong with stating a favourite and sharing your examples without snarking on the people who disagree with you with "it was too hard for them"?

I mean, the whole point of the video was that you can disagree without poking at the people with different taste, and yet there's still this desire to poke. Why is that?

BlumiereBleck:
Wait....people didn't like The Saboteur?

No one in Ireland did with the obviously American voice actor's terrible accent. ;D

Pedro The Hutt:

BlumiereBleck:
Wait....people didn't like The Saboteur?

No one in Ireland did with the obviously American voice actor's terrible accent. ;D

Ahh i wouldn't say that, quite a few of us forgave the accent. I couldn't help but laugh when i heard the main character screaming 'Shiiiiiiitee" as he fell of a building

The only Irish character that really annoyed us was 'Irish' in Red dead redemption and even then the game was so superb that we just got over it.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 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
Registered for a free account here