Didn't Kevin review The Witcher 3?
I don't know lets check... Oh! So he did..
To be honest I didn't read any reviews (and still haven't) for TW3 because having been a fan of 1 and 2 was going to get it pretty much no matter what.
Well except for Polygon which they just absolutely wanted everyone to read it, and so I did and was like........ yeah no haha.
Well, I'd say that DA2's act 3 is one of their weakest... except it's really just sort of typical. I still think of their games in the last ten years, ME1 has the best ending... which isn't saying much, except that it didn't fizzle out or infuriate. Though if we're allowed to consider Trespasser (I do), then DAI's entire arc definitely stands out as one of their best.
I've agreed with you about ME1 before. Great game, pretty good ending. Haven't played Trespasser yet, but it is part of the game and it ends the story so it definitely should be considered, no matter how I feel about how it seemed like they cut story elements to be sold as DLC. I might be with you when I get around to playing it as for the entire arc, but as it stands for the main game the story felt fairly standard to me, with a few flaws in logic that really hurt it for me. Trespasser could change that, an ending can either make or break a story.
While I have no doubts that it will fare better (and I do think that old gen codevelopment was a cinderblock in their swimsuit), I don't think MEA will really be a great indicator. The whole problem was that they tore down a shooter engine and rebuilt it into a RPG engine, isn't it?
Speaking as an early, early millennial (turning 32) who found the game very appealing - I don't really see how it's much different, or any more "chosen one power trippy" than the Warden in DAO (I really feel that Cousland is the only one who has any real personal stake in the story). If anything, the inquisitor is just more of a blank slate, which is probably one of the primary reasons some players felt disconnected when they're comparatively unused to that in big games these days.
For me, as ever, it's mostly about the companion characters and the lore. Trespasser delivers that in spades, for what it's worth. If you have any affection for those things, it's well worth a buy and a play, even if it's on sale at some later date.
I don't know that I would consider the Warden a 'chosen one'. Power trippy for sure but not really a chosen one. He just happened to be lucky enough to not be included in the battle that killed the rest of the Wardens, and the only other Warden is a fairly insecure dude who wants absolutely nothing to do with authority. The Warden was just a guy, or gal, that stepped up because someone needed to step up.
There's a place for that though, just as there is a place for a heavily predefined protagonist. I think that's an argument that we've been having in this thread since day one. There's certainly no shortage of players here on the BSN who regard the characters like the Nameless One or Gorion's ward the be all end all, and all the more recent player characters as mistakes completely incompatible with real roleplaying. For better or worse, the inquisitor is a throwback to that sort of tradition.
I definitely think there is a place for both, and as Hawke showed us, there is a place for a mixture of the two. Hawke was customizable as far as class and looks, but his history is completely predefined.
They've made their mark, for sure - TW3 is a hell of a game. All signs point to Cyberpunk being a whole lot more Bioware than TW, though, which I'm pretty excited for.
I'm still pretty enthusiastic about whatever Bioware comes up with next as well, in any case. ME2 and ME3 are the only times they've ever really disappointed me, and even then, it was the direction of the overarching narrative that annoyed me, not the characters, gameplay or the moment to moment story.
I am really glad that the next Mass Effect game is going into a whole new galaxy, away from all the crap that ME3 gave us. I was not gonna play the next Mass Effect game at all until I found out about that. It is like literally the only thing they could have done to have gotten me at all interested in the game.
Apologies, but this just isn't true.
It's a heavy misconception that gamers or games want to be at this so-called "adult table." Video games were valuable (and still sometimes are) precisely because they contrasted with the (often) heavily distasteful modern forms of entertainment or media, which were, in contrast to your assertion that games are suddenly now in an artistic medium, always an artistic medium.
It's really most other media was sitting at the child table than anything.
Like most people don't know but the original NES Zelda was going to have Ravel's Bolero as the theme song, and you can actually see clear musical inspirations in for example Link's Awakening like a riff on Bach's Well-tempered clavier.
Games were and still often can be high artistry, for a long time now. It's many other things that often haven't been (although that is very broad lots of exceptions exist). What many gamers want is for the rest of the world to take them seriously on their own terms, not "well we have this thing called the interactive cinema-drama."
The day games are truly embraced and all fall into line behind this "adult table" is the day I in all likelihood stop playing them.
...
That's definitely not gamers in general though.
I believe that this is your position. However, if this was the widely held sentiment, gamers at large probably wouldn't have gotten so unhinged when Roger Ebert declared them incapable of being "art." Which isn't my position, incidentally - I've been playing games for the past 25 of my 31 years on this earth. I think it's unquestionably an artistic medium.
Nor would there be a "movement" ostensibly devoted to reforming the media that they apparently don't put any stock in, for that matter (although whether said movement is actually about any sort of ethical reform is debatable).
In any case, I was referring to the world at large. Regardless of whether gamers want it or not, games have achieved cultural legitimacy in the last few years that they've never had previously.
As for those "gamers" that supposedly are out there lashing out and being total jerks to anyone and everyone , I have a theory regarding that those people are actually mostly not gamers at all but people who dress up gamers, act terribly, and then presumably do so in order to make the image of "gamers" being bad.
Ah, no true gamer. I see. That's sensible.
Those pretenders must be spread pretty thin, in that case, since their nonsense is in evidence on pretty much every gaming forum I encounter.
I've agreed with you about ME1 before. Great game, pretty good ending. Haven't played Trespasser yet, but it is part of the game and it ends the story so it definitely should be considered, no matter how I feel about how it seemed like they cut story elements to be sold as DLC. I might be with you when I get around to playing it as for the entire arc, but as it stands for the main game the story felt fairly standard to me, with a few flaws in logic that really hurt it for me. Trespasser could change that, an ending can either make or break a story.
Without Trespasser, I think DAI's ending is adequate. It's not exciting, but I'd rather be underwhelmed than have it ruin most of the stuff I liked about the game (or series, for that matter. Hey, ME3). With Trespasser, it's phenomenal. I don't think there's any indication that Trespasser was "cut out" (I think we can distinguish between that and "planned, but not implemented" in any case). Besides, for better or for worse, Bioware's been doing this for a while. They did it with the Arrival in ME2, for example. We do what we can.
I definitely think there is a place for both, and as Hawke showed us, there is a place for a mixture of the two. Hawke was customizable as far as class and looks, but his history is completely predefined.
Man, I've been saying this for months, but nobody ever agrees with me.
Ah, no true gamer. I see. That's sensible.
Those pretenders must be spread pretty thin, in that case, since their nonsense is in evidence on pretty much every gaming forum I encounter.
Well, perhaps you aren't that much of a gamer, which is fine of course, doesn't automatically put you in the same category as these other types I'm referring to naturally.
I believe that this is your position. However, if this was the widely held sentiment, gamers at large probably wouldn't have gotten so unhinged when Roger Ebert declared them incapable of being "art." Which isn't my position, incidentally - I've been playing games for the past 25 of my 31 years on this earth. I think it's unquestionably an artistic medium.
Nor would there be a "movement" ostensibly devoted to reforming the media that they apparently don't put any stock in, for that matter (although whether said movement is actually about any sort of ethical reform is debatable).
In any case, I was referring to the world at large. Regardless of whether gamers want it or not, games have achieved cultural legitimacy in the last few years that they've never had previously.
Incorrect again, pretty egregious so, on pretty much every point, I'll be patient though.
Gamers at large, right, I literally barely know who Roger Ebert is I think was told to listen to him one time because he's a good critic or something, but when I tried watching all the classic movies was very difficult ergo lost interest in following his opinion or any others like him. How I could have a reaction to any kind (and pretty much everyone I know personally that plays video games is similar) to someone who's opinion I never even followed is impossible.
Second, did not say there was a movement interested in reforming the media, I said there was a group of people dedicated to incorporating a paradigm beyond their fingertips, and that rather than either approaching it reverentially, they cover out a space within it and then attempted to criticize other media haphazardly and with transparently aggressive aims so as to make it appear as though gaming is to blame. That's not the same thing as "reforming," that's attacking, and it's doing so in conjunction with a critical lack of ability to actually improve anything.
Third, your presumption that games didn't already have cultural legitimacy, they were culturally much more legitimate 20 years ago then they are now, it was everything else that has begun to become legitimate, which is good, but sometimes at the expense of games, which is bad.
Man that's really a great list of contenders. That's really awesome.
Sadly I have only played Witcher 3 out of this list so I can't give a good objective opinion on who should win.
Though who will win ? It's definitely going to be a head to head between Witcher 3 and Fallout 4. I'm actually very excited to see who will win, there are a lot of factors to consider. Witcher was released in May so had the time to build a strong fanbase but Fallout 4 coming out in November might allow it to be fresher on people's mind. Also Bethesda has the prestige and a higher fanbase and has already won with Oblivion and Skyrim (though in 2008 Fallout 3 didn't actually win, GTA IV did). However Witcher 3 could use the narrative of being the underdog, the game made by the small studio in Poland.
It's gonna be very interesting regardless of who wins. If Witcher 3 wins though, it'll be able to tell it beat Fallout 4, and that's something.
Dont count MGS out just yet, after all they are the critics's choice in the Golden Joystick award. 
- Bloodborne is ... well I dont have a PS4 so no 
Exclusive titles cannot be game of the year.
- Super Mario Maker: Same as above.
It is a 3 way race between FO4, MGSV & TW3. Personally, I dislike Konami and I pray they fail. Between FO4 and TW3, they are both great fun in very different ways.
I want TW3 to win because they have set the bar for expectations and standards for video games in many areas. I feel that it would be unjust for such effort not to be rewarded.
.... FO4 simply feels too much of the same. It does not feel like a new game. I have like 70++ lockpicks after playing the game for 2 days and I broke only 1 lock pick thus far. Why is this? Because I have practice and done the same thing for hundreds upon hundreds of hours in Skyrim 
... FO4 simply feels too much of the same. It does not feel like a new game. I have like 70++ lockpicks after playing the game for 2 days and I broke only 1 lock pick thus far. Why is this? Because I have practice and done the same thing for hundreds upon hundreds of hours in Skyrim
Or you simply hoard bobby pins! You hoarder! 
Or you simply hoard bobby pins! You hoarder!
I didnt (hides his entire building filled with containers) 
I must admit though, old as some FO4 mechanisms are.... god it is glorious to be able to not only have container but also the ability to build an armed fortress to store my shines. 
I really wish that DAI would have implemented this building system into DAI 
Well, perhaps you aren't that much of a gamer, which is fine of course, doesn't automatically put you in the same category as these other types I'm referring to naturally.
Well, if it means that I'm not fueled by misanthropy, then I guess I'm not a real gamer.
Incorrect again, pretty egregious so, on pretty much every point, I'll be patient though.
Gamers at large, right, I literally barely know who Roger Ebert is I think was told to listen to him one time because he's a good critic or something, but when I tried watching all the classic movies was very difficult ergo lost interest in following his opinion or any others like him. How I could have a reaction to any kind (and pretty much everyone I know personally that plays video games is similar) to someone who's opinion I never even followed is impossible.
Second, did not say there was a movement interested in reforming the media, I said there was a group of people dedicated to incorporating a paradigm beyond their fingertips, and that rather than either approaching it reverentially, they cover out a space within it and then attempted to criticize other media haphazardly and with transparently aggressive aims so as to make it appear as though gaming is to blame. That's not the same thing as "reforming," that's attacking, and it's doing so in conjunction with a critical lack of ability to actually improve anything.
Third, your presumption that games didn't already have cultural legitimacy, they were culturally much more legitimate 20 years ago then they are now, it was everything else that has begun to become legitimate, which is good, but sometimes at the expense of games, which is bad.
On the other hand, if that means I'm also not insane, then I'll take it.
Well, if it means that I'm not fueled by misanthropy, then I guess I'm not a real gamer
Indeed, now you savagely label gamers of whatever stripes as misanthropic, or at least whoever is more into games than you as such.
That's pretty much the carbon copy definition of trolling and attacking, not sure why you are doing that, but you seem like the type who would only ever use words as their weapon and are quite harmless in the grand scheme of things.
I'm sure we'll look forward to more of your aimless ranting, unless of course the moderators here want to actually be moderators.
I just thought it over and realized that I honestly have no idea what you're even talking about. So it's possible that we're just talking past one another.
You should check out Roger Ebert's writings, though. His thoughts on art and life are sublime and beautiful.
No, actually I think I'm pretty much just done visiting this thread, you guys have fun now, it was interesting back when, particularly Xety and Kbomb and more recently Ashwind.
Anyway if moderators don't care, then I don't care about the thread on their forum, fair is fair.
It's funny how people kept having problems with Elhanan who wasn't a troll at all, just a guy passionate about his game and awkward and whatnot, meanwhile the true troll was all around, but yeah if moderators don't care, then I don't care about the thread on their forum, fair is fair.
BRB changing my forum handle to "The True Troll."
TripleT if ya nasty.
I want TW3 to win because they have set the bar for expectations and standards for video games in many areas. I feel that it would be unjust for such effort not to be rewarded.
I think I'm with you on this one. If 2015 me had hopped through a wormhole and told 2012 me that my favorite game that year would be a Witcher sequel, I'd've punched me, but it's an astonishing triumph. Everything about it is so big, and tight, and good. And it does deserve it.
I really am liking Fallout 4, as I've said, but some aspects of it do just feel rote. I thought it might be due to my 19 years of history with Bethesda's games, but the guy above me told me I wasn't a real gamer, so that can't be it. So it might just be because it's been a good three years since I've played a Beth game without an array of transformative mods, and something just feels like it's missing.
I think it's going to come into its own in a year or so for sure, but in the short term, I can't think of a game this year that's more deserving of GOTY than TW3.
My faith in humanity is half way restored. We will see on the 3rd Dec.
Console exclusives can't be GOTY? I guess I just imagined The Last Of Us picking up over 200 GOTY awards then.
My faith in humanity is half way restored. We will see on the 3rd Dec.
Spoiler
Hum...somehow the video doesn't work.
What was it ?
I think if he knee jerk awarded such an excellent game a 4 for not kowtowing to some imaginary PC cabal, then that which shall not be named might actually have a point about "ethics in game journalism" (as though that were actually their raison d'être). Fortunately, that's not the case.
It seems to me like he wanted to spark a nuanced discussion on a relevant topic. The problem is that some people seem to be frightened at the idea of our fair pastime being taken seriously as an artistic medium, at least to the point where it's subject to the same academic criticism and deconstruction that every other artistic medium has been subject to for decades or centuries, where applicable.
I am all for gaming being taken seriously as an artistic medium, but I seriously doubt that guy cared about sparking a discussion. I think it more likely he just wanted to make sure he got as many clicks on his article as he could, so he tried to dig up controversy where there wasn't any. I think the nastiness that people say the article contained speaks to that.
The game is based on Polish folklore, there isn't any people of color in polish folklore, nor where there any such people in Poland during that time frame. To try to spark a discussion about race based on that was silly.
The score is good but what was written is actually really nasty. They might as well scored it like 4 and it would not look hypocritical.
There's giving proper review but to go in dept of his political stance within that review that is frankly really abnoxious considering it's a game made by a minority about their culture and lore who just happens to be white.
This is Polygon we're talking about. They wrote an article about the new Rock Band in which the writer, Colin Campbell basically said he was above it all. That he'd rather sit on the sidelines and talk about politics in the Philippines than actually play the game. He spends the entire article talking about himself and his interests, which clearly isn't gaming. If you had clicked on that article hoping to find out something about the game, you'd be seriously disappointed. Let's remember, these are people who are PAID to play and talk about videogames, but they're above it all, gaming is clearly beneath them.
An actual quote from the article- "All videogames are stupid, of course. That whole thing of, 'you're not really shooting terrorists or winning the World cup, you're just pressing buttons' is patronizing and simplistic, but every now and again you come across a game that has so little connection to who you are that you just end up standing there, gazing at the screen and saying "I'm just pressing buttons and my life has no meaning," to a slightly bemused PR person."
Ugh, the utter smugness, and people wonder why gaming journalism is regarded as an absolute joke.
Without Trespasser, I think DAI's ending is adequate. It's not exciting, but I'd rather be underwhelmed than have it ruin most of the stuff I liked about the game (or series, for that matter. Hey, ME3). With Trespasser, it's phenomenal. I don't think there's any indication that Trespasser was "cut out" (I think we can distinguish between that and "planned, but not implemented" in any case). Besides, for better or for worse, Bioware's been doing this for a while. They did it with the Arrival in ME2, for example. We do what we can.
Man, I've been saying this for months, but nobody ever agrees with me.
Not the Trespasser main story, but things like companion story lines and decisions made during their personal quests not being concluded until Trespasser. They told us nothing about what our Companions were doing after Cory was defeated during the ending. Trespasser took place 2 years after that, they could have told us something then have those story lines continue during Trespasser.
BRB changing my forum handle to "The True Troll."
TripleT if ya nasty.
I think I'm with you on this one. If 2015 me had hopped through a wormhole and told 2012 me that my favorite game that year would be a Witcher sequel, I'd've punched me, but it's an astonishing triumph. Everything about it is so big, and tight, and good. And it does deserve it.
I really am liking Fallout 4, as I've said, but some aspects of it do just feel rote. I thought it might be due to my 19 years of history with Bethesda's games, but the guy above me told me I wasn't a real gamer, so that can't be it. So it might just be because it's been a good three years since I've played a Beth game without an array of transformative mods, and something just feels like it's missing.
I think it's going to come into its own in a year or so for sure, but in the short term, I can't think of a game this year that's more deserving of GOTY than TW3.
Well, since your not a real gamer and all your opinion on GOTY isn't relevant.
Seriously though, what was with that dude, at no point did I see you being disrespectful or trollish. Sheesh.
Retour en haut