200 réponses à ce sujet

[Bryy_Miller]

Oblivin, Mass Effect 1, GTA Series, WoW, FF11 + 12

[Goat_Shepard]

jimmyjoefro wrote...

I don't get the hate for Oblivion. It's easily one of my favorite games, only behind ME. The scenery is beautiful. I've spent hours just roaming around killing random beasts, finding hidden caverns and caves and little villages. Maybe you need to find enjoyment in adventure to enjoy it.

It's all about perspective. I'll tell it in a story: There once was a boy who played and loved Oblivion and Fallout 3 and many other RPGs. Then one day he discovered Mass Effect, followed by DA:O and then ME2. He now can't enjoy any of the other games he owns. He blames and loves Bioware for it. The end.

[jimmyjoefro]

Playing Mass Effect 1 and 2 hasn't affected my enjoyment of Oblivion or Fallout 3 at all. I haven't played Dragon Age, but I doubt it would change anything even if I did.

Modifié par jimmyjoefro, 21 mars 2010 - 06:57 .

[dildeinstein]

WoW.



I guess it would've been great if I started as a WoWer. I moved from SWG to GW to LOTRO and by the time I took the WoW taste test I was not impressed.

[Panderfringe]

jimmyjoefro wrote...

Playing Mass Effect 1 and 2 hasn't affected my enjoyment of Oblivion or Fallout 3 at all. I haven't played Dragon Age, but I doubt it would change anything even if I did.

Some people just like different things, I suppose.

[Lao Dan]

Halo. Got through 1 1/2 missions and never picked it up again.

[wraithofblades]

Id have to say Condemned 1 & 2

[MerinTB]

jimmyjoefro wrote...

MerinTB wrote...

jimmyjoefro wrote...

Halo is extremely overrated, online especially. Nothing better than unloading an entire clip into someone only to have them turn around and shoot you once with a pistol, which of course kills you. Jumping a mile in the air is cool, too. We have Halo to thank for everyone jumping all over the place when they're being shot at, no matter the game. It doesn't help, stop doing it, THIS ISN'T HALO! Oh, and the amount prepubescent idiots talking trash is even more annoying than on COD. 

I really am not a FPS fan, so it pains me to do this but...

Halo didn't invent jumping around - it was the "national pastime" on Counterstrike a couple yeasr before Halo existed.  You know, Counterstrike, king of online multiplayer for nearly as long as Myst was the best selling game.
Jumping around like a jackrabbit DOES unfortunately helping in dodging - prior to the jumping what people did in multi-player FPS games was jam on the sprint key and scoot around backwards at ridiculous speeds.

So while you hate how people play in multiplayer, that doesn't change that Halo was an important game in the genre.  You can't judge whether a game is overrated or not based on the immaturity of people playing the game online - that's only a gauge of those players and their own issues and not the game itself.  What, you think somewhere in Halo is coding a signal that attracts social misfits and people suffering from Tourette's?Again, a genre I don't like - I'm not defending a personal interest here.  Just looking at historical facts.  Because you don't like something doesn't mean it did have an impact and have tons of its decendents emulating it.

Unfortunately, there's an extremely large amount of gamers, especially those in the 22 to 17 y/o range, playing online today that developed their online "skills" playing Halo 2.  They were like 8 years old when Counter Strike ruled the scene, so your reasoning doesn't add up for anyone born after 1985.  They played Halo 2, learned to jump around, and now do it in all the other games they play.  And jumping around doesn't work if they're not playing with noobs.

http://www.gossipgam...s-games-for-pc/

Halo 2 came out in 2004 - but on XBOX.com you find this in 2003 - http://www.xbox.com/.../counterstrike/ "Counter-Strike for the PC is the world’s most popular online
action game. With approximately 2.5-million Counter-Strike
players worldwide and more than 100,000 of them playing at any given
moment, the action is non-stop."

Counter-Strike "ruled the scene" until probably 2005 or 2006 when something like Call of Duty 4 or some such finally unseated it.  It is STILL ridiculously popular.

Counter-Strike came out as a mod for Half-Life in 1999.  Halo was released for the XBOX in 2001. Counter-Strike was released for the XBOX in 2003. Halo 2 in 2004.

YOUR logic doesn't work with actual dates and facts.  You don't have Halo to thank for jack-rabbits, you have Counter-Strike for making it popular (and probably some earlier FPS game where someone figured out the tactic.)

I don't care if there are more MW2 players right now than Counter-Strike players, or more Halo 2 players online in 2006 than Counter-Strike players - the technique gained prominence before Halo multiplayer became popular.

It's like saying Toyota invented cars because the Prius is in such high demand and most Prius drivers weren't alive when Ford .

Because the game is 2-4 years older than the one you want to blame (Halo is overrated because Halo 2 caused a certain tactic you hate?  Good logic there) doesn't mean that older game doesn't count.<_<

[jimmyjoefro]

Halo 2 in 2004 the first time many people (mostly those that are college aged now) ever played an online multiplayer game.  Before XboxLive, many people never played online, and Halo 2 being the first big multiplayer title for consoles, it's the game that so many developed their skills on.  Jumping around may have been on Counter Strike first, but Halo is the reason it is so prominent among the younger people today.

Modifié par jimmyjoefro, 21 mars 2010 - 07:46 .

[MerinTB]

Seagloom wrote...
This isn't directly in response to you, MerinTB. It seems like bashing BG2, PST, and now Deus Ex fans is becoming popular of late, and while everyone is entitled to their opinion, I'm starting to tire of the implication that I'm some nostalgic old geezer for praising two of those games.

It's ok, Seagloom.  No offense taken.

It's probably more because they state with such absolute authority that Deus Ex (or fill in the blank game) is "the goddamn Batman" of games or whatever that they generate negative feedback.

It's also probably like the Tali fans getting bashed - you get too many people saying they like something, a backlash generates.

I wrote that because I'm tired, personally, of people telling me what I like is crap because its not as good as THE BEST GAME EVER (in their opinion which is now law).  I've not played Deus Ex, so I can't judge it yet.  I have tried Torment numerous times, and I love Black Isle so I WANT to like it.  I just haven't enjoyed it at all yet.

Odds are I'm your age or older, Seagloom.  We'll get to that, though...

Yes, I'm aware some of these players have been around since Fallout or further back still, and laud modern CRPGs because they genuinely feel games like Mass Effect are superior. However, in my experience lurking and posting in forums, that tends to be minority. At least among those players willing to post at forums, which I realize is a fraction of game owners.

Fallout?  I played Quest for the Rings on the Magnavox Odyssey.  I cut my CRPG teeth on Ultima, Bard's Tale, Wizard's Crown.  When I look back, I compare most games to Wasteland - that will always hold a special (Planescape / Deus Ex place in my heart.)  But do I think Wasteland is better than Mass Effect?
HELL NO.
Bioware had better technology, better game design theory, more money and programmers, and a crapload of game design history and experience to draw upon to make Mass Effect.  Wasteland doesn't have a chance.  Do I like Wasteland more than Mass Effect?  Yes, because of when I played it and the place it has in my heart, but my taste doesn't cloud my rational judgement that Mass Effect is a better product and a better game (regardless of my personaly taste.)

Baldur's Gate 2, for example, relies heavily on table-top D&D rules that are overly complicated.  Why do you want that level of complication in a single-player CRPG?  I don't understand the desire for it, but it's probably a taste thing.  Simplifiying something so it's easier to do, easier to pick up, and easier to understand DOESN'T have to mean it's making something WORSE.

More on that, though...

BioWare's other games were even worse in that regard. KotOR had terribly easy and simple combat if you understood the bare basics of D20 rules. Jade Empire and Mass Effect both have real time systems, and micromanaging companions was impossible in the former (not that there was a need to), and limited in the latter. They were also painfully short and came with a host of other flaws I will not review here to keep this post from getting even longer.

Why does coming up with their own systems, and not having the extra baggage of established 20 year old pnp game's idiosyncrasies, mean the system is worse?  I like more complicated board games (Risk over Sorry, Betrayal over Monopoly, Stratego over Checkers) but just because Tomb or Arkham Horror have ridiculously thick rule books and game pieces and such, does that make them BETTER than Chess or Go?

Simple != Bad, Complicated != Good.

I understand your desires for the more complicated games - and I wish more of them were made for you.  I desire more turn-based games, REAL turn-based not psuedo turn-based hidden in real time gaming.  I want more SSI games, more Romance of the Three Kingdoms type turns, but  I have to settle for Dragon Age and Final Fantasy XIII as the best I'm gonna get most of the time.

(If you read all that without losing interest, give yourself a treat from the snack jar. You earned it.)

Yay - you can reward me, instead, by reading my Definitive Critique of X-Men: The Last Stand instead.

[MerinTB]

jimmyjoefro wrote...

Halo 2 in 2004 the first time many people (mostly those that are college aged now) ever played an online multiplayer game.  Before XboxLive, many people never played online, and Halo 2 being the first big multiplayer title for consoles, it's the game that so many developed their skills on.  Jumping around may have been on Counter Strike first, but Halo is the reason it is so prominent among the younger people today.

Can someone else field this?  "Halo 2 in 2004 is the first time many people played online multiplayer" garbage?

While I'm sure you could find a sizable number of people this is true for, you'd find far more people who had played online before there was even an XBOX.  Online gaming was pretty big before consoles finally got in on the act (Ultima Online, Everquest, Starcraft, Lineage...) and still there are probably more online players who AREN'T on XBOX Live than who are (between PC's, Macs, PS3's, etc)

For a particular generation of FPS console-only players, you may be close to 100% accurate, jimmyjoefro - but that's such a narrow group you are using as your reason that Halo sucks...

[Ascendant_Sith]

Mine was probably Left 4 Dead 1 and then Modern Warfare 2. L4D1 was okay, but couldn't really get into the series until L4D2 and when I got MW2, I was like, after all this hype. . . .what's sooo great about this game? The main campaign kinda sucked and the game is outright weak without the online multiplayer component.

[jimmyjoefro]

MerinTB wrote...

Can someone else field this?  "Halo 2 in 2004 is the first time many people played online multiplayer" garbage?

While I'm sure you could find a sizable number of people this is true for, you'd find far more people who had played online before there was even an XBOX.  Online gaming was pretty big before consoles finally got in on the act (Ultima Online, Everquest, Starcraft, Lineage...) and still there are probably more online players who AREN'T on XBOX Live than who are (between PC's, Macs, PS3's, etc)

For a particular generation of FPS console-only players, you may be close to 100% accurate, jimmyjoefro - but that's such a narrow group you are using as your reason that Halo sucks...

You can't be serious. XboxLive opened up online multiplayer to a lot of people, and Halo 2 was the driving force in it's popularity. Being probably 40 years old, you're oblivious to this, but growing up in the generation that was about 13-14 when Halo 2 released, I can tell you that most kids had never played an online game before it released.

I played online games like Starcraft before Halo 2 released, sure.  I, along with millions of others, had never played a FPS shooter online, though.

The group you claim to be narrow is actually the broadest group in online console gaming. Casual gamers make up the vast majority of the video game market. That is why mediocre, but action packed games like Halo and Call of Duty are the most popular games online. You can picked them up and play with decent effectiveness, which is what the casual gamer wants.

Modifié par jimmyjoefro, 21 mars 2010 - 08:04 .

[Seagloom]

MerinTB wrote...

Baldur's Gate 2, for example, relies heavily on table-top D&D rules that are overly complicated.  Why do you want that level of complication in a single-player CRPG?  I don't understand the desire for it, but it's probably a taste thing.  Simplifiying something so it's easier to do, easier to pick up, and easier to understand DOESN'T have to mean it's making something WORSE.

I probably should have quoted your whole post...

I understand your comparison and do not disagree with it exactly. However, I think that other than graphics, the divide between Baldur's Gate 2 and Mass Effect is not as wide. I could go detail on this if you reeeally want to know my thoughts, but the gist of it is I find Mass Effect flawed in so many ways that I saw it as a step backward even comparing it to games from other companies.

In any case, it is not about rules complexity. I thought Mass Effect 2 was a *vast* improvement over the first game because BioWare cut out all the RPG-like chaff of inventories and equipment and just stuck to the action while maintaining a story. That isn't an approach I want for every RPG, but I felt it worked beautifully for Mass Effect 2.

I was less impressed with Dragon Age. I'm not fond of D&D rules because they are D&D. (I dislike 4e, as you know, so it definitely isn't bias there.) Besides, BG2 was a pretty extreme bastardization of those rules. No, the reason I prefer BG2 is because of its options. Despite fighters and rogues not having as deep a bag of tricks, it felt like their purposes were clearly defined. Rogues removed traps, unlocked things, backstabbed major threats, and scouted. Warriors tanked and did most of the damage. Clerics healed and mages did AoE damage and weakened enemy mages. Then there were hybrid classes like bards and rangers that mixed these roles up somewhat.

Despite the AI being awful and each individual class aside from mages having fewer options, the game felt more tactical during combat. Maybe it's because we controlled a party of six instead of four. Maybe it's several major battles were scripted in such a way that conventional tactics wouldn't work each time. (Unless you resort to cheese anyway.) It just felt more like a Chess game to oversee a fight.

In Dragon Age, combat was broken down to an MMO-like approach. I have no problem with BioWare going their own way, but that doesn't mean I'm going to give them a free pass. Almost every battle in DA boils down to having a tank use Threaten, then nuking enemies with magic or positioning rogues to flank everything to pieces. Often both. I don't even need to manage my tank thanks to Combat Tactics. He/she will be auto healed while I fall into the same patterns in fight after fight. It's simple and it's dull. I'm also not thrilled by how ineffectual many of those warrior and rogue talents are. Oooh, I can lower attack or defense by a few points, or raise my own during this one attack! Except... most of the time autoattacking alone is more than enough. Other than knockdowns and stuns, or a desire to not feel bored, several talents are entirely unnecessary. Then I look at mages and they're not only leagues more capable but also varied and interesting in comparison.

Apologies for the long answer. In short (too late!) I find DA's system needs work. It's too straightforward, lacks variation, and gets repetitive quickly. That would be fine if it was only limited to skirmishes. BG2 had plenty of no brainer fights where tactics were unnecessary. However, it's that way throughout the game, even against so called bosses. BioWare's designers crammed practically every BG2 class between the talents of Dragon Age's three classes, but the only real difference is how they each do damage. I don't expect a return to a BG2 style for various reasons, and I'm not sure I even want something exactly like it again. What I do know is I want more from DA2.

Where is your Last Stand critique? Yeesh... I didn't enjoy that movie.

Modifié par Seagloom, 21 mars 2010 - 08:27 .

[MerinTB]

jimmyjoefro wrote...

about 13-14 when Halo 2 released, I can tell you that most kids had never played an online game before it released

For that narrow group, you are right.

And when Call of Duty 4 came out in 2008 it was the first online multiplayer game for a bunch of people, people who had never played Halo 2.  And I would bet you good money more people were online playing Call of Duty 4 when it came out than were online playing Halo 2 when it came out.

In 2007 XBOX Live had 8 million subscribers.  That's the ENTIRE NETWORK, not people playing 1 game.

In 1999 Everquest ALONE had 500,000 subscribers.
In 2008, World of Warcraft, ALONE, had 10 million subscribers.

Halo 2 is impressive with about 5 million online in 2008 and nearly 9 million copies sold.  But, again, compare that to Call of Duty 4's 14 million copies sold and much large online presence.

You pick one segment of the gamer population - but again, if you look at Call of Duty 4 and those people who that was their first online game (those 13-14 year olds, you know, who were only like 8 or 9 when Halo 2 came out) who had never owned an original XBOX or been on the original XBOX Live - but you're too OLD to understand them.

Halo 2 didn't invite the jack rabbit.  Halo 2 is not where most FPS today cut their teeth.  And Halo 2 is not Halo, the game you called overrated.

I've had fun following your moving goal posts but I'm done now.  If you think you've convinced anyone that Halo is overrated because Halo 2 "invented" jumping around in a FPS online for those 13-14 year olds for whome Halo 2 was their first online game...
well.

[MerinTB]

Seagloom wrote...
Where is your Last Stand critique? Yeesh... I didn't enjoy that movie.

I'll reply more to you later on that other stuff - but here's the link to my review:
http://ingenre.com/2...the-last-stand/

It originally appeared on Mania.com

[-Semper-]

SithLordExarKun wrote...

So which is the most overrated game you have ever played? Like you keep hearing people preach about how good that game is only for you to play the game then go "oh..  ok".

sims, fable and black'n white. those are all plain boring...

[MegaTofu]

Crysis...



I bought after buying a new computer, mainly to see if it would look pretty running on my system, and sure it did... But good lord the game is so boring. It's utterly lifeless. I read reviews praising it and saying how great a shooter it was, but sadly I never really saw that in the game.

Don't get me wrong, I prefer RPGs, but on occasion I like to play a straight up shooting game. Half-Life (1 and 2) are two of my favorite games ever, and I loved Bioschock as well. Hell, I even liked the first playthrough of Call of Duty 4. Crysis was just a huge disappointment to me.

[Bigchris4747]

Battlefield BC 1 and 2, such slow gameplay makes me want to kill myself

[Chaos-fusion]

Diablo 2. Tried it and it's okay, but I don't see the fuss. There are afew games I enjoy but don't understand the huge fanbase they have. The Halo, Half Life and Metal Gear series being the first that come to mind.

Modifié par Chaos-fusion, 21 mars 2010 - 09:41 .

[Rubbish Hero]

Halflife helped change the way story-telling is done in games.

In fact even today, I was playing Batman Arkham Asylum the other day and the opening sequence is pretty much taken from halflife.

[Rubbish Hero]

I agree. Halflife was well above any FPS of that day.

And in some regards, still is to this day, as games have been influenced by Halo, Modern Warfare 2. and a certain console centricness, games tend to have obviously linear (as in poorly hiding it) go to marker on rader, press "E" at glowy thing after shooting ethnic group with very, very dumb AI to progress with your two weapon slot, that's the extend of most FPS today, Halflife had simple but intelligent design, nowadays many FPS tend to be, well, just stupid. Even the old Doom and Quake games had more of a learning curve than many shooters today.