Rate Human Revolution vs. other LGS-inspired franchise games - by heywood
Papy on 2/12/2011 at 22:11
Quote Posted by Skinner's pigeon
A game can't be an RPG if all builds can use a gun--now that's making up shit.
Yes, and you are the one making up shit. You not only obviously go into hyperbole mode very easily about how you feel, to a point where you sound ridiculous, but you also see only your own context in the words of other people. Read again what I wrote. OK. You won't. So I'll make the very very short version : Deus Ex was not a "traditional RPG" . Go play an old AD&D game to learn what a traditional RPG is.
Llama on 3/12/2011 at 01:43
Quote Posted by Skinner's pigeon
And really, some of the apologetics offered in DX:HR's defence deserved proper responses. A game can't be an RPG if all builds can use a gun--now that's making up shit.
lols what builds? The press X to win build? You can get every aug in the game.
june gloom on 3/12/2011 at 02:45
how about you press x to shut up
christ, at least koki is funny
you're just fucking lame
and lazy too
froghawk on 3/12/2011 at 03:10
I really just find myself wishing that Bioshock and DXHR had been more focused and delivered better endings.
Bioshock had a really gripping and engaging plot, environment and atmosphere (gameplay was meh but whatever) up until the golf club scene. After that, there practically was no plot, the level design became even less interesting, and the game ended with an irrelevant and stupid fight against the silver surfer. All the buildup ended up going towards absolutely nothing. Delivering a good ending is really important, and Bioshock truly buggered its final sequences.
DXHR did the same thing. The game was fantastic until you left the hubs, outsourced and atmosphere-breaking boss battles aside. It had great atmosphere, built up an interesting storyline that tackled the issue of augmentation in an engaging way, and managed to feel like a truly worthy successor to DX. Then they decided to drop the ball. The hubs were by far the most interesting part of the game (I wish there had been more of them), so after you leave Hengsha for the last time things get considerably less interesting from a gameplay perspective... but that's not as upsetting as the fact that they decide to basically ignore all of the story buildup and end the game with a completely irrelevant power-hungry maniac with a plot to kill lots of people, a zombie sequence, a 'boss battle' that involves literally standing there doing nothing, and 'push a button to choose an ending!'.
Both games had huge exciting builds which led to... absolutely nothing. As if the writers completely forgot the main plot they were developing and decided to ignore it and do something stupid instead. This ultimately left me feeling very unsatisfied after playing both games with zero urge to replay either after a single playthrough. And this is coming from someone who even played Invisible War twice, despite all of its flaws - at least that game provided proper resolution to its plot. HR may be a better game in most ways, but I feel less drawn back to it thanks to the lack of focus provided by the boss battles and the final sequence.
Arkham City basically did the same thing with its plot - lots of buildup with an extremely fast, unsatisfying and predictable payoff and irrelevant and rather silly ending - but it did so many other things right that I still enjoyed it. It seems like most new games I choose to play are similarly dropping the ball on their endings, wtf writers
Llama on 3/12/2011 at 06:01
Quote Posted by froghawk
but I feel less drawn back to it thanks to the lack of focus provided by the boss battles and the final sequence.
Arkham City basically did the same thing with its plot - lots of buildup with an extremely fast, unsatisfying and predictable payoff and irrelevant and rather silly ending - but it did so many other things right that I still enjoyed it. It seems like most new games I choose to play are similarly dropping the ball on their endings, wtf writers
Deus Ex: Zombie Revolution.
Skinner's pigeon on 3/12/2011 at 07:00
Quote Posted by Papy
Yes, and you are the one making up shit. You not only obviously go into hyperbole mode very easily about how you feel, to a point where you sound ridiculous, but you also see only your own context in the words of other people. Read again what I wrote. OK. You won't. So I'll make the very very short version : Deus Ex was not a "traditional RPG" . Go play an old AD&D game to learn what a traditional RPG is.
Quote the post where I claimed that Deus Ex is a traditional RPG. Go on, I dare you. And please, broaden your horizons: (
http://www.irontowerstudio.com/forum/index.php/topic,186.0.html) What's a role-playing game?
Here's a bit of advice: Don't presume to think that other people's experiences of a game will be similar to your own. And if you don't want to know how they feel about your choice of timesink, don't read their posts. My dissatisfaction should in no way compromise your enjoyment of the game. I believe this site has an 'ignore' function. Use it. But if you feel the need to defend your timesink, please be prepared to back up your claims. I still haven't seen that proof of DX:HR's superior writing compared to Bioshock 2. This is perhaps not sufficiently challenging for someone of your vast literary experience, in which case I suggest that you return to your hacking minigame. This 'discussion' has been dragged out long enough.
Papy on 6/12/2011 at 10:31
Quote Posted by Skinner's pigeon
Quote the post where I claimed that Deus Ex is a traditional RPG. Go on, I dare you.
Just for the fun of it, I'll do a quick recap...
- You criticized Human Revolution "XP system" as "utterly stupid", adding that you didn't need to elaborate.
- I answered that although I didn't like the idea of getting XP points for killing people or hacking (which ironically is what traditional RPG do, even if Deus Ex didn't do it), I thought the XP system had qualities from a gameplay point of view.
- You then replied that your criticism was because "Deus Ex followed traditional RPG character progression, which means that your chosen build determines your playstyle", while Human revolution did not.
- I disagreed with you about Deus Ex, as it certainly did not followed traditional RPG character progression and I explained why. I then gave you the example of System Shock which was somewhat closer to what traditional RPGs are.
- You then went on saying that I don't know much about RPG and somehow talked about multiclass characters and leveling. (This is when I realized this conversation was going nowhere and so didn't bother to answer.)
- Trying to justify yourself, you then added that I thought "A game can't be an RPG if all builds can use a gun".
- That's certainly not what I think (I played pen and paper RPG where there was no such limitations), so I replied that you "see only your own context in the words of other people". As the discussion was still (for me) about traditional RPGs' character progression, I told you to see what an old AD&D RPG was like to understand what is a traditional RPG (so you can learn a bit about what is a traditional character progression).
Now... Did this recap satisfy your desire for a quote?
As for broadening my horizons, I think I have a pretty good culture about video games. My first console was a Pong machine in the end of the 70s and I certainly played an awful number of games since then. Certainly too many. So here's a bit of advice : try not to use empty ad hominem attacks. It can only makes you look like a fool.
Quote Posted by Skinner's pigeon
I believe this site has an 'ignore' function. Use it.
I'll add your name to my ignore list just after I clicked on "Submit Reply".
Edit : It's done.
Llama on 6/12/2011 at 19:36
Quote Posted by Papy
I'll add your name to my ignore list just after I clicked on "Submit Reply".
Edit : It's done.
Big man
Chiv on 7/12/2011 at 03:52
I just registered to say, I hate all of you. Thanks for wasting precious keypresses bickering like 5 year olds. I looked at this thread expecting something thought provoking from like minded fans of this type of game. Instead I feel like I have just undergone some sort of miraculous non-invasive lobotomy. Any chance of an insightful discussion about the relative merits and faults of each game in this thread has gone down the toilet. Good job team!
:P
Koki on 7/12/2011 at 06:27
Quote Posted by Matthew
Waitaminute, when we say 'minigame' are we solely talking about moving to a different screen? I just ask because, after all, I think we would agree that SS1 had a hacking 'minigame' as did SS2.
We're talking about the fact that you can skip most in-game skill requirements by just being good with a mouse. You can't "cheat" SS2/DX hacking no matter what your accuracy with a railgun is.
