ZylonBane on 23/8/2010 at 20:41
Yeah, writing like that would be pushing credulity even in a NOLF game. In a DX game, it seems to be working in direct opposition to the tone they're otherwise trying to establish.
negativeliberty on 23/8/2010 at 23:50
Quote Posted by mgeorge
I actually played the original first. Playing it again right now as a matter of fact. And there's no doubt that it's the superior game. Never said it wasn't.
What I
am saying is that despite it being inferior, it's still better than the majority of games I've played. I agree character development was pretty much non-existent, it is to easy, blocky environment's, etc etc, but it at least makes an attempt to be a
somewhat intelligent game which is more than you can say for most.
Lets put it this way. I've played IW 3 times, and HL2 once. HL2 is considered one of the best games made in the last 10 years or so and as a pure shooter, it
is the better game, however that's all you do in it. The general consensus of IW is that it's a mediocre game at best. So we've got 2 games. One considered a classic already, and another, forgettable by most.
I can agree with that to an extent, however I just fail to see the relevance of this thinking, it seems to me like another symptom of how gaming is in a (very) bad spot, and everyone's lowered their expectations accordingly.
Allow me to explain why I feel like that, if you'll excuse me for making another analogy to the movie industry; Let's say we'll compare IW to Blade 2 (and not just for the leather coats ;)). As a movie, it's not entirely horrible, it's better than most sci-fi/fantasy sequels, it's set in the same universe (although it doesn't really feel that way), it has reasonably competent direction but a subpar story with some silly stuff that hurts the (previously) gritty atmosphere somewhat.
That's not to say I didn't enjoy it, but at the same time I wouldn't care to watch it again, nor would I call it a good movie, and I doubt I'll remember it for much longer. As a guilty pleasure, you could do worse, but on its own (which is to say, if Blade hadn't been made) it doesn't really hold up. The analogy ends there, because it's probably a better sequel and a worse movie than IW was (as a sequel and a game), and obviously Blade is not to movies what DX is for games.
But this way of judging videogames by what essentially boils down to a 7-9 scale (if you're familiar with the term) just because the other 98% of games are so stupendously mediocre, undergoing only small incremental change (and frequently in the wrong direction) doesn't have any merit in my opinion, and is actually doing a disservice to what developers and gamers alike think constitutes a good game.
Quote Posted by mgeorge
Personally, I'd rather play a game that gives me some choice in how I play my character. Even though it doesn't really make a difference in the story, at least IW gives me an option to try different gameplay styles, whereas a game like HL2, or any straight shooter for that matter, gives you the option to kill and blow stuff up.
But so long as the choices are almost entirely cosmetic, I'll actually take HL2 over IW. Putting aside how it both shines and fails as a tech demo, it's way more compelling than anything I felt playing IW, precisely because it doesn't pretend to be anything other than it is and does so pretty well. It doesn't hold your hand or patronise you with endless explanations or rehashing of the obvious (and playing it you do sort of get the feeling there's a world beyond those invisible walls). It might not be as groundbreaking as the first, but despite having a smaller scope (gameplay wise) than IW it succeeds (if only just) where IW falls spectacularly flat.
Quote Posted by mgeorge
Of course, one man's junk is another mans gold.
True. But I would advise the other man that there are better things out there than junk gold :p
rachel on 24/8/2010 at 17:01
Quote Posted by mgeorge
We as gamers don't get enough FPS/RPG's and I personally don't understand the slamming it got. The gameplay is non-linear, it has multiple endings, and replaying the game actually
does make a difference in how you approach the challenges the game throws at you.
Funny, I just can't get myself to replay past the Seattle lower level... And I liked the game the first time. But it just never seems to be worth it to replay as I realize that all my actions means jackshit and the factions will line up to kiss my as no matter what I do anyway...
mgeorge on 25/8/2010 at 00:04
Quote Posted by raph
Funny, I just can't get myself to replay past the Seattle lower level... And I liked the game the first time. But it just never seems to be worth it to replay as I realize that all my actions means jackshit and the factions will line up to kiss my as no matter what I do anyway...
I agree, your actions do mean jackshit and so does what faction you side with for the most part. And I agree with ZB as well that the writing in the game can be really shitty. But beneath all these flaws, oh and BTW, pretty piss poor AI was well, there are some interesting philosophical ideas that the game presents. To bad they weren't implemented in a better way.
I'm talking more about the actual gameplay though. My first runthrough was pure stealth, second, run and gun, and third using augs that I'd never used before. And while it doesn't change the story, it at least gives you an option of playing your character in different ways whereas a game like HL2 is strictly run and gun. And that's not really a knock on HL2, although I was disappointed that it didn't really improve on the first game other than the physics and graphics. Personally I thought HL1 was the superior game.
rachel on 25/8/2010 at 07:16
Right.
I often think that if I could just force myself to go through these levels and get to later in the game when thing get a little more interesting I would actually restart liking it a bit.... But the start is just so boring :(
ZylonBane on 25/8/2010 at 15:39
Quote Posted by raph
I often think that if I could just force myself to go through these levels and get to later in the game when thing get a little more interesting I would actually restart liking it a bit.... But the start is just so boring :(
I'm telling ya, make a melee girl. Full augs in strength and electrostatic discharge. Punch down security beams! Kill people with a coffee cup! It's goofy, NOLFy fun, which is pretty much where IW belongs.
DDL on 25/8/2010 at 22:20
And make sure you punch the children. That's always good for a giggle. In fact, punch EVERYONE punchable.
Especially tracer tong.
SPG900NY on 23/9/2010 at 22:34
Quote Posted by mgeorge
IW is flawed, no argument there, and
not as good as DE. However you have to keep in mind that it was one of the first games released simultaneously on both the Xbox and PC, hence the small maps. The graphics were actually pretty good for the times, despite the buggy eyed look of the NPC's and rather awful physics.
That may be so, but it was also one of the first games that featured bodies that flayed about in all kinds of positions IIRC. I remember having a blast with that. I hated the interface though in comparison to the first (who didn't)?
ghost_in_the_shell on 26/9/2010 at 21:45
I hated that they forgot to include skills system.
Kaleid on 28/9/2010 at 09:11
They didn't forget it...they do not wish to confuse the big market of console players.
