robio said:I finished Call of Cthulhu today. Great adventure game. It falls apart a little bit at the end, as it becomes increasingly difficult to tell if you are choices are having any effect on the story, but the journey is quite good and I think that's more of the point. I've read there are four different endings, so I'm going to go back to the game somewhere in the near future and play a different way, and see where that leads me.
I’m kind of interested in trying this out some day. I did play Call of Cthulhu: Dark Corners of the Earth back on the original Xbox and enjoyed that one.
Archangel3371 said:I’m kind of interested in trying this out some day. I did play Call of Cthulhu: Dark Corners of the Earth back on the original Xbox and enjoyed that one.
It's pretty cheap so it's worth playing. The backstory of hell the cult gets born is really unique too. I was impressed.
robio said:Archangel3371 said:I’m kind of interested in trying this out some day. I did play Call of Cthulhu: Dark Corners of the Earth back on the original Xbox and enjoyed that one.
It's pretty cheap so it's worth playing. The backstory of hell the cult gets born is really unique too. I was impressed.
Cool. I’ll look into getting it later on perhaps.
Foolz said:Gagan, the only ES game I like (and by like I mean love) is Morrowind. It's super fun for the exact reasons you hate ES: the fact that there is no balance to the skills, no consequences for maxing one out by it meaning you can't max out another, allows you to do hilariously ridiculous stuff. As a normal gameplay system, it's completely broken: the only limit is not your skill, but your imagination. It all also takes place in one of the best videogame settings ever. If by story you mean plot and characters, then sure, Morrowind sucks; but, actually, it's meant to be a desolate, plague-destroyed setting, so the fact that it's essentially deserted even by the husks of people who still inhabit it, make it no less engrossing.
Simply put, the fun in Morrowind is the same fun to be had in GTA 1-San Andreas: unlock all weapons, unlimited ammo cheat mode; doing things like GTA IV and V tried such as more traditional shooting/driving mechanics and mission pacing, just get in the way of you doing something ridiculous that the game (or so it would seem) didn't expect you to do.
Anyway, I can't think of anything weirder than your box-ticking argument for Witcher 3 being better combat, precisely because it is a crushingly mediocre-bad imitation of beat 'em ups. Seriously? Did I miss something?
P.S. The one notable thing about the story in Witcher 3 is its use of Eastern European folklore, but there's only a handful of instances of this. I'll take Morrowind's narrative over mediocre, generic fantasy plots and shitty TV-imitation writing, too. Not to mention how horrifically bad sections of pacing in Witcher 3 were. Jesus.
Witcher 3 is still pretty cool, though.
2 things
1. If i had called the Witcher's combat good, you might have a reason to be weirded out
2. A mediocre attempt at well proven fundamentals is still going to be better than a dumpster fire. Elder Snore doesn't even have the fundies, The Bitcher 3 at least knows what the fundies are even if the devs don't actually get the details of the fundies.
That and the morrowind take is sus. Like ewww, I don't fucking care about the setting, give me good gameplay pls, otherwise kick rocks.
Gagan said:2. A mediocre attempt at well proven fundamentals is still going to be better than a dumpster fire.
Nah, this is what I have a problem with. The assertion that mediocre convention is better than a spectacular failure. This is a matter of taste, as this whole discussion is, but the elevation of mediocrity over anything (no matter how bad) is the epitome of bad taste. 
As for the Morrowind take; I told you why the gameplay is good, as you requested: for the same reasons you think it's bad; your response entirely ignores this, so I can only assume you now see that this is a pointless argument about taste. Not that there's anything wrong with that: see above. 
I beat Gris.
A very artfull 2d platformer. One of the most beatifull I've ever played. Although calling it a platformer might be a bit of a stretch, as there is very little in terms of platforming challenge. I suppose 2d puzzler would be just as apt, although most of the time you're just traversing the beautifull landscapes. Also, another game that apparently is one big metaphor for complex human feelings.
It's beautifull to play through, but I don't think it will stick with me for long. A 7/10 game that gets bumped up to 8/10 because of the graphics.
8/10
Foolz said:Nah, this is what I have a problem with. The assertion that mediocre convention is better than a spectacular failure. This is a matter of taste, as this whole discussion is, but the elevation of mediocrity over anything (no matter how bad) is the epitome of bad taste.
As for the Morrowind take; I told you why the gameplay is good, as you requested: for the same reasons you think it's bad; your response entirely ignores this, so I can only assume you now see that this is a pointless argument about taste. Not that there's anything wrong with that: see above.
First of all sport, you like Bayonetta 2's combat mechanics more than 1, and your beat-em up diet is rich n heavy on Yakuza when DMC is an option for you now. So slow your roll and know your place lol.
Second I don't give a fuck ! What does them trying do for me? What does them doing something different do for me? What does them having some ambition do for me? If the playing it part sucks, it still sucks. A mediocre game is better than a bad one. It's why we went through the trouble of labeling x game mediocre and y game bad. To explain that while neither are good, one is the least bad of the two.
If I want combat, Elder Snore doesn't actually let me do anything interesting in its sandbox because its different componetents don't actually synergize with each other all that well to make for any sort of juggles, or small micro descisions in play. Basic ass Witcher fundies? Sure, positioning actually matters in The Witcher 3, so I give a fuck if I long dodge, or side step in this spot. You had more fun with it? Fine by all means. But there is no sound argument anyone can make where The Witcher 3 is holding a L to what Elder Snore does. Because here's the thing, I can think of a few mods that would make the combat closer in line with what I deem bare minimum good for melee combat. And those would be tweaks to what Witcher 3 has, and just all around making things more consistent. Making Elder Snore's combat good requires adding in mechanics or whole sale changing mechanics. Because most of Witcher 3's short comings would still be there in a bethesda game, in a lot of cases even worse, with the addition of the shit Bethesda does bad because they don't have fundies. So what am I left with?
Exploration? Eh, sure, frankly I'd argue its tedious, I much prefer exploring in a Metroid or a Thief like game, but I can at least concede to the exploration aspect of a Bethesda game and the toy box nature of it. I happen to dig Breath of the Wild, and those elements are certainly in line with I guess what people like about Butthesda games, buuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuut it's still shit. I can't get over how shit it is.
Because I don't find Elder Scrolls freeing, I find it very restrictive in how you handle shit in a fight. Considering my love for games like the entirity of the fighting game genre, Devil May Cry, Tony Hawk Pro Skater, or hell lets use actual sandbox games: The Phantom Pain, Crysis, Far Cry 1 before the trigun show up, or yeah Breath of the Wild. I don't think the issue is my lack of appreciation for wanting to go nuts with my options, tells me Bethesda's game is more rigid by comparsion, or hell I at least need the fundies with my choices, because hey Deus Ex 1 has a lot of choices, but that game sucks.
PS, shut the fuck up and go play Devil May Cry 3 you stupid kiwi!!!
Combat mechanics are not why I prefer Bayonetta 2. 
So, ignoring all the irrelevent waffling about beat 'em ups, you don't like ES because the combat mechanics don't synergise. But you basically said that in a previous post (there being no balance to the leveling), so I didn't actually learn anything more.
I suppose your argument that you can think of ways to improve Witcher 3's combat is sort of new, but I personally can't think of a way of making Witcher 3's combat fun at all (not over a 70 hour game, anyway), and the sort of tweaks you suggested earlier sound like, at best, polishing a turd, so I'm not buying it. You need to flush the turd, and get Platinum or Capcom or even Ninja Theory or pretty much anyone but CD Projekt Red to take an entirely new shit instead. And it's not like I'm being unrealistic, here. The little change they made to the combat with a patch affecting movement or whatever it was was a nice QoL upgrade, but the combat didn't actually become any more fun.
Foolz said:Combat mechanics are not why I prefer Bayonetta 2.
So, ignoring all the irrelevent waffling about beat 'em ups, you don't like ES because the combat mechanics don't synergise. But you basically said that in a previous post (there being no balance to the leveling), so I didn't actually learn anything more.
I suppose your argument that you can think of ways to improve Witcher 3's combat is sort of new, but I personally can't think of a way of making Witcher 3's combat fun at all (not over a 70 hour game, anyway), and the sort of tweaks you suggested earlier sound like, at best, polishing a turd, so I'm not buying it. You need to flush the turd, and get Platinum or Capcom or even Ninja Theory or pretty much anyone but CD Projekt Red to take an entirely new shit instead. And it's not like I'm being unrealistic, here. The little change they made to the combat with a patch affecting movement or whatever it was was a nice QoL upgrade, but the combat didn't actually become any more fun.
Fun here is an end result take. "i found it good" "i found it bad". I'm not arguing what you found fun or not. I am saying there is nothing you could lay at The Witcher 3's combat that I couldn't say is a knock I would hold against Elder Snore. That's argument one. More importantly a lot of the things Witcher 3 gets wrong, Elder Scrolls often does even worse. There is nothing fundamentally sound about what Elder Scrolls does as a combat system, and while yes fundies may not be everything, as even Platinum Games has brain dead defensive options in a lot of their games, buuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuut it's still the basis of what would be a good system. Because I don't even end up at Howard's game being so bad, it's good. It's just bad. Offensively so.
Of all the things you're gonna stan, you can hold that on stanning for Morrowind.
Gagan said:Fun here is an end result take. "i found it good" "i found it bad". I'm not arguing what you found fun or not. I am saying there is nothing you could lay at The Witcher 3's combat that I couldn't say is a knock I would hold against Elder Snore. That's argument one. More importantly a lot of the things Witcher 3 gets wrong, Elder Scrolls often does even worse. There is nothing fundamentally sound about what Elder Scrolls does as a combat system, and while yes fundies may not be everything, as even Platinum Games has brain dead defensive options in a lot of their games, buuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuut it's still the basis of what would be a good system. Because I don't even end up at Howard's game being so bad, it's good. It's just bad. Offensively so.
Of all the things you're gonna stan, you can hold that on stanning for Morrowind.
A'ight, so clearly we've been talking at cross purposes. Personally, the main thing that bothers me about what you're saying is it's an argument for a world in which all games are a shitty derivative of beat 'em ups, just as the standard games criticism is an argument for a world in which all games are polished turds that have been QoL'd to death. That's a lame aesthetic position to take, and has disasterous effects if you have any influence: see the state of triple A. Though a world of bad beat 'em ups would still be better than the state of triple A, I'll grant you that!
The fundamental combat mechanics, outside the leveling where your substantive argument for it being bad is it's "unbalanced" and mine for it being good is that it doesn't constrain itself with balance so we've failed to out argue each other here, are you click on an enemy and they die or they do not die based on the leveling system. That's really all it amounts to. Well, also if they hit you, you either die or you don't die based on the leveling system. I'm failing to see how this isn't a fundamentally sound system. Explain to me how it isn't on its own merits, not how it isn't compared to this completely other different system that isn't actually in the game, as you have been doing, and maybe I'll be able to see you might have a point.
Foolz said:A'ight, so clearly we've been talking at cross purposes. Personally, the main thing that bothers me about what you're saying is it's an argument for a world in which all games are a shitty derivative of beat 'em ups, just as the standard games criticism is an argument for a world in which all games are polished turds that have been QoL'd to death. That's a lame aesthetic position to take, and has disasterous effects if you have any influence: see the state of triple A. Though a world of bad beat 'em ups would still be better than the state of triple A, I'll grant you that!
The fundamental combat mechanics, outside the leveling where your substantive argument for it being bad is it's "unbalanced" and mine for it being good is that it doesn't constrain itself with balance so we've failed to out argue each other here, are you click on an enemy and they die or they do not die based on the leveling system. That's really all it amounts to. Well, also if they hit you, you either die or you don't die based on the leveling system. I'm failing to see how this isn't a fundamentally sound system. Explain to me how it isn't on its own merits, not how it isn't compared to this completely other different system that isn't actually in the game, as you have been doing, and maybe I'll be able to see you might have a point.
Your aesthetics do nothing for me. The error people make is that there is no room for diverging styles n such with what i described. That's not tru at all. Considering in the same genre I love Devil May Cry, I happen to be a stan for Bayonetta? yes? Bayonetta is a wildly different game actually, it's chain combos, over links. It's about using offsets to get to the unique parts of a combo (the finisher of the dial) so you can connect them with less command moves. Where as Devil May Cry 4 was giving the players command moves on top of command moves. I like me some God of War 2. God of War 2 isn't even deep, it's not but dials and very little range for expression. And you have Ninja Gaiden, and God Hand, Onimusha, Otogi. All different battle systems and different levels of success with other components of combat. Shit ninja gaiden is not much of a combo game. I also happen to be a big fan of Dark Souls, Nioh, I'll even call Dad of War good. And they aint Devil May Cry. Now first person melee combat has its own issues obviously, but third person melee combat has developed concepts, and as a result has some non-negotiables, and I aint budging on those.
Having a central foundation and expectation isn't a bad thing. The Witcher would still be a bland action game, but fundamentally sound at least. I don't care that you tried to be cute, if you still ended up as shit. What the fuck does that do for me? I have no desire to eat shit. My brand of criticism would still be harsh on The Witcher, it just would be infinitely more punishing to Bethesda. Which whose fault is that? Mine or theirs for not having a single good game mechanic and a buggy mess of a game for the better part of plural decades?
My substantive argument agaisnt Elder Snore isn't even that it's unbalanced. Balanced is overrated. Witcher 3 isn't balanced. Bayonetta isn't really balanced. The better you get at Bayonetta, the more not a threat any difficulty below infinite climax is. Devil May Cry isn't balanced, most of those enemies can't do shit to you while you're juggling goons in the air. At least I wouldn't use balanced to describe them
My contention is that everything feels poor: In fact poorer than the witcher
Attack animations are inconsistent: Something it also does worse than the witcher
Abilities don't have any sort of synergy with other offensive tools for the player: Something I argue the witcher also does
Positioning doesn't matter: versus the witcher 3 where yeah you have incentive to press for better position for a backstab bonus
Defense is brain dead and rather one dimensional: versus the witcher where again you have reason to parry versus side stepping or long dodging. One is a safety net, the others reward with immediate counter damage or letting you put yourself closer to an advantageous position
Doing any specific style of build is just doing shitty stealth, or shitty combat, or a really bad fps with spells. versus, the witcher 3 isn't even a RPG, and I couldn't give less of a fuck.
Enemies often really only have one to 2 attack options: Something I would also hold against the witcher, but even that game fixes that
After that I criticized the rpg part, because you can just jack of all trades it, there is no real decision to ever make, because there is nothing you ever give up. An Obsidian game, or Larian, or any number of computer rpgs that are Bethesda's peer get that shit, but Howard's games don't.
What's interesting about the numbers killing the enemy or not? You're just clicking, you make little to no smaller decisions in gameplay. Simple mechanics can clearly work platformers create all sorts of smaller arcs the player must respond to and execute depending on the obstacle, enemy placement, etc. And it's built around one fucking button, jump. So I aint buying the bullshit that just because it's not a bland beat em up, that it's at least better for being its own thing. It's a worse thing.
"oh the thing you dislike about it, is what I like". DOES NOTHING FOR ME. If you want to argue for the butt ass gameplay, by all means argue for the butt ass gameplay. But give me a fucking example of what interesting thing the player can do with the system or is at least is asked to do with the systems.
Imagine if you spent this energy stanning for bum ass Todd Howard gameplay on playing Devil May Cry 3 one of the greatest action games ever made.
Aesthetics: you support my point by offering only examples of the same genre, except for like 2 games. I wanna say being that limited would be even lamer than the triple a trash of mainstream games criticism, but I'm not gonna lie, because it wouldn't.
Animation: not a beat 'em up; the animations don't effect gameplay, so you're making an art style criticism here lol.
Abilities: Agreed.
Positioning: Literally not a part of the combat system beyond proximity and hit boxes. This is a good thing, as it allows me to waste less time and effort on the million fights you're forced to do in RPGs (unless you do the smart thing, as you can in Morrowind, and build your character to cheese or skip them so that this isn't an issue).
Defence: It's about proximity and/or strafing, which is a good thing, as above.
Jack of All Trades: if it weren't, you wouldn't be able to do things allowing you to avoid combat or map jumping, skipping sections and other fun things like that.
The system doesn't ask you to do anything interesting, that's for sure. You have to invent interesting things yourself, as above. But there's also flying, and there were other stupid things to do with the endurance stat in particular, but I've forgotten what they were. That's still more things than endure the bad combat of The Witcher 3 on your way to the next story instalment, though.
So in essence, the combat is superior in Morrowind because although it sucks, you can either avoid it entirely, or cheese it in a variety of ways some of which are funny; whereas with Witcher 3 you just have to sit through mediocre crap that isn't even funny. (Funny may contain the word fun in it, but it isn't a general effect statement like fun, or good, but a specific effect caused by what the gameplay mechanics consist of, so please don't be triggered.)
Foolz said:
Animation: not a beat 'em up; the animations don't effect gameplay, so you're making an art style criticism here lol.
This is objectively false. Animations dictate enemy tells, ie shit the player can respond to.
Animations help in making hitboxes n hurtboxes clearer (considering the box itself is often bigger than the actual model, but the point is it makes a poke more visible)
Start up frames, active frames, and recovery frames matter in an action game (hell any game), so animations actually do effect gameplay. Imma need you to hold that fam.
Foolz said:
Positioning: Literally not a part of the combat system beyond proximity and hit boxes.
Yeah you literally don't have to worry about shit, I don't look at that as a positive. If the only positive is "it makes all the fights quicker, because the fighting is so bad" then I would argue that's just further pointing out that it's bad. Again the problem here is that you're stanning for a game you think is good. I'm at least only arguing a game I think is average or okay, is better than a game I think is outright bad.
Your take is "i can at least skip the combat to putz around". I aint out here to putz around. My take is pretty simple, based on the Witcher 3 would I give its expansions or Cyberpunk the time of day? Sure, because CDPR isn't that far off from getting what makes for good gameplay. Based on Morrowind, Oblivion, n Fallout 3, or shit just Morrowind, would I give Todd Howard the time of day? LOLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL no
Animation: They do, if that's how it's designed. That isn't how it's designed in Morrowind. You can say that they should be, but they aren't.
Positioning: You arguing for a game that forces you to waste 10s of hours on soul-sucking mediocrity that you're willing to defend because it ticks your boxes. That's definitely worse.
So don't, what's your point?
My point is just because you have grown accustomed to eating shit, does not mean I'm cool with eating shit fam. Shit is shit, meh is meh. I can work with meh, aint no one got time for shit.
Gagan said:My point is just because you have grown accustomed to eating shit, does not mean I'm cool with eating shit fam. Shit is shit, meh is meh. I can work with meh, aint no one got time for shit.
Interesting that your ultimate point is literally a metaphor about you not liking the taste of something.
I beat Little Nightmares
I usually don't play horror games, I'm not even sure this would count as one. It's a gentle platformer puzzler with a few higher paced sections where you're being chased, set in a dark and damp ship called the Maw. Most of the gameplay involves exploring a room to find the exit or key while staying out of view and reach of the 'monsters' going about their business. There's little in the way of explanation of what the story is about, but you quickly grasp that it's some kind of orphanage where the kids are cooked and served. There's a sense that there's a deeper meaning to this all, but it's up to you to fill in the blanks. The earlier sections of the game are really dark and gloomy, which I found very oppressive to play through. After that most area's are lit better and seem more domestic, albeit in a twisted way. Once I reached those sections the unease slipt away, and while it was a relief, it's also a bit of a shame as the later sections seem almost frivolous and welcoming compared to the first area. The graphics and art style are superb. It's all a bit Burtonesque, but without the colour and the whimsy. Everything's hard , cold and crooked, while the inhabitants of the ship are all clearly human, but heavily deformed. You can really imagine that they're just people doing their job through the lense of a frightened little girl.
It's an experience that will stick with me while I ponder what the story really was about. There is a good theory about it online, which I won't spoil here. I'll take a break from it now and return to it a few months down the line to play the DLC which came included in the Switch version.
8/10