|
I personally enjoyed spending half of RDR's "story" hanging around outside a fort and slowly following people on horseback while listening to hilarious dialogue about snake oil until they decided to open the door. It got good after that I guess
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 21:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 19:32 |
|
|
Also those loading screen messages are not pretentious in context. Most of them start showing up quite late in the game; early game loading screens are "use cover to avoid getting shot" and midgame loading screens have meditations on the nature of cognitive dissonance and the horror of unjust war. By the time the obvious player backhands show up, the necessary legwork has been well and truly done. Also the reason that a good ending wasn't included was memory limits. Loading up the live and dead phosphorus sections simultaneously took up more memory than consoles could muster, so the story had to become linear. They were planning on splitting the moral narrative at that point but it just couldn't be done, so they had to abandon some bits of the story and double down on Walker being increasingly autonomous.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 21:13
|
|
|
Morpheus posted:Bonnie was the best thing about that game. Unsurprisingly after she vanishes from the story forever So, about thirty to sixty minutes from the ending, then?
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 21:40
|
|
|
Somfin posted:Also the reason that a good ending wasn't included was memory limits. Loading up the live and dead phosphorus sections simultaneously took up more memory than consoles could muster, so the story had to become linear. They were planning on splitting the moral narrative at that point but it just couldn't be done, so they had to abandon some bits of the story and double down on Walker being increasingly autonomous. This is like the fifth or sixth conflicting story somebody has posted in thies thread about how Spec Ops was going to or wasn't going to or couldn't have branching storylines so if somebody could actually post a source or something that would be super cool.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 22:54
|
|
|
The stories in the GTA games are absolutely full of characters being forced/blackmailled/cajolled into doing missions that they dont want to do, which I dont think is great for putting the player into the mindset that "this is going to be fun". The characters have a (usually vague) goal and they spend almost none of the plot actively working towards that goal, instead doing things for characters who promise to help you towards that goal, but first you must do X, Y and Z (and the checkpointing in Z sucks, so enjoy repeating the journey across the map if you screw something up). Whereas in Saints Row games (at least from 2 onwards I never played 1) the Boss has a defined goal and then proceeds to generally gently caress poo poo up until the goal is achieved. I'm sure there must be a few times in the SR games where you are told "Now you must do this", but generally the missions are "gently caress you, I'm going to do this, because gently caress you thats why". Sometimes you are reacting to other characters actions, but you arent being forced into a course of action, the Boss has chosen a course of action. The story in those games doesnt drag for me like it does in GTA games, and I honestly think a part of that is that, although the gameplay is generally similar, in SR games you are told you want to do (thing) whereas the GTA you listen to the character bitch about how terrible it is that he is being forced to do (thing).
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 23:00
|
|
|
i like the part in gta where i kill everyone i see
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 23:20
|
|
im pooping! posted:i like the part in gta where i kill everyone i see I like the part where GTAOnline doesn't let you own cop cars for no reason.
|
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 23:27
|
|
|
im pooping! posted:i like the part in gta where i kill everyone i see I was glad when they brought rampages back, but lol at the themed enemy mobs.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2016 23:45
|
|
|
Tiggum posted:Pretentious: characterized by assumption of dignity or importance, especially when exaggerated or undeserved. As in Spec Ops: The Line is pretentious in the way it delivers a simple message about how media glorifies war and violence in a way that implies that it's exceptional and clever for doing so. Evidently it was pretty clever because it definitely runs deeper than a glorification of war. I read it as being about desensitization more than anything else, and to that end there's no way it could be subtle, because it specifically targets players who have become desensitized to games where US soldiers go to other countries and shoot hundreds of people with no thought for the consequences. If you're trying to reach one of those players, you can't be subtle and reserved about it or else they won't respond; you've got to shake them awake and push them. In this way the fact that it's extremely direct by the end is actually to its credit. There's a lot of cleverness in how it gets to its message (marketing itself as another dumb modern shooter and then playing it completely straight at the start of the game is brilliant), but the message itself is more than clear, and that's exactly how it should be. I agree that there's a disconnect between the player and the character, and the one important place where I see this come up is toward the end of the game where you are told straight up that you have to fire into the crowd of civilians, but you can actually just fire into the air to scatter them instead. However, I think it's actually good that it confronts the player directly, even in a small way, because it's what connects your enjoyment of walker's hosed up actions to the message. If you enjoyed shooting foreigners at the beginning of the game, do you still enjoy shooting US soldiers? If you enjoyed the white phosphorous bit (and I think they were 100% going after the AC130 level in call of duty 4 here), you probably won't right after it's over. The game talking to the player directly is basically its challenge that pushes you to think about the way it made you feel, and encourages the player to think instead of just feeling bad about what they did. I don't think the game is trying to be complex at all, but it simply has to be subversive with your expectations or it won't have any effect. The assertion that spec ops is pretentious basically hinges on whether or not you think there's anything meaningful behind what it has to say, and I think there absolutely is. If anyone has not seen the game, I highly recommend watching this. Whether you think it's great or full of poo poo, it sparks a lot of discussion. Owl Inspector has a new favorite as of 04:37 on Jul 20, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2016 04:34
|
|
|
I mean, more power to you if you're the type of too cool for school elité gamer that doesn't go a little "Whaaaaa" when the game directly points out to you in the loading screens that you're enjoying the illusion of murder and directly insults you, if only for the novelty value. Also loving lol at the idea that there are many games like that; I can literally count on one hand the games that actually go into the issue and two of them were the Kane and Lynch games which were, to be kind, significantly less playable than Spec Ops. Also, I enjoyed shooting the American soldiers a lot, especially as it's one of the very few games that actually let you do that; I think Alpha Protocol is about the only other game that lets you actually fight vaguely against American Imperialism in mah bideo games.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2016 04:45
|
|
|
Deceitful Penguin posted:Also, I enjoyed shooting the American soldiers a lot, especially as it's one of the very few games that actually let you do that; I think Alpha Protocol is about the only other game that lets you actually fight vaguely against American Imperialism in mah bideo games. Half-Life? You're not fighting against imperialism there though, it's more of a "they shot first!" thing. I wonder if it seemed edgy at all in 1998, I kind of doubt it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2016 05:09
|
|
|
We're they marines or the in-house cleanup crew? opposing force said they were marines, right?
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2016 05:16
|
|
|
Seeing as spec Ops has caused a back and forth serious business discussion about the nature of violence and participating in carnage in a video game for pages now, it's hard to see it as anything less than an unqualified success in its intended outcome.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2016 05:16
|
|
|
i actually kinda want to play it again now, i recall it having some fun setpieces
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2016 05:20
|
|
|
im pooping! posted:i actually kinda want to play it again now, i recall it having some fun setpieces https://www.humblebundle.com/2k-games-bundle Well you can get it here for a dollar
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2016 05:21
|
|
|
Action Tortoise posted:We're they marines or the in-house cleanup crew? opposing force said they were marines, right? It's sorta ambiguous in HL1 itself, but Opposing Force and Black Mesa push them more towards being Marines, yeah. Opposing Force also has the black ops cleanup crew.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2016 05:25
|
|
|
StandardVC10 posted:It's sorta ambiguous in HL1 itself, but Opposing Force and Black Mesa push them more towards being Marines, yeah. Opposing Force also has the black ops cleanup crew.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2016 05:35
|
|
|
StandardVC10 posted:It's sorta ambiguous in HL1 itself, but Opposing Force and Black Mesa push them more towards being Marines, yeah. Opposing Force also has the black ops cleanup crew. Which kind of means they don't count, really. They could be any military force you want them to be. The fact that you are explicitly fighting and killing your own countrymen, and those countrymen are explicitly Americans, is one of the things The Line really dwells on during its quieter moments. Anyway one of the things dragging it down is how, like the phone in Undertale, a lot of the characterisation is hidden in something that you rarely use. Until my hard mode playthrough, I didn't need the command mechanic much, but Walker's commands and his allies' responses are where a huge amount of his character development/descent into mad brutality shines through.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2016 05:39
|
|
|
Deceitful Penguin posted:Also loving lol at the idea that there are many games like that; I can literally count on one hand the games that actually go into the issue and two of them were the Kane and Lynch games which were, to be kind, significantly less playable than Spec Ops. If anyone's looking to play an awful game for some reason, you can turn off the camera fuckery in the options menu. But it doesn't address any of the other many issues the game has there though. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=76wEMo6ZTd4&t=1534s
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2016 05:43
|
|
|
just in case anyone is still insulted by the loading screens in spec ops: the line, you should know that your computer from 2012 should be able to run the game without ever displaying loading screens, or they were patched out or something, because after like 2 hours of playing ive yet to see a single loading screen chastising me or any loading screens at all for that matter
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2016 08:20
|
|
|
im pooping! posted:just in case anyone is still insulted by the loading screens in spec ops: the line, you should know that your computer from 2012 should be able to run the game without ever displaying loading screens, or they were patched out or something, because after like 2 hours of playing ive yet to see a single loading screen chastising me or any loading screens at all for that matter
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2016 09:18
|
|
|
Oxxidation posted:So, about thirty to sixty minutes from the ending, then? Oh does she return? Because I'm a few hours into Mexico and absolutely bored out of my mind with the game :/
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2016 12:23
|
|
|
Deceitful Penguin posted:I think Alpha Protocol is about the only other game that lets you actually fight vaguely against American Imperialism in mah bideo games. Your handler in that game gets really mad at you if you do also. "You can't kill them, they're American agents!" "So am I, that's not stopping them"
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2016 12:27
|
|
|
Zero Time Dilemma keeps using the word "history" instead of the word "timelines".
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2016 13:36
|
|
|
2house2fly posted:Your handler in that game gets really mad at you if you do also.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2016 13:38
|
|
|
Alpha Protocol, for all of its problems, has a lot of clever design decisions. My favorite is that doing basically anything gives you some sort of permanent bonus to make you good at doing it. Sneak past enemies? Get a sneaking bonus! Punch everyone? Get a punching bonus!
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2016 13:40
|
|
|
JaggerMcDagger posted:Zero Time Dilemma keeps using the word "history" instead of the word "timelines". Sometimes life is simply unfair.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2016 13:46
|
|
|
StandardVC10 posted:Half-Life? You're not fighting against imperialism there though, it's more of a "they shot first!" thing. I wonder if it seemed edgy at all in 1998, I kind of doubt it. RareAcumen posted:If anyone's looking to play an awful game for some reason, you can turn off the camera fuckery in the options menu. But it doesn't address any of the other many issues the game has there though. The camera nonsense in 2 and pixelization of their old man nudity didn't drag that game down as much for me as the whole "no ending" thing did though. 2house2fly posted:Your handler in that game gets really mad at you if you do also.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2016 14:46
|
|
|
JaggerMcDagger posted:Zero Time Dilemma keeps using the word "history" instead of the word "timelines". The rationale behind the game's word choices is ... complex.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2016 14:51
|
|
|
Deceitful Penguin posted:I mean, more power to you if you're the type of too cool for school elité gamer that doesn't go a little "Whaaaaa" when the game directly points out to you in the loading screens that you're enjoying the illusion of murder and directly insults you, if only for the novelty value. I am not to cool for school. I just think it's incredibly silly to let a video game judge you as a person.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2016 14:54
|
|
|
RenegadeStyle1 posted:I am not to cool for school. I just think it's incredibly silly to let a video game judge you as a person. Agreed. I also think it's silly for the game to mention it at all, as if they aren't literally making money off the very same war/torture/destruction. "you're becoming desensitized to war and violence! *continues desensitizing you*"
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2016 15:02
|
|
|
Somfin posted:
Arguably the good ending was Walker shooting himself and finally stopping the endless cycle of violence
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2016 15:15
|
|
|
HaB posted:Agreed. I also think it's silly for the game to mention it at all, as if they aren't literally making money off the very same war/torture/destruction. Its a little weird to argue that people shouldn't make money of things they make. Coppola made a lot of money of Apocalypse Now! but that doesn't really invalidate the message of the movie.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2016 15:17
|
|
|
RenegadeStyle1 posted:I am not to cool for school. I just think it's incredibly silly to let a video game judge you as a person. "This is just a game, you aren't a bad person" seems like the polar opposite of judging you as a person.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2016 15:32
|
|
|
Guy Mann posted:"This is just a game, you aren't a bad person" seems like the polar opposite of judging you as a person. I think a few people took that "tip" as being sarcastic.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2016 15:34
|
|
|
Alhazred posted:Its a little weird to argue that people shouldn't make money of things they make. Coppola made a lot of money of Apocalypse Now! but that doesn't really invalidate the message of the movie. I can't tell if you're joking or not, but I will benefit of the doubt here and offer a serious response: Do you really think that's what I'm arguing? At no point during Apocalypse Now does Coppola have a character turn directly to the screen and say "you there - watching this film - you're disgusting - sitting there enjoying this violence". And a movie isn't an interactive medium anyway, so the analogy doesn't really apply. An interactive game about war/violence, which requires the player to take an active role in that violence and then chastises/judges the player for doing so is silly for doing that anyway, but it's even sillier for the creators of that game to pretend the moral high ground when they are making money off the exact thing they are chastising the player for. I'm not even coming close to suggesting a creator shouldn't make money off what they create. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2016 15:58
|
|
|
The game isn't chastising you though. It's going "hey, games glorify this poo poo in a lot of cases - is that really a good thing". Taking it as a personal, direct insult seems pretty weird.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2016 16:18
|
|
|
HaB posted:Do you really think that's what I'm arguing? At no point during Apocalypse Now does Coppola have a character turn directly to the screen and say "you there - watching this film - you're disgusting - sitting there enjoying this violence". This idea reminds me of the ending to the comic book Wanted.  
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2016 16:32
|
|
|
God I hate Mark Millar.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2016 17:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 19:32 |
|
|
Eminem had a comic book?
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2016 17:16
|
|
