|
Man, this game was a lot of fun. It may not have set pieces on the same level as 2 or 3, but the platforming, exploration, and gunplay might be the best. However, despite liking aspects of the plot, I felt that the writing was weakest in this one.
|
#
¿
Aug 7, 2016 22:31
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 9, 2024 08:15 |
|
|
Red Bones posted:I guess Drake never mentioned his brother for the first three games because he got killed in a Panamanian prison, huh. Or that, in the third game, Drake didn't tell Sully about his brother because he knew his brother would die in the future. The inclusion, and then sudden death of Sam, is not a good idea and makes little sense within the context of the series.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 13, 2016 18:01
|
|
|
SlothfulCobra posted:Most videogames revolve around murdering vast hoards of men, which is why it's so jarring when they try to have lighthearted, upbeat plots when the bodycount is beg enough that you could build a small tower out of bones. I don't think any game has ever really managed to work that out. Were the snarling beasts in UC1 the natives, though? I thought they were Nazis who just lived long lives due to becoming snarling beasts. Also, you could take the UC2 one a step further since the snarling beast was just a disguise, and the native population was composed of blue men smart enough to know foreigners would be scared of strange beasts in strange lands. The blue men knew that foreigners would have the prejudicial disposition to believe the mythical city would also have mythical monsters, being that the city is far removed from our modern sensibilities. What I find more suspicious on Naught Dog's part is that these societies fell due to a lack of avoiding the easily avoidable evil (in UC1, they just needed to not open the coffin or advertise it to travelers; in UC2, they just needed to stop eating the blue resin once people started to become crazed; in UC2, they just needed to not put the contaminant in their drinking supply). Drake shows up, does a quick glance around some corpses or a mural, and understands where the natives went wrong.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 15, 2016 19:40
|
|
At least UC3 changed things up.
|
DatonKallandor posted:FarCry 3 fails at it because it was written by a guy who thought he was being the smartest writer ever (while all his writing ended up in a game that takes no notice of of his writing whatsoever). FarCry 3 fails because the revelation comes too little, too late. Even though it is reasonable to assume the player will understand the protag's descent into violence or his understanding that his decadent former life was a sham, the game sums it all up in a line that comes at the end where the only place it has left to go is that explanation the protag gives after the credits (his "I've become a monster so I can't go home"). All of the protag's character arc occurs when he looks at his bloody hands. There's a lot to love about the writing in the game, however it demands the player to be aware of it from the start. The Line fails because the game puts the player in an unwinnable circumstance and constantly tells the player that they were put in an unwinnable circumstance. The game makes you shoot a person and then tells you that you shouldn't have shot that person. The game accompanies the protag's descent into madness with winks and elbow nudges to remind you that he's descending into madness. The player reasonably could arrive at the conclusion the story wants (the desensitizing affects of violence in games) without the constant reminders, but with the reminder, the game becomes a joke-genre of itself. Imagine a game of Clue where your character ends up being the murderer in the folder, and then imagine once your card is revealed it has "Thou Shalt Not Kill?" scrawled on it. Plus, I laugh at the heavy-handedness of the white phosphorous Madonna and Child.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 17, 2016 16:40
|
|
|
DatonKallandor posted:It doesn't make you shoot that person though. You chose to play the game. That is the choice you are making. It's easier to blame the game than it is to just stop playing, which says a lot about just how used gamers are to the violence and how obendient they are to things those games ask of them. The point of a game is to be played, though. Using the logic that you don't have to play the game, that you don't have to experience the narrative of it, is self-defeating, and probably better belongs in a discussion about walking simulators. The Line is all about false choices, and the "don't play the game argument" creates a retroactively, morally superior loop hole. When you play the game it presents what appears to be an option, which is not really up to choice, and then when you try to dissect the idea of a false choice, the game (not really the actual game but the nebulous entity of the game made by developers, writers, and critics) takes the stance that you didn't have to play the game in the first place, that you are in the wrong for being deceived. This also starts to deal with the problem of how much the player identifies with the character. Discussion on The Line seems to assume that you, the player, are Walker. Lots of people view themselves as part of the character, that they are the character. However, it is perfectly normal to view yourself detached from the character. The character can be a person separate from the player, and the player facilitates the character's passage. When I play a game, it's not me who climbs around Panamanian jails, it's Drake. My hands on the controller could just be eyes directed at a movie screen. Edit: Lots of post since I started to write this makes it look like untimely. As for UC4, how does Rafe smuggle hair product into jail? Mr. Highway fucked around with this message at 19:58 on Aug 17, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Aug 17, 2016 19:52
|
|
|
Action Shakespeare posted:I don't have much to say about unwinnable bosses, but I did notice this native american statue guy. More like Naughty Dog has a thing for Tootsie Roll Pops.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 10, 2016 17:50
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 9, 2024 08:15 |
|
|
Tae posted:Here's a depressing story about humanity related to that scene Not defending that horrible playtester, but there are a couple instances later in the game that make me feel Naughty Dog didn't handle Nadine as well as they could. Unfortunately, like most of my criticisms of the game's writing, these won't be apparent until near the end of the game.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 12, 2016 17:19
|
|