Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Grimskul wrote:
I'll agree on the point of it not being the most original of games when it comes to the plot, but it does IMO do a good job of investing yourself into the characters particularly as Joel and Ellie's relationship develops throughout the story. In this regard, I generally found the gameplay to be quite engaging with the story itself since you can't really go guns-ablazing like in Uncharted or CoD without seriously wounding yourself or depleting your precious ammo. Did you play on Survivor or at least Hard mode? That's when I find it to be really intense, especially since you really have to plan ahead when there are multiple clickers, or worse, like in the basement level of the hotel where you have to turn on the generator. It's also in these harder modes that gathering and searching for resources becomes that much more vital for upgrading weapons so you can actually survive the later waves of guys you have to face. I also liked the change to Ellie's point of view since it legitimately gives you a different perspective as you both feel more fragile and sneaky compared to when you play the more gung-ho Joel.

I agree to a certain extent. But there was a disconnection between me and the main characters. Here they are going around killing people, and it doesn't really faze them.

They just keep doing it. Where in some games I know. Like this war of mine had it where you would kill people but you are a civilain, you aren't military trained you will be pyschologly depressed by it. For the rest of the bloody game. You would never recover from killing someone.

See the problem is that with most games these are civilians, why the hell are they just shooting someone with little regards. It always distrubed me and it will continue to disturb me.

I want to praise and then condemn the last of us for it's crafting system. It's neat in that game. It gives you a nice scavenger feeling without being too boggy and even has some meaningful choices in picking what to craft. But I hate the system in almost every other game that has it now. Stop it! It's not fun anymore.

I agree, but I don't think it is was the best game of 2013. Bioshock Infinite wins that category for incredible gameplay and story.

But thats my opinion of course.

Bioshock infinite was more understandable and it wasn't shoved in your face. I mean you fell in love with characters like elizabeth, and you didn't get stuck on certain parts. Apart from the crappy final fight. Which was basically a retread of tower defense games. It would of been more interesting to have a final boss that was actually difficult.

But eh, I loved the story and the characters. Probably because this was less by choice and more by the fact that your trying to figure out what is going and who those bloody twins are.

In the Last of Us I looked at for its gameplay, approachability and story. If the game literally requires me to play on the hardest difficulty. I will not play that game. Its also why I disliked Alien Isolation (Which is basically a poorman's outlast, except with better AI).

Gameplay wise as I have said I didn't enjoy it. It like most games has a fething crafting system. And I hate crafting systems. I am sorry but everygame since minecraft has to have a crafting system. But I didn't find it useful. I Am survivor how the hell am I able to figure this stuff out? Where did I learn this stuff engineering school?

There is also a lack of a central focus in the game, no central villain except man vs man, nature vs man, man vs self. But I looked at now and I still stand by my opinion. I didn't enjoy The Last of Us.

It was more on the lines of that people told me it would blow me away. Unlike Bioshock Infinite which I heard a ton about decrying it as horrible. And I played it recently because I thought eh, lets play a bad game. And that bloody blew me away. How? because I was given this idea this is a bioshock game. It is going to have polish like I don't even know. Ken Levine is one of the best writers in the game industry. So no wonder why I will like this game. The dialogue was better, it was more natural, less forced, than the last of us. And yet it gets gak. Even though.... You have more manveurability than the last of us. There is no crafting, there is an upgrade system, but it is up to you to do that.

There is also incredibly hard gameplay, And I played it on the hardest difficulty because I loved it so much. Because I wanted to feel more challenged and the game was basically telling me increase the difficulty. You will love it.

So I did.

The Last of Us I just didn't enjoy compared to Bioshock Infinite, mostly due to gameplay and story.

The Last of Us to me was just another Zombie game that was trying to be the walking dead. I don't think it was as revolutionary as my colleagues like to believe, in fact I think both games are great games, but out of the games released in 2013. Bioshock wins in terms of well, being better, more polished, and less reliant on cinematics. It blended both player interaction with player character perfectly. They didn't have to explain. They showed.

There is nothing revolutionary about the last of us. Atr least nothing I can think of. Everything in it feels very worn very known very well not-revlunary.

nomotog wrote:
There is nothing revolutionary about the last of us. Atr least nothing I can think of. Everything in it feels very worn very known very well not-revlunary.

Well. It is revolutionary in terms of how many cinematics there are in the game :/

 Asherian Command wrote:

nomotog wrote:
There is nothing revolutionary about the last of us. Atr least nothing I can think of. Everything in it feels very worn very known very well not-revlunary.

Well. It is revolutionary in terms of how many cinematics there are in the game :/

Na not even that to be honest. I mean a square RPG would crush it in the ciematics department.

I quite enjoyed all 3 of the Bioshock games.

 Asherian Command wrote:


I agree to a certain extent. But there was a disconnection between me and the main characters. Here they are going around killing people, and it doesn't really faze them.

They just keep doing it. Where in some games I know. Like this war of mine had it where you would kill people but you are a civilain, you aren't military trained you will be pyschologly depressed by it. For the rest of the bloody game. You would never recover from killing someone.

See the problem is that with most games these are civilians, why the hell are they just shooting someone with little regards. It always distrubed me and it will continue to disturb me..

Well, to be fair, Joel is shown to be a weathered man by the time you play him, he's already too far gone as you can tell with his interactions with Tommy, who has moved on in with a new life, and Joel even yells at him for being ungrateful for what Joel had to do in order to help them survive. Also these "civilians" you speak of really aren't civilians in the conventional sense at this point, as desperation/hunger/fear have already molded them into either cannibals like David's men who have effectively institutionalized cannibalism in their town to survive and the Hunters who have accepted a very "survival of the fittest" mentality which includes effectively banning children because of their liability as weaknesses.

If you look at how little it takes for people to panic and break down into hysteria and this is over a 20 year period, it's not surprising that at this point everyone is used to the norm of death and having to survive based on who gets the drop on who first. Civility is a façade we put on when we're safe and content but when our shelter, food and lives are threatened we can easily descend to depths we wouldn't think possible, just look at real life cases where people get stranded or otherwise.

Also, no, I would say that it does faze Ellie quite a bit, you notice how she makes statements like "Oh gak!" when Joel beats the tar out of someone and how traumatized she is by her encounter with David and her brutally hacking him to death, since she is noticeably much more withdrawn to Joel after the incident.

Either way, Bioshock Infinite is a great game, but I think its clear that our personal tastes diverge when it comes to what kind of things we're looking for in a game. I respect your decision nonetheless sir *tips hat*.

 Asherian Command wrote:

nomotog wrote:
There is nothing revolutionary about the last of us. Atr least nothing I can think of. Everything in it feels very worn very known very well not-revlunary.

Well. It is revolutionary in terms of how many cinematics there are in the game :/

Metal Gear Solid 4 says hello.

 Medium of Death wrote:

 Asherian Command wrote:

nomotog wrote:
There is nothing revolutionary about the last of us. Atr least nothing I can think of. Everything in it feels very worn very known very well not-revlunary.

Well. It is revolutionary in terms of how many cinematics there are in the game :/

Metal Gear Solid 4 says hello.

I don't consider Metal Gear Solid a game because of how many cutscenes there are alone -.-

Meta Gear Solid is so uninteractive that I consider it a visual novel with some gameplay.

Games should have a balance.... Not over abundance of those cinematics. Like Meta Gear Solid.

 Grimskul wrote:

 Asherian Command wrote:


I agree to a certain extent. But there was a disconnection between me and the main characters. Here they are going around killing people, and it doesn't really faze them.

They just keep doing it. Where in some games I know. Like this war of mine had it where you would kill people but you are a civilain, you aren't military trained you will be pyschologly depressed by it. For the rest of the bloody game. You would never recover from killing someone.

See the problem is that with most games these are civilians, why the hell are they just shooting someone with little regards. It always distrubed me and it will continue to disturb me..

Well, to be fair, Joel is shown to be a weathered man by the time you play him, he's already too far gone as you can tell with his interactions with Tommy, who has moved on in with a new life, and Joel even yells at him for being ungrateful for what Joel had to do in order to help them survive. Also these "civilians" you speak of really aren't civilians in the conventional sense at this point, as desperation/hunger/fear have already molded them into either cannibals like David's men who have effectively institutionalized cannibalism in their town to survive and the Hunters who have accepted a very "survival of the fittest" mentality which includes effectively banning children because of their liability as weaknesses.

If you look at how little it takes for people to panic and break down into hysteria and this is over a 20 year period, it's not surprising that at this point everyone is used to the norm of death and having to survive based on who gets the drop on who first. Civility is a façade we put on when we're safe and content but when our shelter, food and lives are threatened we can easily descend to depths we wouldn't think possible, just look at real life cases where people get stranded or otherwise.

Also, no, I would say that it does faze Ellie quite a bit, you notice how she makes statements like "Oh gak!" when Joel beats the tar out of someone and how traumatized she is by her encounter with David and her brutally hacking him to death, since she is noticeably much more withdrawn to Joel after the incident.

Either way, Bioshock Infinite is a great game, but I think its clear that our personal tastes diverge when it comes to what kind of things we're looking for in a game. I respect your decision nonetheless sir *tips hat*.

This ^

By the time the "meat" of TLoU rolls around, it's been 20 years since the world ended. There are no "civilians" left. Ellie grew up in a world that has never not known want, deprivation, the lack of basic rights, military control and the infected. Joel spent the last 20 years being a shell of a man, having been a raider, a bandit, a transporter, and a scavenger.

^while I agree, It doesn't mean that people become less human there will still be people who will start to value human life because there are less of them.

Personally the problem is that the characters are psychopaths. And People will keep spouting out well they its been twenty years blah blah, survival. Yeah. But they have been living in relatively safe areas. Yes they might of fought zombies, but that doesn't strip your humanity. In the children of men I felt more sympathy, because there was redeemable qualities and they didn't go around killing people for no other reason. They avoided them. They didn't march into densely populated areas on purpose.

Its a problem I often have with games, there was also no central theme. Other than the 'last of us'. Which I still find very funny title. As there are more humans killed in the game.

There is very little reason to kill other humans. Like in Alien Isolation, its legitimatized, people have turned crazy only because they are constantly hunted by a creature that can appear from anywhere at anytime. But do you want to attack these survivors? No there is no reason to. Leave them alone and they will leave you alone.

In bioshock everyone has gone crazy because they are spliced to all high hell.

Whats the Last's of Us excuse? There are zombies. Good fething god that is a lame excuse. 20 years and society fell apart from zombies. You know, because nukes are completely useless. Can they climb? No. Do they regenerate? No. Are they extremely atheletic and have supernatural powers? No... Did you develop any techonlogy to combat the problem? no. Its been twenty years. And the government is supposedly gone? Yep. ARe you a horrible writer with no conception of time? Yep. Not only would this horrible time accelerate progress, but you would have people, weapons experts who are living in isolation anyway, being creating weapons specifically tailored for the problem. You would have researchers studying the virus. I mean in World War Z, in ten years they were able to not only take back an entire coast back! But they had created a special operations units to deal with it. The problem is logistically the game makes no sense. There are gaping plot holes and character problems that I scratch my head at. I know its just a game. But it lacks... ALOT OF DEPTH. Compared especially to bioshock and alien Isolation. There is alot of reasons why the aliens and the splicers are hard to kill or because there is a lot of reasons behind it, isolation, being in space. For gods sakes, Resident evil had more explanation for the Los Plagus was so freaking effective in resident evil 4. They were a small village, what the hell would anyone bat an eye at them?

You had a reason to kill the splicers, the aliens, the villagers, hell the soliders in this War of Mine it is understandable as to why you kill bandits because they are guarding food and your group needs food or medicine or bandages so no one would die.

I mean look at the new far cry 4.... If you sit at the table.....

This happens.



Thats farcry 4.... In15 minutes. They finished it.... That is basically the entire game.

Anyway, next week I will talk about To the Moon integration of story telling, music and gameplay. (Properly)

 Asherian Command wrote:
...

I mean look at the new far cry 4.... If you sit at the table.....

This happens.

Spoiler:

Thats farcry 4.... In15 minutes. They finished it.... That is basically the entire game.

Anyway, next week I will talk about To the Moon integration of story telling, music and gameplay. (Properly)

That...actually looks like it would make for a pretty fething cool plot.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:

 Asherian Command wrote:
...

I mean look at the new far cry 4.... If you sit at the table.....

This happens.

Spoiler:

Thats farcry 4.... In15 minutes. They finished it.... That is basically the entire game.

Anyway, next week I will talk about To the Moon integration of story telling, music and gameplay. (Properly)

That...actually looks like it would make for a pretty fething cool plot.

Spoiler:

Seriously, if you were told the truth, that your father found out about your mother's infidelity and killed your half sister, why wouldn't you side with your "step" father? Feth your actual father, that guys a murderous donkey-cave. And instead of killing you to get revenge for the murder of his daughter, your step-dad pretty much adopts you and invites you to "go shoot some goddamn guns"

I'm not planning on getting FC4 but if they bring out a DLC alternate campaign that lets you become the adopted son and protege of a fabulously wealthy flamboyant despot who rules over an exotic Tibet-like asian kingdom, I'm sold!

The point is that is a normal everyday thing and the most sensible. In real life you bet your ass i would do the same thing as that ending.

It making fun of the entire idea of you fighting for the person that is clearly more evil. That ridicilious circumstances where normal people would of done the opposite of. I mean how many situations are there that are just plain stupid, and could of been avoided by saying sorry, or staying and listening to people?

Its basically the most awesome idea that ubisoft has ever had. And I would play the gak out of a game like that.

I'm not getting that game until theres a DLC that lets me side with the despot.

 Shadow Captain Edithae wrote:
I'm not getting that game until theres a DLC that lets me side with the despot.

Agreed. I am also waiting for it to have a lot less fps drops than it does currently.

Anyone wanna share their thoughts?

A simple game.. To The Moon

So heres a treat. A game that came out in 2011. And something I had never heard of until a few weeks ago. Yet it has been sitting in my Steam Library for a year.

I usually don’t talk about games that hit me in the feels.. There are many times as a writer I play games mostly to see stories, to see narratives and to see if games have well crafted narratives, stories, and characters. Video Games are escapism and they will always continue to be. What gets me up in the morning is the fact, that one day, I will craft experiences for those who play games. I want to give experiences to those who need it and those who want it.

I played a game called To The Moon half expecting it to you know, suck, because the last game I was worked all up to playing was The Last of Us, and I hated the game so much I refuse to play the last of us ever again.

This game… THIS GAME! No words can express my need to talk about this game, no words in English can summarize how I felt. It was like a hidden door finally in me that was finally unlocked, a path was shown to me. Quite simply this game, drove me to tears. I played this a few days ago. My thoughts have been collected, that I can talk about the game.

It is one of the most original games to date. Yes a Video Game, a video game drove me to tears…. Very few times have I ever just played a game from 9:00pm till the morning. I have never felt so strongly about a game and be so engrossed in its characters, its story, its plot line, it was perfect. I can’t find anything wrong with it. It is about love in a way. AS love is blind, so am I. The romantic in me has always had a thing of seeing old couples and hearing about their lives and being quite jealous of the lives they lived.

I know this place is known for rants and political diatribes. With time I have known love, and I have let it fluttered away. The game connected to me at that level. The level of knowing full well of the problems with love, and being blind to what is in front of you.

The game itself’s plot is focused on a dying old man and his final wish to go to the moon. Now for the purposes of not spoiling it. A group called the Sigmund Corp, who grants wishes. These are not boom you get it, it is restructuring of memories or a desire to have the effect of it being a wish. This in no way current time. Only the memories of the person. In order to grant this old man’s wish, two doctors whose job it is to do this for the dying, must go through his memories and see his life, and try to figure out when to implant this idea of going to the moon. This journey is long and it is rewarding, emotionally and game-play wise. It is a puzzle game, nothing that any normal person couldn't handle. It is a RPG maker game, so Don’t expect graphical fidelity or incredible beauty the which you and I would be jealous of. This game has heart, it has all the things that games wish they had.

This game is also blessed with a fantastic musical score. Which compliments the story itself. Without the music, the game would be radically different. Games need music, to help with mood setting and creating tonal changes. The music in this game is used to help tell a story, it also tells stories of its own. Each song is written with purpose and is used to help mechanics, and tell you where you are, whether to feel heroic etc. And surprisingly this is extremely effective, because it uses similar music it changes the dynamics of the story. Overall the music in this game was so fantastic I had to buy it....

I despise and love this game. One I despise as a writer, due to the fact that I was beaten before I could write something that was an art. As a writer, I know when I have met a master, and I the student. It comes at times like this that I must say that whenever anything is great that I despise it. That means it will always remain in my mind, and be one that I will carry in my heart.

Now the only thing I could complain about… Is the following. Lack of game-play. It plays out more of as a.. Well. A Novel. Its less of a game and more of a book, because yes there is game-play it is sparse and limited, most are actual cut-scenes with very little options to do things. That is my only critique of the game. Other than difficulty of puzzles being easy enough that anyone can do it if they have half a brain.

Now I would like to say. Get this game. If you have ever experienced love like I have, you might find it worth it. If you have gone through a break up. I recommend it, sigh. It is with heavy heart that I must tell you that you might need tissues.

With that I leave you with a dramatic monologue of mine.

" I often think that we are just specks in the sea, and many believe I am full of it. That we are not specks in the sea, that we are the craft of God or Gods or Science. I am aware of that idea, and I do not reject it. I am made of dust , and stars. Gods or The universe may of made me, yet I am just speck, no grand plan, just a man. I was breathed with life, and that electricity that we call, will cease its function one day. Death my friends, Is only a factiod. Not a disease, not something curable , something that will lead us to a path, that we do not yet know.One which that I will one day travel down. Then I will just be another speck in the sea, for my love, I will be thrown into the sea, the waves will flutter and I will sink to the deep.Never more but just a speck. In the sea. " .

- Asherian Command

Have you played to the moon?
Would you like to?
Do you think music adds to games feeling and tone?
What is a great story that you can think of?
Do you think games have have the potential to allow for great story telling?
Do you think that games can do reasonable love stories?
Do you think that games have the potential to make you feel something?

 Asherian Command wrote:

nomotog wrote:
There is nothing revolutionary about the last of us. Atr least nothing I can think of. Everything in it feels very worn very known very well not-revlunary.

Well. It is revolutionary in terms of how many cinematics there are in the game :/

I should maybe walk some of that I said back a little. Well not revolutionary it dose do something that a lot of AAA games can't do. It matches the narrative with the game-play. Joel is the same person inside a cinematic as they are outside a cinematic. It's not super hard to do. I mean dog of war pulled it off, but it's proven to be tricky for most newer games to do it because well I don't know why. The stories they want to tell doesn't match up with the games they want to make and they can't be bothered to change one or the other to make it work. Tomb raider had this disconnect from the Lara in the cinematic and the Lara in the game that was so jarring it introduced all of gameing to a fun new word. luto-narrative.

nomotog wrote:

 Asherian Command wrote:

nomotog wrote:
There is nothing revolutionary about the last of us. Atr least nothing I can think of. Everything in it feels very worn very known very well not-revlunary.

Well. It is revolutionary in terms of how many cinematics there are in the game :/

I should maybe walk some of that I said back a little. Well not revolutionary it dose do something that a lot of AAA games can't do. It matches the narrative with the game-play. Joel is the same person inside a cinematic as they are outside a cinematic. It's not super hard to do. I mean dog of war pulled it off, but it's proven to be tricky for most newer games to do it because well I don't know why. The stories they want to tell doesn't match up with the games they want to make and they can't be bothered to change one or the other to make it work. Tomb raider had this disconnect from the Lara in the cinematic and the Lara in the game that was so jarring it introduced all of gameing to a fun new word. luto-narrative.

There are many games like that though. Halo did that, I mean it is quite easy. Bioshock infinite did that.

 Asherian Command wrote:

nomotog wrote:

 Asherian Command wrote:

nomotog wrote:
There is nothing revolutionary about the last of us. Atr least nothing I can think of. Everything in it feels very worn very known very well not-revlunary.

Well. It is revolutionary in terms of how many cinematics there are in the game :/

I should maybe walk some of that I said back a little. Well not revolutionary it dose do something that a lot of AAA games can't do. It matches the narrative with the game-play. Joel is the same person inside a cinematic as they are outside a cinematic. It's not super hard to do. I mean dog of war pulled it off, but it's proven to be tricky for most newer games to do it because well I don't know why. The stories they want to tell doesn't match up with the games they want to make and they can't be bothered to change one or the other to make it work. Tomb raider had this disconnect from the Lara in the cinematic and the Lara in the game that was so jarring it introduced all of gameing to a fun new word. luto-narrative.

There are many games like that though. Halo did that, I mean it is quite easy. Bioshock infinite did that.

Halo dose and it doesn't. MC is rather bland and well faceless. It's a fair examples of building your MainCharcter to match your gameplay. Though MC still acts differently in the cinmatics. Sure they mostly just kill things, but they do it in a cooler way and they have more to say about it.

Bioshock infinite really suffers from the who luto thing. Like how you will root around in garbage for food right in front of people who really should be reacting to someone acting crazy like you are.

It is easy to make the narrative and gameplay match up if you do it that way... Ok that is hard to understand so let me try another way. The last of us was able to mix oil and water. The water being the kill kill kill gameplay of well games, and the oil is the kind of emotional story narrative that isn't about how killy you are. It places the game in a setting where the oil and water has already mixed so it's not really jarrying for jole to cave someones head in because he looks like he dose that and it's not hard to see him being kind and nurturing because we see that too... I don't know if that explains what I mean, but it's what I got for now.

nomotog wrote:

 Asherian Command wrote:

nomotog wrote:

 Asherian Command wrote:

nomotog wrote:
There is nothing revolutionary about the last of us. Atr least nothing I can think of. Everything in it feels very worn very known very well not-revlunary.

Well. It is revolutionary in terms of how many cinematics there are in the game :/

I should maybe walk some of that I said back a little. Well not revolutionary it dose do something that a lot of AAA games can't do. It matches the narrative with the game-play. Joel is the same person inside a cinematic as they are outside a cinematic. It's not super hard to do. I mean dog of war pulled it off, but it's proven to be tricky for most newer games to do it because well I don't know why. The stories they want to tell doesn't match up with the games they want to make and they can't be bothered to change one or the other to make it work. Tomb raider had this disconnect from the Lara in the cinematic and the Lara in the game that was so jarring it introduced all of gameing to a fun new word. luto-narrative.

There are many games like that though. Halo did that, I mean it is quite easy. Bioshock infinite did that.

Halo dose and it doesn't. MC is rather bland and well faceless. It's a fair examples of building your MainCharcter to match your gameplay. Though MC still acts differently in the cinmatics. Sure they mostly just kill things, but they do it in a cooler way and they have more to say about it.

Bioshock infinite really suffers from the who luto thing. Like how you will root around in garbage for food right in front of people who really should be reacting to someone acting crazy like you are.

It is easy to make the narrative and gameplay match up if you do it that way... Ok that is hard to understand so let me try another way. The last of us was able to mix oil and water. The water being the kill kill kill gameplay of well games, and the oil is the kind of emotional story narrative that isn't about how killy you are. It places the game in a setting where the oil and water has already mixed so it's not really jarrying for jole to cave someones head in because he looks like he dose that and it's not hard to see him being kind and nurturing because we see that too... I don't know if that explains what I mean, but it's what I got for now.

Its interesting. But at the same time. Not. Bioshock infinite you can do all the things in the cinematics and in the game. There is a balance. Saying it suffers completely.

And what do you mean Luto? Well the problem with looting is that is a mechanic to get supplies, they would of done more of it but they ran out of time to make that. The storefronts were originally supposed to be purchasable and everything. Thats one thing. And i don't find it as bad as some people make it out to be.

I mean halo 1 did. Definately had what you are describing. Master Chief did everything you could do in the game. Halo 2. Nope. Halo 3. Nope. Halo 4. nope. Halo Reach. Suprisingly yes. Halo reach and halo odst went back to their 'roots' you could do everything that the marines were doing in odst. Halo reach you didn't do badass cinematic scenes. And infact I think halo reach is probably the highlight of the entire halo series for many people.

So did half life to a degree.


And no problem. I mean I don't expect people to play all the games I talk about here. But I expect discussion at least of integration of methods into games.

 Asherian Command wrote:

nomotog wrote:
There is nothing revolutionary about the last of us. Atr least nothing I can think of. Everything in it feels very worn very known very well not-revlunary.

Well. It is revolutionary in terms of how many cinematics there are in the game :/

Did you play MGS4 (or any MGS game?). This is the ending cinematic;




It is over an hour and a half long. And that's just the damn ending. This is every cinematic in the game;




It's a fething miniseries!

Granted i know there's a lot of cinema in Last of Us, but that's not much of a revolution, and it's certainly not unique.

 LordofHats wrote:

 Asherian Command wrote:

nomotog wrote:
There is nothing revolutionary about the last of us. Atr least nothing I can think of. Everything in it feels very worn very known very well not-revlunary.

Well. It is revolutionary in terms of how many cinematics there are in the game :/

Did you play MGS4 (or any MGS game?). This is the ending cinematic;




It is over an hour and a half long. And that's just the damn ending. This is every cinematic in the game;




It's a fething miniseries!

Granted i know there's a lot of cinema in Last of Us, but that's not much of a revolution, and it's certainly not unique.

We actually discussed this. And I was shown this in a PM.

Metal Gear Solid now is less of a game, and more of a bloody visual novel.

I tend to think of it as Hideo Kojima's personal way of trolling people with a conspiracy he invented during an acid trip. The real bloodiness? Trying to make sense of the fething story!

I think the MGS confuses convoluted nonsense and being bloated with good storytelling, obviously the devs never learned about William Shatner in school or they would be familiar with this: Brevity is the soul of wit.

 Cheesecat wrote:
I think the MGS confuses convoluted nonsense and being bloated with good storytelling, obviously the devs never learned about William Shatner in school or they would be familiar with this: Brevity is the soul of wit.

I think there's talent in MGS story telling, but it sure as hell isn't in plot. It's in delivery. MGS manages to deliver its convoluted bloated nonsense with an intensity and passion that really manages to distract you from how little sense the story makes by the end of things XD The delivery of MGS is really well done, and the only thing that to me makes the story worth going through (that and I do like the comedy of the series... it's trashy comedy, but I'm not hard to get a laugh out of XD)

I've never been one for MGS, never liked it, due to many reasons. Might be because I don't find any attraction to the series. Even though I love stealth games.

Anyway.. .Next WEEK IS STEALTH GAMES

Bad dum dum dum dum dum

ALRIGHTY!

So Stealth games!

Mark of the Ninja:

This is one of those games I can enjoy no matter where I am. Ever wanted to be a ninja? Ever wanted to have stealth forced upon you, and have extremely unforgiving game-play, where the game gets harder and harder and the enemies get tougher to kill? *Crickets* Well Too bad this is the stealth genre! So you are a ninja of a clan, and your tattoos have magical powers! Sold yet? Nope? Well neither was I, actually thinking back the story wasn't interesting at all. In-fact it was interesting to point of being more about the villain fearing for his life that there might be a skilled assassin going after him.

Now the real reason why I am talking about Stealth games is for the following reason.... It blends, game-play, sound, and animation perfectly. Now in terms of game-play you have a point system, the game is based getting points, every time you finished a mission your points are totaled into honor, in addition you have to collect scrolls that give you abilities or items. You have two different types of items, traps, and distractions, traps can be used to kill enemies, and distractions are meant to distract. (My god I never would of thought) You do have a health bar, but it only takes 6 shots to kill you, but if the enemy knows you are around you lose points, which means you get less points to spend. The game completely dis-encourages you from getting seen. And rewards you for not killing any enemies. Yes you can go through entire missions without killing a single person.

You have many many abilities, but at the beginning you are limited to a bare few, Assassination kills grant you many points, but the more interesting and more elaborate your kill is, such as distracting or going around them will grant you more points, if you hide the body you are rewarded, there are benefits to hiding bodies, in that the guards will not discover the body. If they do they will all be put on high alert and are extremely hard to attack. You also have darts that can be used for distraction or destroying lights, destroying lights allows you to move through the shadows, the shadows are the most important part of the game, if you are in a spot light they will see you. But unlike other games if you hit that light, and a guard is nearby the guard will know something is up, and will point his gun at it and start searching. You also have access to firecrackers, which could be used to do distract someone with a noise, you also have smokebombs. The next skill set are the traps, which you can lay down to kill guards and sometimes use them to turn them against other guards. The next ability is called far sight, if you go farther into the video you can see me using it, it allows you to look around farther. And it gives you a way to look around and see where the guards are. It also happens to be one of the most interesting features and really adds to the whole aesthetic and beauty of the game.

There are different suits that you can get later on in the game that change up how you play. There is one set that gets rid of your weapons and only gives you distractions. But instead everything you do is silent, running generates no noise and guards cannot detect you, but that does not mean they can't see you or find you.

There are traps, that you have to traverse, the environment itself is basically a puzzle that you have to go through. Stealth games are usually a combination of puzzle and curving difficulty. Often combining all the skills you have learned over time. There are no bosses in this game. Later on in the game you have to face tougher and tougher enemies, but they don't get tired or cliched, but actually make sense. Different AI's will work differently than others, Elite Guards have to be stunned first and then killed once they are stunned, more highly trained guard will not be as easily terrified by a ninja. And yes... You can hang people from poles with chains and scare the ever living gak out of guards and getting them to shoot each other. As you can see in the video. The game itself rewards for risky behavior. You can sneak behind a guard, or over the guard.

The more skills you unlock the easier the game becomes, but there is no trade off. They are only benefits. But the suits that you wear they are trade offs as I have mentioned. The game only rises in difficulty. There is a hard mode version of it that you get for beating the game, where your vision is limited to more 'realistic' meaning you have the vision that the guards have. So you are limited even further, the game also has it so that if a guard sees and shoots you. You are dead. If you are spotted, you are more likely to be killed by random gun fire.

Now let me clear something up, these are the guys that made Shank. Yes that game, and not only is this an upgrade, but damn. This is probably one of the best stealth games I have ever played. This is right up there with Thief 2.

Storywise, it is interesting... Your tattoos come at a cost, your sanity. Now this is shrouded in mystery and is possibly put into the game to get you some connection to the player character. Who doesn't speak. But he's a ninja. So I will give him so credence, as he is techincally dishonored. He wears the tattoo because he dishonored himself and the clan. Your Dojo, was attacked by armed guards and they kill a bunch of ninjas, your master sends you off to go kill A duke who ordered the attack. And once you are done to kill yourself after your mission so that the madness does not take over.

Interesting huh? I bet you can guess where it goes just by that lead up. Asherian Spoiling peoples dreams.

Now I am going to open the floor and say this a recommendation play it is quite fun.

What do you think of gameplay in stealth games?

Any favorite stealth games?

I'm so glad that "To the Moon" doesn't have JRPG combat which is just the worst.

 Cheesecat wrote:
I'm so glad that "To the Moon" doesn't have JRPG combat which is just the worst.

Agreed. (Sorry just woke up!)

I mean it kind of does at the very beginning of the game, but it doesn't need it at all.

Mark of the ninja is the best stealth game ever. Period. There is no qualifier to that statement. The reason it's the best is because it fixes a fundamental flaw with every other stealth game. Trial and error. It's the case with a lot of stealth games that your going to be hammering a quick save and quick load button till you basically guess what you need to do. You just never know what your action is going to result in till after you do it. In mark of the ninja, they tell you everything you need to know about the results of an action before you do it and you can really plan out your movements. (OK not everything is made apparent to you. The terror system some times plays hit or miss because it doesn't tell you in what state a dead body will scare.)

Another aspect I really like about mark of the ninja is the different types of guards and challenges. Other games do it now, but before mark of the ninja you didn't really see a progression of guards in stealth games. I mean sure some put on thicker armor, but that doesn't mean a lot when your stealth. In mark of the ninja, you get all kinds of guards from snipers, to dogs, to big guys with shields that can't be distracted because they would rather shoot a flare then move their fat behind. It even ends with you sneaking around physic ninjas, (It's better then it sounds. All the enemies are fair even the ones that are physic.)

The game is made by the people who made shank, but they also made/are making invisible inc. It's a turn based stealth game. Not as solid as mark of the ninja, but it's still beta. It's mostly neat because it's different.

Mark of the Ninja was awesome, got all achievement for the main game and I will get the rest when I buy the DLC. The point system was annoying though. It encourage you do to a lot of unnecessary stuff, like walk by unnoticed by guard then distract guard then kill him then hang him then hide his body.
A bit too much of a chore.