Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to The Secret Project. All your IP are belong to us.

Click this to register, but you're probably an user anyway because we do have any friends.


If you're already an member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Gaming News
Topic Started: Aug 28 2011, 09:03 AM (32,801 Views)
DucksFAN93
Member Avatar
The Sports Nut Member
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
I see what you're saying, but Rocksteady has earned my trust with their last couple games. I have no doubts whatsoever that the core game of Arkham Knight will be absolutely stunning. The fact that there is DLC (overpriced, but there does seem to be some really cool sounding content in there) doesn't really bother me all that much. I agree that I don't like DLC announced before the game releases, but that is just the way it is right now. I think it's silly to deprive yourself of what is sure to be one of the best core games this year because of the season pass. It's silly.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Granskjegg
Member Avatar
Eg e husfar.
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Wasn't Arkham: Origins pretty bad, though? (plus didn't they announced they wouldn't be fixing any bugs because they were so busy with the DLC?)

*google* Ah, Origins wasn't made by Rocksteady, kewl.

Arkham Asylum and City was really good, however I wont be getting this at release for multiple reasons; I've got enough stuff to play (almost too much) and there are other games I'd rather get first (like GTA V).
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Romanticide
Member Avatar
Cult Leader
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/popsandbox/loud-on-planet-x

/in for Tegan and Sara, Lights, and Metric

But yeah, it kinda sounds like Theatrhythm with a different aesthetic/music, which mite b cool. $10 Canadian for a copy of the game ain't bad either.

Also leaning towards pledging 10 pounds for the Yooka-Laylee game but idk yet lol. Not as sold on it as y'all, but at that price it'll probably be worth.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Romanticide
Member Avatar
Cult Leader
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Posted Image

just leaving this here

I suppose I'll pick the demo up and see how it plays. It might change my mind on the game, who knows. (Right now I'm thinking, "wait and see who gets it".)
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
DarkFlashlight
Member Avatar
it will take a toll
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
I thought that was really stupid until I realized that the reason they're probably doing it at all is just to test the servers by forcing them to have a high capacity since everyone has to play at the same time. I guess it's a little different than MK/SSB since almost literally everyone will be playing mostly online; if the servers don't work, the game basically doesn't work (*cough*Sim City*cough*).

I can play two of those timeslots, so whatever.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Granskjegg
Member Avatar
Eg e husfar.
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
I'm going to try and play on at least one of the times on Saturday.

And a quick question, is it PST or PDT?
http://wwp.greenwichmeantime.com/time-zone/usa/pacific-time/convert/

Would be pretty salty if I checked in one hour late or whatever. :p
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Romanticide
Member Avatar
Cult Leader
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
NoA is based in Redmond, Washington and almost always uses PST, so: PST.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Granskjegg
Member Avatar
Eg e husfar.
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
All right, 1 and 9 PM is pretty much perfect, depending on how good it is I might do both sessions then.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
CALJR_8760
Member Avatar
The Lonely One
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
I might be able to pay, hopefully I can.

Nintendo has partnered with universal studios, and universal studios has pretty much claimed my childhood (the stuff that I can still enjoy as an adult that is cough power rangers cough). I've been wanting to go ever since they added the new Harry potter section, but if I can experience the HarrypPotter section and Nintendo? That would be awesome.

Mario kart just seems ripe and I'd love to see a Spider-Man like ride for smash bros. Or star Fox. I'm sure there'll be at least something for Zelda, Mario, and pokemon, and at least people in costumes for the bigger characters from other franchises along with the Mario and Zelda gang and tons of pokemon. I can almost see them competing with Disney's padawan training for kids by having a pokemon trainer one.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Granskjegg
Member Avatar
Eg e husfar.
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
I was seeing some stuff about Universal and Nintendo. So this is sort of a theme park?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Romanticide
Member Avatar
Cult Leader
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Posting some things. Might be beating some dead horsies, but these are good things, so whatever.

[utube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rZpg2OViI7Q[/utube]

Fuck Konami.

This is the danger in the all-digital future: A content provider or storefront deciding it doesn't want to make something available anymore for whatever reason, thus ensuring it's eventually lost to the sands of time. Things disappear all the time in the physical world, but the difference is that the producer of... whatever... isn't recalling something just because it wants to take its toys and go home. Recalls happen because shit is fucking dangerous in the physical world, not because a company got embarrassed that a product will no longer be made and thus decided to make it impossible to experience a game related to said product.

Not every product/work of art will be great in the all-digital future, but it should be up to us to decide what disappears and what doesn't (I prefer nothing vanish if possible, as I've stated in previous posts), not storefronts and publishers.


http://www.nodontdie.com/steve-gaynor/

I love this site in general, so this is less of a "this is a really good interview and y'all should read it" post than a "you should read ALL the interviews" sort of post. This interview is good and y'all should read it, but y'know what I mean. They're long, but they also go in-depth on things that most major sites barely mention.

Basically this is a thing that "gaems jurnalizm" should aspire to do more often. You know, as opposed to the character assassination RPS pulled on Molyneux, fuck that shit, or as opposed to daily hype piece #34578394. What we have is basically enthusiast writing by slightly more educated fans, which isn't bad but it's hardly journalism. The only reason we put up with it is because those sites are the only way we get news on upcoming games.


http://www.polygon.com/2015/5/11/8585247/nintendo-should-kill-consoles

I don't expect console players to like this premise, but I agree with it. If consoles stick around, I think they're going to inevitably have cross play with mobile devices/PC anyway (because far larger install bases, AAA costs, etc), which lends itself to the idea that Nintendo should transition from making consoles to providing a service that can work regardless of platform. If your games can be played on other devices anyway, what reason is there to spend all that money making your own devices? Pour it into providing the best damn service possible and making the best games possible.

Nintendo can do some amazing things with its hardware, we all know this, but it could do even more amazing things if it didn't have to invest money into developing a new handheld and a new home console every five years. That's money that could go towards hiring better development talent and making their games even more polished than they already are, amongst other things. Like, idk, actually fucking marketing a game and not sending it out to die.

The downside is pretty big, however. We'd be even closer to an all-digital future and the bad things that entails, because all the non-console/handheld devices have embraced digital distribution. I don't think the internet infrastructure in the US, to say nothing of poorer countries, is ready for it, and telecoms aren't chomping at the bit to upgrade it (because that costs money that could go to shareholders instead). A lot of places don't even average 15 mbps, which isn't all that fast but almost necessary to download major games in a passable amount of time. Nintendo would also be competing even more directly with the mobile space than they already plan to, and that market is radically different than what they (and us, as "core gamers") are used to.

I like the idea, but as long as internet sucks for most people, this is nothing more than a dream. People want to buy a disc, put it in a machine they know will accept it, and play a game, not... wait hours to download a game on their shitty tubes, pray that it works on their device of choice, and then finally play it.


http://boingboing.net/2015/05/11/why-are-the-stories-in-video-g.html

I'd agree with a lot of this.

A point that isn't really discussed is that many of our most well-refined mechanics depend on violence, which lend themselves to the stories of genres like FPS, RPG, beat-em-ups, and so on. Where are the storytelling mechanics? We have branching dialogue trees, which are nice and all, but as they are, I don't feel they change much. Even if you take a different alignment, you're still oftentimes forced into the same limited set of endings. Yes, this is because programming lots of events/routes would result in games taking unacceptable amounts of space because they'd need lots of new assets and unacceptable amounts of time to develop all this stuff. I get that.

Even the most ambitious games will give us, idk, a new level or something, but then we'll be forced back onto the same path as everyone else. What's the point if that doesn't have a significant impact on the story? The best side content does is "enhance appreciation of the story", but that's a far cry from "adds to the story" or even "changes the story".

Game writing needs to be better in general, but I think the article nails it when it's said that game writing is a lower priority than mechanics or what not. This makes sense, but it seems like a self-fulfilling prophecy. We know that games writing will suck (because it's so hard to *do* in this medium and it's not a priority), developers/publishers devote fewer resources to it, the game comes out, we say the writing sucks, and the cycle continues.

Also play the game mentioned in the article. It'll take you ~15 minutes, but it's an illuminating experience from someone who has actually done game writing.
Edited by Romanticide, May 12 2015, 03:42 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Romanticide
Member Avatar
Cult Leader
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
http://kotaku.com/for-two-years-the-kanye-west-rpg-has-been-hiding-a-dis-1704673459

Looks like I have to play this again lol. It was a pretty standard (gameplay-wise) albeit funny JRPG, but this is just some weird-ass shit.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
DucksFAN93
Member Avatar
The Sports Nut Member
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
https://medium.com/@adrianchm/the-boy-who-cried-white-wolf-on-polygon-s-the-witcher-3-review-f7ac8d7f0a5

I think this article says a lot about truth in gaming. I think it's a good read about some issues with reviews that we've been talking about.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Romanticide
Member Avatar
Cult Leader
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Note: "You/your" in this post refers to no specific person unless stated otherwise. I use the word mostly for ease of writing.


I'll start with the obvious, I guess:

This game still got an 8 at Polygon. Even when we consider that most sites use a 7-10 scale, an 8 is still a perfectly playable game that most sites would recommend to fans of the series/genre. Hell, most sites would recommend it to most gamers. Also, much of their review is filled with glowing praise for the game. The only things Polygon really criticized were the lack of minority characters and the perceived misogyny. Gameplay-wise it did criticize the ending for inconsistent difficulty and the camera for sucking at being a camera, but most gameplay stuff was praised.

Like it or not, Polygon is the most socially progressive of gamer enthusiast sites. It shouldn't be a shock to anyone that such issues would factor into their reviews at this point. There's a body of evidence that shows this (Bayonetta, GTAV, other gaems), and if you don't want to hear about those things in your reviews... Well, most other gaming sites are happy to oblige! You can simply read or watch those reviews and find viewpoints that you're more inclined to agree with/give credence to because they ignore social issues you don't care about. This is your choice, of course. The problem is that there is a vocal segment of the gamer population that does not want to see this critique *at all*. Even if you don't want to read about that stuff, I'd like to think that all reasonable people can agree, "yeah, stifling stuff I don't like is bullshit".

I do feel the author of the review opens himself up to a fallacious line of logic in stating the game lacks "real world" minorities. In a fantasy universe, the "real world" minorities are often replaced by other races. I don't know The Witcher's equivalents (well, outside of the eponymous Witchers), but I'm sure they exist. I'm most familiar with The Elder Scrolls, so it will be my example here. In that universe, the Khajiits and the Argonians are treated worse than any other race, though there isn't a lot of love for the Orcs, Dark Elves, or really any non-Imperial/Nord race either. The white equivalent is the Imperials, and arguably the Nords in Skyrim. Point is, the real world issues are *still there* (note the rampant discrimination against Windhelm's Dark Elves/Argonians in Skyrim - this is pretty blatant social and institutional racism by any standard), but somehow they're more acceptable when given the thin coat of paint that is made-up races based on real races in a made-up universe that is obviously based on our world. A game that deals with racism in these universes is treated like it's for mature gamers, but a game with real world races and trappings is dismissed as "SJW bullshit" or some such nonsense. It's a stupid double standard. I guess that the latter game would be too grounded in reality for some players to accept, and you know what? It's perfectly alright to feel that way. However, my point is that the obvious fantasy game also often strives to be grounded in reality, and that's where the logic falls apart.

The author of the article you linked says... Minorities exist in The Witcher's universe. Congrats. Amazing argument. This is the shit I was saying the review opened itself up to. It's stupid and doesn't foster discussion because it's apparent minorities exist in this game. What does foster discussion is talking about the role these minorities play in the game: Do these minorities have an important role to play in the story? Are they stereotypes? Do they reinforce the systems that oppress them, in-game and/or in real life? Can the player relate to their experiences? Is their in-game culture distinct? So on and so forth. If we're going to talk about the lack of representation, we'll never get to the cool stuff.

As far as misogyny goes, I haven't played this game and won't for a long time (too many other things, so I'll wait on a sale), so I guess I can't say. Sure, the first game had Triss, who I don't feel was objectified or anything like that from what I saw of her character. There was the early sex scene between her and Geralt, but I felt she made that choice for herself. That's the thing: It feels like a lot of female characters in video games *don't* have the choice to be sexy/have sex/be awesome, and that's what is being criticized. Triss had that choice, so I say: You go, girl!

However, I did do some of the sex scenes in the first game and... Trading cards? Really? This is literal objectification: You have sex, you get a trading card, which reduces the depth of a woman to a possession and a picture on a card. Not that these women are complex characters ANYWAY, but you know. It does not help that unlocking the sex scenes (at least the ones I did) was piss easy, making sex feel more like a reward for a good deed and less a milestone in a meaningful relationship. I know one night stands are a thing, but the problem is one night stands are the endpoint for most relationships in video games. You do the relationship stuff, you get the sex, you do nothing to maintain that relationship until the end of time. There was also the quest with the (rumored?) witch, which... Is really problematic. This is very apparent, especially given the rhetoric the male village leaders employ once you escape from the cave.

The game's universe is misogynistic. I don't think this is a real point of contention. Rather, the debate is between the viewpoints of "it's based on the real world, what did you expect?" and "it's 2015, video games can do better." As you might guess given my stances on everything ever, I'm in the latter camp. People invoke the realism argument for a game's world, but ignore that Geralt can down tons of potions in less than a second, can carry a lot of stuff for extremely long distances, doesn't need to eat in-game, etc, etc. There's a lot about a video game that's unrealistic, and a lot of that is for gameplay reasons. I can accept this. What I cannot accept is that a fictional universe needs to adhere to the real world so stringently that it might as well be a lesser version of reality. What's the fun in that shit? It's not like a few blacks, Asians, beast people, sentient amorphous blobs, or whatever else is going to totally shatter immersion. If it does, well, it says more for the person complaining than it does for the game.

If a diversion from reality can make a game more fun and make more people feel included, I'm for that shit. Always. I don't see why you wouldn't be unless you're so invested in making games "realistic" or "serious" that all else has to fall to the wayside.


I feel this is worth spelling out: None of these problems would be so big in a vacuum. It's just that a ton of games have clearly sexist and misogynistic tropes. If it were a few games, we could just dismiss them as niche or not representative of the gaming landscape, but lots of mainstream games feature tropes that are problematic. You might not see this, which is fair enough, but part of the purpose of this criticism is to educate people and say, "Problematic stuff is in games. Learn about it and you'll see it everywhere."

(For what it's worth: I don't think the gaming media does a great job at educating. That's not its forte. Gaming media can point out that a problem exists, but it does a piss-poor job at pointing out why that's a problem and why its audience should give a shit. Rather, it preaches to the choir. You know, converted assholes like me.)

Also, enjoying games with problematic tropes does not make you a bad person, a sexist, a racist, etc. *I* enjoy games with plenty of this shit and I don't ever feel personally attacked. Even defending games from this criticism doesn't make you a bad person or anything. I'd argue the only thing that makes you a bad person is wanting to suppress this type of criticism. (see: Gamergate)


I think there are two things that make people feel attacked when they see this stuff:
1) Their political stances. Conservatism and Libertarianism don't focus on these issues because either they don't see them as problems, or if they DO, they would prefer to attack them in another way. The gaming media is leftist to a fault. Part of this is a culture war along party lines, which has always existed in gaming tbh, and Gamergate just made that blow up in a big way.
2) This sort of criticism is new to gaming media. We didn't start seeing it regularly until, what, 2012? 2013? Part of this is because the medium has only recently become technologically advanced enough to create games that can begin to strive for realism. Another part of it is that the other mediums have accepted this sort of criticism for, what, decades now? I don't know. What I do know is that cultural criticism is the norm in books, television, and movies. While some fans don't accept that, most connoisseurs of those mediums don't take to Twitter and attack *prominent critic* over this stance. (I know trolling happens to anyone with a reasonably big name, but it's often not as organized as Gamergate or whatever.)


One last point: I don't know if I'll buy The Vanishing of Ethan Carter either. It sounds like a good game, but I know part of my money would pay a Gamergate supporter, which... doesn't sit well with me. But I don't know. It's not like I've heard of this guy harassing women, so props for meeting the minimum requirement to be decent. Maybe I'll grab it when it's on sale. *shrug*
Edited by Romanticide, May 17 2015, 07:10 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
DucksFAN93
Member Avatar
The Sports Nut Member
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
I agree with everything you just said. I couldn't word it better myself. The point of my posting was the fact that polygon's reviewer was kinda hypocritical about these facets. One minute he condemns the violence, but then he tweets that he can't wait to see game of thrones (which I've heard is all sex and violence). My linkage was to show poor journalism :p
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Entertainment · Next Topic »
Add Reply