JMastiff
<Member>
<Member>
1.
If it is relevant! Tekken 6 without some flashes (not all of them, some are needed to see if it was just-frame therfore it has gameplay consequentions) would still be tekken 6. It's the same game on psp and on ps3.
2.
No. Games doesn't need stories to be good. If the core gameplay is clear story is not necesssarry. It's authors choice - if he wants to include story and if he feels it is needed to convey his idea - fine. It is another measure to deliver an experience. If it is coherent without it why adding it?
3.
As I said above it's a matter of coherence and justification. If using certain mean is justified it is considered core part of the work. I'm not saying I'd erase all graphics, that's exaggeration. But if you remove one unnecessary sentence in the book you're writing you are certainly getting closer to better result.
4.
Just like I said, you may stop wherever you want it is quite healthy actually but there are traps waiting for those who expect just to be led through an experience without questioning it. I like to have high expectations but that doesn't mean I can't enjoy something simple. I agree with what you said, that doesn't really contradict my previous opinion but if I was an author of whatever I'd consider my recipient smart and critical I wouldn't want to lead him. I'd rather make him ask questions and find answers inside the work. That is CRUCIAL in games and not many people had the balls to actually do it.
If it is relevant! Tekken 6 without some flashes (not all of them, some are needed to see if it was just-frame therfore it has gameplay consequentions) would still be tekken 6. It's the same game on psp and on ps3.
2.
No. Games doesn't need stories to be good. If the core gameplay is clear story is not necesssarry. It's authors choice - if he wants to include story and if he feels it is needed to convey his idea - fine. It is another measure to deliver an experience. If it is coherent without it why adding it?
3.
As I said above it's a matter of coherence and justification. If using certain mean is justified it is considered core part of the work. I'm not saying I'd erase all graphics, that's exaggeration. But if you remove one unnecessary sentence in the book you're writing you are certainly getting closer to better result.
4.
Just like I said, you may stop wherever you want it is quite healthy actually but there are traps waiting for those who expect just to be led through an experience without questioning it. I like to have high expectations but that doesn't mean I can't enjoy something simple. I agree with what you said, that doesn't really contradict my previous opinion but if I was an author of whatever I'd consider my recipient smart and critical I wouldn't want to lead him. I'd rather make him ask questions and find answers inside the work. That is CRUCIAL in games and not many people had the balls to actually do it.
Canoas
<Member>
<Member>
1.
Obviously you can dismiss anything isn't relevant.. That's exactly the definition of the word. You can say it about anything, be it story, music or gameplay. If it's not relevant then it is irrelevant. And by definition if it is irrelevant then it has no impact on the rating.
2.
They don't need stories to be good, they need them to be great. Name a storyless singleplayer game that got a 9/10 rating. It's the story that makes a game memorable, just like a book or a movie. With no story the game is just a way to pass the time.
4.
I don't really have anything else to say about this.
Obviously you can dismiss anything isn't relevant.. That's exactly the definition of the word. You can say it about anything, be it story, music or gameplay. If it's not relevant then it is irrelevant. And by definition if it is irrelevant then it has no impact on the rating.
2.
They don't need stories to be good, they need them to be great. Name a storyless singleplayer game that got a 9/10 rating. It's the story that makes a game memorable, just like a book or a movie. With no story the game is just a way to pass the time.
4.
I don't really have anything else to say about this.
Canoas wrote:
2.
They don't need stories to be good, they need them to be great. Name a storyless singleplayer game that got a 9/10 rating. It's the story that makes a game memorable, just like a book or a movie. With no story the game is just a way to pass the time.
Halo. (For the weirdos that think it's for the single player campaign)
Toshabi wrote:
Halo. (For the weirdos that think it's for the single player campaign)
Ermm, u know that the Halo story is kinda... AWESOME? Therea re books, comics and stuff and every true Halo fan like the story. Srsly...
I played Halo (the first) only for singleplayer. Multiplayer maybe 30 minutes or sth.
Canoas
<Member>
<Member>
You proved how wrong you are yourself..
Who cares about true fans? Every true fan of Twilight will like the story, does that mean it's still good? No.
That's like saying every person who think blue is red thinks that blue is red. It's true, but red is still red. This is simple common sense.
Xiron wrote:
every true Halo fan like the story.
Who cares about true fans? Every true fan of Twilight will like the story, does that mean it's still good? No.
That's like saying every person who think blue is red thinks that blue is red. It's true, but red is still red. This is simple common sense.
Canoas wrote:
You proved how wrong you are yourself..
Who cares about true fans? Every true fan of Twilight will like the story, does that mean it's still good? No.
That's like saying every person who think blue is red thinks that blue is red. It's true, but red is still red. This is simple common sense.
Wait a second. It seems like you dont undestand it.
It's all about taste. Taste is unique (a little bit at least). If I like the story of whatsoever, it deasont mean it's awesome for you. But for me it IS an epic story. Puncto.
Stop arueing about it. It makes no sense. If yu dont agree with someones opinion on something (be it a game or whatever) dont, never ever in your whole life, say he's wrong. Because he isnt. He (dont) likes it. For you it's the opposite.
So if a Twilight fan likes the story it means he thinks the story is good. You dont like it, which obv. means the opposite. You cant simply say "this is bad, this is good, and yall gotta belief that." No. You cant.
JMastiff
<Member>
<Member>
Canoas wrote:
1.
Obviously you can dismiss anything isn't relevant.. That's exactly the definition of the word. You can say it about anything, be it story, music or gameplay. If it's not relevant then it is irrelevant. And by definition if it is irrelevant then it has no impact on the rating.
2.
They don't need stories to be good, they need them to be great. Name a storyless singleplayer game that got a 9/10 rating. It's the story that makes a game memorable, just like a book or a movie. With no story the game is just a way to pass the time.
4.
I don't really have anything else to say about this.
1. Relevant to the whole work, relevant to the idea you want to express. Maybe I've chosen a wrong word. If something included in the work is irrelevant to its structure it distracts the reciever and might bend the meaning therefore it has huge impact on how you rate or experience it.
2. I don't agree with those ratings. Maybe that's why it would be hard to do. Another thing is I don't think there is a game that reached that level sufficiently enough to show you clearly the idea. The bottom-line hovewer, build upon errors made by designers rather than good examples, is that the way you interact with the game and how you engage the problems that occur, doesn't have to be tied to a story. I'll say even more, there is no game that was able to merge them. The information you provide for player can be send by other means and it usually is. Mind I said 'it doesn't HAVE to be', merging the two is an option but it's up to the author if he decides to do so.
EDIT: Ah yes, almost forgot, not the best example for you and me but that should cover the idea.
http://www.metacritic.com/game/psp/tetris
Canoas
<Member>
<Member>
@Xiron
It's you who doesn't understand it. Taste is not unique. Most qualities of taste will be present in the large majority of the population. That's how you rate things. That's how The Godfather or Shawshank Redemption become accepted as some of the best movies ever made. It is not unique at all.
By your reasoning all movies/books/games/food/painting deserve a 10/10 rating. It makes no sense at all.
I can't say that a Twilight is bad because I don't like it, but I can say that Twilight is bad because it lacks any depth whatsoever and the majority of the population thinks it's ****.
Please, just leave the discussion for the grown ups will you?
@JMastiff
1. But graphics are relevant. The better the graphics are the better the game is. Play a game for PSP in a full HD TV and it'll be horrible. If you're doing the opposite though, and if it's a game like tekkan that needs simple distinguishable graphics then it won't change much, but it will still look better in a big TV.
2. Play LA Noire. You play the role of a detective, you need to figure things out on your own with the information you by playing the game. If you can't solve it then they'll still let you go forward by having your partner that solve it or have your theory proven wrong. It's pretty amazing really.
But I get what you're saying, even though I disagree. Most games don't really "want" you to be that interactive. There's a story that's been written for you and you don't really get much say in it, like when reading a book. Sure, maybe you don't want the main character doing that, but that's not up to you to decide. In an RPG game your job will be to save the world and you have no say in it, as it should be.
That example would be good, but I read the reviews. This score is no different from the 9/10 and 10/10 some people gave to Mario Land 2. The reviews most people gave do not match the score, for example, the guy who said this gave a 9/10:
"Worth a download for £4 / $10, Its a good version, maybe not quite as good as the DS version but still fun none the less, my only gripe is that the audio will drive you round the bend. "
So, if it's a 9/10 game why is he saying it's worth the 10$? And a 9/10 means one of the best games you've played so far, yet he describes the game as only good and fun. If good describes a 9/10 I wonder what the guy uses awesome and amazing for.
Take a look at the critic reviews as well.
Play UK - 9.3 - "A great range of genuinely entertaining play modes." Really? That's a comment for a 9.3/10 game?
VideoGamer - 9.0 - "At £3.99 this is one of the more expensive releases in the Minis range, but considering what you actually get, this still represents excellent value for money." They're clearly rating the game based on what it costs and not what it is.
You're linking me a site where people take a look at the price and then decide how good the game is based on it. That means if you doubled the price the ratings would drop noticeably. I think you will agree as well that cost does not influence a rating. A painting is not rated based on what it costs, it's the exact opposite.
It's you who doesn't understand it. Taste is not unique. Most qualities of taste will be present in the large majority of the population. That's how you rate things. That's how The Godfather or Shawshank Redemption become accepted as some of the best movies ever made. It is not unique at all.
By your reasoning all movies/books/games/food/painting deserve a 10/10 rating. It makes no sense at all.
I can't say that a Twilight is bad because I don't like it, but I can say that Twilight is bad because it lacks any depth whatsoever and the majority of the population thinks it's ****.
Please, just leave the discussion for the grown ups will you?
@JMastiff
1. But graphics are relevant. The better the graphics are the better the game is. Play a game for PSP in a full HD TV and it'll be horrible. If you're doing the opposite though, and if it's a game like tekkan that needs simple distinguishable graphics then it won't change much, but it will still look better in a big TV.
2. Play LA Noire. You play the role of a detective, you need to figure things out on your own with the information you by playing the game. If you can't solve it then they'll still let you go forward by having your partner that solve it or have your theory proven wrong. It's pretty amazing really.
But I get what you're saying, even though I disagree. Most games don't really "want" you to be that interactive. There's a story that's been written for you and you don't really get much say in it, like when reading a book. Sure, maybe you don't want the main character doing that, but that's not up to you to decide. In an RPG game your job will be to save the world and you have no say in it, as it should be.
That example would be good, but I read the reviews. This score is no different from the 9/10 and 10/10 some people gave to Mario Land 2. The reviews most people gave do not match the score, for example, the guy who said this gave a 9/10:
"Worth a download for £4 / $10, Its a good version, maybe not quite as good as the DS version but still fun none the less, my only gripe is that the audio will drive you round the bend. "
So, if it's a 9/10 game why is he saying it's worth the 10$? And a 9/10 means one of the best games you've played so far, yet he describes the game as only good and fun. If good describes a 9/10 I wonder what the guy uses awesome and amazing for.
Take a look at the critic reviews as well.
Play UK - 9.3 - "A great range of genuinely entertaining play modes." Really? That's a comment for a 9.3/10 game?
VideoGamer - 9.0 - "At £3.99 this is one of the more expensive releases in the Minis range, but considering what you actually get, this still represents excellent value for money." They're clearly rating the game based on what it costs and not what it is.
You're linking me a site where people take a look at the price and then decide how good the game is based on it. That means if you doubled the price the ratings would drop noticeably. I think you will agree as well that cost does not influence a rating. A painting is not rated based on what it costs, it's the exact opposite.
Canoas wrote:
@Xiron
It's you who doesn't understand it. Taste is not unique. Most qualities of taste will be present in the large majority of the population. That's how you rate things. That's how The Godfather or Shawshank Redemption become accepted as some of the best movies ever made. It is not unique at all.
By your reasoning all movies/books/games/food/painting deserve a 10/10 rating. It makes no sense at all.
I can't say that a Twilight is bad because I don't like it, but I can say that Twilight is bad because it lacks any depth whatsoever and the majority of the population thinks it's ****.
Rly? I said that? A 10/10 rating?
You get me wrong. I say everyone has his own opinion. I dont like The Godfather. Best example, glad u brought that up. It may be "one of the best movies ever" but I dont like it.
So if someone says "The Godfather is good - best movie ever" this means HE THINKS it is. I THINK it is not since I dont like the movie. Get it now?...
You need to log in before commenting.
So you're saying that taking away the visual "beauty" of a game is less important than it's sound counterpart? That's not fair at all, humans are highly dependent on their vision as it's our most developed sense. Epic graphics and scenery and at least as important as the soundtrack.
3rd
The story is the main component of a single player game, that's why the best games all have pretty good stories. And the current way of developing games is as macdonaldish as every other media. There are macdonaldish movie and macdonalsish books as well. And it's not infrequent at all for such movies and books to be high rated either. The Da Vinci Code and Angels & Demons are a perfect example of that. Just toss some conspiracy theories and obscure symbology and you got yourself a best seller! The depth of the book, however, is still nill. Give me an example of a high rated macdonaldish game and I'll give you a macdonaldish book in return.
And if you're comparing it to a book then it just proves your 1st paragraph wrong. Taking away the visual detail of a game would be the equivalent of taking away the adjectives in a book. Would the main story and plot twists of the book change? No, but it would all become a lot more bland and certainly hurt the book.
4th
I don't think it's only up to us to consider something sufficient, I'd say it's up to the book/movie/game/food. If it doesn't move you to an extend that you want to understand it's meaning then no one will bother to do it. If the wine didn't taste as good as it does do you think someone would dedicate their life to it? No. There would simply be no wine tasters in the world. If I don't like the overall experience I won't bother to re-watch it. It's wonderful when you watch something a second time and you understand things that you didn't before, but if the movie doesn't make me want to watch that second time then I'll never find them out. Is it my fault? I wouldn't say so. It's not about where we want to go, it's about where the movie/book/game takes us.