Here's the TL;DR of this article.
Storytelling matters more in gaming, because gameplay is a unique form of storytelling. Find a way to tell a story better through the gameplay, and you'll have better stories.
It's not really judging it for what's not there, but rather more about not being completely satisfied with what is.
I struggled with whether to include it or not, but ultimately felt that the amount of time required to really get into the good stuff the game has to offer is too great.
I guess that by Dragon Warrior VII's end, I felt more accomplished for having beaten such a long game, than I did for experiencing something really special.
The same goes for Final Fantasy II. I respect it for trying some new things, but many of the mechanics are just too raw to really r...
I suppose it being labeled as an opinion on both this site, and the article wasn't enough indication that you may disagree with the specifics?
Also, I deeply apologize for basing personal opinions around facts. In the future, I'll be sure to make outrageous claims based on absolutely no information whatsoever.
I actually don't think it's that difficult (except for a few parts), and completely understand when people say they don't like it.
But, my point is that the things Dark Souls does has to offer, few other games can. The satisfaction the game inspires is due in some part to the challenge to be sure, but its also a result of the incredibly tight mechanics, depth of story, dripping atmosphere and engaging combat.
The difficulty thing does get overplay...
See that's the thing. I always heard people say things like that, but I never really respected how true it is.
It's incredibly satisfying.
Like you said, the sense of accomplishment that you feel while working your way through it just isn't there for the majority of games on the market.
Actually what I say is that while I personally feel that this project will be a broken piece of crap, realistically I can't comment on the quality of a game that doesn't exist.
However, I also don't think that not knowing the quality of a game upfront somehow then justifies funding it.
Based on what we're given? I see a cheap, borderline offensive cash grab that is promoting nothing intriguing on a gameplay front. Better than the first Shaq ...
I think the problem is that you're associating non-open world games with games that are just corridors.
There are a lot of design styles that don't have to be one or the other. For instance, the "Metroidvania" style of Arkham Asylum, or even Dark Souls, is an interesting middle ground between the two ideas.
Oh to be sure, but from a design, pitch, and marketing standpoint, is it difficult to successfully convince consumers that going away from an open world game towards something else isn't a step back in a way?
You actually perfectly touched on a lot of the reasons I found this topic to be interesting.
I mean, are open world games inherently superior? Content wise it seems like it at times, but there are qualities other genres offer that open-world cannot.
Arkham is an interesting case of this, because Rocksteady released two different style games that were both incredible. In that instance, does the idea of an open world game being "bigger and better" mea...
I'm not sure I follow. Haven't both of those series retained somewhat similar world exploration methods for their main installments?
By that I mean, not spin offs like Final Fantasy Tactics.
Author here.
In case it bothers anyone, this piece does mainly look at gay characters in gaming, as the inspiration came from Far Cry 3 writer Lucien Soulban's recent comments on the topic.
I don't know why an article clearly about diversity would cause a red alert when homosexuals are mentioned, but there you are.
Well you see, I mainly had two pieces of criteria for this list:
1. Games primarily known for their PC releases.
2. Games that were actually good.
Deadpool didn't really meet either requirement I'm afraid.
It would help their image even further if they would support it.
But wouldn't it be better if Naughty Dog focused their efforts on creating a new experience that hits you in the same way the originality of The Last of Us did, instead of re-treading the same world hoping lightning strikes twice?
I mean Uncharted 2 was a great example of a game that needed a sequel, because there was a lot of elements of the first game that didn't work well. The Last of Us, however, hit all the right notes the first time.
I wouldn&...
So anything that says something bad against Nintendo is click bait?
I agree with the author. Why would Nintendo not even bother to acknowledge this is happening?
Thanks!
But the thing there is that the "cutscenes connected to stages" style of storytelling benefited the type of game that Mass Effect is.
The point is that style of gameplay/storytelling is the most prolific, but shouldn't be viewed as the default method of game storytelling. Sometimes it works, but some games require something more "outside the box" to get their stories across more effectively.