Whoops. Honest mistake, actually. Sorry about that.
Anyone who thinks they get to dictate to other people why they can and cannot play to be a serious gamer is an idiot.
What kind of logic is that "game review can only be reliable if it's the same as every other game review"
It's almost like you believe in a world where people don't have personal opinions.
Holy lack of comprehension, Batman.
Bioware was taking one of the philosophical arguments made in response to the Ferni Paradox - of the idea that exploration of space (and contact with unknown worlds) is limited because a force actively prevents it, and materialised that philosophical argument as the idea of the Reapers.
If you can't understand the motives of the Reapers with that in mind, then you shouldn't be analysing games.
Truly horrible article.
The fact that the author doesn't seem to realise that the Reapers are the embodiment of one of the popular philosophical arguments at the moment for why humans haven't discovered other alien life (go do some reading around possible "answers" to the Fermi Paradox), invalidates the entire argument.
"Oh, but the Reapers are so BORING" - not if you understand the reason Bioware built them, kiddo.
Go back to Call of Duty. That sickens me far more than anything Compile Heart has ever made.
I loved the first, one of my favourite import games I've ever bought.
You're American, aren't you?
I know that because only Americans think they're so important that they're the only market that counts in the world.
You don't actually make a living as an executive at a game developers or publisher, do you?
So how can you possibly know how game projects are budgeted?
You do know that the amount of money that goes back to the publisher after the cost of manufacturing, logistics, retailer margin, marketing and so on means that a publisher gets a fraction of what the consumer pays for a game, right?
Except I never said titillation wasn't a part of the game. Titillation was Suda's point. What people fail to understand was that he was criticizing it.
Don't they teach you kids about irony and subversive art in school any longer?
Hi. I'm the author of this piece.
I have met Suda and he is a very intelligent and reflective artist. One of the best, most insightful conversations I have ever had about games.
You, on the other hand, are making assumptions. Unsurprisingly, you are wrong.
Given that everything that Eidos touches at the moment turns to gold, I reckon this is going to be something special.
Another N4G user who can't read beyond the headline!
Nice argument.
I agree with a lot of what you've said there, but there's something I'd like to add to it:
The games industry - that is the readers, the writers and websites like N4G - need to learn to separate unprofessional writers with properly trained and educated journalists. Right now it's possible for a kid with a blog and no writing experience to get as much more traffic by writing a useless, pandering rant than a 15, 20-year journalist...
It annoys me more that people think that a game is like a hamburger where you can pull the pieces apart.
A game is like a cake. Once you've thrown the everything together it's a single product and trying to split it into "sugar, eggs, cream" from that point is just silly.
The games industry will have a Roger Ebert. It'll be someone who realises that games are more than the building blocks. How many film critics write "the camera an...
@parapraxis - no, you do not understand loss leading.
Loss leading in manufacturing (that's what Nintendo is, a manufacturer) is when a company sells a product at a lower price than what it costs to make, in order to sell higher margin associated products.
The printing industry is the most aggressive with this strategy. A company like Brother builds a printer for $100. It sells that printer to the retailer for $75, accepting a loss of $25, in the knowl...
No doubt there are going to be comments here about how this is meant to be a bad thing.
It's loss leading. It's a smart move by Nintendo. It's not loss making.
@Pozzle - in the article I did actually argue that game prices should come down.
Gamers should still focus more on quality than quantity. Especially when the latter comes at the expense of the former.
I agree the game is good, which is why I gave it a good score. Lord I wish gamers would stop having a cry over 70% scores.
A game should stand on its own merits. If I have to have played the previous games to 'properly' enjoy this one then the developers did a terrible job. Other sequels manage to be enjoyable whether you're new to the series or not. So what's this game's excuse?