Darunia Wrote:Weltall, you made a mistake in your post--you said that Silent Hill owns every other game---which is impossible because Quest 64 has that illustrious title. :clap:

Quote:FE and BG2 aren't 2004 games.

A Black Falcon Wrote:I meant games that I played this year. I started BGII in January. :) And got FE this summer. It's different if you mean only games released this year, but 'played this year' is a good question too...

If only games released this year count, it's not a hard question for me because I don't have very many games released this year. For GC MMAC is the only one. (other three are older). For GBA it's NES Zelda by default (other five are older). For N64 nothing counts. :D And for PC... hmm... does anything? *checks* Nope, none of the eight PC games I've gotten this year came out in '04...

So for me 'played this year' is a better question. I only have two games total released in '04. :)

Quote:So since I played Super Metroid this year and every year for the past... ten years or something it means that I can vote for that as GOTY?

Darunia Wrote:Was MGS:TS really that good EM~ cuz if you REALLY insist, I'll look into it.

Quote:I don't most of the genre as a whole, just like you don't like the football genre. But just because you don't like something as highly praised as Madden doesn't mean that you have bad taste in games. No, what matters is the games you like in the genres you like. For example, you like the arcade racing genre but like shit like Cruisin' which every intelligent racing fan despises.

Quote:But you still like shitty games. Cruisin' is crap no matter how you try to excuse it!

Quote:I've already explained, in great depth, why I don't care for PC RPGs. I will not repeat myself because you were too dumb to get it the first time.

Quote:Nope. It's intentionally simplistic. You think it's too simplistic... but the simplicity is the whole point of the game. And in that form it's a great arcade racer. Not worth buying at home for much of anything, due to how it doesn't last long, but fun in the arcades... but you'll never listen so that's enough of that. All I can say is that I hope someday you understand that the opinions of people other than you can actually be valid sometimes.

Quote:Explaining it all away because of more complex interfaces and no direct controls when everything else about the games is the same makes no logical sense, you know...

Quote:Sure, there are plenty of people out there who dislike Fallout and/or Baldur's Gate. But generally they can come up with decent reasons... and if they can't I don't think their opinions are any more valid than yours are. Oh yeah, and actually playing them for more than a little bit helps. By your own admission you have only played them a little bit. Not enough for you to say you can have a real opinion on the stories (oh you said they both were bad, but then admitted that you hadn't played much of either one which fully negated your completely incorrect "point") not exactly the way to actually understand the games. Both of those titles take quite a while to fully grasp... I know the vagaries of 2nd edition D&D as implemented in BG are still a bit confusing to me despite how many hours I've spent in the games...

Oh, and if your complaint is about how you must search out story in these games, that is true in Fallout (and the open-endedness is its great strength!) but BG for the most part is more linear. Oh you can do things in various orders and wander all around but the main story... it's hard to miss. Kind of like KotOR (though probably not quite as extreme, due to the more open areas). Though you may disagree if your point on this issue meant something other than what I thought it did...

Quote:F-Zero is simplistic, yet F-Zero is awesome. Cruisin's crappiness isn't just because of it's simplicity. The fact that you consider Cruisin' to be good shows that you are a poor judge of game quality.

Quote:What the hell is wrong with you, Brian? I mean seriously, what is wrong with you? You remind me of a certain president from a certain recent debate who seems to be completely unaware of what the hell the other person is ever saying. Your entire response here is ignorant enough as it is, but to top things off you're responding to what you believe is what I said when in fact I said nothing of the sort! You are responding to your very own delusion! Snap out of it!

Quote:Those are totally different games. And F-Zero is not anywhere near as simplistic as Cruis'n! Cruis'n is simplistic to the extreme. That is simply not true for F-Zero. Also, Cruis'n has intentionally easy courses -- the turns aren't too hard or too steep and that is by design. The main challenge is the oncoming traffic... but that is how it is SUPPOSED to be! The designer said so. Disagree with his design choices fine but don't mistake it for what it was never meant to be. You clearly are doing that...

Quote:Just trying to remember the various arguements you've said in numerous threads that could relate to this. And I think I did a decent job of it... but it's tough when you say so many sometimes conflicting things about this stuff. I don't remember you making one succinct statement of your problems with those games... you've said various things in various threads every once in a while, really...

Quote:Like, when we talked about story you said that BG and Fallout had poorly done stories. Based on what you said was a few, but not too many, hours of play. If that is correct it doesn't seem like a particularly well supported (or astute) analysis... (oh, and this is, as far as I can remember, the only place you talked about Fallout)

Quote:Then in the other recent arguement you said that you greatly prefer direct controls. My response for games like BG is that you should think of them as strategic RPGs... as in greatly influenced by strategy games, which is understandable when you look at the history of the RPG (D&D decended from wargames, for instance, as did modern strategy games).

Quote:Then in various discussions you say you dislike how complex the control scheme and interface is in lots of PC games (and BG in particular)... I guess it is moderately so but don't think of that as a bad thing at all. Different opinions...

Quote:Hmm, were there any other major categories (that would affect this)? I'm sure I'm forgetting something but don't know what it is...

Quote:Design choices?? Haha, what a lame excuse. I love racing games where you have to avoid oncoming traffic, but none of the Cruisin' games offer any sort of fun. They're crap, plain and simple!

Quote:Do you think the Cruis’N games get the credit they deserve?
- Well, they were incredibly successful – we sold about 70,000 of ‘em. Probably one of the most successful series of arcade driving games. They were accepted among the arcade gaming masses, but the nerd types wanted more challenge to the actual business of being on the road. I wanted them to be more about fun and avoiding the traffic and less about fighting a bad control or difficult terrain. A lot of designers seem to believe that, when you try to turn right in a driving game, you shouldn’t actually turn right, you should go into a skid and blow up and flip over, otherwise it’s not ‘realistic’. I believe that if the player tries to turn right, then you should let ‘em – rather than messing around trying to make the game some ridiculous simulation that’s not very much fun.

Quote:I never once said that.

Quote:And I responded by saying that if I want to play a strategy game then I'll play Total War or Fire Emblem. I play RPGs for very different reasons.

Quote:I played much more BG than Fallout, and I complained about BG's poor storytelling methods.

Quote:The immersion factor, you forgot about that. That ties into controls and perspective.