The mere fact that I criticize games for their linear and handholding quality automatically assumes I support open world games like Skyrim is hilarious.. Which just illustrates how fvcked up mainstream gaming has become as of late..
sSubZerOo
Im not gotta copy paste the entire post cause it would clog up the thread but let me respond:
You seem not to have a clue what I am talking about.. Let me explain it to you.. CoD syndrome.. Where your funneled down a narrow cooridore.. Ultimately led to some huge set explosion in which you have no control over or any input in there.. Bioshock Infinite was a damn good example of this..
What are you talking about? where did this happen? this clearly shows me that you havent played the game at all, because if you had played it (or read any review for that matter) you would understand that this game is devoid of set pieces. That's what makes it so different from the uncharted franchises. There are no major set pieces where you are running down a falling building shooting people along the way. This game is understated. All the tension in the game is due to character interaction and the tension and fear of being vulnerable amongst a large force of hostile forces. The entire time I played the game, I cannot remember a single COD-esque set piece. If I am mistaken, please, feel free to correct me. The only thing that may even remotely in some skewed way be considered to come close to a set piece, is the first 10 minutes of the game, the prologue and thats it for the entire game. So please, if you have evidence proving otherwise, do tell.
Yes I have as stated earlier.. TLOU isn't some masterpiece that some how broke the boundaries.. It had the exact same build up narrative in which you are hand held in doing certain things.. TLOU didn't do anything new in this regard, in fact it was quite standard to other games.
You don't always have to reinvent the wheel. Sometimes just making the best looking and performing car is good enough. You are assuming that every single game that comes out has to be a brand new and completely innovative adventure, which is a flawed way of thinking. What you are saying is that unless a game is completely revolutionary and innovative, it automatically cannot be a masterpiece. If you look at any medium of art, the majority of what we consider masterpieces are derivative of some prior form of art, gaming is no different. Sure there are masterpieces that are completely fresh and innovative, but those are the minority. The majority of masterpieces are just a perfection and extension of existing art. That's is what TLOU is. Its not brand never before seen concepts, and it doesnt have to be. It just has to be the best or one of the best in that category, and that's what it accomplishes, just like Bioshock Infinite. So your assumption that only brand new revolutionary experiences count as masterpieces is flawed at the core. Mozart and Bach didnt invent classical music, they just refined it to perfection, that's why their works are masterpieces.
And here is where I am going to stop you right here.. Your comparing a 2 hour movie to a video game in which it is meant to be interactive.. Has it ever occured to you why people are starting to yearn for games like Dayz? Because they are sick of the same linear ass narrative people have been playing for years now, especially in genres like FPS's..
Has it occured to you why TLOU is selling so amazingly well and is one of the highest rated games of all time? Could it possibly be because people like the game? You are erroneously claiming that people are no longer interested in a tight, cohesive narrative with linear but well defined gameplay, yet TLOU is selling very well. And while we are talking about linear games that hand hold you...What's the best selling franchise these days...I think it goes by something like...umm....Call of Duty? Yeah that's right CALL OF DUTY! King of linearity. So clearly people dont seem to have a problem with linearity. Once Day Z sells more than COD, then we can talk.
No I just find it hilarious that you some how think that sacrificing game depth just so the dev can shovel their half baked canned sh!t down your throat of a plot line is tolerable.
Once again your personal opinion being thrown around as fact. This is an art form, it is the creators RIGHT to show you what they want to show you. You make it seem like you have some special right to the game. Like the developer should consult you before they make the game. That's not how it works. The developer had a story in mind they wanted to share with you, and if you were interested, you bought it. If you werent you skipped it. Simple as that. I not a fan of all that abstract modern art nonsense, so I dont buy it. Simple as that. But people who understand it and enjoy it, buy it and love it...that's the thing about art, different people experience it differently. And once again, being linear doesnt automatically mean sacrificing depth. Give me some examples of how depth was sacrificed. Cause this game has a good melee system, a deep gunplay system, a deep gathering and crafting system, great survival elements, good stealth system. Where was the depth lost? Every aspect they decided to include in their game had sufficient depth for the scope. Or are you one of those people that thinks adding random frivolous activities counts as depth (i.e. San Andreas body building side quests)?
Log in to comment