God of War - A Case Study

[Trunkage]

Some of these YouTuber?s seem so full of themselves. Just looking at that thumbnail from the one above gives me that distinct impression and makes me want to avoid clicking it. I?d go so far to say it?s kinda repulsive.

YouTuber?s like VaatiVidya are far more preferable as they don?t feel the need to plaster their mug all over their content. He?s intelligent, humble sounding with a pleasant voice and the quality of content he puts out speaks for itself.

My partner absolutely hates Vaati. It's like a drone in her ears. He's a headphones only video

 

[CriticalGaming]

I miss Totalbiscuit already.

 

[Casual Shinji]

I miss Totalbiscuit already.

Would he have played it though -- it wasn't full 60 fps.

 

[CriticalGaming]

I miss Totalbiscuit already.

Would he have played it though -- it wasn't full 60 fps.

God of War? Probably not, I just miss his normal critiques. He probably would have had a field day with the pc release of Monster Hunter World.

Also the Co-Optional podcast is dogshit without him. Jesse Cox and Dodger have just given up completely on being entertaining in any way whatsoever.

 

[Casual Shinji]

Also the Co-Optional podcast is dogshit without him. Jesse Cox and Dodger have just given up completely on being entertaining in any way whatsoever.

Well, what are ya gonna do? He was the captain of that ship, but they don't exactly want to abandon it either.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

The strength of the attacks changes, but it's not like they become completely unprecedented attacks that you're unfamilliar with. The wind-up shows an attack is coming and the following flash telegraphs the impact. I had way less trouble parrying in GoW '18 than I did in Dark Souls or Bloodborne. It was no more wonkier than parrying in Revengeance. In fact the reaction time and ease reminded me of the golden fleece in the classic games. And yeah, you can turn off the signs in Arkham, but then that game's combat is pretty much completely rhytym based.

No, the bottomline was pretty much that the game is too focused on graphics and being cinematic, therefor the combat and everything else suffers. And I only saw the GamingBrit video where he had played it and proclaimed anyone who praised it was just fooled into liking it.

And about the camera.. It's not like I didn't have the occasional issue where something hit me from off-screen, but no more than other similar games. It's funny, because MatthewMattosis points to The Wonderful 101 as having a perfect camera, when I actually stopped playing that game because I got sick of being hit by cannon balls off-screen.

The enemy indicators are a pretty nitpick-y issue for me, not near one of the major issues, plus the indicator issue has more to do with the RPG elements (causing the inconsistencies) than the actual indicators.

I feel much of the video was about gameplay issues over the cinematic nature. I think going for the whole 'the game is a single shot' didn't do anything for the game nor has any impact since it takes several sittings and normal menu usage to playthrough. Whereas that single shot sequence from Children of Men has quite the impact. I do feel going for that definitely makes the game slightly worse overall because of how less fast it takes to do things (like the not-so-fast fast travel) just to accomplish that 'single shot'. The camera I think can work for the gameplay because it does make combat more brutal and punchier, so it's not up Kratos' ass purely for cinematic purposes. Like I said before, the camera is perfectly workable as you don't have to constantly see the battlefield to be effective in combat because you can have that mental snapshot of where the enemies are and keep track of them to a degree having that internal clock (much like a quarterback) knowing that the enemy is say 5 seconds from reaching you. Online shooters totally require that skill already.

I haven't played 101 so I can't comment on that though if the Switch gets it, it'll probably force me to buy a Switch to play 3 Platinum games (101 + Bayo sequels).

I also recommend Raycevick and Whitelight.

Raycevick is top-notch and goes so deep into gameplay mechanics (I actually learned what it was that made Max Payne 3's controls feel off for me after watching his video). I checked out Whitelight and didn't really think his analysis was that great plus most of his videos are about games I haven't played.

 

[Casual Shinji]

I think going for the whole 'the game is a single shot' didn't do anything for the game nor has any impact since it takes several sittings and normal menu usage to playthrough. Whereas that single shot sequence from Children of Men has quite the impact. I do feel going for that definitely makes the game slightly worse overall because of how less fast it takes to do things (like the not-so-fast fast travel) just to accomplish that 'single shot'.

From a gameplay aspect, no. At least, not that I'm actively aware of. The intro fight with Baldur definitely benefited from it though. That sequence made you feel like you were right in the middle of this intimate yet highly destructive one-on-one brawl.

However, it's also done wonders for the cutscenes. The fact that the entire game had to be one shot made it so they put a whole lot of effort into the camera work. The way the camera moves and shots are framed is pretty fantastic, and not something games usually bother with. Even Naughty Dog, for all their cinematic clout, have pretty boring shots and framing. The only other comparison I can think of is the opening cinematic to Metal Gear Solid 5: Ground Zeroes, and that's good company to be in.


The combination of single-shot plus a Zelda-esque hub world might've been asking too much though -- A traditional linear game would probably be a better fit.

 

[BrawlMan]

I also recommend Raycevick and Whitelight.

Raycevick is top-notch and goes so deep into gameplay mechanics (I actually learned what it was that made Max Payne 3's controls feel off for me after watching his video). I checked out Whitelight and didn't really think his analysis was that great plus most of his videos are about games I haven't played.

Different strokes for different folks. They're plenty of games I haven't played that either commentator talks about. Off all the games White has talked about, I've only played Crysis (not the whole game), Crysis 2, FEAR 1 and its expansions, FEAR 2, and most of the Need for Speed games. Hell, I've only played 4 games Raycevick talked about. I find both of their commentaries engaging. Like I said, everybody's tastes are different, so no harm.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

From a gameplay aspect, no. At least, not that I'm actively aware of. The intro fight with Baldur definitely benefited from it though. That sequence made you feel like you were right in the middle of this intimate yet highly destructive one-on-one brawl.

However, it's also done wonders for the cutscenes. The fact that the entire game had to be one shot made it so they put a whole lot of effort into the camera work. The way the camera moves and shots are framed is pretty fantastic, and not something games usually bother with. Even Naughty Dog, for all their cinematic clout, have pretty boring shots and framing. The only other comparison I can think of is the opening cinematic to Metal Gear Solid 5: Ground Zeroes, and that's good company to be in.

The combination of single-shot plus a Zelda-esque hub world might've been asking too much though -- A traditional linear game would probably be a better fit.

In sections it works like the Baldur fight as you mentioned but doing it literally the whole game, I don't think had any impact. I doubt I would've even known it was all a single-shot if I hadn't saw an article about it. Sure, it ended making it so there was better cinematography but the good cinematography doesn't require said single-shot (for the entire game) either.

Different strokes for different folks. They're plenty of games I haven't played that either commentator talks about. Off all the games White has talked about, I've only played Crysis (not the whole game), Crysis 2, FEAR 1 and its expansions, FEAR 2, and most of the Need for Speed games. Hell, I've only played 4 games Raycevick talked about. I find both of their commentaries engaging. Like I said, everybody's tastes are different, so no harm.

I watched his Christmas video and just what he said about BF1 struck me as rather off. I've played 1,000s of hours of shooters while participating in 1,000s of clan battles as well and a couple tourneys. He said that BF1 wasn't competitive because players don't have enough say in winning/losing (saying how he has a 49% win percentage) and the only way to get a positive KDR is playing sniper. I haven't played BF1 but shooters play basically the same across the board and unless BF1 does some really odd things, he just isn't good at shooters then. Plus there's only a very select few players that can play sniper and actually help the team win because of how hard that class is as it requires both extreme aiming ability along with expert tactical and map knowledge (you gotta know basically every sight line). 99% of people that play sniper are really causing the rest of the team to play down a man. If someone can't figure out the basic strats of how you play a shooter, that sorta immediately brings into question how good any of your game analysis is.

 

[BrawlMan]

From a gameplay aspect, no. At least, not that I'm actively aware of. The intro fight with Baldur definitely benefited from it though. That sequence made you feel like you were right in the middle of this intimate yet highly destructive one-on-one brawl.

However, it's also done wonders for the cutscenes. The fact that the entire game had to be one shot made it so they put a whole lot of effort into the camera work. The way the camera moves and shots are framed is pretty fantastic, and not something games usually bother with. Even Naughty Dog, for all their cinematic clout, have pretty boring shots and framing. The only other comparison I can think of is the opening cinematic to Metal Gear Solid 5: Ground Zeroes, and that's good company to be in.

The combination of single-shot plus a Zelda-esque hub world might've been asking too much though -- A traditional linear game would probably be a better fit.

In sections it works like the Baldur fight as you mentioned but doing it literally the whole game, I don't think had any impact. I doubt I would've even known it was all a single-shot if I hadn't saw an article about it. Sure, it ended making it so there was better cinematography but the good cinematography doesn't require said single-shot (for the entire game) either.

Different strokes for different folks. They're plenty of games I haven't played that either commentator talks about. Off all the games White has talked about, I've only played Crysis (not the whole game), Crysis 2, FEAR 1 and its expansions, FEAR 2, and most of the Need for Speed games. Hell, I've only played 4 games Raycevick talked about. I find both of their commentaries engaging. Like I said, everybody's tastes are different, so no harm.

I watched his Christmas video and just what he said about BF1 struck me as rather off. I've played 1,000s of hours of shooters while participating in 1,000s of clan battles as well and a couple tourneys. He said that BF1 wasn't competitive because players don't have enough say in winning/losing (saying how he has a 49% win percentage) and the only way to get a positive KDR is playing sniper. I haven't played BF1 but shooters play basically the same across the board and unless BF1 does some really odd things, he just isn't good at shooters then. Plus there's only a very select few players that can play sniper and actually help the team win because of how hard that class is as it requires both extreme aiming ability along with expert tactical and map knowledge (you gotta know basically every sight line). 99% of people that play sniper are really causing the rest of the team to play down a man. If someone can't figure out the basic strats of how you play a shooter, that sorta immediately brings into question how good any of your game analysis is.

As for his BF1 video, I can't say anything for or against him, because online shooters aren't my forte. The most I ever did was Quake III: Arena, COD4, Far Cry Instincts, and some of the Unreal Tournament games. If something feels not right about the video, there is not much I can say other than go with your gut. I don't question his ability in shooters; seeing his videos about FEAR and Crysis lends to this. Now if he's not good on BF1, that is on him, but I am not going to drop him altogether. White never goes out his way to insult others liking a game he does not like, and is more than aware when a game or series has a polarizing reception. See his FEAR 2 or Crysis 3 video, if you wish.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

As for his BF1 video, I can say anything for or against him, because online shooters aren't my forte. The most I ever did was Quake III: Arena, COD4, Far Cry Instincts, and some of the Unreal Tournament games. If something feels not right about the video, there is not much I can say other than go with your gut. I don't question his ability in shooters; seeing his videos about FEAR and Crysis lends to this. Now if he's not good on BF1, that is on him, but I am not going to drop him altogether. White never goes out his way to insult others liking a game he does not like, and is more than aware when a game or series has a polarizing reception. See his FEAR 2 or Crysis 3 video, if you wish.

I don't really got anything against him (not like he's doing a CleanPrince or DownwardThrust) just that I question if his in-depth criticism is on par or better than some other Youtubers. Online shooters are all really about basic tactics (how to take/hold objectives) and positioning skills over l33t aiming skills, they really ain't hard to get. I'd checkout one of his singular game vids if I had played any of them before as I much prefer checking out what other people think about something after experiencing it myself.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

The strength of the attacks changes, but it's not like they become completely unprecedented attacks that you're unfamilliar with. The wind-up shows an attack is coming and the following flash telegraphs the impact. I had way less trouble parrying in GoW '18 than I did in Dark Souls or Bloodborne. It was no more wonkier than parrying in Revengeance. In fact the reaction time and ease reminded me of the golden fleece in the classic games. And yeah, you can turn off the signs in Arkham, but then that game's combat is pretty much completely rhytym based.

No, the bottomline was pretty much that the game is too focused on graphics and being cinematic, therefor the combat and everything else suffers. And I only saw the GamingBrit video where he had played it and proclaimed anyone who praised it was just fooled into liking it.

And about the camera.. It's not like I didn't have the occasional issue where something hit me from off-screen, but no more than other similar games. It's funny, because MatthewMattosis points to The Wonderful 101 as having a perfect camera, when I actually stopped playing that game because I got sick of being hit by cannon balls off-screen.

The enemy indicators are a pretty nitpick-y issue for me, not near one of the major issues, plus the indicator issue has more to do with the RPG elements (causing the inconsistencies) than the actual indicators.

I feel much of the video was about gameplay issues over the cinematic nature. I think going for the whole 'the game is a single shot' didn't do anything for the game nor has any impact since it takes several sittings and normal menu usage to playthrough. Whereas that single shot sequence from Children of Men has quite the impact. I do feel going for that definitely makes the game slightly worse overall because of how less fast it takes to do things (like the not-so-fast fast travel) just to accomplish that 'single shot'. The camera I think can work for the gameplay because it does make combat more brutal and punchier, so it's not up Kratos' ass purely for cinematic purposes. Like I said before, the camera is perfectly workable as you don't have to constantly see the battlefield to be effective in combat because you can have that mental snapshot of where the enemies are and keep track of them to a degree having that internal clock (much like a quarterback) knowing that the enemy is say 5 seconds from reaching you. Online shooters totally require that skill already.

I haven't played 101 so I can't comment on that though if the Switch gets it, it'll probably force me to buy a Switch to play 3 Platinum games (101 + Bayo sequels).

I also recommend Raycevick and Whitelight.

Raycevick is top-notch and goes so deep into gameplay mechanics (I actually learned what it was that made Max Payne 3's controls feel off for me after watching his video). I checked out Whitelight and didn't really think his analysis was that great plus most of his videos are about games I haven't played.

On one hand I can understand why someone would think that, because to me it felt so natural that I never really stopped to think about it.

On the other, I?d have to disagree for pretty much exactly the same reason. There is no game out currently with a better cinematic presentation imo, and that technique is a big part of why. It felt like a continuous adventure whenever playing, and of course you have to divert to menus quite a bit, but during gameplay it was simply a pleasingly effect that made it feel like something would be ?off? if it wasn?t there. It?s kinda like how things like AI, animation, camera work, etc. are most noticeable when they?re badly implemented; otherwise they?re mostly superfluous, natural elements. That's how GoW?s presentation felt for me.

Also, the one cut technique didn?t have nearly as much to do with slow fast travel ETA as actually loading the new area did. I?d rather run a loop around some mystical looking void while listening to Mimir?s lore tales than stare at a loading screen.


As for MP3, what was it that felt off? If I had to guess he said something about the physics engine or motion capture (or some combination) playing a part in its controls being the way they are.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

On one hand I can understand why someone would think that, because to me it felt so natural that I never really stopped to think about it.

On the other, I?d have to disagree for pretty much exactly the same reason. There is no game out currently with a better cinematic presentation imo, and that technique is a big part of why. It felt like a continuous adventure whenever playing, and of course you have to divert to menus quite a bit, but during gameplay it was simply a pleasingly effect that made it feel like something would be ?off? if it wasn?t there. It?s kinda like how things like AI, animation, camera work, etc. are most noticeable when they?re badly implemented; otherwise they?re mostly superfluous, natural elements. That's how GoW?s presentation felt for me.

Also, the one cut technique didn?t have nearly as much to do with slow fast travel ETA as actually loading the new area did. I?d rather run a loop around some mystical looking void while listening to Mimir?s lore tales than stare at a loading screen.

As for MP3, what was it that felt off? If I had to guess he said something about the physics engine or motion capture (or some combination) playing a part in its controls being the way they are.

The whole single shot of GOW is really a minor nitpick. I think if they didn't have to do it literally all the time and allowed for a bit of gamey-ness here and here to move things along faster, I feel it still would've had the same overall impact.

Movement in really every Rockstar game never feels "right" or as smooth as other games feel. In MP3, I never felt "right" when moving up stairs and having to shoot at the same time (that yacht level for example). Raycevick illustrated that animations take priority over user control in MP3 and that has to be why the game doesn't feel as smooth as it should.

Spoiler: Raycevick MP3 video cued up to the specific part

 

[BrawlMan]

Apparently Joseph Anderson releases his 3 hour(!) video essay on God of War tomorrow. Have mercy.

On his twitter he says 'almost a masterpiece' so he did atleast like the game.


https://twitter.com/jph_anderson/status/1034185437575823360

His videos tend to be pretty good though but I always watch them in chunks.

I just finished watching his video. You weren't kidding; the guy does not skip on the detail. Despite the longevity of his review, Anderson's video is the most fair and objective. He does not go on any long winded tangents insulting the viewer(s), telling them they're are "wrong, duped, or misguided", and actually backs up his arguments. Certainly better than GamingBrit's two part ***** fit and one part damage control. Thanks for the mention of him.

 

[Trunkage]

Apparently Joseph Anderson releases his 3 hour(!) video essay on God of War tomorrow. Have mercy.

On his twitter he says 'almost a masterpiece' so he did atleast like the game.


https://twitter.com/jph_anderson/status/1034185437575823360

His videos tend to be pretty good though but I always watch them in chunks.

I just finished watching his video. You weren't kidding; the guy does not skip on the detail. Despite the longevity of his review, Anderson's video is the most fair and objective. He does not go on any long winded tangents insulting the viewer(s), telling them they're are "wrong, duped, or misguided", and actually backs up his arguments. Certainly better than GamingBrit's two part ***** fit and one part damage control. Thanks for the mention of him.

Unless it's Mario Odyssey. He definitely wasn't unbiased there. It was a really weird video compared to his other work

 

[BrawlMan]

Apparently Joseph Anderson releases his 3 hour(!) video essay on God of War tomorrow. Have mercy.

On his twitter he says 'almost a masterpiece' so he did atleast like the game.


https://twitter.com/jph_anderson/status/1034185437575823360

His videos tend to be pretty good though but I always watch them in chunks.

I just finished watching his video. You weren't kidding; the guy does not skip on the detail. Despite the longevity of his review, Anderson's video is the most fair and objective. He does not go on any long winded tangents insulting the viewer(s), telling them they're are "wrong, duped, or misguided", and actually backs up his arguments. Certainly better than GamingBrit's two part ***** fit and one part damage control. Thanks for the mention of him.

Unless it's Mario Odyssey. He definitely wasn't unbiased there. It was a really weird video compared to his other work

Don't get me wrong, he had his own sets of valid complaints, nitpicks, or biases. The only difference being he didn't treat those of differing opinions as thundering dumbasses. The worst he does it call out others of this attitude. That said, he understands why certain fans dislike the new direction God of War has taken, and have a right to their opinion.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

Cory Barlog paid a visit to From Software recently. Wonder what that was about.

Some people also think they found hints about Bloodborne 2 in their new VR game, even though Miyazaki himself denied it.

 

[Bombiz]

Sure other games have exploits but RE4 plays great if you house-rule out such exploits whereas God of War never plays great IMO.

okay wait this has been bothering me for sometime now. couldn't you say the same thing for the souls games? or are those games just as bad even with those house rules? cause it seemed like a lot of your problems with DS1 was that the most optimal way was to play with a shield up all the time or something similar.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

Sure other games have exploits but RE4 plays great if you house-rule out such exploits whereas God of War never plays great IMO.

okay wait this has been bothering me for sometime now. couldn't you say the same thing for the souls games? or are those games just as bad even with those house rules? cause it seemed like a lot of your problems with DS1 was that the most optimal way was to play with a shield up all the time or something similar.

I never understood personally why shield use automatically =?s ?bad? or ?boring?. At worst it?s just a safer way to play, and at best it?s a great tool to use in hairy situations, like hazardous environments compounded by aggressive enemies. I?ve had lots of tense moments in Souls games with shield usage that wouldn?t be there if I played completely offensively.

Having said that, I?m really intrigued by Sekiro, because it looks like the type of game where a great defense creates an even better offense. After essentially four Souls games and Bloodborne, it feels like a natural progression of From?s formula.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

Sure other games have exploits but RE4 plays great if you house-rule out such exploits whereas God of War never plays great IMO.

okay wait this has been bothering me for sometime now. couldn't you say the same thing for the souls games? or are those games just as bad even with those house rules? cause it seemed like a lot of your problems with DS1 was that the most optimal way was to play with a shield up all the time or something similar.

That was a quote from me actually. The RE4 exploits mentioned were like going up a ladder and killing "zombies" one-by-one. A DS exploit in the same vein would be like killing distant enemies cheaply with arrows. It's house-ruling out those kind of exploits. To me, GOW's combat never feels 'right'; you just have all these little things like poorly designed enemy super armor, gliding movement, inaccurate/non-exact controls, attacks being inconsistent due to the level system, etc. Thus, removing cheap exploits, the core combat never works anyway. I'm not the biggest DS fan but it does combat better than GOW like you know and understand what attacks will consistently stagger the enemy.

I never understood personally why shield use automatically =?s ?bad? or ?boring?. At worst it?s just a safer way to play, and at best it?s a great tool to use in hairy situations, like hazardous environments compounded by aggressive enemies. I?ve had lots of tense moments in Souls games with shield usage that wouldn?t be there if I played completely offensively.

Having said that, I?m really intrigued by Sekiro, because it looks like the type of game where a great defense creates an even better offense. After essentially four Souls games and Bloodborne, it feels like a natural progression of From?s formula.

The shield is boring because there's no skill at all involved with it. You just hold a button anytime (there's no timing required or anything) you want to be completely immune from damage. It's basically as easy as just shooting arrows from afar to slowly kill enemies in how passive shielding is. And the shield was poorly balanced in that you didn't need to commit any stats towards shielding and you were great at it. Plus, the underlining mechanic that allowed you to have basically max stamina after an enemy combo by just lowering your shield between enemy hits to regain lost stamina. Bloodborne removed shields completely and made Souls combat better. Sekiro looks pretty interesting because of the posture system and forcing the player to time blocks instead of just holding a button for magic immunity from damage.