What I quoted from you specifically said you couldn't think of any way it influenced the gaming industry. That is WAY different than justifying it being a GOAT game. Which I personally don't think it was.
Your video game hot take(s) thread
- Thread starter Dany_the_penguin
- Start date
I personally don't recall those games being as big, or as instantly popular and widely dispersed like BL 2. Granted, I think a lot of those titles were Nintendo titles? Not sure, but I vaguely recall their names, but never played them. And I don't recall people losing their shit about them like they did with BL2.
I asked about a prevalence of Borderlands clones that might merit it being "hot taken" as the "most influential game of all time." A smattering of games potentially influenced by pieces of it ain't that.
Borderlands 2 is not even true cel shading. I wish I was not making this up but it's true. It uses a comic book style, but it's not true cell shading.
Cel Shading - TV Tropes
Cel Shading is a style of computer rendering that replaces the shading gradient of conventional rendering with flat colors and shadows (as seen at right). In layman's terms, it imitates the look of hand-drawn artwork and animation. The style was …
tvtropes.org
Check the bottom folder that says not celshading but mistaken for it.
According to this there's actually way more before than after.
Yeah, look at all the shooters that have incorporated loot in their games from Destiny, Division, Anthem, etc. Everyone wants to make the next looter shooter than everyone plays. Doesn't Call of Duty have some kind of loot system now? They gots loot boxes for some reason. I remember when you played a game and got all the guns from the get-go and just tried them when you wanted to instead of having unlocks, that asinine "breakthrough" level system of COD4. I guess you can always go back to something like Diablo for loot influences and probably something before that. Borderlands may have inspired shooters to incorporate stupid loot systems.
Destiny has boring gunplay. I need lower cooldowns, and more grenade, and melee spam.
Same with Divison 2.
Also, Genshin Impact is good for one reason, and that's due to the fact that it's a live-service good without multiplayer driven-loot. Fuck Multiplayer twitch shooters.
Same with Divison 2.
Also, Genshin Impact is good for one reason, and that's due to the fact that it's a live-service good without multiplayer driven-loot. Fuck Multiplayer twitch shooters.
I was watching the final mission of Hitman 3, and I have to say, how ironic that a game praised for supposedly allowing the player to do whatever they want ends with a literal linear corridor.
I also noticed in the comments people defend the game's short story by saying it's meant to be replayed. In my opinion, that is ridiculously fucked. No game should make you replay it to get the "real" experience.
I also noticed in the comments people defend the game's short story by saying it's meant to be replayed. In my opinion, that is ridiculously fucked. No game should make you replay it to get the "real" experience.
- Feb 7, 2011
- 8,594
- 3,109
- 118
- Country
- 'Merica
- Gender
- 3 children in a trench coat
The fun of the hitman games is mastering each level and figuring out all of the various ways to kill your targets. The story is actually sort of superfluous. If that doesn't appeal to you then that's fine, but then the game as a whole really isn't for you.
Replaying is fine, but having a shorter and smaller game and saying that's fine because you can play it all over again is crazy. Hitman 3 has six levels, Hitman Absolution had twenty. I'm no veteran of the franchise, but six seems like a poor showing. Maybe they'll do DLC, but in my opinion that's a different kind of scummy.
EDIT: I am assuming of course that Hitman 3 has the standard release price. If it was like a $40 kind of thing, then that would change my opinion.
I haven't played either but I'd ask about the quality of said levels. I've gotten the impression the new Hitman games have fairly large levels with a lot interesting ways to plan the approach, eliminate the targets and get out of there without being noticed, thus giving incentive to try it again with a different approach to pull off a different kill. I can see the appeal in that even if I haven't experienced it.
Is large levels not already something the Hitman franchise has done in the past?
That reminds me. Deus Ex Human Revolution needing, for some reason, energy to take down people. Same amount of energy for taking down one or two people though, because that makes sense.
That cooldown to 'get your energy back' was ridiculous.
1. There are whole genres out there, that are all about the replayability.
2. This is one of the more robust levels in Absolution
https://d2skuhm0vrry40.cloudfront.net/2013/articles//a/1/5/4/6/2/1/8/18_02.jpg.jpg
And this is the 2nd actual level in HITMAN(2016):
https://guides.gamepressure.com/static/mapy/en/gfx/map_1640.jpg
I think Hitman III costs 60 us dollars, but you also get access to the levels from previous games? Something like that.
Hitman level design philosophy kinda took a left(or rather, right) turn after Absolution. Basicly, from HITMAN(2016) onwards it focused on trimming out the fat, and leaving the meat, which are those layered levels with hundred npcs, and many different opportunities to take out the targets.
Think of the old Hitman entries as a course of 20 or so different sweet rolls. While the post 2016 Hitmen each being around 6 multi-layered cakes.
Absolution is an odd duck in the series. It's more linear, and narrative focused than both the classic entries, and new games.
Ironically, the corridor you mentioned sounds like a nod towards Absolution, or classic games.
Last edited:
Difference being they all suck and did not add much new, different, or better. It goes back to my argument off looter elements that did appear games, but did not do much better or worse than Borderlands. 4 or 5 games (some of which that have failed hard: Anthem and Avengers)don't count for the whole industry or "most influential game of all time!". All it did was influence the shitty, underhanded, screw you parts of gaming, which is less Borderlands fault, and more of an industry problem. COD has always been chasing trends and lost its identity during and post Modern Warfare. Remember when they trying to copyTitanfall with their more sci-fi settings, but not as interesting gameplay mechanics? If Borderlands was really that influential, we would be seeing it everywhere in the AA and indie space. Thankfully, that is not the case, and I am all the more happy for it. If you all play is AAA games from the Unholy Trinity, then yeah, I could see that perspective. The huge flaw being is that it's too narrow minded and you're only looking from one angle that the other angles might as well not exist from. But those angles do exists, the person in question just does not want to acknowledge them or want to think about it.
The thing was, Absolution was a huge departure for the series in that it consisted of incredibly linear, scripted level design where there were very few avenues to meeting your objectives. Sure, you could taken one alley instead of another, or take out targets in different orders, but there was very little means for experimentation or creativity. It’s why it’s kinda the black sheep of the franchise, especially after Blood Money.
With the new trilogy, it’s a big toy box design where pretty much any one location has more unique replay-ability than the entirety of Absolution. That’s the biggest difference. That’s why people will keep finding new ways to complete the new games whereas Absolution can easily be tossed aside after one play through. It’s also why people might find the story just “along for the ride”, because the main draw of these games is being given a bunch of freedom in approach, and the overall failure of Absolution to resonate is proof of that.
Last edited:
I played the betas for both of them and deleted them before I even played an hour, they're both garbage. It was obvious Bungie basically made a multiplayer shooter and stuffed it into a looter shooter MMO thing. They didn't want players to be too powerful to make PvP balancing easy, and even the "ultimates" we're triggered by killstreaks.
I was just saying I can see the argument for why Borderlands could be called influential, adding loot to shooters has become the default. The core of Borderlands isn't even the loot, it's the skill trees; but most of the time copycats miss the thing that actually makes it all work. A game that was immensely influential to shooters was Metal Gear Solid 4's online, which you can see components of that in just about every multiplayer shooter from Ghost Recon to PUBG/Fortnite to Overwatch to Halo/Gears/COD/BF/Uncharted.
I don't know. I'm going off what I've seen and heard about the new games. I have no idea if the older games had a similar dynamic and personally, I can see the appeal of
"Here's a big map, crowds and some targets who have a schedule they follow along with a bunch of possible ways to off them. Go nuts".
I know, I was just pointing out the big hole in Gyrobot's argument. It was influential, but not for the right reasons and many people missed the point. But it sure as hell was not "The most influential game of all time!" as he was claiming.
No argument there.
- Feb 7, 2011
- 8,594
- 3,109
- 118
- Country
- 'Merica
- Gender
- 3 children in a trench coat
Capcom should remake the Resident Evil games as coop shooters, or add coop modes to the remakes.
It honestly doesn't make sense to me that there's only a couple of resident evil games that are coop games when almost every game in the series (barring 4 and 7) give you a competent partner that the main character could be working with.
Resident Evil 1 - Chris and Rebecca and Jill and Barry could just be working as teams.
Resident Evil 2 - No reason that Claire and Leon aren't working together the whole time. They always end up in the same place.
Resident Evil 3 - Jill and Carlos.
Resident Evil 0 - Rebecca and Billy (you're controlling both of them at the same time anyway, might as well make it a coop game).
Code Veronica - Claire and Steve
Revelations - You have a coop partner with you at all times anyway, might as well let someone control them.
It honestly doesn't make sense to me that there's only a couple of resident evil games that are coop games when almost every game in the series (barring 4 and 7) give you a competent partner that the main character could be working with.
Resident Evil 1 - Chris and Rebecca and Jill and Barry could just be working as teams.
Resident Evil 2 - No reason that Claire and Leon aren't working together the whole time. They always end up in the same place.
Resident Evil 3 - Jill and Carlos.
Resident Evil 0 - Rebecca and Billy (you're controlling both of them at the same time anyway, might as well make it a coop game).
Code Veronica - Claire and Steve
Revelations - You have a coop partner with you at all times anyway, might as well let someone control them.