To be fair, FEAR 2 isn't exactly a high level of intellectual game design either. Fear 1 had a few effective sequences, but most where cheap scares, like Alma popping up right at the top of a ladder.Maybe they know about it but ZP is not what I would call a high level of intellectual discussion on game design.
Taste and familiarization with a certain control scheme is pretty much the direct opposite of scientific. Also, there is a reason most successful console FPS have some kind of aiming assistance.Foreign Shadow said:Is Yahtzee making a crack about console gamers there? If not, my bad, but if so....I bring to your attention, Mr. Croshaw: Exhibit A: Any console controller of the last four generations save the Wii. Exhibit B: The keyboard and mouse on your PC. Scientific control: Prince of Persia: Sands of Time. I am a console gamer because every game that I have ever played that has ever required real-time control of a character is a hundred times less aggravating and a thousand times more enjoyable playing it with a console controller than a PC set up.
I think one of the intel tidbits you find explains this. Something about a newer batch of replicas that were being tested during the incident. They weren't out and about until the crap hit the fan, as opposed to the ones Fettel already had for the first game, so they're late to the party.MisterIncognito said:My question though, is why, if this is supposed to take place directly after the events in the first F.E.A.R. did the clones soldiers suddenly upgrade their armor and weapons? Shouldn't the look exactly like the clone soldiers from the frist game, and be using the exact same weapons?
Wasn't "Dreamfall" a sequel to TLJ? To be fair, "Dreamfall" ended on a cliffhanger too, which I wasn't exactly thrilled with when I had reached the end.panthrjd said:Complaining about games that had cliff hangers for sequels that have no confirmation of getting made and he puts Beyond Good and Evil instead of The Longest Journey? Guess he never played the latter.
And doesn't Beyond Good and Evil sorta-kinda-maybe have an announced sequel?
Although I love to be an optimist, I'll have to side with Shadowkirby here:mark_n_b said:Yes! A world without sequels would be a beautiful place. Companies wouldn't deign to drop the coolest of IP's involving people who bust spirits just because they are only interested in "sequel and franchise properties" and we would get much more innovation and variation. Prototype 1 (and I am going to be the first to call it that because that's what it is) will be awesome Prototype II and III and so on will be considerably less so.
This is why I respect Croshaw and enjoy his reviews (I won't even deign to watch any other video feature on this site) he knows and is saying the things it will take developers and publishers a good ten years to figure out on their own.
ShadowKirby said:Maybe they know about it but ZP is not what I would call a high level of intellectual discussion on game design.BlueInkAlchemist said:Do developers not know about Zero Punctuation? Or are the production teams really that thick?
The game industry was built on the sequel model. No Mario series, no Zelda series, only the original Prince of Persia, only one Madden, NHL games that, like it or not, sell. People will buy franchises they trust.Vlane said:Yeah right. Good joke.ShadowKirby said:Nope, the game industry would be dead.Wasder said:A world without sequels... A good thing?
Thanks for the compliment =)mark_n_b said:You, sire, have a way to optimistic view of things. Sequels are a money grubbing tactic and result in the perpetual "or do they?" endings referenced in the movie. Games like Zelda and Mario and Final Fantasy had sequels because they were truly great games that had a market for revisits. And none of those titles readily interconnect from one to the next. Gears of War and F.E.A.R. and god knows what else have sequels because the companies don't want to spend money on developing new art and game-play, but still want to charge just as much for it.tobyornottoby said:NO it wouldn't be wonderful, as I don't see how a world that doesn't allow its people to do what they like as 'wonderful'.
Remakes are made because they SELL, and they sell because people LIKE them
(and of course because a sequel can build on an established working idea, instead of having the risk of not finding new solid ground)
People like them? People like what marketing tells them to like. End of story. (or is it? Check out the next post I may or may not make to find out for sure.)
I love remakes =)Sewblon said:Banning sequels probably isn't worth losing half life 2, Civilization 3, and Super Mario Galaxy, but remakes should have the death penalty, preferably death by auto cannibalism.
yourbeliefs said:Wasn't "Dreamfall" a sequel to TLJ? To be fair, "Dreamfall" ended on a cliffhanger too, which I wasn't exactly thrilled with when I had reached the end.panthrjd said:Complaining about games that had cliff hangers for sequels that have no confirmation of getting made and he puts Beyond Good and Evil instead of The Longest Journey? Guess he never played the latter.
And doesn't Beyond Good and Evil sorta-kinda-maybe have an announced sequel?
Third-Person -> Controller?Anaphyis said:Taste and familiarization with a certain control scheme is pretty much the direct opposite of scientific. Also, there is a reason most successful console FPS have some kind of aiming assistance.Foreign Shadow said:Is Yahtzee making a crack about console gamers there? If not, my bad, but if so....I bring to your attention, Mr. Croshaw: Exhibit A: Any console controller of the last four generations save the Wii. Exhibit B: The keyboard and mouse on your PC. Scientific control: Prince of Persia: Sands of Time. I am a console gamer because every game that I have ever played that has ever required real-time control of a character is a hundred times less aggravating and a thousand times more enjoyable playing it with a console controller than a PC set up.
....have you even tried playing a platformer using the keyboard and mouse set-up? It's not simply a matter of taste and familiarization, it's a matter of design and ease of use. Many styles of game-play are simply much easier with a console controller than the keyboard. You can adapt to and use the keyboard-I've done it myself-but it's not as natural or intuitive as console controllers. I concede your point regarding FPS's though. I just don't really play them, so they don't enter into my calculations very often...Anaphyis said:Taste and familiarization with a certain control scheme is pretty much the direct opposite of scientific. Also, there is a reason most successful console FPS have some kind of aiming assistance.Foreign Shadow said:Is Yahtzee making a crack about console gamers there? If not, my bad, but if so....I bring to your attention, Mr. Croshaw: Exhibit A: Any console controller of the last four generations save the Wii. Exhibit B: The keyboard and mouse on your PC. Scientific control: Prince of Persia: Sands of Time. I am a console gamer because every game that I have ever played that has ever required real-time control of a character is a hundred times less aggravating and a thousand times more enjoyable playing it with a console controller than a PC set up.
Agreed. i tried the demo despite never playing FEAR 1 - any sense of terror the game might have evoked was overshadowed by my confusion at pretty much everything. "Okay, so here are some army looking guys and - wait, no, he's on the other side. Got it. Now - hold on, why is there a skull-head guy fighting WITH them. . .oh, i can flip this table to, nope, i forgot to throw that grenade i guess. Game over."Doug said:Excellent review, and fortunately I don't seem to have missed out on anything by avoiding FEAR 2, just as I hoped.
It must be for the same reason people thought RE5 was racist.SICK0_ZER0 said:"So far, only the Japanese has succeeded in creating a 'scary' game."
why was he banned 14 days for saying that?