thats true. i have a creative x-fi soundcard with suroundspeakers and you hear stuff all over you. particularly in school in this corner you hear all kind of stuff where you simply look all over.GlassPirate said:
Zero Punctuation: Fear 2
- Thread starter Yahtzee Croshaw
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Yes Thief 2 ( I talk now about 2 since I played 2 and 3 so far ) does have this good atmosphere and the gameplay by "idea" would be interesting. The problem is though that ( at last under expert ) the gameplay is buggy in Thief 2 and downright annoying ( guards with eyes at the back of their head, getting stuck in geometry in the worst place, in total darkness know exactly where you are although never having seen you, and so forth ). In Thief 3 these stealth mechanics worked ( AI behaved how it should, can't see you if it really can't, doesn't get stuck in geometry, does not know where you are in darkness unless seeing you, and wall hug... adds to immersion ). Also the story in T2 is hard to follow. In T3 it is easier to follow and makes more sense ( I do get the entire T2 story but it's still messy presented ). After all I judge games often using my so called "frustration meter". If a game frustrates you like hell with buggy controls, buggy AI or other problems then it gets minus points from my side. T2 pulled many of my nerves with ugly gameplay problems which I did not experience like that in T3. This is why I can't understand how T2 is considered the peak and T3 a let down as I experience it exactly the other way looking "only" at pure technical measures.Slipslop said:Thief 1 and 2 had great athmosphere, story, the gameplay was very exciting and they were pioneers in the stealth genre and did almost everything right and Half Life 2 really nice level design and an interesting story with much room for speculation. You didn't explain HL2 by yourself, you just said it's a bad sequel so gimme hotshot.Odjin said:No argument, just fanboy ranting, useless post and irrelevant attack. Fanboy statement means to say: "it's great but I can't say why". If you want to counter somebody's opinion you have to provide arguments on why the other opinion is incorrect and yours correct. This is called discussion. If you (fanboy) are not able of this stop attacking me.Slipslop said:Odjin said:Definitely not. In what way do you think I'm wrong?Slipslop said:You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about buddy... are you a casual consumer zombie?Odjin said:Duh... Thief 2 is not really great... totally messy AI and you sneaking like a bulldozer. I don't know but Thief 3 had been way better: working AI, sneaking works as sneaking should do ( love the wall hug ) and the story is coherent and not running after you although you sneak like a snail. And HL2 has also been a bad sequel. So we are left with 0 good sequels... no need to fear this new regime
Because Thief 2 and HL 2 were great games not bad ones.
What goes for HL2 I did not exactly elaborate, that's correct. This is because I did so already at other places. Level design is very boring and feels like being pulled through by a string instead of playing a linear set of maps ( as HL did ). Story is next to non-existent ( changed in EP1/2 but in HL2 itself it's non-existent ) while HL put a lot of stress on unraveling what happened. One message board with news paper articles doesn't count as story telling there. The AI is also rather meh. While in HL you had AI which knew what cover is and did flank at times the combine AI can be at best labeled bad or random at best. Too many scripted sequences trying to hide the flawed AI. Destroyed a lot of the game. The next point are the badly implemented physics. Now not in terms of "technically" bad but "gameplay wise" bad. Physics puzzles are obvious from miles away and are artificial, plugged in for the sake of having physics puzzles. Take Trespasser to see how physics puzzles are correctly done ( and well done ) and HL2 as an example of how to not do it. It's annoying to have an entire map ( ravenholm ) made only to showcase the gravgun. After all HL2 is a techdemo but at best mildly a game compared to the precedor.
So this doesn't mean HL2 is bad, it's just like comparing DX:IW to Deus-Ex... comparing a chicken nugget to a king size burger. You can enjoy a chicken nugget but the king size burger is just a lot better.
No I think you missed the point of what Yahtzee said. He wasn't badgering sequels. In fact he said he was willing to pay the price of no Thief 2 and Half-Life 2 just to have no uninspired sequels. The problem isn't directly sequels. The problem is the entire entertainment industry tries to milk the consumers with their magic money machine franchises. AKA no effort or creativity, just use the simple step-by-step ingredients of franchise X and tada! Millions of dollars are bilked from millions of idiot consumers!smudgey said:
It's not bad that there is a million games that uses a space Marine as the main hero. It's that the plot is identical. Space Marine encounters alien life forms that takes great joy in mutilating humans. Space Marine stops aliens. Aliens not totally gone in the end opening up for the sequel. You can pretty much summerize most movies this way too. But by far the worst cookie cutter entertainment is US TV. OMFG It is the worst thing... I have a problem categorizing US TV as entertainment. In fact I don't think the two words should ever be used in the same sentence. If any TV show gets popular, soon there is a 100 clones all equally suck with bad acting and ridiculously corny drama.
Any ways.. the problem isn't sequels as much as uninspired copies. "More of what we want." is cheaper and less annoying if I just play the game (or movie) I already bought over again. Story continues and extended plots are alright if they are actually worked on as hard and is as inspired as the original. But nowdays, most of the time its just the franchise owners turning the crank on his money making machine.
Just have the internet, please.Odjin said:Yes Thief 2 ( I talk now about 2 since I played 2 and 3 so far ) does have this good atmosphere and the gameplay by "idea" would be interesting. The problem is though that ( at last under expert ) the gameplay is buggy in Thief 2 and downright annoying ( guards with eyes at the back of their head, getting stuck in geometry in the worst place, in total darkness know exactly where you are although never having seen you, and so forth ). In Thief 3 these stealth mechanics worked ( AI behaved how it should, can't see you if it really can't, doesn't get stuck in geometry, does not know where you are in darkness unless seeing you, and wall hug... adds to immersion ). Also the story in T2 is hard to follow. In T3 it is easier to follow and makes more sense ( I do get the entire T2 story but it's still messy presented ). After all I judge games often using my so called "frustration meter". If a game frustrates you like hell with buggy controls, buggy AI or other problems then it gets minus points from my side. T2 pulled many of my nerves with ugly gameplay problems which I did not experience like that in T3. This is why I can't understand how T2 is considered the peak and T3 a let down as I experience it exactly the other way looking "only" at pure technical measures.Slipslop said:Thief 1 and 2 had great athmosphere, story, the gameplay was very exciting and they were pioneers in the stealth genre and did almost everything right and Half Life 2 really nice level design and an interesting story with much room for speculation. You didn't explain HL2 by yourself, you just said it's a bad sequel so gimme hotshot.Odjin said:No argument, just fanboy ranting, useless post and irrelevant attack. Fanboy statement means to say: "it's great but I can't say why". If you want to counter somebody's opinion you have to provide arguments on why the other opinion is incorrect and yours correct. This is called discussion. If you (fanboy) are not able of this stop attacking me.Slipslop said:Odjin said:Definitely not. In what way do you think I'm wrong?Slipslop said:You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about buddy... are you a casual consumer zombie?Odjin said:Duh... Thief 2 is not really great... totally messy AI and you sneaking like a bulldozer. I don't know but Thief 3 had been way better: working AI, sneaking works as sneaking should do ( love the wall hug ) and the story is coherent and not running after you although you sneak like a snail. And HL2 has also been a bad sequel. So we are left with 0 good sequels... no need to fear this new regime
Because Thief 2 and HL 2 were great games not bad ones.
What goes for HL2 I did not exactly elaborate, that's correct. This is because I did so already at other places. Level design is very boring and feels like being pulled through by a string instead of playing a linear set of maps ( as HL did ). Story is next to non-existent ( changed in EP1/2 but in HL2 itself it's non-existent ) while HL put a lot of stress on unraveling what happened. One message board with news paper articles doesn't count as story telling there. The AI is also rather meh. While in HL you had AI which knew what cover is and did flank at times the combine AI can be at best labeled bad or random at best. Too many scripted sequences trying to hide the flawed AI. Destroyed a lot of the game. The next point are the badly implemented physics. Now not in terms of "technically" bad but "gameplay wise" bad. Physics puzzles are obvious from miles away and are artificial, plugged in for the sake of having physics puzzles. Take Trespasser to see how physics puzzles are correctly done ( and well done ) and HL2 as an example of how to not do it. It's annoying to have an entire map ( ravenholm ) made only to showcase the gravgun. After all HL2 is a techdemo but at best mildly a game compared to the precedor.
So this doesn't mean HL2 is bad, it's just like comparing DX:IW to Deus-Ex... comparing a chicken nugget to a king size burger. You can enjoy a chicken nugget but the king size burger is just a lot better.
He pretty much nailed it. FEAR 2 did feel a lot more like a console game, and I'm a console gamer myself.
God bless this review for the bit about open-ended endings made just for the purpose of having a sequel, because I'm getting sick of that.
i dont know, for reasons such as first impressions of how you think the review will play out, which you cant do if youve seen it, or i personally think saying something like "im glad he chose this to review" and then maybe intending to edit after seeing to elaborate is perfectly fine.Knight Templar said:
i just think that after seeing how other forums operate, this is a bit over the top