Editorials and Features

Forum for Editorials and other News Features

Fumbling The Handoff

  • SanadaSanada662,255
    Posted on 25 July 16 at 22:52Permalink
    I'm glad to see Judgment was the headliner for this one.
  • Posted on 26 July 16 at 21:40Permalink
    dresdenWWII said:
    New Vegas is vastly superior to Fallout 3 in many areas--narrative, choice & consequence, companions, gameplay additions, and general role-playing. These improvements are thanks to the fact it was created by many of the same developers (now working under Obsidian) who made Fallout 1 & 2, unlike Fallout 3. In a sense, one could claim Fallout 3 is the filler sequel handed off to another studio.
    100% agreed. The story especially was waaaaay better in New Vegas. But this is nothing new with Obsidian. I felt like KOTOR 2, as far as narrative and dialogue go, was a huge leap from KOTOR 1, which was made while Bioware was still BIOWARE and not the watered down corporate EA version of the company. That speaks volumes.

    Just wanted to comment on this post, carry on lads.
  • AnxsighetyAnxsighety1,238,746
    Posted on 30 July 16 at 06:02Permalink
    Where the hell did these Bioshock 2 defenders come from. This thread became the only people in the gaming community who feel that way. I don't love Infinite like most do, but 2 is a trash pile compared to the original, and even to Infinite as well.

    Halo hasn't evolved enough, which is ironic considering the original title. The newest one tried to be something is wasn't. ODST may be the most boring game ever made as far as campaign goes. Judgment is 50/50, but still probably on the negative side of things.

    Anyways, original point just has me baffled. There is literally nothing better or even as good about Bioshock 2 as 1. The only thing I think I may have liked better was how much character they put into the Little Sisters. That's about it. The game is a mess.
  • AnxsighetyAnxsighety1,238,746
    Posted on 30 July 16 at 06:05Permalink
    s3bb86 said:
    Dwabi said:
    ME 2 was the least RPG-like but had the most engaging cinematic experience. The new dialogue interupts are perhaps my favorite thing ever. ME3 had the best mechanics, but that's because I like ARPGs and shooters, if I was an RPG purist I would've been pissed.
    I never thought of ME2 and 3 as RPGs, it is even debateable for ME1 imo. they are story driven shooters with RPG elements. you have a class and some skills attached to them, thats it. no attribute points to use, no crafting system and so on. They are great games, ME3 is in my top 3 for the 360 generation, but at - least for me - no RPGs
    They are not shooters. They are RPGs. Well, we could debate 3. In general, the game is spent walking around, doing nothing, talking, dialogue choices, etc. the shooting doesn't make up a majority of the game. At least in 1/2.
  • AnxsighetyAnxsighety1,238,746
    Posted on 30 July 16 at 06:08Permalink
    Bar6arian said:
    Embrace change as its the only thing you can count on. I think Gears 4 will do great but won't be like the original for me so I'll more than likely pass on it.
    If you've followed it at all, it will probably play closest to the original compared to the rest of the series.
  • AnxsighetyAnxsighety1,238,746
    Posted on 30 July 16 at 06:10Permalink
    Ackter said:
    Multiple ways to complete a quest will always be superior to only one way of completing a quest.

    That's not subjective at all.
    That's like saying a choose your own novel is better than a well written one.

    If a game is made well, the one option should be entertaining/fun/engaging. Your argument is poor.
  • Removed Gamer

    Removed Gamer

    Posted on 30 July 16 at 06:18Permalink
    Holy quadruple post
    Walkthrough Manager and Platformer LEGEND
  • Posted on 30 July 16 at 12:54Permalink
    Judgment was a terrible game!
    It had a couple of redeeming features(some good campaign level settings and OverRun mode), but otherwise it was tripe.
    It pissed over previously established story points, made the campaign overall more of the optional arcade mode that Gears of War 3 had and ruined MP by taking away key features.
    Everyone who had key roles in the Gears franchise up to that point left during the development of Judgment.
    To say that the Coalition are a "handoff" developer is doing them disservice.
    Rod Ferguson, the Coalitions lead, was one of those key personnel from the original trilogy.
    I'm pretty sure Gears of War is in safe hands.
  • misfit119misfit119910,866
    Posted on 31 July 16 at 01:57, Edited on 31 July 16 at 02:01 by misfit119Permalink
    xSRYANx said:
    Where the hell did these Bioshock 2 defenders come from. This thread became the only people in the gaming community who feel that way. I don't love Infinite like most do, but 2 is a trash pile compared to the original, and even to Infinite as well.
    Honest to god I've always felt that Bioshock 2 was one of the worst RPG shooters I've ever played. I don't think I've ever disliked a game as thoroughly as I did Bioshock 2. I didn't care for the weapons, the enemies, the story, the plot, the characters or the dialogue. Oh and the crappy multiplayer. There's literally not a single thing I like about that game. Yet I see it defended as underrated and I literally cannot comprehend how that is.

    LostSoul 301281 said:
    JTo say that the Coalition are a "handoff" developer is doing them disservice.
    Rod Ferguson, the Coalitions lead, was one of those key personnel from the original trilogy.
    I'm pretty sure Gears of War is in safe hands.
    To be fair the real handoff developer was People Can Fly for Judgement. It was then passed on to The Coalition after Epic left the building. So Gears of War has a bit of hot potato going on with it which is never good for a series.

    As to the article itself:
    One of the companies that sprung to mind while reading this article was Obsidian. Every game they touch is a mess of half-baked ideas, horrible characterization and glitch-riddled bug fests.

    KotOR 1? One of the best Star Wars games I've ever played. KotOR 2? A chance for the writer to whine about how stupid the setting is (i.e. everything that comes out of Kreia's mouth).

    Fallout 3? Interesting take on the Fallout universe. Had problems but no worse than the previous games. Fallout: New Vegas? An interesting setting. Good start. Oh wait, yet more preachy whining from Chris Avellone! (via Ulysses) Terrible black and white factions! An overburdened game engine that crashes as much as it works.

    Neverwinter 1? Interesting game that got better with each piece of DLC released. Neverwinter 2? Barely functioning mess of a game that ends on a rocks fall everybody dies. DLC improved things a bit but not that much.

    Don't even get me started on the boring slog that is Dungeon Siege III.

    I swear it's like a company dedicated to taking previous game series' and then running them into the ground. It's a shame too since when they do their own work, the results are damned good. For example South Park and Pillars of Eternity. Alpha Protocol also had a lot of promise as well. I'd go for a sequel for that game.
    Looking to boost any MP achievements I don't have for any game I own.
  • SedgendarySedgendary266,144
    Posted on 31 July 16 at 17:36Permalink
    xSRYANx said:
    Ackter said:
    Multiple ways to complete a quest will always be superior to only one way of completing a quest.

    That's not subjective at all.
    That's like saying a choose your own novel is better than a well written one.

    If a game is made well, the one option should be entertaining/fun/engaging. Your argument is poor.
    Except he is not talking about the story of the quests but the design of them in an RPG, giving one option on how to complete a quest can ruin the experience in an RPG especially in main quests. For example you can create a character in Deus Ex Human Revolution that goes through the entire game without getting into conflict with anyone relying on stealth and their wits to get the objective done, except those boss fights which require you to do something your character isn't set up for which makes it annoying and out of place for that character.
  • WhyattThrashWhyattThrash329,809
    Posted on 31 July 16 at 18:36Permalink
    Sedgendary said:
    xSRYANx said:
    Ackter said:
    Multiple ways to complete a quest will always be superior to only one way of completing a quest.

    That's not subjective at all.
    That's like saying a choose your own novel is better than a well written one.

    If a game is made well, the one option should be entertaining/fun/engaging. Your argument is poor.
    Except he is not talking about the story of the quests but the design of them in an RPG, giving one option on how to complete a quest can ruin the experience in an RPG especially in main quests. For example you can create a character in Deus Ex Human Revolution that goes through the entire game without getting into conflict with anyone relying on stealth and their wits to get the objective done, except those boss fights which require you to do something your character isn't set up for which makes it annoying and out of place for that character.
    Deus Ex was fixed in an update to allow non-lethal takedowns of bosses
  • ShinnizleShinnizle827,515
    Posted on 31 July 16 at 18:55, Edited on 31 July 16 at 18:55 by ShinnizlePermalink
    Sedgendary said:
    For example you can create a character in Deus Ex Human Revolution that goes through the entire game without getting into conflict with anyone relying on stealth and their wits to get the objective done, except those boss fights which require you to do something your character isn't set up for which makes it annoying and out of place for that character.
    I know it's beside the point, but just get the Typhoon augmentation and just destroy the bosses. That way you don't have to carry weapons in your inventory just for the boss fights (you do have to make space for the Typhoon ammo though).
    Broke is a state of wallet. Poverty is a state of mind.
  • GrantX360GrantX360172,978
    Posted on 03 August 16 at 14:21Permalink
    I like this article, although I think you are caught in 2 minds here as a few people have said. As always though the success of any game is based on personal preference. After the fairly stagnant Gears Of War 3 I personally enjoyed what Judgement tried to do but I agree Halo 4 and 5 campaigns just haven't even nearly hit the highs of the first 3 games. For me Max Payne 3 was awful and not even close to the film noire style of the first game. Which goes down as one of the greatest of all time.

    A good read, thanks for sharing.
  • The GlobalizerThe Globalizer1,064,817
    Posted on 13 November 16 at 03:43Permalink
    Sorry to bring back a necrothread, but had to say two things:

    New Vegas is my favorite Fallout.
    Rogue is my favorite Assassin's Creed.

    BioShock 2 was inferior and I expect Batman: AO to be inferior to the fantastic AA and AC.
  • MagicalChildMagicalChild669,920
    Posted on 12 February 17 at 12:30Permalink
    Sedgendary said:
    xSRYANx said:
    Ackter said:
    Multiple ways to complete a quest will always be superior to only one way of completing a quest.

    That's not subjective at all.
    That's like saying a choose your own novel is better than a well written one.

    If a game is made well, the one option should be entertaining/fun/engaging. Your argument is poor.
    Except he is not talking about the story of the quests but the design of them in an RPG, giving one option on how to complete a quest can ruin the experience in an RPG especially in main quests. For example you can create a character in Deus Ex Human Revolution that goes through the entire game without getting into conflict with anyone relying on stealth and their wits to get the objective done, except those boss fights which require you to do something your character isn't set up for which makes it annoying and out of place for that character.
    Except that quest design has a great deal to do with story as your example proves. What feels as out of place for a character is largely based on what you know about them or associate with them, so... story.
    But I understand what you're aiming at. The problem in this case, however, is the inconsistency of providing one or multiple ways to complete the quest. smile


    Anyways, I wanted to give an example why I disagree with Ackter:
    Let's say there's a quest to "get whatever potion".
    Now Game A let's you "collect the ingredients to make the potion" while in Game B you either "dig out the potion in a forest" or "find the potion in a barrel" or "it's randomly dropped by a killed enemy".

    According to Ackter Game B is objectively superior. To me, Game A is the better one. Even though it provides only one way to complete the quest, that one way actually makes sense. The requirements in game B are way too random for my taste. And I'm sure, I'm not the only one to feel this way.
    In short, your statement is actually very subjective. wink
    I don't need to get a live. I'm a gamer. I have lots of lives!
Want to join in the discussion? Please log in or Register For Free to comment.