Sheikah

Said it in one. He's created a set of criteria that can only really be met by the kinds of games he's dismissing. Self-fulfilled prophecy.

Yeah, it's all a guess at the end of the day what could ever be 'realistic'. As cool as this game sounds, it doesn't seem to have the same fun factor based on everything I've seen of it. When I see clips of it it certainly doesn't excite in the same way, a feeling that feels reverberated in the media. NMS has the hype spotlight for sure. At the end of the day, I couldn't care less if a spaceship has a level of clunk to it that might make you feel you're flying a spaceship. I just want a fun game. I like that this game will have planetary landings now but this should really have been a feature from the beginning. I do wonder whether it will feel tacked on as the game wasn't designed around it, rather it is an addition. If you also look at that announcement they said 'we're beginning with...', making it sound like people will also be trickle fed the different planet types that they can land on.

Sorry man, I am going to Amsterdam this week and won't be back until the weekend.

Not the right topic but related...I reckon @Cube and I might be picking up the BK version of this vinyl OST.... Limited to 3,000 copies. Link.

I can't help but feel the two are connected there. Ayup.

I want to say you mean brutal as in amazing, purely because I don't see how it can be anything else. You're just being weird with language like all the cool kids, right? Tell me you're not cray cray plz.

A great deal is the Metal Gear Solid PS4 bundle limited edition on GameSpot IE for £280 (they deliver to UK). Given the game will be £40-50 on release, it's about the same value as getting the console for £280 and 2 cheaper games. You also get that rather cool looking limited edition which I'd say has value in itself.

Should be on in 45 mins to an hour.

It's funny how people seem to know exactly what I said yet never have any fucking proof of me ever saying it. What I've said about the Wii is that it was short term success that worked because it had such mass appeal. And well done Nintendo for making something so appealing. That said, I think the success went to their heads and they tailored their entire focus on making something 'alternate', and stepping away from the competition. Ultimately the low power 'quirky' approach adopted as a result of the Wii, I think, has led to their unfavourable situation right now.

I think you're still missing the point here, as you're telling me at length about your preferences, and that's great and all... But going back to what it was that I called out in your post as being nonsense, it was you saying that developers lost track of what they were doing by making games where story is the primary focus, which is clearly untrue. The developers made the game they intended. Just because it's not something you might like, many others did like it, and importantly, it was what they set out to make. And if it wasn't, how would you know? You can't make such a statement. He said that any game where story was the primary focus meant the developers had lost track of what they were doing. Pick any games you like where story dominates (I provided a list). There is no defence to the argument, I don't know why you're trying to make one.

Nope. I'm pure and simply pointing out bullshit. It's what I do.

Yeah? He's basically saying that the developers didn't set out to make the games they made, instead losing track of what they wanted to make, resulting in the final product. The guy who set out to make 999 wanted to make a visual novel. He'd made visual novels before. It's no mistake! I never argued that at all. Feel free to try and prove that though!

Well that's fine if you don't want to play these games. But your original comment was that the developers had lost track of what they were doing by making these games. Which is indeed nonsense.

I know you said more but if that is truly what you believe then I can say nothing more than that you are wrong and further talks on this probably aren't going to go anywhere if you're completely convinced on that. Nobody is going to make such simple links as 'commercial success automatically means best game/console ever' like you are doing. That said, there are clear patterns that can be observed based on success and widespread adoption of media (which ultimately boils down to making games that captivate and engage with the modern audience). It's not wrong to look at those in closer detail and make those links.

It's not that you have a different opinion to me that makes your views seem archaic, it's the opinion itself. My apologies if I didn't make that clear. And I'm sorry, but you clearly just said that games that focus on story above all else are indicative of the developers having long track of what they are doing. Which is, frankly, nonsense. I listed a bunch of games where the story was practically 90-95% of the game. In 999 you only have about 2 instances per play through on average to make a choice that impacts the outcome. The rest is mostly watching a story unfold before your eyes. And that game is easily one of my favourite DS games, and was well loved by many. Clearly the developers set out to make that game, so I've no idea how you can say that the developers lost track of what they were doing.

I think, to quote Flink, there are a few dinosaurs in this topic. People that believe games should be nothing more than they always have been traditionally. To say this, Zechs...I wonder, have you never played Phoenix Wright, Gone Home, 999, Virtue's Last Reward, Ghost Trick, The Walking Dead? These are all games that have thrived from being 90-95%+ story. To say that these games have lost track seems very odd to me, as the focus on the story that sucked you in is exactly what made these games. Just as there are games that are near enough 100% gameplay with next to no story. I don't see why we should be saying one or the other of these 2 types of games have 'lost track'. And if it's what the developers set out to make, which it almost certainly is, then I'm not sure how you can say they lost track at all.

It really is. By the sounds of things, more PS4s have been sold than X1s and Wii Us combined.

Economic success is clearly linked to making something that a lot of people like. That's not to say that good things will automatically be successful, as they may not have mass appeal, but it's not exactly 'weird' that people are pointing to lack of commercial success in this way. For instance, one of the ways Nintendo could broaden their appeal is by bolstering their online offering in games as well as improving third party relations, which in turn would make their console more successful. Put it this way - if Nintendo never had considerable commercial success with their home consoles you might say there's no point to be had here as nothing has changed. But the fact is, they did have such success in the past. This change in fortunes raises questions that are impossible to ignore, and it's not wrong to point this out. Why aren't Nintendo selling many home consoles, like they used to? As you can probably figure out - commercial success isn't isolated from pleasing customers. And making great games that people want is what pleases them, ultimately. I have seen very poor arguments made regarding this matter such as "GTA/COD sell well but are shit", as a means to show that success and great games don't really mix. But that kind of argument completely misses the point. Those games sell well because they appeal. Making appealing and relevant games is part of what makes them great. People are obviously getting a lot of enjoyment from these games, hence buying them and putting a lot of time into them. So even if you disagree on a personal level, the fact remains that there is an aspect of Nintendo's games that can be improved because they are not nearly as appealing to the modern audience as you may think. That's not to say they cannot be great games in their own way, but having a console with mostly just Nintendo games that appeal to specific groups of people will have the effect of both low sales and a mixed reception. It's not really a stretch to make the sales comparison in this situation.

On the one hand that's a shame, but on the other hand you can only really look at one screen at once anyway (thinking about the Wii U parallels here too; I look at the TV or gamepad, not both). It would probably be more useful to use the other screen for something else too, like the inventory.

Resolution is a small part of what makes films look old - you can see the difference immediately even in films released right now, between DVD and Blu Ray versions. Aspect ratio is another point as old films tended to be 4:3, unlike these days (same with games). Add to that artefacts in the film (common in old films), black and white, poorer sound recording... Of course there are artistic choices and the way people talk and behave in old media that can also make it seem old-fashioned years down the line...however, Witcher 3 is set in a Medieval fantasy period and these choices are therefore somewhat timeproof, because it's supposed to mirror a particular time period. Most of those factors then don't have as big a bearing this day and age, which is why talking about the the leap from NES doesn't as easily apply to games of this era. Ok, resolution and framerate will continue to climb, but I think what we're seeing with Witcher has got to a point where it will still look nice years down the line. We're not going to see anywhere near the same level of games becoming outdated so easily because they're approach a much greater level of sophistication.

I'm not going to deal with it. I'm just going to write you off as someone who doesn't really know what they're talking about, because it shows. If you don't give the meat of the game a good go, ie. the raids and PvP modes, that's 70-80% of the real game you never even touched, so don't take offense when people don't exactly take you seriously. It would be like if I judged Smash Brothers by one or two single player only modes and came away thinking it was an uninspired, boring bag of wank. You can make the argument that it takes time to access the raids, sure (L27+, generally), and that could form part of your cons list that I can tell you want to expand upon, but to damn the game you didn't really properly play so generally...when you don't have a rounded opinion of it, just doesn't really make sense. This also isn't about whether your PS4 comments are valid or not. The point was that you were telling people this wasn't the place to bring up PS4 discussion... right after bringing up the PS4 in a completely unprovoked way. I'm not sure if you noticed you were doing it, actually! The comparisons aren't 1:1 though; the human eye can only resolve resolution up to a certain point, for example. I'm not saying we're there yet, but beyond a certain point it's minimal returns. At some stage, while we're going to be able to see advances between systems, games from the previous generation will have sufficient definition/realism to still remain rather good looking. We saw how dated PS1 style graphics were after advancing a single generation. Right now, the last generation's graphics don't seem anywhere near as outdated following the generation jump as they did back then. Graphics are generally getting to the point where we notice less and less any major blemishes in previous generation games after advancing to the next systems (e.g. massive, blocky hands in FF7). Improving power has a lot to do with game design as well as graphics, which is why it's certainly something worth improving. That said, it's not like in 5 years we'll look at 1080P Witcher 3 and think it looks like shit, like we might have done with a blocky PS1 game. Witcher 3 looks great as it is; I don't think improvements in graphics will suddenly change our opinion of that, purely because 3D graphics on the system have matured to a point that they can look pretty realistic, or even artistic on their own merits. Another example would be 1080P Journey, just re-released on PS4. I can't imagine in even 20 years time people will look at that and think it looks crap. You can just tell that it looks pretty sweet by itself, without having to benchmark it to whatever else we know is out at the time.

I didn't seem to get mentioned before either. Not really sure why people tried to lynch me - I've been honest with everyone here what I've done every single night. I tried to push DuD's lynch because he was caught twice targeting the guy who died and I had a readout that said Diageo targeted who he said he did which put DuD in the spotlight again (looking back, it now looks like Diageo did target DuD rather than my evidence being forged, making DuD untargetable as 2 people could not reach DuD that night; nobody else came forward to say they made that happen). I pushed hard for the lynch because I believed it, straight up confessing to roleblocking him one night too. Hardly subtle or tactful. My first night's ability was also to report to the town in the writeup what somebody did that night, and that info got confirmed. Bit of a shit power for Mafia to wield to say the least. @Dannyboy\-the\-Dane I hope you at least can stop things getting out of hand should they start going down this shitty path again. @Cube I may have missed the part where you explained your power (or forgot) - does this mean you targeted Sprout?

Level design and mechanics are top notch. These are the guys who made Halo and it shows; the gameplay has a real sense of weight to it and they clearly put a lot of effort into making weapons feel good (unlike something like Borderlands where there is a lot of random generation going on with their weapons). If you'd have come complaining about story or running out of things to do after a while I'd agree with you, but in terms of gameplay it's top tier for a console FPS. There's a reason why people are still playing the PvP activities long after they've got most the things they want. It's just good fun! Regarding the PS4 thing, I don't think it was really necessary at all, and it isn't the first time I've seen you do it here. (Yes, I realise this may seem ironic given I am talking at length about an FPS game that appears on other consoles, but being an avid fan of this game I'm going to call someone out if they start with the generalisations)

I don't recall you joining in a forum raid or large social activity (such as PvP) once. It's no surprise you walked away thinking that! As is common with these kinds of games, you get out what you put in. Us sociable fellows have a great laugh. Also regarding you saying 'not here to talk PS4'...you pretty much just brought the PS4 up again for no reason. Not the first time, either.

'Mediocre'. Right. I'm guessing you call it that because you heard other people say that and it's 'cool' to nod along. Yet again, talking about games you haven't played like you are an expert. I honestly have no clue how Wii can be banned while you continue to troll these boards. I've played 550 hours of Destiny since it was released September last year. Since then I have spent countless hours in raids and got to know several people on this forum who I knew nothing about before. Going on raids has been such a fun experience, like something I've never really had in a game before. More recently, and near enough every weekend, I team up with people on here to play Trials of Osiris (PvP) which is great fun (and infuriating when you get rinsed, bit that's another matter ). Sorry, but this is no mediocre game. Call out its flaws all you want, but this underneath it all a pretty great game in its own way.