The masterstroke of calling the game Hardcore

"

syrioforel wrote:

Go back and play old games now. They (often) feel and look like crap. There are some exceptions, but not many.

I take exception to this. And the rise of Minecraft is the ultimate poo in the general direction of all the 'looks' junkies.

It was the 'looks' junkies who ruined three great franchises - Neverwinter Nights, Dragon Age and Mass Effect.

In each case there was a hugely popular initial game and, come the sequel (ME III for the ME franchise) it was only the 'look' of the game that the developers spent any time on. Did the 3D rock look enough like a rock? Did the character's sword look 'cool' enough. The stories and gameplay for each was so abysmally bad that it killed each franchise stone dead.

I'd still much rather play 2D Worms than 3D worms, and everyone on the planet agreed. Worms 3D killed that franchise so badly that all subsequent Worms games have been reverted back to 2D, but they were never able to regroup all the lost fans.

If you think graphics are the most important aspect of playability you're more likely someone who's idea of gameplay is to crow at friends who's systems can't keep pace with yours - you could do that with cars, holidays, watches, you don't need to ruin everyone else's on the plant's gameplay experiences to do that.

Back on the topic of masterstroke...



Yes, indeed, gorgeous word.

But no, aRPGs aren't supposed to be Hardcore in a gaming sense. They're supposed to be casual games for Hardcore people - such as construction workers and builders. Where the dumbs can feel gamingly dominant in a social environment. A kind of anti-chess dominance mentality. Naff off you geeky brainmelt, I want to slay huge numbers of dragons in two minutes with my mighty great-axe of skull crushing while listening to some painful Death Metal band on my headphones.

aRPGs aren't about figuring out how to get the key to unlock the door to open the chest which contains the Magic Wand which enables you to defeat the next monster easily rather than tiresomely.

aRPGs aren't about making sure you give the right answers to the right dialogue screens to enable you to unlock the right moral path for your adventurer.

aRPGs aren't about all kinds of elements cRPGs are about - that's why they have a different acronym, because they are something different.

aRPGs are casual games for Hardcore people instead of Hardcore games for casual people.

If an aRPG challenges you mentally, it's not an aRPG.

"

syrioforel wrote:

I mean the early PS1-era games, full of jaggies because they hadn't gotten ahold of the whole "3D" thing yet.

FF7 comes to mind, while FF6 was beautiful and remains so.

I played Crash Bandicoot and Destruction Derby on the PS1 and if I played them again today I wouldn't bat an eyelid at the 'look' of the game, because that's no what my gaming eye looks at. My gaming eye looks for what I need to do to win.

I haven't encountered 'bad' unwatchable graphics since about 1989 and the 16 bit systems where the pixels were so large as to make imaging of anything in detail was practically impossible. But games which didn't 'need' the graphics, such as Tetris and Space Invaders are just as playable today as when they were first released.

"

Nightmare90 wrote:

"

demivion wrote:

LOL i'm in tears, didn't read, you lost me at the word "masterstroke"

I just read this after reading Charan's modified gardening thread and must join the laughter.

There's nothing quite like a good mass debate.