Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Starks
Sep 24, 2006

This thread has been fun to read and so have the reddit reactions. it's awesome to me that the thing that seems to have broken people the most is Abby's muscles.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Starks
Sep 24, 2006

postpone the game, give it another year in development and hire nicolas winding refn to do some rewrites.

Starks
Sep 24, 2006

Stux posted:

need to put a moratorium on anything other than completely 100% literal storytelling until gamers have sorted themselves out

Just don’t do storytelling at all imo. Games are not art and shouldn’t try to be, like TV they’re supposed to be trashy distractions for your brain that have more in common with cocaine than they do with literature or film. Years from now people will talk about wannabe blockbuster movie crap like Half Life 2 or God of War 2018 as an embarrassing moment in cultural history and only counter strike, Dota, and Doom will be remembered as good games.

Edit: and mortal kombat

Starks
Sep 24, 2006

The dog thing seems even more trivial than the muscle girl. You kill dogs in tons of games. Generally speaking if the dog attacks you it’s a-ok. I accidentally dynamited a dog in rdr 2. Who cares

There’s lots of actual reasons the game is gonna be trash

Starks
Sep 24, 2006

Calaveron posted:

The worst part of dogs as an enemy type is their yelps and cries because you really can’t make a dog do that without hurting it while any dingdong with a microphone can pretend to get a chunk of rebar through its eye and record it so that’s also why it’s hard to fight dogs in games

I fuckin wish this was true. My neighbours dog cries for 15 minutes like he’s dying whenever they leave the apartment.

Starks
Sep 24, 2006

ErrEff posted:

I really hope the animators that worked on the RDR2 skinning stuff didn't own pets.

I agree that forcing people to view any actual violent images is abusive (and unnecessary), and I think it's a bigger problem with animators and programmers that get moved around and put on different projects vs. hollywood where the people who specialize in gore and violence seem to have a passion for creating those special effects and make up.

That being said this part of your post is a dumb take. It's like saying that you hope morticians don't have children. Just because you're squeamish about something doesn't mean that everyone who isn't is hosed up.

On that note here's a cool video of how they make the violent sounds for Mortal Kombat. Potentially :nms: since you see a bunch of the MK11 fatalities:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IYS0rPYjW28

Starks fucked around with this message at 18:00 on May 13, 2020

Starks
Sep 24, 2006

Not so dead and gay now are we?

Starks
Sep 24, 2006

sebmojo posted:

the words 'spoiled' and 'ruined' are pretty severe imo is the thing, its like complianing that someone ruined the peanut butter by opening it before you got to it. I WAS GOING TO MAKE THE FIRST SCOOP DAMMIT HENRY why are you like this

tbc in this scenario henry may be a dick but you still have a basically full jar of peanut butter

idgaf about peanut butter or spoilers but if henry fucks up that first scoop of nutella with the little star swirl in the middle? I'm hyperventilating

Starks
Sep 24, 2006

ImpAtom posted:

As I mentioned before that is because there are multiple ways to enjoy something. Well-designed stories can be enjoyed multiple ways. The 'spoiler-free' experience however is limited to either a first time or something you've seen maybe like once twenty years ago and don't remember.

It doesn't have to be A or B. Most people who worry about spoilers still enjoy B. They just dislike having A taken away from them.

The weird attitude of "how DARE you tell me to not do something" when it comes to spoiler stuff is genuinely pretty weird TBH. It always seems to be followed with "Well I don't care about it so you must be lying. In fact here is this (one, singular, and constantly misattributed) study that says *some* people actually enjoy stories that are spoiled more! So science is on my side and gently caress you!"

Caring about spoilers is a symptom of extreme insecurity and overcare, and I would think that in this thread of all places we would understand that


You’re not mad because you know how some dumb story ends, you’re mad because you think you missed out on a feeling you may never feel again.

Starks fucked around with this message at 02:58 on May 26, 2020

Starks
Sep 24, 2006

ImpAtom posted:

I don't think it's the case of it being a bad story if you are aware of the twist so much as it has an impact on how you view things and even on your ability to enjoy something *more* on a rewatch. Most forms of entertainment we create tend to be designed to evoke emotion more than anything else and foreknowledge has an impact on the emotions you can feel during a story. If someone turns out to be a traitor and murders their friend, it will have a very different impact on you if you liked/trusted that character versus knowing they were a traitor. Even upon a rewatch the emotions from your first watch still persist.

If a story relies on a twist and *just* a twist then it's a bad story, but it depends on everything surrounding that twist. Twists that succeed succeed because they force the viewer/player/etc to recontextualize what they have already seen. This is why poorly done twists kind of suck because it lacks that element of getting someone to change how they viewed something. When this succeeds it means that even rewatching you're viewing the first half differently because you know what is coming and can appreciate hints/clues/foreshadowing/etc that you missed the first time.


See, this is exactly the dumb thing I mean. It isn't just "I don't care about spoilers" but having some super weird superiority complex over anyone who does.

Yes. People are mad because they are watching/playing/whatever something designed to make them feel emotions. That is in fact the point of the vast majority of human entertainment. It is something designed to evoke emotion from the audience. They pay the pretty ridiculous amounts of money to experience these things because that emotion is important to them. Why is that a bad thing?

The vast majority of “human entertainment” is just dancing around a fire and telling stories. Pretty sure cavemen weren’t killing each other because kushim spoiled the ending to a legend or whatever, it’s a uniquely online phenomenon

You just posted that the god of the underworld tried to flood the forest with the tears of the bereaved and it created the sea? Wtf man

Starks fucked around with this message at 03:19 on May 26, 2020

Starks
Sep 24, 2006

Brother Entropy posted:

no one is killing each other because of spoilers today either ya loon

I just assume that’s how they settled arguments in the post-Neanderthal days

Starks
Sep 24, 2006

Infinitum posted:

Maybe just like don't spoil things, and let people enjoy the media they like?

Yes to #1.....no to #2

Starks
Sep 24, 2006

Relax Or DIE posted:

infinitum is cool

I googled this and got this link https://infinitumlife.com/

Edit: oh it’s the op who says “edgy” in every post Lmao

ImpAtom posted:

It absolutely is not a uniquely online phenomenon.

"Spoilers" have been a thing since before the internet existed. Like people were spoiling Star Trek: The Wrath of Khan so seriously they actually reshot the opening to hide the fact that Spock dies later in the film. Alfred Hitchcock literally paid for ads asking people not to spoil Psycho:



On top of that back in the Ye Olden Days it was considered common to ask people not to spoil the outcome of a sports event if someone had recorded it the night before but not had the chance to watch it. Because despite it being a real-life event the surprise of the outcome was important to people.

The only uniquely online thing about this is how fast they spread and how easily they are confirmed. You hear more about it now because it is happening more. Because the internet allows for instant long-range communication with a wider variety of people from different places in a way that didn't exist before it.

Edit: Roger Ebert, as he usually did, put it very well: "The characters in movies do not always do what we would do. Sometimes they make choices that offend us. That is their right. It is our right to disagree with them. It is not our right, however, to destroy for others the experience of being as surprised by those choices as we were."

Yeah you’re right about old movies and now that I think about it they did that for Star Wars 2: Empire Strikes Back as well.

Starks
Sep 24, 2006

ErrEff posted:

You simultaneously agreed with my take and thought it was dumb. Alright - I suppose the two are not mutually exclusive.

Not sure where in my post I somehow alluded to the idea that people who might be desensitized to violent imagery are "hosed up"? People can certainly compartmentalize things based on context (like your mortician example), that doesn't mean they're not affected.

Actually, it's interesting that you mention morticians. Did you know that only about 5% of their time is spent actually working on corpses, the rest is paperwork, administrative things and being in contact with families of the deceased? Compare that to a RDR2 VFX artist that spends all day in front of a screen animating someone peeling the skin off an animal or looking up reference material for it, minus lunch hours.

Yeah, basically this. People in this business get shuffled around a lot between tasks, there's very little picking and choosing at the big studios.

It seemed like you were saying that animators shouldn’t be allowed to own dogs, which I thought was a bit much. I’m vegan so I don’t feel guilty about playing RDR2 since I save hundreds of animals every day through my conscious choices.

Starks
Sep 24, 2006

Viewtiful Jew posted:

You can't trust anybody when it comes to spoilers, not even yourself.

https://twitter.com/PlayStation/status/1258131429936021507

Lmao

Starks
Sep 24, 2006

Stux posted:

youve just tried to redefine fun to the point schindlers list or a documentary about AIDS is "fun" or even enjoyable, theyre explicitly neither and not supposed to be either. no one enjoys watching things like that but pure enjoyment or fun isnt the sole single metric for media and nor should it be.

The Last of Us 2: pure enjoyment or fun isnt the sole single metric for media and nor should it be

Starks
Sep 24, 2006

really promising for a game when people start arguing about whether or not entertainment should be enjoyable

Starks
Sep 24, 2006

lotta pedants here. a game doesn't have to "fun" per se but it should be competitive or challenging in a satisfying way. a game with bad gameplay mechanics is just a bad game regardless of anything else, the same way that a movie with lovely acting/directing is a bad movie or a novel with poor writing is a bad novel.

it's literally called a "game". if you don't wanna play it and you just wanna watch the cutscenes, it's a bad game

Starks
Sep 24, 2006

Harrow posted:

I don't think "bad gameplay" is necessarily what anyone is talking about when they talk about TLoU (1 or 2) not being traditionally "fun." The actual gameplay mechanics in the original are perfectly competent, even if it isn't the best stealth or action game ever made--it has a satisfying loop and does a good job of putting you into situations where you have to scrap and improvise in combat. I fully expect TLoU2 to do pretty much that, maybe more refined and better. The "it's not necessarily trying to be 'fun'" thing is almost certainly more about the atmosphere, story, and general tone.

oh lol that's even dumber than what I thought was going on. RE2Make wasn't fun either by that criteria (wrong its the best game, fight me)

Starks
Sep 24, 2006

Zongerian posted:

AIDS documentary Last Of Us 2

Starks
Sep 24, 2006

It’s already pissing people off more just by having a girl who works out as a character. Just look at the subreddit (or don’t. Maybe don’t.)

Starks
Sep 24, 2006

Wasn't the review embargo yesterday? Not a single one out yet?

NVM I'm dumb

Starks
Sep 24, 2006

Again what is it with people freaking out about the dogs. You kill dogs in tons of games.

Anyways I reloaded my preorder

Starks
Sep 24, 2006

Brother Entropy posted:

there are people who in fact don't like that you have to kill dogs in so many games, and tlou2 seems to be going out of its way to underline 'boy don't you feel bad about killing dogs in this game?' so logically those people are going to be doubly bothered

I’ve never seen it as a complaint on these forums I guess. Like I read the threads for Rdr2, re2make, dark souls etc and I’ve never seen it come up. It feels like people don’t really care now, they just want to be right about this game and are looking for reasons to “dog pile” it hahaha.

Starks
Sep 24, 2006

Remember The Last Jedi? 90% on rotten tomatoes yet fans hated it and it destroyed the franchise.

Starks
Sep 24, 2006

Zeta Acosta posted:

except for the fact that in mgs a game almost 20 years old you totally can skip killing the wolfs if you play smart enough (and cheat) and it dont force a cutscene on you with HEY KILLING DOGS IS BAD OK??? VIOLENCEEEE! When loving Kojima show more restrain than you, you have a problem.

I don’t really play the anime games so I’m not familiar with the company you mention.

Starks
Sep 24, 2006

The subreddit is melting down over the positive reviews, if you’re into that sort of thing

Starks
Sep 24, 2006

Zeta Acosta posted:

Chernobyl was one of the greatest tv show i have ever seen and the subject topic is insanely grim, they had a whole episode about the animal killing squad and even them didnt show dog killings in extreme detail. Mmmm i wonder why.

Lmao

Starks
Sep 24, 2006

LITERALLY MY FETISH posted:

thank god you guys are finally getting it

also the actual point is we still don't really know what the game will be, I don't think anyone who had an opinion before today actually changed it, so it's more fun to just make fun of all of it while we still have to wait and see. holding up metacritic of all things as proof that it's actually a good game is just the most lol poo poo my dude

I dunno man I canceled my pre order after the leak but restarted it today after reading the review from my trusted video gaming review website. I’ve enjoyed a lot of games in spite of the bad story, like God of War. I usually skip most cutscenes any way so it doesn’t really matter.

Starks
Sep 24, 2006

Dapper_Swindler posted:

https://twitter.com/leighalexander/status/1271109095102263296

https://twitter.com/leighalexander/status/1271101665094127626


i dont like alexander because she is also a pretentious shithead writer type just as much as the dumbasses she mocks but lol. also she can dish it but cant take it, what a shock.

the narrative designer of Love Island Season 2: The Game dropping wisdom

Starks
Sep 24, 2006

psychoJ posted:

just gonna say that i hope that this game isn't bad, mainly because i preordered it on psn when i was very very drunk :shepspends:

Good news, it’s literally one of the best reviewed games of all time.

Starks
Sep 24, 2006

oddium posted:

also shut up about how badly you actuallly do want to kill the dogs

No one has posted that.

(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)

Starks fucked around with this message at 06:33 on Jun 13, 2020

Starks
Sep 24, 2006

Stux posted:

misery can be art and its not wrong for something to make you feel miserable

Video games are not art tho

Starks
Sep 24, 2006

Stux posted:

all human creativity is art

Ok but playing video games has more in common with railing a line of cocaine than it does reading a poem. No one ever died because they did a 48 hour painting-viewing marathon.

Starks
Sep 24, 2006

SpazmasterX posted:

Did the ending change from what I heard? lmao

I don’t think Ellie dies if that’s what you mean.

Starks
Sep 24, 2006

The Unnamed One posted:

Bob Dylan of gaming is literally Anthem.

Nobody wants to be that

I demand an explanation for this post.

Starks
Sep 24, 2006


Lol

Starks
Sep 24, 2006

SpazmasterX posted:

idc about how many "professional video game reviewers" give the game a perfect score because they did that poo poo the first time around and that game was a shiny turd. I'm more interested to see the actual player responses over the next month.

It’s going to get review bombed for having a lesbian and a girl with muscles so this isn’t really a good metric either tbh

Starks
Sep 24, 2006

Cancelled my preorder based on this post

LostRook posted:

And more's come out. The first 3 hours is on youtube if you look for it and it's hilarious.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Starks
Sep 24, 2006

DLC Inc posted:

it owns that loving Resident Evil is the one zombie fiction that gets it right: it is the corporations that are evil. Not only that but the cop in Resident Evil, Leon, is a cop for just one loving day and then leaves the force after the corrupt Raccoon Gov't + insane Police Chief fucks his poo poo up. Hell, to its credit even RE moved beyond zombies and is now full tilt into psychological and gothic horror with RE7/8.

Like all anime games though RE’s story is stupid, which is why I mostly skip the cutscenes. I didn’t even know half of what’s in your post was in the games because it’s so convoluted and hard to follow. It’s a good game because the gameplay is fun which is the only thing that matters in video games.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply