Gripes about the writing

Wooz said:
On that subject: The Enclave in Fo2 was something you learned about very late into the game. Having an NPC spout tirades about them in the early game kind of ruins the element of dread they're supposed to represent. And off the ol' man goes, enclave this, enclave that, that advertises itself across the wasteland. Too... bland.


This was prolly aimed at new players who hadnt played Fallout2 and have no idea what Enclave was. To trick them into believing it just an old automated radio or indeed a good ol` USA goverment remains.
 
thefalloutfan said:
People who are interested in FPS games will obviously regard FPS games as being the best, no?

Errrr, no, not really.

I'm easily just as upset about Doom 3
 
cratchety ol joe said:
Upon walking to Rivet City, I was presented with my opening speech options.

One of which was "I'm hear to see Dr Li" (or however that was actually written in game"

now as a player, as a character I'd never heard of a Dr Li so i was left wondering WHAT in hell this was about. Several times I have been given speech options regarding knowledge I simply don't have.

Yeah, I too was perplexed by this 'Dr Li' option. How hard is it to write up a check for the speech to see if you have information about a 'Dr Li'? This is an elementary thing for an RPG!
 
I notice a lot of hate for GoW (1). What's wrong with it?

It isn't trying to be an RPG. It doesn't pretend to be telling a story. It's a 3rd person shooter, and does 3rd person shooting OK.

It doesn't have easy-mode VATS combat. Some parts need more than one attempt on normal and several attempts on hard.

As a new IP, there weren't any fans of previous games to disappoint.

Yes it's stupid (chainsaw... gun?). But it's not trying to be a military sim, or a puzzle game, or anything it isn't.
 
k9wazere

I think Gears around here became something like a cliche for a "dumb shooter", an anti-CRPG (which is neither dumb nor a shooter). It's on the same level as hate for "console kiddies" and such, I wouldn't pay any attention to it. :D
 
M-26-7 said:
bhlaab said:
As a shooter GoW isn't particularly good. It's clumsy and broken.
For PC maybe...

Nah, I've played plenty of PC and console shooters. GoW just has a really really bad cover system and the characters run slow and clumsy which is fucking obnoxious and the enemies don't seem to react much at all when you shoot them, soaking up damage like sponges. How is it possible to make a shooter without headshots in this fucking millenium?
 
bhlaab said:
How is it possible to make a shooter without headshots in this fucking millenium?
Trying not to get too far off topic, you're right that the AI isn't so great, but what are you talking about "a shooter without headshots"? Gears of War had the best headshots ever... Nothing more satisfying than the crack of the head exploding in a glorious shower of blood and brain matter.

00EE9F7C14097103C52D.jpg
 
GoW is just an analogy for your average console shooter. Could've used Halo instead though, it's even worse than GoW, some kind of HL or UT ripoff. At least GoW was trying to be original.
 
Oh come now, Halo wasn't just a rip off, it introduced (at the very least, popularized) the worst mechanic in FPS history, recharging health. I haven't played GoW but Halo would likely make my shit list on that alone. I'm not saying that Halo can't be fun (it's alright for a console shooter but there others I'd take over it) but that mechanic is broken and causes the required skill gap to be smaller (compared to other FPS games) in group play.
 
I played the Halo 1&2 and didn't seem to notice the recharging health... In GoW though it's pretty bad, the character is short of immortal. I guess loading game takes away the fun...

Halo CAN be pretty fun, but I'll take HL or UT over it any day.
 
Best shooter recently was Call of Juarez. Been waiting for a Wild West shooter since Outlaws. Half Life still the very best ever though, broke the mould of how a shooter should be. Half Life 2 sucked in comparison, crappy X-files 'you wake up with no idea what you are doing' plot, 80% of the game you were just aimlessly trying to get to some resistance hideout for some reason, in a boat or buggy. The episodes released afterwards were a lot better, were better paced and varied.
 
Uh, what? Half-Life 2 is one of the most well crafted games in existence. If you can't follow the plot, it's your fault, not the designers'.
 
Mikael Grizzly said:
Uh, what? Half-Life 2 is one of the most well crafted games in existence. If you can't follow the plot, it's your fault, not the designers'.
I think that HL2 is overrated, it's a good game but it's not some revelation like people label it as. The plot's weaving into the game is pretty cool and I agree that that part of the game was certainly done better than any that I can think of. That said, the characters never grabbed me (some people seem to really love them) and the plot wasn't very original, even for a FPS. I didn't think that the gameplay was anything mind blowing, parts were good and others were average or mediocre. I thought that the gameplay of the original Half-Life was better overall (possibly due to level design) but that HL2 was much more story driven and intensive. That said, I beat HL2 and still haven't gotten around to beating the original game due to getting bored with the gameplay in the alien world (got monotonous) but that HL2 was also shorter.

I can't say which was the overall better game but I can say that neither is my favorite FPS or the must enjoyable experience I had with a FPS but that's partly because neither game is my favorite style.
 
Sorry Grizzly, I disagree. You wake up on a train going to some city. Why? Who knows? How does Barney know you're coming? Who told him? Why when you are meant to save the world, you get no information about what to do?

Going further you are regarded as the saviour of the world, the 'Free man', everyone knows about you, but why? Between the first HL and this one, it just seems like you've been in a coma. You don't seem to realise the world has been conquered by the combine. Why are you such a hero to everyone before you actually do anything?

Then you spend most of the game going to meet Eli. NOT taking down the combine, not waging war against them...no...it's just one contrived obstacle after another between you and the resistance. How long do you drive a buggy or be in the boat? Seems like forever. Drive up to a gate, shoot some guys, beat a puzzle, open gate, drive to the next gate etc.

Only the last section of the game you start to act like the bad arse hero everyone makes you out to be, taking part in the attack on the Citadel.

Plotwise Half Life 2 was halfarsed and excessively mysterious (like they wanted to keep most of the story secret to be told in expansions), it really is on a level with Fallout 3 in terms of story. Don't try and suggest that I didn't understand the story as it was as that's not the problem, it's the nature of the story and all the blank parts that is the problem. I mean the story is : you show up somehow in City 17, spend two thirds of the game trying to get to Eli or the resistance, then you go to the citadel and destroy it.

Of course Half Life 2 is still a great game for the FPS, even if you can't look down sights, lean, or climb ladders realistically.

I always thought it was a bit half finished storywise though, the Episodes did a far better job of explaining it more.
 
UncannyGarlic said:
Mikael Grizzly said:
Uh, what? Half-Life 2 is one of the most well crafted games in existence. If you can't follow the plot, it's your fault, not the designers'.
I think that HL2 is overrated, it's a good game but it's not some revelation like people label it as.

Stop rewriting history ignoramuses, Half-Life 2 was considered a great FPS by the gaming media that did not revolutionize the genre but presented the first notable usage of physics to impact gameplay in something other than a gimmick or niche game.

That was the general verdict for the body of the gaming media, however much you agree is up to opinion, but no one ever said that it's widely considered to be some revolutionary product, it wasn't.
If you want to brush up on your gaming history, dig around for some old gaming magazines instead of tastelessly running off the vapid opinions of some poorly informed herds of nerds upon the internet.
 
Commiered said:
Sorry Grizzly, I disagree. You wake up on a train going to some city. Why? Who knows? How does Barney know you're coming? Who told him? Why when you are meant to save the world, you get no information about what to do?

Because that's what the G-Man wants. You are a tool in his hands, hired to do one thing. You are patiently railroaded by the G-Man into doing his bidding.

Barney didn't know - he saw you on a security camera and rushed in to prevent you from travelling to Nova Prospekt.

Going further you are regarded as the saviour of the world, the 'Free man', everyone knows about you, but why? Between the first HL and this one, it just seems like you've been in a coma. You don't seem to realise the world has been conquered by the combine. Why are you such a hero to everyone before you actually do anything?

Because you're the one who defeated the alien invasion single-handedly. You were elevated to this status by Black Mesa survivours, like Isaac Kleiner or Eli Vance.

Then you spend most of the game going to meet Eli. NOT taking down the combine, not waging war against them...no...it's just one contrived obstacle after another between you and the resistance. How long do you drive a buggy or be in the boat? Seems like forever. Drive up to a gate, shoot some guys, beat a puzzle, open gate, drive to the next gate etc.

I love those segments. It's not Fallout 3, where you can complete a large quest with a five minute hike.

And, unless I'm mistaken, great uprisings aren't happening with a bunch of people grabbing guns and shooting stuff. They are carefully orchestrated events, and when you arrived, it was the eve of such an uprising. That's why you were sent to BME - to contact Eli Vance and get a role assigned in the grand scheme of things.

Only the last section of the game you start to act like the bad arse hero everyone makes you out to be, taking part in the attack on the Citadel.

Because that's the uprising.

Plotwise Half Life 2 was halfarsed and excessively mysterious (like they wanted to keep most of the story secret to be told in expansions), it really is on a level with Fallout 3 in terms of story. Don't try and suggest that I didn't understand the story as it was as that's not the problem, it's the nature of the story and all the blank parts that is the problem. I mean the story is : you show up somehow in City 17, spend two thirds of the game trying to get to Eli or the resistance, then you go to the citadel and destroy it.

You didn't understand the story. It's extremely detailed and well presented, but you seem to have shut your brain down. Marc Laidlaw made sure everything makes sense and is realistic.

You're not briefed just like any American soldier in Iraq or Afghanistan isn't instructed what happened on 9/11, because everyone assumes you know it and were around. They simply assume you were elsewhere or in hiding.

The devil lies in details, like the board with newspaper clippings in Eli's lab or the cork board in Kleiner's lab. Or the graffitis. Or interactions with other humans. It's very subtle and deep.

Of course Half Life 2 is still a great game for the FPS, even if you can't look down sights, lean, or climb ladders realistically.

It's not CoD, it's Half-Life.

I always thought it was a bit half finished storywise though, the Episodes did a far better job of explaining it more.

Because they have more time after the uprising to brief.
 
Eyenixon said:
Stop rewriting history ignoramuses, Half-Life 2 was considered a great FPS by the gaming media that did not revolutionize the genre but presented the first notable usage of physics to impact gameplay in something other than a gimmick or niche game.
I've seen a good number of comments about the game suggesting as much but as for the gaming media, that's a mixed bag. Still, the story is heavily sited as an area that it transcended the FPS genre and that I'm not so sure about, it's storytelling (and maybe writing) yes, it's plot... not so much.
"Nothing less than a revolution in the gaming industry that will keep gamers busy for years to come, just as the original did." ~ 2404.org
"Valve have once again managed to transform a genre, and taken pure gaming pleasure to brand new, unthought of heights." ~GamerArchive
"Valve just hit the top note no other PC game developer could reach." ~Edge Magazine
"No other game does as many things as well as Half-Life 2; I had so much fun that I can forgive the game its abysmal ending." ~The New York Times
"History in the making. It raises the bar for interactive entertainment, and then uses that bar to club all other games into submission...Valve has forged the framework for the next generation of games, demonstrating what our medium can and should be able to accomplish - an exhilarating entertainment that can emotionally move you one moment, kick ass the next, and keep you immersed the whole time." ~PC Gamer
"There just isn't anything that can touch Half-Life 2. It's the bees' knees, the cats' whiskers; hell it's the dogs bo- lets just say it's pretty damned good." ~IC-Games
"This will be remembered as a historic occasion in gaming." ~Game Informer

There's a whole lot more "best game ever"s but I think that this stuff will do for showing that critics made revolutionary claim, though they didn't always use that word.
 
Nonsense, they all said it would be considered to be a new standard for FPS gaming but none stated that it would revolutionize anything, very few did at the least.
That's how the gaming media works.
 
Back
Top