True Gaming Arkham Knight is the most cinematic game I've ever played |
- Arkham Knight is the most cinematic game I've ever played
- Can games tell unique, impactful stories outside of metannaratives?
- What ever happened to the classic rts genre? I always ask this but I feel like no one has really ever answered why it just suddenly disappeared.
- You guys always do 100% Achievements?
- Are Video Games More Valuable as Games, or Stories?
- Unexcited by New Releases
- Fallout NV npc's are more dynamic then Fallout 4's
- Essay final for College: What are the positive effects and negative effects of video games on generation Y?
- Why do they even bother having combat at all in RPGs where you heal after every battle?
| Arkham Knight is the most cinematic game I've ever played Posted: 04 Dec 2017 09:00 AM PST I can think of plenty of games that I have enjoyed due to their cinematic quality, but one of them always stood out to me. Batman: Arkham Knight. SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS I didn't play Arkham Asylum but I am aware of how they used the fear gas element to distort in game events. But I think that Arkham Knight took these techniques to the next level, and some of the scenes completely blew my mind. I'll give a few examples and why I think they were so effective. The first one that comes to mind is early in the game, when Batman is moving the canisters in Ace Chemicals, and Joker appears just as he turned around. Legitimately scared me both times I played through the game, mostly because of the flow between player control and the cutscene. The next (and the best imo), is when Batman enters the clocktower in the race to save Barbara Gordon. Instead of landing where you expect to land, you land in an apartment, which comes out of nowhere. The scene only starts to develop as you pan the camera, and the room changes every time a piece of it goes out of view. This is where you get to witness the moment Joker shoots Barbara, complete with the trademark hawaiian shirt from The Killing Joke. Eventually, you will pan the camera and the clocktower will return to normal. This is a technique that I have only seen used this well in Arkham Knight, and is super effective at conveying a memory or hallucination, without once taking control away form the player. This technique where things change while they aren't in view is used throughout the game, and really gets the idea across that Batman is losing his mind to Joker. Even throughout the open world of Gotham, Joker will appear on rooftops to speak to Batman, and once he finishes, he will be gone when you next look away. Sorry if this was a bit of a ramble, but just wanted to express my love for these moments in Arkham Knight. Let me know if there are other games that use techniques like this, because I think they are worth more than any set piece or QTE. [link] [comments]  |
| Can games tell unique, impactful stories outside of metannaratives? Posted: 04 Dec 2017 06:59 AM PST Okay, so yesterday a thread popped up here discussing games that tell stories not possible in any other medium. A lot of the usual picks, a la Bioshock, Spec Ops, Portal, Undertale, etc. etc. But they all seem to rely on very similar elements, albeit with certain differences. Treating the player as a character and using the restrictions of video games as a medium (namely the illusion of choice) in order to get the player to connect emotionally to the events in the story. Now, don't get me wrong, all these games are stellar, truly outstanding achievements in storytelling. But is this all games can tell? I won't go far into deciding whether metanarrative is an inherent good or bad, but I do think it is interesting that a lot of these popular narrative-heavy games are popular because of the way they play with expectations, subversion, and in some cases directly interact with the player's experience. They all tend to treat the player as a character, either giving them choices within the narrative or playing with the inevitable restrictions of said choices. And yeah, sure, irony and postmodernism have been hip for decades, it's natural that those elements bleed into such a young medium, but it feels like most renowned stories in games either take one of three routes: Try to directly ape film/television (especially Hollywood), give the player agency, or comment on the player's lack of agency. I guess, to put it other words, can games tell linear narratives in unique ways? Can you get the player personally invested in a story without directly involving them in it, or will it always seem like a lesser form of other mediums? [link] [comments]  |
| Posted: 04 Dec 2017 08:39 AM PST I am sure everybody in here remembers the classic rts genre but what ever happened to it.. it was so big in the early 2000s from its roots in the mid to late 90s and then all of a sudden poof it was gone like a breath of fresh air.. and it really hasn't returned since yet. Just to clarify I am talking about your standard base building rts game where you create units out of buildings then combine your forces and make strategic plays. It can be even semi simulated like the majesty series or full manual say like command and conquer or dark reign or kknd. I honestly haven't heard much in this genre besides the annihilation series, ashes of the singularity and maybe grey goo.. and a few other medieval and ancient warfare aoe clones. Zero medieval fantasy though. [link] [comments]  |
| You guys always do 100% Achievements? Posted: 03 Dec 2017 05:25 PM PST To me, Never. I rarely do play one game several times. but Being 100% is an another level. they need to play over and over like 3~4 times. Beating game in higher difficulty or collecting clams are boring to me. Are you 100% guy? and do you think it is better way to play same game over and over? [link] [comments]  |
| Are Video Games More Valuable as Games, or Stories? Posted: 04 Dec 2017 12:52 PM PST https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V-JyLxQteUw I've encountered gamers who seemingly don't care at all about the stories in the games they play - they're just looking for pure entertainment. But I love playing through a good story, and when they're done extremely well, I feel like I would rather play a good story-driven game than watch the movie or read the book version. But I'm also not attracted to most "Walking Simulators", as they basically seem like movies that you move through at your own pace, and... with more reading. That got me thinking about what makes a good game, and whether they are indeed more valuable simply as games, or as a vehicle for story. Where do you find the value of games? Should developers simply focus on gameplay innovation, or should games aspire to be the ultimate storytelling medium? Can games really tell stories better than films or novels? [link] [comments]  |
| Posted: 04 Dec 2017 12:29 PM PST I was watching Kim Justice's video about Team 17 and I've realised something about myself. Towards the end, Kim talks about Team 17's more recent releases, one of which was The Escapists. When I go to the game shops in Norwich when I no college lessons for a considerable time, I often see The Escapists in the shops, but until now I've thought nothing of it. Like most other games... But this has made me realise that I've not been excited for recent releases. I'm not talking AAA games like Call of Duty, Assassin's Creed so on and so forth, I'm talking about well produced and worth while games like The Escapists. I've seen a few releases like Senran Kagura: Peach Beach Splash that've caught my eye but few other than that. And it's not like Mario Kart 8 and Super Smash Bros., two games that made me want and get a Wii U in 2014 (although I had played Mario Kart before and very vaguely Smash Bros.). So how could I get more excited by new releases? Maybe it'll help if I tell you a bit about myself. I'm not a very adventurous person, I often don't like to try new games unless they're things I'm familiar with, like arcady racing games. I'm always wary of buying games in case I don't like it and I would've wasted my money (which I don't have much of).I'm also of the mind set that I I haven't heard about it, it's rubbish And that games must be well review so that I have assurance. I don't like taking many risks. I'm also relatively unaware of events, mainly because I haven't found a reliable source of information, with many websites having biases that try to influence people (although if these biases are stated, then it's not as bad), although I am looking into Edge magazine which I've heard good things about. I like many retro games/consoles such as the Mega Drive. Currently I'm quite interested in ToeJam and Earl in Panic on Funkotron on the Mega Drive (and it's fully PAL optimised apparently, so no need for importing an American version). One of the things I like about retro games is that I can try a new genre of game for quite cheap using already established classics of the genre, to get a feel for the genre and if I'll like it or not [link] [comments]  |
| Fallout NV npc's are more dynamic then Fallout 4's Posted: 04 Dec 2017 11:47 AM PST I've put more then a few hours into Fallout 4 and have enjoyed it. I've never played New Vegas or 3 (though I want to start doing a series on New Vegas). Anyways I've been watching a series on New Vegas and I can't help but notice that it seems the NPC's (enemy and allies not just companions) are more dynamic in their actions I mean in Fallout4 when I shoot NPC's they take damage and maybe I'll cripple a limb. However in the series (which I believe to be unmodded) the NPC's run away when they see the fight not going in their favor. When the guy playing the game shot the retreating npc (a bandit or something like that) he crippled the man's leg yet he kept limping along. Also when fighting his one companion became frenzied...something I don't believe happens in fallout 4. I enjoyed Fallout 4 but am I wrong in thinking that the NPC's are less dynamic in their actions? I mean they take cover and sometimes try to flank me yet I've never seen them run for the hills or limp around the firefight. Am I the only one thinking this and are there any mods that enhance the behavior of npc's to be more dynamic in Fallout 4 (for Xbox One...or PS4 but isn't that one more restrictive?) [link] [comments]  |
| Posted: 04 Dec 2017 02:23 PM PST Hello Everyone, I'm writing my final essay over the positive effects of video games, and was wanting some more evidence from the gamer community. I'm a gamer myself mostly on console, and just built my first PC yesterday. Anyone can reply and give positive or negative feedback. Thanks for any reply and have a Merry Christmas. [link] [comments]  |
| Why do they even bother having combat at all in RPGs where you heal after every battle? Posted: 03 Dec 2017 06:13 PM PST That aren't strategy rpgs? Like literally they become just incredibly crappy strategy rpgs because every fight is an independent affair with no relation to the wear and tear of your characters. Thus normal battles in these games become pointless and are literally there just for busy work. Wild Arms 4&5 I think realized this and they just gave you the option to flat out turn the battles off (Which I did mind you). It's already bad enough when FPS's do this, but rpgs that do this are equally mind boggling. Might as well trim the fat all together and just have boss fights. You're never going to have interesting short encounters where the designer has to plan for the player to have full hp/mp in every battle. I get that most rpgs are poorly balanced and designed and don't offer much depth, but this is just a lazy fix to the problem of players just constantly going to the menu and abusing their limitless healing items/mp. As much as I complain about P5, at the very least it doesn't do this. Can you imagine how lame this game would have been if that were the case? Actually I have to give P5 credit (at least early P5). Because it gives player incentive to not just go back and restock, else they end up wasting a day. Perhaps more RPGs can figure out a mechanic such as this (BOF:V also figured out a solution to the typical problem). [link] [comments]  |
Post a Comment