Does Hacking Like This Make Anyone Else Mad? (1 Viewer)

[Allen_Appel]

First, I'd like to say these are great forums, with interesting topics and intelligent members. I'm very glad I stumbled across them. I don't mean to belabor this, but indulge me my response. I'm not questioning the need to debunk the "aura" theory, even as I propped it up. I think the idea that consoles have a videogame vs. PC "feel" is ridiculous (a better argument would be about games: I do think RPGs and RTS's have a PC "infrastructure" that can't easily be transcended). I just happened to notice that JoshF and Morgan said pretty much the same thing, and Morgan got immediately slammed for it. I am new to these particular forums so I don't know the "Compleat Chronicles of Morgan Jolley", but as I've said elsewhere, I have read the majority of the posts kept alive, and I see a pattern. I can't possibly be expected to know what goes on offline between members, only what I read here. And JoshF's "taken to task" had a completely different tone than Morgan's. It just seems that there's a perceived "need" to challenge Morgan on his opinions. Even a newbie like me can see that it's futile. Morgan will admit (maybe only reluctantly) to being wrong on (some) facts (the facts he presented in this thread were explanations of why he *perceives* the Xbox to be PC-like), but you will never get him to change his opinion. His posts must be like a loose tooth. It hurts, but you just have to press your tongue against it. I don't understand why he's not on everyone's "ignore" list if he causes such agita.

Romier, my comment on you reentering the debate was more about Morgan being criticized for posting again than your reversal. As for editing posts, I do that before I submit them. What could possibly be said on an Internet forum (save for a personal attack) that would prompt me to regret my response? I'm not that emotionally involved.

To get back to that (more interesting if off-topic) rail-shooter discussion (since we all seem to agree that Linuxed Xboxes are a dumb idea), I'm not a big fan of the genre. With the notable exception of Rez, the "force-forward motion" (good description, Aaron) of these games frustrates me. I can't control my character fully and I feel at the mercy of the programmer. The game becomes reduced to a button-masher, rather than requiring any real strategy. Do I fight or flee? Shall I wait for the enemy to swarm, or take the battle to him? Stealth or shoot? Null options. You're going forward at this pace, son, and you'll take what we throw at you.

 

[JoshF]

Allen: What about games like Starfighter and Ace Combat in which, while you're in perpetual motion being "forced" forward, you have control over your direction, speed, and pitch?

So we have rail shooters, forced-motion shooters, and combinations of the two.

 

[Morgan Jolley]

I've had my arguments with Morgan over the years (more than I can count)

And yet we can still carry on good conversations in other threads that don't get heated, which is one of many reasons why I respect your opinion and actually pay attention to what you, specifically, say (even if it doesn't seem like it).

I don't want to bring the thread off-track again, but I felt I had to respond to a few things.

Oh, and I love Time Crisis II. Whoever says on-rail shooters are bad games because of technology is trying to cover up the fact that they just don't like the style. Games like Panzer Dragoon Orta (oh, it was on EGM's thing on CNN last night and looks AMAZING) and Time Crisis show that you can have a melding of fun gameplay with great graphics and still push the genre ahead a little.

 

[Romier S]

What could possibly be said on an Internet forum (save for a personal attack) that would prompt me to regret my response? I'm not that emotionally involved.

Too bad, I do get emotionally involved. Its a bi-product of having interacted with so many of these folks for so many years. As I mentioned above I consider many people here to be friends and at times, very much like everyday life outside of an internet forum, things are said that can be regretted later. If thats not something that you can understand than there isn't much else for us to discuss on the subject.

As for the subject at hand it great see people actually giving reason as to why they dislike a particular genre. I have a queston though in that regard, a great many folks who dislike the "rail shooter" claim to have enjoyed Rez and use that as notable exception to the rule. I am curious as to what about Rez broke the rules for you? (This is a legitimate question and not a "what it made it so special" challenge. The reason is I am writing an article on games that have failed over the yearsto capture the masses and the mindset of todays gamers for my website and it would help my research.) I may ask about several other games as well if you guys dont mind.

 

[Morgan Jolley]

Technically, would Frequency count as a rail shooter/rhythm game? (sorry, the announcement of the sequel's official name prompted me to play the first one again tonight)

 

[BrianB]

I'd classify it as a rhythym game. The game mechanic is more or less "simon says" like most rhythym games.

 

[Allen_Appel]

Still, Frequency has "force-forward motion", unlike something like Britney's game or DDR, so I'd think of it as a rail-shooter. Of course, I obviously don't know the subtle classifications of the genre. I would define a rail-shooter as "any game where my perspective is moved forward at a set pace (with slight allowable user variations) and I cannot choose any arbitrary path." Oh, "and I shoot things."

Rez never really felt like a "game" to me. (Oh, no, he's got "feelings" again). It was more about making music than shooting, it's just that the only way to make the music was to shoot. I don't even particularly like trance/techno, but it just caught me up. It's also a game I can get non-gamers to play. But I hate Hate HATE other music games (primarily because I am pretty terrible at them). I'm actually on the hunt for Samba de Amigo, though.

I'll stop defending Morgan now. If he don't care, me don't care. It's just videogames, after all.

Romier, what's the focus of your article? Games that were critical hits but failed to sell (Ico), or hyped games that turned out to suck (State of Emergency)?

 

[Romier S]

Games that were critical hits but failed to sell (Ico),

Hit it on the head the right there.

Though part of the article as well is the "hype" that the gaming community decides to selectively place on certain games and how can work (or backfire such as in the case of say Blinx for the Xbox) for the game.

 

[Allen_Appel]

How about games that people insist will be terrible (Celda, Metroid Prime as FPS), yet turn out to be great? (I'm assuming on Zelda. I mean, come on!)

 

[Javier_Huerta]

Heh. I still don't know why people think Metroid Prime is a great game. I played it for 15 minutes, and it went back on its box. Tried to give it away to my cousin, and he said he didn't like the game either.
To each its own, I guess.

 

[BrianB]

Still, Frequency has "force-forward motion", unlike something like Britney's game or DDR, so I'd think of it as a rail-shooter.

But the motion is irrelevant - all the player does is follow the beat & move left/right, there's zero shooting involved Think about it - essentially, you're tapping the buttons in time with directions scrolling up the screen, it's just presented in a different graphical style to DDR, but the mechanic is very very similiar. The big twist is that you effectively have multiple sets of arrows scrolling up the screen & you get to choose which set you do.
Actually, thinking about it, it's probably closer to 5 key Beatmania rather than DDR. Still the same "Simon says" genre