Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community
Old 01-20-2020, 10:59 AM   #81
OutOfTheCube
Franchise Player
 
OutOfTheCube's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Exp:
Default

Demographics, probably. We're mostly a bunch of old guys (or getting older) and that crowd typically enjoys the lengthy single player games with engaging stories and characters and more strategy based gameplay than the online twitchy skill-based stuff that the teenagers destroy us at.
OutOfTheCube is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to OutOfTheCube For This Useful Post:
Old 01-20-2020, 12:33 PM   #82
CroFlames
Franchise Player
 
CroFlames's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Exp:
Default

My list

1. Uncharted 4
2. Diablo 3
3. Civ 5
4. LEGO Lord of the Rings
5. Witcher 2


I can't believe I haven't played some of the great games on these lists. Will definitely get into Last of Us, Witcher 3, Skyrim & Mass Effect etc.
CroFlames is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2020, 01:00 PM   #83
CorsiHockeyLeague
Franchise Player
 
CorsiHockeyLeague's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheIronMaiden View Post
There is a heavy bias towards RPGs, why is that? Is it because the games are so big with so many mechanics? Or is it just the most popular genre?
Probably the same reason why silly comedies don't win a lot of oscars. They can be enjoyable but there's not a lot of actual merit when you're looking at criticism. A lot of people might find Fortnite entertaining and fun, but it's mindless junk at the end of the day.

Anyway, the only real RPG on the list is Skyrim, and I don't really think it deserves to be. Witcher 3 is more of a story-based action/adventure game, its RPG elements are secondary - same goes for TLoU, Mass Effect, Horizon Zero Dawn, Nier Automata, Deus Ex HR and others than have been mentioned. Even BOTW... Zelda games should be their own category - they have almost nothing in common with games like Skyrim or DOS2.
__________________
"The great promise of the Internet was that more information would automatically yield better decisions. The great disappointment is that more information actually yields more possibilities to confirm what you already believed anyway." - Brian Eno
CorsiHockeyLeague is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to CorsiHockeyLeague For This Useful Post:
Old 01-21-2020, 07:04 PM   #84
btimbit
Franchise Player
 
btimbit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: SW Calgary
Exp:
Default

Updated to here!

GTAV retakes its top 5 spot from Red Red Redemption 2

Skyrim pulls within 1 point of the top spot. Not sure how I feel about this. I enjoyed Skyrim, but this close to game of the decade? Meh

Also surprised to see that the vote I added for it right now was the first mention of Uncharted. One of my fav series, but it didn't make my list. Possibly because it's best games were pre 2010? Either way, definitely thought I'd see it mentioned more
btimbit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2020, 01:00 PM   #85
Itse
Franchise Player
 
Itse's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Helsinki, Finland
Exp:
Default

I'm always a bit annoyed that the Last of Us gets hailed as this great achievement in game writing.

It's got an extremely stock zombie apocalypse setting, with mostly pretty generic characters and gameplay that's okay at best. Is the dialog and voice acting good for what it is? Sure I guess, but... Meh. I mean, the storyline about that kind of bonding should definitely be up my alley, but it's just so generic. It feels like the kind of writing that gets praised by people who don't usually play games with an emphasis on the writing.

Maybe it gets good at some point, but honestly the gameplay itself is also so generic that after multiple attempts I've always just moved on to something more engaging. I'm currently I guess about halfway through? If the story takes that long before it actually gets good, that's not stand out excellence in writing. If we're talking about the best writing of the decade in games, to me Last of Us doesn't even register as a competitor.

Then there's the whole "I'm a game that wants to be taken very seriously but also I'm a game where you routinely kill dozens of people with your bare hands" thing going on. But not even in an entertaining way, you just keep sneaking up on people and doing the same thing over and over. At times you use a shiv, wow.

I'm currently on a mission to go through my bought games backlog and play through every game I've bought that I still think I want to play through. Mostly it's been very much worth it. (I didn't expect much of Doom, it was bloody awesome. Senua's Sacrifice was really impressive and interesting even with it's faults etc.)

And now I'm currently back with Last of Us, and it's still pretty boring to actually play.

If I want a game with good characters and story, I'll play something in the Life is Strange series. Sure there's very little actual gameplay there, but at least what it has makes sense in the context of the story. If I want to make hard decisions in a crap world with a grumpy bearded protagonist, I'll play the last two Witcher games.

And really just off the top of my head, games that IMO have better writing that the Last of Us: Senua's Sacrifice, Life is Strange, Banner Saga, Disco Elysium, Witchers 2 and 3, Tides of Numenera... Heck I'd even put Vanishing of Ethan Carter up there. (Easily my favourite of the "walking simulator genre", it really drew me in and actually scared the crap out of me at one point, which is hard to do.)

Good writing is just so much more than just dialog and voice acting.

Last edited by Itse; 01-23-2020 at 01:31 PM.
Itse is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Itse For This Useful Post:
Old 01-23-2020, 01:38 PM   #86
Matata
Lifetime Suspension
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Exp:
Default

I think video games are a pretty poor medium for linear story telling, so I don't even touch games like TLoU. Cut scenes just kill the flow of gameplay and remind you that none of your choices actually matter, because all you're doing is following a linear path between cut scenes, and watching polygon models 'act' is always pretty cringey for me. I think it works better with games that have a sense of humor (GTAV), but generally I just want game play out of my games.

I much prefer the story telling of games like Skyrim because you create your own story by choosing how your character interacts with the world, merging the gameplay and storytelling together, rather than have them constantly interrupt each other.
Matata is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Matata For This Useful Post:
Old 01-24-2020, 03:10 AM   #87
Itse
Franchise Player
 
Itse's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Helsinki, Finland
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Matata View Post
I think video games are a pretty poor medium for linear story telling, so I don't even touch games like TLoU. Cut scenes just kill the flow of gameplay and remind you that none of your choices actually matter, because all you're doing is following a linear path between cut scenes, and watching polygon models 'act' is always pretty cringey for me. I think it works better with games that have a sense of humor (GTAV), but generally I just want game play out of my games.

I much prefer the story telling of games like Skyrim because you create your own story by choosing how your character interacts with the world, merging the gameplay and storytelling together, rather than have them constantly interrupt each other.
Obviously we're getting deep into preferences here, but I would defend TLoU in that it does do a good job of inserting most of the dialogue and character development among the normal gameplay, and uses cutscenes in a fairly limited fashion.

As for linear storytelling... I think I disagree with you there. This might have a lot to do with me being an active tabletop/live roleplayer, but I've always found the "ability to tell your own story" in digital games to be super limited.

To me the real strength of digital storytelling lies in telling fairly linear stories, while really drawing you in to experience the path of the protagonist in a way that few other formats can do. Usually this is best achieved by inserting some level of player agency in the decision making, but the limitations of having to create content/response for anything the player does means, to me, that a highly autonomous player experience tend to be somewhat shallow.

It's actually why I think the best player choice in a game is of the type where most of the work is put into giving a lot of context and background before the choice, and focusing less on trying to create "different paths" after the choice. The Witcher games are a great example of this style of storytelling. They're fairly linear in what actually happens, but the choices you make still feel weighty.

A good choice in games is one where the impact of the decision is less important and less interesting than the process of making that choice.

Last edited by Itse; 01-24-2020 at 03:16 AM.
Itse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2020, 08:51 AM   #88
stone hands
Powerplay Quarterback
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Itse View Post
Obviously we're getting deep into preferences here, but I would defend TLoU in that it does do a good job of inserting most of the dialogue and character development among the normal gameplay, and uses cutscenes in a fairly limited fashion.

As for linear storytelling... I think I disagree with you there. This might have a lot to do with me being an active tabletop/live roleplayer, but I've always found the "ability to tell your own story" in digital games to be super limited.

To me the real strength of digital storytelling lies in telling fairly linear stories, while really drawing you in to experience the path of the protagonist in a way that few other formats can do. Usually this is best achieved by inserting some level of player agency in the decision making, but the limitations of having to create content/response for anything the player does means, to me, that a highly autonomous player experience tend to be somewhat shallow.

It's actually why I think the best player choice in a game is of the type where most of the work is put into giving a lot of context and background before the choice, and focusing less on trying to create "different paths" after the choice. The Witcher games are a great example of this style of storytelling. They're fairly linear in what actually happens, but the choices you make still feel weighty.

A good choice in games is one where the impact of the decision is less important and less interesting than the process of making that choice.
you just described why nier:automata is pick for game#2 of the decade, it would be #1 if it wasn't for botw being my favorite game of all time
stone hands is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to stone hands For This Useful Post:
Old 01-24-2020, 09:35 AM   #89
Itse
Franchise Player
 
Itse's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Helsinki, Finland
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stone hands View Post
you just described why nier:automata is pick for game#2 of the decade, it would be #1 if it wasn't for botw being my favorite game of all time
I've heard much good about it, definitely planning to play it at some point.
Itse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2020, 10:13 AM   #90
stone hands
Powerplay Quarterback
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Itse View Post
I've heard much good about it, definitely planning to play it at some point.
if you decide to play it, I cant possibly stress enough to play it to completion. there is multiple playthroughs required to get the entire story and it's essential to the overall experience which imo is the best example of using the medium of video games to it's fullest potential
stone hands is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to stone hands For This Useful Post:
Old 01-24-2020, 11:08 AM   #91
CorsiHockeyLeague
Franchise Player
 
CorsiHockeyLeague's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Itse View Post
It's got an extremely stock zombie apocalypse setting, with mostly pretty generic characters and gameplay that's okay at best. Is the dialog and voice acting good for what it is? Sure I guess, but... Meh. I mean, the storyline about that kind of bonding should definitely be up my alley, but it's just so generic. It feels like the kind of writing that gets praised by people who don't usually play games with an emphasis on the writing.
This is just entirely... wrong. You've stated this with some conviction but it's utter nonsense. The zombie apocalypse setting is a bit tired now (less so at the time), but even that is done in an interesting way by use of the cordyceps to create enemies that are kind of this mix between terrifying and beautiful. The notion that the most dangerous ones are blind but use echolocation while the less advanced still have their sight creates the basis for a good stealth experience.

But what's really wrong here is the notion that the characters are generic. That's an absurd statement. They're actually deep and well developed, and they grow as the story goes along, largely through their interactions with each other rather than with the plot. That's what's different. That doesn't mean that actual character-driven storytelling is some revelation, because it isn't... except in videogames. If this were a movie, it would not get an oscar best picture nom - actually, Logan, to which it is often compared to for obvious reasons, is a pretty good comparable. But until other games start doing this, telling a tight and cohesive character-driven story (which I gather you only got a little way through), TLoU is miles ahead of anything else.
Quote:
Then there's the whole "I'm a game that wants to be taken very seriously but also I'm a game where you routinely kill dozens of people with your bare hands" thing going on. But not even in an entertaining way, you just keep sneaking up on people and doing the same thing over and over. At times you use a shiv, wow.
Well, you're pretty clearly playing it wrong, or on a difficulty that's far too easy for you. If it's on a hard enough difficulty you should really be killing very few people and sneaking past most of the enemies, except where forced to fight. It's primarily supposed to be a stealth game, and it creates tension very well. Regardless, it is still trying to be a video game, not a survival simulator. That being said, the mechanics are certainly a bit clunkier 7 years later than they were when it came out.

In any event, while there are obviously objectively good and bad games in terms of gameplay, it may simply be that stealth games aren't your taste... on that, some variance in opinion is reasonable, which is why Rocket League appears in some of these top 5's, I guess.
Quote:
And really just off the top of my head, games that IMO have better writing that the Last of Us: Senua's Sacrifice, Life is Strange, Banner Saga, Disco Elysium, Witchers 2 and 3, Tides of Numenera... Heck I'd even put Vanishing of Ethan Carter up there. (Easily my favourite of the "walking simulator genre", it really drew me in and actually scared the crap out of me at one point, which is hard to do.
This is where your already well-off-base post completely falls apart. None of these, with the arguable exception of Disco Elysium (and in fairness I've never played Tides of Numenera and probably should), has better writing, and none of them have better performances. The notion that Witcher 2 and 3 are better written is so laughable that you should really give up posting on this topic ever again. I've said before that those are good games, but they're written exactly as badly as the average pulp fantasy novel and the characters have exactly that much depth and development to them as you'd find in that sort of material. It's fine, totally tolerable and at times enjoyable, but it's "video game context" fine - in other media, it would be unbearably cheesy. I've seen arguments made for Planescape Torment - which I'm surprised not to see on your list given that Tides is - but even that is still pulp fantasy, it's just more carefully crafted and philosophically interesting pulp fantasy.

Senua's Sacrifice is brilliant, incidentally, and probably deserves to be on this list notwithstanding a couple of really badly designed bits gameplay-wise. But it's a well-executed, interesting concept of a game, more than it is a compelling narrative. Sort of like Edith Finch in that (and really only that) sense.
Quote:
Good writing is just so much more than just dialog and voice acting.
Dialogue*... Anyway, both are completely necessary to actually execute a well written game, so they're pretty crucial. And I don't think anyone is suggesting that they're sufficient on their own, or you'd see way more arguments for the Uncharted games, which are really very well voice acted.
__________________
"The great promise of the Internet was that more information would automatically yield better decisions. The great disappointment is that more information actually yields more possibilities to confirm what you already believed anyway." - Brian Eno

Last edited by CorsiHockeyLeague; 01-24-2020 at 11:13 AM.
CorsiHockeyLeague is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to CorsiHockeyLeague For This Useful Post:
Old 01-24-2020, 02:31 PM   #92
Blaster86
UnModerator
 
Blaster86's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: North Vancouver, British Columbia.
Exp:
Default

Last of Us sucked.
__________________

THANK MR DEMKO
CPHL Ottawa Vancouver
Blaster86 is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Blaster86 For This Useful Post:
Old 01-24-2020, 06:25 PM   #93
Mazrim
CP Gamemaster
 
Mazrim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: The Gary
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Blaster86 View Post
Last of Us sucked.
Mazrim is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Mazrim For This Useful Post:
Old 01-24-2020, 06:32 PM   #94
Wood
First Line Centre
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Blaster86 View Post
Last of Us sucked.
Of all the posts about it, this one is most convincing. I'm won't bother playing it, thanks Blaster!
Wood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2020, 07:36 PM   #95
Blaster86
UnModerator
 
Blaster86's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: North Vancouver, British Columbia.
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wood View Post
Of all the posts about it, this one is most convincing. I'm won't bother playing it, thanks Blaster!
It's the succinctness that really makes the point work.
__________________

THANK MR DEMKO
CPHL Ottawa Vancouver
Blaster86 is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Blaster86 For This Useful Post:
Old 01-25-2020, 05:38 AM   #96
Itse
Franchise Player
 
Itse's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Helsinki, Finland
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague View Post
This is just entirely... wrong. You've stated this with some conviction but it's utter nonsense. The zombie apocalypse setting is a bit tired now (less so at the time), but even that is done in an interesting way by use of the cordyceps to create enemies that are kind of this mix between terrifying and beautiful. The notion that the most dangerous ones are blind but use echolocation while the less advanced still have their sight creates the basis for a good stealth experience.
Eh. Sorry, it's a super generic setting with uninteresting level design and clunky mechanics. The excuse for what the zombies are this time does not actually affect the setting in a reasonable way, and it's still super super unrealistic.

The game design also isn't very good. The clickers will still "hear you" for no reason if you're close enough in front of them but not at their back, which shouldn't be how echolocation works, and the "runners" don't actually see that far but actually hear you to a point that there's really no significant difference between how they react. The only significant difference between a "clicker" and a "runner" is that the former are tougher to kill.

And don't get me started on "bloaters", what an embarrassment that was, sheesh. How the hell am I supposed to take anything serious after that?

And let's talk about the problems of that setting. What are the zombie hordes eating? In fact, what does anyone eat? Why is everyone living in squalor after such a long time? Have they forgotten how to clean up? Why aren't there any patches in anyones clothes? Why doesn't anyone wear mismatching clothes? Is everyone still fashion conscious, even though they seem to have stopped bathing

More generally, why are people concentrated in urban environments, when it would make so much more sense in every possible way to set up in the countryside. (Smaller population = less zombies, a lot more space = easier to build defenses, running natural water and natural food sources would be available...)

It's almost as if the makers forgot that "generic zombie setting #1" is typically set only a rather short time after the apocalypse. The world functions exactly like the typical "zombie apocalypse was recent" setting, but since the writers moved things too far into the future, the generic things stop making even the modicum of sense they usually make.

It's also why it's impossible to ignore just how generic everything is, and how little actual thought was put into most of what the game is.

Quote:
But what's really wrong here is the notion that the characters are generic. That's an absurd statement. They're actually deep and well developed, and they grow as the story goes along, largely through their interactions with each other rather than with the plot. That's what's different. That doesn't mean that actual character-driven storytelling is some revelation, because it isn't... except in videogames. If this were a movie, it would not get an oscar best picture nom - actually, Logan, to which it is often compared to for obvious reasons, is a pretty good comparable. But until other games start doing this, telling a tight and cohesive character-driven story (which I gather you only got a little way through), TLoU is miles ahead of anything else.
Deep and well developed can still be generic. The protagonist is just a slightly older and grumpier than usual average AAA protagonist, and Ellie is just a generic "likable teenage girl character", which is actually a massive problem because so much of what Ellie says makes no sense for a character that's supposed to not know about the world before the Apocalypse. How does she know how to make fun of something like "checking into a fancy hotel"? It's cute, but makes no sense.

Quote:
Well, you're pretty clearly playing it wrong, or on a difficulty that's far too easy for you. If it's on a hard enough difficulty you should really be killing very few people and sneaking past most of the enemies, except where forced to fight. It's primarily supposed to be a stealth game, and it creates tension very well.
The main part of the stealth game is killing enemies. This is by far the best strategy. Sneak up on people and kill them. How am I supposed to be afraid and feel tension, when I can just sweep through a house in an afternoon and clean it up from anything threatening?

The level design is also kind of ***t. It's random block of stuff thrown around with no rhyme or reason. Why does every corridor in this house have random furniture pieces thrown around? Where did they come from? They don't look like they belong anywhere in this place, and there's no reason why anybody would have moved them here. Why are they all the same? Please just for the sake of variety, could you throw in maybe a higher piece somewhere (can hide behind but can't jump over) or something that will block the way but not the view?

No, apparently that would have been too much thought put into this.

Why is this hotel that they just specifically said was supposed to be so fancy (fancy enough that a guy who apparently used to own a pretty nice house could not afford to ever stay in one) so crappy when you get inside it, with all the rooms being super small and impersonal and all the furniture looking like it was 20 years old by the time of the apocapypse?

I guess the writers and level designers just never shared notes.

And why is the loot random? It makes absolutely no sense. Suddenly a runner will drop a proximity bomb, but a guy who clearly has a gun and bullets does not have them when you kill him?

It makes even less sense when there's hard limits to what you can carry, so that if they took a bit of time to consider how they pace different different enemy types, there should be no problem if in some encounters you could stock up on bullets. (Not that being short on bullets is a serious problem anyway.) All random loot does is remove what few pieces of strategizing might be involved in the stealth slaughter mechanics. "That guy has a gun, I might want to take him down for those bullets" becomes "I should take down everyone I can because any of them could have something useful".

Oh, and how come I can make frickin' proximity bombs out of sharp objects and alchohol? It's just beyond ridiculous, and such a boring choice. Setting up a trip wire and trying to lure a zombie into it would at least require some tactical thinking, but they needed to make it proximity bombs because... I've got nothing. It's just dumb.

The best way forward is constantly killing enemies as you move forward by sneaking up behind their back. Which is what I'm doing. Again why am I supposed to find this scary, when I can just massacre about 20 "hunters" in an afternoon without breaking a sweat? It doesn't really help that Ellie goes "sheesh" for the twentieth time when I do that. Freak out or shup up, but eh, that's not good.

Why is there such a large bunch of people constantly keeping patrol to kill and rob anyone who comes down a certain road, when every other thing told in the story heavily suggests that there shouldn't be that many people travelling around, and there's even a note in the game listing what they've found on the travellers, to underline that robbing them makes no sense because they don't have that much interesting stuff on them Also, why is it an all male gang? Is it an all gay gang, or are they all aromantic asexuals who just don't care? Why do they choose to live in a mostly defenseless house in slum conditions, when they could have bunkered down and cleaned up? Is it just because they're bad people so it didn't occur to them?

So, it's just a generic "bad for no reason" gang, with not even a spoonful of effort put into making them interesting or believable, but since super generic zombie apocalypse setting #1 has to have gangs like that, there they are.

Quote:
Regardless, it is still trying to be a video game, not a survival simulator. That being said, the mechanics are certainly a bit clunkier 7 years later than they were when it came out.
The controls weren't very good for the time. I played it first when it was about a year old.

Quote:
This is where your already well-off-base post completely falls apart. None of these, with the arguable exception of Disco Elysium (and in fairness I've never played Tides of Numenera and probably should), has better writing, and none of them have better performances. The notion that Witcher 2 and 3 are better written is so laughable that you should really give up posting on this topic ever again.
Your lack of taste and understanding of what is good writing and what isn't is so bad it's cute to see you try. But don't worry, I'm sure that if you try really hard to understand subtlety and complexity, you'll start to slowly understand this stuff.

(I'm just making fun of your incredibly condescending attitude here.)

Quote:
I've said before that those are good games, but they're written exactly as badly as the average pulp fantasy novel and the characters have exactly that much depth and development to them as you'd find in that sort of material.

It's fine, totally tolerable and at times enjoyable, but it's "video game context" fine - in other media, it would be unbearably cheesy. I've seen arguments made for Planescape Torment - which I'm surprised not to see on your list given that Tides is - but even that is still pulp fantasy, it's just more carefully crafted and philosophically interesting pulp fantasy.
Look, dude, stop saying pulp fantasy, you clearly don't know what that actually means.

Witchers 2 and 3 are dark fantasy, mostly. (Blood and Wine DLC steers heavily into high fantasy.)
Witcher TV series is pulp fantasy.
Planescape torment is high fantasy. It's also a game that's good for it's time, but super dated now.

Also, saying "just pulp fantasy" is a pretty good indicator that you consider genre to be a designator of quality.

Too bad for you. The characters in Witcher 3 are very, very well written, with a lot more nuance and complexity than most of what's going on in TLoU. Obviously Witcher 3 has orders of multitude more writing in it, so the quality goes up and down a lot more than it does in TLoU... But the good stuff just blows anything TLoU does out of the water with complexity and nuance.

In any case, Last of Us isn't very well written. It definitely has some good things going for it, but the world, the characters and the gameplay are in constant conflict with each other, to a point where I find it impossible to take it seriously. Any time I'm drawn into the game for a moment, there's something around the corner which makes me go



and pulls me out of it with it's sheer stupidity.

Last edited by Itse; 01-25-2020 at 07:45 AM.
Itse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2020, 11:00 AM   #97
Scorch
First Line Centre
 
Scorch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Blaster86 View Post
Last of Us sucked.
No.
Scorch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2020, 02:51 PM   #98
calumniate
Franchise Player
 
calumniate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: A small painted room
Exp:
Default

Last of us was basically a ladder moving simulator. It sucked
calumniate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2020, 03:51 PM   #99
FlameOn
Franchise Player
 
FlameOn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Calgary
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by calumniate View Post
Last of us was basically a ladder moving simulator. It sucked
I believe you were actually playing death stranding
FlameOn is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to FlameOn For This Useful Post:
Old 01-26-2020, 06:18 PM   #100
ComixZone
Franchise Player
 
ComixZone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Exp:
Default

...I actually do think The Last of Us is horribly overrated. I feel like it was lapped up because of the dramatic nature of it's narrative, but that it's moment to moment gameplay was stiff and un-engaging. Neil Druckmann is also a pompous buttwaffle. I enjoyed the game enough to see it through to the end, but game of the decade? Nah, hell nah. Especially when up against games like Skyrim, The Witcher 3, GTA V and Red Dead Redemption 2.
ComixZone is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:51 AM.

Calgary Flames
2023-24




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright Calgarypuck 2021