Deadly Premonition ?

Grumpypants

Anyone played this on 360 ? I picked it up in HMV for 17.99 and it has mixed reviews from a 10/10 from destructiod (not that that is worth anything) down to 30% from other sites. Very mixed bag and so far im not too confinced either way.

Its very like the resident evil 4/ Alan wake games so far but with even dodgier controls and camera angles. Not sure is i should press ahead with it or is it a piel for garbage any thoughts?

Mr Freeze

Queue Retr0gamer!

Retr0gamer

Get past the initial chapters and the game totally opens up into a massive sandbox environment with some really clever touches and a weird attention to detail. It has it's problems like the dodgy controls and repetitive combat but stick it out. The story is very well written and way better than the likes of alan wake and heavy rain.

It's a weird one. Low budget and cheaply made yet at the same time has one of the best videogame stories ever and some truly great sandbox moments. The acting is pretty good as well and excpetional in the case of York.

If you didn't get on with something like No More Heroes then it might not be for you.

Grumpypants

Ill stick with it i got to the bit where the raincoat killer jumps up and you have to dodge him.... i got killed !!

calex71

Bought this a while ago , this thread has reminded me to actually start this game

Grayditch

Played an hour or so. I'm enjoying it despite it's absolute ugliness and gaudy controls!

ShaneU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5OUP_Z3iZPs

Love this game, completely bonkers

Grayditch

I am also loving this game and it's use of certain music at the most innapropritate times!

Retr0gamer

I love how the game is so low budget yet there's a stupid amount of attention to detail in some of the most minute things. Stuff like the real time beard growth and the way the game has only about 6 music tracks that are repeated all the time yet very car you buy has it's own music just only when you drive that car.

mickydoomsux

Easily my game of the year. An utter mess technically but pretty much the most memorable and unique gaming experience i've had in years.

Bought it and the controls are diabolical. Only played for about 20 minutes though, so it might improve?

Quigs Snr

This arrived today... haven't started yet, please tell me it controls better than Alone in the Dark on the 360, which I have just finished, and quite liked, despite it's many flaws, not least of which was the fact that controlling the character was like trying to take a cruise liner around a Forumula 1 race track.

Fanny Cradock

Somebody posted an amusing link to a complete playthrough of the game. It is worth a watch (not the whole thing obviously) if you come across it. I think the link can be found somewhere on the last DP thread that was started here.

Grumpypants

Quigs Snr wrote: »

This arrived today... haven't started yet, please tell me it controls better than Alone in the Dark on the 360, which I have just finished, and quite liked, despite it's many flaws, not least of which was the fact that controlling the character was like trying to take a cruise liner around a Forumula 1 race track.

I haven't played alone in the dark for a long time but this controls really poorly.

Retr0gamer

Deleted User wrote: »

Bought it and the controls are diabolical. Only played for about 20 minutes though, so it might improve?

The action segment of the game is not what you are playing the game for and are by far the worst segments of the game. It;s the open world sandbox that moves in real time that you get to later on is where the real magic is. Controls aren't that bad anyway, it's not like there's loads of fast action that absolutely require precise movement. It's a slow game. You aren't playing uncharted 2.

Cherry_Cola

Playing through this at the moment aswell and must say I absolutely love it!

Sure the controls are crap and graphics not up to scratch but the story is good and it's hilarious in places. It's such a rip off of Twin Peaks but I think that's what makes it even better!

Grumpypants

Cherry_Cola wrote: »

Playing through this at the moment aswell and must say I absolutely love it!

Sure the controls are crap and graphics not up to scratch but the story is good and it's hilarious in places. It's such a rip off of Twin Peaks but I think that's what makes it even better!

Yea it really is like they said here make a David Lynch film but go nuts make it mental

Grayditch

You're going to have to forgive it a LOT, let's just say that. It seems to be rewarding, though.

I downloaded the Soundtrack. I love the Main Title track. It's amazing. The whistling song is gas.

cherryghost

I didn't forgive all the problems with it.

It's a terrible game with some utterly stupid set scenes

Retr0gamer

I feel the good far out weighs the bad. Most people have a problem with the combat in the game but the gamem isn't about combat it's about the story and the investigation and the crazy stuff that can happen in it's sandbox world.

Grumpypants

Retr0gamer wrote: »

I feel the good far out weighs the bad. Most people have a problem with the combat in the game but the gamem isn't about combat it's about the story and the investigation and the crazy stuff that can happen in it's sandbox world.

Did this thread make you go back and play it again today ??

pablomakaveli

I just picked this up as well today after seeing it mentioned a few times in different threads. Probably won't play it for a while though since i've a few other games to get through first.

Retr0gamer

Grumpypants wrote: »

Did this thread make you go back and play it again today ??

Finished FF13 so decided to get straight back into it. Today has been a Starcraft 2 binge though.

fatguy2k1

just started playing this last night. horrble graphics, clunky controls and yet i can't put it down. as already been noted, it is Twin Peaks:The Video Game

Grumpypants

The poor combat controls are only surpassed by the poor walking controls which are surpassed by the hopeless driving controls. The graphics are poor and the map is useless. But i like it but my god you shouldn't have to fight so hard against a game just to get around.

It does get a whole lot better once you get the sub machine gun

Retr0gamer

I don't think it's that bad control-wise. The only terrible parts are when it goes into a fixed camera and it gets confusing and awkward. Other than that it's functional, nothing better, nothing worse. Car controls get a lot better when you get the better cars or do the sidequest for th radio that lets you teleport to any previously visited location (an absolute lifesaver).

Grayditch

Christ, I cant wait to get a better car or teleport to destinatons!

NeoKubrick

It's just bad game design. Instead of creating a film, the developers created a film within a game. It's like the developers stop and pause the film every five minutes to force you to play a full game of monopoly to progress to watch the next five minutes. If the game was as good as monopoly, you could play it, but it isn't. If the film was as good as the high standard of actual films, you could watch it, but it isn't. However, if the story was as good as that high standard, then the developers would be producing a film and competing in the film industry rather than creating a film and calling it a game.

The perfect example of the game's bad design is opening the map. To quickly open the map, the player presses the 'back' button, but to close the map, the player has to press 'B' twice. So, instead of two clicks on one button, to quickly open and close the map, the player has to use two buttons and use three clicks. It's an unnecessary interface design and any game designer would instinctively know that and correct it (but that's the point, they're filmmakers not game designers). This bad interface design is made worse by the fact that it's difficult to orient yourself in the world with a map that moves relative to the player's direction and therefore, the player has to consult the map a lot. That's one example of bad design and it is consistent throughout the rest of the game.

The brown saturation is a blemish on the visuals.


It's a great example of how top-down development does not work.

Retr0gamer

I think it's more an example of a developer with zero budget being way too ambitious. I actually think the game is quite an achievement that they crafted something with so little bugs when you look at the overly ambitious games from russia and eastern europe being just as janky but being riddled with bugs a lot of which are game destroying.

I'm willing to forgive any game any amount of jankiness if the experience is interesting and unique and in the case of deadly premonition it's unique, clever, hilarious, fantastically written and acted and in some cases there's some genuine genius game design. Every other developer is pumping out the same game so even if it's a bit unpolished I still think SWERY and his team deserve a lot of credit for making such a unique game in a world were every game can be grouped into about 4 different genres. Often when a developer tries something new in gaming there's a certain amount of jankiness since it's new territory. Just look at Dagger Fall, GTA 3 or Operation Flashpoint.

It's the experimental art films of videogames, flawed but trying something new and stepping into new territory. If you are looking for perfect game mechanics then you're doing it wrong. Enjoy the game for how different it is from anything else.

NeoKubrick

Retr0gamer wrote: »

I think it's more an example of a developer with zero budget [...]
[...] there's some genuine genius game design. [...]
It's the experimental art films of videogames, flawed but trying something new and stepping into new territory. If you are looking for perfect game mechanics then you're doing it wrong. Enjoy the game for how different it is from anything else.

That hyperbolia serves no purpose. Obviously, they had a budget and decent relative to independent developers who can't secure publishers and whose games don't have worldwide boxed-distribution. Good game design is relatively cheap; production values drain a budget. I picked an example which does not relate to the budget and it would have had cost "zero" to correct precisely to avoid the weak and delusional counter-argument that the budget caused that bad design and not the developers themselves. You can claim that the poor design and implementation of the map was as a result of the low-budget, but that's absolutely ridiculous.

You can claim that Deadly Premonition is the equivalent of an experimental art film, but then, that claim would be ignorant of the actual independent gaming scene and institutional filters. Experimental art films have fewer institutional barriers and filters than a Hollywood film just as the independent gaming scene has fewer, than worldwide boxed-distributed games. Here, read:

It's been said that combat was a last minute addition once the bulk of the game was completed. If so, what was the reasoning behind adding combat?

The combat was added after we received advice from our publisher that Western audiences would have difficulty accepting a main character who didn't fire a gun. I don't know if that's entirely true, but our audience certainly accepted Agent York.

Source

That's SWERY claiming that they added combat based upon "advice" from their publisher. As I've said that hyperbolia serves no purpose: Deadly Premonition is not the equivalent of an experimental art film and from his response, it's the opposite equivalent (more in common with a Hollywood film). It's not an unique game and there's no new territory the game explores. It isn't that different from everything else (the game mechanics are inferior copies of other games). You claim, but don't quote where I expected it of any game let alone Deadly Premonition, that I'm looking for perfect game mechanics; no, I am looking for game mechanics because it is a computer game. It's a badly designed computer game with some interesting characters and a decent plot: a top-down developed computer game.

That's just the cold truth of the matter without superfluous and pretentious critique. By the way, what exactly were the "genuine genius game design"?

Retr0gamer

You need to lighten up. It's pretty obvious when I said it had zero budget I wasn't meaning it literally and was referring to the fact that it had a much smaller budget than a bigger mass appeal project. Thanks for the statement of the obivous that it was hyperbole just in case nobody picked it up.

You also need to lighten up a bit thinking that every game needs polished game mechanics to be enjoyable. Good game mechanics aren't essential all the time. For some gamescan be good despite their faults because of the experience. For someone who seems to think they are some new games journo type you really don't have much of a clue. There's plenty of games out there that are a bit clunky and horribly flawed but are still a worthwhile experience. The home micro and 90's PC scene were full of these games, maybe I'm more forgiving having more experience with games that are overly ambitious to their detriment but remain enjoyable. Sometimes games are better than the sum of their parts.

As for the genius game design, I refer to the real time movement of people in the world and how it can genuinely surprise you. Go peek in on someone or talk to some one acting suspiciously outside of the main plot and you'll come across some really inconsequential set pieces that will surprise you and add to the setting, story and immersion. The game isn't trying to be a GTA or Resident Evil clonedespite borrowing from these badly. It's got more in common with adventure games. An adventure game that uses a sandbox environment instead of a point and click interface? I don't think there's any other game like that and it LA Noire is anything to go by it might just be the next big thing. If you are expecting a game to rival those two then you're playing the wrong game.

Deadly Premoniton is definitely flawed but ultimately I'm finding it hugely entertaining and for me that's all that matters. I don't really mind that the game developers didn't have the budget to focus on interface design or QA testing meaning that it's 2 button presses to get out of the map screen and the cars handle shoddily because the games one fo the best gaming experiences of 2010. I'm enjoying it a lot more than Heavy Rain which I really liked. Both are adventure games. Heavy Rain is better put together but Deadly Premonition has the more interesting and better written story and in adventure games that's the most improtant thing.

landsleaving

My game of the year after playing it over Christmas tbh, haven't been as enthralled by a game world since Shenmue. Screw the comabt and driving, they're clearly only in there to make it sell a little better, which is fair, its all about wandering around finding out as much about the plot as possible. The fact that I'm intrigued to the point I'll ignore flaws just shows how well the story is plotted and integrated into the game.

NeoKubrick

Retr0gamer wrote: »

You need to lighten up. It's pretty obvious when I said it had zero budget I wasn't meaning it literally and was referring to the fact that it had a much smaller budget than a bigger mass appeal project. Thanks for the statement of the obivous that it was hyperbole just in case nobody picked it up.

You also need to lighten up a bit thinking that every game needs polished game mechanics to be enjoyable. Good game mechanics aren't essential all the time. For some gamescan be good despite their faults because of the experience. For someone who seems to think they are some new games journo type you really don't have much of a clue. There's plenty of games out there that are a bit clunky and horribly flawed but are still a worthwhile experience. The home micro and 90's PC scene were full of these games, maybe I'm more forgiving having more experience with games that are overly ambitious to their detriment but remain enjoyable. Sometimes games are better than the sum of their parts.

As for the genius game design, I refer to the real time movement of people in the world and how it can genuinely surprise you. Go peek in on someone or talk to some one acting suspiciously outside of the main plot and you'll come across some really inconsequential set pieces that will surprise you and add to the setting, story and immersion. The game isn't trying to be a GTA or Resident Evil clonedespite borrowing from these badly. It's got more in common with adventure games. An adventure game that uses a sandbox environment instead of a point and click interface? I don't think there's any other game like that and it LA Noire is anything to go by it might just be the next big thing. If you are expecting a game to rival those two then you're playing the wrong game.

Deadly Premoniton is definitely flawed but ultimately I'm finding it hugely entertaining and for me that's all that matters. I don't really mind that the game developers didn't have the budget to focus on interface design or QA testing meaning that it's 2 button presses to get out of the map screen and the cars handle shoddily because the games one fo the best gaming experiences of 2010. I'm enjoying it a lot more than Heavy Rain which I really liked. Both are adventure games. Heavy Rain is better put together but Deadly Premonition has the more interesting and better written story and in adventure games that's the most improtant thing.

That was an amusing tantrum.

Hyperbolia like "zero budget" and "experimental art film" serve no purpose in this discussion. With worldwide boxed-distribution on consoles, they would have had a decent budget and relative to independent developers nowhere close to a budget of zero. Experimental art films have fewer institutional barriers and filters on their content than Hollywood films and as I proved, the developers of this game implemented combat on the "advice" of their publishers. So, drop the rhetoric instead of advising people to 'lighten up' and throwing tantrums. Drop the strawman arguments, too. First, you claimed that I expect "perfect game mechanics", but continue to weasel out of where you found that quote. Now, you're claiming that I said "every game needs polished game mechanics to be enjoyable", and you will weasel out of quoting where you found that too. Please quote and link where I stated either of these two statements you're arguing with, or admit that you fabricated them.

It's irrelevant that you found the game hugely entertaining. I couldn't care less. Subjective unsubstantiated opinions are worthless and yours are no exception. I have substantiated my argument that it's a badly designed computer game with some interesting characters and a decent plot and an example of how top-down development fails. You haven't. Real-time movement isn't "genuine genius game design", but it is an effective and satisfying method to communicate information and it is in Oblivion, which is an adventure game that uses a sandbox environment. However, this neat design doesn't negate the consistent bad game design of the rest of the game and it certainly doesn't qualify it as unique or charting new territory.

Grayditch

...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5OUP_Z3iZPs

Retr0gamer

NeoKubrick wrote: »

First, you claimed that I expect "perfect game mechanics", but continue to weasel out of where you found that quote. Now, you're claiming that I said "every game needs polished game mechanics to be enjoyable", and you will weasel out of quoting where you found that too. Please quote and link where I stated either of these two statements you're arguing with, or admit that you fabricated them.

Ahem...

NeoKubrick wrote: »

It's just bad game design. Instead of creating a film, the developers created a film within a game. It's like the developers stop and pause the film every five minutes to force you to play a full game of monopoly to progress to watch the next five minutes.

NeoKubrick wrote: »

The perfect example of the game's bad design is opening the map. To quickly open the map, the player presses the 'back' button, but to close the map, the player has to press 'B' twice. So, instead of two clicks on one button, to quickly open and close the map, the player has to use two buttons and use three clicks. It's an unnecessary interface design and any game designer would instinctively know that and correct it (but that's the point, they're filmmakers not game designers). This bad interface design is made worse by the fact that it's difficult to orient yourself in the world with a map that moves relative to the player's direction and therefore, the player has to consult the map a lot. That's one example of bad design and it is consistent throughout the rest of the game.

Neokubrick wrote:

Deus Ex and System Shock 2 are great games, but a FPS game, first and foremost, is combat, and I don't know if you've played either game recently, but both games have simplistic combat which isn't getting better with age. Both games excelled in other areas, but not combat.

Neokubrick wrote:

FPS should aspire to be more than combat, but a FPS, by definition, will have to challenge the gamer the majority of the time with combat, and if the combat isn't interesting, then, the most important component of the game is not interesting. You can't put games with inferior combat above games with superior combat in the FPS genre; it just doesn't make sense.

There you go. It's been well documented that this game has some pretty serious design flaws and I even warned you about them before so I don't know why you are complaining when you should have expected niggles like these before starting the game.

Neokubrick wrote:

It's irrelevant that you found the game hugely entertaining. I couldn't care less. Subjective unsubstantiated opinions are worthless and yours are no exception. I have substantiated my argument that it's a badly designed computer game with some interesting characters and a decent plot and an example of how top-down development fails.

Bad design doesn't make something a bad game necessarily. Halo is quite a good game despite the terrible reuse of assets and terrible Flood AI. I also think that a piece of entertainment being ultimately enjoyable is far more important than nit picking the stuff it gets wrong.

NeoKubrick wrote: »

Real-time movement isn't "genuine genius game design", but it is an effective and satisfying method to communicate information and it is in Oblivion, which is an adventure game that uses a sandbox environment. However, this neat design doesn't negate the consistent bad game design of the rest of the game and it certainly doesn't qualify it as unique or charting new territory.

It's hardly the same thing as in Deadly Premonition now. Depending on where the characters are will trigger new events in the game. In oblivion it just changes the the location of the character and isn't more sophisticated than the NPCs randomly milling about in an 8-bit RPG.

As for the publisher input, my answer is so what? Deadly Premonition could never have been made with no budget so some publisher sucking up had to be done to get funding. The game was budgeted to sell about 70,000 copies in Japan (which it failed miserably to reach) and hopefully find a publisher in the West if some miracle occurs. It's the way all games are funded in japan at the moment unfortunately. Anyway the point remains that attacking my posts by taking everything I said literally isn't winning you any arguments.

Grumpypants

Grayditch wrote: »

...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5OUP_Z3iZPs

Dam you ...guess whats stuck in my head all day now !!!

Doooo do do dododo dododo do do do doooo


And the graphics aren't that bad check out this driving scene

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u27l7O_9lb0

Grayditch

Haha. That still rivals some of the standard cars in GT5.

NeoKubrick

Retr0gamer wrote: »

Ahem...

Can you explain how any of those quotes relate to the two quotes you fabricated and attributed to me, or were you imitating a monkey and flailing your arms about hoping to reach and grab a banana? Can you explain you why you picked a quote which actually contradicts the quotes you falsely attribute to me? If I expect "perfect game mechanics" and demand "polished game mechanics", it would be inconsistent to claim that I think Deus Ex and System Shock 2 are great games. So, how you inferred those two quotes from that incompatible single quote is beyond explanation least of all standardized logic and grammar. The other quote is incongruous: it's explicitly a statement pertaining to the first-person shooter genre (here are a few clues if the actual quote wasn't clear: "FPS should", "but a FPS", and "in the FPS genre"). Is Deadly Premonition a first-person shooter, now? I wouldn't be surprised to see you claim that after the delusion "experimental art film" comment. The two relevant quotes to this discussion do not equate to an expectation or demand of "perfect game mechanics". Here, read an actual quote where I make the distinction between great games and experiences and which debunks your two fabricated quotes: source.


Responding to what people literally post is the basis for the existence of forums and makes discussion possible. It's not my fault that your posts are mostly gibberish and operate under logic foreign to the human race and grammar, to the English language. You imply that if that serious design flaws are recognized of a game before playing the game, it's permissible to ignore them when critiquing the game. That's gibberish. Oblivion had the same design except years before the release of Deadly Premonition; obviously, the scope of Oblivion limited the routines of the NPCs (hundreds as opposed to dozens in Deadly Premonition) and it was released in 2006.

As I've said, unsubstantiated subjective opinions are worthless in a discussion attempting to critique a game. Either you substantiate your argument and counter why Deadly Premonition isn't a badly designed game, hasn't interesting characters or a decent plot or why top-down development works or explain how a game that was subject to institutional filters on its content was the equivalent of an experimental art film and not equivalent to a Hollywood film (I still don't think you understand this distinction and the significance of a publisher's input) or stop spamming the thread with posts about unqualified enjoyable experiences, hyperbolia and worthless discussion.

Mr Freeze

This game clearly has audiences divided.

If I see it in the bargain bin some day, perhaps I might see what all the fuss is about.

@Retr0Gamer

(instead of starting a new thread) Did you see the trailer for the game Catherine, looks similar in its madness to this game but with a big budget and nice anime graphics, could be right up your street.

Retr0gamer

NeoKubrick wrote: »

Can you explain how any of those quotes relate to the two quotes you fabricated and attributed to me, or were you imitating a monkey and flailing your arms about hoping to reach and grab a banana? Can you explain you why you picked a quote which actually contradicts the quotes you falsely attribute to me? If I expect "perfect game mechanics" and demand "polished game mechanics", it would be inconsistent to claim that I think Deus Ex and System Shock 2 are great games. So, how you inferred those two quotes from that incompatible single quote is beyond explanation least of all standardized logic and grammar. The other quote is incongruous: it's explicitly a statement pertaining to the first-person shooter genre (here are a few clues if the actual quote wasn't clear: "FPS should", "but a FPS", and "in the FPS genre"). Is Deadly Premonition a first-person shooter, now? I wouldn't be surprised to see you claim that after the delusion "experimental art film" comment. The two relevant quotes to this discussion do not equate to an expectation or demand of "perfect game mechanics". Here, read an actual quote where I make the distinction between great games and experiences and which debunks your two fabricated quotes: source..

I didn't fabricate any quotes, they were more observations of perosnality. Also quoting out of context, I know someone else that's done that before. You're alos taking quotes way out of context above. Pot, kettle, black.

NeoKubrick wrote: »

Responding to what people literally post is the basis for the existence of forums and makes discussion possible. It's not my fault that your posts are mostly gibberish and operate under logic foreign to the human race and grammar, to the English language.

I'm sorry that I don't speak in absolutes and that you have a hard time comprehending subtlies such as hyperbole and sarcasm. I like to use the english language to make things interesting but looks like I've given you far too much credit.

NeoKubrick wrote: »

You imply that if that serious design flaws are recognized of a game before playing the game, it's permissible to ignore them when critiquing the game. That's gibberish.

Not ignore them. Put up with them if the experience is good as a whole. It's all about the experience in the end.

NeoKubrick wrote: »

Oblivion had the same design except years before the release of Deadly Premonition; obviously, the scope of Oblivion limited the routines of the NPCs (hundreds as opposed to dozens in Deadly Premonition) and it was released in 2006.

Destroying your own argument? So what if it was released in 2006, deadly premonition did it better and with more ambition than the big budget oblivion did. I wouldn't even say the two systems are comparable considering how primatively it is implemented in Oblivion.

NeoKubrick wrote: »

As I've said, unsubstantiated subjective opinions are worthless in a discussion attempting to critique a game. Either you substantiate your argument and counter why Deadly Premonition isn't a badly designed game, hasn't interesting characters or a decent plot or why top-down development works or explain how a game that was subject to institutional filters on its content was the equivalent of an experimental art film and not equivalent to a Hollywood film (I still don't think you understand this distinction and the significance of a publisher's input) or stop spamming the thread with posts about unqualified enjoyable experiences, hyperbolia and worthless discussion.

Well then feel free to go on nit picking at the mechanics all you want and boring us all to big fat salty tears. We all know it's poor in lots of areas, we can read that anywhere. I'd rather talk about peoples experiences with the game good or bad.

Retr0gamer

CKWPORT wrote: »

@Retr0Gamer

(instead of starting a new thread) Did you see the trailer for the game Catherine, looks similar in its madness to this game but with a big budget and nice anime graphics, could be right up your street.

Can't wait for Catherine! Looks really interesting and it's by the team behind Persona 3 and 4 which are two of my favourite games.

NeoKubrick

Retr0gamer wrote: »

Well then feel free to go on nit picking at the mechanics all you want and boring us all to big fat salty tears.

Retr0gamer wrote: »

I also think that a piece of entertainment being ultimately enjoyable is far more important than nit picking the stuff it gets wrong.

That's utterly priceless from someone who throws epic tantrums any time someone reminisces about their "enjoyable" experience on certain games.

Retr0gamer wrote: »

I didn't fabricate any quotes, they were more observations of perosnality. Also quoting out of context, I know someone else that's done that before. You're alos taking quotes way out of context above. Pot, kettle, black.

If that made any sense, you'd be specific rather than sheepishly generalize. You did fabricate quotes to justify inferring that I expect "perfect game mechanics" and demand and think "every game needs polished game mechanics to be enjoyable". I even sourced a post that demonstrates the distinction I make between great games and great experiences which completely embarrasses your fabricated quotes. If it was an observation of personality, you're a poor judge. The least I would expect is a retraction. You're referring to the quote I pulled which I cited because you claimed that you had superior knowledge of and experiences on the PC gaming scene in the 90s but said this in 2004:

Retr0gamer wrote:

"The PC FPS games before it were terrible and repetitive crap"

That quote is not out of context, at all. It proved that you did not have a "superior knowledge" of the 90s PC gaming scene: you wouldn't be claiming in 2004 the above if you were having superior experiences in the 90s. Furthermore, it proves that I was right to guess that you pilfered someone else's opinion on the subject of Halo: Combat Evolved, because, obviously, your opinion changed from the above to another position. You even insecurely mention and imply this 90s experience again in this thread after I called you up for grossly ignoring the real gaming equivalent of the experimental art film scene, the independent PC scene, by calling Deadly Premonition, a worldwide boxed-distributed game a "experimental art film". Here:

Retr0gamer wrote:

"The home micro and 90's PC scene were full of these games. maybe I'm more forgiving having more experience"

I don't know if you're trying harder to convince the rest of us or yourself. Explain how I have taken two quotes below out of context. One refers explicitly to the FPS genre and the other claims that both games are great in spite of their combat mechanics which contradicts your fabricated quote:

Deus Ex and System Shock 2 are great games, but a FPS game, first and foremost, is combat, and I don't know if you've played either game recently, but both games have simplistic combat which isn't getting better with age. Both games excelled in other areas, but not combat.

FPS should aspire to be more than combat, but a FPS, by definition, will have to challenge the gamer the majority of the time with combat, and if the combat isn't interesting, then, the most important component of the game is not interesting. You can't put games with inferior combat above games with superior combat in the FPS genre; it just doesn't make sense.

Retr0gamer wrote: »

I'd rather talk about peoples experiences with the game good or bad.

I agree. I posted my experiences and substantiated my argument, and your unwarranted response was trite. If the bad game design is highly referenced and therefore deserves no discussion, then the good story that is highly referenced too deserves no discussion. Again, this is the gibberish logic I'm referring to. You can delude yourself that it's nit-picking to discuss the game mechanics but the reality is different. The bad game design is consistent throughout the game and it is major part of the experience and it contributes to the inaccessibility of the game.

There's no question that Deadly Premonition implemented that design better, but your original claims were that this was new territory and unique and that there was no such game in the adventure genre in a sandbox environment. All claims which are false, because Oblivion implemented that design in 2006, as stated, and the Elder Scrolls series has been releasing adventure games in sandbox environments for a decade.

Grayditch

I've just seen Laura Palmers actual prom photo on the wall of the dead girl's bedroom. I say actual, it's pretty pixelated, but it's the photo alright.

Mr Freeze

Retr0gamer wrote: »

Can't wait for Catherine! Looks really interesting and it's by the team behind Persona 3 and 4 which are two of my favourite games.

Ya it looks very interesting especially if you are an amine fan!
Doubtful that it will get a western release I'd say! If it does it might be worth a look.

Anyways I'll let ye get back to yer DP debate!

Retr0gamer

NeoKubrick wrote: »

That quote is not out of context, at all. It proved that you did not have a "superior knowledge" of the 90s PC gaming scene: you wouldn't be claiming in 2004 the above if you were having superior experiences in the 90s. Furthermore, it proves that I was right to guess that you pilfered someone else's opinion on the subject of Halo: Combat Evolved, because, obviously, your opinion changed from the above to another position.

Yes it is taken out of context because you don't understand the difference between hating a game and saying it's bad and calling something overrated. I'm not the one that bullishly stands by the frankly silly thinking that Halo was anyway revolutionary despite all the evidence to the contrary and going on like guns, grenades and melee is some form of holy trinity that has never before been seen in a game. Halo is a decent game but it's overrated and between Deus Ex in 2000 and Halo in 2002 there were very few good FPS games released with a lot of derivative stagnant rubbish. My opinion of the series hasn't changed. I'll contradict you if you call the game crap or if you hold it up on some pedestal that it doesn't belong on. You can keep saying that someone influenced my thinking until you believe it but it's still not true.

Anyway I'm kind of sick arguing with you. I see no point in it with someone as stubborn and pigheaded as you. I'd have more respect for you if you could admit when you are wrong but it's totally beyond you.I can only imagine how long it took to search every post I made with Halo in it to find one from 6 years ago that you could twist to try and convince yourself about me being influenced by someone else.

Retr0gamer

CKWPORT wrote: »

Ya it looks very interesting especially if you are an amine fan!
Doubtful that it will get a western release I'd say! If it does it might be worth a look.

I'm pretty sure it will get a western release in America at the very least. Atlus have been really good in bringing their games over and since the Persona team are behind it it's got a lot of hype.

NeoKubrick

Retr0gamer wrote: »

Yes it is taken out of context because you don't understand the difference between hating a game and saying it's bad and calling something overrated. I'm not the one that bullishly stands by the frankly silly thinking that Halo was anyway revolutionary despite all the evidence to the contrary and going on like guns, grenades and melee is some form of holy trinity that has never before been seen in a game. Halo is a decent game but it's overrated and between Deus Ex in 2000 and Halo in 2002 there were very few good FPS games released with a lot of derivative stagnant rubbish. My opinion of the series hasn't changed. I'll contradict you if you call the game crap or if you hold it up on some pedestal that it doesn't belong on. You can keep saying that someone influenced my thinking until you believe it but it's still not true.

Anyway I'm kind of sick arguing with you. I see no point in it with someone as stubborn and pigheaded as you. I'd have more respect for you if you could admit when you are wrong but it's totally beyond you.I can only imagine how long it took to search every post I made with Halo in it to find one from 6 years ago that you could twist to try and convince yourself about me being influenced by someone else.

It isn't out of context. You claimed that there you were aware of "superior experiences" of Halo's combat on the PC before its release in 2001 in a weak argument, but in 2004, you're claiming that Halo was the best FPS money could buy (it took all of a minute to find that quote):

I think the fact that I'd been playing PC games since 1992 and had my own PC since 1996 counts more.

Also it was the best example of a FPS since Half Life and Deus Ex. The PC FPS games before it were terrible and repetitive crap. Halo was the best FPS money could buy until Metroid Prime came out and is still probably the best game on the xbox.

Furthermore, you omitted a detail of your quote in the above post: you claimed Halo was the best FPS since Deus Ex and Half-Life (released in 1998); so, the timeline would be from 1998, not 2000, to 2002. Anyway, you claim it is the best FPS money could buy until Metroid Prime; therefore, that timeline is irrelevant. You claim that your opinion hasn't changed, but it is plain and explicit that you're changing it even now.

In every discussion we had, I proved that Halo: Combat Evolved was revolutionary and destroyed your weak arguments. Where is evidence of this to contrary? Link to the discussions and point to exactly where you proved that Halo was not revolutionary; the difficulty is you can't fabricate quotes this time. In fact, you ineptly and unwittingly implied Halo was revolutionary in the last discussion: "Halo was de-evolutionary to the FPS genre". If that wasn't enough delusion in your post, you imply that anyone other than yourself is stubborn and pigheaded. A couple of months ago, I pointed you to documents where you could inform yourself about the Halo series and its design, because it's been clear that you don't have a clue about the Halo series or, in general, game design or game AI (hopelessly clueless). You idiotically ignored it, because you rather be blissfully ignorant and repeat what someone told you about the series after 2004 than invalidate every single time you threw a tantrum over a 'Halo is great' comment over the last six years. That's the truth of the matter and the same with Final Fantasy XII ("You know what, you're still wrong").


I'd have more respect for you if you dropped the cringe-worthy assumption that your opinion trumps everyone else's despite the gibberish logic and bias and especially on subjects which you have absolutely no knowledge or understanding of.

Retr0gamer

NeoKubrick wrote: »

It isn't out of context. You claimed that there you were aware of "superior experiences" of Halo's combat on the PC before its release in 2001 in a weak argument, but in 2004, you're claiming that Halo was the best FPS money could buy (it took all of a minute to find that quote):

I'd ask you to readit agian but you've already proven you can't follow simple english. Anyway I wouldn't expect anything less from someone that will fabricate something to suit their own interpretations and flat out ignores any evidence that proves him wrong. I don't mention it'sthe best FPS that money can buy, you'rejust making it up and drawing conclusions to suit yourself. Go read it properly without an agenda.

NeoKubrick wrote: »

Furthermore, you omitted a detail of your quote in the above post: you claimed Halo was the best FPS since Deus Ex and Half-Life (released in 1998); so, the timeline would be from 1998, not 2000, to 2002.

Deus Ex was released in 2000 genius.

NeoKubrick wrote: »

Anyway, you claim it is the best FPS money could buy until Metroid Prime; therefore, that timeline is irrelevant. You claim that your opinion hasn't changed, but it is plain and explicit that you're changing it even now.

The best in a sea of mediocrity isn't a glowing opinion. Again you fail to realise the difference between somebody finding a game over rated and somebody not liking a game.

NeoKubrick wrote: »

In every discussion we had, I proved that Halo: Combat Evolved was revolutionary and destroyed your weak arguments. Where is evidence of this to contrary? Link to the discussions and point to exactly where you proved that Halo was not revolutionary; the difficulty is you can't fabricate quotes this time. In fact, you ineptly and unwittingly implied Halo was revolutionary in the last discussion: "Halo was de-evolutionary to the FPS genre". If that wasn't enough delusion in your post, you imply that anyone other than yourself is stubborn and pigheaded. A couple of months ago, I pointed you to documents where you could inform yourself about the Halo series and its design, because it's been clear that you don't have a clue about the Halo series or, in general, game design or game AI (hopelessly clueless). You idiotically ignored it, because you rather be blissfully ignorant and repeat what someone told you about the series after 2004 than invalidate every single time you threw a tantrum over a 'Halo is great' comment over the last six years. That's the truth of the matter and the same with Final Fantasy XII ("You know what, you're still wrong").

And you think you are some kind of expert? Give me a break. You're the worst kind of zealot that fallen for their own delusions. I kept asking you for evidence on how it was revolutionary and you have still yet to provide any evidence. I might have said de-evolutionary, a wrong choice of words and said I meant stagnated but you just cling on to it. Anyway I'm still waiting on you to provide some evidence. I've provided enough of myown but only get the fingers in the ears response from you. I'm not going to link to it, it's there in the halo forum if you want to find it and what use will it do anyway, you'll just be as pigheaded as always so there's no point even discussing anything with you.

NeoKubrick wrote: »

I'd have more respect for you if you dropped the cringe-worthy assumption that your opinion trumps everyone else's despite the gibberish logic and bias and especially on subjects which you have absolutely no knowledge or understanding of.

Pot. Kettle. Black.

Grayditch

"Zach, I ... I think I see where this is going"

chrislad

Got this for 10quid in London so I may give it a bash later on tonight, if I can stop playing Castlevania.

Grumpypants

I've just gone through the lumber mill bit, lots of creepy shivers up the spine moments.

How long is the game ive just finished episode 1 chapter 5. About 4 hours in.