Zero Punctuation: Top 5 Games of 2014

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 NEXT
 

Naming Thief the worst of the year is fine by me. I got it on sale despite what I'd heard and got maybe 3/4 of the way through it before I couldn't take it anymore. I hated that game. I hated how generic and grim it was. I hated how arbitrary some of the time I got caught seemed. I hated the stupid QTEs to open windows and move beams to move from one part of the "open" world to the other. It was boring and I uninstalled it without ever looking back once.

LordTerminal:

Johnny Novgorod:

LordTerminal:
You're biased against Nintendo and you don't like fighting games so why touch something you obviously aren't going to like other than to deliberately piss people off?

He liked Paper Mario: The Thousand-Year Door, Super Paper Mario, EarthBound and Luigi's Mansion: Dark Moon. He's just biased against games that are bad and/or boring.

Funny considering that Smash Bros. is neither.

That is of course your opinion. There are a lot of people who think otherwise. But even if it's neither bad or boring, there's nothing much new to it to call it Best Game of the Year. Probably the reason why he didn't pick Bayonetta 2, a game he ostensibly enjoyed, but felt essentially "more of the same".

Kitsune Hunter:

Johnny Novgorod:

LordTerminal:
You're biased against Nintendo and you don't like fighting games so why touch something you obviously aren't going to like other than to deliberately piss people off?

He liked Paper Mario: The Thousand-Year Door, Super Paper Mario, EarthBound and Luigi's Mansion: Dark Moon. He's just biased against games that are bad and/or boring.

Implying that Smash Bros. 4 was a objectively bad or boring game

Bender has laughed so hard at so many things at everyone's convenience, it's become rather meaningless :) Case in point:

Evonisia:

With the exception of Smash, wouldn't this just mean that we should stick to refining old ideas rather than just giving old ideas new names?

Bayonetta 2, Hyrule Warriors and Mario Kart 8 didn't exactly do much new, just tried refining what was already fine. Not exactly the best attitude to have especially in a new console generation.

Well, then be prepared for that attitude to persist for the indefinite future, because there is a 90% chance that it's going to stay that way. This is what happens when designers try to rely on brute force instead of actual designing and lateral thinking. Destiny, Sunset Overdrive, Watch Dogs, The Crew, Drive Club, Knack, basically every attempt to try and sell the new generation has failed for one reason or another. It just goes to show that a new name doesn't mean much when your lack of competency shows through in the final product.

Kenjitsuka:

No offense, but all the interesting stuff above are sequels.
And not just part 2 either; MK 8, Dynasty Warriors 8 or 9, SB part 4 AND 5...

Also not really doing anything too new as far as I can gather from reviews either.
One might even wonder if expansion packs in the old days would not contain the same level of new stuff as these sequels.

And....? They're sequels, but yet those still held my interest a helluva lot more than all the other stuff coming out. Sure, they stick to the same established skeleton that they always have, but that's like complaining that sharks haven't really evolved in the past million years; no need to improve that much when you hit it out of the park from day one.

daxterx2005:
Im shocked you didn't give the worst game of the year to Sonic Boom.
Everyone seems to be hating on that game saying its even worse than Sonic 06.

The thing about Sonic and Spider-Man is that they had already been in bad games, but the Thief trilogy kept its acclaim.
Actually, I think people still agree that Sonic 06 is still the worst. Sonic Boom is more bland, but at least it wasn't ruined by load times, sudden deaths, no auto-saves, and an undertone of bestiality.

Jman1236:
A worst 5 game list without COD? It's a mircle!

Actually yeah 2014 has be a low point for gaming in general with AAA games shooting themselves in the foot time and again:Looks at destiny:

CoD was actually not shit this year. It could even have been good if they didn't fuck up the matchmaking 2 weeks after launch and the netcode wasn't written by a dyslexic 10 year old.

But 2014 was far from a low point. Sure, AAA sucked, but smaller devs and indies more than made up for it. In fact I can't remember a year with so many awesome releases: Wolfenstein, Shadow of Mordor, Shovel Knight, South Park, Divinity Original Sin, Wasteland 2, Transistor, Titanfall, Hearthstone and probably a few others I'm missing right now.

I've always found it very unfair for Zero Punctuation to put Final Fantasy XIII and Lightning Returns: Final Fantasy XIII on the top 5 worst list when he's only played 3-5 hours of said games each. You can't know what an RPG is about in said 3-5 hours story wise, character development wise, combat wise, or atmosphere wise.

It's really stupid to do that. FF13 was a decent game and while LR was only passable, neither deserved to be on that list. If you look at the games on said countdowns, all of those other games were pretty broken in every regard.

KingdomFantasyXIII:
I've always found it very unfair for Zero Punctuation to put Final Fantasy XIII and Lightning Returns: Final Fantasy XIII on the top 5 worst list when he's only played 3-5 hours of said games each. You can't know what an RPG is about in said 3-5 hours story wise, character development wise, combat wise, or atmosphere wise.

It's really stupid to do that. FF13 was a decent game and while LR was only passable, neither deserved to be on that list. If you look at the games on said countdowns, all of those other games were pretty broken in every regard.

If an RPG (or frankly, any game) bores or annoys you to the point that you don't want to play it past 3-5 hours then yes, that is a completely valid complaint. You do realize that 5 hours is two full length movies, right? If a game can't be interesting or have something to grip you in two movies worth of time, then it's perfectly fine to mark it down.

Johnny Novgorod:
snip

Using my own joke as a reply, hilarious, you should do stand up some time, my friend

Johnny Novgorod:

That is of course your opinion. There are a lot of people who think otherwise.

Define "a lot". The majority of reviews has praised the game, perhaps you could provide us some links to some negative reviews to represent the large number of people you claim say otherwise. Not to say everyone will like SSB4, that's impossible, but considering you like to give the impression that most people thought the game was bad, allow me to give the same reply you gave to LordTerminal: That is of course, your opinion.

tilmoph:

KingdomFantasyXIII:
I've always found it very unfair for Zero Punctuation to put Final Fantasy XIII and Lightning Returns: Final Fantasy XIII on the top 5 worst list when he's only played 3-5 hours of said games each. You can't know what an RPG is about in said 3-5 hours story wise, character development wise, combat wise, or atmosphere wise.

It's really stupid to do that. FF13 was a decent game and while LR was only passable, neither deserved to be on that list. If you look at the games on said countdowns, all of those other games were pretty broken in every regard.

If an RPG (or frankly, any game) bores or annoys you to the point that you don't want to play it past 3-5 hours then yes, that is a completely valid complaint. You do realize that 5 hours is two full length movies, right? If a game can't be interesting or have something to grip you in two movies worth of time, then it's perfectly fine to mark it down.

Movies and RPGs are completely different. Movies are just two hours to 1.5 hours long due to the fact that you don't control what happens in a movie, and you just watch what happens on the screen. Plus character development is very simplified in movies as well (the characters in the LOTR books are far more developed than their movie counterparts).

It's not valid to just say "I know exactly what is happening in 40 hour RPG when you have only played 5 hours". That is 1/8th of the time that is needed to understand what is going on, why that is happening, what the characters journeys are like and how does the game play.

Honestly, I got the feeling that Thief was just Yathzees Fanboy being mad, nothing else.

[quote="KingdomFantasyXIII" post="6.867855.21719699"

Movies and RPGs are completely different. Movies are just two hours to 1.5 hours long due to the fact that you don't control what happens in a movie, and you just watch what happens on the screen. Plus character development is very simplified in movies as well (the characters in the LOTR books are far more developed than their movie counterparts).

It's not valid to just say "I know exactly what is happening in 40 hour RPG when you have only played 5 hours". That is 1/8th of the time that is needed to understand what is going on, why that is happening, what the characters journeys are like and how does the game play.[/quote]

So you think 5 hours isn't enough time to introduce the mechanics and characters in an RPG? Of course movies are simplified, but they can still produce engaging stories in that time span. RPGs can and do as well. Final Fantasy Tactics introduces the Job system, the main characters, a narrative arc, and a variable amount of the prologue in the first 5 hours. Baldurs Gate 2 Gives a character intro to several companions, gives you time to explore the various class skills and abilities, and has you doing some sidequests (complete with side stories) in the first 5 hours. Alpha Protocol has had you go through the opening mission hub, develop your character, and given you a chance to engage in the dialogue tree and seen how the relationship system works.

None of these gave you everything, or even close to everything, narrative or mechanics wise in the first 5 hours, but they have given enough to give you a solid idea of the stories tone, the main characters, and the mechanics. If after 5 hours an RPG hasn't given something to hook you in, that is terrible design. Obviously, narrative and mechanic heavy games like RPGs are going to need a long time to really open up and give you the meat of the story and systems, but 5 hours is more than enough time to present the player with the information they need to know if continuing for another 35+ hours is really worth it.

Both #1s surprised the hell out of me. Shadow of Morder #1? I was expecting Saints Row 4. And Thief the worst game? I'd just kind of forgotten that one and didn't remember Yahtzee heaping stealing piles of hatred-infused shit on it at the time (although that said, I'd better go back and rewatch that review now).

Lightknight:
The way the top and bottom games were portrayed was perhaps the most confusing way Yahtzee has displayed them. I would have preferred to see them all at one time in relation to one another. This video in general was a bit on the confusion side but I suppose he was just fitting it all into one spot.

I've got to watch it a second time to be sure of what I saw or missed.

EDIT: Ok, after watching it a second time I guess that makes sense. You top-hatted beautiful bastard, you. Haha.

I've watched it several times now and I'm still confused, what is it?

Tiny bit disappointed Dragon Age wasn't there, since it was my runaway GotY. But I guess it's not really his thing. SoM, Alien and DS2 were undeniably great. I'm going to have to play Wolfenstein at some point.

KingdomFantasyXIII:

Movies and RPGs are completely different. Movies are just two hours to 1.5 hours long due to the fact that you don't control what happens in a movie, and you just watch what happens on the screen. Plus character development is very simplified in movies as well (the characters in the LOTR books are far more developed than their movie counterparts).

It's not valid to just say "I know exactly what is happening in 40 hour RPG when you have only played 5 hours". That is 1/8th of the time that is needed to understand what is going on, why that is happening, what the characters journeys are like and how does the game play.

Except it's completely valid because if a game does not grab you within four hours than clearly jack shit is happening. Heck, with some games that's half their running time. It gave him nothing to grab onto; no interesting characters, no underlying mystery, no interesting world to explore, nothing. Contrast this with previous entries in the series; within the first hour of FFIV you're given a clear task (go to village to deliver something), got introduced to some interesting characters in Kain, Cecil, and Rydia, and also have a surprise twist (why would someone burn said village to the ground/my country is up to something). FFVI was much the same way, giving the mystery of the Espers, having Terra and Locke set out on a journey to meet with the resistance, and of course seeing an interesting world filled with fascinating characters. And FFVII starts off with you blowing up a reactor. Exciting, but you're also learning about the setup (you again all-powerful, evil corporation) and learn a few things about Cloud and the people he's with (he's an ex-SOLDIER).

FFXIII does nothing so competently or interesting. It's just stuff happening, except we have no context for the stuff happening, mostly due to shitty story-telling as evidenced by vital exposition being relegated to an in-game dictionary instead of woven into the narrative properly. If a game's opening is so crap that it's painful than better to just chuck it instead of hoping it'll magically get better.

tilmoph:
[quote="KingdomFantasyXIII" post="6.867855.21719699"

Movies and RPGs are completely different. Movies are just two hours to 1.5 hours long due to the fact that you don't control what happens in a movie, and you just watch what happens on the screen. Plus character development is very simplified in movies as well (the characters in the LOTR books are far more developed than their movie counterparts).

It's not valid to just say "I know exactly what is happening in 40 hour RPG when you have only played 5 hours". That is 1/8th of the time that is needed to understand what is going on, why that is happening, what the characters journeys are like and how does the game play.[/quote]

So you think 5 hours isn't enough time to introduce the mechanics and characters in an RPG? Of course movies are simplified, but they can still produce engaging stories in that time span. RPGs can and do as well. Final Fantasy Tactics introduces the Job system, the main characters, a narrative arc, and a variable amount of the prologue in the first 5 hours. Baldurs Gate 2 Gives a character intro to several companions, gives you time to explore the various class skills and abilities, and has you doing some sidequests (complete with side stories) in the first 5 hours. Alpha Protocol has had you go through the opening mission hub, develop your character, and given you a chance to engage in the dialogue tree and seen how the relationship system works.

None of these gave you everything, or even close to everything, narrative or mechanics wise in the first 5 hours, but they have given enough to give you a solid idea of the stories tone, the main characters, and the mechanics. If after 5 hours an RPG hasn't given something to hook you in, that is terrible design. Obviously, narrative and mechanic heavy games like RPGs are going to need a long time to really open up and give you the meat of the story and systems, but 5 hours is more than enough time to present the player with the information they need to know if continuing for another 35+ hours is really worth it.

Hilarious examples. Here are some actual good examples of the whole "knowing 5 hours of a RPG and therefore you know the solid idea" does not work:

Persona 3 and Persona 4. You have no idea all the characters that are introduced, no real idea of the combat system, no idea what the mystery of the story is going to revolve around and no idea what challenges await you. It takes 75-80 hours to finally figure everything out.

Kingdom Hearts 2: Dude it takes 5 hours to get through Roxas's story. Hell, we never even touch on Sora's story in that point of time (save for flashbacks of KH1). What is Organization XIII? What are the Nobodies? Why is Roxas "half of Sora"? What is the game mechanics that will hook you in? How come the Seeker of Darkness is back? Why does Diz want revenge against said Organization XIII? What challenges lie in Sora's journey? Will he find Riku? You won't get those answers in 5 hours

NEIR and Drakengard 3: Both of these games rely on the multiple paths kind of storytelling. The first path is not aways the right path. Plus as you go through each path, you uncover the hidden mystery behind all of them. Characters from one path might not show up in another and could later on act differently due to the path's different story. Plus gameplay mechanics are also hidden within each road to keep the games fresh.

See what I mean? 5 hours does not equal "I understand"

Shadow of Mordor was just excellent, I was genuinely surprised because I hadn't payed any attention to it till a couple of days before release, then bought it day one and have barely put it down since.

Im currently finishing off Farcry 4 for the 2nd time and then I have Inquisition sitting under the browning xmas tree just waiting.

2014 wasn't so bad.... but while the opportunity presents...

Destiny sux as I predicted and escapist promoted the shit out of it..... (Nelson voice) HA HA!

JUMBO PALACE:
Naming Thief the worst of the year is fine by me. I got it on sale despite what I'd heard and got maybe 3/4 of the way through it before I couldn't take it anymore. I hated that game. I hated how generic and grim it was. I hated how arbitrary some of the time I got caught seemed. I hated the stupid QTEs to open windows and move beams to move from one part of the "open" world to the other. It was boring and I uninstalled it without ever looking back once.

I lasted about 10 minutes, twice, then gave up and traded it the next day. It was a crime on the game industry.

Aiddon:

KingdomFantasyXIII:

Movies and RPGs are completely different. Movies are just two hours to 1.5 hours long due to the fact that you don't control what happens in a movie, and you just watch what happens on the screen. Plus character development is very simplified in movies as well (the characters in the LOTR books are far more developed than their movie counterparts).

It's not valid to just say "I know exactly what is happening in 40 hour RPG when you have only played 5 hours". That is 1/8th of the time that is needed to understand what is going on, why that is happening, what the characters journeys are like and how does the game play.

Except it's completely valid because if a game does not grab you within four hours than clearly jack shit is happening. Heck, with some games that's half their running time. It gave him nothing to grab onto; no interesting characters, no underlying mystery, no interesting world to explore, nothing. Contrast this with previous entries in the series; within the first hour of FFIV you're given a clear task (go to village to deliver something), got introduced to some interesting characters in Kain, Cecil, and Rydia, and also have a surprise twist (why would someone burn said village to the ground/my country is up to something). FFVI was much the same way, giving the mystery of the Espers, having Terra and Locke set out on a journey to meet with the resistance, and of course seeing an interesting world filled with fascinating characters. And FFVII starts off with you blowing up a reactor. Exciting, but you're also learning about the setup (you again all-powerful, evil corporation) and learn a few things about Cloud and the people he's with (he's an ex-SOLDIER).

FFXIII does nothing so competently or interesting. It's just stuff happening, except we have no context for the stuff happening, mostly due to shitty story-telling as evidenced by vital exposition being relegated to an in-game dictionary instead of woven into the narrative properly. If a game's opening is so crap that it's painful than better to just chuck it instead of hoping it'll magically get better.

1. FF4 only introduces the characters, but it does not develop them. The lack of development and only showing the archtype does not make good characters.

2. The task of "Go to a Village to deliver something" is not the main storyline and lacks any form of connection to the major plot points. It only shows "Government bad, you are good". You would never have guessed that Golbez was Cecil's lost brother, that Cecil came from the moon, and that the main villain (Zemus) is trying to get his lunar brethren to populate the planet.

3. FF6 gives you the mystery of the Espers but does not explain why it's a mystery. you have to play farther in order to understand what is going on with the Espers and why they are important. Same thing with FF7. You would never have guessed all of the plot twists from just the first 5 hours. It takes more than that to understand what is going on.

4. FF13 did set up these mysteries as well: What is the Pulse L'cie's focus? Why does Fang have a white L'cie brand? Why does Cocoon and Grand Pulse hate each other so much? Again, questions that will be answered past the 5 hour mark.

Personally my worst game of the year would be Destiny (and it's recent DLC providing the extra salt on the wound) because while not bad in a typical or obvious way like most game it's a more subtle yet more devious kind of suck. Here we had the maiden voyage of a new IP with a well regarded dev studio and a whopping 500 million budget behind it. The trailers and demos of it looked fantastic like a cross between Halo, Mass Effect, and Borderlands. Sure Activision is just as bad if not worse than EA but...hey it's Bungie so it can still be amazing right?

WRONG!!!! Rather than sailing off into the sunrise on golden sails, this brand new IP decked out in bling and marching out to trumpet flare like a king took a few steps off the ramp and proceeded to fall flat on it's face. Even I tried to look the other way and convince myself it would get better. But the more I played the more cracks showed and the deception fell apart revealing the cold truth...that Destiny is a waste of time and money. Sure it looks nice and sounds nice, the basic combat is tight an fun...but that's all! Everything else is so mediocre, missing, or just poorly thought out. The story barely qualifies as a rough draft and requires logging off to read trading cards on a website to get any background info. The combat gets repetitive quickly as your forced into killing the exact same mobs in the exact same missions that never evolve beyond shooting waves of dudes while Dinkle-bot hacks something. PVP suffers from the same grind, balancing issues, and same RNG loot drops that reward afk'ers with epic gear while giving skilled players junk or nothing at all. Everything quickly boils down to a grind-fest for better gear and not even a rewarding grind. When it's preferable to camp the starting zone and farm mobs from a cave rather than do your quests/dungeons then you have really, really fucked up as a game designer. The list of problems could go on for a mile but so many of them could/should have been addressed long before release.

There is just so many features missing and content cut out either to sell later as DLC or to dumb it down for the lowest common denominator it's simply inexcusable. Sure there are tons of shitty indie games on Steam that dare to charge cash for their garbage, but this is a $60+ AAA game made by a team of devs who should know better...that we expect better from. Whatever the reasons behind the scenes it doesn't change the fact that Destiny is an epic disappointment trying to fool gamers into paying more for less. The potential is/was there I can see it in the shallow husk of a game it turned out to be, and that is what makes me so mad at Destiny and Activison/Bungie for squandering that potential as well as our trust in them to deliver a satisfying experience. Even now some part of me wants to love Destiny but I just can't.

Huh. I'm kind of relieved Ubisoft's titles this year didn't make the Bottom 5, but I understand why they weren't in the Top 5.

PMAvers:

Dragonheart57:
Funny how the bottom 3 were all reboots or tie-ins, but I don't think anyone would be surprised by that. On the other hand, the top 3 were also tie-ins or reboots (I think, not sure about Wolfenstein), which is much more interesting.

Wolfenstein is technically a sequel to the previous couple of games. There's some characters that have shown up in previous ones, and events have been referenced.

And it's so bloody good.

It was strange to me to hear him compare Wolfenstein:TNO to SO:TL. I don't want to feel bad about killing Nazis, that gets in the way of my fun!

Kitsune Hunter:

Johnny Novgorod:
snip

Using my own joke as a reply, hilarious, you should do stand up some time, my friend.

image

Good god man, you broke it!

I guess this must be a case of Your Mileage May Vary, because I really enjoyed the Thief game. The ending and final fight were disappointing, but to this day I still like to load it up every once in a while and tour the streets, blackjacking people over the head and pinching their purses. Or just plain replaying some levels and trying to figure out where the hell I keep missing loot.

Why did I know in advance that this thread would be 50% Nintendo fanboys complaining about Smash? You guys really need to get over two things:

1) Not everyone likes Smash. That is actually a thing that is possible, rather than "t3h bi45" against the corporation you've decided to attach your self-worth to.
2) Even if he had adored the game, it couldn't go on the list because he didn't review it.

Like children somtimes - predictable, irritating children.

Kinda surprised Inquisition didn't make it, despite Yahtzee saying it was his favorite Dragon Age.

Objectable:
Sonic Boom makes me so sad. And the TV Show is halfway fun, to!
The game is just... *sobs*
COME BACK SONIC GENERATIONS! I MISS YOU!

Calm thine tits. It's not even like Rise of Lyric is a standard or mainline Sonic platformer. It's a spinoff title whose genre within the platformer heading has more in line with Lego City than most Sonic games. It does have those token boost-pad segments, seemingly in an attempt to say "no, but Sonic MUST BE ABOUT SPEEEEEEEED!", but that's hardly its core gameplay.

Lost World, not Rise of Lyric, is the most recent standard Sonic game. Of course, even that one is kinda "meh" next to Colors, but Colors and Generations were at the tail end of a long line of games that worked on polishing their mechanics, whereas Lost World was experiencing with a new setup. I imagine the next game to use that new set of mechanics it introduced will be able to polish it some more.

KingdomFantasyXIII:
I've always found it very unfair for Zero Punctuation to put Final Fantasy XIII and Lightning Returns: Final Fantasy XIII on the top 5 worst list when he's only played 3-5 hours of said games each. You can't know what an RPG is about in said 3-5 hours story wise, character development wise, combat wise, or atmosphere wise.

It's really stupid to do that. FF13 was a decent game and while LR was only passable, neither deserved to be on that list. If you look at the games on said countdowns, all of those other games were pretty broken in every regard.

It's not meant to be a "fair" list though, everybody knows by now ZP is anything but fair, just a lulzy show.

And yes I love FFXIII (points to avatar), but I do find enjoyment in watching Yahtzee rag on it, simply because he's hilarious at it (especially since I actually felt the same way he did for the first 10 hours or so, so I can actually relate to his experience).

Silvershock:
Why did I know in advance that this thread would be 50% Nintendo fanboys complaining about Smash? You guys really need to get over two things:

1) Not everyone likes Smash. That is actually a thing that is possible, rather than "t3h bi45" against the corporation you've decided to attach your self-worth to.
2) Even if he had adored the game, it couldn't go on the list because he didn't review it.

Like children somtimes - predictable, irritating children.

Then maybe he shouldn't partake in what can best be described as a childish, insecure taunt. Doing such a thing and then expecting people to not get irritated or call him out on his behavior is akin to mooning someone and then complaining when they call the cops on your ass. Then again, at the end of the day, it really just comes off as sour grapes; pouting that the game is better designed, more critically acclaimed, and more adored the world over despite being pure, unashamed fanservice of the highest order.

I went in expecting to have my jimmies rustled, but they were left undisturbed, so that's good I guess. I also don't get why people are so sycophantically defensive of smash bros. I've played it, I've got it, I even got a couple of amiibos, but I wouldn't put it in my top 5, top ten maybe, but not top 5.

Johnny Novgorod:

erttheking:
Also on another note, Shadow of Mordor? Honestly didn't see that coming.

Didn't you watch his review? He loved it.

Yeah but there's a difference between loving it and loving it more than anything else that came out this year. I thought Alien Isolation would've taken that prize.

Silvershock:
Why did I know in advance that this thread would be 50% Nintendo fanboys complaining about Smash? You guys really need to get over two things:

1) Not everyone likes Smash. That is actually a thing that is possible, rather than "t3h bi45" against the corporation you've decided to attach your self-worth to.
2) Even if he had adored the game, it couldn't go on the list because he didn't review it.

Like children somtimes - predictable, irritating children.

Then maybe Yahtzee shouldn't have said that he was only going to talk about games he played, and then moved on to talking about how shit Smash Bros anyway. And maybe he also shouldn't have directly insulted the fans. I mean, it could've been forgiven if it was funny, but sadly those jokes didn't even get a chuckle out of me. Because they were less jokes and more insults.

Silvershock:
Why did I know in advance that this thread would be 50% Nintendo fanboys complaining about Smash?

I've seen a grand total of three people in this thread who positively mentioned Smash Bros. Methinks you just enjoy complaining about it a bit too much.

Kind of glad he didn't review Smash because I can't imagine it being anything he didn't say in his Brawl review but enough about that - decent choices for Best 5 and Worst 5. Kind of impressive just to find a valid Top 5 since this was not a very good year for gaming, but good picks, good games, and good video. Here's to another year.

KingdomFantasyXIII:

Aiddon:

KingdomFantasyXIII:

Movies and RPGs are completely different. Movies are just two hours to 1.5 hours long due to the fact that you don't control what happens in a movie, and you just watch what happens on the screen. Plus character development is very simplified in movies as well (the characters in the LOTR books are far more developed than their movie counterparts).

It's not valid to just say "I know exactly what is happening in 40 hour RPG when you have only played 5 hours". That is 1/8th of the time that is needed to understand what is going on, why that is happening, what the characters journeys are like and how does the game play.

Except it's completely valid because if a game does not grab you within four hours than clearly jack shit is happening. Heck, with some games that's half their running time. It gave him nothing to grab onto; no interesting characters, no underlying mystery, no interesting world to explore, nothing. Contrast this with previous entries in the series; within the first hour of FFIV you're given a clear task (go to village to deliver something), got introduced to some interesting characters in Kain, Cecil, and Rydia, and also have a surprise twist (why would someone burn said village to the ground/my country is up to something). FFVI was much the same way, giving the mystery of the Espers, having Terra and Locke set out on a journey to meet with the resistance, and of course seeing an interesting world filled with fascinating characters. And FFVII starts off with you blowing up a reactor. Exciting, but you're also learning about the setup (you again all-powerful, evil corporation) and learn a few things about Cloud and the people he's with (he's an ex-SOLDIER).

FFXIII does nothing so competently or interesting. It's just stuff happening, except we have no context for the stuff happening, mostly due to shitty story-telling as evidenced by vital exposition being relegated to an in-game dictionary instead of woven into the narrative properly. If a game's opening is so crap that it's painful than better to just chuck it instead of hoping it'll magically get better.

1. FF4 only introduces the characters, but it does not develop them. The lack of development and only showing the archtype does not make good characters.

2. The task of "Go to a Village to deliver something" is not the main storyline and lacks any form of connection to the major plot points. It only shows "Government bad, you are good". You would never have guessed that Golbez was Cecil's lost brother, that Cecil came from the moon, and that the main villain (Zemus) is trying to get his lunar brethren to populate the planet.

3. FF6 gives you the mystery of the Espers but does not explain why it's a mystery. you have to play farther in order to understand what is going on with the Espers and why they are important. Same thing with FF7. You would never have guessed all of the plot twists from just the first 5 hours. It takes more than that to understand what is going on.

4. FF13 did set up these mysteries as well: What is the Pulse L'cie's focus? Why does Fang have a white L'cie brand? Why does Cocoon and Grand Pulse hate each other so much? Again, questions that will be answered past the 5 hour mark.

There are a few things that separate the beginning of Final Fantasy XIII from the rest of the examples and i guess it would be best described as a lack of agency, while the mysteries are also presented in Final Fantasy XIII there is nothing to get more info of except the codex, there are no npc:s to talk to, there are very limited paths to explore, combat takes a long time to become anything but press x to deal damage, item customization takes a long time to get anywhere.

Most of this results in the first 5 to 10 hours to just walking down the corridor while sometimes fighting and sometimes going through flashbacks. There is very little to break the monotony, heck you don't even need to worry about potions or anything as health gets back full after every fight, resulting in even fewer breaks from the initial corridor running. It also takes some time to be able to level the characters, again resulting in the lack of things to keep the player engaged.

It is not valid to say you know everything about the game by that point, but for many it is enough to get completely bored of the game and lose interest.

Jman1236:
A worst 5 game list without COD? It's a mircle!

Actually yeah 2014 has be a low point for gaming in general with AAA games shooting themselves in the foot time and again:Looks at destiny:

And Far Cry 4 and Thief and Assassins Creed.

I had completely forgotten about Thief, being reminded of its existence was like an unwelcome kick to the crotch. Seriously, screw that game, it killed any hopes of there ever being a proper continuation of the Thief franchise and for that I'll never forgive it.

Fuck that game.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here