Silver Arrows
(Banned)
- 4,715
- Brandon, MB
- Silver-Arrows21
You're probably in some pretty deep echo chambers, then?Why is it then then that i keep hearing about how games from ****ing 2001 are literal masterpieces that can't be topped when i hardly hear the same for most modern games...?
You do know that's unrealistic, and not able to be done by everyone. In fact, lets be real, about the only time in recent history that such a stealth drop (which is what you're advocating) was actually performed well was by Apex Legends. Otherwise, a lot of this is just personal preferences.The only time a release date should be announced is when the game is essentially 100% done and it should be like a week before release- not 2 months, not 2 years, not 3 years (Looking at you metroid prime 4) not any amount of time longer than 2 weeks.
TLOU is as much of a game as Half-Life is, no matter how much your personal opinions say it isn't.Half life is a GAME, that just so happens to have really cinematic storytelling. I can't say the same for say, the last of us (yes, both the sequel and the original) which is a MOVIE that just so happens to have really generic gameplay.
...which absolutely can, and has, been done. In fact, it's alright if a game prioritizes story and cinematics - we like to call those point and click adventures, or visual novels. Which, should be noted, are as valid a video game as Half-Life, TLOU, or in the case of this forum, GT, is.the other completely ****ed it up in the 2010s by telling everyone to prioritize story and cinematics over actual gameplay.
Once more, Arkane's entire existence (and lets be real, Bethesda's catalog if we're being honest with ourselves) proves that isn't really the case. Control is another good example - hell, most of Sam Lake's modern catalog is great, and aside from the one game that he wasn't even there for and really just rubber stamped his name onto (Max Payne 3) are all single player experiences. The fact of the matter is, once more, you are not looking hard enough, considering that these experiences off the top of my head are all available and can be found, and for the most part, are apart of the AAA gaming space.As opposed to the mid-late 2000s where there was a perfect blend of multiplayer focused games and singleplayer experiences, as opposed to now where multiplayer completely dominates singleplayer and you can hardly find singleplayer focused experiences outside of the indie scene and JRPGS. I like those genres, but why must they be the only safe havens for me to find singleplayer games?
Incredibly debatable. Most people would consider the driving physics of GTA IV to be one of the worst aspects of the game, and I'd be inclined to agree.Let me bring up GTA4-5. GTA4 had incredibly realistic car physics that were a huge departure from how the 6th generation games controlled. You had to master how the cars worked and predict how the physics would react to your driving in order to get anywhere and get there efficiently, unlike in GTASA where the cars are more predictable and easy to control. This resulted in a really rewarding and fun driving system that made the game that much more fun, since you do a ****ton of driving in GTA. (it ain't called GTA for no reason afterall lol)
GTA V isn't a sim racer. It is, for all intents and purposes, arcade driving physics. Which considering the game it's supposed to be, is 100% okay. Considering driving is one of the most numerous portions of the game, it has to be a rock solid platform, which it is. It works for the type of game it's supposed to be, and certainly doesn't have people fishtailing and burning out for twenty minutes from a stop like GTA IV did.and then here enters GTAV, where all the cars react so predictably and move so normally that it just feels overly unrealistic compared to how damn good 4 controlled.
To loop it back to the game that's being talked about in this thread, GTS has the interiors lovingly crafted with small graphical details that most other games wouldn't. Hell, audio cues too, if the rev beep in the FD RX-7 is any indication. Most of it goes unused though. The issue becomes at what point do developers realize said 'little details' are actually worth it in the grand scheme of things. Something Polyphony has not truly figured out yet.Except that nowadays, graphical features that were once considered normal in the 2000s are now overly glorified and made into ****ing selling points. Little details in 2000s games that were unnecessary but immersive and cool
This isn't a Digital Foundry video, come on.(basically, the game has cloth physics where the prince can get mud, dirt, and other gunk on him, which causes the game to change his idle animation and make him wipe it off. Guarantee you this would be announced as a selling point if the game were released today)
At the risk of playing myself, this thread went off the rails a long time ago. This is also my cue to probably exit this thread, considering how it's more or less turned into you ranting about the modern gaming industry in the most naïve way possible that makes it incredibly clear how old you are in ways the age on your profile couldn't. If you want to continue living in a nostalgic bubble for an era of games that you were born and raised in, be my guest. But the industry is innovative, you're simply not looking in the right places or are so blinded by your own tunnel vision that you can't see said innovation.
For now: