Black Ops or Halo Reach???

[Dark Claws]

I would like to take this opportunity to express that the way that you two (Firetooth and Volkov) have been arguing with one another is nigh impossible to read. You guys should go back to typing in paragraphs much like Firetooth was doing originally. Thoughts were much more coherent then.

For once, i agree.or maybe you guys could just post smaller discussions and rebuttals. It is very annoying to read.

[Gen. Volkov]

Firetooth, a physics engine upgrade does not constitute a major change, and I think you know that. Now you are the one quibbling.

Also, pedantic is the wrong word, since the definition you give is not the primary definition of the word. Someone who is pedantic is a person who is very learned and likes to show off that fact. Right now, I am being pedantic. LOL. When I was pointing out that the Half Life was original and Half Life 2 wasn't, I was not being pedantic. It wasn't even really a quibble, because there is very little that Half Life 2 does that is original. It's a sequel, that is their nature.

As to sequels, the one that comes to mind is Terminator 2. Not the game, the movie. Most people agree that it was the best of the franchise. Still had the same characters, and a similar plot, but told the story in a whole new way. Well, that's what I want in a game sequel. I want it to retain enough of the original to be recognizable, but include a lot in the way of originality. I realize that is a tough mix, but you are asking for my ideal, hypothetical, sequel here. Keep the characters, and maybe only do a slight revamp of basic gameplay, but add a bunch of new features, and change the setting, even do a plot twist as in T2, where you go from the inevitable end of humanity in T1, to the idea that yes, you can change the future, in T2.

Honestly, I have never played Fallout 3. I've had it recommended to me, but I have not played it. I don't know how similar it is to Fallout, which I loved. I would consider Deus Ex: Human Revolution a modern game, but then it isn't all that great compared to the original, which just reinforces my point. It's good compared to CoD and other modern games, but that just shows how far the general level of games have sunk. It's a slightly shinier turd in a world of crap. Fallout 3 is probably the same deal. I'll put the fact that you are satisfied with the progression of the Elder Scrolls series since Morrowind down to the same sort of effect. Also, I think you do not realize how big the video game industry is. It is a prime factor in why people have ceased to expect originality and have come to expect familiar mediocrity.

I am not making assumptions about what you think when it comes to originality. I am merely going off what you have said. Maybe you do not realize everything you imply when you say certain things. How I am reading your third response basically says to me that my first interpretation was right. You prefer the same crap over and over to taking a chance with originality. Which is fine, some people like to feel safe and secure. Oh, and as a side not, something that is compelling is never bad. It may be disturbing or depressing or a number of other things, but if it sucks you in enough to be compelling, it is not bad, by definition.

As to number of video games, I'd be willing to bet that the number released in a given year either hasn't changed or has gone down since the 1980s. There were actually more systems in the 80s than there are today. I don't know if the number of developers has gone down or up since then, but again, I'd be willing to bet that the number of independent developers has also gone down, due to a general consolidation of the industry. Each company might release more games in year, but I don't think they match, and probably don't exceed the combined output of the developers in the 80s. Anyway, point is, the crap proportion of games has gone up. Of my top 10 games, I think exactly one was made after 2005. Portal. Which is the exception that proves the rule. If Portal had been released before 2005, it would still be a very good game, but I do not think it would have received all the attention and acclaim that it did in 2007. Why? Because it was this shining beacon of awesome in a world of mediocrity. Oh, and I don't think Human Revolution is better in any respect except for graphics, than the original Deus Ex. That's simply because it's a decade newer.

Speaking of which, the fact that Human Revolution has different physics for dead bodies just means it's a newer game. I'm not even sure they had the processing power to model that sort of thing in 2000. The fact that hacking is different just makes the game more tedious, in my opinion. It doesn't add to the story, it just serves to lengthen the game. Besides, the "hacking" in that game is just an abstraction, since real hacking or cracking is basically just guessing passwords or using security exploits. Oh and they are FPS games, in the strict sense of the word. They are played from the first person POV and you shoot in them. Yeah, OK, they aren't DOOM or Halo, because there is a lot more to them than just shooting, but the point stands. In any event, Deus Ex handles gunplay a lot better than Human revolution, because it is not as big a part of the game, in my opinion, and it's far more dangerous. (i.e. realistic.) I suspect the reason you prefer Human Revolution is because in Deus Ex if you go in guns blazing, you will be a colanderized in short order, whereas in Human Revolution, while combat is still highly lethal, it's not AS lethal, so going in guns blazing works. In Deus Ex, gun play is a last resort unless you focus only on becoming a killing machine. In Human Revolution, because of the console kiddies, gun play has been made a more attractive option. Also, while Deus Ex has "bosses", you are not forced to fight most of them in any sort of linear way, as in Human Revolution. I'm not saying Human Revolution is all bad, it is a shinier turd than most, but what they did to make a console game with mass appeal basically ruined it for me.

Firetooth, I think you need to go back and read this thread. The people you mention are either disagreeing with Neo on very specific points, but agreeing with his overall point, or are not as old as you think they are, though to be honest, I'm not sure how old Uiblis actually is. Or in the case of Kilk, has made a grand total of two posts in this thread, which had no bearing on his opinion of Neo's position. So basically, I think you are making some pretty erroneous statements based on a very strange interpretation of this thread. For example, there is the fact that you do not seem to understand that you insulted Neo, and that is why he made that post that you got all up in arms about. How exactly did you expect him to respond to that? As to your list, if you seriously made that post in 3-5 minutes before school, please get out of this thread and do not come back. That is further evidence that you are not paying enough attention, and I am wasting my time in this thread. In fact, this is my last post.

[Genevieve]

This may seem a little pedantic of me, but it's "pedantic", Volkov, not "pendantic". :)

[Gen. Volkov]

Fixed. I forgot to spell check. (OK, fine, my last post in response to Firetooth.) Thanks Lucy.

[Firetooth]

I'm not making a response as Volk has no wish to discuss further, but I know Kilk and Sharp don't share Neo's views because I spoke to both of them individually. And Uiblis is probably 16 from what I can tell. Not denying some people agree with Neo though.

[Dark Claws]

This completely switched meanings. So, because Firetooth vs Volk's arguement died, I would like to ask simply which is your favorite and least favorite video game (it's probably buried in your posts, but I'm too lazy to dig them out).

[Firetooth]

This completely switched meanings. So, because Firetooth vs Volk's arguement died, I would like to ask simply which is your favorite and least favorite video game (it's probably buried in your posts, but I'm too lazy to dig them out).

Mine would be Mass Effect 2 or the original Knights of the old republic.

Least favorite? Not sure, most of the COD titles.

[Neobaron]

Favorite game? Long ago there was something called "Dungeon Keeper" that I will still install for kicks to this day. ROME: Total War redefined the GS hybrid genre and is pretty functional. I played Red Baron 3D competitively for something like 15 years. Maybe we should make a by genre list somewhere. :3

Lease Favorite? Doom 3. SOOOOOO much hype for so little decent content.

[Firetooth]

Best part about Rome total war is the senate, of course. Love those guys. :)

[Neobaron]

eh i normally mod them out of the game. the factions are silly in the vanilla game, but the whole "please the people to get permission to take over" gimmick was fun a couple times.

If you like ROME, give RTR a shot. I think they're up to version 9 or something ridiculous now, but the addition of the eastern seleucid empire and the lesser known successor states is p interesting.

[Dark Claws]

I've wanted Rome: Total War since I figured out the game engine was used for a series called 'Decisive battles of the Ancient World". I never really had the time or money to get it though. I love all RTS's, except for the really stupid ones.

[Neobaron]

The TW series isn't really an RTS. It has RTS aspects, but it is more geared to the TBS/GS folks who like to dabble in real time action.

Also Rome is like 10 dollars with all of its expansions included on Steam just so you know.

[Dark Claws]

I'm really cheap.