| bugrimmar said: ^huh, the very reason i turned to a strategy guide is because of the game's horrible grinding mechanic. i wanted to try to play the game longer. if i didn't take the guide, i would not have played after the first death. you're too passionately against strategy guides for some reason that you fail to understand why people read them in the first place. sure, some people read them for the pointless reasons you mentioned (getting better loot, whatever), but some of us read them because a game is not good enough to spend time on, but we want to give it a try to see the whole story because it seems interesting. |
I'm sorry, I'm just completely baffled. You want to give it a try. The reason reviewers like the game is because of things that you are removing from the game. The tension, the surprise, the mood, the feeling of victory, the triumph of surmounting an incredible challenge. You are breaking all of it and can't seem to understand why critics rate it highly.
You guys complain about this, but, jesus, some of the greatest games of all time were always a case of repeating the game over and over. Case in point, Contra, tetris, super mario 3. It's the same thing.
I'm sorry if I can't understand. You think the game isn't good, but it's interesting. I just can't understand that. It's such a contradiction.
Again, sorry. I am just not going to agree with you. It's not about the game itself. It's the entire mentality that the gaming community has gotten used to nowadays. Rejeuvenating health, insta-saves, chechpoints, dying-boosting-health, endless lives, gamefaqs, etc etc. It's something that has turned the industry from actually getting your money's worth and experience out of the game, to churning out an endless "beat x game as quickly as possible so you can buy another game and beat that".
Again, I'm sorry. I'm not trying to be offensive to you. It just hurts to see the gaming community in this state.
Essay Pro