By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
alephnull on 19 March 2010
Edit Thread
Grahamhsu said:
alephnull said:
Grahamhsu said:
Severance said:
Rainbird said:
It's not really 360 fans saying that though

really? i countless times ran into someone "meh if i wanna buy a ps3 to play MGS4/HR i'd go watch a movie"

Perhaps they're implying they'd rather watch a Blu-Ray film on a PS3?

As for HR I'm actually not sure if I can call it a game...not trying to degrade or insult it, I enjoyed my 10+ hours with it, but if I were to dissect it as a game it starts to become weird...This is a game with no game over, no continue, sometimes the point/goal is to literally sit around and wait. It doesn't matter if you fail or succeed in Heavy Rain the story continues and an ending will be given to each character, so essentially you don't have to even have a goal in the game. I still loved the idea of a movie I can influence, it's been an idea I've wanted to see come to life for a while. However, how do you explain gameplay for a game like that?! It's as though the gameplay itself is near nonexistent. 

For MGS4 though I have to agree with some of the haters, I didn't hate the game...but I definitely felt like the cutscenes made the game feel a lot less "actiony". In the middle of MGS4 I remember I stopped at Chapter 4 because I couldn't stand it, I needed guns, explosions, and shit! I popped Infamous into my PS3 instead, finished it, returned to MGS4. Played another chapter or two, went to Killzone 2, and than finally returned back to MGS4 again...

Mass Effect may have a shitload of convo choices, but at least they're all skippable and there's still a bunch of humanoids to blast. I've played through the original game 10x times I know there's plenty of action in Mass Effect. Story and Lore are always important in Bioware games but for the OP to say it is a story driven game is incorrect. Mass Effect 2 can be story, action, or loot based. What I mean by that statement is that you're driven to play it because of either the story, action, or the loot.

All the reasons given for why HR is not a game also apply to Sim City and a number of other applications usually considered to be games.

No you're a PC gamer so you should understand that the idea of "Gameplay" involves how to play the game. Gameplay is when you throw a shock combo in Unreal Tournament 3, Gameplay is when you Micro units in Starcraft, and gameplay is when you macro units in Starcraft, gameplay is exactly what it means. Now if I were to give you a game where you press a button to move, and the rest of the game consisted of button presses that you don't have to press (the game would continue on even if you fail) would you call that a game?

Sims have a goal, sims have a game over or a point where you're like oops I fucked up my town with one too many earthquakes. Sims have gameplay how do I get more people into my town, I can choose to have better roads? More jobs etc.

There's certainly no "game over" point, at least in the original sim city. Was the goal to get more people in your town? You could certainly choose to do that. However, the only consequence if you don't, is that you won't have more people in your town.