| TheConduit said: No for specifically describing games in a way that makes them sound as bad as you possible could not fairly representing the games true value to gamers and the gaming industry. For example Halo that did not make your list could be described as: Series that went from great to good to normal to bad to silghtly better or same,same,same,same and same. Either lacked proper online, lacked proper ending, lacked sufficeint graphics, lacked innovation or lacked Master Chief. Halo is a great game series but by over simplifying and focusing on the negative I've completely misrepresented the games worth. Lots of big games have lots of generic elements and you know why? BECAUSE that way they can appeal to a larger audience. And its the 10% difference that makes the difference to these big games. Plus yes Uncharted was Linear but considering how big of a focus on cinematic moments there were it would have been practically impossible for them to maitain even a fraction of that quality and make the game non-linear. Not all games need to be or should be linear. |
it's an opinion it can't be wrong, it can just be consesusly bad, you could microanalyze it either way. maybe severence was a little severe. he could think god's overrated (among other possibilities), still is choice
And obviously I get along with severence most of the time, not necessarily agree with everything he says here. But yes normally when you don't like a game people have a tendency taking into mostly the negative aspects, because they are being negative (as is the idea of the topic)... like all the FFXIII threads that popped up and are still popping up here. including in this thread.
