Famine said:
smellygoat said:
@ Famine
I think you me have misunderstood me a little, so I'll try clarify.
Indeed I was talking about gameplay in my post, but I was also talking story and how it relates to gameplay. There are many ways to tell a story, because of books and movies people often think of characters, dialougue and plot as the first. But stories can be told in endless ways, and experience a story throguh gameplay is what gaming is all about.
I know its the same out story with mario rescuing the princess. But i think it would be impossible for someone to go through SMG and all its bizzare and imaginative locations and think, "I've been here and done all this before".
Really there is alot of great and origingal ideas in this game, and thats what makes a good story.
This topic reminds me of a discussion i had about wether or not Pulp Fiction has a deeper meaning in the same way as Schindlers List has. I argued pulp fiction, like SMG HAD to have deeper meaning or people wouldn't enjoy it, as without meaning entertainment fails to be entertaining. I think this meaning can someitmes be hard to find when it is an internal and emotional thing, but it still noetheless exists. |
But isn't the same true about all games? Had a lot of games taken place in the same local and kept the same game mechanic (Insert Mega Man here), then wouldn't most people get a feeling of repetition? |
Yes it is true for all games, reguardless of genre. It's even true for Tetris. Your point about the same local doesnt have exactly apply here because mario has never been in space, and there are enough new game mechanics here to keep the game feeling fresh for most, but that isn't what the GoW director was talking about.
He called SMG's story vapid, and i claimed he didnt really think about the words he was using. Vapid basically means flat and lifeless, and I dont think the locals, enemies and puzzels in SMG are lifeless at all, quite the opposite.
Sure the game could be called bizzare, silly or childish, but not vapid.
