By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
estebxx on 29 October 2014
Edit Thread

 

KLAMarine said:

That's not necessarily true: gameplay can be flawed but still be good. What gameplay is good and which isn't ultimately comes down to personal opinion. Some, not all, people were just diappointed with the game's AI.

well what i highlighted pretty much says it all, so all i can do now is simply respect your opinion (since its a valid opinion afteall).

KLAMarine said:

It's a little more complicated than that. You say that a game with more reviews has a harder time maintaining a good score versus a game with less reviews. Let us do the math shall we? Let's use the numbers you posted, four people versus 100:

If four people were to give U2 a 10/10, the average would equal 10 (4*10/4=10). That's 100% praise.
Now let's assume one out of those four gave U2 a 0/10 instead. Our average would fall dramatically to a 75% praise ((3*10+0)/4=30/4=7.5).

If a hundred people were to give U2 a 10/10, the average would again equal 10 (100*10/100=10). If we change one of those 100 reviews to a 0/10, our average would fall to 99% praise ((99*10+0)/100=990/100=9.9).

A drop of 25% in the former is greater than a fall of 1% in the latter so it would seem a game with more good scores has an easier time maintaining an average. This comes at the challenge of convincing 100 people to give a game a 10/10. This should be harder than convincing four people to each give a game 10/10 for obvious reason. This is why I argue that the number isn't all that relevant since a high number and a low number both come with their own tradeoffs: the average from a smaller number is easier to achieve but harder to maintain and an average from a larger number is easier to maintain but harder to achieve.

actually i tried to prove the same thing but i guess it came out backwards, since you are right games with lower number of reviews for an average will have a harder time mainteining a good review since one single "bad" review could lower the average score more dramatically, and while both (large number of reviews and low number of reviews) may have their ups and downs i still think that a solid number of reviews for each game (lets say 60 or 100 reviews for every game) would be a more stable way to make a game ranking.

KLAMarine said:

A design choice CAN be a flaw. In this case, making Ellie invisible and even allowing Ellie to run into enemies with no consequences was immersion-shattering for Matthewmatosis as he points out in his video. He suggested a better design choice such as making Ellie and other companions stick close to Joel so that your allies would find themselves out in the open less often and thus one's immersion would remain intact more frequently.

ok i can see why you dont like this desing choice, i can respect that (afterall it does break the inmersion to see ellie out in the open and the enemies not noticing her), i just personally didnt mind this as much since i never got into a situation where ellie (or any other companion) was so obviously out in the open (as the ones showed on the video that you linked).

KLAMarine said:

Now you're accusing them of dishonesty. Just because it didn't happen to you doesn't mean it didn't happen to others. The difference is Matthewmatosis and HyperBitHero provided actual footage of lapses in AI. You say you didn't encounter issues but that does not prove that bad AI doesn't exist in TLoU.

no thats not it, i can see that it CAN happen afterall i saw the video and i know that a situation like that (like ellie bumping into enemies can happen), all i was saying is that its not something very common since this is the first time i have seen that, (since i didnt encountered that issue while playing the game and i didnt saw that in other reviews), in other words i ACCEPT that the AI can behave weirdly in those situation and break the inmersion, but its not something very common.

KLAMarine said:

People's word versus actual footage of AI breaking down? I think I'll lend more credibility to the actual footage.

again, you misunderstod my point, im not saying that the issue doesnt exist, (because i can see that its there) all im saying is that since i didnt encountered the issue myself and neither did my friends and the reviews that i read and saw, then its probably a rare issue, not that it doesnt exist but rather than its kind of rare.

KLAMarine said:

Yes, I'm certain they can fight but stealth sections are still problematic.

i guess they can be problematic if they take your hidding spots, outside from that i dont see how they can be problematic since they cant even be seen by enemies even if they bump into them.

finally i see that a lot of our arguments are due to misunderstandings, so i hope i was clear enough this time.