| darkknightkryta said: The point that the author is trying to make is that innovation and revolution are being improperly used. The Last of Us is innovative. So's the majority of games. There's nothing revolutionary about any of them. For example: Pacman was revolutionary, Ms. Pacman was innovative. |
the thing is, im not going against the author, i agree that most (not all) but most games do new stuff, but NOT most of them do revolutionary stuff, and thats because they dont need to revolutionize the game genre in order to be great games, and TLOU as well as many new games and sequels did do some new stuff making them "Innovative" in a sense, just like Ther Order according to the article is being innovative in the way it gives the player control over segments that would normally be cutscenes, plus having the same assets in such a high quality for cutscenes and gameplay.
so in summary i was missusing the word Innovative in my last comment just like people are missusing the word innovative when they judge games like The Order, so in order to make my last post more clear what i meant to say is:
"most games are not Revolutionary and thats because they dont need to be revolutionary to be great games, or to have any sort of quality"
