ZenfoldorVGI said:
patapon said:
Much of the games appeal comes from it flair. There's no question about it. Some people love it like yourself, others do not. If you don't, than the combat doesn't do much for ya... it's a feature that acts as an aggravating or mitigating factors to your view on the games greatness.
For example, some people think God of War has the superior fighting mechanic, others Ninja Gaiden. Making statements like its gameplay is objectively better than X just shows me that you love the flair...
...and Bewbs ^_^
|
I think that's completely wrong. You can't say that gameplay is completely objective while saying that presentation isn't. By your example, everything spoken about any game is subjective, and Ninja Bread Men can be better than Mario Galaxy.
In reality, depth is a key factor. While the gameplay in GoW is good, it isn't very original, and it isn't very deep. Bayonetta strikes a perfect balance there with difficulty, depth, and innovation.
Whatever people are saying that GoW has a better battle system than Bayonetta, I highly doubt those are people who have actually played Bayonetta.
What you have done, is marginalize Bayonetta in your head, probably to justify yourself not purchasing it. To most people, extreme quality differences are not really objective(and by that, I don't mean their opinion about the individual game, but their opinion about certain things superiority to others being a quantifiable fact ie Godfather II v Bloodrayne the film), Mario Galaxy is better than Ginger Bread Men, and Bayonetta's gameplay is much better than most other action games, especially DMC 2 and 4, and it is unarguably much deeper than any GoW game by any quantifable scale. That said, everyone has an opinion, but please play the game(if you have I apologize, but by your reasonings I assume you haven't, and I also assume that if you did, you would comment on your opinion rather than others) before stating things like "X isn't better than Y, because gameplay is objective." If you played X, you probably wouldn't agree with yourself.
Also, if everything ever written is subjective, why not buy this game for the hell of it. You just might like it. Most owners do as do most critics. It's got a better chance than anything to be a superior AAA game in your own subjective opinion.
|
Please, tell me where I said gameplay is objective and presentation isn't. Because well, I didn't say that. And yes, the aspects of a game are all subjective. That is the only objective fact when discussing quality.
Ninja bread man is a terrible game IMO. But what makes it bad and not great? Criteria. Criteria is the basis for breaking down anything in this world. It helps to quantify things and make sense of them. Take the category's of good, bad, fantastic, jizztastic, hellish, sluggish, etc. What makes something fit into this framework of standards? Well, execution of any such product or thing. In the case of ninja bread man, everything is arguably broken. From the controls to the graphics, things were done in such a fashion that it would be hard to complete any task the game throws at the player. But this is such a simple example. The game comes nowhere near perfection in any regard.
When we look at two games such as God of War and Bayonetta, things are much more complicated because the games actually have a good execution. It no longer becomes a "OMG wut? You think people can think GBM can be better than MG is some peoples heads? NOT BY ANY STANDARDS!!!" After reading your post, it seems as though you think its easy to objectively say Bayonetta is better than God of War. Which is why you went ahead and used such contrasting games of such contrasting quality to attack subjectivity vs. objectivity. You used the criteria of "depth" to state that it is better than God of War.
"In reality, depth is a key factor. While the gameplay in GoW is good, it isn't very original, and it isn't very deep."
You know, I constantly hear about how God of War 'lacks' depth and I have no other recourse but to laugh at these people. In God of War, the player is given a large variety of combos, items to obtain throughout the game, different weapons to use, magic system with different... magic, system for leveling up everything stated previously and Kratos' unique fighting style (which is my favorite hack and slash fighting style). Is this not depth good sir? I guess I don't understand... IMO, the criteria of depth encompass different combos, combo effectiveness against particular enemies, different weapon styles, and a system for expanding gameplay (in GoW, leveling up magic and weapons) IMO again, God of War seems to have depth in spades.
In terms of subjectivity, it seems people are fully justified in liking gow more than Bayonetta and vice versa. Both games have different styles with different gameplay... which is good! More diversity is better as I always say 
But as you know and as you probably believe, the OP stated Bayonetta was objectively better than all the other action games. Maybe in your opinion based on your criteria... but not fact.
Also, I hope you understand I never said anything ill of Bayonetta. I have not played the game in its entirety and hope you realize I have not... "What you have done, is marginalize Bayonetta in your head" No marginalization here my friend. No need to get angry or feel like I have wronged anything. I simply am saying that the game has a very Japanese flair thatis aggravating or mitigating to the experience and gameplay. Is this not true? From what I played, it seems to be a centerpiece right down to enemy design to the music that plays in the background.Some people love that... and some people don't. Agreed?
