Games you are currently playing - Part 7

[Osprey]

I'll never understand the "if I want story I'll read a book" mentality. I hear it a lot. Why relegate certain functions to specific mediums so rigidly? Especially considering that different storytelling things can be accomplished with different mediums (not that Witcher is specifically one of those cases).

Some of us like to sit down with a game to play it. The interactivity of gameplay is something that you don't get with most other mediums (ex. movies, TV, books). Why spend much of your limited game time not doing the one thing that games are uniquely suited for and, instead, passively watching a story that's inferior to what you could get from any other medium?

 

[Shareefruck]

Some of us like to sit down with a game to play it. The interactivity of gameplay is something that you don't get with most other mediums (ex. movies, TV, books). Why spend much of your limited game time not doing the one thing that games are uniquely suited for and, instead, passively watching a story that's inferior to what you could get from any other medium?

But ultimately, the fact that it happens to be inferior storytelling is the actual issue (and equally would be so if it took place in a movie or book), not the fact that it took place in a videogame.

If instead you thought the story was legitimately great but still rejected it because it took place in a videogame, simply because you have certain expectations for the medium that must be abided by to gain your approval, that would seem pretty silly and like overly rigid thinking, don't you think? And that's basically what the statement implies.

It's certainly valuable when something takes full advantage of a medium's capabilities, but it doesn't make much sense to me to only like things that do and reject everything that doesn't.

 

[Commander Clueless]

I think it was shouted out earlier, but I want to give another shout out to Chained Echoes.

This era of RPG was not one I was into, being a PC gamer during the time (strategy, mostly), but I have to say this one is pretty cool.

My wife is very much into this type of RPG, and she can't put it down.

 

[Osprey]

But ultimately, the fact that it happens to be inferior storytelling is the actual issue (and equally would be so if it took place in a movie or book), not the fact that it took place in a videogame.

If instead you thought the story was legitimately great but still rejected it because it took place in a videogame, simply because you have certain expectations for the medium that must be abided by to gain your approval, that would seem pretty silly and like overly rigid thinking, don't you think? And that's basically what the statement implies.

It's certainly valuable when something takes full advantage of a medium's capabilities, but it doesn't make much sense to me to only like things that do and reject everything that doesn't.

No, the inferior storytelling is not the actual issue for me. The issue is that I play games for the interactivity, exploration, puzzle solving, role playing, skill testing and critical thinking involved in them, not to sit back and watch cutscenes and scripted sequences that I have little to no control over. You're viewing that as "rigid thinking" and "rejecting it," but it's just expressing what I like and don't like. IIRC, you aren't a fan of open world games, but you probably don't view yourself as rejecting them and having rigid thinking because they're not your cup of tea.

 

[Shareefruck]

No, the inferior storytelling is not the actual issue for me. The issue is that I play games for the interactivity, exploration, puzzle solving, role playing, skill testing and critical thinking involved in them, not to sit back and watch cutscenes and scripted sequences that I have little to no control over. You're viewing that as "rigid thinking" and "rejecting it," but it's just expressing what I like and don't like. IIRC, you aren't a fan of open world games, but you probably don't view yourself as rejecting them and having rigid thinking because they're not your cup of tea.

But why do you have a specific function designated to a medium in the first place that you want it to be for specifically? Where does that come from? If you remove the interactive component from a videogame, it can just be judged as something similar to a movie, no? And if you remove the visuals, it can function as a book.

I can understand not valuing story outright (which is kind of how I think of open worlds), but if, hypothetically, a videogame gives you the exact experience as a movie you like, but happens to be a videogame, why would the label of what it technically is matter enough to change your impression of it? Shouldn't what you appreciate ideally be separated from your preconceived expectations for it?

To me it kind of sounds similar to someone liking comedies but not being on board with the idea of a horror comedy simply because they don't want to watch horror movies to laugh. It's just an arbitrary genre label-- who cares what it's traditionally for, as long as there's good stuff that you value within it?

Like... I could maybe understand someone finding the constant whiplash between gameplay and story to be too jarring to be effective-- but that's still a pretty different position from "If I wanted story, I'd read a book." Do you mean that the act of having to press buttons in a movie to proceed to the next scene would completely ruin a movie for you, full stop?

 

[93LEAFS]

Control is truly one of the must underappreciated games of last gen. Just an absolute masterclass in physics-based gameplay and pacing. I also platted the game and enjoyed every second of it. I can't wait for a sequel.

Great game, love the Lynchian mixed with X-Files vibes. They created a really interesting universe. It's more than the RT Tech demo some made it out to be at launch.

 

[Osprey]

But why do you have a specific function designated to a medium in the first place that you want it to be for specifically? Where does that come from? If you remove the interactive component from a videogame, it can just be judged as something similar to a movie, no? And if you remove the visuals, it can function as a book.

I can understand not valuing story outright (which is kind of how I think of open worlds), but if, hypothetically, a videogame gives you the exact experience as a movie you like, but happens to be a videogame, why would the label of what it technically is matter enough to change your impression of it? Shouldn't what you appreciate ideally be separated from your preconceived expectations for it?

To me it kind of sounds similar to someone liking comedies but not being on board with the idea of a horror comedy simply because they don't want to watch horror movies to laugh. It's just an arbitrary genre label-- who cares what it's traditionally for, as long as there's good stuff that you value within it?

Like... I could maybe understand someone finding the constant whiplash between gameplay and story to be too jarring to be effective-- but that's still a pretty different position from "If I wanted story, I'd read a book." Do you mean that the act of having to press buttons in a movie to proceed to the next scene would completely ruin a movie for you, full stop?

Why do I want games to have gameplay? It's because that's what makes them games and provides an experience that movies and books don't. When I load up a game, I want to game, not watch a movie. Why should I appreciate something that doesn't give me the experience that I'm after? I don't ask why you don't appreciate open world games more. Clearly, they aren't to your taste, as games that are light on gameplay aren't to mine. You're making it overly complicated.

 

[Shareefruck]

Why do I want games to have gameplay? It's because that's what makes them games and provides an experience that movies and books don't. When I load up a game, I want to game, not watch a movie. Why should I appreciate something that doesn't give me the experience that I'm after? I don't ask why you don't appreciate open world games more. Clearly, they aren't to your taste, as games that are light on gameplay aren't to mine. You're making it overly complicated.

Why not? I was under the impression that we already did have a big discussion about that where I was pressed on the reasoning. The short answer ended up being something to do with finding the value of escapism/immersion/player freedom/scale somewhat superficial, which open world games tend to lean into as the main draw (that sandbox appeal), and feeling that the antithesis of that-- meaningful constraints/restrictions/focus on author curation a big part of what makes game design elegant, intimate and personal (I've heard Disco Elysium described as technically an open world in definition but not open world in purpose/appeal, and that's one of my favorite games). I don't recall coming across as sensitive to that question, and if someone's unaware of that reasoning (or just unsatisfied with the logic), I don't think I can blame them for wondering "doesn't that seem narrowminded?", as far as they can tell (I don't think I asserted it as a certain claim, just a tentative impression). Did I end the discussion on "it is what it is, leave me alone" or something? I honestly don't remember-- I think I recall wanting to explain my feelings as best as I could and make sense of it.

If you're uncomfortable with digging deeper into the subject (or just find it tedious), that's fine, we can drop it, I just don't grasp it well enough to be able to honestly appreciate the different perspective and have a different impression on it. Why would the designation of "this is a game, which should be like this" or "this is a movie, which should be like that" matter enough to result in a different opinion on two potentially identical experiences? Without knowing more, it seems very arbitrary to me (like "these are just the rules/boundaries and I have a distaste for them being broken"). Do you feel the same way about genres, like "this is what I expect from this genre vs. that genre and I only like it when things stay in those boundaries, because that's what they're best at"? Even if it is just a personal preference thing and nothing more, I wonder where that preference comes from.

 

[Jovavic]

I think it was shouted out earlier, but I want to give another shout out to Chained Echoes.

This era of RPG was not one I was into, being a PC gamer during the time (strategy, mostly), but I have to say this one is pretty cool.

My wife is very much into this type of RPG, and she can't put it down.

I'm into the last act and it's a blast, easily the best of these smaller JRPG throwbacks like Lost Sphear and I Am Setsuna that have come out in recent years.

 

[flyersnorth]

The conversation isn't intriguing enough and there's too much of it. I'd rather be out there hunting monsters, saving villages, and slicing soldiers in half. Instead there's an extra 2-3 conversation points per interaction and i spend most of my time talking to some Ye Ol' English bartender or blacksmith or whatever.

There's also the *way* in which conversation is incorporated into a game.

In Outer Worlds, every single character stops what they're doing, gets up, smiles, and looks directly at you in a "I'm ready for conversation now, friend." That's just not believable and breaks immersion for me.

On the other hand, RDR2 has a boatload of dialogue and conversations, and every single one of them feels authentic and genuine, and happens in ways that we expect - while riding or walking with someone, looking back and shouting at someone as you walk away, casually in town as you greet people, and so on. The interactions feel real and meaningful so it's much more immersive for me.

I love me some Geralt grunts, but yeah, I felt the conversation in Witcher was somewhere between good and just ok.

 

[Osprey]

Why not? I was under the impression that we already did have a big discussion about that where I was pressed on the reasoning. The short answer ended up being something to do with finding the value of escapism/immersion/player freedom/scale somewhat superficial, which open world games tend to lean into as the main draw (that sandbox appeal), and feeling that the antithesis of that-- meaningful constraints/restrictions/focus on author curation a big part of what makes game design elegant, intimate and personal (I've heard Disco Elysium described as technically an open world in definition but not open world in purpose/appeal, and that's one of my favorite games). I don't recall coming across as sensitive to that question, and if someone's unaware of that reasoning (or just unsatisfied with the logic), I don't think I can blame them for wondering "doesn't that seem narrowminded?", as far as they can tell (I don't think I asserted it as a certain claim, just a tentative impression). Did I end the discussion on "it is what it is, leave me alone" or something? I honestly don't remember-- I think I recall wanting to explain my feelings as best as I could and make sense of it.

If you're uncomfortable with digging deeper into the subject (or just find it tedious), that's fine, we can drop it, I just don't grasp it well enough to be able to honestly appreciate the different perspective and have a different impression on it. Why would the designation of "this is a game, which should be like this" or "this is a movie, which should be like that" matter enough to result in a different opinion on two potentially identical experiences? Without knowing more, it seems very arbitrary to me (like "these are just the rules/boundaries and I have a distaste for them being broken"). Do you feel the same way about genres, like "this is what I expect from this genre vs. that genre and I only like it when things stay in those boundaries, because that's what they're best at"? Even if it is just a personal preference thing and nothing more, I wonder where that preference comes from.

As I suggested, I don't ask why you don't appreciate open world games because I understand that they're just not to your taste, which is fine. I'm not going to bother arguing with you about it, so I don't know why you're arguing this and care what my tastes are. I'm not "uncomfortable" discussing it. It's just that there isn't much to dig into and it's pointless to justify taste to someone who has difficulty understanding a different one than his own. If you really want to dig into something, consider why my taste matters so much to you. I can only guess that it's because you love story-rich games and feel threatened by an opposing opinion. I can't think of any other reason why you'd be so argumentative about it. It's like if I were to press and press you on why you don't appreciate open world games, which I love. I don't do that because I don't mind that you have a different opinion and taste than me. I don't understand why you mind so much about others' opinions.

 

[John Price]

If you have PS+ check out Yakuza LAD which is on sale for free.

Currently playing Elden Ring and Judgement, which is another RGG game.

 

[Shareefruck]

As I suggested, I don't ask why you don't appreciate open world games because I understand that they're just not to your taste, which is fine. I'm not going to bother arguing with you about it, so I don't know why you're arguing this and care what my tastes are. I'm not "uncomfortable" discussing it. It's just that there isn't much to dig into and it's pointless to justify taste to someone who has difficulty understanding a different one than his own. If you really want to dig into something, consider why my taste matters so much to you. I can only guess that it's because you love story-rich games and feel threatened by an opposing opinion. I can't think of any other reason why you'd be so argumentative about it. It's like if I were to press and press you on why you don't appreciate open world games, which I love. I don't do that because I don't mind that you have a different opinion and taste than me. I don't understand why you mind so much about others' opinions.

It's not that I mind, it just doesn't logically track for me (and similarly, I can't think of any other logical reason besides narrowmindedness, so that's my tentative impression). When a thing doesn't make sense to me, I try to make sense of it, but beyond that, you seemed insulted by the mention of "narrowmindedness" as a possible explanation, so to remedy that, I'm trying to better understand how exactly that works for you to find a possible alternative impression to have myself (one that's more charitable). I'm insistent on going down the line of questioning only out of a desire to be able to meet you halfway, because otherwise, I just wouldn't bother considering any other possibility besides my original tentative conclusion.

The disconnect I guess is that "people just have different preferences" just doesn't give me a satisfying answer (because unexplainable preferences/biases are very compatible with narrowmindedness), so I'm trying to dig a little deeper about why you have that preference and how far it goes when it comes to other things (enough to think-- oh, it's rooted in some philosophy he has that I don't, but can make sense of and not find narrowminded). I don't want to just blindly assume a better impression just out of respect to you.

If you don't want to continue down the line of questioning because that's as much of a reason as you can or care to give (or just don't think it's any of my business), that's fine, but I think that means we're back to where we started. I guess that's fine too.

It's not a matter of feeling threatened due to loving story games, though-- I love story generally, yet would perfectly understand someone not liking it across all mediums (which logically should "threaten" me more). It's the contradiction (in my view, anyways) that confuses me.

 

[Le Barron de HF]

My only grip with games who are super invested story wise is that with the pace I finish my games. I've forgotten most of the nuances or storytelling elements that are important to the plot. I started Mass Effect but don't have the time right now to play something like that.

 

[Andrei79]

We're all different, and that's what makes finding a game that really clicks with you so special.

I'm not a fan of linear single player games in general (GoW, Plague Tale Requiem, Jedi Fallen Order) and find them boring / limited.

But gimme XCOM 2 or Divinity OS 2 all day, any day. Or RDR 1/2, GTA V, even most of Cyberpunk.

As much as Ubisoft gets flak, I enjoyed the hell out of FC 6 in co-op mode with a friend... same with Borderlands 3 (but all of them really). Same with Valheim, Green Hell. We're doing Grounded right now, and waiting for Redfall. So, games I would never play by myself become insanely fun when plowing through it with a friend.

If you like XCOM and OS2, I highly, highly recommend Pathfinder WOTR. I'm 50 hours in and it's one of the best cRPGs I've ever played. On par with DOS2 and what I feel is the successor to Baldur's Gate (I know BG3 is coming out).

 

[Dolemite]

In addition to Modern Warfare 2 I'm working on the Platinum for Death Stranding. Its tough but not as tough as Lego Star Wars: The Skywalker Saga (the toughest 100% completion game in modern gaming). The plus is I'm still finding cool little things like this in the game.

My only grip with games who are super invested story wise is that with the pace I finish my games. I've forgotten most of the nuances or storytelling elements that are important to the plot. I started Mass Effect but don't have the time right now to play something like that.

Mass Effect sucks you in with the speed and suction of a industrial vacuum and doesn't want to let go. The first three are awesome but man they're big time suckers.

 

[Frankie Blueberries]

In addition to Modern Warfare 2 I'm working on the Platinum for Death Stranding. Its tough but not as tough as Lego Star Wars: The Skywalker Saga (the toughest 100% completion game in modern gaming). The plus is I'm still finding cool little things like this in the game.




Mass Effect sucks you in with the speed and suction of a industrial vacuum and doesn't want to let go. The first three are awesome but man they're big time suckers.

I find it amusing when people say they’re “working” towards something in a game, like it’s a grind and/job, not just entertainment.

 

[PeteWorrell]

I find it amusing when people say they’re “working” towards something in a game, like it’s a grind and/job, not just entertainment.

A lot of achievements in games feel like boring chores. I won't force myself to get them all as i won't bother with those i am not interested in. Like the Mahjong achievements in the Yakuza games that i have never bothered with because i could care less about learning it and mastering it.

 

[Osprey]

It's not a matter of feeling threatened due to loving story games, though-- I love story generally, yet would perfectly understand someone not liking it across all mediums (which logically should "threaten" me more). It's the contradiction (in my view, anyways) that confuses me.

If you perfectly understand someone not liking story across all mediums, then you shouldn't be arguing with me. I explained at the beginning that I value gameplay over story in games. That should be easy enough to understand. I think that you're confusing yourself by inferring and extrapolating things that don't make sense instead of just accepting the explanation at face value.

 

[Shareefruck]

If you perfectly understand someone not liking story across all mediums, then you shouldn't be arguing with me. I explained at the beginning that I value gameplay over story in games. That should be easy enough to understand. I think that you're confusing yourself by inferring and extrapolating things that don't make sense instead of just accepting the explanation at face value.

It honestly isn't. I'm hearing what you're saying but I don't understand it. The "in games" qualifier is very confusing to me. Thinking that gameplay and story is a bad mixture and therefore not liking its presence in games, I can understand. Liking gameplay more than story or not liking story, period, I can understand. Thinking that videogame storytelling doesn't actually get good enough to be worth valuing compared to other mediums, I can understand. Even just not enjoying the logistics/hassle of holding a controller and pressing buttons to progress a story, to the point where it's a deal-breaker that ruins the experience of an otherwise great one, I can understand.

But none of those seem to be your position. The desired designation and role of the medium seems to be-- That, I don't understand.

Just accepting an explanation at face value without making sense of it is just not behavior I believe in. But it sounds like we're not making any headway. Oh well, let's just drop it, then.

 

[Ceremony]

Lego Star Wars: The Skywalker Saga (the toughest 100% completion game in modern gaming).

I know you post stuff that gets reactions but you genuinely know nothing about trophies or being a completionist, please stop saying this. It's objectively wrong. Length does not equate to difficulty.

 

[John Price]

After Margit beats me for the 6th time in Elden Ring despite me being 25 and having the summon and wolves after him

We lost a lot of good runes that day. Sad.

 

[flyersnorth]

If you like XCOM and OS2, I highly, highly recommend Pathfinder WOTR. I'm 50 hours in and it's one of the best cRPGs I've ever played. On par with DOS2 and what I feel is the successor to Baldur's Gate (I know BG3 is coming out).

I've had my eye on it for a while, and definitely want to check it out!

From what I remember, you can play in either turn-based or RTwP? Which mode are you playing?

 

[Andrei79]

I've had my eye on it for a while, and definitely want to check it out!

From what I remember, you can play in either turn-based or RTwP? Which mode are you playing?

Yes, you can play both. I play real time, pause is a nice option for tough battles.

 

[The Merchant]

Bought Alan Wake Remastered because it was on sale and I'm a big Remedy fan because of Control. Got through the main story and man that game really falls off towards the end. I know it's dated at this point, but some of the gameplay decisions were perplexing, to say the least. Tried starting the first epilogue chapter and I'm not sure I can push myself through it.