View Single Post

Default 

December 27th, 2012, 05:54
Originally Posted by Kefka View Post
I think I made it clear I played Oblivion, Fallout 3 and New Vegas without Fast travel for over 100 hours each.
Well, I'm glad for you but I'm not that much into masochism and self-punishment.
The game is already bad by itself, playing it without FT makes it unbearable for me.

That is beside the fact that Skyrim has ingame fast travel, and beside the fact that all the TES games(well not sure about arena only played it a little) do the same thing
Uh… yeah… And whoever claimed otherwise, exactly? How is that relevant to what I was saying, exactly?

And you may not like Skyrim but it reach the highest levels of achievement, massive games sales and popularity and extremely well received by the critics.
I'ts simply a bad game that fools people into thinking "that's the virtual world i ever wanted" because it has most of its fans in an audience of clueless customers without any reference to compare it.
People without knowledge of the genre or any decent standard about solid game mechanics.
If you go on any gaming forum you will easily notice that if on one hand it's true that for every 100 people playing Skyrim you will hardly find one playing Gothic/ultima/Risen, on the other hand almost everyone who played those prefer them to Skyrim.

That is a damn good game right there
I strongly disagree, and on a side note I don't know a single respectable gaming critic -with a decent knowledge of the RPG genre- who praised Skyrim beyond its obvious merits (presentation, size, production value, etc).
Then again, i'm apparently talking with someone who thinks that commercial success and press exposure must mean quality, so I should probably give up on this side argument.

I don't like most non rpg's, but I do think that say a game like that new Batman game from last year which also got great metacritic scores and great sales is clearly a good game
Arkham Asylum and Arkham City were more than good. They were instant classics.
Same goes for Mark of the Ninja this year. In fact those are games miles ahead of Skyrim in terms of tight design.

Let's be clear, because things are becoming a bit confusing here, especially with Fluent and his bullshit accusations based on the imaginary crap in his head.
I'm not one of those "posers" who like to pretend there aren't good games anymore.
I could easily point a few good-to-excellent games for every single one of the past years. Still, I'm not exactly happy with this trend for more and more idiot-proof games from bid budget studios/publishers.

Oh, and just to be even more clear about the main issue: no, i wouldn't have a problem with a "super easy mode" for Dark Souls 2, if that would not affect the core design in any way.
My problem is: I don't think it's possible. A "super easy mode" would most likely have a fallout effect on the overall design.
How can they make, for instance, a new Sen's Fortress if they have to worry about how easy it must be played in easy mode? It's not like doubling HPs would work, in that place.

Plus, let's face it, the super-easy-mode would be likely shitty to play, because as someone else put it "Dark Souls is a learning experience, if you take away the need to learn from it you are left with nothing".
Then again as I already said… that's probably ok for those who don't actually like to play games, just to breeze through them mindlessly.
Tuco is offline

Tuco

Tuco's Avatar
Watchdog

#76

Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 173