> Nope, people still would have criticised the endless, tedious codec
> conversations and the rubbish pansy main character regardless.
ummm.. no.Everybody kept comparing it to MGS1.
The Evil Dictator wrote:
> Homosh. I hate you.
Who doesn't ?
You just make me so angry.
I said it's stupid to pre-judge a game based on those which came before in a series, then feel let down because - despite being one the most frickin' awesome games of recent history - it didn't quite meet up to your standards?
You'd rate it higher if they released it under a different name?
No socio-political rants, if you please.
I can do that, but then the video gaming industry will
> become nothing more than a tool for gamers to pass time, and another
> one on the list of the gazillion ways for investors to rob our money.
It is that now..... just some examples of it transcend the rubbish and are genuinely awesome, arguably 'cultural' events. Resi 4 simply being that because it was so damn good. If your argument holds, that we simply have to look at story as well as video game, then Pac Man was rubbish, Tetris wasn't that good, Goldeneye was too shallow in narrative, Civilisation had no point to it because it told no story, and Resident Evil 4 isn't as good as Resident Evil 1 because it didn't have a convoluted and 'interesting' story. Note a pattern of quality?
How the hell was it not full of horror? :P
> What a terrible way of looking at things.
What do you mean ? That people should look at video games just as video games ? I can do that, but then the video gaming industry will become nothing more than a tool for gamers to pass time, and another one on the list of the gazillion ways for investors to rob our money.