RedEye9 wrote on May 29, 2017, 21:46:Beamer wrote on May 29, 2017, 10:55:I'm sure you've noticed but he missed everyone's point.
Ugh. You missed my point.
But my favorite comment was how many hit's the rant received. Especially telling is the 7 comments it got, 3 of which are from the writer of the rant. rflmao
I would have at least made some shill accounts to make it look like peeps were interested.
Slick wrote on May 29, 2017, 13:12:
When I form a solid logical argument, I get "no one cares", brilliant riposte.
How is anyone supposed to take the commentary seriously when it reads: "reviewers don't care that it has the same name as some random game from a decade ago"
Some random game from a decade ago.
Right.
I can only imagine the death threats this guy would have received if he said that about the new Battlefront LOL.
Beamer wrote on May 29, 2017, 10:55:I'm sure you've noticed but he missed everyone's point.
Ugh. You missed my point.
Dacote wrote on May 29, 2017, 09:24:Quboid wrote on May 28, 2017, 23:45:How dare you tell somebody that they are free to do as they please with their own work. This is the most blatant trolling I have ever seen. TROLL ALERT /s
As I said before, you do you. If this is a problem for you, you're right to put that in your review and I don't think anyone should have a problem with that - but people will be surprised.
Next thing you will say is that you support him in his endeavors, that will really stir him up. not /s
Slick wrote on May 28, 2017, 18:32:Beamer wrote on May 28, 2017, 12:43:Slick wrote on May 27, 2017, 03:58:Beamer wrote on May 26, 2017, 10:06:
Fallout was dead. Big budget isometric games are dead. You can spend all your time angry and mourning them, or you can play what's out there and enjoy it for what it is.
So you're saying that games with interesting characters, lore, world-building, fun game mechanics, satisfying puzzles, introduction to new ways to interact in a 3D space, inventive death loops, gravity puzzles, wall-walking, portals, and mind-fuckery turning a rock into a planet to explore is all dead? Says who? you?
"All games are now only about spending 30 minutes scrounging for garbage to fabricate 12 shotgun shells only to never want to use them in a fight while being bored stiff reading office e-mails and exploring nearly identical corridors in a bland spaceship until it ends. ENJOY IT FOR WHAT IT IS, THIS IS ALL WE HAVE NOW."
Give me a break.
No, I said isometric games are dead. Not sure how you got the rest of that. Fact: big budget isometric games are dead. The people who whined about Fallout 3 not being isometric were lost causes.
The rest, I have no clue where you got that from. No one had a clue what the content of F3 was back when all the whining was going on. But it's really, really weird for me to say "isometric is dead" and you to follow with all of that other stuff.
Are you serious?
You took my argument and made an analogy to Fallout.
You're saying that Prey 2017 ditching all of Prey 2006's trappings is somehow analogous to Fallout not keeping alive a dead genre (isometric POV in Fallout's case).
Okay.
I retort by using your own metaphor, to carry over to my example, that the key elements of the game in question (Prey 2006) are "obsolete".
I literally took YOUR analogy and ran with it.
Then you attempt to cockblock me because I'm not talking specifically about isometric games. I think your analogy isn't, in fact, an analogy at all, and that you possibly don't understand what an analogy is, and are quite possibly talking out of your ass.
Quboid wrote on May 28, 2017, 23:45:How dare you tell somebody that they are free to do as they please with their own work. This is the most blatant trolling I have ever seen. TROLL ALERT /s
As I said before, you do you. If this is a problem for you, you're right to put that in your review and I don't think anyone should have a problem with that - but people will be surprised.
Quboid wrote on May 28, 2017, 23:45:Slick wrote on May 28, 2017, 23:10:
Anyone care to explain the hypocrisy? Are you even capable of understanding it?
Because nobody cares.
Reviewers don't mark it down because reviewers don't care that it has the same name as some random game from a decade ago
Slick wrote on May 28, 2017, 23:10:
Anyone care to explain the hypocrisy? Are you even capable of understanding it?
SlimRam wrote on May 28, 2017, 21:05:and /thread
Slick, I played the 2006 demo and didn't care for it (which I've told you several times now), I'm RIGHT NOW playing the new one and just broke out of my fake apartment into the simulation area (see I know that because i'm actually playing the game). Nothing about this exchange has made me "mad" as you keep implying. I find the fact that someone that doesn't even know what a first person shooter actually is (and good job on dodging my Deus Ex reference for what a FPS/RPG is btw) considers himself to be a game reviewer, actually hilarious. As I've said over and over, you took 2 points off of the total of your review (from a 7 to a 5) just because the game was called Prey and it didn't resemble the original at all. Like Redeye said, put a disclaimer at the beginning and move on. You literally punished this game just because of it's name, that's not fair to the developer or to the person reading your review.
Nope, I never said that Prey 2006 "doesn't matter" that's you putting words in my mouth again. Your argument was that Prey 2006 had a cult-like following, I said that I wasn't aware of this following or of the games popularity because none of my friends ever bought the game (and they are pretty avid gamers). If you say the game was that popular, so be it, i'll take your word for it. Sorry if this new game "desecrated" (in your words, with full drama mode engaged) your beloved IP but that shouldn't have hurt your review as bad as it did. You even TELL everyone in your review that the game would have been a 7 if it had been called anything else...really? You might as well post a huge banner over your review saying:
"If Your Looking For an Unbiased Review of This Game Please Look Elsewhere Because I'm a Huge Fanboy of the Old Prey".
Your "perspective" of Prey 2006 (amongst the other jabs that you so graciously shared) was an entire paragraph dedicated to how neato you thought the death sequences were compared to it not being in this new game and how the mirrors didn't reflect like in the original...really?
What is my issue with this? My issue with this is that you are letting your fanboyism affect your review of the new Prey game. Real people worked on this game and real money and jobs are put on the line to make these games. The fact that you so casually shit on the game because it offended your beloved IP and then have the actual nerve to call yourself a "journalist" shows exactly how immature you actually are, and how insincere you are as a game reviewer.
Dacote wrote on May 28, 2017, 21:42:
This keeps coming to mind Slick in his formative years.
SlimRam wrote on May 27, 2017, 23:47:
snip
RedEye9 wrote on May 28, 2017, 11:11:
snip
Beamer wrote on May 28, 2017, 12:43:Slick wrote on May 27, 2017, 03:58:Beamer wrote on May 26, 2017, 10:06:
Fallout was dead. Big budget isometric games are dead. You can spend all your time angry and mourning them, or you can play what's out there and enjoy it for what it is.
So you're saying that games with interesting characters, lore, world-building, fun game mechanics, satisfying puzzles, introduction to new ways to interact in a 3D space, inventive death loops, gravity puzzles, wall-walking, portals, and mind-fuckery turning a rock into a planet to explore is all dead? Says who? you?
"All games are now only about spending 30 minutes scrounging for garbage to fabricate 12 shotgun shells only to never want to use them in a fight while being bored stiff reading office e-mails and exploring nearly identical corridors in a bland spaceship until it ends. ENJOY IT FOR WHAT IT IS, THIS IS ALL WE HAVE NOW."
Give me a break.
No, I said isometric games are dead. Not sure how you got the rest of that. Fact: big budget isometric games are dead. The people who whined about Fallout 3 not being isometric were lost causes.
The rest, I have no clue where you got that from. No one had a clue what the content of F3 was back when all the whining was going on. But it's really, really weird for me to say "isometric is dead" and you to follow with all of that other stuff.
Slick wrote on May 27, 2017, 03:58:Beamer wrote on May 26, 2017, 10:06:
Fallout was dead. Big budget isometric games are dead. You can spend all your time angry and mourning them, or you can play what's out there and enjoy it for what it is.
So you're saying that games with interesting characters, lore, world-building, fun game mechanics, satisfying puzzles, introduction to new ways to interact in a 3D space, inventive death loops, gravity puzzles, wall-walking, portals, and mind-fuckery turning a rock into a planet to explore is all dead? Says who? you?
"All games are now only about spending 30 minutes scrounging for garbage to fabricate 12 shotgun shells only to never want to use them in a fight while being bored stiff reading office e-mails and exploring nearly identical corridors in a bland spaceship until it ends. ENJOY IT FOR WHAT IT IS, THIS IS ALL WE HAVE NOW."
Give me a break.
Slick wrote on May 27, 2017, 18:37:Dacote layed down the road but you chose to drive over the cliff. Portals were developed by a group of students in a final project. Valve hired those talented graduates, as good companies tend to do, and released a game based solely on portals.
Also I'm well aware of the origins of Portal. And that wasn't Arkane, I think you meant Valve. Valve haven't put out an original IP since Half Life. All they do is use community mods, and then straight-out buy it from them, or just bring them into their studio. The point was that Prey was a AAA game that used portal puzzles first, before any other big publisher game touched the idea. Forgetting the half-dozen other original gameplay mechanics they introduced, that should be enough to consider it "impactful".
The first thing to forget is the original Prey. This has flat-out nothing to do with it. It is, frankly, ridiculous that it has the same name. This isn’t a sequel, nor a remake, nor a sister-game. It’s utterly unrelated.See how succinct that was, there is absolutely no need in good journalism to continually hold the readers head under the water until they beg to come up for air.