GRcade

HSH28 wrote:

Carlos wrote:It is unashamedly a video game, it cares not about plot and cut scenes but about pure unadulterated gameplay, sadly a dying trend outside of indie games.

Except for the fact that it contains a clearly lovingly crafted and wonderfully written story as well.

Yes, but its Mario: Plot comes second to the gameplay. This is why I love Paper Mario so much.

HSH28 wrote:

cooldawn wrote:Likewise it's ridiculous for anyone to think a single player campaign should be marked up or down based on a part of a game that has no relevance to it i.e. multiplayer.

Except you can't buy SP campaigns without the MP bits that are attached. Its one thing, even if for some reason you only want a part of it.

That's not the point and even if it was you can. I'm not talking about an choice interaction with a game to enter in to either a single player or multiplayer experience, I am talking about context. For instance MW2's multiplayer has no relationship to it's campaign. The package is both elements but the seperate parts offer different experiences.

HSH28 wrote:I find it truely strange that people think about these things seperately, online is so much a part of games now that I will generally not play a game (SP or MP) unless I'm connected to the net.

It just feels wrong to be playing games while not connected. One of the reasons I don't like playing games on PS3, it just doesn't feel as connected as when I'm on 360.

Well I don't know what to say about this apart from it's a shame that you can't enjoy a game if it doesn't meet particular criteria. A game should be enjoyed for what the developers have created...not whether it's 'connected' or not. That's a pretty sad way of thinking about games in general...wanting a game to be something it was never intended to be.

cooldawn wrote:Well I don't know what to say about this apart from it's a shame that you can't enjoy a game if it doesn't meet particular criteria. A game should be enjoyed for what the developers have created...not whether it's 'connected' or not. That's a pretty sad way of thinking about games in general...wanting a game to be something it was never intended to be.

I feel sorry for you.

Theres no single game on 360 that doesn't meet this criteria.

HSH28 wrote:

cooldawn wrote:Well I don't know what to say about this apart from it's a shame that you can't enjoy a game if it doesn't meet particular criteria. A game should be enjoyed for what the developers have created...not whether it's 'connected' or not. That's a pretty sad way of thinking about games in general...wanting a game to be something it was never intended to be.

I feel sorry for you.

Theres no single game on 360 that doesn't meet this criteria.

Ha ha, I don't need online to appreciate an experience so don't feel sorry for me because I can enjoy a game for what it is...not what it isn't.

Even though if the game's only have a single player mode? Like Alan Wake?

cooldawn enjoys a game more if it's exclusively on PS3.

You don't have to go into an in depth discussion.

Wedgie wrote:Even though if the game's only have a single player mode? Like Alan Wake?

Ah, but it's getting DLC episodes [read - rip off extra bits]

EDIT: As for Mario Galaxy. It's glorious. It doesn't need to be mp. I'd LOVE a HD version but that's about it!

Are people actually discussing the plot in Galaxy?



It's even thinner than the two player mode.

Photek wrote:

Wedgie wrote:Even though if the game's only have a single player mode? Like Alan Wake?

Ah, but it's getting DLC episodes [read - rip off extra bits]

EDIT: As for Mario Galaxy. It's glorious. It doesn't need to be mp. I'd LOVE a HD version but that's about it!

First episode costs £0.

I'm outraged.

cooldawn wrote:Ha ha, I don't need online to appreciate an experience so don't feel sorry for me because I can enjoy a game for what it is...not what it isn't.

You don't seem to be able to understand. This is a part of all games now. Its you thats not appreciating games for what they are, because you are missing a huge chunk of the experience.

HSH28 wrote:

cooldawn wrote:Ha ha, I don't need online to appreciate an experience so don't feel sorry for me because I can enjoy a game for what it is...not what it isn't.

You don't seem to be able to understand. This is a part of all games now. Its you thats not appreciating games for what they are, because you are missing a huge chunk of the experience.

You're right, I don't understand. What am I missing out on, exactly?

Rik wrote:Are people actually discussing the plot in Galaxy?



It's even thinner than the two player mode.

Hugo was on about the storybook thing, I think. I thought that bit was very well told, myself.

cooldawn wrote:

HSH28 wrote:

cooldawn wrote:Ha ha, I don't need online to appreciate an experience so don't feel sorry for me because I can enjoy a game for what it is...not what it isn't.

You don't seem to be able to understand. This is a part of all games now. Its you thats not appreciating games for what they are, because you are missing a huge chunk of the experience.

You're right, I don't understand. What am I missing out on, exactly?

Feeling connected, being part of a community that you can see...

I don't think I'd want to buy another console that wasn't always online like the 360 now.

rudderless wrote:Weirdly, it's probably the aspects I was least sure about where it truly excels.

I knew the driving sections would be groundbreaking.

...

HSH28 wrote:

cooldawn wrote:

HSH28 wrote:

cooldawn wrote:Ha ha, I don't need online to appreciate an experience so don't feel sorry for me because I can enjoy a game for what it is...not what it isn't.

You don't seem to be able to understand. This is a part of all games now. Its you thats not appreciating games for what they are, because you are missing a huge chunk of the experience.

You're right, I don't understand. What am I missing out on, exactly?

Feeling connected, being part of a community that you can see...

I don't think I'd want to buy another console that wasn't always online like the 360 now.

That has absolutely no bearing on this discussion. The point is games should not be marked down for not having online multiplayer or the single player experience market down for having a bad online experience i.e. a single player campaign is a seperate entity. The point of the discussion has been about the impact of online multiplayer components in reviews...not if a game is 'connected'.

Essentially single player and multiplayer components could be marked seperately without prejudice.

NGE wrote:

rudderless wrote:Weirdly, it's probably the aspects I was least sure about where it truly excels.

I knew the driving sections would be groundbreaking.

...

It was the dating simulator level that I thought was particularly revolutionary.

Seems like a good issue.

Does the MG2 review contain spoilers of any significance.

NGE wrote:

rudderless wrote:Weirdly, it's probably the aspects I was least sure about where it truly excels.

I knew the driving sections would be groundbreaking.

...

You git. The driving sections are pretty dreadful, yeah. They're more a means to an end than anything else, just a way of getting about Bright Falls a little quicker.

Just received my copy of E215 today. I'm not sure I see the logic in Edge reviewing Cave Story. Edge is a UK magazine and Cave Story has no UK release scheduled. Since Cave Story is a download only title, importing is not an option. So why review it?

Sabreman64 wrote:Just received my copy of E215 today. I'm not sure I see the logic in Edge reviewing Cave Story. Edge is a UK magazine and Cave Story has no UK release scheduled. Since Cave Story is a download only title, importing is not an option. So why review it?

Maybe they expected people to pirate it?