Then don't listen to me, genius.

You can state the obvious sure, but it doesn't change the fact that Fallout 1 and 2 are considered classics and that FO4 is considered the black sheep of the series, financially successful or otherwise. Gameplay and story > graphics and sound. Has been true for RPGs since the 90s.

But you know what, I'm not gonna argue with you. You want to say FO4 is the best game in the series ever, go ahead. Just don't rope me into it.
I don't like FO4. The Fallout series in general is not all that good. Like I'm sure 2 has a better story than 3 or 4 or NV. That's not a super hard bar to pass.
 
Is Life is Strange even good? I remember it huffing and puffing about ebil government in the same tired way as others, or am I confusing games again?
Uh, not a word about the government.

It was sort of charming in a so-bad-it's-good sort of way for the first four episodes, and it was fun to fuck about with the ability to rewind time to savescum conversations and do puzzles, then it shit the bed so hard the subsequent fecal fountain managed to hit the ceiling come the final episode.
 
So does Virtue's Last Reward, and that's still a visual novel. :V
How about the fact that you pilot a character through an interactive environment? I mean I always thought that the distinction between a VN and game was that a VN didn't have environments and were simply a series of interconnected scenes with CYOA style dialog.
 
How about the fact that you pilot a character through an interactive environment? I mean I always thought that the distinction between a VN and game was that a VN didn't have environments and were simply a series of interconnected scenes with CYOA style dialog.
VLR's escape segments were like that that, only instead of walking around freely, you moved between several different viewpoints.
 


I don't have the skill to put into words how I dislike Life is Strange so here's someone who can.


Not in reference to the video itself but his comment near the end when recommending Night in the Woods before the fandom makes him resent it :

There are many poor excuses that can be made for criticism. 'The fans annoy me' is not one of them. The fandom should, in no way, influence your enjoyment of the work. If you are a fan, you can turn to the fandom to enhance your enjoyment. Otherwise, just ignore them.
 
Last edited:
Not in reference to the video itself but his comment near the end when recommending Night in the Woods before the fandom makes him resent it :

There are many poor excuses that can be made for criticism. 'The fans annoy me' is not one of them. And I have met people who dislike creative works because of the fandom rather than any particular distaste for the work.
I mean the Steven Universe fandom have basically poisoned the show for me due to the fact that it is hard to associate the show with any positive emotions anymore. It's especially bad if, like me, you're a person that finds engaging with a work far better where there is a community to discuss the story with. Certain communities can be so toxic that it isn't fun to try and engage with them and doing so can ruin the experience.
 
There are many poor excuses that can be made for criticism. 'The fans annoy me' is not one of them. The fandom should, in no way, influence your enjoyment of the work. If you are a fan, you can turn to the fandom to enhance your enjoyment. Otherwise, just ignore them.

This is absolutely true (see Undertale, love it, but stay away from the fans), but the fact of the matter is some games are very much related to their communities. Any MMORPG cannot be divorced from its community due to the multiplayer nature of its structure. Same goes for shooters as well.

The reason why Rimworld has such a nice (albeit cannibalistic) community is because it's single player. No one literally gives a crap if you spawn yourself a level 20 everything pawn. But MMORPGs? Overwatch? Things like that, community does in fact matter.
 
This is absolutely true (see Undertale, love it, but stay away from the fans), but the fact of the matter is some games are very much related to their communities. Any MMORPG cannot be divorced from its community due to the multiplayer nature of its structure. Same goes for shooters as well.

The reason why Rimworld has such a nice (albeit cannibalistic) community is because it's single player. No one literally gives a crap if you spawn yourself a level 20 everything pawn. But MMORPGs? Overwatch? Things like that, community does in fact matter.

I will admit I'm mostly speaking in regards to single player games and non-interactive media (I forgot this was the game opinions thread rather than the general opinions thread). Honestly, I find most multiplayer games to have pretty weak stories. Even if I do really like the presentation that they're wrapped in.

For instance, Overwatch, Destiny, and I suspect Anthem when it comes out. Along with most MMOs. I love the presentation, the story content is always really wanting.

Edit : I would actually pay retail price for quality, full featured, tablet/phone portable games.
 
Last edited:
...So nothing like that?
From my experience with Telltale's games, which LiS seems to borrow structure from, most of the differences are on a superficial level.
Can you walk around a bit? Sure. Is there anything that can be accomplished by freely walking around that can't be accomplished by having a rotating camera and different choices of PoV? Not really.
Controversial opinion : Paladins is a good alternative to Overwatch.
I disagree with that, but only because I consider Paladins a superior alternative to Overwatch.
 
There is more to Life is Strange than the Telltale games in terms of gameplay.
That's...a pretty low bar, though. Cookie Clicker has more gameplay than Telltale's games. And that still doesn't really address my point. What about the free-walking control scheme makes it completely and totally different from VLR?
 
Back
Top