Interplay still alive

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

I view games as a whole series, not individual games.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

That's ridiculous.

[mkreku]

The only Ultima games I view as bad were 8 and 9 the rest were average or better than average given the timeframe in which they were originally released.  I view games as a whole series, not individual games.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Did you play Akallabeth or Ultima 1? They were NOT considered very good games when they arrived. Average or below average, although they sold well. Ultima 2 was just Ultima 1 with more content (because of more space, I assume). It was Ultima 3 that started the real Ultima technology and setting, and Ultima 4 was the real breakthrough.

[Judge Hades]

I view games as a whole series, not individual games.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

That's ridiculous.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

And your point? Look who you are talking to.

[Judge Hades]

Did you play Akallabeth or Ultima 1? They were NOT considered very good games when they arrived. Average or below average, although they sold well. Ultima 2 was just Ultima 1 with more content (because of more space, I  assume). It was Ultima 3 that started the real Ultima technology and setting, and Ultima 4 was the real breakthrough.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Yes, I have played the entire Ultima series and I thought Akallabeth and Ultima 1 were quite interesting.

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

your point?  Look who you are talking to. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

The point is, it's ridiculous. It dosnt matter who says it , it will always be so.

[Judge Hades]

The point is, it's ridiculous. It dosnt matter who says it , it will always be so.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

That is not a point, that is a subjective statement that has no merit.

 

I judge a game individually if the game is done so as a stand alone game without any connection to other games. Games that continues a plotline or uses the same setting are very much connected. You must judge the whole in order to get the larger picture of the style in which they are presented. That is the only way to gain an objective view on a game's or games' worth.

[Diogo Ribeiro]

A game can be judged both as a standalone game and as a game that is meant to be taken as part of a series (when applicable), and while a bad game does not affect a good game in the series, it can contribute to a fluctuating appraisal of the entire series. Simple example (in the case of the Ultimas): the lower quality of some Ultima games does not influence the higher quality of some other Ultima games, but when considering the entire series it can't be considered superb or mediocre based on only the great or only the inferior titles: all of them, both good and bad, contribute to the overall feel of the series. One can't only enjoy 3 games out of a series of 12 then proceed to consider the entire series brilliant. Well, one can do it but he's most obviously lacking in clear judgement or objective capability.

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

I'd say that depends on whether or not the series are connected.

 

FOT for example has nothing whatsover to do with FO1&2 , it's not even the same genre.

 

You may have more justification with FO and FO2 since they have a link (albeit a tenuous one). But even if you hated FO2 it would have no impact on how much you enjoyed FO.

 

The only time I could see that becoming a factor is if you adondoned the series altogether because you hated game X. But then you would never know if things improved would you ?

 

You couldnt apply that to something like the FF series, since appart from the names, they are like totally different games.

[Diogo Ribeiro]

I'd say that depends on whether or not the series are connected.

 

FOT for example has nothing whatsover to do with FO1&2 , it's not even the same genre.

 

Of course, there has to be some measure of continuity that establishes it as part of a series. Fallout Tactics wasn't even a CRPG to begin with, and it doesn't really connect to the Fallout CRPGs in terms of genre. In this regard the only applicabele continuity for the purposes of determining on what grounds it can be compared would be found in other elements that both games would have (ie, setting, story, etc.).

 

You couldnt apply that to something like the FF series, since appart from the names, they are like totally different games.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

But they all share some measure of continuity; some elements that when combined you'll go "this is a Final Fantasy game". It can be the artwork, the gameplay, the setting, the themes of the games or how said themes are handled; could be (and often is) all of these and more. But a chocobo pimping game, even if Chocobos are a recurring component of the games, has much less continuity with the Final Fantasy series than any other episode of the series when compared between themselves. And in the event of said chocobo pimping game was released as Final Fantasy XIII, Squarenix really wouldn't be justified in calling it Final Fantasy because it bears no resemblance to anything that uses the franchise name. Just as a firstperson shoother where you play the part of the The Chosen Brahmin on a quest to kill all the suicide Deathclaw bombers really wouldn't merit being called Fallout 3. Sequels should have continuity in regards to the series they are a part of (even in the case of games like Final Fantasy games which aren't direct sequels but are nonetheless possessing of an undeniable connection). Otherwise they really aren't sequels at all.

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

Of course, there has to be some measure of continuity that establishes it as part of a series. Fallout Tactics wasn't even a CRPG to begin with, and it doesn't really connect to the Fallout CRPGs in terms of genre. In this regard the only applicabele continuity for the purposes of determining on what grounds it can be compared would be found in other elements that both games would have (ie, setting, story, etc.).

 

But they all share some measure of continuity; some elements that when combined you'll go "this is a Final Fantasy game". It can be the artwork, the gameplay, the setting, the themes of the games or how said themes are handled; could be (and often is) all of these and more. But a chocobo pimping game, even if Chocobos are a recurring component of the games, has much less continuity with the Final Fantasy series than any other episode of the series when compared between themselves. And in the event of said chocobo pimping game was released as Final Fantasy XIII, Squarenix really wouldn't be justified in calling it Final Fantasy because it bears no resemblance to anything that uses the franchise name. Just as a firstperson shoother where you play the part of the The Chosen Brahmin on a quest to kill all the suicide Deathclaw bombers really wouldn't merit being called Fallout 3. Sequels should have continuity in regards to the series they are a part of (even in the case of games like Final Fantasy games which aren't direct sequels but are nonetheless possessing of an undeniable connection). Otherwise they really aren't sequels at all.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I like FOT but all that manually cleaning up the battlefield annoyed the hell out of me.

 

Chocobo pimping? game

 

Well you could compare FO and FF and their relationship with FOT and Final Fantasy Tactics (Advanced).

[Diogo Ribeiro]

Tactics wasn't a bad game, but I never felt it ever got good either. The inital feel of the game was let down by a very tedious and repetitive gameplay; there were only a handful of levels and objectives that really stood out. I also didn't felt like I was playing a Fallout game either, but that's a different story. In the end it came off as a competent game but not polished enough in several areas.

 

Well I had to come up with some example of radical departure from standard gameplay :D

 

True; pretty much the same as mentioned before, I guess.

[Darque]

I think the biggest problem with FOT is the fact it's a turn based game built to be played as a real time one.

 

Did anyone really play that game in real time?

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

I think the biggest problem with FOT is the fact it's a turn based game built to be played as a real time one.

 

Did anyone really play that game in real time? 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Yep although it needed a pause button it was easier to play than an IE game since each individual character had less options.

[jaguars4ever]

At least we know Elder Scrolls : Fallout will look awesome.  :cool:

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

But will it have Patrick Stewart?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

He plays the son of Dogmeat

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

He would would have to be the great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great soon of Dogmeat...who we hereby dub Dogwheat. :cool:

[Diogo Ribeiro]

I think the biggest problem with FOT is the fact it's a turn based game built to be played as a real time one.

 

Did anyone really play that game in real time? 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I did. IIRC all I had to do for the most part was set everyone in the party to Overwatch Mode and run around the map, letting them fire against anything and kill on sight. It was even more boring than the turnbased mode it sported.

[Gabrielle]

I think the biggest problem with FOT is the fact it's a turn based game built to be played as a real time one.

 

Did anyone really play that game in real time? 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That was a problem with it. Sure there were more but It's been years since I played it. Also the only Fallout game I never completed.

[Darque]

You didn't miss much unfortunately.

 

Overall I enjoyed it, but I tend to be forgiving toward most games.

[Gabrielle]

I usually complete games I play but FOT and PST are the only ones I never have. PST just sucks and FOT I started to get bored with it.

[Skynet]

I usually complete games I play but FOT and PST are the only ones I never have. PST just sucks and FOT I started to get bored with it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Didn't you say you only played about five minutes of PS:T? That isn't exactly enough to form a proper opinion. <_<

[Darque]

Ha! you've got a point there.

 

That's not even enough time to get thru the intro

[Gabrielle]

Half hour to an hour.

[Diamond]

  Half hour to an hour.

That's still not enough.

When playing first time I began to like Torment after playing for 3 hours.

[Gabrielle]

It was enough for me to call it quits.

[HaPhApAbLaP]

It was enough for me to call it quits.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

but...but...

 

That isn't exactly enough to form a proper opinion.

 

I know your from the state of cynicism, and some would make allowances, but we are talking PS:T

Edited November 9, 2005 by HaPhApAbLaP

[Darque]

It was enough for me to call it quits.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

That style of gameplay isn't for everyone.