Your Top Ten Games

[Bos_hybrid]

Oh you got to be ****ing kiddin' me. ME's story best ever? Ever heard of, uhh, Planescape Torment, Fallout, Ultimas, System Shocks, Sam&Max, Grim Fandango etc. etc?

 

Torment, Fallout was/are great, System Shock 2, was again good, Sam&Max and Grim Fandango never played. As is said it's an opinion, its just what you like.

 

Yeah, that is the craziness... in my opinion. Have you played any of Xard's examples, Bos? I'm interested to know how ME trumps PS:T.

 

It's an opinion, not a fact. I prefer Vulcans to Elves.

 

You see here's the thing,IMO MEs story is better then any game before it and MoTB is right up there too.

 

Ok... Mass Effect has a better story than every other game that came before it? Why was its story so good when compared to the others -I have yet to play it as I do not own a 360-, and why are you so dismissive of past games? Have you played these classics, or are you making an attack et al without good reason?

 

Never attacked, stated an opinion. But yes I have played the classic's. If you are referring to PS:T, BG 1&2 Fallout 1&2 etc.

 

How do you want me to explain an opinion?

 

How about this, I found ME characters more interesting then PS:T, BG 1&2(even if there wasn't enough dialogue with them), I enjoyed the paragon/renegade metre and the effect it had on the story even if minor, (why does evil in DnD games have to be kill puppies with severed limbs evil?), the villain's were interesting. The numerous alien species that I found interesting, the story behind them, the dislike of humans, the racism of humans, the back story, all of it is well done, IMO. No expected twists, no poorly developed characters, no shallow villains, the story wasn't drawn out and inflated to make the game longer. Was ME the holy grail of storytelling.... no, but then IMO neither are the classics.

 

I'm not dismissive of the classics its just I haven't enjoyed their stories as much.

[astr0creep]

My top 10

 

1- UFO Enemy Unknown(X-COM)

2- Final Fantasy VII

3- Deus Ex

4- Final Fantasy Tactics

5- God of War 2

6- God of War

7- Fallout 2

8- Neverwinter Nights + Hordes of the Underdark

9- Lands of Lore The Throne of Chaos

10- Ultima Underworld The Stygian Abyss

[Xard]

Oh you got to be ****ing kiddin' me. ME's story best ever? Ever heard of, uhh, Planescape Torment, Fallout, Ultimas, System Shocks, Sam&Max, Grim Fandango etc. etc?

 

Torment, Fallout was/are great, System Shock 2, was again good, Sam&Max and Grim Fandango never played. As is said it's an opinion, its just what you like.

 

Now I was going to do this rant in Animu thread ( I still might) but what I bolded has over the time changed to be one of the most annoying arguments/defenses of all time. You may prefer Dumb and dumber over Tarkovsky's Stalker but that doesn't change the fact latter one is one of the greatest achievements of cinematic art and first is dump (if funny) ****.

 

Maybe I like eating **** instead of spaghetti bolognese but I shouldn't be stupid enough to start arguing it is better food. Maybe my cousin Joe prefers some trashy nu-metal band called Linkin Park over The Beatles but he shouldn't be stupid enough to start going on how Linkin Park is much more important, better and influencing band in history of popular music.

 

Yet in the end everything is up to opinion and person himself. However we should never forget Platon's classical definition of truth/knowledge "Truth is well argued true belief" which is only way to reach at least remotely objective stance on the matter. Unless you manage to pull out some absolutely shining feats of arguing (and 100 % no one in this world is good enough for that job) Stalker will always be better movie than Dumb and Dumber (when going by as objective route as possible)

 

You not liking something =/= absolute POS

 

Now forgive the rant as you gave explanation for your views (and thus you shouldn't take that rant as anything personal ) and even though I heavily disagree and could go on to derail the thread I'm not willing to do so.

Edited April 21, 2008 by Xard

[Hurlshort]

Xard, that really is the most ridiculous argument I have ever seen from someone not named Volourn.

 

Mass Effect has a good story. Planescape: Torment and your other examples all have good stories. None of them are the Beatles. None of them are "works of art" that will be looked back on for centuries to come. They are all in the same ballpark and it's very much a matter of personal preference.

[Xard]

Xard, that really is the most ridiculous argument I have ever seen from someone not named Volourn.

 

Mass Effect has a good story. Planescape: Torment and your other examples all have good stories. None of them are the Beatles. None of them are "works of art" that will be looked back on for centuries to come. They are all in the same ballpark and it's very much a matter of personal preference.

 

I was talking more in general, not about bos_hybrids (as I said) as he did explain reasons for his opinion. As for your last sentence I disagree, there's no ****ing way one could consider stories of Jade Empire and Planescape "in the same ballpark".

 

And there's nothing ridiculous in my argument. If you can with straight face say "yes, Dumb and Dumber is better movie than Stalker because I like it" I don't know what to say. Maybe "go get some taste and perspective" or such.

Edited April 21, 2008 by Xard

[Krookie]

And there's nothing ridiculous in my argument. If you can with straight face say "yes, Dumb and Dumber is better movie than Stalker because I like it" I don't know what to say.

 

Explain to me why I can't say that.

[Xard]

Read my post, twerp. And go get some perspective and taste.

 

If you add "for me" in the end it is all different (thus bos_hybrid has good base for his stand) but when trying to achieve more "general" or "objective" view that is undefensable claim. edit: still talking about my movie comparison, not games

Edited April 21, 2008 by Xard

[Krookie]

All the guy said was that he liked "this game" better than "that game". Everything was all good until you (and whoever else) jumped in telling him he had to reword his sentence to make it more acceptable to you. (I hope) You're smart enough to understand what he meant, because I thought it was pretty obvious that he was just stating his opinion. Jumping in and saying "Oh! OH! He's trying to achieve more "general" or "objective" yada yada yda" is just annoying to most other people on the forum. Even if he had said "Mass Effect is the best RPG ever", there really isn't a reason to all jump on him for that because it's obviously an opinion.

[random n00b]

You are obviously not educated enough to appreciate the finer pleasures of life. Or something.

[thepixiesrock]

And because something has an impact on a certain medium/genre doesn't make it better than somehting else. For example, The Beatles' music isn't better than Linkin Park's music. And it would be hard to argue against that if you don't know anything about music. "yes, The Beatles are a better musical group than Linkin Park because I like them" is essentially the argument you seem to be making.

[Hurlshort]

It also should be mentioned that there are entirely different genres here. I don't even know what Stalker is, but it doesn't sound like a comedy. I don't know why you would even try to make a comparison to Dumb and Dumber. Same with Linkin Pak and the Beatles. In fact, Linkin Park is closer to Planescape because it appeals to a smaller, cult like audience, whereas Jade Empire and Mass Effect are more akin to the Beatles because they have a broader audience.

 

Also, who was arguing that Jade Empire is the best? I don't remember seeing that anywhere. Sure, it made some top ten lists, but it wasn't number one anywhere. Even if it was, that would just mean the game appealed to them over all others. It's not shocking, it was a solid gaming experience.

[Lohengrin]

Anyone who starts drawing analogies to Tarkovsky when discussing computer games, will not sound credible when he tells other people to get some perspective.

[Xard]

Neither do you when you start to talk out of your ass wihtout any kind of idea what I tried to do, namely comparing two movies as example of stupidity, conversation ending strawman nature of "whaa but i liek it more and that sucks " without backing your statement with any kind of observance

 

 

(bigger response to whole ****e coming soon enough)

Edited April 24, 2008 by Xard

[thepixiesrock]

And now we wait.

[Musopticon?]

Sorry Xardy, I really couldn't grasp what you were trying to emphasize with those parallels, so I don't think your taking of minor offense over Bos_hybrid's assumed implications, which I can't see either, is justified.

 

We'll see, won't we.

Edited April 24, 2008 by Musopticon?

[Guest The Architect]

I agree with Xard. The "it's an opinion not a fact" is an annoying argument/defense.

 

Now I've never played Planescape Torment, Fallout or any of the games Xard mentioned before, although just from this forum alone, I've gathered that most people who have played those games who've also played Mass Effect agree that PS:T and such has the better plot. Now you have to ask yourself - why is that? It must be doing something right to gain such a more potent recognition in that regard than ME.

 

Now sure, Bos hybrid gave reasons why he liked ME more plot wise and that's fair enough, but give me one good reason why someone couldn't come out and argue why he/she thinks PS:T is better than ME in such a way that would make it ridiculous to argue against?

 

For example instead of just saying "The characters in ME had more depth than in PS:T" you would say "The characters had more depth in ME because they had this and that and blah blah etc as opposed to PS:T which was lacking..." See what I mean? The more details that are applied to an argument, the more clear it becomes what is better.

Edited April 25, 2008 by The Architect

[random n00b]

I agree with Xard. The "it's an opinion not a fact" is an annoying argument/defense.

Indeed. However, when you counter an argument in that shape with "my opinion is fact because, unlike you, I have taste and perspective", you are just taking the silliness one step further.

 

 

Now I've never played Planescape Torment, Fallout or any of the games Xard mentioned before, although just from this forum alone, I've gathered that most people who have played those games who've also played Mass Effect agree that PS:T and such has the better plot. Now you have to ask yourself - why is that? It must be doing something right to gain such a more potent recognition in that regard than ME.

And the posters in this board as a whole are a representative sample because...?

 

See Bandwagon Effect and selection bias.

 

 

Now sure, Bos hybrid gave reasons why he liked ME more plot wise and that's fair enough, but give me one good reason why someone couldn't come out and argue why he/she thinks PS:T is better than ME in such a way that would make it ridiculous to argue against?

 

For example instead of just saying "The characters in ME had more depth than in PS:T" you would say "The characters had more depth in ME because they had this and that and blah blah etc as opposed to PS:T which was lacking..." See what I mean? The more details that are applied to an argument, the more clear it becomes what is better.

The problem is that people here are arguing on what's "better". Better has not been defined thus far, because it's not an objective concept like, for instance, "up" and "black". Edited April 25, 2008 by random n00b

[thepixiesrock]

Not to mention you're basically saying that instead of having the opinion that something is good because you like it, you have the opinion it's good because a lot of people you know like it.

[Hurlshort]

I liked the story in ME much better than PS:T. I didn't know anything about Sigil or even much about D&D when I played PS:T, and I think it really crippled my understanding of the entire plot. But I shouldn't need to have a ton of geeky background knowledge to enjoy a game. ME was an entirely new game world, but it didn't make me feel like I needed a PhD in order to fully understand the universe.

 

I'm getting the impression that unless something is cryptic and misunderstood by the masses, it can't be considered art.

[Guest The Architect]

Indeed. However, when you counter an argument in that shape with "my opinion is fact because, unlike you, I have taste and perspective", you are just taking the silliness one step further.

 

I know.

 

And the posters in this board as a whole are a representative sample because...?

 

See Bandwagon Effect and selection bias.

 

I'm also basing it on the high rankings games such as PS:T and Fallout tend to get on "classic PC games" lists and things like that, and that they're highly regarded games for their plot, whether as the plot isn't the source of Mass Effects' acclaimed status, rather it's the flashy, fun, action packed interactive sci-fi movie zest to it that makes it awesome, which is what you'll find most people who've played the game and liked it compliment it on.

 

The problem is that people here are arguing on what's "better". Better has not been defined thus far, because it's not an objective concept like, for instance, "up" and "black".

 

But when what is better is defined, is it still a completely objective concept? It's one thing to look for different things in the quality of a story, it's another to look for the same things in the quality of a story, but then be in favour of something that contradicts your views over something that doesn't.

 

And Bos has stated the qualities he looks for in a story, by pointing out the crap he doesn't want in a story that he thought wasn't in Mass Effect, and given that it's Xard, I know he'd look for the same qualities in a plot that Bos does, so what makes you think better hasn't been defined yet, since we know what qualities to compare in this instance, such as the character depth of the villains, the little back story details of the "setting", the character development quality and the pacing of the story?

 

Not to mention you're basically saying that instead of having the opinion that something is good because you like it, you have the opinion it's good because a lot of people you know like it.

 

Not for me personally, no. If I like something, it's because I like it, but if many of the people I know happen to not like what I like, I want to know why and can't help but feel that there's something I'm missing or taking for granted. To me it's like a subconscious effect, like how they say you act like the people you hang out with, sometimes without even realising it.

Edited April 25, 2008 by The Architect

[samm]

I liked the story in ME much better than PS:T. I didn't know anything about Sigil or even much about D&D when I played PS:T, and I think it really crippled my understanding of the entire plot.

Funny enough, I didn't have a clue either. What I "knew" about AD&D came from BG1, but still PS:T was very intriguing, not least because of the setting unknown to me at that time.

 

But I shouldn't need to have a ton of geeky background knowledge to enjoy a game. ME was an entirely new game world, but it didn't make me feel like I needed a PhD in order to fully understand the universe.

Agreed with the points here, and I like new game worlds as well, though the look of the one in ME never made me feel like I wanted to play that game because of the universe.

 

I'm getting the impression that unless something is cryptic and misunderstood by the masses, it can't be considered art.

I can see how you're getting that impression. But let me assure you, it's not entirely true, as there pieces of art that are appealing to mainstream but still considered art. Edited April 25, 2008 by samm

[thepixiesrock]

I think there is a problem with veiwing games as art. Games can be veiwed as art, but games are more so veiwed as entertainment. It's the same problem with movies and music. Movies and music are entertainment, and art. The difference is, there is a deffinite market for art movies, and art music. Games do not have an art market yet. If music and movies were made with the explicit purpose of entertainment, they wouldn't be able to pregress. If music and movies were made with the explicit purpose of art, they wouldn't be able to sell.

 

I haven't studied film, but music has made it's biggest steps from time period to time period and genre to genre through music made to be art. The musicians weren't as concerned with selling as they were with creating. Games are missing that, because games are an industry. Games need to make money in order for more games to be made. It's fine to value games in an artistic way, but I think it's a bit premature for the industry to view games more as art than entertainment, and to judge games based on that.

[Shryke]

you know, pixies actually does raise a very good point

[kirottu]

you know, pixies actually does raise a very good point

 

Yeah, I think he

Edited April 25, 2008 by kirottu

[Pidesco]

While I agree in broad terms with what Pixies is saying, I think that there is market for art games. It's a much smaller market than the mainstream of course, but it's there for a developer to cater to and profit from. It's tiny, but it's also pretty much an untapped market without any competition. I think real, in depth studies of the gamer demographic are in order.

 

I think cinema is a good industry for the gaming industry to learn from due to its multifaceted structure. The fact that a huge chunk of the film industry is broad appeal, Hollywood blockbusters, hasn't stopped smaller arthouse films from across the world, from getting financed and from being successful. Considering there's an industry where products as diverse as Titanic, Airplane!, Weekend, Ben Hur, City of God, Raising Victor Vargas, or Persona can all be made, and be commercially successful, I can't see why games as industry can't have as broad a range as any other cultural endeavour.

 

Linkin' Park can live alongside John Cage.