Bellum said:
Thank you for pointing it out. I suggest ignoring it. Is that coherent enough for you?
Gamespot reviews M&B!
- Thread starter LostLEGION
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
Thank you for pointing it out. I suggest ignoring it. Is that coherent enough for you?
Right back at you.crimsonfilms said:
I don't even know what that means. You're going to have to be coherent if we're to have a meaningful conversation.
Obviously, yes. Parodies don't generally get bloated budgets, so I didn't mind the inferior production values etc.
Again, I have no idea what you're trying to say.
The Doom marine.
Only in your mind. Which is the point, you see. Or rather you don't.
Neither it is in M&B.
Wait a second, so allocation of skill points = narrative?
Analogy ≠ comparison. Use a goddamn dictionary if you're unclear on the difference.
Translation: "I don't have a good counter point, so I'm just going to ignore the argument."
We've been there already. You take the role of an airline pilot, etc, etc.
You shouldn't have even begun, but please, feel free to go for as long as you like. I'm having a total blast.
[quoteI don't even know what that means. You're going to have to be coherent if we're to have a meaningful conversation.[/quote]
Edited for clarity.
Where did you make that obvious?
And I am to believe your dont care about quality when the budget is low? So I assume you spend a lot of time playing $10 shareware? No matter the quality?
Right....
The fact that you find it funny means the actors did their acting job.
A marine. A member of the Union aerospace corporation. Mission and motive - to stop an alien attack. Has a sarcastic comedic streak. Voice acted some lines.
The point that the Doom guy has an animated face, a simple given mission, has voice acting, is about 3 attempts more than M&B. It is amazing. A game that has a one dimensional main character was given more effort to be fleshed out than M&B.
Wait... you argue it is subjective yet ***** about the taste of the GS critic. You are trying to have your cake and eat it to.
Right, that is why there is a predefined backstory for the kingdoms. You need participate in such events in order to achieve certain gamplay (like being a lord) or hire an NPC.
If the narative was not important, the devs would have not created the gameplay as such. It would have been no NPC interaction that did not involve combat. If combat was the only thing that is important guiding 5 cattles, collecting tax, reconciling NPC conflicts, would not have been in the game.
I agree allocation of skill points = narrative is LOL. Too bad that is not the only thing that is part of your character development.
I mean the developers obviously thought character development is important as there are game mechanics that is not directly related to combat that is part of the game.
So LOL must be the part where you don't see the entire mechanics of the game and is totally blinded by one aspect - combat.
I'm not sure if that is good thing for the developer - put all that effort and even fans like you fail to see it.
Edited for clarity.
Obviously?
Where did you make that obvious?
And I am to believe your dont care about quality when the budget is low? So I assume you spend a lot of time playing $10 shareware? No matter the quality?
Right....
There WAS actiing in spaceball. An effort to act and deliver the lines in a artful and meaningful way. I'm not sure you know this comedy actually requires acting skills. There is a saying in comedy --- 'Comedy is 70% delivery, 30% material'
The fact that you find it funny means the actors did their acting job.
A marine. A member of the Union aerospace corporation. Mission and motive - to stop an alien attack. Has a sarcastic comedic streak. Voice acted some lines.
The point that the Doom guy has an animated face, a simple given mission, has voice acting, is about 3 attempts more than M&B. It is amazing. A game that has a one dimensional main character was given more effort to be fleshed out than M&B.
Wait... you argue it is subjective yet ***** about the taste of the GS critic. You are trying to have your cake and eat it to.
Right, that is why there is a predefined backstory for the kingdoms. You need participate in such events in order to achieve certain gamplay (like being a lord) or hire an NPC.
If the narative was not important, the devs would have not created the gameplay as such. It would have been no NPC interaction that did not involve combat. If combat was the only thing that is important guiding 5 cattles, collecting tax, reconciling NPC conflicts, would not have been in the game.
Wait a second, so allocation of skill points = narrative?
I agree allocation of skill points = narrative is LOL. Too bad that is not the only thing that is part of your character development.
I mean the developers obviously thought character development is important as there are game mechanics that is not directly related to combat that is part of the game.
So LOL must be the part where you don't see the entire mechanics of the game and is totally blinded by one aspect - combat.
I'm not sure if that is good thing for the developer - put all that effort and even fans like you fail to see it.
I get it, you can make a quick non sensical analogy but a reasonable and limited comparison is not allowed. Cherry picking again.
Translation: "I don't have a good counter point, so I'm just going to ignore the argument."
mrtwilight23
Recruit
Could you make a metaphor explaining how an analogy is not a comparison?
(and don't mention fruit)
(and don't mention fruit)
kwekl
Squire
crimson you may have heard of an expression before about arguing with idiots and being beaten with experience.
The people you are discussing with are, by my calcultions, about 13 (+/-2) years old.
Imagine having this discussion with a 12 year old face to face (i.e not over the internet) and I think you'll quickly understand why the best option is to stop.
The people you are discussing with are, by my calcultions, about 13 (+/-2) years old.
Imagine having this discussion with a 12 year old face to face (i.e not over the internet) and I think you'll quickly understand why the best option is to stop.
Actually yeah, I do spend a lot of time playing $10 shareware, namely Mount&Blade. Your point?crimsonfilms said:
Funny, I don't see many Best Actor Oscars going to low budget comedies.
Airline pilot. An employee of the TWA airlines. Mission and motive - fly planes for money. Voice acted some lines (and not just grunts and huffs either).
That's Duke Nukem, not the Doom marine.
Are you being serious?
No, I argue that it is imaginary.
There is? Where?
None of those could be meaningfully called narrative, those are just excuses for you to get to some fighting.
True, there are also stat points and proficiencies. I don't really see how that makes a difference, though.
The LOL must be the part where you don't see the non-combat mechanics for what they are. You talk of character development, so let's examine it. We have 24 different skills in M&B. Of these, 18 are directly or indirectly related to combat and completely useless elsewhere. Five give you advantages before/in/after combat, but also have uses outside of it (namely riding, path-finding, inventory management, engineering, and trade), and only a single skill has no combat use whatsoever (persuasion). If that doesn't clue you in on what the focus of M&B is, I don't know what could.
Yes, how terrible for Armagan that I gave him my money and got years of great fun hacking people to pieces in return.
I get it, you can make a quick and non-sensical comparison but a reasonable and limited analogy is not allowed. Cherry picking again.
Translation: "I can't think of anything witty to say of my own, so I'm just going to use your own line."
I know, but I just can't stop! It's too much fun to watch him embarrass himself over and over again!032125 said:
mrtwilight23 said:
Don't bother asking. He will just quote the irrelevant part of your comment, thus missing the point and replying with a childish remark along the lines of 'I know you are for what am I'. then later compare you to a Yugo, while he is a Ferrari. The circle of life continues....
kwekl said:
Well yeah. I know it is the internet but one should always attempt not to assume the level of intelligence of your fellow human beings.
I am going to play Maple Story now. Because by some weird logic - it should be the greatest game of all time. Free and focused on combat and no coherent narrative :-/
And oh... it is not a RPG. But a MMO side scrolling version of Might and Magic.
Bellum said:kwekl said:
Leave the guy alone! You can see clearly enough that he's holding his own.
You missed his point
Collie
Sergeant
I don't know if anyone in the thread is still talking about the review or about some other petty thing, but after reading the Gamespot review, I actually think it's one of the better reviews I've read recently. It clearly points out of the negatives and positives, and at times I feel he's trying to give the game a break for being an indie title, but at the same time realises it's in a market dominated by big budget titles and really it does have flaws which the score must reflect.
I've been playing the game since .801 was released and my first experience of the game was purely combat driven. Occasionally you'd go around towns to trade, but for the most part you'd just find a party of bandits or Dark Hunters if you were plucky enough and set about hacking people to death. Rest, and repeat ad-infinitum. As the versions increased in number, this part of the game experience became more and more diluted with quest like elements and politics involving other factions and fiefs, but it was all held together by flimsy basic text and simple tasks that lacked fun and yet took up your time with all the extra travelling and cow herding you'd need to do. Whilst as a beta game we weren't too bothered as we'd seen how the game had been progressing over the years, a certain extra level of critique becomes perhaps necessary as the game reached final release stage. The development towards creating a feature-rich story based game was dropped in favour of just getting M&B realised, but so too was an overall level of completeness. Thus I can see how players unfamiliar with the game may not like it, or at least be apprehensive about Mount and Blade. The game remains very simple and basic, and its selling point is for the most part, the excellent battles. Yet getting to a point where you can fully appreciate large armies fighting and sieges takes a considerable time, and it's during that time the player is plucked into a world where they have no real direction or clue what to do, eventually stumbling upon some of the most mundane quests outside of an Elder Scrolls title. I'm actually struggling to get into the game again without wanting to cheat early on just so I can skip the tedious first 10 hours of trying to make some money and getting some renown so I can actually fight some meaningful battles.
With mods and support from the public, the game has the potential to be truly fantastic in not just the battles, but with a decent and enjoyable storyline. Until then, you can't blame some sites and magazines from awarding M&B scores below 7. Myself personally, I still love the game and the journey it took from beta though to full release. I can imagine it will be one of those games I still enjoy playing occasionally years from now.
One thing that from the review I took note of and AGREE 100% with is this:
I've been playing the game since .801 was released and my first experience of the game was purely combat driven. Occasionally you'd go around towns to trade, but for the most part you'd just find a party of bandits or Dark Hunters if you were plucky enough and set about hacking people to death. Rest, and repeat ad-infinitum. As the versions increased in number, this part of the game experience became more and more diluted with quest like elements and politics involving other factions and fiefs, but it was all held together by flimsy basic text and simple tasks that lacked fun and yet took up your time with all the extra travelling and cow herding you'd need to do. Whilst as a beta game we weren't too bothered as we'd seen how the game had been progressing over the years, a certain extra level of critique becomes perhaps necessary as the game reached final release stage. The development towards creating a feature-rich story based game was dropped in favour of just getting M&B realised, but so too was an overall level of completeness. Thus I can see how players unfamiliar with the game may not like it, or at least be apprehensive about Mount and Blade. The game remains very simple and basic, and its selling point is for the most part, the excellent battles. Yet getting to a point where you can fully appreciate large armies fighting and sieges takes a considerable time, and it's during that time the player is plucked into a world where they have no real direction or clue what to do, eventually stumbling upon some of the most mundane quests outside of an Elder Scrolls title. I'm actually struggling to get into the game again without wanting to cheat early on just so I can skip the tedious first 10 hours of trying to make some money and getting some renown so I can actually fight some meaningful battles.
With mods and support from the public, the game has the potential to be truly fantastic in not just the battles, but with a decent and enjoyable storyline. Until then, you can't blame some sites and magazines from awarding M&B scores below 7. Myself personally, I still love the game and the journey it took from beta though to full release. I can imagine it will be one of those games I still enjoy playing occasionally years from now.
One thing that from the review I took note of and AGREE 100% with is this:
I can't think of one another game that has given me wrist troubles more than M&B... aside from Daley Thompson's Decathlon or Hypersports on the ZX Spectrum. I'm glad I'm not the only one who finds M&B a bit of a strain at times!
".
furryfrump
Banned
you know whats really funny about it all, mount and blade is ranked 9th overall in game spots most popular game and 6th in todays rankings betting Cod4, mass effect, civ4 and mark of chaos.
Merentha said:
being lost as a noob is part of the fun, as a noob all you have to do is enter your first battle to "get it", to understand what the game is about and why its so much fun.
i dont buy this "there's nothing there to help noobs!" argument. boo hoo hoo, poor noobs, cant tie their own shoelaces. I personally am tired of modern games being too easy and too noob friendly, a lot of my favorite game franchises have been ruined because the sequels cater to the new player too much, everything becomes dumbed down. the Total War franchise was this way, the Asheron's Call franchise was this way. In order to broaden their mainstream appeals and sell more copies, game companies remove features which are deemed "too deep" and insert new player friendly features.
i. HATE. it.
I find it ironic that he ended the article with interest in how Taleworlds would have done with an Oblivion-sized budget. I own Oblivion - I bought it as soon as it came out. That was also about the time that I caught wind of M&B. I never finished Oblivion - and I've never stopped playing M&B. I find Oblivion to be far more bland than M&B - every battle feels exactly the same to me. There's no strategy, no maneuvering, nothing all that exciting. That, and the sigil-stone quests in there were incredibly monotonous.
If you're looking at the game graphically then yes, Oblivion is definitely the better game. Depth, level of control, and more uncertainty make M&B my preference, though.
That said . . . I would love to see how M&B would look with an Oblivion budget . . .
If you're looking at the game graphically then yes, Oblivion is definitely the better game. Depth, level of control, and more uncertainty make M&B my preference, though.
That said . . . I would love to see how M&B would look with an Oblivion budget . . .
chantrain said:
Agreed. I too am tired of seeing this one same argument; the first time I fired up the game, I looked around, saw some River Pirates, jumped into a battle with them and knew exactly what I was doing. The rest was just as easy. It's not exactly a complex game, though I suppose to some individuals, lacking the required brain cells, it may be quite taxing. Honestly, if you can't figure it out for yourselves, don't come crying to us. You will receive no sympathy.
Exactly. Want to see a game with a REALLY steep learning curve? Play Dwarf Fortress.Nordmann said:
Lord Kinlar
Master Knight
Gamespot's rating is unfairly low, and it shows. 
http://www.gamestats.com/objects/782/782487/articles.html
http://www.gamestats.com/objects/782/782487/articles.html
