I fail to understand in what way Spelunky is different about death or what it invented that set it apart from the whole genre of roguelikes
Cagliostro88's forum posts
I'm not completely disappointed, but i had major problems with it.
First the story. As with Watch Dogs, killing off family members of the protagonist at the start doesn't make me sympatethic to him in the slightest. It's actually becoming off-putting. But the characters in general were not interesting to me. The antagonist weren't developed at all (still know nothing about the hand of sauron), as the rest of the supporting cast (queen and daughter:meh, soldier and slaves:still meh; dwarf hunter:another meh, only ratbag was somewhat funny); i understand that through the nemesis system you should have many actual antagonists randomly generated, but i died only three times to orcs and immediately went on revenge so i had no such experience of memorable orc enemies. After a while they all seemed the same to me. I only remember an orc i ascended to warchief position because i liked his setup. When the game presented me with my "nemesis" i had no clue who he was, just some random orc with metal patches on his head declaring he burned 15 men because i set him on fire sometimes prior
This bring me to the second problem i had. Even before the final parts where you're an overpowered, unstoppable killing/converting machine (i managed to dominate all the orc roster on the second map rapidly just for fun, and it autocompleted the objective of converting the warchiefs, even tho one spot in the captains ranks was always empty :( i wanted all to be blue! :D), escaping if the situation is becoming difficult is so freaking easy. On open fields you're always a few meters away from plants, and in strongholds the orcs don't have the same agility as you so you can easily jump away and hide on a roof. The only time i had to retry missions was in a few of the "avoid detection" ones, and even that was because i found some bugs in detection between sets of walls.
The third major issue for me were the final missions. The tower was badly implemented, the encounter was not interesting for me; about my "nemesis" i've already spoken; the five talons were just butchered by my orcs (i only managed to have a "conversation" with three of them, the 2nd and the 4th were before i could even cross swords with them); the final QTE was a joke, i expected a boss fight instead.
Fourth: i completed it 100%, but there is no reward for getting all collectibles, and the reward for completing all the slave missions is kind of ridiculous.
In short: story and characterization not interesting for me; the nemesis system failed to provide me memorable enemies; too easy to avoid dying at the hands of the orcs; the final parts were disappointing; no rewards for collectibles hunt.
I played it to completion so it has that for it, but it was akin to a dinasty warrior game with arkham combat for me, mindlessy slaughtering orcs whitout needing to focus too much.
This has to become a regular site feature. Cooking with Dan it's the best cooking show i've ever seen :D
I can't wait till i can buy the Dan Ryckert Book of Non-Fancy Cuisine.
I would honestly buy it in a heartbeat
@synthesis_landale: I'm not sure that I agree with the notion that women who have disagreed with Anita's assertions have been roundly dismissed or mistreated. At least not across the board. Maddy Myers wrote a glowing review of Bayonetta 2 and has talked about how she finds the character to be an empowering one. Maybe she's taken more flak for that stance than I've seen, but there are dissenting opinions from women writers out there.
It comes back a lot to the differences between second-wave sex negative feminists and third wave feminists.
I'm glad you never seen two of these really going at it, and only polite dissense :)
I lost count of how many times i've seen "internalized sexism" thrown at women these months by men who don't even make the effort to inform themselves about the people who accuse of it to even know if it is true or not
I want to thanks all the staff (alex and patrick in particular), for discussing with us on this forum. Even alex and jeff appearing yesterday on the Hatred thread is really appreciated. I felt for many many days (this mess is really exhausting) that some healing can start only when people talk to each other, and having you here insteand that behind a wall of 140 characters is something a little heartwarming for me. So i want to reiterate: thank you
I really don't like to play Devil's advocate, but he posted on Something Awful and Penny Arcade (were he thought the people would have been more sympatethic to Zoe) and only after they deleted everything there he went to other venues like 4chan. I post this just to be clear on the facts :)
The point is that personal relationship grievances shouldn't be aired publicly in the first place - not on SA, not on PA, and definitely not on 4chan. Doing so suggests the person is trying to get others to gang up against their ex in order to get "revenge" at their ex for leaving them - punish them for not wanting to be in a personal relationship with them anymore.
I find that point agreeable, and appreciate the stance GB started related to the Temkin case on no discussion on such subjects. Problem for many was that other outlets felt that it was just this specific istance that they should enforce similar rules, while they had no problem going at it (with many clickbait articles) in other cases :)
Let's remember that the vast majority of Eron's post is slut shaming,
Patrick you're really misusing the term "slut-shaming" here. It's without a doubt that people used the zoepost to slutshame Zoe Quinn, but that's not what the zoepost is. To say "we didn't have a open relationship and you cheated on me" it's not slut shaming, any third-wave feminist can tell you that. He never condemns the sexual coduct of Zoe beyond the breaking of her "relationship contract" (as in, this is a monogamous relationship, ergo having multiple partners is in contradiction with that). People saying "what a *derogatory insult to women and their free sexual conduct*, look with how many people she had a relationship", that is full on slut shaming, and what happened a lot after the zoepost broke out
edit. I say this as someone who believes in a polyamorous lifestyle (and conduct himself in a way according to this), i know very well the difficulties of understanding something like this
I suppose I'm talking about the immediate fallout, which was almost entirely based around slut shaming. Zoe was never even given a chance to respond. People just assumed Eron was right. For elements of GamerGate to cry hypocrisy when their "side" of the argument isn't given equal measure, when was Zoe given a chance to respond? When was Zoe given an opportunity to defend herself? Besides the fact that she shouldn't have had to defend herself in the court of public opinion against such charges, she was never given such an opportunity. Eron coined the "five guys" term that became so popular in videos, including one that has nearly one million views on YouTube right now. (It's probably over that right now, but I don't want to give it a click.) Who coins a phrase for how an ex acted, and posts it to a place like 4chan? Eron continued to interact with the leaders of GamerGate, even prior to its branding, and helped them orchestrate how to act in public.
I'm not in any way discussing that. And i agree with most of it. I'm not attacking you, in my post you can read that i feel slut shaming happened a lot to her. I took a problem only on defining the zoepost itself as slut-shaming, wich is not. No need to be defensive, i'm mostly agreeing with you :)
ps: people assumed Eron was right because of the huge amount of logs he provided (even more breach of privacy if you want), and the fact that while no breach of ethics happened with Grayson (no positive coverage exist, as much as many terrible people wish it did) , no one denied the relationship happening.