Gaff

@Vegetable_Side_Dish said:

@crapcom said:

You can't sell a $60 game & make it *uncomplete* so the consumer will have to spend an extra $60 later down the line. Unless this is advertised on the box, I consider this blackmail.

I agree with you, but it's been discussed here before. People like bending over backwards these days.

I agree with both of you, but I fail to see how characters that haven't been completed and / or aren't essential to the plot / lore / core game make a game incomplete.

Also, horrible sense of deja-vu going on here.

It's happened before.

If I remember my history correctly, that's why Activision was founded.

I just finished my first session with the game, let it save and... now I'm not sure I'm going to finish that Journey.

It's kind of surprising how quickly I bonded with my companion: guiding each other to powerups we found, recharging each other's jumps, swinging the camera around to check where he was.

I guess I'll start again, tomorrow night.

Finally found this thread on International Women's Day.

Vagrant Story (PSX and PSN). Because NTSC PSX titles don't play nice with unmodded PAL consoles.

And in before someone starts mentioning Dynasty Warriors.

@Brodehouse said:

Depth does not mean complex. Most complex games are actually extremely simple but obfuscated by unintuitive control and interfaces. Dungeons and Dragons has always been in an incredibly complex game, but can be rendered incredibly shallow by min-maxing. BioShock is a complex game, but it's depth is immediately nullified when Jeff uses the wrench and the lightning bolt for the entire game. Someone mentioned Angry Birds. Angry Birds is incredibly simple. If you're just trying to beat stages, Angry Birds seems shallow. If you're trying to get 3 stars in every level, you will learn to see the subtleties. It truly becomes a game of planning and skill.

Also, this. Depth is a moot point when the path of least resistance is so much easier and more viable than more in-depth paths, ie not worth the hassle. Prime example: The Zerg Rush.

I'm just going to pop in here and ask for working hypotheses / definitions of "depth", "complexity", "accessibility" and "mainstream". Because putting "depth" / "complexity" diametrically opposed to "accessibility" / "mainstream" is terribly confusing when the OP starts praising Starcraft's depth and complexity... and its "easy to learn", "intuitive" principles. It's really weird to see someone skew very much in favour of one direction and then start using qualities that come from the other direction.

"I like the colour white because it's so wonderfully black"

It just doesn't make any sense.

@Grumbel said:

@potatomash3r said:

I think its bias both ways. Its either a 10 or 0.

The 0 score is of course meaningless as an actual review, but it tells you when something iffy is up with a game that regular reviewers didn't bother to complain about (i.e. things like problematic DRM, day-one DLC and other issues).

Though I still can't see how problematic DRM, day-one DLC, the addition of multiplayer, on-disc DLC, On-line Passes, publisher business practices, lore continuity, a perceived dumbing down and pandering to the mainstream, a perceived disrespect for the fans, cosmetic changes to the character designs and whatever rabid "fans of the series" can drum up affect the disc I put into my console.

@mfpantst: You mean like Kotaku Star Commenter system? It's been a while since I went there, but it never was totally clear why you suddenly had a star next to your name. "Spark an interesting discussion!": So vague. "Be constructive!": Errr, what? "Make a funny pun!": Oh God. And I won't even imagine the friction between a system like this and the current Silver / Gold medal tier the WM sites have going.

Or you could have a user-moderated comment system, in which good comments get up-voted, bad comments get down-voted. And that would leave the door wide open for favouritism and groupthink. Eugh, this is giving me a headache.

I think the easiest way is to trust the community to self-regulate, flagging the worst offenders? Kind of like it is now?

@FLStyle: http://www.giantbomb.com/profile/newmarcom/mlg-vs-the-street-fighter-community/30-51762/http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=430842

From looking at the GAF thread, in 2005 MLG partnered with EVO. FGC shat on the FPS community, and vice versa. SRK blew a gasket, Capcom Japan caught wind of it and barred MLG from ever doing Capcom games for fear of "harming the community". The last couple of years has seen the MLG taking up non-Capcom fighting games, in what I presume to be a gesture of good will and competence towards Capcom Japan. Of course, the FGC is having none of that. And around that time Justin Wong and Marn had to resort to asking for donations to go to ESWC, Electronic Sports World Cup in France. Mind you, I think this was before Justin Wong got a sponsorship deal with Evil Geniuses. And whether sponsorships are still a part of "being grass roots" is a question for another time.

I distinctly remember this, because, at its core, it was the same discussion: keep things grass"roots, warts and all, or get professional and organised.