@geirr: No, I'm posting a forum header that actually requires you read. Imagine that. If you actually read the content of the OP, you would know it works in tandem with the heading.
rick_deckard's forum posts
@geirr: Because this is not a thread about wether or not you read Patrick's articles. It's a thread about commenting on something you haven't read. The irony is just striking. I'd say this turned out even better than I could have hoped, as the social commentary is just phenomenal.
If you google Moby Dick studios, you'll actually find that it isn't real. So this is a sneak campaign for another game, and it seems a lot like something Kojima would do. I'm gonna say this has some kind of connection to Ground Zeroes.
@emem: A game should focus on the interactive nature of the medium to tell it's story. The Walking Dead has a good story, but I would rather watch that story unfold every week in a TV-series. This is where developers have the most to learn. It's a shame that cutscenes are now a accepted cop out, instead of crafting a story that is integrated with the gameplay. Why would you make a game if you're gonna take away the part that defines the experience? For me, it's the same as movies griding to a halt in the action scenes, and the viewer has to play out the scene to continue.
The answer is of course that it is easier. And sadly, few are willing to fight the good fight. If you're a developer, I want to ask you the following: If you can't make this interactive, why are you making a game instead of a film/series? Story is extremely important to me as a gamer, but if it doesn't work in tandem with the gameplay, then I'm gonna tap out. Irrational and Bethesda are currently doing a good job in mixing gameplay and story in their games, but I think it's possible to take it even further.
@oulzac: You got that from one CG trailer? Personally, I knew it was Dark Souls 2 after 15 seconds. I looks a lot like the previous game.
@dungbootle: I know! Do some people not understand the irony of their comments? Some guys are basically commenting without reading my OP, in a thread where I am asking people not to comment on something they haven'r read. #sad
EDIT: PLEASE READ THE ORIGINAL POST BEFORE COMMENTING. THANK YOU!
Though the title might sound negative towards Patrick, it's everything but. I really enjoy the stuff Patrick writes. Personally, I think he's probably one of the few true writers of our little industry. He could probably work for the New York Times, but I'm glad he sticks around here at Giant Bomb.
But seriously guys. Do you just read the headline he writes, then post a comment? This is far from all of you, but a lot of users just seem to have no idea what they are actually commenting on. That's not the way to show you appriciate his work.
The story that really pushed me over the edge in regards to making this thread, was the story about the Kickstarter-project (Alpha Colony) that fell 28 bucks short. In the story, it is clearly stated why it didn't help that the they donated money to their own project. Like, it's super freaking clear. I think the Kickstarter policy mentioned there is pretty shocking, and I expected a good discussion on the matter.
Instead, I scroll down, and three of the five first comments literally say the same thing. "Why didn't they donate the money themselves?" And after that, there's just a boatload of that kind of comments on every page.
Seriously guys. Patrick writes this stuff for us. If you're not gonna read it, fine. But don't go posting on the forums if you don't, because that just a huge freaking insult to Patrick, and to the rest of us that want a good conversation on the topic. And commenting like that on a article that has so cleraly stated the answer to your question, just makes you look like the biggest jerk in history. This really pissed me off, and I never get pissed off.
[MOD EDIT: Users who insult members of staff will be subject to moderation. Remember our golden rule, folks: Don't be a jerk.]