WVUEers's forum posts

#1 Posted by WVUEers (110 posts) -

I know earlier this week Kotaku said they didn't like the "Gump" effect that AC3 had (as in Forrest Gump) and Patrick some what shared these feelings on the Bombcast. What I find humorous though is that there is a real figure by the name of George Hewes who often has been referred to as the Forrest Gump of the revolution because even though he was just a plain old guy he was present for numerous monumental moments. So it's not ridiculously far fetched especially if you factor in the fiction that in AC you have secret organizations in play with presumably inside info.

Secondly it's a videogame, it's pretty dumb to be playing a game where 2 secret factions have been warring for centuries and you go back in time through your ancestors memories (or some shit) and the thing that takes you out of it is going "Wait a minute.... he was at both of these historical moments? Hurmph, I think not. "

#2 Posted by WVUEers (110 posts) -

@mosespippy: I mean if trophies are your sole motivation then why even play? Your original complaint was that there wasn't enough hockey, there's plenty of hockey, you just don't like that they evenly dispersed their achievements/trophies to other modes not that they haven't provided you with "enough hockey". It's not like trophies are a huge part of the game so they're not forcing you in anyway to play these modes you detest.

#3 Posted by WVUEers (110 posts) -

@mosespippy said:

I don't think more off ice stuff is a good idea. NHL 11 came with my second PS3 and I tried it. I felt that there was too much time wasted in menus than actually playing hockey. I do agree with you about other leagues though. This morning I was looking at my Sergei Zubov card from 1992 when he played for Central Red Army and realized that the KHL has probably never appeared in an NHL game. I checked the giant bomb wiki and it seems they've never been in any video game, let alone an NHL one. I would think EA could at least sign a deal and put out a KHL game in Russia using the NHL game as the backbone of the tech.

I didn't like NHL 11 very much. I still prefer NHL Hitz 2002. I'm not a big sports gamer though. I only like ones that either embrace their arcadey nature or ones that get simulation correct. The NHL games don't reach the level of sim that I want. I feel like the only sports games that have gotten sim right are F1, Tiger Woods and MLB The Show.

The trouble with the KHL is that it views itself as being a competitor to the NHL as opposed to a supplemental league, and as a result the relationship between the NHL and KHL has been frosty to say the least. So the KHL would likely never sign off on appearing in an NHL game unless it was called NHL/KHL 13, and they probably wouldn't even go for that unless they were paid just as much. But honestly the game can live with out the KHL, it has the German leagues, it has the SEL, it has a fair amount of Euro leagues, it just doesn't use them at all.

Also I'm not really following one the "too much time wasted in menus". I mean if you want to play hockey you could most definitely just play the quick play and be in and out like that, but if you want to play franchise the whole point is kind of to get lost in menus. Complaining about menu's in something like BAP or Franchise is like playing Final Fantasy and being upset over turn based combat, it's a core part of the feature. Also as I'm sure anyone who has spent extended time with BAP can tell you, after playing game after game you almost want something to break up that monotony. The whole point of the feature is to put you in a players shoes, so why not actually do it?

#4 Posted by WVUEers (110 posts) -

NHL 12 was not with out its flaws. Physics wise it suffered from many of the issues that plagued the new FIFA physics engine (although guys doing triple axels over a slight push seems a bit more believable in FIFA). But any man who thought that EA was just going to seamlessly integrate a new physics engine in the first year was being a bit naive, I fully expect NHL13 to be much more balance and believable. What I'm really looking for in NHL 13 is a little imagination.

What I mean when I say imagination is that feature wise NHL has grown stagnant which is disappointing because fundamentally the gameplay continues to surpass expectations. One of the best examples of this is NHL Be a Pro, the mode (that is now a standard in all sports games) allows players to take the role of just one hockey player and bring him up through the ranks of the Canadian Junior system, the NHL draft, the AHL, and ultimately the NHL. And while the gameplay in this mode is awesome and so easy to lose hours of ones life to, the features the mode offers hasn't changed too much in 3-4 years. This past year added a full Canadian Junior season prior to the draft, which was awesome, but the mode is lack so much more to really drag the player in to feeling like they're a hockey play, so here's my suggestions...

  • Expanded off ice features- Now I'm not suggesting they go all hokey like NCAA did a few years back and give you tests on whether you want to enter a wing eating contest or not, but they should present you with a more realistic idea of what issues players deal with. Media for instance is a huge thing, from the constant spot light of being a top rated prospect to just trying to get some attention by being a lowly rated one. On the NHL level media is huge, they make or break a players perception in a city, they can glorify him into a hero or villainize him and run him out of town. A player should certainly be aware of how he's being perceived.
  • Deeper contractual aspects- I want to know what's going on with my players contract. As it stands once you resign with a team that's the last you hear of your contract until the next resigning. I want to be able to hold out, I want, to be able to demand a trade, I want to be able to hear the teams reasoning for why they're doing what. One of the coolest moments I had in NHL gaming history was NHL 09. My player was crushing the Art Ross race with the Flyers, we were in first place and then for some reason I was traded. It was wild, but I was left to use my imagination as to why it happened.
  • International play/The inclusion of other leagues- This one is so simple because all the necessary components are already there. We already have international teams, we already have alternative Euro leagues, include them in BAP. International hockey is so important in hockey, it's a shame it's under utilized.

Thoughts?

#5 Posted by WVUEers (110 posts) -

One of my biggest gripes is that things that were in last generation were stripped from the first few games this time around then re-added to grand fanfare.

Road to Glory- Last generation it was called Race for the Heisman, a good amount of changes have been made but the basis of it remains the same. In fact I'd say that the non-gameplay elements were better then.

Teambuilder/D1-AA- Took them a while to add this. On the one hand teambuilder is awesome even though they've been horrible at updating it. But really what other reason aside from laziness is there to not have FCS teams? I mean FIFA has practically every league, NHL has every league they can (KHL probably will never sign on). At one point it was feasible for them to put these teams in the game why isn't it now? I remember when the first generation jump happened this question was brought up and the developers gave this excuse about how previously they just reskinned teams or some shit and now they had to go in and individually design them, clearly this is bullshit though since now we have teambuilder. And fuck, teambuilder even give us all the logos and shit so licensing isn't an issue. Ugh.

#6 Posted by WVUEers (110 posts) -

I'm a die hard college football fan, even when my team isn't playing I can watch two of the scrubiest teams play and have a ball, I have no idea why. Not an NFL fan, but damn do I love college ball. So it goes with out saying that I buy this game pretty much every year. I have purchased every next gen version the year of release, I have at least 3 PS2 NCAA games, I'm that guy who knows the game is exactly the same every year but those slight tweaks to the uniforms or the update in rosters push me over the edge. This year though? I'm having serious doubts. When I booted up the demo and began to play I had to pause to make sure I wasn't playing NCAA 12. The game looks identical, it handles fairly the same only maybe they've played with how much weight each player feels like they have when they shift while running (but I've long since suspected this is a superficial touch they put on every next year gen to give the illusion of changing the gameplay), but for the most part it remains an identical game save for a few presentational differences. Honestly perhaps the most angering "feature" they've added is the Heisman mode, it is in all honestly Road to Glory chopped with a few bits of video added into it, a nice small feature on its own, certainly not the big addition fans were waiting for. This mode feels like it could have been completed in two weeks, it's not adding anything to the game aside from film. When NHL 12 added a similar mode it was on the bottom of a list of a dozen other things.

It just it doesn't feel like they did anything this off season with this game. Typically you here people claim sports games are just roster updates but true fans can see the little nuances they worked on that are huge to the experience, or that the features they added are actually big things. This game though? I don't get it. This is probably my favorite game franchise I'm just at a loss for what they did all year.

#7 Posted by WVUEers (110 posts) -

@NegativeCero said:

Maybe yearly UFC games were not the way to go with it, but I'm sure EA will do the exact same thing. We'll see if they get better sales.

Which is why they actually were on a two year cycle. The last UFC game before 3 was UFC 2010

#8 Posted by WVUEers (110 posts) -

Undisputed 3 came out at some point in March. The site did a QL on it. Honestly it's a really, really well put together game. Of the small technical issues I had with the previous games, none of them were present in UFC 3. The game was also packed with content. The addition of Pride wasn't just cosmetic either, all of the Pride specific rules were included. Not that they're exactly conflicting markets but maybe the fact that UFC 3 dropped around the time Mass Effect 3 did led to it be lost. Overall though I can't speak higher of the gamer.

#9 Posted by WVUEers (110 posts) -

@Animasta said:

I think the point is that if Lara did not shoot that guy in the head, well... It was just kinda uncomfortable. The fact that she's making a lot of moaning sounds is also a little weird, and can come off as torture porn-ish. I'm not saying it's any more or less misogynistic than games usually are, but still, it's a little more in your face in tomb raider. They're also probably not going to talk about the rape attempt in any decent capacity, rather sweeping it under the rug which is a little insensitive.

Also pretty sure plenty of people were angry about how women were portrayed in Heavy Rain.

edit: Heavy Rain is undoubtedly more misogynistic than Tomb Raider will be

Isn't that the point of every game though? If you don't act something terrible befalls your character, like death, or the world ending, etc. When that action becomes rape or sexual assault it's suddenly too much? If this is in film is this even thought about twice? It's long been a character trait of large villainous gangs to be rape hungry, it's just one more quality that gives them their disgusting image.

I think honestly a lot of this push back comes from the fact that the gaming industry is in fact so male dominated. Gamers and those who work in the industry are now so aware of the image they've had for years with the double d breasted Lara and the booth babes, it's almost as if now there is a much more conscious effort to avoid those sexist pitfalls which is great but it goes to a fault like this. To me I only ask one thing, is this a natural course for these characters and this story? The answer is yes, this isn't throwing in gratuitous nudity or having the main character fight in a bikini the whole game, it's a deplorable action by a villain in order to establish the idea that as a woman on this island Lara is faced with even more dangers than a man may (thusly having to actually over come gender differences quite literally). And all of this is from a fucking implication, and impli-fucking-cation, not the actual action.

I also have to laugh that it makes you uncomfortable to think about what would have happened if she didn't shoot the guy in the head. The over the top violence at this E3 doesn't seem to phase anyone, but a little bit of implied rape or sexual assault from a villain is apparently stomach churning. I guess I kind of find it hard to take critiques on things like this from an industry that lost their shit when the main character from The Last of Us shot a defenseless guy in the face with a shotgun. It's like people are trying to find some sort of line for where taste lies in the gaming industry but it's a fucking joke to try and figure it out.

#10 Posted by WVUEers (110 posts) -

@joshth said:

I have to wake up in like seven hours... How long can I wait for this... This is a true test of how much I love Giant Bomb.

Psh that's it? I can't remember the last time I got a solid 7.