Giant Bombcast 02/25/2014

@mrsmiley said:

Just some people who want to feel important by taking other peoples arguments and make it theirs.

So Brad just basically argued that Quake 3 has no strategy nor depth. YOU ARE CRAZY

Jeff didn't go off until Brad said shooters like CoD and BF contain no strategy and that it's all left trigger right trigger. Shooting that argument down for being ridiculous is the right thing to do. Friends don't let friends get away with shit like that. Having an opinion is fine, it's great in fact. But you should probably be able to articulate why you feel the way you do.

Especially if your job is to talk and write about the thing you have an opinion about.

Brad's argument is insane. Basically PvZGW and TF2 are deeper than other shooters because they have medics? It's fine that he prefers those games, but writing off other shooters as being "just right trigger/left trigger" is crazy. Not enjoying/playing a genre doesn't make it less deep just because you don't appreciate it. I think trading card games are dumb and I don't play them, but I'm not going to act like there's no complexity to it. PvZGW, TF2, BF, CoD, Titanfall... you're killing and capturing stuff. Prefer whatever you want, but don't act like your choice is so much deeper than the others.

Jeff was right to challenge Brad on his comment. They both failed to get their point across well. I expected better arguments from writers. Interesting conversation regardless.

I really hate to say this, but I think Brad had a point and agree with him; so now I don't know what to do with my life.

Wow with all this talk about the argument did everyone forget about how amazing the "ad" in this week's podcast was. I guess not a lot of you guys heard it? Is that a premium thing where you don't hear it?

As soon as i saw that argument begin, i immediately thought "THE COMMENT SECTION GANNA BE GOOD"

But for real, that wasn't a dirty argument. People are getting way too into it, when it was just a slightly heated debate.

I've always preferred class-based shooters and horde mode gameplay to the more vanilla multiplayer FPS games. I'm one of the rare ones that has almost no interest in Titanfall. So I guess I agree with Brad? That's fucked up.

Whenever people ask "what should a new Doom game even be these days?" I immediately say "Bulletstorm with monsters and a better IP."

I say this out loud, even if I am on the train or sitting in the library. I can't help it.

EDIT: And add a roguelike mode where the game randomly generates a series of more-and-more-difficult levels full of monsters and guns and equipment/perks, and then have a daily challenge to go along with it. IT CAN BE DONE!

Prefering that style of game is not agreeing with Brad though. What Brad said is those other games are not in any way strategic and only consist of left trigger right trigger. It's not his position that is retarded, it's his justification for it. Maybe dude just got heated, or maybe he's really just that dumb. Who knows.

@CatDetective said:

I have it on downcast. I think you just go to the "Add " tab and enter the RSS feed's url and your giantbomb username/password. It'll show up as "Premium Podcasts" and just lumps the premium bombcast and other premium podcasts from the site together.

@beepmachine: Yay it worked! Thanks!

Haven't listened yet, but is Brad making hyperbolic statements again?

@brad You are totally correct in that "argument" with @jeff and it honestly seems kind of crazy how emotionally invested Jeff seems when it comes to first person shooters. In any case, a team game played competitively will eventually differentiate the players with certain "roles" by the very nature of determining the best way to accomplish a specific goal, but that's not the point. The point is that certain games have built in mechanics and design choices which create these roles. This allows for predetermined play styles in each role rather than the roles and play styles being determined by the "meta" game created after intense competitive play.

I guess a good example would be basketball. The roles of the five positions weren't immediately thought up when the game was created because they had no idea what the most effective way to play was. Over time the roles evolved through competitive play and even to this day they evolve through competition. Football/Baseball, on the other hand, are games specifically designed with roles carved out to do different things and act in different ways. I think that is basically Brad's point. In the former game roles develop during competitive play, where as the later game has roles specifically outlined within the structure.

Therefore, it is easy to see that, for a person playing non-competitively, a video game with built in strategic roles would be more complex and varied that one without these mechanics built in. So, if complex and varied mechanics make a more interesting game, in Brad's opinion, then it is completely reasonable for him to dismiss the simpler games like Call of Duty as being bland. That's not to say that enjoying a game without built in complexity is somehow wrong, but you still have to admit the differences between the two and that the strategy comes about through competitive team play rather than causal play.

TUNE IN FOR BEEF BETWEEN JEFF AND BRAD

At first I was totally with Brad, as I much prefer a horde mode to straight-up team deathmatch in shooters. But, as always, Brad's opinion quickly descended into hyperbole and poorly thought-out arguments, which grew continually less valid as Jeff challenged them. At this point I feel completely unable to trust/respect Brad's opinions/reviews, even when I agree with them, because whenever I hear him defend them in-depth they come across as baseless or uninformed.

Again, I completely agree with Brad's initial opinion, but how he went about arguing it was just plain crazy.

Did brad's girlfriend break up with him?

Brad is a fucking crazy person.

I installed Brutal DOOM and enjoyed it more than I enjoyed most FPS in resent years. What makes DOOM good is still good. Modern controls and nice graphic is all we need. Well may be better level desing too.

God that NES talk at the end really makes me want to play some NES games...

I'm pretty sure our old NES is still in a drawer at my parents' place. A few years back I got rid of all my old systems and games. But when I plugged in the NES to test it out, I wound up playing Duck Hunt for the next three days. I just knew I could never bring myself to sell the thing.

Do I want to become one of those crazy collectors that tracks down old NES games? I guess I'd have to get a CRT television in our apartment. I'm not sure if my girlfriend would go for all that.... Hrmm

Also, regarding the Philips CD-i, there were three different Zelda games and also Hotel Mario. And they should totally play some Philips Cd-i games on a UPF or something. I'd love to see some other old bad systems too, like maybe the Magnavox Odyssey?

@roboculus92:

No, I'm labeling you as a fanboy because that's all you've shown me. It's funny you call me narrow-minded when all you've been fixated on was my off-hand opinion of CoD and Titanfall and continue to miss the point of the post. What else can you call that? So if you're finally done arguing that pointless topic, good. I am too.

back to the plants vs zombies conversation... it's $30 on 360, $40 for XBone.

still too much but at launch hey, whatever. When it hits $15 or $20 around Xmas I could see me and my kids getting into this.

I agree with Brad that class-based shooters are generally more interesting, but I also agree with Jeff calling out Brad for his over-generalizations and inane arguments. In any case, it was nice to see some passion out of the duders for a change.

I cannot overemphasize my disappointment that when Jeff mentioned this would be the tenth Tony Hawk game, nobody made a "Tony H.A.W.X." joke. What with the grinding with fighter jets.

Huh, I think I'll try to play Oni somehow... I've been convinced by "anime" and "Bungie."

I, for one, still playing the Mass Effect 3 Multiplayer every now and then.

Brad formulated his view poorly, sure, but I wouldn't say his arguments didn't "grow less valid", it was mostly misinterpretations. If he needs a more class-based system to enjoy shooters, with roles that don't ultimately just change the way you shoot people then that's perfectly fine. Look at it from his perspective as the only(?) Dota-player of the bunch, a game where you have supports, 'junglers', tanks, damage dealers and so on.

Maybe having a sniper rifle or a shotgun isn't enough variety for him. It sure isn't for me.

Sure, but it would be nice if one of them remembered that they actually did a TNT of said horde mode.

Brad gets served in this podcast!

Brad got served

Any podcast that makes a TV Carnage reference within the first 5 seconds will always have my undying loyalty. I figured it'd be the Bombcast! They are, of course, THE BEST IN THE BUSINESS!

some great "daddy hit mommy" vibes between brad and jeff in this one

@pol4icy: Because Jeff likes hating games simply because of the publisher name on the box.

lol

Anyway, the scuffle was silly. They both argued the same thing and were being stubborn. Maybe they were just having a bad day.

@abendlaender: No one said it was the end of the world. Just that it was unpleasant to listen to. Imagine being in Vinny's position (he and Drew were clearly trying to stay out of it). It was very uncomfortable.

Kaz... I'm already a baseball.

RIP Macho Man : (

Poor Vinny, trying to steer the conversation away and then NOPE.

I bet there was some serious smackdown after this episode.

What? No, not between Jeff and Brad, I'm talking about those Australian guys arguing about thongs.

Well it was more intense than usual, even more heated than some of their GOTY debates, so naturally in the initial comments people were excited. I suppose it might have snowballed a bit since then. That sort of argument is definitely not the status-quo for the podcast.

Say what you want about Castlevania Judgment but at least it knew that Trevor Belmont and Alucard are different people.

Ha! You're joking right? Titanfall is also an EA game...

It didn't age very well though, so be warned.

While I see both sides of the short argument between Brad and Jeff, honestly I think I gotta side with Jeff after thinking about it for a bit. I can see what Brad's argument was, that in order for a shooter to be interesting, there has to be something besides shooting people. However, FPS games since Doom have always been about more than just shooting. You honestly can't tell me that Quake 3 or Counterstrike have no depth because there are no different classes to play like TF2. To play competitively in ANY FPS (yes, even COD multiplayer), you have to have a solid grasp on combat tactics as much as general combat strategy. There is a difference. Tactics is knowing to flank left or right if your teammate is engaging/suppressing the enemy, predicting enemy movement, never reload during a firefight, be quick on the draw, etc. Strategy is picking your class (if the option is available), knowing the map, going over the plan with teammates, having an overall gameplan and sticking to it, etc. What Brad was saying, essentially, is that a shooter needs gameplay mechanics and systems that emphasize strategic cooperative play styles or it's brainless and boring. That isn't true at all, and Jeff called him out on it. Are there brainless shooters on the market? Sure there are. However, COD and Battlefield campaigns are the only thing I can think of where not a lot of thought is required. A shooter doesn't need ham-fisted "strategy" elements to be fun, look at Counterstrike. One of the most competitive, deep shooters on the market and it boils down to "shoot that guy".

What it comes down to is that Brad is a more strategy minded gamer and Jeff is more tactically minded, if that makes sense. Probably why Jeff likes fighting games so much because those are tactics based games, not strategy based. I should probably go to bed.

What's cracking, warez can I find out more information?

@vinny@jeff

I would actually be very interested in a feature/video on the last generation versions of cross generation games.

One might say that game hadn't aged well when it was released either. Even back in the day the control scheme was completely insane.

Come on, you guys; it's obvious Kiefer Sutherland is voicing Stryker.