Escapist Podcast: 024: Dr Who, Serious Sam 3 & Questions

[The Escapist Staff]

024: Dr Who, Serious Sam 3 & Questions

This week, we discuss the Red Cross's move to look into video games abiding by the Geneva Conventions and our thoughts on the new Dr Who game and the series in general. We also run through our thoughts on Serious Sam 3 and other "dumb fun" games.

Watch Video

 

[Vie]

If you think the dog is annoying, wait till you meet a certain daedra - get their object - and then meet one of their followers.

It's even more annoying when you've left that item at home, and they follow you around demanding to have this item used on them.

 

[BlindedHunter]

While the Geneva convention obviously can't police the world of video games, and hopefully won't try, I do think it is something to be concerned about more than most people are saying (and thank you Susan for arguing that). As a gamer, I know that if I have learned nothing else about how to wage war it is to use everything necessary to do so and win. That is what games have taught me, and applying that to war would not lead to a respectful treatment of the Geneva convention.
If nothing else, I think that military training needs to reflect this, and reinforce the Geneva convention rules.

Also, bowties are cool.

 

[Henrik Moeller]

12.7mm used against personnel isn't against the conventions. Anti-material weapons in general are, but 12.7mm isn't automatically considered anti-material.

 

[shiajun]

Other games

Adventure games: errr...Grim Fandango? Monkey Island? The Longest Journey? Something like that? I am too much of a fan of those games to choose one. Maybe some King's Quest, although it may be very similar to the RPG vibe in the other games mentioned. As a genre, they don't have any of the mechanics of other genres and usual focus on other skills.
Horror: Silent Hill or Amnesia? They try to appeal to an entirely different emotion and pyschological impact than other geners.

And I would have gone for Starcraft. It has influenced so many lives (no just game developers) all over the world for so many years, and specially in Korea, for it not to be a historic milestone in gaming.

 

[X10J]

There are two fundamental truths in the Whoniverse:

1.) Humanity needs The Doctor. This is well evidenced and relly doesn't need any proof other than all of the times The Doctor has come through for us.

2.) The Doctor needs humanity (in more ways than one). There are of course the obvious vain benefits; The Doctor loves an audience. There are however more subtle needs as well. The Doctor is not just a hero, he's closer to a God. This God-like status grants him his ability to do great things. And horrible things. If The Doctor goes unchecked he poses a danger to himself and to every other thing in existence, see his needing Donna to save him in Turn Left and "The Time Lord Victorious" in The Waters of Mars. The Doctor needs human companions to keep closer to humanity, to keep him humble, and to keep him safe.

Unfortunately, The Doctor forgets these more subtle needs and so views himself vain and dangerous to his companions, which he is, but it's worth it. It's a bit like Omelas (which heavily inspired The Beast Below, by the way); the companions are, in some respects, sacrifices for the greater good.

 

[Lex Darko]

Five games to represent gaming.

Jade Empire - RPG with a great story, great fantasy setting

Sins of a Solar Empire - Space RTS with mass space armadas shooting it out

Halo Anniversary - Halo, first shooter to do vehicles well (so many people forget that)

Infinity Blade - definitive proof mobile gaming can be complex and have deep of gameplay while appealing to "core" gamers.

Madden - Not because I like madden (I don't) but because it's one of the best selling and longest running series in gaming bar none.

Other games

Spoiler

A list of five games was really hard, so many I wanted to include but the list is five.

Non list games

Skies of Arcadia
Knights of the Old Republic
Ghost Recon 2
Demon's Souls
Lost Odyssey
Age of Empires
Warhammer 40k

 

[Revolutionary]

Am I the only one who is really disappointed in all the "Steven Moffat as Executive producer" era material? probably not but still...just putting it out there that Russel T. Davies is a genius and Steven Moffat....not so much.

 

[Revolutionary]

Could Lenny Henry be the next Doctor WHO?

The Doctor not "Doctor Who". Doctor WHO is the name of the show, THe Doctor is the character Also the Doctor is always a white Male. THe companion (at least the main one) is always a female.

 

[Camaranth]

Just another note for the ridiculousness of the Simpsons, I picked up an edition of Trivial Pursuit and one of the questions was
" who were the coaches of Bart and Lisa's Ice-Hockey teams?" (This was a UK edition)
I don't know which is worse, that this was an actual question or that I knew the answer without any thought.


I may have to give Dr Who another shot. I've watched it on BBC a few times and just never really got into it. Any advice on where to start?


Maybe include a game that shows experimental controls like DDR or RockBand.

 

[Susan Arendt]

Just another note for the ridiculousness of the Simpsons, I picked up an edition of Trivial Pursuit and one of the questions was
" who were the coaches of Bart and Lisa's Ice-Hockey teams?" (This was a UK edition)
I don't know which is worse, that this was an actual question or that I knew the answer without any thought.


I may have to give Dr Who another shot. I've watched it on BBC a few times and just never really got into it. Any advice on where to start?


Maybe include a game that shows experimental controls like DDR or RockBand.

Easiest place to start is the beginning of new Who, with Ecclestone. You can, however, jump to Tennant if you find the show is a bit slow starting.

Here's my suggestion: watch "Blink." if you don't like that one, you probably won't enjoy the show much overall.

 

[Tamrin]

I'm not much of a fan of Dr. Who but the episodes I watched I did like. The first Doctor I saw was Christopher Eccleston who later became David Tennant. Both of these two I liked but David more than Christopher. I can't stand Matt Smith. Even backed by good writing I just can't seem to like watching this guy act.

 

[Formica Archonis]

I'd include Doom, not just for spawning the entire FPS genre (ah, Doom clones), but also for being one of the first to have a vibrant modding community. All the levels, megawads, total conversions, source ports....

 

[Andy of Comix Inc]

Serious Sam 3 is not "dumb". It's not stupid. It's bombastic and frantic, but very rarely is it not running several very complex systems together as a systematic whole, and expecting the player to keep all these systems in check as quickly and as efficiently as possible. It also doesn't drag the player along a leash like a dog - "ooh look at that! We made that! The developers. We're great!" ...if Yahtzee doesn't shed legitimate light on why Serious Sam 3 is the best FPS of the year - and it is - I'll have lost faith in game journalism entirely.

 

[Steve Butts]

Just another note for the ridiculousness of the Simpsons, I picked up an edition of Trivial Pursuit and one of the questions was
" who were the coaches of Bart and Lisa's Ice-Hockey teams?" (This was a UK edition)
I don't know which is worse, that this was an actual question or that I knew the answer without any thought.

Guilty.

Kill, Bart! Kill, Bart!
Kill Bart! Kill Bart!

 

[Susan Arendt]

Serious Sam 3 is not "dumb". It's not stupid. It's bombastic and frantic, but very rarely is it not running several very complex systems together as a systematic whole, and expecting the player to keep all these systems in check as quickly and as efficiently as possible. It also doesn't drag the player along a leash like a dog - "ooh look at that! We made that! The developers. We're great!" ...if Yahtzee doesn't shed legitimate light on why Serious Sam 3 is the best FPS of the year - and it is - I'll have lost faith in game journalism entirely.

It's gleefully brainless, for which I love it. There are no great moral questions to ponder, no subtext to parse. It is balls out, run around and kill shit mayhem, something it does very, very well. Dumb does not mean "not challenging or well crafted." Dumb, in the sense we meant it here, is a conscious decision made by the developers. We do not mean it as an insult. We've got nothing but love for Serious Sam.

 

[Andy of Comix Inc]

Serious Sam 3 is not "dumb". It's not stupid. It's bombastic and frantic, but very rarely is it not running several very complex systems together as a systematic whole, and expecting the player to keep all these systems in check as quickly and as efficiently as possible. It also doesn't drag the player along a leash like a dog - "ooh look at that! We made that! The developers. We're great!" ...if Yahtzee doesn't shed legitimate light on why Serious Sam 3 is the best FPS of the year - and it is - I'll have lost faith in game journalism entirely.

It's gleefully brainless, for which I love it. There are no great moral questions to ponder, no subtext to parse. It is balls out, run around and kill shit mayhem, something it does very, very well. Dumb does not mean "not challenging or well crafted." Dumb, in the sense we meant it here, is a conscious decision made by the developers. We do not mean it as an insult. We've got nothing but love for Serious Sam.

Yes but the mechanics of play aren't "dumb". I honestly think that "smart" games like Call of Duty are stupider in the gameplay department. (Find target, pull trigger.) As apposed to Serious Sam were you have to manage thousands of enemies from every direction or get your ass handed to you on a blood-soaked platter.

The game has more of a brain than any other shooter in 2011, even if it is for everything but core concept/context. I dunno, just kind of wish people could acknowledge more the skill-driven mechanics of the shooting, instead of just the bare essentials of "there are monsters, kill them". It sells Serious Sam short.

 

[Mike Kayatta]

I think historical significance is less important than actual play experience for the capsule. People can just read about games like Space War if they need to, or recreate them easily based on concept. Compare that to something like Skyrim, where you'd never feasibly be able to identically make it again. I'll also say that MMOs are created by the players. If you moved the game into the future, it would almost by definition become a different game than you tried to put in. That being said, here is my list ... I think (obviously, this is decently impossible )

Tetris - as Susan said: elegance, impact. Also, local mutliplayer, cross platform
StarCraft - rise of e-sporting, strategy not based on puzzle, but reaction time, network and LAN multiplayer
Grim Fandango - wonderful story, humor, and extremely accessible
Half-Life 2 - shows the idea of progression in sequels, the epitome of physics and FPS gameplay at the same time
Finally, I hate to add this because it's so recent, but Skyrim - extremely complex, shows open world, RPG, and finally, if the world ended today, its the best example of how far we actually came before blowing ourselves up.

Also, the video is blank for the podcast ... so, might be the perfect chance to just put up your favorite submitted animal picture as a placeholder while you guys are talking. Just sayin'.

Another great podcast guys, keep them coming!

 

[Susan Arendt]

Serious Sam 3 is not "dumb". It's not stupid. It's bombastic and frantic, but very rarely is it not running several very complex systems together as a systematic whole, and expecting the player to keep all these systems in check as quickly and as efficiently as possible. It also doesn't drag the player along a leash like a dog - "ooh look at that! We made that! The developers. We're great!" ...if Yahtzee doesn't shed legitimate light on why Serious Sam 3 is the best FPS of the year - and it is - I'll have lost faith in game journalism entirely.

It's gleefully brainless, for which I love it. There are no great moral questions to ponder, no subtext to parse. It is balls out, run around and kill shit mayhem, something it does very, very well. Dumb does not mean "not challenging or well crafted." Dumb, in the sense we meant it here, is a conscious decision made by the developers. We do not mean it as an insult. We've got nothing but love for Serious Sam.

Yes but the mechanics of play aren't "dumb". I honestly think that "smart" games like Call of Duty are stupider in the gameplay department. (Find target, pull trigger.) As apposed to Serious Sam were you have to manage thousands of enemies from every direction or get your ass handed to you on a blood-soaked platter.

The game has more of a brain than any other shooter in 2011, even if it is for everything but core concept/context. I dunno, just kind of wish people could acknowledge more the skill-driven mechanics of the shooting, instead of just the bare essentials of "there are monsters, kill them". It sells Serious Sam short.

We didn't say they were.