Spec Ops: The Line. A Shooter Propelde By Story Rather Than Gameplay?

[Aidinthel]

I enjoyed the demo, and I will likely pick the game up. I will probably wait until the price goeas down though because I don't feel like paying the, "Release day," price. If I really decide that I want it, I will either save up a little or pray for it to show up on a Steam mid-week madness event.

It's 50% off on Amazon right now, and you can activate it on Steam.

Hell people are comparing it to "Heart of Darkness" for Christ's sake.

Considering that the game makes a number of very obvious references to Heart of Darkness (a character named "John Konrad"), that's a natural comparison.


I just finished the game, and I'd say that the $25 I paid for it was a pretty good price. The gameplay itself is competent but lackluster cover-based TPS, and there are some issues with the story, but it's just so damn refreshing to see a mainstream video game at least trying to tell this kind of narrative, to be this kind of art. I felt genuinely bad about some of my actions in this game, and watching the main character degrade both mentally and physically over the course of the story was very interesting. The industry should be telling more stories like this.

 

[Isshiresshi]

I honestly CANNOT bring myself to play this game, when I saw the commercial that made it look somehow more brown then any shooter in recent history I immediately tuned out. The commercial made it look like it had somehow taken everything wrong with recent shooters and made one long brownathon through desertestan and its close neighbor country dirtestan.

Hey, it'd be nice if I was wrong though.

I suppose they did not show any of the indoor enviroments in the commercial? Which is really a shame! They really nail the rich and colourful and spectacular designs that makes Dubai a true oasis in the desert!

Hmm... an oasis in the desert? I bet there's a huge metaphor between war and such a place as an oasis, the only sanctum and good thing in a desert, getting consumed by sand...

 

[Frybird]

I just finished the game, and I'd say that the $25 I paid for it was a pretty good price. The gameplay itself is competent but lackluster cover-based TPS, and there are some issues with the story, but it's just so damn refreshing to see a mainstream video game at least trying to tell this kind of narrative, to be this kind of art. I felt genuinely bad about some of my actions in this game, and watching the main character degrade both mentally and physically over the course of the story was very interesting. The industry should be telling more stories like this.

The problem i guess, as i see it from comments here and elsewhere, is when a game advertises itself to actually tell a meaningful story, it's suddenly compared to a much higher standard.

Of course, it's a bit of the games own fault to reference and compare itself to such an important work like "Heart of Darkness", but i can't help but feel like a lot of the jaded bitching against Spec-Ops wouldn't have been thrown at less ambitious game-stories.

Many of the criticisms may be right from an objective standpoint, but i have the feeling that a game deserves praise for trying to be ambitious alone, just so Dev's will be motivated to follow up on that and improve, rather than being scared off and not even trying...

 

[IBlackKiteI]

A pale shadow of a shadow of the original Heart of Darkness. It robs bits and pieces from both, trying to imitate the sombre tone and mood of the book, the overt viciousness of the film (towards the end), the philosophical aspects of the French plantation scenes from the Director's Cut, the colonialist criticisms of Konrad's original work and then tries to play it off as a generic pipe-shooter.

It's the laziest kind of attempt at trying to pose as a smart, edgy story, when all it does is takes the best bits from far superior sources, doesn't credit them and adds only unnecessary twists that create more plot holes and contrivances than they should.

Thus far what I've seen and heard of the game and what it seems to be going for make it out to be exactly this. There may be a few interesting moments and overall it's setting and plot is set out a bit better than most shooters, but that's about it.
Storywise, the worst thing about it is that it pretty much screams at you 'This is deep and meaningful and clever and cutting!' all the damn time. I think the best part about Apocalypse Now was that much of it's implications and themes were quite subtle, whereas this thing just keeps hitting you over the head with a sledgehammer, constantly trying to remind you how great and edgy it is.

It's kind of odd and a little sad that this appears to be regarded by some as the current pinnacle of video game storytelling, but it's even weirder that those same players disregard the faults of it's pretty mediocre gameplay (ie, the real bones of the game) altogether just because of a few moments of apparent 'moral complexity' (or whatever you wanna call it) in game. You can accidently fry a bunch of civilians at one point so it's automatically considered on par with literary works which are just a hell of a lot better than it overall?

Blurgh, I think we should all read more books.

 

[Serving UpSmiles]

A pale shadow of a shadow of the original Heart of Darkness. It robs bits and pieces from both, trying to imitate the sombre tone and mood of the book, the overt viciousness of the film (towards the end), the philosophical aspects of the French plantation scenes from the Director's Cut, the colonialist criticisms of Konrad's original work and then tries to play it off as a generic pipe-shooter.

It's the laziest kind of attempt at trying to pose as a smart, edgy story, when all it does is takes the best bits from far superior sources, doesn't credit them and adds only unnecessary twists that create more plot holes and contrivances than they should.

Thus far what I've seen and heard of the game and what it seems to be going for make it out to be exactly this. There may be a few interesting moments and overall it's setting and plot is set out a bit better than most shooters, but that's about it.
Storywise, the worst thing about it is that it pretty much screams at you 'This is deep and meaningful and clever and cutting!' all the damn time. I think the best part about Apocalypse Now was that much of it's implications and themes were quite subtle, whereas this thing just keeps hitting you over the head with a sledgehammer, constantly trying to remind you how great and edgy it is.

It's kind of odd and a little sad that this appears to be regarded by some as the current pinnacle of video game storytelling, but it's even weirder that those same players disregard the faults of it's pretty mediocre gameplay (ie, the real bones of the game) altogether just because of a few moments of apparent 'moral complexity' (or whatever you wanna call it) in game. You can accidently fry a bunch of civilians at one point so it's automatically considered on par with literary works which are just a hell of a lot better than it overall?

Blurgh, I think we should all read more books.

Games have been imitating books, movies for ages you know from Tolkien to saving privare ryan, it's nothing new, picking more intellectual works such as "Heart of Darkness" can only mean story telling is getting more complex.

I'm still waiting for a game based of American Psycho :L

 

[matrix3509]

No. It just means that they're just dumbing down more complex material because they've run out of safe bets.

When a game can evoke a feeling of disgust at the protagonist and at yourself for killing people, it is of highest ignorance to say its dumbing anything down. Your own ignorance proves you either weren't paying attention, or just looking for things to complain about.

 

[InsanityRequiem]

No. It just means that they're just dumbing down more complex material because they've run out of safe bets.

So what you're saying is you want more CoD like games where it's war porn and going 'Murica fuck yeah!'? While your opinion is your opinion, I for one am sick of CoD and CoD-like story telling. Which is why I'm enjoying Spec Ops a hell of a lot more than I have enjoyed any of the CoDs for the past seven years.

And in regards to the mediocre gameplay, what do people expect? After 30+ years of gaming, there is literally nothing new to add to gameplay for now. If you want, you can say we've reached the gameplay pinnacle for shooters, with only technology keeping us from breaking out into something different.

 

[Guy from the 80's]

Started playing it, first impression : Oh no, another pointless unlimited ammo minigun scence. Played it some more but a friend visited so I quit and havent played it since. Will probably play it if I have nothing else to play.

 

[InsanityRequiem]

Wow, way to miss the point completely. I recommend actually reading what people are posting the next time you wanna jump in a conversation.

No, I got your point perfectly fine. Trying to emulate something like Heart of Darkness is dumbing it down, and safe bets are overused. And what's more safe than Call of Duty "America is awesome, everyone sucks, shoot all these weapons!"?

Or you could tell me what your point is instead of saying a long spiel on how the story of Spec Ops is horrible crud, and the developers shouldn't have even tried.

 

[Shocksplicer]

The story didnt really impress me. The main character came across as a bit of a stupid twat (though I suppose that was intentional), and the twist at the end was just so fucking stupid...

Overall, it seeme like it was trying to make a point about the violence of man or something, when that exact point has already been made dozens of times and much better to boot.

 

[Thandran]

Holly Batman you people are being harsh.

Just completed it twenty minutes ago ... it did not do anything revolutionary but it was a satisfying experience.

The gameplay, while basic, was solid and fun. Some of the sequence were really engaging and tense. I especially liked some of the turret sections.

The story was nothing special but to see the degradation of a soldier in a video game was something I've never seen before. In my opinion, it probably portrays true war/battles a lot better than any other MOH, BF or COD.

The best thing about the game for me was the squad and its banter. Seeing tensions rise, fights erupt ... t'was wonderful, meaningful and something really hit the spot that made me think about my actions. Besides that I'd also like to praise the game for its setting and atmosphere. Some of the music choices contemplated the gameplay and story wonderfully.

Especially the ending.

What I don't like is the fact that higher difficulties just make you become really good friends with walls. And they could've replaced the health regeneration.

Come on people, come down of your horses and play the game with no prejudice or expectations. I was pleasantly surprised.

 

[OldDirtyCrusty]

Holly Batman you people are being harsh.

Forget about it. Everytime a game does something different storywise a few guys will jump out of the bush to name movie examples doing it better, more meaningfull and being the original. I`m glad if we get more good book/movie ripoffs to play instead of the crap most action games call a story. Maybe it could be a start for good mature original stories in general gaming (especially shooter are in need of those).

 

[ElPatron]

They could have had me if the game had at least actual normal soldiers instead of the "HURR DURR WE SAY SPEC OPS BECAUSE WE'RE SO HIGH SPEED LOW DRAG WE CAN'T WASTE TIME SAYING SPECIAL OPERATIONS!" bullcrap.

Besides we know they put the game in Dubai only so that the US teenagers can shoot more Arab people.

I'm sure it doesn't have anything to do with the fact that real wars in the Middle East marked this decade and they kinda ran out of more countries to fuck up without inventing new ones.

Be right back, I'm going back to the Cold War and moan about James Bond films involving communists and evil geniuses.

Forget about it. Everytime a game does something different storywise

I'm not so sure ripping off things is "different".

Star Wars was cool even with all the things it ripped off, but today?
We ***** about movies not being original anymore! I think it would be hypocrisy to claim that videogames doing it is a "breakthrough". That's basically saying that videogames aren't serious yet.

It's like videogaming is a mentally disabled kid. If videogaming entered a room and knocked someone's 200? painting people would just smile and pat him in the back.

 

[trooper6]

It seems like a fascinating story and I was really interested in it...but then I heard that the single player campaign was 4-5hours long. I'm not paying $60 for a 4-5 hour game. Yeah, I know there is multiplayer, but I don't really play multiplayer.

So...yeah, I'll wait until I can get it really cheaply.

 

[Smeggs]

Now I'm torn.

Everything I've seen and some of the dialogue made me go, "Most generic characters ever in Brown-Filter City fighting ex-CIA guy whose probably trying to steal some secret experimental weapon that was being made there."

But if I'm wrong, color me interested, I suppose. It'll be a test to look past the generic-looking gameplay for me, but if the story is any good I can overlook it. After all, the atmoshphere, story and moral of Metro2033 is what I loved.

 

[Thandran]

Now I'm torn.

Everything I've seen and some of the dialogue made me go, "Most generic characters ever in Brown-Filter City fighting ex-CIA guy whose probably trying to steal some secret experimental weapon that was being made there."

But if I'm wrong, color me interested, I suppose. It'll be a test to look past the generic-looking gameplay for me, but if the story is any good I can overlook it. After all, the atmoshphere, story and moral of Metro2033 is what I loved.

You're wrong about the ex - CIA.

A fair warning --> the story is something different compared to most military shooters. However if you're remotely connected to military type books, movies ... you'll see some stuff way before it happens.

I don't wish to deter you from buying a copy though! But to be honest ... the campaign, albeit satisfying, is short. Started playing yesterday, finished today.

I'd advise you to buy it for 20 - 30 dollars/euros/drachmas?. It isn't worthy the 60 price tag. They still have some patching up to do.

Edit: Spelling errors.

 

[Aidinthel]

Everything I've seen and some of the dialogue made me go, "Most generic characters ever in Brown-Filter City fighting ex-CIA guy whose probably trying to steal some secret experimental weapon that was being made there."

I think the fact that the characters appear so generic on the surface might actually be an intentional deconstruction of the shooter clichés. Like the devs wanted to show what would happen to these types of people in the real world. They march in expecting to be the Big Damn Heroes and fix everything by killing all the Bad Guys, and fare badly when the situation proves more complex than they expect.

It seems like a fascinating story and I was really interested in it...but then I heard that the single player campaign was 4-5hours long. I'm not paying $60 for a 4-5 hour game. Yeah, I know there is multiplayer, but I don't really play multiplayer.

So...yeah, I'll wait until I can get it really cheaply.

It's a bit longer than that. Steam didn't record my play time properly, but the Kotaku reviewer said it took him about 7 hours. And as I linked earlier it's half-off on Amazon right now. And from what I've heard the multiplayer isn't very good. It's really something you should buy for the single-player.