Huh, didn't know that. Its been a long time since I've played CoD with my friends, but most of my memories were of 4 way splitscreen in a buddy's house. It can do 2 way splitscreen right? AW I do know isnt.Dirty Hipsters said:
The Most Overrated Games that Aren't
- Thread starter SnakeTrousers
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Never really understood what the problem with quest markers is. That's really stupid if it's the main reason why people give as to why Skyrim is overrated.BiH-Kira said:Because the fanboys stopped being so ridiculously annoying about how the game is the best thing ever so now you can actually see the unpopular opinions that where there since the beginning.Arnoxthe1 said:Also agree with Skyrim.
It's really stupid too because when it first came out, almost EVERYONE was singing its praises. Talking about how great it was for RPing and how much it improved Oblivion's/Morrowind's combat and etc.
And then after a while, everyone just started to hate it.
The fact that the game forces you to use the quest markers is enough to make the game an infinitely worse RPG than Morrowind, meaning the game actually is overrated.
- Feb 7, 2011
- 8,802
- 3,383
- 118
- Country
- 'Merica
- Gender
- 3 children in a trench coat
If I remember correctly CoD4 didn't do split screen online, CoDWaW did 2 player, MW2 didn't do online splitscreen, Black Ops 1 and MW3 both did 2 player online splitscreen, and I stopped playing the series at that point so I don't know about the others, but I highly doubt any of the later games increased the splitscreen player count considering most multiplayer games are cutting splitscreen entirely.Bob_McMillan said:
I'm going to go ahead and mention World of Warcraft.
9 out of 10 posts here on the Escapist, and 99,9 of out 100 posts on the WoW forums themselves are threads about how aweful the game is, how stupid the lore is, how dumbed down it is and how vanilla was the best thing ever.
Well, I've played since vanilla, and as far as I'm concerned almost every big expension improved on most things.
*People tend to forget that in vanilla any class that had some healing spec, was suppose to heal and was bad at everything else.
*Paladin's in 40 man's were there for the 5 minute buffs they could cast, and when they were done casting them on each single person at a time, the first one was already expired.
*The only stat that mattered during vanilla raiding was Fire resistance.
*out of the 40 people, most just auto-attacked on the mobs while streaming videos.
*There were no rotations, you just spammed moves.
*The Flightpaths were not linked. Now, if you want to travel from A to D you just click on the location of D and you fly there, in vanilla, you had to travel from A- B, wait until you've landed, then travel from B-C wait again.
*There were no auction houses in the major cities except for Ironforge and Ogrimmar.
*Warlocks had to actually carry around 20+ Non-stackable Soul-shards.
*Hunters had to carry around Ammo.
*Weapon skills....
*Looking for a raid or instance group was mostly standing in a major city, shouting that you wanted to do said instance or raid, then, when you finally found that last member needed, you had to wait until everyone was back from being AFK, argue who goes to the summoning stone, warlock summon or wait until everyone traveled to the instance, and go afk again only to get no useful loot because the Paladin shoulders dropped and your group is horde.
The only thing I really miss is actual World PvP.
These days taking 2 other friends who are level 100 as well, go to a lower level zone and gank people is considered World PvP, instead of what it really is, ganking. While in vanilla, you had endless battles bewtween Southshore and Tarren mill.
9 out of 10 posts here on the Escapist, and 99,9 of out 100 posts on the WoW forums themselves are threads about how aweful the game is, how stupid the lore is, how dumbed down it is and how vanilla was the best thing ever.
Well, I've played since vanilla, and as far as I'm concerned almost every big expension improved on most things.
*People tend to forget that in vanilla any class that had some healing spec, was suppose to heal and was bad at everything else.
*Paladin's in 40 man's were there for the 5 minute buffs they could cast, and when they were done casting them on each single person at a time, the first one was already expired.
*The only stat that mattered during vanilla raiding was Fire resistance.
*out of the 40 people, most just auto-attacked on the mobs while streaming videos.
*There were no rotations, you just spammed moves.
*The Flightpaths were not linked. Now, if you want to travel from A to D you just click on the location of D and you fly there, in vanilla, you had to travel from A- B, wait until you've landed, then travel from B-C wait again.
*There were no auction houses in the major cities except for Ironforge and Ogrimmar.
*Warlocks had to actually carry around 20+ Non-stackable Soul-shards.
*Hunters had to carry around Ammo.
*Weapon skills....
*Looking for a raid or instance group was mostly standing in a major city, shouting that you wanted to do said instance or raid, then, when you finally found that last member needed, you had to wait until everyone was back from being AFK, argue who goes to the summoning stone, warlock summon or wait until everyone traveled to the instance, and go afk again only to get no useful loot because the Paladin shoulders dropped and your group is horde.
The only thing I really miss is actual World PvP.
These days taking 2 other friends who are level 100 as well, go to a lower level zone and gank people is considered World PvP, instead of what it really is, ganking. While in vanilla, you had endless battles bewtween Southshore and Tarren mill.
That's just a shorter way of explaining how much worse the lore, story, quests and world are in Skyrim than in Morrowind.jhoroz said:
here is how it was in Morrowind.
1. find quest giver
2. talk and read a long text where the quest giver explains the situation, explains what you need to do and in detail explains where you need to go
3. you then go on an adventure actually searching for that something because all you have is the detailed description
4. finish quest
Here is how Skyrim goes
1. find quest giver
2. "talk" with him and he doesn't really explain anything
3. follow quest marker
4. finish quest
The Morrowind style of questing forced the developer to make a memorable world, a world where each location is different and you can go by a description. Skyrim's world is dull and lifeless. Wherever you go, you find almost the same thing. All the caves are the same, all the dungeons are the same. The character have almost no backstory or story at all. The cities are almost non-existing. For the biggest city in Syrim to have less than 20 houses, that's just freaking ridiculous.
Resident Evil 4. Have replayed this endlessly. Never gets old. Pacing, challenge, atmosphere and nearly everything besides the voice acting and story are absolutely brilliant.
God of War 2.
Half Life.
Baldur's Gate 2. Every time I think 'man, when I play this again it's going to suck'...it doesn't.
Batman: Arkham Asylum. Feels shorter every time I play it, but just as good.
Diablo 2.
God of War 2.
Half Life.
Baldur's Gate 2. Every time I think 'man, when I play this again it's going to suck'...it doesn't.
Batman: Arkham Asylum. Feels shorter every time I play it, but just as good.
Diablo 2.
That bit was not what got me about The Line. It was more the progressive decline into madness that did it for me, the breakdown within the squadron and constantly doing things that you think are right but have horrible consequences.Zhukov said:
The same in what way? Morrowind has many cases of repetition. Certain caves have the same exact interior. Same with towers, ruins, houses. The capital city is a giant copy/paste job. I can't think of any repeated interiors in Skyrim. As far as I'm aware, each location has a unique layout.BiH-Kira said:
I agree. The scope of the towns is ludicrous.BiH-Kira said:
Like that one place, where every NPC wonders if you wonder about the big cemetery they have. So I looked for that cemetery. Imagined a huge ass gothic masterpiece with lots of crypts and fog and undead creatures. And then I find this stupid little gathering of 20 tombstones that looked just about the right size for a small village like the one it was in.
Also, Skyrim has got to have the worst animations of any non-trash game of the last 15 years. It's astonishing how they can be so bad. Takes me right out of the immersion. Starting with that dragon attack in the intro. Actually, there were at least a handful of horrible animations before that. It feels like they are mostly reusing animations from Oblivion and Morrowind. The game came out in 2011 and the NPCs have no facial animations at all.
And how come the engine isn't capable of rendering the interior of houses in the same plane as the rest of the world? Gothic could do that 10 years earlier!
To me, Skyrim is actually a really disappointing game when you consider where they were with Morrowind in 2002 and how financially successful Oblivion and Fallout 3 have been for Bethesda. But it has been an overwhelming success for them again. So here's hoping that for TES VI they'll shoot for contemporary standards.
A few of the Jarl's houses are exact copies. And a lot of the houses/inns/shops are very similar, especially in the smaller towns.Prince of Ales said:
As with Morrowind, the samey look is excacerbated by Skyrim's eerily FPS-like color palette. Everything is brownish-grey and few of the towns/settlements have a particular look and feel about them.
It happens with all Elder Scrolls games.RealRT said:The same thing happened with Oblivion too.Arnoxthe1 said:Also agree with Skyrim.
It's really stupid too because when it first came out, almost EVERYONE was singing its praises. Talking about how great it was for RPing and how much it improved Oblivion's/Morrowind's combat and etc.
And then after a while, everyone just started to hate it.
1. Game announced. Press goes gaga for early screens and meaningless trailer. Fans opine "this looks like it will solve all the problems with the last one! Especially the goofy run cycle!"
2. Game is released and sells like fucking wildfire. Everyone loves it, proclaims it to be "just like the last one, but better."
3. Player base laments things missing from past release after all. Modding community steps in to transform game into system-killingly beautiful work of art. Players loudly proclaim it not worth playing without Missy's Skimpy Undies for BBOSHTMF or whatever player model mod they use. Game is roundly decried as an insult to the past installment, wherein running looks no better after all.
4. A new game is announced. Press goes gaga for early screens and meaningless trailer. Fans opine "this looks like it will solve all the problems with the last one! Especially the goofy run cycle!"
Spec Ops deserved all that hate, to be honest.
I hate it when games try to be conversation starters first, and actual games second. It's possible to do both, you know. Being a conversation piece works a lot better for other media, like movies, TV, books, etc. seeing how they don't have any interactivity. I've never liked games where the only / dominant hook is the story.
Also, the gameplay was just boring as all fuck; I understand that this might have been a design choice, but holy crap - I was the one who had to actually play through that stuff.
TL
R - Gameplay >>>>> Story.
I hate it when games try to be conversation starters first, and actual games second. It's possible to do both, you know. Being a conversation piece works a lot better for other media, like movies, TV, books, etc. seeing how they don't have any interactivity. I've never liked games where the only / dominant hook is the story.
Also, the gameplay was just boring as all fuck; I understand that this might have been a design choice, but holy crap - I was the one who had to actually play through that stuff.
TL
R - Gameplay >>>>> Story.
You're absolutely right. But, you see, that's actually the reason why I think it's so good. This was not made for people who are already critical of these types of games. And why would it, what's the point? To get a bunch of like-minded people together to generally agree that, yes, war is a bad thing and the modern military shooter genre is kinda embarrassing? Preaching to the choir, and frankly, not exactly a revolutionary idea. So reversing that was pretty much the only sensible option - how else would you be able to tell that moral, anyway? And it was sensible for them to assume that most players weren't going to pick up some random TPS set in some desert country for the story.CutesySiren said:
Of course, in the end it turned out that the game resonated extremely well with reviewers, and the handful of people who did buy the game were all at least partially in on the message before they even started it. If you or me or anyone didn't play it to feel like a hero, then why did we? Well, because other people told us that it's been such an exceptional experience for them. It's not the game's fault, though, that we were told it was up to something before we even gave it the chance to do anything.
Could you specify why?SKBPinkie said:
I'm of the opinion that games should prioritize gameplay first, and story / characters second. The primary difference between games and other media is interactivity. If that isn't important for some people (and that's perfectly okay), then being a conversation piece is perfectly sufficient over being a good game. For example, Gone Home has a great message about a family and society deal with sexuality with a great 90s backdrop.Gladion said:
However, is it a good game? No, because its gameplay is severely lacking, and it doesn't really tell its story through its gameplay. If I watched a YouTube playthrough of the game (with no commentary), my experience would've basically been the same. Same goes for TLOU and Bioshock Infinite.
Then again, there are games that combine both story and gameplay really well. Brothers, Shadows of the Colossus, the ending of Halo:Reach, etc. All I'm saying is - the story shouldn't feel like a separate entity when it comes to games. If you do want to tell a story through the medium, make use of the interactivity aspect.
Halo.
The only sin Halo committed was not being first and foremost a PC game. If Halo had been released as a PC game instead of an Xbox game, it would bolster universal praise just like the HL games. This especially applies to Halo:CE which in many respects is still far ahead in terms of game design than the other Halo games and most FPS games in general.
The only sin Halo committed was not being first and foremost a PC game. If Halo had been released as a PC game instead of an Xbox game, it would bolster universal praise just like the HL games. This especially applies to Halo:CE which in many respects is still far ahead in terms of game design than the other Halo games and most FPS games in general.
That's basically Bioware games in general. Bioware has yet to actually make any above-average games; they just make excellent nuggets of writing mixed in with a bog-standard story, then wrap it all up in an experimental* gameplay model that's never polished enough to truly shine.Jim Trailerpark said:
*-Up until ME2, at least.
Unrelated: I have yet to actually play Spec Ops, and while the concept is up my alley to a degree I still won't touch it because as far as "self-aware, semi-deconstructist games that comment on the questionable tropes their genres rely upon" go, I sincerely doubt Yager can beat Katawa Shoujo.