Zero Punctuation: Top 5 Games of 2013

[Sam Rothrock]

I agree with both number one spots. Bioshock infinite certainly wasn't perfect, but it accomplished a lot more than last of us. Meanwhile, Call of Duty Ghosts was a Call of Duty game.While a certain amount of staleness is expected with sequels, Call of Duty proves that the contents bottom of the barrel they're scraping at are really rather pathetic.

 

[Xangi]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VdNhwb7iuI4

Not sure if you can embed here, it's been a while, but here's a video summing up what you SHOULD have thought about Bioshit Infinite if you were actually paying attention. Yes you. To sum it up: Story's garbage, gameplay is garbage, message is garbage and Ken Levine's a moron.

Really? You're going to try and tell people the opinion they "should" have about a game? Wow. That's... the only word I can think of is arrogant.

Personally, I adored most of the games on this list (haven't played Papers, Please or Metal Gear), and would wager my Top 5 would look pretty similar. Saints Row IV was an entertaining blast, Black Flag is fantastic, and Bioshock Infinite is certainly my favourite game of the year as well. The gameplay was great, certainly way more interesting than any other FPS I played this year, the story was interesting and made me think, the characters were brilliant, and I really enjoyed puzzling out the ending with my brother.

You seem a bit upset, did you watch the video? It's basically 40 minutes on why you're either wrong or at least very unjustified in liking that game. No need to get shitter shattered over one anonymous asshole on the internet who disagrees with you there man, even if he does bring pretty much bulletproof arguments to the table. The fact that you actually think the gameplay was in any way good shows how you either haven't played good games or are lying through your teeth about it. The ending is absolute nonsense even by the game's own logic (outlined in the video), and there is an actual quote from Ken Levine saying "I like things that make me feel stupid". No seriously, look it up.

Now, just before you even go off with the "you haven't made a game" or "then tell me a good game" arguments, 1.) I don't have to be a game developer to review games, just like movie critics don't have to make movies to be critics and 2.) Here are some good games (shooters only, since B:I is a shooter), though not all (if any) are from this year: STALKER, EYE (even if it is a terrible translation), Arma 2 & 3, Hard Reset, Shadow Warrior 2013 (not as good as the original), Shadow Warrior, Duke Nukem 3D, Far Cry 3 (though the writing can get fairly annoying, gameplay is also better with mods), Deus Ex:HR (first is also good, but not really a shooter so much as an RPG)... etc you get the point, I could list also nearly every big shooter pre-2004 but that seems ridiculous. Hell, just randomly grabbing aything with a user rating better than 7.5 on metacritic will probably net you a better game than B:I, or at least a less pretentious and more fun one.

 

[Evonisia]

I agree with both number one spots. Bioshock infinite certainly wasn't perfect, but it accomplished a lot more than last of us. Meanwhile, Call of Duty Ghosts was a Call of Duty game.While a certain amount of staleness is expected with sequels, Call of Duty proves that the contents bottom of the barrel they're scraping at are really rather pathetic.

It's actually limited to Infinity Ward as of late. Both Ghosts and MW3 were stale messes compared to Black Ops II and Black Ops. But then again, IW is basically 60 people plus the pizza guy so can we really be all that offended when they produce soulless crap?

 

[Don Reba]

I thought Beyond: Two Souls was one of the best games of the year. But then, I played it on YouTube (due to its unfortunate choice of platform), so you can tell I don't hold interactivity to be the end-all of gaming.

 

[dakkster]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VdNhwb7iuI4

Not sure if you can embed here, it's been a while, but here's a video summing up what you SHOULD have thought about Bioshit Infinite if you were actually paying attention. Yes you. To sum it up: Story's garbage, gameplay is garbage, message is garbage and Ken Levine's a moron.

Really? You're going to try and tell people the opinion they "should" have about a game? Wow. That's... the only word I can think of is arrogant.

Personally, I adored most of the games on this list (haven't played Papers, Please or Metal Gear), and would wager my Top 5 would look pretty similar. Saints Row IV was an entertaining blast, Black Flag is fantastic, and Bioshock Infinite is certainly my favourite game of the year as well. The gameplay was great, certainly way more interesting than any other FPS I played this year, the story was interesting and made me think, the characters were brilliant, and I really enjoyed puzzling out the ending with my brother.

I would expect a published writer, a game creator and paid game critic to see bad writing and bad game design coming miles away, which is the case with the lazy mess that is Bioshock Infinite.

 

[Azahul]

You seem a bit upset, did you watch the video? It's basically 40 minutes on why you're either wrong or at least very unjustified in liking that game. No need to get shitter shattered over one anonymous asshole on the internet who disagrees with you there man, even if he does bring pretty much bulletproof arguments to the table. The fact that you actually think the gameplay was in any way good shows how you either haven't played good games or are lying through your teeth about it. The ending is absolute nonsense even by the game's own logic (outlined in the video), and there is an actual quote from Ken Levine saying "I like things that make me feel stupid". No seriously, look it up.

Now, just before you even go off with the "you haven't made a game" or "then tell me a good game" arguments, 1.) I don't have to be a game developer to review games, just like movie critics don't have to make movies to be critics and 2.) Here are some good games (shooters only, since B:I is a shooter), though not all (if any) are from this year: STALKER, EYE (even if it is a terrible translation), Arma 2 & 3, Hard Reset, Shadow Warrior 2013 (not as good as the original), Shadow Warrior, Duke Nukem 3D, Far Cry 3 (though the writing can get fairly annoying, gameplay is also better with mods), Deus Ex:HR (first is also good, but not really a shooter so much as an RPG)... etc you get the point, I could list also nearly every big shooter pre-2004 but that seems ridiculous. Hell, just randomly grabbing aything with a user rating better than 7.5 on metacritic will probably net you a better game than B:I, or at least a less pretentious and more fun one.

Ah, that everpresent problem of the internet. The inability to convey tone. No, I'm not in the least bit upset. My favourite movie of all time is Cloud Atlas, which was... divisive, to say the least. I can handle someone not liking the things I like. I'm just a bit incredulous that there are people with the temerity to say that other people "should" hold a particular opinion, and that anyone that doesn't agree with you just hasn't been paying attention. So I was surprised, maybe even a little stunned, by the way you phrased your post.

Anyway, you (and the chap in the video) are entirely entitled to your own opinions. They are just that though. Opinions. There is no incontrovertible proof that Bioshock Infinite is a bad game (and I'd hardly call the video "bulletproof"). It's pretentious, sure, but I like media that decides it wants to try and say something. I agree with you though, "you haven't made a game" is the most absurdly laughable excuse of a defence I have ever heard. I even agree that most of the games on your list are good games (no experience with the Shadow Warrior ones). The Deus Ex series is a big favourite of mine, for example, and I've sunk far too many hours into the S.T.A.L.K.E.R. series over the years for my own health. I'm... just not really sure what that list is meant to prove. Good games exist, I never denied that. I just happen to think Bioshock Infinite is one of them.

 

[Enlong]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VdNhwb7iuI4

Not sure if you can embed here, it's been a while, but here's a video summing up what you SHOULD have thought about Bioshit Infinite if you were actually paying attention. Yes you. To sum it up: Story's garbage, gameplay is garbage, message is garbage and Ken Levine's a moron.

Really? You're going to try and tell people the opinion they "should" have about a game? Wow. That's... the only word I can think of is arrogant.

Personally, I adored most of the games on this list (haven't played Papers, Please or Metal Gear), and would wager my Top 5 would look pretty similar. Saints Row IV was an entertaining blast, Black Flag is fantastic, and Bioshock Infinite is certainly my favourite game of the year as well. The gameplay was great, certainly way more interesting than any other FPS I played this year, the story was interesting and made me think, the characters were brilliant, and I really enjoyed puzzling out the ending with my brother.

You seem a bit upset, did you watch the video? It's basically 40 minutes on why you're either wrong or at least very unjustified in liking that game. No need to get shitter shattered over one anonymous asshole on the internet who disagrees with you there man, even if he does bring pretty much bulletproof arguments to the table. The fact that you actually think the gameplay was in any way good shows how you either haven't played good games or are lying through your teeth about it. The ending is absolute nonsense even by the game's own logic (outlined in the video), and there is an actual quote from Ken Levine saying "I like things that make me feel stupid". No seriously, look it up.

Now, just before you even go off with the "you haven't made a game" or "then tell me a good game" arguments, 1.) I don't have to be a game developer to review games, just like movie critics don't have to make movies to be critics and 2.) Here are some good games (shooters only, since B:I is a shooter), though not all (if any) are from this year: STALKER, EYE (even if it is a terrible translation), Arma 2 & 3, Hard Reset, Shadow Warrior 2013 (not as good as the original), Shadow Warrior, Duke Nukem 3D, Far Cry 3 (though the writing can get fairly annoying, gameplay is also better with mods), Deus Ex:HR (first is also good, but not really a shooter so much as an RPG)... etc you get the point, I could list also nearly every big shooter pre-2004 but that seems ridiculous. Hell, just randomly grabbing aything with a user rating better than 7.5 on metacritic will probably net you a better game than B:I, or at least a less pretentious and more fun one.

Must people be educated on why they shouldn't like something, or didn't really like it? Eiher it just becomes a bitter argument that moves nobody, or it does move someone, and colors their memories of something they enjoyed before the eargument.

I mean, what does that accomplish, other than making people have a worse time?

Not having played the game at all, I'm not really taking either position. I just weary of this sort of argument in general.

 

[ShakerSilver]

Is there some kind of band that joined together to try and shout down everyone who likes and praises Bioshock Infinite?

Must it be some sort of conspiracy to hate a game? Can it not just be several people who dislike the game and it's undeserved praise?

 

[Azahul]

I would expect a published writer, a game creator and paid game critic to see bad writing and bad game design coming miles away, which is the case with the lazy mess that is Bioshock Infinite.

The game is playable, and certainly more engaging and fun (for me) than a lot of First Person Shooters out there, so the quality of its game design sort of ends up in the area where opinions one way or the other are just going to be entirely subjective. Some people, evidently, liked what it did. Equally evident is that some people did not. Subjectivity man.

Pretty much the same goes for the writing. It had some great characters, an engaging setting and story, and an ending that at least tried to do a lot more than the average video game narrative. Frankly, I think the accusation of "bad" writing there is pretty ludicrous. You can say it didn't appeal to you, but it wasn't fundamentally broken and so you can't expect everyone to conform to the same viewpoint on it.

 

[Two-A]

Aliens: Colonial Marines and Simcity was a no brainer but its weird Ride to Hell: Retribution got left out. Still, its nice that a game that fucks up on so many levels gets an honorary award. Also, its good to see a "Spunkgargleweewee" title getting the #1 worst game slot.

Left out? He gave it the "Total Abhorrence" award. Did you watch the end of the video?

 

[dakkster]

"Copy pasted plasmids." Yes, it's part of the story. It is the same multiverse. It's like complaining that Bioshock 2, a far worse game, was worse because it specifically re-used the plasmids of Rapture while still in Rapture. Personally, I found the vigors/plasmids to be useful enough and this is still, I believe, a Bioshock game. Why would you expect there to be a different game play element?

Plot holes. The words that we often throw around just to throw them around. Specifically, those plot holes are... which, exactly? I'm not saying that the game doesn't have any, just that it was not "swiss cheese." In fact, most of its story lines were tied up and most of its mechanics at least attempted an explanation. Without pointing specifically to plot holes that were, in fact, plot holes and not just a lack of attention to the presented dialogue, then it's not a fair comment.

In Bioshock 1, the plasmids and gene tonics are explained within the rules and logic of the game world. In Bioshock Infinite, vigors are never explained. It's obvious they are just put there because it's Bioshock. If they put vigors in the game, they should at the very least show us how and why they are in the world. And no, pointing to "it's metaverse and therefore okay" is just lazy and can be a copout argument to everything in Infinite. No go. Gear is even more illogical. Why would a pair of pants give you the ability to turn enemies into ice if you hit them with the skyhook? It's just a blatant copy of gene tonics, but Irrational Games and Ken Levine were too damn lazy to explain gear within Infinite's game world and logic.

As for the plot holes, I recommend you watch pretty much any of smudboy's videos where he tears apart the writing and design of Infinite. http://www.youtube.com/user/smudboy/videos There you have 90+ minutes of Bioshock Infinite analysis. Just pick any video and listen for two minutes and you'll find point after point on how terrible the writing and design of Bioshock Infinite is. It's shit, no contest.

 

[dakkster]

I would expect a published writer, a game creator and paid game critic to see bad writing and bad game design coming miles away, which is the case with the lazy mess that is Bioshock Infinite.

The game is playable, and certainly more engaging and fun (for me) than a lot of First Person Shooters out there, so the quality of its game design sort of ends up in the area where opinions one way or the other are just going to be entirely subjective. Some people, evidently, liked what it did. Equally evident is that some people did not. Subjectivity man.

Pretty much the same goes for the writing. It had some great characters, an engaging setting and story, and an ending that at least tried to do a lot more than the average video game narrative. Frankly, I think the accusation of "bad" writing there is pretty ludicrous. You can say it didn't appeal to you, but it wasn't fundamentally broken and so you can't expect everyone to conform to the same viewpoint on it.

Nope. Not subjective. It's pretty obvious you've never read any literary theory. The writing is pure shit and it IS fundamentally broken if you care the least bit about story, characterization and writing.

I think Bioshock Infinite is a good game. It's okay. Game of the year? Not a snowball's chance in hell. Even if we strip out all of the bad writing and the illogical game design choices, it's a game where you have almost the same enemy over and over and over again and they are all bullet sponges. Then you have to ignore the fact that it's not explained anywhere how a normal human can take 20 bullets and still stand.

Edit: If you're annoyed by people saying that it's bad writing, I invite you to look at the smudboy videos I linked to in my previous post. Everything you need to realize how awful the writing is in the game is in those videos.

 

[Erttheking]

First the community and now Yatzhee?! Will someone please tell me which version of Papers Please everyone is playing that such a incredible game?! I must have gotten like a beta release with all the bugs, crashes, poor optimization and sticky mess instead of the epic mind-altering version everyone else got.

I don't get it either. My best guess is because it is an indy game with subject matter that could be considered controversial, Escapist hipsters eat it up, irregardless of whether it's 'fun' to them or not.

No, no no no no no, if you want to show your disagreement with someone on a game, you can do it without resorting to name calling. I happened to think that Papers Please was fun.

 

[Aardvaarkman]

I still can't believe a game as lazy as Saints Row IV gets as much praise as it does. It's not a bad game, but this? Meh.

I don't quite get this either. The series always seem to be talked about in such glowing terms, but I just can't get into it. I played SR IV part way through, but gave up after being frustrated by the unconvincing physics and graphics. I thought the intro scene of the punk-ass President as a jolly housewife was amusing, but beyond that...

I tried to play previous versions, with the same result. Are these games supposed to somehow get a lot better deeper into the game?

 

[Erttheking]

I would expect a published writer, a game creator and paid game critic to see bad writing and bad game design coming miles away, which is the case with the lazy mess that is Bioshock Infinite.

The game is playable, and certainly more engaging and fun (for me) than a lot of First Person Shooters out there, so the quality of its game design sort of ends up in the area where opinions one way or the other are just going to be entirely subjective. Some people, evidently, liked what it did. Equally evident is that some people did not. Subjectivity man.

Pretty much the same goes for the writing. It had some great characters, an engaging setting and story, and an ending that at least tried to do a lot more than the average video game narrative. Frankly, I think the accusation of "bad" writing there is pretty ludicrous. You can say it didn't appeal to you, but it wasn't fundamentally broken and so you can't expect everyone to conform to the same viewpoint on it.

Nope. Not subjective. It's pretty obvious you've never read any literary theory. The writing is pure shit and it IS fundamentally broken if you care the least bit about story, characterization and writing.

I think Bioshock Infinite is a good game. It's okay. Game of the year? Not a snowball's chance in hell. Even if we strip out all of the bad writing and the illogical game design choices, it's a game where you have almost the same enemy over and over and over again and they are all bullet sponges. Then you have to ignore the fact that it's not explained anywhere how a normal human can take 20 bullets and still stand.

Uh, yeah. Be default, opinions are subjective. You cannot say that games are objectively bad. With the possible exception of games like Superman 64 where they just flat out don't work. You don't like it, that's fine, you have that right. You do not have the right to tell other people that they are wrong for disagreeing with you.

 

[Aardvaarkman]

Not sure if you can embed here, it's been a while, but here's a video summing up what you SHOULD have thought about Bioshit Infinite if you were actually paying attention. Yes you. To sum it up: Story's garbage, gameplay is garbage, message is garbage and Ken Levine's a moron.

Well, that certainly sounds like an even-handed and honest appraisal without any hint of bias whatsoever.

 

[dakkster]

I would expect a published writer, a game creator and paid game critic to see bad writing and bad game design coming miles away, which is the case with the lazy mess that is Bioshock Infinite.

The game is playable, and certainly more engaging and fun (for me) than a lot of First Person Shooters out there, so the quality of its game design sort of ends up in the area where opinions one way or the other are just going to be entirely subjective. Some people, evidently, liked what it did. Equally evident is that some people did not. Subjectivity man.

Pretty much the same goes for the writing. It had some great characters, an engaging setting and story, and an ending that at least tried to do a lot more than the average video game narrative. Frankly, I think the accusation of "bad" writing there is pretty ludicrous. You can say it didn't appeal to you, but it wasn't fundamentally broken and so you can't expect everyone to conform to the same viewpoint on it.

Nope. Not subjective. It's pretty obvious you've never read any literary theory. The writing is pure shit and it IS fundamentally broken if you care the least bit about story, characterization and writing.

I think Bioshock Infinite is a good game. It's okay. Game of the year? Not a snowball's chance in hell. Even if we strip out all of the bad writing and the illogical game design choices, it's a game where you have almost the same enemy over and over and over again and they are all bullet sponges. Then you have to ignore the fact that it's not explained anywhere how a normal human can take 20 bullets and still stand.

Uh, yeah. Be default, opinions are subjective. You cannot say that games are objectively bad. With the possible exception of games like Superman 64 where they just flat out don't work. You don't like it, that's fine, you have that right. You do not have the right to tell other people that they are wrong for disagreeing with you.

Opinion is subjective, yes. Mapping out story structure and character motivation is not. That's objective fact. You can't say that a game has great writing if the game's writing goes against every single established facet of good writing through thousands of years of storytelling.

 

[Erttheking]

I would expect a published writer, a game creator and paid game critic to see bad writing and bad game design coming miles away, which is the case with the lazy mess that is Bioshock Infinite.

The game is playable, and certainly more engaging and fun (for me) than a lot of First Person Shooters out there, so the quality of its game design sort of ends up in the area where opinions one way or the other are just going to be entirely subjective. Some people, evidently, liked what it did. Equally evident is that some people did not. Subjectivity man.

Pretty much the same goes for the writing. It had some great characters, an engaging setting and story, and an ending that at least tried to do a lot more than the average video game narrative. Frankly, I think the accusation of "bad" writing there is pretty ludicrous. You can say it didn't appeal to you, but it wasn't fundamentally broken and so you can't expect everyone to conform to the same viewpoint on it.

Nope. Not subjective. It's pretty obvious you've never read any literary theory. The writing is pure shit and it IS fundamentally broken if you care the least bit about story, characterization and writing.

I think Bioshock Infinite is a good game. It's okay. Game of the year? Not a snowball's chance in hell. Even if we strip out all of the bad writing and the illogical game design choices, it's a game where you have almost the same enemy over and over and over again and they are all bullet sponges. Then you have to ignore the fact that it's not explained anywhere how a normal human can take 20 bullets and still stand.

Uh, yeah. Be default, opinions are subjective. You cannot say that games are objectively bad. With the possible exception of games like Superman 64 where they just flat out don't work. You don't like it, that's fine, you have that right. You do not have the right to tell other people that they are wrong for disagreeing with you.

Opinion is subjective, yes. Mapping out story structure and character motivation is not. That's objective fact. You can't say that a game has great writing if the game's writing goes against every single established facet of good writing through thousands of years of storytelling.

No it freaking isn't. The quality of story telling is subjective. There is no scale to determine the quality of a format in any book. Your complaints basically seem to be boiling down to "It doesn't do things the way other things do things" and while that might be a reason enough to dislike it, it doesn't give you a leg to stand on when you are claiming that it is objectively bad. You can't scientifically prove that Bioshock Infinite is a bad game.

 

[Azahul]

Nope. Not subjective. It's pretty obvious you've never read any literary theory. The writing is pure shit and it IS fundamentally broken if you care the least bit about story, characterization and writing.

I think Bioshock Infinite is a good game. It's okay. Game of the year? Not a snowball's chance in hell. Even if we strip out all of the bad writing and the illogical game design choices, it's a game where you have almost the same enemy over and over and over again and they are all bullet sponges. Then you have to ignore the fact that it's not explained anywhere how a normal human can take 20 bullets and still stand.

With a couple of years of literary theory behind me, I honestly cannot tell what is broken in Bioshock's story. Not to mention the fact that there's a fairly large body of literary theory that states that objectivity is a myth and that all experiences are subjective, making it pretty hard to state "Nope. Not subjective," in one breath, and then "It's pretty obvious you've never read any literary theory" in the next. Care to expand on that?

As for the gameplay, I'm honestly baffled by the bullet sponge argument. Bioshock Infinite is not a game aiming for realistic depictions of combat. You ride around on sky rails, fire lightning bolts out of your hand, and have a weird electromagnetic shield across your body. Why are you also expecting shooting aspect of the game to work like the S.T.A.L.K.E.R. series? I can accept the argument that the game doesn't have very good difficulty scaling, but that's a fairly minor concern for a game not explicitly built to serve as a challenge to all skill levels.

 

[Xangi]

hueg

Cool story bro. I would completely seriously honestly no-joke like to see some counterpoints to the video.

With a couple of years of literary theory behind me, I honestly cannot tell what is broken in Bioshock's story.

Shit characters, illogical nonsense handwaves, bad logic, inconsistent logic, terrible PC-adjusted setting, thinking it's deeper than it is. Those are the main bits.

Must people be educated on why they shouldn't like something, or didn't really like it? Either it just becomes a bitter argument that moves nobody, or it does move someone, and colors their memories of something they enjoyed before the argument.

I mean, what does that accomplish, other than making people have a worse time?

Not having played the game at all, I'm not really taking either position. I just weary of this sort of argument in general.

To be fair I did say why he was "wrong or at least unjustified". I mean you can like punching yourself in the face, but you're pretty unjustified in doing so.