Saturday, May 24, 2003
Penny Arcade had an interesting rant with the theme of "Games that don't fit the current mainstream=shit and deserve bad reviews."
Here's a big chunk of what Tycho said:
"You know how when we killed Jesus, he asked God to forgive us because we just didn't know any better? You need to show that brand of divine benevolence to these animals who mar gaming with their ignorance, with their sloth, and with their ineptitude.
So, they gave a game most people won't play a bad score. Why is that? Well, you need to understand that "genres" are like deep grooves worn into a solid oak bar. Think of Publishers as barmen, sliding beverage after beverage along those known channels, and the press are like the pretty maids that wait ready to receive them. These sweet things are batting their eyes at the barmen constantly - understand, that's how they got the job in the first place - and they're ready to ferry the drinks out to you and me, just so long as they arrive along the expected trajectories.
But sometimes something comes out that, gol durnit, just don't run right on the tracks. Maybe it slides right between two channels, maybe it's not even on what you might call the bar, per se. There's no-one there to catch it, it just hits the lip and flings into the void. And none of them care, because, why should they? They have plenty to do already with just the games that fit the standard scheme. They certainly don't have time for some sort of Gaming Activism, finding and exposing games people might not have seen or heard of. Gaming journalism today isn't about journalism, assuming that it ever was. It's about people who don't give a fuck reciting hip scripts from Industry one-sheets, hitting all the right notes until the next crate of games arrives. I'm surprised that you're surprised."
(CW)TB
This hit such a cord with me thanks to my fairly recent complaints because of the raves and reviews games are getting for their 'inventive' gameplay when a smaller company made a game MUCH better just a few years ago.
Specifically, I'm speaking of the RTS genre and the current leap its making from "pound your enemy to dust with a barrage of throw-away soldiers" to "level up your hero and use them to vastly influence the flow of battle and THEN pound your enemy". Thus adding the concept of RPG to the now stale RTS genre. Warcraft 3 was hailed as the first to do so and the supposed Warcraft3-Killer, Lords of Everquest, will be the next level of it.
I say, fuck that. SSI, famous for the Turn Based Strategy games Warlords (up to like #7 in the series now, I think), 3 years ago made an RTS called Warlords: Battlecry. It had MORE RPG stuff than Lords of EQ and War3 have combined, better and faster gameplay and CONTINUITY (you take the same character with you throughout your battles....YES, even in multiplayer).
Why have you never heard of it? Two reasons:
1) It had 2D graphics and animations. HOLY SHIT! TRAVESTY!!! Yes. Reviewers DESTROYED the game simply because they wanted 3D graphics and no game deserved a rating over 70 if they didn't have them. Graphics are not the fucking point. Too much emphasis is on graphics. What the hell about the gameplay?
2) The timing. While, I was more than ready for a game like this, the mainstream of gamers were ready for another boring Starcraft or Age of Empires clone game. And they got them. By the dozens. So finally when people got bored enough, Warcraft 3 happened to be just finishing and released in a giant lull of games and SLAUGHTERED everything. Don't get me wrong, the game was awesome, but the story wasn't as compelling as other Blizzard games and the gameplay, while extremely competative still relies more on exploiting the race with the most powerful units and the random luck of finding that almighty item drop from a creep.
Warlords:Battlecry managed to form a loyal following from the first game, however. SSI, no stranger to sequels, decided to make W:BC2 which is equally awesome and has expanded units, magic, items, characters and singleplayer. The graphics are better (much better than say Starcraft) yet still 2D. And still, it gets axed 20% on the reveiw scores because of it.
So. The moral of this rant? Graphics and repetative gameplay are more important than creativity or anyother aspect of a game. Need more proof? DOOM3. Halo2. The various Starwars games that are like clones of degenerate clones. Go read any preview/review at GameSpy or Gamespot or IGN and see what I mean.
Here's a big chunk of what Tycho said:
"You know how when we killed Jesus, he asked God to forgive us because we just didn't know any better? You need to show that brand of divine benevolence to these animals who mar gaming with their ignorance, with their sloth, and with their ineptitude.
So, they gave a game most people won't play a bad score. Why is that? Well, you need to understand that "genres" are like deep grooves worn into a solid oak bar. Think of Publishers as barmen, sliding beverage after beverage along those known channels, and the press are like the pretty maids that wait ready to receive them. These sweet things are batting their eyes at the barmen constantly - understand, that's how they got the job in the first place - and they're ready to ferry the drinks out to you and me, just so long as they arrive along the expected trajectories.
But sometimes something comes out that, gol durnit, just don't run right on the tracks. Maybe it slides right between two channels, maybe it's not even on what you might call the bar, per se. There's no-one there to catch it, it just hits the lip and flings into the void. And none of them care, because, why should they? They have plenty to do already with just the games that fit the standard scheme. They certainly don't have time for some sort of Gaming Activism, finding and exposing games people might not have seen or heard of. Gaming journalism today isn't about journalism, assuming that it ever was. It's about people who don't give a fuck reciting hip scripts from Industry one-sheets, hitting all the right notes until the next crate of games arrives. I'm surprised that you're surprised."
(CW)TB
This hit such a cord with me thanks to my fairly recent complaints because of the raves and reviews games are getting for their 'inventive' gameplay when a smaller company made a game MUCH better just a few years ago.
Specifically, I'm speaking of the RTS genre and the current leap its making from "pound your enemy to dust with a barrage of throw-away soldiers" to "level up your hero and use them to vastly influence the flow of battle and THEN pound your enemy". Thus adding the concept of RPG to the now stale RTS genre. Warcraft 3 was hailed as the first to do so and the supposed Warcraft3-Killer, Lords of Everquest, will be the next level of it.
I say, fuck that. SSI, famous for the Turn Based Strategy games Warlords (up to like #7 in the series now, I think), 3 years ago made an RTS called Warlords: Battlecry. It had MORE RPG stuff than Lords of EQ and War3 have combined, better and faster gameplay and CONTINUITY (you take the same character with you throughout your battles....YES, even in multiplayer).
Why have you never heard of it? Two reasons:
1) It had 2D graphics and animations. HOLY SHIT! TRAVESTY!!! Yes. Reviewers DESTROYED the game simply because they wanted 3D graphics and no game deserved a rating over 70 if they didn't have them. Graphics are not the fucking point. Too much emphasis is on graphics. What the hell about the gameplay?
2) The timing. While, I was more than ready for a game like this, the mainstream of gamers were ready for another boring Starcraft or Age of Empires clone game. And they got them. By the dozens. So finally when people got bored enough, Warcraft 3 happened to be just finishing and released in a giant lull of games and SLAUGHTERED everything. Don't get me wrong, the game was awesome, but the story wasn't as compelling as other Blizzard games and the gameplay, while extremely competative still relies more on exploiting the race with the most powerful units and the random luck of finding that almighty item drop from a creep.
Warlords:Battlecry managed to form a loyal following from the first game, however. SSI, no stranger to sequels, decided to make W:BC2 which is equally awesome and has expanded units, magic, items, characters and singleplayer. The graphics are better (much better than say Starcraft) yet still 2D. And still, it gets axed 20% on the reveiw scores because of it.
So. The moral of this rant? Graphics and repetative gameplay are more important than creativity or anyother aspect of a game. Need more proof? DOOM3. Halo2. The various Starwars games that are like clones of degenerate clones. Go read any preview/review at GameSpy or Gamespot or IGN and see what I mean.
