survival horrors usually aren't "fun," you play them for the intensity. the gameplay for both games is quite intense, the second one is way more intense than the first as long as you play it on a harder difficulty
survival horrors usually aren't "fun," you play them for the intensity. the gameplay for both games is quite intense, the second one is way more intense than the first as long as you play it on a harder difficulty
you're play survival horror games wrong if you find them fun, you're probably playing them on the easiest difficulty. thats why most of these games have no replayability factor because there is zero tension once you know what you're heading into
This is neither a survival horror nor a game, and the only challenge in those is paying attention to writing that makes streaming services' average look like high art.
>thats why most of these games have no replayability factor because there is zero tension once you know what you're heading into
No, these have no replayability because they're fucking movies. Walk down corridor with zero level design, figurative and literal gay vomits exposition, press button to get violently flung to canned animation's spot with zero risk, rinse and repeat.
>Walk down corridor with zero level design, figurative and literal gay vomits exposition, press button to get violently flung to canned animation's spot with zero risk, rinse and repeat.
Tell me you never played the game without telling me you never played the game
Yeah, sure, because millions of people who DO play them for fun are playing these games "wrong". You do know that feeling scared and under pressure can be "fun" for a lot of people, right? You are aware of the millions of dollars horror movies make at the box office, are you?
Jesus Christ, "YoU dOnT gET iT!!" and all variations of it are absolute brainlet takes 98% of the time. Please shut up, forever, about everything.
TLOU Part II has tons of gameplay and has some of the best level design in AAA gaming
you're play survival horror games wrong if you find them fun, you're probably playing them on the easiest difficulty. thats why most of these games have no replayability factor because there is zero tension once you know what you're heading into
If you aren't playing TLOU on Grounded you're playing it wrong. People complain about le nudolarrative disneyious or whatever because it's a game that criticizes violence while being a violent TPS power fantasy, but trust me, on Grounded, every fight feels like a desperate struggle to survive and you're ONLY killing people because it will keep you alive for a little bit longer
>If you aren't playing TLOU on Grounded you're playing it wrong. People complain about le nudolarrative disneyious or whatever because it's a game that criticizes violence while being a violent TPS power fantasy, but trust me, on Grounded, every fight feels like a desperate struggle to survive and you're ONLY killing people because it will keep you alive for a little bit longer
yea you really need to play these games on at least survivor. if anyone played the game on anything less than this then they played some mediocre third person shooter because you can just shoot your way out of everything because you have too many resources
cashed in on narrative over gameplay, which is why you should not give them money. following uncharted blowing up, making the game became a slog to get through instead of the entire point of the project. video games are unique because you have to play them rather than watch a screen.
then we get tlou, which is a boring cover-based 3rd person shooter being buoyed by a well made revisions of Children of Men with zombies. it's not groundbreaking, but the videogame commentary & journalism scenes are desperate to be taken seriously as "art", so they overhype fucking everything that you shouldn't for a game.
I’m tired of seeing games like this get lauded as “art” because they emulate film. If you need to use crutches like this to tell your story in a video game, you’re not using the medium properly. It’s a slap in the face to games that tell a great story through engaging gameplay.
>survival horrors usually aren't "fun," you play them for the intensity
skiing isn't usually "fun", you do it for the intensity
This is how stupid you sound.
the word you are all looking for is "compelling"
Games don't need to be fun, they need to be compelling.
"Compelling" casts a much wider net than "fun": it encompasses both This War of Mine and Cookie Clicker. clearly the former type is preferred, which is why you can have people pay money to watch movies like 127 Hours and All Quiet on the Western Front, neither of which could be considered "fun".
sorry you couldn't finish the sentence anon. perhaps you think "compelling or "engaging" are synonymous with fun, ill give you the benefit of the doubt
im pretty sure everyone on Cinemaphile and here who plays games does not have fun playing anything, they're too miserable to know what fun is supposed to be
well, sure, that's also synonymous with compelling or engaging. I just never see any of those options offered up when people piss themselves for the millionth time over this years-old headline.
Games are pastimes. If a game isn't fun, then it cannot be "compelling" or any other superlative. A game that isn't fun serves no purpose whatsoever. The best you could claim for an unfun game is that it's actually a simulator for job training or something, but this ain't it.
entertainment doesnt need to be fun, survival horrors are not fun, none of them are. you whine too much anyway, people who whine like this do not have fun doing anything
>survival horrors are not fun
Yes they are, when they're actually good games. Maybe you simply don't like the genre, which is fine, but in that case you should stop pontificating about it.
none of them are fun. sex is fun, survival horror is not
3 months ago
Anonymous
If you don't think they're fun then you shouldn't play them. You're wasting your time playing a game you don't enjoy.
3 months ago
Anonymous
i play those games to be entertained, not to have fun. i watch drama, documentaries, and horror movies to be entertained as well because theyre not meant to be fun
if you want a fun horror movie i suggest garbage like those shitty hot fuzz movies lol
3 months ago
Anonymous
You seem to be using a very autistic definition of "fun". If you're being entrained then you're having fun in the sense that most normal people would use the word. And if you aren't having fun, then you aren't being entertained.
3 months ago
Anonymous
so you have fun watching movies like manchester by the sea?
>is tlou good
Yes, the actual game is fun enough, the story is not for some, but the parts you play are decent. TLOU2 is even better. It's a solid action game, and probably one of the best 3rd person action games ever made. I loved Manhunt and TLOU2 is in my opinion the pinnacle of the kind of game. The story in 2 is not for everyone either, but the gameplay is solid.
The decision to switch POVs is the thing that 100% shows they have no clue of how to mix story and gameplay (1 was a total accident or had other creators) and they know story is just a thing you barely have to concern yourself with and just skip.
The people who pretend they liked the game for gamergate-tier reasons cant convince us they enjoy licking toilets
>OH YES I TOTALLY WANT TO FIGHT ELLIE IN A BOSS FIGHT, THIS IS SO MUCH FUN, I'M SO INVESTED IN THIS, I WANT TO THROW MOLOTOVS AT THE CHARACTER I WAS PLAYING AS FIRST
Literally making the audience want to run through and quickly get over with whole sessions of gameplay and just do it for obligation because you can't skip it
>OH YES NOW I'M ELLIE, I TOTALLY WANT TO BEAT ABBY EVEN THOUGH I PRETENDED EARLIER I HAD SO MUCH EMPATHY FOR ABBY THAT I WANTED TO KILL ELLIE
>The people who pretend they liked the game for gamergate-tier reasons
no one does that. You have literal opposite. People hating the game without playing because le woke, garden gnomes, trannies, neil druckmann ~~*early life*~~, anita sarkeesian
I've literally seen assholes say the sequel is the best video game ever because they think they're sticking it to alt right chuds. Don't try to pretend that doesn't happen.
All of those are perfectly fine reasons to not want to invest yourself in a game's world and story. 50% of a game's appeal being killed so it becomes a estrogen soap opera of "revenge you shouldn't want" (which YOU DON'T because you don't WANT to be shooting at Ellie for instance) is really boring
the fact that the gameplay is reasonably fun precisely because it feels good killing random NPCs (while your gun fx sounds might as well be the target's names since everytime you shoot some gay goes "NO! STEVE!") is a testament of how dogshit and jammed in with a crowbar the shitty story is.
>People hating the game without playing because le woke, garden gnomes, trannies, neil druckmann ~~*early life*~~, anita sarkeesian >All of those are perfectly fine reasons
Blackrock and vanguard owned companies (all companies) don't make games to be "fun" and movies to be "good" anymore, they haven't since 2008 or so. Now they have to be "masterpieces of storytelling" (a game that is really a movie) or "cleverly subversive" (black and women characters in existing ips)
Part II requires a brain that knows more than the MCU, Nintendo, and chicken nuggets. This is the only reason people consider the bad, they need their fairy tale story telling.
I don't like Part II because it retroactively makes Joel's decision at the end of the original Objectively Wrong, completely recontextualizing the end of the first game in a worse light and because the game doesn't know what it's doing narratively with it's vengeance through-line. Having Ellie second-guess herself in the clutch of exacting her revenge and letting Abbie go is fine, but you can't then have her still lose everything as if she *had* gotten revenge. That's atrocious storytelling and for a game that proudly trumpets its storytelling it's a baffling decision.
>Part II requires a brain
Token Korean sperm donor hears tommy being attacked. he literally just blows his cover and rushes through the door only to catch a bullet in the head. this will forever be one of the most retarded things i have ever seen in any medium.
The show hit all the high notes of the first game but ultimately nothing feels as impactful because you miss out on what feels like a "journey" of survival.
The original game was ok. While the plot was predictable and decent at best the character interactions worked fine (to the end of building up the relationship between Joel and Elli) and level design, art design and creature design were above average. The clickers are a fairly iconic and memorable variety of zombie and there are a number of very distinctive locations that provide some well crafted scenarios. Gameplay also conveys the idea of surviving with scraps fairly well. Never played 2 because as far as i`m concerned this should have been a self contained story and it`s already done.
As for the show, for what i`ve seen, it is inferior to the game. It`s certainly more unfocused as it wastes time on side stories that add nothing to the main plot, there are less infected so the survival aspects of it are washed out, the events are more generic as the places visited have less personality, Joel is far more bland (he`s shown as less violent and more approachable/ reasonable). IDK, the whole thing feels more like a slightly less shitty version of TWD so i lost interest by episode 6 or so.
The first game is really good because it had the old developers. Then this one corporate suck up fired them all and then made a fool of himself directing the "sequel" all by himself losing Sony a lot of money.
eh
Neon
No
Nay
tlou 2 it was kino
I think his quote makes sense. The game IS fun but in a grim, slightly uncomfortable way. It's a different kind of fun from Uncharted.
this
and this
Sonyggers really making the most mental gymnastics to justify movies games being """"fun"""""
survival horrors usually aren't "fun," you play them for the intensity. the gameplay for both games is quite intense, the second one is way more intense than the first as long as you play it on a harder difficulty
Intensity is fun, Naughty Dog is deathly allergic to gameplay and it shows in every single one of their D movies.
you're play survival horror games wrong if you find them fun, you're probably playing them on the easiest difficulty. thats why most of these games have no replayability factor because there is zero tension once you know what you're heading into
This is neither a survival horror nor a game, and the only challenge in those is paying attention to writing that makes streaming services' average look like high art.
>thats why most of these games have no replayability factor because there is zero tension once you know what you're heading into
No, these have no replayability because they're fucking movies. Walk down corridor with zero level design, figurative and literal gay vomits exposition, press button to get violently flung to canned animation's spot with zero risk, rinse and repeat.
i see you played the game on the default difficulty
Zoomers are awfully smug about being disabled, Apple could only wish to have a cult half as braindead as Sony's.
t. has never actually played the game, only watched streamers playing on easy
>Walk down corridor with zero level design, figurative and literal gay vomits exposition, press button to get violently flung to canned animation's spot with zero risk, rinse and repeat.
Tell me you never played the game without telling me you never played the game
>game is literally an interactive movie
>"diffculty" levels
Yeah, sure, because millions of people who DO play them for fun are playing these games "wrong". You do know that feeling scared and under pressure can be "fun" for a lot of people, right? You are aware of the millions of dollars horror movies make at the box office, are you?
Jesus Christ, "YoU dOnT gET iT!!" and all variations of it are absolute brainlet takes 98% of the time. Please shut up, forever, about everything.
its tense not fun, horror movies arent fun either
Sounds like you have an extremely specific definition of fun.
mario kart is fun, last of us is not. video games are not art
TLOU Part II has tons of gameplay and has some of the best level design in AAA gaming
If you aren't playing TLOU on Grounded you're playing it wrong. People complain about le nudolarrative disneyious or whatever because it's a game that criticizes violence while being a violent TPS power fantasy, but trust me, on Grounded, every fight feels like a desperate struggle to survive and you're ONLY killing people because it will keep you alive for a little bit longer
>If you aren't playing TLOU on Grounded you're playing it wrong. People complain about le nudolarrative disneyious or whatever because it's a game that criticizes violence while being a violent TPS power fantasy, but trust me, on Grounded, every fight feels like a desperate struggle to survive and you're ONLY killing people because it will keep you alive for a little bit longer
yea you really need to play these games on at least survivor. if anyone played the game on anything less than this then they played some mediocre third person shooter because you can just shoot your way out of everything because you have too many resources
I play on Game Journalist mode, and asking me to do otherwise is gatekeeping
>Didn't play TLOU2
It shows
They created arguably the best and most cohesive 3D platformer with Jak 1 and then completely shit the bed afterwards. I don’t get it.
I got something you can Jak bro, now check these ropes
David Carradine?
cashed in on narrative over gameplay, which is why you should not give them money. following uncharted blowing up, making the game became a slog to get through instead of the entire point of the project. video games are unique because you have to play them rather than watch a screen.
then we get tlou, which is a boring cover-based 3rd person shooter being buoyed by a well made revisions of Children of Men with zombies. it's not groundbreaking, but the videogame commentary & journalism scenes are desperate to be taken seriously as "art", so they overhype fucking everything that you shouldn't for a game.
I’m tired of seeing games like this get lauded as “art” because they emulate film. If you need to use crutches like this to tell your story in a video game, you’re not using the medium properly. It’s a slap in the face to games that tell a great story through engaging gameplay.
>survival horrors usually aren't "fun," you play them for the intensity
skiing isn't usually "fun", you do it for the intensity
This is how stupid you sound.
dont act like youve ever been skiing you broke poor subhuman
Skiing isn't even expensive, you know you don't have to go to aspen to do it right?
so youre too poor for aspen lol
What I'm hearing from you is that you have no experience skiing and you're bitter about it.
Why don't you just go skiing?
>as long as you play it on a harder difficulty
The difficulties in part 2 are much easier, though. I recently played it on "survivor" and it felt like "hard" in the first game.
the word you are all looking for is "compelling"
Games don't need to be fun, they need to be compelling.
"Compelling" casts a much wider net than "fun": it encompasses both This War of Mine and Cookie Clicker. clearly the former type is preferred, which is why you can have people pay money to watch movies like 127 Hours and All Quiet on the Western Front, neither of which could be considered "fun".
>Games don't need to be fun
fucking jesus christ lmao
sorry you couldn't finish the sentence anon. perhaps you think "compelling or "engaging" are synonymous with fun, ill give you the benefit of the doubt
>sorry you couldn't finish
I just finished in your mother
im pretty sure everyone on Cinemaphile and here who plays games does not have fun playing anything, they're too miserable to know what fun is supposed to be
no the word is "entertaining." something doesn't need to be fun to be entertaining
well, sure, that's also synonymous with compelling or engaging. I just never see any of those options offered up when people piss themselves for the millionth time over this years-old headline.
Games are pastimes. If a game isn't fun, then it cannot be "compelling" or any other superlative. A game that isn't fun serves no purpose whatsoever. The best you could claim for an unfun game is that it's actually a simulator for job training or something, but this ain't it.
entertainment doesnt need to be fun, survival horrors are not fun, none of them are. you whine too much anyway, people who whine like this do not have fun doing anything
Perhaps they have fun whining. Did you ever think of that?
no, theyre are whining junkies, they dont have fun doing it they only have a compulsion to whine
>survival horrors are not fun
Yes they are, when they're actually good games. Maybe you simply don't like the genre, which is fine, but in that case you should stop pontificating about it.
none of them are fun. sex is fun, survival horror is not
If you don't think they're fun then you shouldn't play them. You're wasting your time playing a game you don't enjoy.
i play those games to be entertained, not to have fun. i watch drama, documentaries, and horror movies to be entertained as well because theyre not meant to be fun
if you want a fun horror movie i suggest garbage like those shitty hot fuzz movies lol
You seem to be using a very autistic definition of "fun". If you're being entrained then you're having fun in the sense that most normal people would use the word. And if you aren't having fun, then you aren't being entertained.
so you have fun watching movies like manchester by the sea?
never seen it.
By that logic wouldnt movies need to be "fun" as well? Yet the highest rated movies are usually far from fun.
im sure that anon is a huge marvel fan because those movies are so fun teehee
Its funny how Cinemaphile will never stop seething over tlou
Explains why their games fucking suck then.
It's fun and I think the story is good but Neil Druckmann is a certified tard.
The first game was great. Everything that came after is shit.
>is tlou good
Yes, the actual game is fun enough, the story is not for some, but the parts you play are decent. TLOU2 is even better. It's a solid action game, and probably one of the best 3rd person action games ever made. I loved Manhunt and TLOU2 is in my opinion the pinnacle of the kind of game. The story in 2 is not for everyone either, but the gameplay is solid.
MODS!
remember when games used to be fun and exciting
>fun
Remember when fun can mean more than one specific thing?
So pre-360/ps3/wiiu era then? Gaming died a long time ago.
The decision to switch POVs is the thing that 100% shows they have no clue of how to mix story and gameplay (1 was a total accident or had other creators) and they know story is just a thing you barely have to concern yourself with and just skip.
The people who pretend they liked the game for gamergate-tier reasons cant convince us they enjoy licking toilets
>OH YES I TOTALLY WANT TO FIGHT ELLIE IN A BOSS FIGHT, THIS IS SO MUCH FUN, I'M SO INVESTED IN THIS, I WANT TO THROW MOLOTOVS AT THE CHARACTER I WAS PLAYING AS FIRST
Literally making the audience want to run through and quickly get over with whole sessions of gameplay and just do it for obligation because you can't skip it
>OH YES NOW I'M ELLIE, I TOTALLY WANT TO BEAT ABBY EVEN THOUGH I PRETENDED EARLIER I HAD SO MUCH EMPATHY FOR ABBY THAT I WANTED TO KILL ELLIE
>The people who pretend they liked the game for gamergate-tier reasons
no one does that. You have literal opposite. People hating the game without playing because le woke, garden gnomes, trannies, neil druckmann ~~*early life*~~, anita sarkeesian
I've literally seen assholes say the sequel is the best video game ever because they think they're sticking it to alt right chuds. Don't try to pretend that doesn't happen.
>I've literally seen assholes say the sequel is the best video game ever because they think they're sticking it to alt right chuds.
how do you know?
literally you
i don't even know what gamergate was and i never cared enough to google it
All of those are perfectly fine reasons to not want to invest yourself in a game's world and story. 50% of a game's appeal being killed so it becomes a estrogen soap opera of "revenge you shouldn't want" (which YOU DON'T because you don't WANT to be shooting at Ellie for instance) is really boring
the fact that the gameplay is reasonably fun precisely because it feels good killing random NPCs (while your gun fx sounds might as well be the target's names since everytime you shoot some gay goes "NO! STEVE!") is a testament of how dogshit and jammed in with a crowbar the shitty story is.
>People hating the game without playing because le woke, garden gnomes, trannies, neil druckmann ~~*early life*~~, anita sarkeesian
>All of those are perfectly fine reasons
You cannot refute that anon's post. Well, that part anyway, the gameplay existing or being fun bit is absolutely laughable.
you dont need to see shit coming out of a butt to know it's shit
Why don’t you just not play it and stfu instead of throwing a tantrum 24/7
The first game is. It's been all downhill since then.
No
Neil cuckman is the George Lucas of games
he has no idea what made the first game popular that was good despite him
>I lived long enough to see /misc/ by and large come around to TLOU2 as a masterpiece
Surprised tbh
best games ever, easily, especially part 2
Blackrock and vanguard owned companies (all companies) don't make games to be "fun" and movies to be "good" anymore, they haven't since 2008 or so. Now they have to be "masterpieces of storytelling" (a game that is really a movie) or "cleverly subversive" (black and women characters in existing ips)
Part II requires a brain that knows more than the MCU, Nintendo, and chicken nuggets. This is the only reason people consider the bad, they need their fairy tale story telling.
I don't like Part II because it retroactively makes Joel's decision at the end of the original Objectively Wrong, completely recontextualizing the end of the first game in a worse light and because the game doesn't know what it's doing narratively with it's vengeance through-line. Having Ellie second-guess herself in the clutch of exacting her revenge and letting Abbie go is fine, but you can't then have her still lose everything as if she *had* gotten revenge. That's atrocious storytelling and for a game that proudly trumpets its storytelling it's a baffling decision.
Snyderfags are cultured compared to you.
Part 2 is as Marvel as it gets. kys
>Part II requires a brain
Token Korean sperm donor hears tommy being attacked. he literally just blows his cover and rushes through the door only to catch a bullet in the head. this will forever be one of the most retarded things i have ever seen in any medium.
Yeah both games are fun
yes
The games are fantastic and the show was okay.
The show hit all the high notes of the first game but ultimately nothing feels as impactful because you miss out on what feels like a "journey" of survival.
The original game was ok. While the plot was predictable and decent at best the character interactions worked fine (to the end of building up the relationship between Joel and Elli) and level design, art design and creature design were above average. The clickers are a fairly iconic and memorable variety of zombie and there are a number of very distinctive locations that provide some well crafted scenarios. Gameplay also conveys the idea of surviving with scraps fairly well. Never played 2 because as far as i`m concerned this should have been a self contained story and it`s already done.
As for the show, for what i`ve seen, it is inferior to the game. It`s certainly more unfocused as it wastes time on side stories that add nothing to the main plot, there are less infected so the survival aspects of it are washed out, the events are more generic as the places visited have less personality, Joel is far more bland (he`s shown as less violent and more approachable/ reasonable). IDK, the whole thing feels more like a slightly less shitty version of TWD so i lost interest by episode 6 or so.
The first game is really good because it had the old developers. Then this one corporate suck up fired them all and then made a fool of himself directing the "sequel" all by himself losing Sony a lot of money.