Can we just rename this "The Earthbound circlejerk thread" and have everyone orgasm and be done with it?
I swear we always get a really annoying Earthbound thread once every few months and every post is just filled with the sound of my continued sighing.
It will inevitably lead to a circle jerk in due time, don't worry.Except, as far as I can see it, there's no Earthbound circle jerk. I do see the naysayers have been startled though.
Did he say anything about what type of people to ask?Me and some guy were having a discussion and it was said that if I asked 1000 people that 10 or so would know what Earthbound/Mother is....so here we go. Do you know what Mother/Earthbound is
It will inevitably lead to a circle jerk in due time, don't worry.
I've skim-read the thread and the moment I reached the magical conclusion that "gameplay is not something to be expected from a story-driven game", I lost hope. Some people think that elevating one aspect of a video game and completely downplaying all the others is a good thing - it's not. What makes a good game is the overall balance of its constituent elements, favoring the ones that are specific to a given genre. Favoring, not "forgetting about the rest".
A video game is a game first and foremost, it's designed with an intention to be played. Similarly, a movie is filmed with an intention to be watched and a book is written with the intention to be read. When your product fails at its most basic, fundamental purpose, your produt is bad. A video game has to be carried by its gameplay, no matter how you look at it. You can have the best *insert element* you could possibly imagine, but if the game simply isn't fun and feels like a chore, people won't play it - they have other, more productive projects they could work on.
To elaborate on this point, these days we often see people complaining about "games that look gorgeous but play like crap/have a poor story/have lackluster features" - this is because one element of the overall product was given far too much attention, making other elements suffer. It's all about the balance, guys.
I'm just commenting on the overall aura of the thread. I don't think a video game can "fly" solely on story - that makes it a good story and a terrible video game. Again, Earthbound/Mother is not my cup of tea - I always wanted to try it out but I could never force myself to play something that's giving me all the signs that I won't like it... so I watched some gameplay footage instead and read the story, I didn't fancy either so I called it quits.Unfortunately, I have never played the game, so I can't say either way if it's good or bad on the gameplay. You said it wasn't your cup of tea, but you didn't say it was shit.
The Last Of Us seemed to do quite well relying just on story.I'm just commenting on the overall aura of the thread. I don't think a video game can "fly" solely on story - that makes it a good story and a terrible video game. Again, Earthbound/Mother is not my cup of tea - I always wanted to try it out but I could never force myself to play something that's giving me all the signs that I won't like it... so I watched some gameplay footage instead and read the story which I didn't particularly fancy.
That's false and you know it. The Last of Us "flies" because of its gorgeous visuals, great use of sound and lighting, solid (albeit not really inspired) story and fun gameplay - it's a good balance.The Last Of Us seemed to do quite well relying just on story.
I found the gameplay to be quite bland. Storytelling was great, but I was not a fan of the gameplay.That's false and you know it. The Last of Us "flies" because of its gorgeous visuals, great use of sound and lighting, solid (albeit not really inspired) story and fun gameplay - it's a good balance.
Alright, that's your opinion. Still, you have other elements that support the story such as graphics, aesthetics and sound which all build the correct tone and atmosphere, allowing the story to have a more profound impact on you. The exact same story wouldn't be nearly as gripping if the game didn't convey the urgency of your situation by showing you a destroyed, dilapidated landscape full of clicking noise - that noise alone built tension as you traversed buildings or underground passages. Again, there's more to games than just the story. The story was the meat in the sandwich, sure, but without all the other elements, you'd just be eating a slice of ham, not an actual sandwich.I found the gameplay to be quite bland. Story/Storytelling were great, but I was not a fan of the gameplay.
Can we just rename this "The Earthbound circlejerk thread" and have everyone orgasm and be done with it?
I swear we always get a really annoying Earthbound thread once every few months and every post is just filled with the sound of my continued sighing.
I'm certainly not arguing against any of that, well except for the tension, because I never felt that immersed in the gameplay. Clickers especially annoyed me not because they were scary or hard, but because they cheated with their auto-kill animation that would fire off even sometimes when you were in the process of bashing their head in with a brick. If clickers were about, it just became a process of moving slowly, which didn't really feel tense to me. If I got caught, I have to suffer through the annoying auto-kill animation and then I'm sent back to just before he got me.Alright, that's your opinion. Still, you have other elements that support the story such as graphics, aesthetics and sound which all build the correct tone and atmosphere, allowing the story to have a more profound impact on you. The exact same story wouldn't be nearly as gripping if the game didn't convey the urgency of your situation by showing you a destroyed, dilapidated landscape full of clicking noise - that noise alone built tension as you traversed buildings or underground passages. Again, there's more to games than just the story.
I can see how you'd say that if you didn't like the gameplay - that's precisely my point. A game with poor gameplay feels like less of a game and more something else... so yes, I agree fully.Everything else about the graphics, sound, atmosphere, etc. goes back to my initial statement that it was a great movie.
I was just trying to draw a parallel. As for Earthbound, I thought the story was overrated; maybe I would have enjoyed it more if I had played it when I was younger. Gameplay-wise it was like JRPGs of the era with it's own twist here and there. It didn't have random-encounters but rather you actually have to walk into them, much like Chrono Trigger, but with an added element where if you approach an enemy from behind, you get a in an extra attack at the start of the battle (and vice versa if he sneaks up on you). I didn't much care for the combat in it because there wasn't much you could do strategically to defeat tougher enemies, so there was a bit of grinding.I can see how you'd say that if you didn't like the gameplay - that's precisely my point. A game with poor gameplay feels like less of a game and more something else... so yes, I agree fully.
But we're getting terribly off-topic, let's get back to Earthbound and how everybody/nobody has ever heard about it.
Pretty sure that gave him the idea for the final boss in Earthbound, not for the whole series. As far as fame is concerned, everybody and their dog knows Pokemon, gamer or not. Earthbound/Mother? Not so much.According to Super Smash Bros. Direct there's no famous game EarthBound like Pokemon series are so.
All which starts MOTHER Saga is Shigesato Itoi's incident on Cinema when his 13 watched Military Policemen & Dismembered Beauty.Phil Sandhop wanted to announce EarthBound Zero as SpaceBound,EarthBound had finally its release on Europe,EarthBound 2/MOTHER 3 has first prototype on Superfamicom-canceled,second on N64DD(switched on N64 like Majora's Mask)as EarthBound 64-canceled,final port first phrase was suppose to have beta sprites was MOTHER 3 Beta in 2001,second attempt was at 2006 as final GBA game in 2006.Two years later Itoi said there will be no MOTHER 4.
An argument is not compelling if the delivery is lacking. Compelling defines the interest, and unless you are a very special kind of person, monotone is always boring.
Thank you for proving my point.
Even in your response, you don't seem to understand the argument or see the bigger picture. It seems that the majority of the people here don't even understand that games are put into categories because of how broad the term is today. The majority can't even accept this realization and as a result, are so arrogant that they use their preconceived idea of a game to bash others that don't fit their mold.
I could replace the name of a game like The Last of Us with Mother and the same arguments another poster used to defend TTLU would stick.
It truly is sad that people can't see things objectively.
Your response only gives credence to my entire post.
This whole post defines the problem with our society today.