Recently, after coming across a "The Clash on the Big Bridge" remake in the FF12 soundtrack I decided to give it another chance, after all, that song kicks ass, who knows, maybe I was just being too hard on it.
Well, after playing it for a while now, about 30 hours in, I can honestly say that it is a much better game than I gave it credit for. Sure, the story for the first twenty hours consists of: go into dungeon, fight boss, walk outside and see ships flying above you. The "main protagonist" isn't even integral to the plot, but you can do what I did and just cut him out of the party by using three other characters.
However, I do still have some issues with the game. For one, it's a grindfest... even more so than it's predecessors. You fight through an enormous area, get to a boss, die, go grind, fight the boss again, die, grind just a little more, change a gambit or two, then win. Rinse and repeat. Also, the concept of Licenses is such metagame bullshit that I can scarcely fucking believe it. Why do I need to spend magical points that are NOT tied to experience in order to gain some intangible "license" allowing me to equip a piece of armor? Experience points fall under my suspension of disbelief, I'm willing to accept that your progress through martial prowess is measurable by a set amount of points that each victory is "worth". But license points do not fall under this suspension, what the fuck is a license grid? Is it an physical piece of paper that I have to mark off? What's to stop me from marking off every part of the grid immediately? Also, the concept of buying technicks and magicks makes no sense to me either. What does an "Aero" look like? Is it a scroll? Is it a magic orb? The prospect used in some PnP RPGs of spending XP on upgrades is understandable as well, your XP is teaching you new moves through itself, that makes sense. Spending license points does not. What the fuck are license points other than a metagame concept that was just thrown in to make up some bullshit progression system?
Whatever, Final Fantasy 12 is definitely better than I remember, but it's still not very good.
Showing posts with label Pariah's Angry Rants. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Pariah's Angry Rants. Show all posts
Saturday, November 20, 2010
Friday, October 22, 2010
GameInformer Addendum
And then they have the fucking audacity to dock Amnesia .75 for "low replayability" ON A $20 INDIE GAME ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME?! How the fuck does a game as amazing as Amnesia lose to trash like Halo?!
GameInformer
GameInformer is the scum of the earth.
Halo: Reach gets a 9.5, meanwhile Knights of the Old Republic is getting crucified as one of the worst games made because "the characters are re-hashes of canonical Star Wars Movie characters". I'd also like to point out that they never provided any specific examples of any characters that are just rehashes. This is especially hilarious when Halo is just every PC FPS ever made prior to it on a console, yet this doesn't warrant a mention.
They also proceed to bash World of Warcraft, not that I want to defend that Lore Raping piece of shit, but they bash it for the wrong reason. They complain that the gameplay is the same as Everquest when that was released. IT'S A FUCKING MMORPG DICKWAD HOW ELSE IS THE COMBAT SUPPOSED TO BE?! Are we going to go with this bullshit that Action RPGs should be MMOs now? This shit doesn't work, lag, regardless of how good computers are nowadays, IS INEVITABLE AND IN THE HIGHLY COMPETITIVE WORLD OF MMORPGS WHEN YOU CAUSE SOMEONE TO LOSE BECAUSE OF LAG THEY WILL RAGEQUIT! Your MMO is destined to die if it uses some fancy new combat system. If you don't like the combat DON'T PLAY THE FUCKING GAME! Just because you think the combat is "old" doesn't mean it's not perfect for the genre.
Finally, the entire Pokemon series is called "the same game". Anyone with half a brain knows why this is fucking bullshit because everyone played pokemon as a kid. The new games have new little monsters to collect, new magical moves to use in their death battles, and a new cutesy continent full of happy people willing to let a 10 year old kid wander the planet training deadly monsters. THAT'S WHAT POKEMON IS! IT'S A GREAT CONCEPT WITH NEARLY FLAWLESS EXECUTION IN TERMS OF ITS COMBAT! Why does all combat have to fall under the categories of either "what you deem to be fun" or "ground breakingly amazingly new" to be acceptable?
I've been done with this magazine ever since they rated Halo ODST a 9.25
In fact they kind of lost me with the decimal rating anyway. Not to get off on another rant but what separates a 9.25 and a 9.5? Fucking seriously.
Whatever, when Halo ODST got a 9.25 they sealed their fate as the worst "gaming" magazine ever. Now they've committed atrocities so grave that the only choice is to fucking destroy them on my blog to my one follower.
By the way, welcome. Yes I noticed you. Oooh, it feels weird to know that I have an audience now.. even if it is just one person.
Halo: Reach gets a 9.5, meanwhile Knights of the Old Republic is getting crucified as one of the worst games made because "the characters are re-hashes of canonical Star Wars Movie characters". I'd also like to point out that they never provided any specific examples of any characters that are just rehashes. This is especially hilarious when Halo is just every PC FPS ever made prior to it on a console, yet this doesn't warrant a mention.
They also proceed to bash World of Warcraft, not that I want to defend that Lore Raping piece of shit, but they bash it for the wrong reason. They complain that the gameplay is the same as Everquest when that was released. IT'S A FUCKING MMORPG DICKWAD HOW ELSE IS THE COMBAT SUPPOSED TO BE?! Are we going to go with this bullshit that Action RPGs should be MMOs now? This shit doesn't work, lag, regardless of how good computers are nowadays, IS INEVITABLE AND IN THE HIGHLY COMPETITIVE WORLD OF MMORPGS WHEN YOU CAUSE SOMEONE TO LOSE BECAUSE OF LAG THEY WILL RAGEQUIT! Your MMO is destined to die if it uses some fancy new combat system. If you don't like the combat DON'T PLAY THE FUCKING GAME! Just because you think the combat is "old" doesn't mean it's not perfect for the genre.
Finally, the entire Pokemon series is called "the same game". Anyone with half a brain knows why this is fucking bullshit because everyone played pokemon as a kid. The new games have new little monsters to collect, new magical moves to use in their death battles, and a new cutesy continent full of happy people willing to let a 10 year old kid wander the planet training deadly monsters. THAT'S WHAT POKEMON IS! IT'S A GREAT CONCEPT WITH NEARLY FLAWLESS EXECUTION IN TERMS OF ITS COMBAT! Why does all combat have to fall under the categories of either "what you deem to be fun" or "ground breakingly amazingly new" to be acceptable?
I've been done with this magazine ever since they rated Halo ODST a 9.25
In fact they kind of lost me with the decimal rating anyway. Not to get off on another rant but what separates a 9.25 and a 9.5? Fucking seriously.
Whatever, when Halo ODST got a 9.25 they sealed their fate as the worst "gaming" magazine ever. Now they've committed atrocities so grave that the only choice is to fucking destroy them on my blog to my one follower.
By the way, welcome. Yes I noticed you. Oooh, it feels weird to know that I have an audience now.. even if it is just one person.
Thursday, September 23, 2010
Pariah's Angry Rant: Halo
Possibly one of my shorter rants as destroying Halo is like tearing a hole in the proverbial wet paper sack. Anyway, here we go.
Halo, it's a true phenomenon of the day. As with all phenomena, you either love it or you hate it. Guess which one I am.
Got your answer yet?.. Oh sorry I'll give you a bit more time..
I FUCKING HATE IT! I gave Halo a chance, I really did. I love Science Fiction, especially when it follows the age old formula of: Humans go into space and find bi-pedal, aerobic alien species. This species is hostile and we retaliate with a war. However it seems that the only way to win is to use genetically enhanced super-soldiers, so we do. It's fucking great and is the basis of my favorite Science Fiction series: Warhammer 40,000. However, what Warhammer did that Halo didn't is that it expanded on that base, it gave more depth to the basic story, where as Halo was content just sitting at the cliche. The Space Marines is Warhammer weren't explicitly created to defeat the aliens, in fact they were originally created to conquer Earth, or Terra as it's called in Warhammer. This gives a brand new level of possible depth for the characters just in the very framework of the story. These people were made to kill, not a foreign species, but their own species. It's even seen in the books surrounding the Horus Heresy where, during the effort to re-establish contact with and dominance over the vestiges of humanity that had been lost in the stars during a storm in the parallel reality used for long distance space travel, the Space Marines are used to slaughter several planets-worth of military forces. Without even talking about individual characters I can illustrate just how much deeper Warhammer is than Halo.
But Halo's fanbase doesn't care about stories. If they did they wouldn't be playing Halo and defending it so voraciously. Halo's gameplay is fundamentally different from almost every Warhammer game made, so I will have to abandon that comparison... in favor of one that actually fits better. Halo's gameplay is nothing more than a cut and paste Unreal Tournament or Quake engine, for consoles. Hell, I'd even venture to say that Quake 3 for the PS2 is a better game than Halo. Halo has yet to offer anything to the genre except the first decent FPS port to consoles. All it does is take worn out aspects, throw some high res textures on them and stuff them into the game.
Do you know why Halo has the level of success it does now? It's because when Halo was released the FPS genre was one that generally shied away from consoles since at the time their RAM was vastly lower than what was possible with a modern computer, and with the twitch reflexes and quick pay-off of an FPS game quick load times were essential as well as minimizing possible screen tear. Bungie simply took a, at the time, ballsy leap into the genre and was able to crank out a console FPS that did the same thing computer FPS had been doing for years. Most people, at the time, were either console or computer gamers, sure, most owned both, but few actively played video games on them both, so the console gamers were astounded by what they had been missing out on, THAT is why Bungie has such a large fanbase. So Bungie has no need to innovate, they hooked people in, and since moderate gamers, the ones who like FPS the most, have smaller amounts of gaming dollars they like to stick with a series they know, like Halo, so they just lap up every single game Bungie churns out. Bungie doesn't need to bring in more buyers, so they don't try.
THAT is why I hate Halo. It's unoriginal, uninteresting, and all around mediocre. It's not worth my money, and is not worth yours. If you want an FPS that is shallow, focused solely on multiplayer, requires minimal strategy, and offers the same mechanics Halo does, buy Battlefield: Bad Company 2. I don't play it, but at least it's gameplay isn't entirely worn out.
Halo, it's a true phenomenon of the day. As with all phenomena, you either love it or you hate it. Guess which one I am.
Got your answer yet?.. Oh sorry I'll give you a bit more time..
I FUCKING HATE IT! I gave Halo a chance, I really did. I love Science Fiction, especially when it follows the age old formula of: Humans go into space and find bi-pedal, aerobic alien species. This species is hostile and we retaliate with a war. However it seems that the only way to win is to use genetically enhanced super-soldiers, so we do. It's fucking great and is the basis of my favorite Science Fiction series: Warhammer 40,000. However, what Warhammer did that Halo didn't is that it expanded on that base, it gave more depth to the basic story, where as Halo was content just sitting at the cliche. The Space Marines is Warhammer weren't explicitly created to defeat the aliens, in fact they were originally created to conquer Earth, or Terra as it's called in Warhammer. This gives a brand new level of possible depth for the characters just in the very framework of the story. These people were made to kill, not a foreign species, but their own species. It's even seen in the books surrounding the Horus Heresy where, during the effort to re-establish contact with and dominance over the vestiges of humanity that had been lost in the stars during a storm in the parallel reality used for long distance space travel, the Space Marines are used to slaughter several planets-worth of military forces. Without even talking about individual characters I can illustrate just how much deeper Warhammer is than Halo.
But Halo's fanbase doesn't care about stories. If they did they wouldn't be playing Halo and defending it so voraciously. Halo's gameplay is fundamentally different from almost every Warhammer game made, so I will have to abandon that comparison... in favor of one that actually fits better. Halo's gameplay is nothing more than a cut and paste Unreal Tournament or Quake engine, for consoles. Hell, I'd even venture to say that Quake 3 for the PS2 is a better game than Halo. Halo has yet to offer anything to the genre except the first decent FPS port to consoles. All it does is take worn out aspects, throw some high res textures on them and stuff them into the game.
Do you know why Halo has the level of success it does now? It's because when Halo was released the FPS genre was one that generally shied away from consoles since at the time their RAM was vastly lower than what was possible with a modern computer, and with the twitch reflexes and quick pay-off of an FPS game quick load times were essential as well as minimizing possible screen tear. Bungie simply took a, at the time, ballsy leap into the genre and was able to crank out a console FPS that did the same thing computer FPS had been doing for years. Most people, at the time, were either console or computer gamers, sure, most owned both, but few actively played video games on them both, so the console gamers were astounded by what they had been missing out on, THAT is why Bungie has such a large fanbase. So Bungie has no need to innovate, they hooked people in, and since moderate gamers, the ones who like FPS the most, have smaller amounts of gaming dollars they like to stick with a series they know, like Halo, so they just lap up every single game Bungie churns out. Bungie doesn't need to bring in more buyers, so they don't try.
THAT is why I hate Halo. It's unoriginal, uninteresting, and all around mediocre. It's not worth my money, and is not worth yours. If you want an FPS that is shallow, focused solely on multiplayer, requires minimal strategy, and offers the same mechanics Halo does, buy Battlefield: Bad Company 2. I don't play it, but at least it's gameplay isn't entirely worn out.
Sunday, September 19, 2010
Free? To Play Freakout
Lord of the Rings Online has recently stated that they have released a "Free to Play" option for their Massively Multiplayer RPG. Enticed by this proposal I took a look at it. Here's what I found.
Despite this being placed in the Free to Play Freakout tag it will work more like a "Pariah's Angry Rant" for reasons you shall see.
Turbine thinks what they are doing is releasing free to play content for their "Award Winning" game in order to give people a taste of the MMO so that hopefully they'd decide to pay for it down the line. What they've done, however, is spit in the face of anyone who doesn't want to pay for their game.
Here's how a great, successful, Free to Play MMO works: They offer full content access to ALL players. Make an account and you can access every single bit of content in the world. Then, add a cash shop, similar to what you can find on most Korean MMOs. Stock the cash shop with different buffs that give the payers certain advantages, such as increased EXP gain, or a faster mount. (Of course not something like a new class or equipment or stat boosts, that breaks the game). There, you've got a great base for an MMO that, if it's fun of course, will make you money and make you lots of fans who will WANT to pay you money.
What you DO NOT DO is this: Grant free players access to most zones, however, only give them quests in the first three that will take them to about level 25. Give them limited chat, crafting, storage, inventory, money cap, support, no permanent mount, etc. Instead have three levels of players: Free, Premium, and VIP. To get Premium, force them to purchase something from the store, whether it be points or actual content. Then to get VIP force them to pay A SUBSCRIPTION FOR YOUR FREE TO PLAY GAME.
If you don't see whats wrong with this then you are part of the problem. This game is not "Free to Play" it's "Free to Test" it's little more than an extended trial version. Turbine would be making so much more money if they'd follow the guidelines I set in the first paragraph, not only that, they'd have a much larger and more loyal fanbase. At the moment, they are offering Free to Play quality content for a Premium price. While there may be some Turbine sycophants out there, as there always is, that doesn't change the fact that this game is an insult to anyone who came there looking for a Free to Play game.
I am frankly infuriated that this is how it turned out. I had been eagerly awaiting the Free to Play release of LotRO as I don't currently have the means to support an MMO subscription, and this really felt like a slap to the face. Like they were some soup kitchen chef who looked out at all the hungry faces awaiting food, then as each person came by for their share they kicked them in the shins and gave them a few drops of soup. It's unacceptable that they think they can get away with this.
I wouldn't really be so upset about this if the game was better, if it was a game with the production quality and polish of something like World of Warcraft then I wouldn't be able to bash it so hard. But it's not, the combat is crude and clunky, everything feels swampy and delayed like you are walking waist deep in mud, and the crafting is restrictive, forcing you to take a set of three instead of giving you a choice of what you want. So if you were hoping to get Tailoring, Foresting, and Armorsmithing, for whatever reason, too bad, you're fucked. Then there's Turbine, which has become my new symbol for everything that is wrong with MMOs nowadays.
That's all for this hybridization of Free to Play Freakout and Pariah's Angry Rants, hope you enjoyed it
HappyPariah
Despite this being placed in the Free to Play Freakout tag it will work more like a "Pariah's Angry Rant" for reasons you shall see.
Turbine thinks what they are doing is releasing free to play content for their "Award Winning" game in order to give people a taste of the MMO so that hopefully they'd decide to pay for it down the line. What they've done, however, is spit in the face of anyone who doesn't want to pay for their game.
Here's how a great, successful, Free to Play MMO works: They offer full content access to ALL players. Make an account and you can access every single bit of content in the world. Then, add a cash shop, similar to what you can find on most Korean MMOs. Stock the cash shop with different buffs that give the payers certain advantages, such as increased EXP gain, or a faster mount. (Of course not something like a new class or equipment or stat boosts, that breaks the game). There, you've got a great base for an MMO that, if it's fun of course, will make you money and make you lots of fans who will WANT to pay you money.
What you DO NOT DO is this: Grant free players access to most zones, however, only give them quests in the first three that will take them to about level 25. Give them limited chat, crafting, storage, inventory, money cap, support, no permanent mount, etc. Instead have three levels of players: Free, Premium, and VIP. To get Premium, force them to purchase something from the store, whether it be points or actual content. Then to get VIP force them to pay A SUBSCRIPTION FOR YOUR FREE TO PLAY GAME.
If you don't see whats wrong with this then you are part of the problem. This game is not "Free to Play" it's "Free to Test" it's little more than an extended trial version. Turbine would be making so much more money if they'd follow the guidelines I set in the first paragraph, not only that, they'd have a much larger and more loyal fanbase. At the moment, they are offering Free to Play quality content for a Premium price. While there may be some Turbine sycophants out there, as there always is, that doesn't change the fact that this game is an insult to anyone who came there looking for a Free to Play game.
I am frankly infuriated that this is how it turned out. I had been eagerly awaiting the Free to Play release of LotRO as I don't currently have the means to support an MMO subscription, and this really felt like a slap to the face. Like they were some soup kitchen chef who looked out at all the hungry faces awaiting food, then as each person came by for their share they kicked them in the shins and gave them a few drops of soup. It's unacceptable that they think they can get away with this.
I wouldn't really be so upset about this if the game was better, if it was a game with the production quality and polish of something like World of Warcraft then I wouldn't be able to bash it so hard. But it's not, the combat is crude and clunky, everything feels swampy and delayed like you are walking waist deep in mud, and the crafting is restrictive, forcing you to take a set of three instead of giving you a choice of what you want. So if you were hoping to get Tailoring, Foresting, and Armorsmithing, for whatever reason, too bad, you're fucked. Then there's Turbine, which has become my new symbol for everything that is wrong with MMOs nowadays.
That's all for this hybridization of Free to Play Freakout and Pariah's Angry Rants, hope you enjoyed it
HappyPariah
Monday, August 30, 2010
Pariah's Angry Rants: The Focus on the Community and a new crash?
This will be a divergence from my normal style of ranting... of spewing for a bunch of reasons why I hate things. Today will be more of an opinion piece about where video gaming is going and what I see in the future.
Take a walk down the street nowadays, chances are most people you see will own some sort of video game console. If you ask them their opinion on the status of the industry I can assure you again, most of them will say that it's a fairly healthy industry. However, there's the off-chance you might get one who has actively thought about it, one who has taken a good hard look at the path video gaming is going down. Now, the first person you've found, the one who mentions that it's healthy, they are the sheep. The ones who have been blindfolded and led down a path of ever increasing mediocrity. The second person you've found, they are a true gamer. They understand that quality cannot be eschewed forever. That games cannot simply throw together a 4 hour campaign with six levels that have some minor differences and enemy variation with a story that sounds as though a brain-dead howler monkey thought it up. But where did it all start?
If we look back in the past video games had stayed a fairly underground medium until around the Sixth Generation where it became almost a social abnormality to not play video games. It was in this sixth generation that microsoft took it's first steps into the video game industry with the release of their Xbox a revolutionary console that placed focus on the community through the use of it's integrated XboxLive support. Now, this in and of itself is not anything bad, in fact, being able to connect to others on a community from a console is actually a very good thing. However, with it came games that had easy access to online play for their titles thanks to XboxLive. This is where the problem starts. Games such as Halo pioneered the notion that a single player campaign can be an oversight in lieu of a, supposedly, badass multiplayer experience. This is the problem. This degeneration led to an overarching feeling of a reduced need for single player focus or even effort put into creating it. In reality most of the blame falls to the consumer when it comes to the trend away from single player. But they aren't the only culprit. In an issue this great they couldn't be.
Our next culprit is: Marketing. Market research has shown that regardless of how good your game is, if it's not marketed constantly then it doesn't sell as much as other more marketed games do. This has led many gaming companies to spend their ever increasing budget of tens of millions of dollars on marketing their games over actually play testing and making the games fun and worth their pricetags. It goes back to the greed of the companies attempting to exploit the gaming industry to line their pockets.
Now we come to the final point. What I believe is going to happen to gaming, and, honestly, what I hope. Gaming will continue as is for another two to three years, until it gets to the point that even the common gamers, the sheep, realize what is going on and rebel thus resulting in a second crash. Companies will go bankrupt, massive ones such as Microsoft and Sony will attempt to cut their running bills and end long term services or hike the prices up massively. Then an even darker age of gaming will descend where almost nothing is made and only the hardcore fans of certain games continue. I, myself, will be unaffected by this as the majority of my enjoyment doesn't come from new games anymore, as is the case for some others. However, many young people or "cutting edge" adrenaline junkies who focus on the yearly release of Call of Duty will be driven away by the high prices. Then, after another year or two of this Dark Age a shining knight will appear, the proverbial NES to our crash, and drag us out with a brave new leap into the video gaming industry and it will be reborn with a renewed emphasis on the gamer and quality.
Hopefully this is the future, hopefully in 5 years the gaming industry can have quality as it did back in the early 90s.
Cheers,
HappyPariah
PS. As far as MMOs are concerned I feel they are truly the perfect specimen to view when it comes to how to deal with games that want to focus on multiplayer, as I've no inherent problem with games that focus on the community. Build a game that is fun to play first and foremost, one that can stand on it's single player game, THEN incorporate the multiplayer aspects.
Take a walk down the street nowadays, chances are most people you see will own some sort of video game console. If you ask them their opinion on the status of the industry I can assure you again, most of them will say that it's a fairly healthy industry. However, there's the off-chance you might get one who has actively thought about it, one who has taken a good hard look at the path video gaming is going down. Now, the first person you've found, the one who mentions that it's healthy, they are the sheep. The ones who have been blindfolded and led down a path of ever increasing mediocrity. The second person you've found, they are a true gamer. They understand that quality cannot be eschewed forever. That games cannot simply throw together a 4 hour campaign with six levels that have some minor differences and enemy variation with a story that sounds as though a brain-dead howler monkey thought it up. But where did it all start?
If we look back in the past video games had stayed a fairly underground medium until around the Sixth Generation where it became almost a social abnormality to not play video games. It was in this sixth generation that microsoft took it's first steps into the video game industry with the release of their Xbox a revolutionary console that placed focus on the community through the use of it's integrated XboxLive support. Now, this in and of itself is not anything bad, in fact, being able to connect to others on a community from a console is actually a very good thing. However, with it came games that had easy access to online play for their titles thanks to XboxLive. This is where the problem starts. Games such as Halo pioneered the notion that a single player campaign can be an oversight in lieu of a, supposedly, badass multiplayer experience. This is the problem. This degeneration led to an overarching feeling of a reduced need for single player focus or even effort put into creating it. In reality most of the blame falls to the consumer when it comes to the trend away from single player. But they aren't the only culprit. In an issue this great they couldn't be.
Our next culprit is: Marketing. Market research has shown that regardless of how good your game is, if it's not marketed constantly then it doesn't sell as much as other more marketed games do. This has led many gaming companies to spend their ever increasing budget of tens of millions of dollars on marketing their games over actually play testing and making the games fun and worth their pricetags. It goes back to the greed of the companies attempting to exploit the gaming industry to line their pockets.
Now we come to the final point. What I believe is going to happen to gaming, and, honestly, what I hope. Gaming will continue as is for another two to three years, until it gets to the point that even the common gamers, the sheep, realize what is going on and rebel thus resulting in a second crash. Companies will go bankrupt, massive ones such as Microsoft and Sony will attempt to cut their running bills and end long term services or hike the prices up massively. Then an even darker age of gaming will descend where almost nothing is made and only the hardcore fans of certain games continue. I, myself, will be unaffected by this as the majority of my enjoyment doesn't come from new games anymore, as is the case for some others. However, many young people or "cutting edge" adrenaline junkies who focus on the yearly release of Call of Duty will be driven away by the high prices. Then, after another year or two of this Dark Age a shining knight will appear, the proverbial NES to our crash, and drag us out with a brave new leap into the video gaming industry and it will be reborn with a renewed emphasis on the gamer and quality.
Hopefully this is the future, hopefully in 5 years the gaming industry can have quality as it did back in the early 90s.
Cheers,
HappyPariah
PS. As far as MMOs are concerned I feel they are truly the perfect specimen to view when it comes to how to deal with games that want to focus on multiplayer, as I've no inherent problem with games that focus on the community. Build a game that is fun to play first and foremost, one that can stand on it's single player game, THEN incorporate the multiplayer aspects.
Wednesday, August 25, 2010
The Nice Guy's Guide to Failing at Love
Hello hello viewers and welcome to a HappyPariah's sure-fire guide! Today's subject: How to be a Nice Guy and Fail at Love!
Well the first thing you have to realize is that: it's not hard. 98% of Girls and young women have an ingrained view what they want from a lover. They feel that "Nice Guys" are stagnant, that "Nice Guys" will "lie" to them and subdue their own true opinions in order to avoid conflict. A girl or young woman has a subconscious grading scale in their mind that automatically scans a man as he approaches her. If the man doesn't match preconceived notions of "Badass" or "Mysterious" then she instantly writes them off as being "Boring". So, here's what you must do my fine, fish faced friend.
First: Be completely yourself. As a nice guy this should be easy as holding up a world-changing lie for the purpose of prolonging a relationship is already a sentiment you deem much too volatile and not worth the work. So whatever you do, do not act like someone else or someone you think the person might take interest in. Be entirely you. Next, compliment the woman or girl, but do it in a natural way, don't just walk up and say "Hey babe, you're hot." Work it into a conversation and make it flow through your dialogue. Girls don't like to think in relationships. Therefor the blunter you are with your compliments the more they'll understand and immediately flock to you. So be complicated.
Y'know what I can't do this shit anymore, it's way to complicated. Writing a parody article about how to fail at love as a nice guy by having every example of how to act being an actual example of a way to succeed is way too confusing so I'll just degenerate into a rant here.
What the fuck is up with young women and girls these days? Honestly, they are so concerned with "mysterious" men or people they think will make the relationship "fun and exciting" through "spontaneity" that they blind themselves to the people truly worth their time: The Nice Guys. Y'know that saying "Nice Guys Finish Last"? It's fuckin' true in todays society. It appalls me. I've no clue where they get this shit, THIS IS A WORD FOR WORD QUOTE I'VE RECEIVED ON THE TOPIC OF NICE GUYS: "nice guys r... well nice... lol... but their just boring and let the girls they like walk all over them without standing up for themselfs" That quote required several face-desks to erase from my working memory. Basically the point made was that nice guys are nice (no duh fuckwit), but they are boring (...uhm why?), and suck up to their love (no... fucking... duh). I'm frankly astounded by this tomfoolery. I don't understand how nice guys are boring! Is it because they'd prefer a date to follow something like this: a pleasant dinner from a chain restaurant, nothing horribly fancy, but still a quality establishment, followed by a stroll along some attraction of amusement such as: A pier, mall, carnival, etc. Or even a peaceful place where the two could be alone to spend simple time with each other like a beach, or plain, or knoll, or anywhere involving natural beauty and peace, then ending in a heartfelt discussion or in earlier dating stages personal discussion? Is that it? Is that "boring? Would you prefer your date to be: dinner from a fast food restaurant, sitting around their house kissing each other for god knows how long until one of his friends drops by to invite him to some shitty concert which he then invites you to? (That's not to say that physical displays of affection are undesirable, on the contrary, a nice guy's perfect date often includes an extended period of physical contact, just not sucking each others' face for forty minutes, or to say that concerts are not viable date destinations, a band that both parties enjoy could always be a great date). HELP ME TO UNDERSTAND WHY NICE GUYS ARE BORING?
The message of this rant is: Nice Guys, keep doing what you're doing, at about 27 women understand how shallow relationships with "spontaneous" guys are and desperately seek you and your stability out, by then you've got the pick of the litter and have probably already found the girl of your dreams. Girls and Young Women, stop being so idiotic, spontaneity might seem "fun and exciting" but it's really all just the same thing, you need to see Nice Guys for what they really are, the perfect specimens for true, lasting, stable, relationships.
Cheers, HappyPariah
PS. No pictures today because I am lazy and pissed off
Well the first thing you have to realize is that: it's not hard. 98% of Girls and young women have an ingrained view what they want from a lover. They feel that "Nice Guys" are stagnant, that "Nice Guys" will "lie" to them and subdue their own true opinions in order to avoid conflict. A girl or young woman has a subconscious grading scale in their mind that automatically scans a man as he approaches her. If the man doesn't match preconceived notions of "Badass" or "Mysterious" then she instantly writes them off as being "Boring". So, here's what you must do my fine, fish faced friend.
First: Be completely yourself. As a nice guy this should be easy as holding up a world-changing lie for the purpose of prolonging a relationship is already a sentiment you deem much too volatile and not worth the work. So whatever you do, do not act like someone else or someone you think the person might take interest in. Be entirely you. Next, compliment the woman or girl, but do it in a natural way, don't just walk up and say "Hey babe, you're hot." Work it into a conversation and make it flow through your dialogue. Girls don't like to think in relationships. Therefor the blunter you are with your compliments the more they'll understand and immediately flock to you. So be complicated.
Y'know what I can't do this shit anymore, it's way to complicated. Writing a parody article about how to fail at love as a nice guy by having every example of how to act being an actual example of a way to succeed is way too confusing so I'll just degenerate into a rant here.
What the fuck is up with young women and girls these days? Honestly, they are so concerned with "mysterious" men or people they think will make the relationship "fun and exciting" through "spontaneity" that they blind themselves to the people truly worth their time: The Nice Guys. Y'know that saying "Nice Guys Finish Last"? It's fuckin' true in todays society. It appalls me. I've no clue where they get this shit, THIS IS A WORD FOR WORD QUOTE I'VE RECEIVED ON THE TOPIC OF NICE GUYS: "nice guys r... well nice... lol... but their just boring and let the girls they like walk all over them without standing up for themselfs" That quote required several face-desks to erase from my working memory. Basically the point made was that nice guys are nice (no duh fuckwit), but they are boring (...uhm why?), and suck up to their love (no... fucking... duh). I'm frankly astounded by this tomfoolery. I don't understand how nice guys are boring! Is it because they'd prefer a date to follow something like this: a pleasant dinner from a chain restaurant, nothing horribly fancy, but still a quality establishment, followed by a stroll along some attraction of amusement such as: A pier, mall, carnival, etc. Or even a peaceful place where the two could be alone to spend simple time with each other like a beach, or plain, or knoll, or anywhere involving natural beauty and peace, then ending in a heartfelt discussion or in earlier dating stages personal discussion? Is that it? Is that "boring? Would you prefer your date to be: dinner from a fast food restaurant, sitting around their house kissing each other for god knows how long until one of his friends drops by to invite him to some shitty concert which he then invites you to? (That's not to say that physical displays of affection are undesirable, on the contrary, a nice guy's perfect date often includes an extended period of physical contact, just not sucking each others' face for forty minutes, or to say that concerts are not viable date destinations, a band that both parties enjoy could always be a great date). HELP ME TO UNDERSTAND WHY NICE GUYS ARE BORING?
The message of this rant is: Nice Guys, keep doing what you're doing, at about 27 women understand how shallow relationships with "spontaneous" guys are and desperately seek you and your stability out, by then you've got the pick of the litter and have probably already found the girl of your dreams. Girls and Young Women, stop being so idiotic, spontaneity might seem "fun and exciting" but it's really all just the same thing, you need to see Nice Guys for what they really are, the perfect specimens for true, lasting, stable, relationships.
Cheers, HappyPariah
PS. No pictures today because I am lazy and pissed off
Tuesday, August 17, 2010
Pariah's Angry Rants: Gamers with a Vagina
Let me begin by saying that there are three distinct archetypes of female gamers. There is: The 1/2 Gamer (generally an anime fan who likes to pass some time with a JRPG or two, their lineage can be traced to the genesis of the PlayStationX), the Holy Grail (a true gamer, she enjoys everything from strategy heavy video games to table top games into Dungeons and Dragons and other pen and paper RPGs), and the Gamer Girl (basically every 13 year old adrenaline junky who thinks Call of Duty is the best series ever, comments on the deep story of Gears of War, and takes the "holier than thou" stance when dealing with "nerds"... but without a penis). This rant will focus on the last one, the scum pit of the entire planet, the Gamer Girls.
If there is anything I hate in the world it's people who think they are better than someone else for some arbitrary reason. Gamer Girls exhibit this in quantities that rival that of hipsters, something I never though possible, until I became better acquainted with the nightmare of Gamer Girls. You see, Gamer Girls operate on the same frequency as normal bitchy girls, but instead of turning their bitchiness towards a boyfriend, they feel the need to exert it on everyone they come across in a video game. The Gamer Girl will continually gripe and moan about how she's hit on in a video game or treated differently in a video game just because she is a girl. However, when she kills a boy she will whip up a one man shitstorm and start bashing on the guy that just got killed by a girl. What a motherfucking double standard. Then they go on to gloat and rant about how they are a girl who plays "video games" (as I hardly consider Halo, Call of Duty, Gears of War, etc. video games) only to bitch even more when they are called out on being a girl.
This atrocity began around 2001 with the release of the x-box. My theory behind the reason that the X-Box began this relies on two factors: 1) The X-Box was the first American video game console thus it was marketed specifically to Americans... the adrenaline junky, overly competitive, xenophobic ones that refused to buy a Japanese system. and 2) It was the first system with integrated online support, thus the genesis of games made solely for the online modes *coughcoughhalocallofdutygearsofwarcoughcough*. With this came the archetype that everyone outside of it hates: The adrenaline junky who thinks he's a legitimate gamer. It only made sense that such a widely encompassing archetype would eventually include both sexes.
I'm not a proponent of sexual discrimination when it comes to video games, the thought that girls should only play "girl games" and leave the FPS to the "men". I think that EVERYONE who plays these games regularly have some problem and need to go out and purchase a brain. They are really just sheep mindlessly being herded to the next game in the series without thinking, following the trend because "video games are cool now".
That's enough angry ranting for now. Now it's time for me to make myself happy again, and talk about the true Female Gamers, the Holy Grails. The Holy Grails can trace their lineage back to the days of the genesis of male gamers, back to the beginning. The True Female Gamers, they enjoy the thinking mans' games. They enjoy RPGs, RTSs, certain fighting games, retro games (true retro games, not fucking PSX), pen and paper RPGs, they enjoy TRUE ROLE PLAYING, none of this Oblivion bullshit. They are called the Holy Grail because, for one reason or another, there aren't many of them at all. The older games and the prospect of Role Playing doesn't really appeal to women as much as it does to men. So if any of you true gamers, you thinking men, you masters of the BlazBlue, you Final Fantasyholics, you Dungeon Masters or Dungeon Delvers, you LARPers ever happen upon one of these rare specimens realize this: You have hit the jackpot with this, you'll most likely never find one again. Treat them right, treat them like they wanted to be treated, like a gamer, just like you.
That's all for today guys. Cheers,
HappyPariah
If there is anything I hate in the world it's people who think they are better than someone else for some arbitrary reason. Gamer Girls exhibit this in quantities that rival that of hipsters, something I never though possible, until I became better acquainted with the nightmare of Gamer Girls. You see, Gamer Girls operate on the same frequency as normal bitchy girls, but instead of turning their bitchiness towards a boyfriend, they feel the need to exert it on everyone they come across in a video game. The Gamer Girl will continually gripe and moan about how she's hit on in a video game or treated differently in a video game just because she is a girl. However, when she kills a boy she will whip up a one man shitstorm and start bashing on the guy that just got killed by a girl. What a motherfucking double standard. Then they go on to gloat and rant about how they are a girl who plays "video games" (as I hardly consider Halo, Call of Duty, Gears of War, etc. video games) only to bitch even more when they are called out on being a girl.
This atrocity began around 2001 with the release of the x-box. My theory behind the reason that the X-Box began this relies on two factors: 1) The X-Box was the first American video game console thus it was marketed specifically to Americans... the adrenaline junky, overly competitive, xenophobic ones that refused to buy a Japanese system. and 2) It was the first system with integrated online support, thus the genesis of games made solely for the online modes *coughcoughhalocallofdutygearsofwarcoughcough*. With this came the archetype that everyone outside of it hates: The adrenaline junky who thinks he's a legitimate gamer. It only made sense that such a widely encompassing archetype would eventually include both sexes.
 | |
| An example of this monstrosity in it's environment... it fucking sickens me |
I'm not a proponent of sexual discrimination when it comes to video games, the thought that girls should only play "girl games" and leave the FPS to the "men". I think that EVERYONE who plays these games regularly have some problem and need to go out and purchase a brain. They are really just sheep mindlessly being herded to the next game in the series without thinking, following the trend because "video games are cool now".
That's enough angry ranting for now. Now it's time for me to make myself happy again, and talk about the true Female Gamers, the Holy Grails. The Holy Grails can trace their lineage back to the days of the genesis of male gamers, back to the beginning. The True Female Gamers, they enjoy the thinking mans' games. They enjoy RPGs, RTSs, certain fighting games, retro games (true retro games, not fucking PSX), pen and paper RPGs, they enjoy TRUE ROLE PLAYING, none of this Oblivion bullshit. They are called the Holy Grail because, for one reason or another, there aren't many of them at all. The older games and the prospect of Role Playing doesn't really appeal to women as much as it does to men. So if any of you true gamers, you thinking men, you masters of the BlazBlue, you Final Fantasyholics, you Dungeon Masters or Dungeon Delvers, you LARPers ever happen upon one of these rare specimens realize this: You have hit the jackpot with this, you'll most likely never find one again. Treat them right, treat them like they wanted to be treated, like a gamer, just like you.
That's all for today guys. Cheers,
HappyPariah
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)