I'm thinking the problem is that people here aren't into that kind of linear storytelling, what with being RPG fans and whatnot.
I'm thinking the problem is that people here aren't into that kind of linear storytelling, what with being RPG fans and whatnot.
Myeahh.. I enjoy some linear storytelling - I just picked up COD:AW, for example. I just didn't like the gameplay of RM that much and the story, at four hours in or so, wasn't that interesting.
Let's try to give Eli some all-around good games, not controversially good ones. I was on the fence about suggesting Shadowrun
ragonfall, but I've yet to read a credibly bad word about it.
Frank Miller's Hardboiled and Nihei's BLAME! are pretty good to. And Appleseed, of course, in it's many variations.
Let's try to give Eli some all-around good games, not controversially good ones. I was on the fence about suggesting Shadowrun
ragonfall, but I've yet to read a credibly bad word about it.Frank Miller's Hardboiled and Nihei's BLAME! are pretty good to. And Appleseed, of course, in it's many variations.
I just enjoy good stories, whether I have control over them or not. Control can sometimes be fun, as can having control being taken away from me - because usually that means the Devs have an easier time telling a focused tale. There's not one formula that I prefer over the other. I don't even mind linear gameplay, either.
As long as you're not discarded afterwards (too often) it's not that bad. I've spent most of my life being a tolerated necessity (career military during/after Vietnam then a cop).
I also like open-world games, puzzle games, 2D beat-em-ups, fighting games, shooters, strategy games, and a million other things. My likes are far-reaching and more expansive than you genre-discriminating peasants could ever hope to comprehend. If gaming knowledge was power, this would be me.
Anyway, it doesn't surprise me that you didn't like Remember Me, having not even played to the end. I shudder thinking of all the games with twist endings that you're probably completely uninformed about. Seriously—if you have time for a Vader mask (and don't think I didn't see that), you have time to start finishing games. It's getting embarrassing. Do it for the children.
What children? I don't even like kids. Except you kids, of course.
FInite time means weighted value towards fun/minute. If that ratio tips, I close the book or shut down the game or close Netflix. I'll suck up so-so for awhile, say 15% of estimated total time investment, but if it gets more than that, bye bye. Thus why I never finished, for example, book 2 of Locke Lamora.
You know. The children. All of them, I guess.
That's a strange expression when you think about it, though—everyone always says "the children" instead of "our children," "those children," or any of the million other phrasings that would make more sense. Instead they're referred to with a detached, singular "they" that sounds borderline-sociopathic in how it puts a nebulous group of underage people on a pedestal as being the children instead of just some children. "The" used in that way has a certain connotation of ownership and permanence, too; if you hire a pest exterminator, you refer to that individual as "THE exterminator" because one's chosen career field is usually a way of describing them that survives the test of time. Beyond that, you have a sense of ownership being that money changes hands, so you're effectively indebted to one another until both parties fulfill their end of the transaction. Kids, however, aren't either of those things, both growing out of childhood and owing a society of grown adults uninvolved in their conception (most of the time, at least) absolutely nothing. It seems to be the case that "the children" are little more than an anthropomorphic manifestation of what little innocence still exists inside of adults; are we truly caring about our underage members of society, or are pleas regarding them nothing more than a desperate attempt to grasp at our own dissipating sense of wide-eyed wonder as the coldness of the world slowly saps it from us and replaces it with jadedness?
As for finite time, is time truly finite? We experience time on a linear track, and yet we're never capable of seeings outside of its flow, with this coloring our judgment. Is it not possible—nay, probable given a certain inherent randomness to the universe—that time as we experience it doesn't exist like a table of dominoes, flowing endlessly in a single direction, but instead consists of an infinite number of snapshots haphazardly scattered around like Polaroids dumped onto a desk? If that were the case, then what dictates the length of a "moment" in one of these snapshots? Is each moment not effectively a boundless eternity all its own outside of time's flow? Do we not all simultaneously contribute to an ever-increasing number of eternities, our experiences in turn allowing us to be both their unwitting curators and source? Is your perceived finite time worth enough that you would condemn certain eternal moments to the abject nothingness of never having been?
That's a strange expression when you think about it, though—everyone always says "the children" instead of "our children," "those children," or any of the million other phrasings that would make more sense. Instead they're referred to with a detached, singular "they" that sounds borderline-sociopathic in how it puts a nebulous group of underage people on a pedestal as being the children instead of just some children. "The" used in that way has a certain connotation of ownership and permanence, too; if you hire a pest exterminator, you refer to that individual as "THE exterminator" because one's chosen career field is usually a way of describing them that survives the test of time. Beyond that, you have a sense of ownership being that money changes hands, so you're effectively indebted to one another until both parties fulfill their end of the transaction. Kids, however, aren't either of those things, both growing out of childhood and owing a society of grown adults uninvolved in their conception (most of the time, at least) absolutely nothing. It seems to be the case that "the children" are little more than an anthropomorphic manifestation of what little innocence still exists inside of adults; are we truly caring about our underage members of society, or are pleas regarding them nothing more than a desperate attempt to grasp at our own dissipating sense of wide-eyed wonder as the coldness of the world slowly saps it from us and replaces it with jadedness?
As for finite time, is time truly finite? We experience time on a linear track, and yet we're never capable of seeings outside of its flow, with this coloring our judgment. Is it not possible—nay, probable given a certain inherent randomness to the universe—that time as we experience it doesn't exist like a table of dominoes, flowing endlessly in a single direction, but instead consists of an infinite number of snapshots haphazardly scattered around like Polaroids dumped onto a desk? If that were the case, then what dictates the length of a "moment" in one of these snapshots? Is each moment not effectively a boundless eternity all its own outside of time's flow? Do we not all simultaneously contribute to an ever-increasing number of eternities, our experiences in turn allowing us to be both their unwitting curators and source? Is your perceived finite time worth enough that you would condemn certain eternal moments to the abject nothingness of never having been?
I don't know what it is but can I have some! And a few folks on this (or for that matter any) forum could use a healthy dose as well!
Would you believe I've never done drugs? When I was in 2nd or 3rd grade, I won a contest and got to go on a D.A.R.E. police ride during the middle of class. Saying no to drugs got me out of school once! I think I had to sell a bunch of things door-to-door, too. Either way, I also won a Star Fox watch. That doesn't have anything to do with anything, but it was a cheap little LED version of the first level and it was awesome at the time.
