GamingOblivion
Banned
Huber layin' down those truth bombs about Fallout 4
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Gametrailers Thread: Good Night and Good Game
- Thread starter Hasney
- Start date
Finished GT Live discussion and as much as this hurts to say, Brandon frustrated me a bit throughout. He just kept saying stuff about games that he didn't really know quite that much about and he completely killed some conversations by bringing up something irrelevant.
Also, that wasn't cool if Ben was the swing vote on the expansion if he hadn't even played Hearts of Stone. Should've only been between people who had completed both.
But overall, sounds like they made some good and tough decisions in the fairest manner that they could.
Edit: Also, I totally agree with Fallout 4 feels like it's nominated just for the sake of it.
Also, that wasn't cool if Ben was the swing vote on the expansion if he hadn't even played Hearts of Stone. Should've only been between people who had completed both.
But overall, sounds like they made some good and tough decisions in the fairest manner that they could.
Edit: Also, I totally agree with Fallout 4 feels like it's nominated just for the sake of it.
Unfortunately, it only seemed like maybe 2 people completed both expansions.Finished GT Live discussion and as much as this hurts to say, Brandon kind of annoyed me a bit throughout. He just kept saying stuff about games that he didn't really know quite that much about and he completely killed some conversations by bringing up something irrelevant.
Also, that wasn't cool if Ben was the swing vote on the expansion if he hadn't even played Hearts of Stone. Should've only been between people who had completed both.
But overall, sounds like they made some good and tough decisions in the fairest manner that they could.
Huber talks shit, but only when Ben's not on. We need an official shouting match between the two.
Anyway, i'm fine with how their GOTY went (whether i agree with some picks or not) the only argument i have problem with, is the idea of gameplay = combat, that Brad seemed to bring up when talking about Bloodborne.
I think if you mention how well a gameplay mechanic works, in Witcher you have to consider various mechanics that aren't combat as well.
But this is the old debate of "walking simulators are not games" at its core.
Anyway, i'm fine with how their GOTY went (whether i agree with some picks or not) the only argument i have problem with, is the idea of gameplay = combat, that Brad seemed to bring up when talking about Bloodborne.
I think if you mention how well a gameplay mechanic works, in Witcher you have to consider various mechanics that aren't combat as well.
But this is the old debate of "walking simulators are not games" at its core.
Huber talks shit, but only when Ben's not on. We need an official shouting match between the two.
Anyway, i'm fine with how their GOTY went (whether i agree with some picks or not) the only argument i have problem with, is the idea of gameplay = combat, that Brad seemed to bring up when talking about Bloodborne.
I think if you mention how well a gameplay mechanic works, in Witcher you have to consider various mechanics that aren't combat as well.
But this is the old debate of "walking simulators are not games" at its core.
There is way more about Bloodborne that I could have said then just its combat and game play (like i said, in goty meetings we argued for 3 hours on bb vs witcher) but we were pressed for time on GT Live. Witcher 3 is my 2nd game of the year and i totally acknowledge what it accomplishes in other areas besides game play. It all just depends what each person looks for in a game.
Barajas_201
Member
I see no lies, Huber nailing it.
There is way more about Bloodborne that I could have said then just its combat and game play (like i said, in goty meetings we argued for 3 hours on bb vs witcher) but we were pressed for time on GT Live. Witcher 3 is my 2nd game of the year and i totally acknowledge what it accomplishes in other areas besides game play. It all just depends what each person looks for in a game.
Yeah i understand the conditions and context of your statement.
However it is a sentiment that i argued with in various Bloodborne vs Witcher 3 threads (for whatever reason, a comparison that keeps coming up beyond GOTY discussion) and so wanted to point that out.
For the record, since it was brought up in the video, i think if anything Dragon's Dogma's combat system would adapt a little better than Souls' to the Witcher's encounter design.
Even though it still probably wouldn't fit in the lore like the actual W3 combat does.
Yeah i understand the conditions and context of your statement.
However it is a sentiment that i argued with in various Bloodborne vs Witcher 3 threads (for whatever reason, a comparison that keeps coming up beyond GOTY discussion) and so wanted to point that out.
For the record, since it was brought up in the video, i think if anything Dragon's Dogma's combat system would adapt a little better than Souls' to the Witcher's encounter design.
Even though it still probably wouldn't fit in the lore like the actual W3 combat does.
I agree, I think DD combat would fit much better.
Bloodworth
Member
We just had another yelling match about whether StarCraft II: Legacy of the Void is an expansion or not (since Matt wasn't there last night to counter Huber). Bottom line - LotV does not need any previous game for you to run it, nor does it include the previous content. You don't get the multiplayer additions from LotV without buying it either. It's a complete game in and of itself.
I think the concept of seeing LotV as an expansion is just a matter of perception because all three parts say StarCraft II in the title. And I know some people will say it's a "standalone expansion", but really what even is that if it's not just a game? What makes LotV different from a yearly CoD release, Majora's Mask, Far Cry 3: Blood Dragon, etc.? All of these games use existing parts to make something new and separate from what came before, as does LotV.
So in the end, despite whatever perception may be, I'm going to define expansion more narrowly as a release that requires a base game to play it - that's literally incomplete on its own.
I think the concept of seeing LotV as an expansion is just a matter of perception because all three parts say StarCraft II in the title. And I know some people will say it's a "standalone expansion", but really what even is that if it's not just a game? What makes LotV different from a yearly CoD release, Majora's Mask, Far Cry 3: Blood Dragon, etc.? All of these games use existing parts to make something new and separate from what came before, as does LotV.
So in the end, despite whatever perception may be, I'm going to define expansion more narrowly as a release that requires a base game to play it - that's literally incomplete on its own.
Very excellent points. I agree with you.We just had another yelling match about whether StarCraft II: Legacy of the Void is an expansion or not (since Matt wasn't there last night to counter Huber). Bottom line - LotV does not need any previous game for you to run it, nor does it include the previous content. You don't get the multiplayer additions from LotV without buying it either. It's a complete game in and of itself.
I think the concept of seeing LotV as an expansion is just a matter of perception because all three parts say StarCraft II in the title. And I know some people will say it's a "standalone expansion", but really what even is that if it's not just a game? What makes LotV different from a yearly CoD release, Majora's Mask, Far Cry 3: Blood Dragon, etc.? All of these games use existing parts to make something new and separate from what came before, as does LotV.
So in the end, despite whatever perception may be, I'm going to define expansion more narrowly as a release that requires a base game to play it - that's literally incomplete on its own.
brotkasten
Member
New GT Time is up, first episode of the year!
LiquidSolid
Member
Finished GT Live discussion and as much as this hurts to say, Brandon kind of annoyed me a bit throughout. He just kept saying stuff about games that he didn't really know quite that much about and he completely killed some conversations by bringing up something irrelevant.
Also, that wasn't cool if Ben was the swing vote on the expansion if he hadn't even played Hearts of Stone. Should've only been between people who had completed both.
But overall, sounds like they made some good and tough decisions in the fairest manner that they could.
Edit: Also, I totally agree with Fallout 4 feels like it's nominated just for the sake of it.
Why? Not only is it impractical to play everything that's nominated for an award, it's also missing the point of the awards. They're not meant to be definitive awards, they're meant to reflect the GT crew's preferences. If more of them played one game/expansion than another, then that vote is a good reflection of their thoughts.
Good show. Loved hearing that Ian brought his A game to the GOTY debate, taking notes and crushing their points one by one. He did us proud. I also loved Huber calling out Fallout 4.
The "RPG-ness" discussion was interesting and aligns with my own thoughts on the subject. There's also the point where even if you somehow managed to figure out exactly what a RPG is and isn't, what happens if a game is "more RPG" than another game but sucks? Does it still win that award then? I think it's a weird direction to try to head down for that category.
We just had another yelling match about whether StarCraft II: Legacy of the Void is an expansion or not (since Matt wasn't there last night to counter Huber). Bottom line - LotV does not need any previous game for you to run it, nor does it include the previous content. You don't get the multiplayer additions from LotV without buying it either. It's a complete game in and of itself.
I think the concept of seeing LotV as an expansion is just a matter of perception because all three parts say StarCraft II in the title. And I know some people will say it's a "standalone expansion", but really what even is that if it's not just a game? What makes LotV different from a yearly CoD release, Majora's Mask, Far Cry 3: Blood Dragon, etc.? All of these games use existing parts to make something new and separate from what came before, as does LotV.
So in the end, despite whatever perception may be, I'm going to define expansion more narrowly as a release that requires a base game to play it - that's literally incomplete on its own.
I agree with you but out of curiosity, what would you consider something like Driveclub Bikes, where you can choose whether to buy the standalone version or expansion version and there's a price difference between the two?
Bloodworth
Member
I agree with you but out of curiosity, what would you consider something like Driveclub Bikes, where you can choose whether to buy the standalone version or expansion version and there's a price difference between the two?
To be honest, even though I got a code for Driveclub Bikes, I haven't even gotten to mess with it. Considering the standalone version, I'd lean toward classifying it as a game. If they made all new courses for the bikes, that would strengthen that for me. If they just put bikes on the existing tracks, I might lean more towards just calling it an expansion.
One thing that actually ended up being unintentionally different this year is how we handled the category. The past few years, we considered all of a game's expansions in a bundle, - we would have likely grouped Driveclub Bikes in with everything else that came out for Driveclub this year. Splatoon kind of has the same thing going on with all the extra maps and modes, and Witcher 3 gave out a bunch of freebies too. I wonder if there's just so much of that kind of thing now that it's harder for those little additions to stand out. With such strong individual expansions to pick from, we ended up forgetting about that way of doing things entirely.
The only argument i have problem with, is the idea of gameplay = combat, that Brad seemed to bring up when talking about Bloodborne.
I think if you mention how well a gameplay mechanic works, in Witcher you have to consider various mechanics that aren't combat as well.
personally, bloodborne had me obsessed with it. there are things in the way this game is designed that i'd say are close to perfection in terms of gameplay mechanics.
I FUCKING LOVE how i started out shit and was getting wrecked and then by the end, the game had taught me how to be good at video games.
most importantly, there is an amazing risk / reward system to the gameplay. exploration versus spending/losing echoes. you are encouraged to explore the incredibly designed levels to get echoes to skill up and find new loot.. but there is a risk to it that if you die, you risk losing all your echoes.
and theres also the fact that the game is as hard as you want it to be based on summoning, npcs, and insight. its a gameplay mechanic that i cant think of being in any other games.
theres more to bloodbornes gameplay than just good feeling button mashing and rolling. you actively learn to be good at video games through the way the gameplay teaches you to play. there is a risk/reward system to the gameplay that encourages exploration but makes you think about it because of your echoes/levelling up mechanic. and finally, the gameplay is as hard as you want it to be due to the way difficulty can actually be spent as a currency (insight).
also. it has p4p the best good feeling button mashing and rolling.
Bloodworth
Member
Hey Blood, just curious if you think Infamous First Light is a game as that seemed more like a standalone expansion to me too. Sounds very similar to the LotV case.
That one's a pretty good example, as I think it's easy to argue for either side. The big, big difference I see between that and LotV is that First Light is taking the exact same chunk of city from Second Son and just putting new objectives into it, which is why my gut is to call it an expansion. Of course, you could totally just buy that and get your fill as many people have done. So I could totally be a stickler and say that it's a game.
Eh I think it's one thing to say that a game is better than Fallout 4, but it's a whole other thing to dismiss it entirely. There are large communities out there still playing and enjoying it, with people getting sucked into the settlement system alone. I think to say that the game gets in "on name alone" is a mistake.
*referring to Huber's argument towards the end of course
*referring to Huber's argument towards the end of course
LiquidSolid
Member
To be honest, even though I got a code for Driveclub Bikes, I haven't even gotten to mess with it. Considering the standalone version, I'd lean toward classifying it as a game. If they made all new courses for the bikes, that would strengthen that for me. If they just put bikes on the existing tracks, I might lean more towards just calling it an expansion.
Fair enough. I haven't played it yet either, so I'm not sure exactly how much they've added but based on the price, I'd guess it's just the bikes and a new event. It does have a new trophy list and its own DLC though, so it's a bit of a strange deal.
One thing that actually ended up being unintentionally different this year is how we handled the category. The past few years, we considered all of a game's expansions in a bundle, - we would have likely grouped Driveclub Bikes in with everything else that came out for Driveclub this year. Splatoon kind of has the same thing going on with all the extra maps and modes, and Witcher 3 gave out a bunch of freebies too. I wonder if there's just so much of that kind of thing now that it's harder for those little additions to stand out. With such strong individual expansions to pick from, we ended up forgetting about that way of doing things entirely.
That's funny but I can understand why you'd do that for 2015 in particular. If it were up to me, I'd probably split it up into two categories, one for Best Support and another for Best Individual Expansion, because I think they're both pretty noteworthy these days. That way you can acknowledge games that have been continually improved since they launched like Splatoon and Driveclub, as well as fantastic individual expansions like The Old Hunters and Hearts of Stone. But that would require adding another category and I'm guessing you don't want to add to the workload you guys already have.
Good GT Time episode. Loved the bet. Sorry Huber, I want you to win, but I think Bosman's going to get this one. Though Bosman's expectations for the NX seem so ridiculously high that he's probably setting himself up for a fall anyway.
Can't say I understand why Brandon and Huber were so upset over Kotaku leaking Assassin's Creed's every year though. If I had to pick between a leak or a boring (and buggy) as hell E3 demo, I'll go with the leak.
TheDarkKnight774
Member
Man Kyle is all over the road in this Ep. He thought last gen it was UE2? The hell?New GT Time is up, first episode of the year!
Edit: Oh man the NX bet is great. Both are great payoffs
Don was on point with the editing in the latest GT Live episode.
And one of the reasons l watch GT e.c.t rather then listen to the podcasts:
http://i.imgur.com/RWR9U4E.gifv
You would miss some of the inside jokes.
And one of the reasons l watch GT e.c.t rather then listen to the podcasts:
http://i.imgur.com/RWR9U4E.gifv
You would miss some of the inside jokes.
personally, bloodborne had me obsessed with it. there are things in the way this game is designed that i'd say are close to perfection in terms of gameplay “mechanics”.
I FUCKING LOVE how i started out shit and was getting wrecked and then by the end, the game had taught me how to be good at video games.
most importantly, there is an amazing risk / reward system to the gameplay. exploration versus spending/losing echoes. you are encouraged to explore the incredibly designed levels to get echoes to skill up and find new loot.. but there is a risk to it that if you die, you risk losing all your echoes.
and theres also the fact that the game is as hard as you want it to be based on summoning, npcs, and insight. its a gameplay mechanic that i cant think of being in any other games.
theres more to bloodbornes ‘gameplay’ than just “good feeling button mashing and rolling”. you actively learn to be good at video games through the way the gameplay teaches you to play. there is a risk/reward system to the gameplay that encourages exploration but makes you think about it because of your echoes/levelling up mechanic. and finally, the gameplay is as hard as you want it to be due to the way difficulty can actually be spent as a currency (insight).
also. it has p4p the best good feeling button mashing and rolling.
Those are all things Demon's Souls introduced.
Not saying it's a bad thing, mind you, even Witcher uses and makes great pretty well trodden gameplay mechanics, but for me, that particular aspect had wore out its impact when i got around to Bloodborne, having put several hundred hours in past games.
I loved Bloodborne, but personally it's the first time where i started to feel franchise fatigue.
On top of that i didn't really love the build restriction (compared to Dark Souls) as well as the more aggressive gameplay (good in theory) that promoted spamming R1 as a viable option a bit too much, again, compared to past games, then you have some other minor problems, like the bone headed fast travel design choice, or the loot being weak, or the whole Chalice segment of the game, which i find to be just terrible top to bottom.
These are the reasons why, personally, even though i loved the game overall, BB couldn't be my GOTY (3rd on my list, after W3 and MGSV).
But again, i totally think it's a perfectly legitimate choice as GOTY, especially if it was your first Souls experience.
Case in point, i bought First Light first (i think my first ps4 game, aside from Last of Us remastered, which was bundled) and had a blast with it, i loved it a lot.That one's a pretty good example, as I think it's easy to argue for either side. The big, big difference I see between that and LotV is that First Light is taking the exact same chunk of city from Second Son and just putting new objectives into it, which is why my gut is to call it an expansion. Of course, you could totally just buy that and get your fill as many people have done. So I could totally be a stickler and say that it's a game.
Because of it i later bought Second Son, but the whole thing had really worn out its welcome and i almost didn't finish it.
I guess in that sense i wish i had just got First Light.
brotkasten
Member
I loved the discussion and would be more than happy, if we'd get this every year, instead of a recording of the actual discussion. It was a shame that Ian and Ben couldn't be there, though.
I absolutely understand Huber's attitude towards Fallout 4 and I especially loved the point "what did it do for gaming", but without having played it, I still find it harsh to say that it shouldn't even be nominated, when you have a tonne of people who enjoyed it or are still enjoying it.
Aw, shit. Did we have to pick sides again? Because I totally missed that and don't want to be on the wrong team again. Boo, other guys! Booo!
I absolutely understand Huber's attitude towards Fallout 4 and I especially loved the point "what did it do for gaming", but without having played it, I still find it harsh to say that it shouldn't even be nominated, when you have a tonne of people who enjoyed it or are still enjoying it.
Good show. Loved hearing that Ian brought his A game to the GOTY debate, taking notes and crushing their points one by one. He did us proud.
Aw, shit. Did we have to pick sides again? Because I totally missed that and don't want to be on the wrong team again. Boo, other guys! Booo!
Don Draper's Hat
Member
Whatever happens with this NX bet we, the viewers, will win.
Aw, shit. Did we have to pick sides again? Because I totally missed that and don't want to be on the wrong team again. Boo, other guys! Booo!
#teambloodbornetilwedie
Die Squirrel Die
Member
Can't say I understand why Brandon and Huber were so upset over Kotaku leaking Assassin's Creed's every year though. If I had to pick between a leak or a boring (and buggy) as hell E3 demo, I'll go with the leak.
I wouldn't call it arrogance but I do think in that discussion both Huber and Jones seemed completely blind to the POV of the regular consumer, when complaining about Kotaku spoiling their hype over a reveal.
The scrutiny that Ubi now face over how they handle AC is well earned, and it wasn't just Unity that put them there. There have been rumblings for years about the negative effects of the annualisation of AC. ACR was a B-team filler game, ACIII was buggy, unpolished, poorly paced and finished Desmond's story in a completely unclimatic, nothing way. And then there was Unity and we all know what happened there. AC dev diaries shouldn't have to begin with the current team throwing the previous game under a bus to sell the consumer on how the next game won't be a mess.
Which is where we come to Huber and Jones. They play a disappointing game and sure, they may have a negative experience with it, but firstly they can just turn to the stack of games they've got piled up, some of which they may have even bought for themselves. Secondly though, since there jobs are in the gaming press, there is always some value to them in playing even a terrible, broken or disappointing game, because it adds to their knowledge that they bring to their work, for example, when they are sitting on a panel, discussing an issue, recording a podcast.
Most people don't get that. They play a game that Ubi has rushed to market and all they've got is an emptier wallet and maybe the hope that the trade in value is still decent. Huber and Jones complaining about their hype being spoiled is like complaining that there are too many steps to climb to get to the top of their ivory tower.
yeah wut
I mean, I'm usually on the 'battle lines should be drawn between the press and the publishers" side of things, but the line goes where one side of it is pro-business and the other is pro-consumer. I'm not on Jones's side when it comes to the whole Kotaku blacklist debate in general. There's a ton of value in having an outlet that's more than willing to eviscerate their reputation with content producers in an industry where those producers are habitually deceptive, anti-consumer, and do their best to manipulate the editorial process.
But, it's a case-by-case basis. You have to look at each leak and decide whether it's helping you or it's helping 'them' ('them' being either the developers or Kotaku itself). Imagine losing something like the Shenmue 3 announcement, or FFXIII on 360, or The Last Guardian's reemergence or any other game that made a show. Granted, none of these things leaked and we don't know what Kotaku did or didn't know, so maybe they're exercising a bit more editorial restraint than we're giving them credit for.
A new Assassin's Creed, even one that's skipping a year, is none of those things though. Honestly, that game should get leaked yearly, because their milking has turned the series into a non-event. But wanting to preserve reveal moments puts GT in an "ivory tower"? Come on, now. If you're playing a busted Ubi game, it's your own fault for Day 1ing it blind, and that's an issue that has zero relation to the discussion about reveals being robbed.
I mean, I'm usually on the 'battle lines should be drawn between the press and the publishers" side of things, but the line goes where one side of it is pro-business and the other is pro-consumer. I'm not on Jones's side when it comes to the whole Kotaku blacklist debate in general. There's a ton of value in having an outlet that's more than willing to eviscerate their reputation with content producers in an industry where those producers are habitually deceptive, anti-consumer, and do their best to manipulate the editorial process.
But, it's a case-by-case basis. You have to look at each leak and decide whether it's helping you or it's helping 'them' ('them' being either the developers or Kotaku itself). Imagine losing something like the Shenmue 3 announcement, or FFXIII on 360, or The Last Guardian's reemergence or any other game that made a show. Granted, none of these things leaked and we don't know what Kotaku did or didn't know, so maybe they're exercising a bit more editorial restraint than we're giving them credit for.
A new Assassin's Creed, even one that's skipping a year, is none of those things though. Honestly, that game should get leaked yearly, because their milking has turned the series into a non-event. But wanting to preserve reveal moments puts GT in an "ivory tower"? Come on, now. If you're playing a busted Ubi game, it's your own fault for Day 1ing it blind, and that's an issue that has zero relation to the discussion about reveals being robbed.
brotkasten
Member
Pay attention to the 3 minutes conversation before Kyle reveals that the Assassin's Creed leak came from 4chan and then the 3 minutes after.
Complete 180 of opinion, it was bizarre.
I thought that was weird, but I guess it's a clear difference if you're responsible for the leak or if you're simply confirming rumors from a message board.
I like to think that was Kyle being a sneaky moderator and directing the conversation in that direction, only to pull the rug from under their feet. But that would be mean, so I don't think it was intentional.
Hydrophobic
Member
I think either Huber or Bosman wins the bet this week. The speed runners seem to be giving themselves more time than they think they'll need. Also, Huber trying to prevent a cursed monkey paw situation by being super specific. But can you ever really outsmart the monkey paw?
RabbitNoir
Neo Member
Great GT Live & Time, super enjoyed them, although i would have loved to see Huber vs Ben on FO4.
How long till the clarinet show btw?
5 hours, and Kyle's streaming in 3
Supermanisdead
Member
someone better upload the whole clarinet thing to youtube. twitch does not play well with my internet.
RabbitNoir
Neo Member
Time to lock in bets:
Huber gonna pull a Bosman and weasel his way out with a loophole
or
Be a man and stand tall with the clarinet?
Stand tall
No loopholes for Huber, he's been practicing.
Die Squirrel Die
Member
I'm wondering if Huber and Bosman might need to get more specific in their bet on the NX release. IIRC the terms were just about when the NX releases, Bosman says 2016, Huber says 2017, but what if the NX has multiple hardware configurations? Say an NX handheld releases in Japan and NA in 2016, but Europe in 2017 and an NX console doesn't release anywhere until 2017, how would that be decided?
I'm wondering if Huber and Bosman might need to get more specific in their bet on the NX release. IIRC the terms were just about when the NX releases, Bosman says 2016, Huber says 2017, but what if the NX has multiple hardware configurations? Say an NX handheld releases in Japan and NA in 2016, but Europe in 2017 and an NX console doesn't release anywhere until 2017, how would that be decided?
Mario Party probably
I'm wondering if Huber and Bosman might need to get more specific in their bet on the NX release. IIRC the terms were just about when the NX releases, Bosman says 2016, Huber says 2017, but what if the NX has multiple hardware configurations? Say an NX handheld releases in Japan and NA in 2016, but Europe in 2017 and an NX console doesn't release anywhere until 2017, how would that be decided?
They talked about being able to purchase it and hold it in their hands. Blood also added "in america", so japan release wouldn't count.