Resident Evil 6. 6/10

[EvilRyu2099]

Well UT and the games prior had similar elements which current FPS games are lacking.. You had non regenerating health and being able to hold multiple weapons.. You also had stuff you had to explore without it being hinted and none of the stages were linear either.. You don't get this as much and to me it's a shame.. For instance even in a game like Battlefield.. What's the purpose of medics when you have regenerating health? Other than to regenerate faster.. I agree with your latter points 100%..

[ice445]

I did play the game, and it was mediocre for sure. But despite the fact it's a failed hybrid abortion of a game it's still about as playable as Duke 3D today. Mechanics aren't really something that makes a game fun. Doom is cool and all, and it's enjoyable in short bursts. But yeah, it's Doom. Same with the original quake. I can tolerate the later ones although I've always been a UT 99 kind of guy. That game is the pinnacle of arena shooter.

Mechanics don't make a game fun? What point is there in games if the mechanics suck? That's the same as saying a platformer without platforming is just as fun. May as well watch a pretty animated movie in that case. UT is great because of it's mechanics!

Quake, Doom, or Duke aren't arena shooters. More like first person maze games with lots of shooting. I can understand why somebody wouldn't like them, but, it's a bit strange that you'd like UT and not them...

I should have clarified. I mean, as long as the mechanics are acceptable, a game can still be good. I'm not saying the games we're discussing (excluding DNF) don't have good mechanics. But at the same time, good mechanics alone don't make a game great. I mean I'm not going to downplay Doom's historical significance or anything, it's just that I'm (and probably you as well) are used to newer additions to the genre.

Anyway let's just forget about DNF. Bad example. My ultimate point is that FPS games haven't really gone backwards. Sure, the days of uber complex mazey levels and no hint system are gone, but that's not really a bad thing in my opinion. Not that I want my FPS games to be like CoD where it's just a braindead trigger fest, but I'd rather not get lost constantly. If I wanted that I'd play an RPG.

Also, when I say I like UT 99, that also includes the original Unreal. I wasn't trying to say I prefer an MP designed game over an SP one. Even still, UT 99's single player was still somehow awesome, and felt like a legitimate adventure.

[Erik_Twice]

But at the same time, good mechanics alone don't make a game great.

I can't think of any other reason why Chess, Tetris and Robotron are great other than their mechanics being great.

Sure, the days of uber complex mazey levels and no hint system are gone, but that's not really a bad thing in my opinion.

I have never gotten lost in Quake, or Doom. I would also wager that if you need to put a hint system in your game you are doing something wrong when it comes to level design.

[Xeogred]

Yes please emphasis the difference between UT and Unreal, it's huge. That was a very confusing argument. lol

[Menegrothx]

If you think about it though, what is being a critic really all about? Isn't it essentially just a job where you get paid because someone decided that your opinion is more important than everyone else's? I mean, what really qualifies someone to be a professional reviewer or critic?

Your opinnion is more important if you are a qualified critic. That includes having vast knowledge of what you talk about (whether it's wine, movies or video games) and expertise (you know how to write a review, you know how to analyze and review the product in a professional and objective manner). A person who has played RPGs ever since the days of Ultima 0 and Wizardry 1 and played (or atleast extensively tried out) allmost all of RPGs that have ever been released and really knows how good RPGs work (game mechanics wise), what are the high peaks of RPG storytelling and writing and so on is more qualified to review a RPG than a person who has played Final Fantasy VII, X and XII and Skyrim. A person who knows the genre well is better qualified to make a statement about a games quality than a person who has very little comparison points (=hasn't played many games of the genre) and weak understanding of the genre as a whole.
So pretty much what RyaN said

One would hope that, regardless of personal preference, a critic at least has a very broad knowledge of what makes good game design. That's really the only requirement in my eyes.

You can't say that all video game reviewers these days are "professionals", but there are incompetant people in most careers starting from teachers and cops, so that doesn't give you the right to delegitimize the career as a whole.

My ultimate point is that FPS games haven't really gone backwards. Sure, the days of uber complex mazey levels and no hint system are gone, but that's not really a bad thing in my opinion. Not that I want my FPS games to be like CoD where it's just a braindead trigger fest, but I'd rather not get lost constantly.

Have you ever played System Shock 2 or Deus Ex?

[Erik_Twice]

I mean, what really qualifies someone to be a professional reviewer or critic?

Making a convincing, accesible argument about why a certain piece of art is or isn't interesting or well made is good criticism so I would wager a good reviewer would be someone who consistently makes good convincing arguments to explain why art is or isn't interesting.

[dsheinem]

I mean, what really qualifies someone to be a professional reviewer or critic?

Making a convincing, accesible argument about why a certain piece of art is or isn't interesting or well made is good criticism so I would wager a good reviewer would be someone who consistently makes good convincing arguments to explain why art is or isn't interesting.

Exactly. Contrary to what a lot of people seem to think, not all opinions are of equal validity or value. Good criticism is good argument. Good argument derives from melding strong critical thinking skills with experience and expertise into communication that resonates with the audience.

[ninjainspandex]

Now only if that COD crap gets the same treatment.

The recent COD games are all pretty solid FPS games in my experience. For what they try to do - provide a modern or historical warfare-based FPS that emphasizes multiplayer yet contains a solid single player mode - they do it really well...

I agree call of duty gets a bad rap, I find it funny how franchises that become extremely popular suddenly get dubbed the worst series of all time. I assure you if the game was terrible it wouldn't be one of the best selling game franchises of all time. Sorry for derailing the thread.

[MrPopo]

I assure you if the game was terrible it wouldn't be one of the best selling game franchises of all time. Sorry for derailing the thread.

I'll direct your attention to Hanson, the Backstreet Boys, and other acts of the late 90's.

[dsheinem]

I assure you if the game was terrible it wouldn't be one of the best selling game franchises of all time. Sorry for derailing the thread.

I'll direct your attention to Hanson, the Backstreet Boys, and other acts of the late 90's.

But they are good at what they do and should be judged next to other kinds of like acts...no?