quote:

Sorry, but I insist to say PoP became nothing more than a mainstream saga like those Nintendo or current capcom games. T2T was just a proof of how low the saga can dive, but the new one lacks of any originality or good execution.Just repepition of the older games, like Zelda, like Mario, like any other mainstream game.
The only thing worth were the graphics, though I hate cell shated games.

Well said

quote:

Originally posted by Tristan_129:

quote:

Originally posted by prince_pk:
There is more to the game than meets the eye, so i believe. Ubisoft must have an explaination of everything. We just saw few pieces in jigsaw puzzle. We don't even know how will they fit, how'z the complete puzzle like.
So I'll have to wait for the next games {{{[ON PC[}}} (suck DLC :@ ) to find out the truth of all the confusion.

Uh,hello?
So you see that Two Thrones has a ''message'' ?
PoP just simply became a game. Or it became just a mindless game-saga after WW. When a company decides the course of a game and deracinate the former staff except the artistic people from SoT/WW, then yeah, the game doesn't have any message.

I'm lost here are you trying to say that T2T and POP NG don't have messages simply because they have a different staff? I also don't understand what you mean by POP simple became a game. For me that's all POP ever was is just games. I'm a big POP fan but personally I never thought of POP as anything that special or that it was something more to me. I simply saw POP games as games that I highly enjoyed playing.

Oh and don't believe that just because something is mainstream that can't be good. Imo I think that what Mario and Zelda do is just use same formulas but add new ideas to them. Sometimes it's good to keep things the same and just improve on what's already there. Repetition doesn't always have to equal bad.

@ Tristan
sorry but T2T was just a proof of how high the saga can climb, it was a gorgeous game
and I agree with darkfarah on what she said above

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Grafferu,

quote:

Originally posted by Grafferu:

quote:

Originally posted by Tristan_129:
T2T was just a proof of how low the saga can dive

sorry but T2T was just a proof of how high the saga can climb, it was a gorgeous game
and I agree with darkfarah on what she said above

With dear respect of your arguments, grafferu, but I think this is where our opinions split apart.

Like it usually does when it comes down to T2T and NG. I don't know if it's getting OT,but I guess you leave me no choice.

I lived through the game saga since I was 5 and I was always happy with the new waqys of execution of each game, even WW was really original in gameplay and story and had at some point philosophical and ancient content.

But, it broke down with the change of KB to T2T.

Kindred Blades was an independent project organized by Mallat. Maybe it used the same gameplay of it's followers SoT and WW, but it went storywise, themewise and philosophical wise it's own course.And some nice promised updates like environmental freedom, epic experience in Speedkill and the badassery of the (white haired) Dark Prince.

When fanatic SoT fans literally flamed the game on many forums, Ubisoft decided to break down the independence and cleaned the half of the staff and 'promoted' Mallat to the GEO.And then they took just some N00b who only did Handy games just to have more controll over the project. And with a fast redesign and a forced implementation to go 'back to it'S routes', T2T was born:
with a heavy loss of story elements, character developement and dynamics, loss of graphical value(just watch the goddamned E3 presentations and you'll know what I am talking about) and worse, gameplay. Seriously, the gameplay in T2T sucked and was not like it was promised.

Just in case if you don't get it what I am talking about:
T2T made POP to a cheap Main Stream saga.I rather call it the (great) seminal catastrophe of the PoP-franchise.

No more having each game it's own course(see SoT and WW), KB was forced to go back to a SoT-theme which didn't even fitted in the actual story. And this is how I define Mainstream:
Just repititions of certain plot points, ,characters and themes(See Mario and Zelda).
Maybe even gameplay, but I come to that in NG.
T2T was just a cheap SoT-copy and anyone who played it can admit that. Vizier tries to take over the world, Prince stops it ,saves the world and the princess. How original is that?Oh,and just to make sure to let the game still take it's 'own course' and add the DP only ugly redesigned just to make sure no one noticed that the game was changed comepletly in it's outcome. [/sarcasm]

And what did KB offer? I leave that question open for you ,so that you can go to my goddamn youtube account and watch the goddamn videos about KB.And try to read some reviews from and before E3,and you can see what the game really intended.Make yourself an own interpretation of it, I have mine.


Now we come to NG. Like I said, this game is just another main stream game. I like to quote Yahtzee from Zeropunctation that NG is just a ''Golden Eggs laying Duck(SoT and earlier games) which was turned into pieces but then sticked up again to make a new duck(NG) only that the duck is dead on the inside.''
And this is just it. Maybe adding some Persian gods to let the game look original, but it's just the same **** we saw in the previous PoP-games before.

Combat system was taken from the first PoP-game, but only graphicaly improved.
Jump and Run system same from SoT, alittle advanced, but buggy and unenjoyable, and nothing new anyway.
Dialogues-idea taken from SoT, but toally americanized which makes my stomache curl.
Environmental value with backtracking from WW and SoT, but Cell-shaded quality(I HATE IT!).

Mysterious wanderer ending up in a new place and ends saving the world and the Princess...uh,hello, is that new?

See what my point is? The game lacks of any originality and just took stuff from previous games not to make the effort to make something new, and stole ideas from Shadow of Colossus. Just a graphical improvement, nothing more.

It's like Zelda,like Mario,like Resident Evil 5, it's like any goddamn Mainstream game!

And I don't see any philosophical value or 'secret message' in it. By Ormazd, the game didn't even had to do with Persian Mythology at all except using the names of Ahura Mazda and Ahriman.

And i doubt it will have any 'secret message' in the next game. I predict that NG-2 will just be like NG-1 with Ben Mattes still in charge as a puppet from Ubisoft to do whatever they ask.

If you liked T2T, then it just has too do that you had the SoT-theme in it,right?
Not because of the graphical value, or the gameplay, just you just had your (forced) SoT back in it, huh?
Then you are no better than those Zelda fanboys, who denies any reforms in the game saga of Zelda and just want always the same **** over and over again.
I stopped playing any Zelda game after Wind Walker when I reaized that is the same ****. And it also goes to Resident Evil. I love RE:4, but RE:5 was just damn boring for me because it was the same! SO this saga is also dead for me.
Like PoP. I am just here because I have many sympathisants around.

Get my PoV now?

Well Tristan I read your post and what I said earlier still applies for it. I understand you want all the game series you play to completely original and new, but you gotta understand that there are some things that don't need alot of changing. I know this is going sound crazy to you but some people like playing the same thing over and over.


They know they are playing the same thing again but they still like it and you don't have to be a fanboy or fangirl to think like that. SOT all it was about a man and a woman trying to save the world from a great evil. That idea has been done before but it was done differently is the point. That's all most games do is just take an idea and build up on it.

There's nothing wrong with taking ideas especially if they're good ones. Someone can say they don't like God of War simply because they felt that after they played WW it was same thing. They share alot similarities and ideas but they're both still original in their own way. All games are repetitive what you do in the beginning of a game is what you do trough out the whole game. It was same thing over and over and again but that's what made it fun right? The same can go for game series as well. So what I'm saying is that most games are mainstream if you think about it yes even SOT and WW. The time powers in SOT and WW, I played a game with that idea before, it was called Blinx.

Did I mind no because it was done differently in SOT and WW even though it was same idea and concept. Just like TV Shows their episodes makes them mainstream. DBZ is good example of what I mean. Someone came in and made that horrible abomination to the franchise called DB:E. The makers tried to do something that what you want in games series and their result was a bunch of disappointed long time DB fans who wanted to see the same thing again but with real actors (myself included) . Is like what I said before repetition isn't always a bad thing because sometimes people want the same thing.

*reads Tristan's part...*
@Tristan: Now I understand you man, I kinda feel exactly the same way with T2T, I wont lie to you, I kinda liked the game and its features, but I always felt it wasnt the conclussion that was originaly intended for the trilogy. And I letally condemn the new additions to the PoP team because of the severe modifications to the original plan (Kindred Blades), I guess it was a terrible mistake, but thats done and over with by now.

@Farah: You know, from all the people who has debated something with me in here you're the very best ... [regarding what you said on the past page... thanks! you know it]
Now, on this page, I definitely gotta agree with you and support your point about those "repetitions"; Id like to make a brief analogy for this; PoPSoT and Gears of War.
When Gears of war appeared, it was shocking, it was a game like no other before, it had the basics every shooter had, but they were innovated and executed masterfully. The game was a success, and a second part was definitelly in order; when that happened, Gears 2 offered what was already good on Gears 1, but it also improved, added and experienced new elemenets which worked just fine in gameplay. The result was obvious, another success.
The same happened with PoP (I wont obviously mention it again ), but what definitelly ruined what SoT and WW managed to built was the change of a big and influential part of the dev team, and that happened in such an inconvenient moment (because of the stage in which the game was on development). I guess all of us or almost all of us could agree that T2T/KB could've been better under Yannis and the other members control, but as I said, thats over and done with it.
EDIT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Another useful example for this matter is C0ck of doody 4 and C0ck of doody 5... The game may try to be the same, but when the dev-team or a part of it is different, one of them will definitelly suck or it will be inferior to the original team work, just like any C0ck of doody developed by Treychard

Now, about the topic of this thread...
No comments right now, Ive written enought ...

Lol thanks les people always did say I should of been on a debate team and your welcome. What I was saying to Tristan I necessarily debating though. I agree with just about everything he said really especially about T2T. I was so mad to find out they changed how the DP looked he looked like he had fight with someone with a flamethrower. I could rant about it but Tristan seems like he already did that for me. All I was trying to say is that somethings are better left unchanged that's all.

Yes I agree with everything you said about Gears, to a person who's never played it, it looks like another shooter but it's something totally different. I was beginning to feel like tristan when playing shooters, starting to feel like they were all the same. Well Gears made me love shooters again. Great story, gameplay, and characters hell I can't even explain how awesome it was right now. Which reminds me I got to play Gears 2 again to get all my achievements back that's not going to be fun lol. Oh and hate COD4 and 5 it seems like all these noobs want every FPS to be like it. Saying how that every time a new FPS comes out, it needs the control scheme of COD4, they act like lazy gamers that don't want to adapt.

You know I hate ME but I'm still trying to play because I still don't think I'm giving a fair chance. I love RPGs,shooters, and sci fi so that's why think I'm not giving it a chance and I plan on getting ME2. ME2 might have same ideas has the first but there being improved so that they can be even better. Now back to what tristan was saying, like I said he really is right about all he said I just voiced my view on the matter. Still it's how he feels and it's his opinion like you said before. I'm not going to be some close minded jerk and not even try to understand he's reasons for feeling that way. So Trist don't take my response the wrong way alright be cool.

@Tristan:

" Pheeeeeeew......that was a long post....couldn't agree more ... You said exactly what i had in my mind. I was so disappointed that i never played pop 2008. They made pop 2008 unrealistic .... made him superman...... ... i don't want to talk about it ...it's been said over and over by many fans.....

When they decided to make Sands Of Time there were seven core team members who actually made it happen and i think they were not involved in WW and TT. This team is also responsible for assassin creed 1. Really talented guys... i wish they come back to reinvent the pop franchise."

How do you know?

quote:

Originally posted by KZarr:
How do you know?

interviews........

quote:

Originally posted by habid_m:

quote:

Originally posted by KZarr:
How do you know?

interviews........

ownz'd

Video games have no messages.They're not bought for the story or the characters or the settings or the villains.They're bought just to be played.Simple as that.

quote:

Originally posted by mboltevski:
Video games have no messages.They're not bought for the story or the characters or the settings or the villains.They're bought just to be played.Simple as that.

Pong days are over, are you aware of that?

The industry evolves... Games aren't what they used to be anymore. They're becoming more powerful, more deep and unique.

If you play Prince of Persia just because of the gameplay then you're not a POP fan... Let alone a gamer.

quote:

Originally posted by mornegroth:


If you play Prince of Persia just because of the gameplay then you're not a POP fan... Let alone a gamer.

People still just play games because of:
1) Gaemplay
2) Graphics

Why do you think Main Stream games are so popular? Also, 1P-shooter and those co-op games and ''Killer''games are no difference.

Jesus, there are so many underaged kids who play just games because of killing time or people. They don't care about the message.

I guess this is when games with 'message' divides itself from games with no 'message'.

It's like the vast difference popularity culture for mindless and manipulative entertainment and literature culture in the times of the 17th.

Fine you have your opinions for saying games are art.For me they're not.

I dont place them in the same rang as films,books,paintings or other forms of art.

A blogger once had a interesting opinion about this issue.I'll try to find it and put it here.

Till then peace.

quote:

If you play Prince of Persia just because of the gameplay then you're not a POP fan... Let alone a gamer.

I have to agree with this gameplay is important but so is the story. Unless it's maybe a sports game like maddan or party game like mario party or GH then that really doesn't apply.


Also trist you say main stream games like you call them are popular because of just their gameplay and graphics. One of the games you called mainstream earlier was RE5. I can assure you lots of people don't like that game. Many people got turned off from buying it after playing the demo simply because you can't run and shoot. Only the true fans like me bought it because of the story. Also if underage kids don't care about the message in any game at all, then that doesn't divide games with messages to games with no messages. To underage kid a game is a game so your "non main stream games" are no different to them.

Just the other day my god brother wanted to play my god of war psp game s game that doesn't really have a deep message but it has a deep storyline. I asked him why he and he said because it looks cool lol. He says that about POP SOT too and if he can, he'll skip the cutscenes just so he can play the game. He won't even try to listen when the game tries to tell him what to do. Of course that's when I cut him off and say that he better not come to me telling me that he needs help because I'm not helping him.

@ Tristan
I honestly don't know how you can state that T2T came with a heavy loss of story elements, character development and dynamics, graphical value, gameplay...I personally think it's the exact opposite, but that's just me
the you said "T2T was just a cheap SoT-copy and anyone who played it can admit that" ... well I played it and don't admit that, no way, there goes your argument
and maybe you don't remember but just like T2T, the SoT has the same plot, Vizier tries to take over the world, Prince stops it ,saves the world and the princess, so if T2T isn't original, then the SoT is no better, I personally think both games rocked
about KB and NG games, why did you even get into that ? we were talking strictly about the SoT Trilogy
anyways, in the end I have to answer your last question "If you liked T2T, then it just has too do that you had the SoT-theme in it,right? Not because of the graphical value, or the gameplay, just you just had your (forced) SoT back in it, huh?" the answer is NO, hell no, like I said above, I loved the gameplay, graphics, new moves, Dark Prince, chariot race, all the new features, story, everything else, T2T was a gorgeous game

@ darkfarah
couldn't said it better myself

@Morne:Whether the game has incredible graphics,or awesome story,or incredible VA,or top notch AI,it never changes it's essence-to play it.

"Gamers do not play games because of their stories"

This line belongs to a blogger text that I intend to translate(hopefully good) and post it integraly here.

Till then cheers and be positive.

exactly
when I first play a game I usually have no clue what the story is, I play it because I've seen some gameplay footage and liked the way it looked, then after I start playing I find out what the story is and like it/dislike it

@Farah: LOL! you really should be on a debate team *reads rest of her post*
Give a chance to ME... Something may hit you soon, and yeah ME2 looks like it will be hell of a ride
@Bobby and mboltevski: I dont have the money to buy all the games I see like some sexless geeks do, I have to decide carefully what to play, and I always check both story and gameplay before buying something, and I have NEVER bought a piece of crap game blindly... POPNG was the only exception and its a mistake it wont happen again ; Now, the opinion of a blogger isnt enought to justify "Gamers do not play games because of their stories", thats just a generalization: generalizations are not precise, and are not absolutes either they are mainly resources to give a title to a text or to used to start a calculation/investigation ; I play games because of their stories, I dont play brainless games without a little bit of story as background (well, maybe UT3), so I'm way out of that blogger's cheesy generalization [never believe or swallow everything you read, create your own judgement after reading different points of view at least]
Now, games are deep and games got messages... only good ones of course, dont expect to see much from PoPNG or Fifa08 , good games from cool studios, with years under development and with a nice story usually carry messages within, but that depends on everybody's perception; that's another story.
I also consider games are a different and new kind of "art", why? because not anybody can create them... Games require talented people, skills, passion, and effort to get them done, its pure teamwork... The day a random guy like you or me, or a kid out there in the streets is able to create a game alone without an effort, that thay I'll consider games just a simple entertainment source, meanwhile, I'll consider and appreciate them as a different kind of "art" period.
@morne: I agree with ya man, as usual... (or mostly )

Now about the main topic of this thread... bah, I dont give a crap by now, nothing interesting about it yet