JackKieser
-
Posts
550 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Articles
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by JackKieser
-
-
Look, we all play games for different reasons. Whether the story is meant to be secondary or not, for Injin it seems, at least for Zelda, for instance, the story comes secondary. There's nothing wrong with that; we all play games for our own reasons, and to each his own.
But, if a game is deliberately developed with story as a major point, like Twilight Princess or MP3, it's kind of a kick in the balls to the developer NOT to take the story seriously and give it a little consideration during gameplay.
Along that line, though, if story is meant to be a large part of the game, design wise, then the developer should also take care and make sure it is up to the highest standards of storytelling, or else it's a kick in the balls to the people playing, as if their standards come second to the designer's. If they don't want to do that, then its fine to just not put any story in. Look how many frigging GREAT games have little to no story at all.
It's all a matter of perspective and balance.
--Jack Kieser
-
Sorry man, but that's not what... most studies about game releases and sales say. The highest number of games being sold are in the categories of 'E Rated', 'Licensed', and 'Sequels'.
The fact of the matter is that we as the more immersed and hardcore of gamers see all sorts of great games. But walk into a Gamestop or EB and look at the shelves. Tell me how many games you see there that aren't BLATANT attempts at putting out a game for the sake of putting out a game. That's what is usually fueling the debate about the current relationship problems between designers and publishers; publishers only really want to greenlight projects that they feel have the least risk, which equates to things they've seen sell before. Hence, no drive for creativity.
Or rather, the designers WANT to be creative, but between publishers who tell them that creativity is too much of a risk, and politicians who try to scare designers into thinking that if they are too creative or out there, they might get scapegoated for something, they just don't see it as worth it anymore.
Game Informer did a great article about it, but I can't remember which issue.
[/offtopic]
--Jack Kieser
EDIT: Just read the last part about 'who cares about the story, anyways?' Um... anyone who has pioneered for either the ethical treatment of games as an art form or anyone who has fought Clinton or Lieberman about game regulation. We focus so much on technical stuff, like how pretty a game is, that we neglect the fact that, like it or not, games can tell stories, and damn good ones, now. Not to mention the fact that stories drive... many major titles these days. GoW anyone? Brutal hack-and-slash adventure game... that was driven by its story. Story can be very important if we let developers know that they are worth the time and effort.
-
Aninymouse... thank you. I'd actually never heard the term 'retcon' before I'd read your post, so thanks for introducing me, in a way, to it. And you're totally right.
Retro or any other studio that handles the Metroid franchise (or any franchise like it) has the right to flesh out the canon for that particular story, as long as it doesn't completely rewrite the history of the franchise into something totally different (i.e., Samus is actually a guy and never was a bounty hunter. In fact, she isn't even human!) or isn't so unintelligible that it makes a lack of story seem like a better option (btw, in case anyone got confused... I'm not saying that happened here. Just saying that it shouldn't.)
Retro, I must say, should be commended. For such a lack of story in the Metroid universe, the Prime games did a lot of good in adding canonical info and beefing up the story, regardless of a few flaws in execution. The log scans in all three games were amazing. ESPECIALLY in Prime 3. Good god, some of the Pirate scans... were beautifully written. It's stuff like that which gives me hope that gaming won't implode or self-detonate from creative stagnation (or whatever buzzword the ESA is using these days).
--Jack Kieser
-
That's why I think most people's attitudes towards the story are from the"Aeris shouldn't have died" line of thinking. When the icicle takes out Rundas, you are surprised, just as is Samus. It's a shock, and not what you wanted to see. You share Samus's frustration as she makes her shots after Ghor. It worked well, it just wasn't what people wanted to see. No warm fuzzies.
Also: "not only do we have another gameplay element". More elements are not always better. That just as easily could have disrupted the flow of the game or changed the feel too much for it to feel like Metroid.
Samus... was orphaned, lost her parents, raised by Chozo. The Chozo have disappeared. Adam and even the Baby Metroid were lost. To me, at the end as she sits outside her ship with her helmet off at Skytown and the flashbacks of the other Hunters that story element of their death seemed very fitting.
See, I know it doesn't seem like that, but that's not how I feel.
(I know the hunters needed to die; I just think the WAY in which they died and how Retro handled both the characters and Samus' relation to them was... off. Could have been better. Personally, I think Rundas' death was the best handled out of all of them.
Rundas was corrupted long before Samus had any clue what had happened to him, so it was fitting that it was such a surprise ending for him. Personally, I had that thread of hope that even though I was shooting the hell out of him, I could smoehow un-corrupt him; after all, I figured it would HAVE to happen eventually to Samus, so why not him.
And then the ice spikes.
The problems start with Ghor, in my opinion. Ghor still had SOME semblance of sanity. He was coherent and he was calculating. He was also a mechanoid, which while we know is still susceptible to Phazon, he still had the best chance of regaining his mind. His death could have been utilized thematically. Instead, he just went crazy as shit. Totally predictable, no twists, nothing to keep the player thinking, on his/her feet.
And then Gandrayda. As I've already said, Gandrayda could have easily been the most emotional of the hunter deaths (although, technically it was... but you know what I mean.). She was the one who was most connected to Aran: she was her direct rival. What better way to pull the ol' heart strings than with a tale of sacrifice, the rival giving her life to ensure... who knows what. Unfortunately, we'll never know, because she went out like a punk bitch just like the other two.
I guess what irks me is that we, as players, were NEVER worried about Samus. We knew what would happen. She'd kick DS's ass, get the hell out of there, and somehow be not corrupted at the same time. We never had a semblance of worry for Samus' fate. Retro had to have known this. So, all the hunters died in ways that were also indisputable. We knew what would happen to them, too. At least, they could have made it a tragic story of inevitability or something. A story of angst, where we try to stave off the inevitable, only to fail at every turn until we, broken and defeated, succumb to its will, only to be tragically saved in the end, unlike our comrades.
But nothing like that. Just a shallow, or at very, very least, predictable, story that manages to make the game cohesive enough, without doing anything extra. There might as well have been no story at all, and it would have been just the same. And that, I suppose, bothers me. From a design standpoint, it's sloppy work. Retro could have done better.
Even though they did a good job, for what it's worth.
(P.S.: About the added gameplay element: A ) as far as I'm concerned, the Prime series stopped feeling like Metroid, or at least felt less like Metroid than before, when Retro tried to inject an unnecessary overarching story to the mix in Echoes, and B ) as I said, it could have been done tastefully, bringing in story and character development to balance it out. Where there is a will, there is a way.) )
--Jack Kieser
And an edit for the above post: see, though, Retro brought this upon themselves. They chose to try to tell a story to us explicitly, instead of the implicit story in past Metroid games and in Prime 1. If you start something, you should finish it. Granted, they shouldn't have to give us everything, but there are important facets that leave the player with a sense of imbalance if not accounted for; its why cliffhangers piss people off so much. (Case in point, the DS's that come out of the hunters when they die. What did Retro do to explain that? Nothing. I thought that DS was absorbing their bodies. But nothing during the final battle explained that. If DS didn't absorb them, then why was she there? These are important questions that can never be answered, as this is the end of the Prime trilogy (or at least, the Prime story).
Backstory can be left to the imagination, but in-game story should be cohesive and explanatory. Or at very least, should support itself.)
-
I totally agree about the corruption thing. The instant I saw the biohazard scan in your ship, I figured that your Phazon level would be decided based on plot devices instead of your Hypermode uses. Then again, there are people who would use Hypermode so much that there would literally be no possible way they could survive to the end of the game... such as myself.
I tell you, the first time my Hypermode failed on me... I freaked out. I was all like, "Oh, shit. Time for me to go, huh?" And I died quick.
--Jack Kieser
-
Super Metroid. I'm not sure... exactly what you mean.
You start off, it's a solid story intro. First moments on Zebes, then a surprise Space Pirate intro. Zebes was revealed to be a Space Pirate home of operations once again. Later, You see evidence of what they were trying to do with the baby Metroid. Mochtroids, the empty Metroid Capsule, sand creatures in Maridia, etc. Then the final encounter is basically entirely a scripted story event.
I really wouldn't say that Super Metroid had no story, and the things that were there added a ton to its immersiveness.
How is Metroid Prime 3 any different? A "well thought out story with deep and evolving characters and situations that can't be predicted or disputed" is subjective. And sounds very much like "Aeris shouldn't have died" arguments.
EDIT: I had to make an edit because I was suddenly compelled to say that Fusion had a fantastic story. I think I've said that before.
Pretty much all spoilers here, so have fun with that.
(I'll give you that SM had storyline elements to it, but I don't think many people would say that it was a story-driven game. Most Metroid games aren't story-driven games, insofar as the story is not the most projected piece of the project. MP3, however, is entirely story-driven. Therein lies the subtle, but evident, difference.
And I'm sorry if this seems pretentious, but for the most part, a "well thought out story with deep and evolving characters and situations that can't be predicted or disputed" is not subjective; whether that story is good or not, however, is. That is not what I'm arguing here; I liked the story to Prime 3. It was a good story, and the tale they wanted to tell I liked. But, I didn't like the execution of that story. There were facets of the story that were weak. You can't possibly tell me that there was any serious about of character development in that story.
Sure, things HAPPENED to the characters. But did they evolve as people throughout the course of the game? Did we come to understand their emotions, their drives, their personalities, that is, past the minute amount we got in 3 or 4 log scans? More importantly, did we witness any of these changes, past the point of "Oh, noes! Teh Phazonz makes uz crazies!!" I argue that this was not the case; we did not get a chance to know the other characters; hell, we didn't even get the chance to know the character we were PLAYING as!
I watched every cutscene and got every log scan in the game, and I STILL can't tell if Samus felt even a shred of remorse for killing those other hunters. I don't know how it affected her, and she's the most important character in the story! We didn't get any information about her throughout the course of the game, other than being able to see the corruption spreading every time we used the scan visor (which, btw, was a good touch, and very creepy).
As for the whole "Aeris" thing... sure, did I want the hunters to die? No, I didn't. But, if their deaths were handled in different ways, it would have been ok. For instance, I think the scans indicate that Gandrayda might have been the last to turn; if that was the case, what if we got to play through a section of the Pirate Homeworld with her, seeing the corruption at work, but powerless to stop it? Eventually, she gets to the point when she knows there isn't much time left, tells Samus to kill her and that she is sorry for being such an Uberbitch, and then goes crazy. Samus kills her, sheds a tear, and somberly walks away after the boss fight. In that scenario, not only do we have another gameplay element (the fighting alongside another hunter), but we also witness an outside effect of the corruption first hand (besides the transparent corruption in Samus) AND we get insight into both of the characters.
There are ways that the story could have been a little beefier and could have been a little more cohesive and a little less predictable, which would have made for a better overall game. I don't expect everyone to agree with me (after all, whether it was a good story or not, as I said, IS subjective), but we should, I think, start holding designers accountable if they want to be storytellers, which I think it is evident that Retro was trying to tell a story. Yes, they did a very good job, for what is is worth... but just because MP3 was such a high profile game doesn't mean there isn't definite room for improvement.)
-
Ok, all good points about the lack of story in Metroid games... but we are forgetting a few things here. First of all, when dealing with immersiveness, which by the way is what Metroid has ALWAYS been good at, a number of factors have to be considered. Yes, gameplay is one of the largest, hence the great care taken for motion controls, especially in things like opening hatches and activating switches; but there are others that must be balanced.
You know why, I'm sure, most people are still rating Super Metroid over MP3? I'm willing to bet most people still think that game was more fun, but I think it has to do with experience. The experience in Super Metroid was the most cohesive of any of the Metroid games to date, with maybe Prime coming a close second (notice, still over Prmie 3, though), and it was due to a LACK of story.
In Super Metroid, no one CARED what the story was; they were playing blind, as far as story went, and that was fine. The game had a purposeful lack of story. That helped with the immersiveness because there were no "Oh, yeah right. Fuckin' bullshit." moments and no, "Well, I totally saw THAT coming." moments to take you out of the game. Prime 3, however, had both of these types of moments.
Either you have no story at all, or you have a well thought out story with deep and evolving characters and situations that can't be predicted or disputed. If a game has a crap story, or at least one that is riddled with holes and missed potential, the player will pick up on it, and it will break the 4th wall, thus utterly destroying immersiveness.
When I saw Rundas on Bryyo for the first time, I knew something was up; I just didn't know what. He came to my aid during the fight in Bryyo Fire and I thought, for a moment, that I had owed him again; then, he tried to kill me. I didn't see it coming, really; I was blindsided by his defection a little more than I should have been. But, from that point on, I knew what would happen to the other hunters. And, I was right. Immersiveness compromised.
When I saw Ghor's ship / suit in SkyTown, I figured he would defect; it was proof of my earlier assumption on Bryyo, as far as I was concerned. He has his free will, I would learn, but that was little consolation.
Then, when Gandrayda snuck up on me on the Pirate Homeworld, I was taken off guard again; I REALLY thought that guy was a marine. But, either way, what I knew would happen all along did. She defects, I kill her, and the story effectivly dies with her. No more characters, no more development, no more story (yes, we still had Samus, but I don't think it could be argued that she has ever had any character development in any game not called Fusion, and the Admiral, the only other main character... ha.).
I guess what I'm trying to say is that everyone says that the story doesn't really matter, that it isn't what you like about the game, whatever. But, just like a good story can make a game better than it is, a bad or flimsy story can make a game worse than it is. Super Metroid had NO story, so it COULDN'T interfere with the game's immersiveness. If Retro wanted that kind of success with this game, they should have just taken the story out a la SM and Prime 1 and left a good game alone, but they took the conservative path of game design and threw in a cohesive but still fractured story, which I feel hurt the game as a whole.
If you need any more proof, look at Echoes, arguable the least favorite in the series for most people. Also had the least cohesive and least dynamic story in the series, probably put there just to justify the Light/Dark dynamic and to make for some objective-based gameplay.
Story should work together with gameplay to make a better game; one isn't more important than the other.
(I would also like to thank everyone on this thread, because I think I found my research topic for this semester; Immersiveness and Story: A Study of the Metroid Saga.)
--Jack Kieser
-
Sorry, man. I'm studying to be a game designer; story is big for me. Yes, the game has amazing points that make it arguably one of the most amazing FPS(esque) games ever made, plus is the best use of Wii control that we'll see for a while.
But... Retro dropped the ball. This series was made as their epic saga, their huge trilogy. You can tell because of the level of story they have injected into a series that really never needed or had a rich story in its games. As far as epic sagas go... I was disappointed. As were many others who I talked to who played the game. The story was weak in too many areas in ways that could have easily been fixed.
As a designer, I know that story will play an important role in the development of the industry as a whole. We need high-profile games like this to REALLY focus on the storytelling aspect, as well as the gameplay aspect. For that reason, I wish Retro had stepped up a little. It was too conservative in its storytelling and the choices they made concerning the events in the game, which I felt detracted from such a great immersive gameplay exerience.
(Spoiler, btw: Not to mention, I had an emotional connection with the other hunters even by the end of the Norion section. I didn't want them to die, even though when that bitch on the G.F.S. Olympus told me about all our PEDs, I knew what was going to happen. I wanted to see their characters evolve as they dealt with the Phazon threat, both in the field, as well as in their bodies. Alas, nothing; Retro killed ALL THREE of them off without even flinching. )
MP3 is an amazing game, yes. But it DOES have faults and criticisms; I should think that it would be GOOD to point those out so that Retro or any other company could make a better game.
(For the record, I just listened to Wil Wheaton's PAX 07 keynote again, so I'm kinda bolstered right now... sorry about that. lol.)
--Jack Kieser
-
Wow... I almost don't know what to say.
...Oh, never mind, I figured it out. What in the great blue fuck are these people smoking?? I mean, it looks, awesome and fun, to say the least... but really. Damn.
--Jack Kieser
-
Yay for spoilers... they should really make a spoiler tag or something.
I agree with Big Boss on this one, especially about Gandrayda. You know, even though Samus is all badass and everything, why did they have to therefore assume that everyone else is NOT badass? Rundas may have seemed like a prick, but he was skilled. And had a strong will. Who says that he coudn't have fought off that corruption? Ghor wasn't even all organic! In fact, he barely had any organic components left in him (I think something like 5%, but don't quote me); I know that Phazon can affect machines, but if anyone could have fought it off, he could have. And Gandrayda... was a bitch. Sure. I'll give her that. But she was powerful. Her body could literally take on any form, as well as the qualities that form entailed. There are literally hundreds of ways that she could have staved off that corruption.
I'm sick of games making the lead character the only badass one in existance. Yes, Samus rocks. We can agree on this. But, she isn't the only one that rocks.
And while I'm ranting on story, what happened to them when they died? I mean, GREAT boss potential. Seriously. Even if they wanted to kill off the characters (which I, as you can tell, don't support), what about that flying Dark Samus that popped up every time you killed a hunter? Why did Retro not, I don't know, use that in the final fights? Have Dark Samus use some of thier stuff, but in new and refreshing ways? Come on, guys... step up.
--Jack Kieser
-
Ok, so I found the SkyTown lore (right the frick in front of me, of course), and now all I'm missing is the Pirate scan between "Victory and Loss" and "Disaster at Elysia".
And of course, that last damn Energy Tank. Still can't figure out where the hell it is.
As always, if anyone can give me any info that helps me out, Friend Vouchers a plenty.
--Jack Kieser
-
Ok, so I beat the game about 2 hours ago, but with a 99% completion rate (so as not to get the 100% ending). Only problem is... I really can't find the last energy tank. I figure it's in the final area (sorry, no spoilers here), but I can't find it anywhere.
Also, has anyone found all the SkyTown lores? Because I'm missing one of the scans and I can't for the life of me figure out which room its in. I don't know what the lore is called, but it's the one right below "Federation" on the list.
If anyone can find this stuff, free vouchers for the help, I guess. I need a lot more, so I can only guess how many everyone else needs. (I have 11 to give, so if you need them, let me know)
--Jack Kieser
-
Oh snaps! A bitch gonna die!
... I just wish the boss wasn't Petey. As far as Mario 'staples' go, he's pretty lame, IMO.
--Jack Kieser
-
Hey, if it's making it easier, who cares? Besides, it has nowhere near the reach that ZSS's whip has. I'm thinking she's gonna be more of a pain tether-recovery-wise than Link will. Now, if he had the double Clawshot and could scale walls... then I would agree.
Let's just hope for cheapness-sake that his grab doesn't auto-aim, too.
--Jack Kieser
-
What interests me is the part about charging the spin attack. If you can charge it in the air (and while you charge, you fall slightly slower, as if delayed), I wonder if you'll go up more?
Plus, if the bombs are made by Barnes... maybe we'll get different kinds as well. As a Link player, the possibilities are intriguing, indeed...
--Jack Kieser
-
So, I'm wondering... Sakurai says they'll share the same damage (which is good; they could be seriously broken otherwise), but that the Pokemon have another "stat" named "stamina"... is he just talking about how well they can take a hit, or might there be something else we're missing here. This could be a reference to how long you can have a particular Pokemon in battle before having to switch... but that's just my guess.
--Jack Kieser
-
Holy fuck... I blew a load when I saw this update. And I think I just did again...
...
...yeah. I did. Really, the possibilities that this opens up are amazing. How will damage be handled? After all, it seems that 'Ash' (I'll call him that for lack of a name) can switch out his Pokemon at will, so if Charizard gets 30%, Squirtle gets 10%, and Ivysaur gets 45%, will it all be cumulative, or will each Pokemon have a separate damage counter? Can Pokemon be knocked out (as in, can they faint)? Are these the ONLY 3 that can be used, or will they add more before the game's release? Does this mean that these 3 aren't in the Pokeball item?
Why would they want to have to make 3 movesets for one character?
All valid questions that I hope will be answered soon.
--Jack Kieser
-
I know that movie was tool-assisted and all... but I feel like less of a person after watching that thing. I don't care how much they slowed it down or how many save states they used. The guy playing that has some ridiculous skill.
--Jack Kieser
-
I don't think it would really help to run around with it like Sakurai mentioned without being able to attack as well (I assume when you try, you'll just throw the ball again), but a lot of these could really screw with a match. I'm thinking Togepi's darkness move-style from Melee.
--Jack Kieser
-
Pssh... for THAT wait, I was expecting something a little less... gimmicky.
--Jack Kieser
-
You don't really mean that, do you Strike?
...
...
...
...or do you?
--Jack Kieser
-
*dances furiously*
... It would help if it wasn't so damn late. But if the update gods demand a dance, so it shall be done.
*dances more*
--Jack Kieser
-
Man, if this isn't the latest I've ever seen Sakurai at updating the Dojo, it's probably a REALLY close second.
--Jack Kieser
-
So... the Ice Climber stage with different textures? And ladders... yay.
We've never seen climbing like that in Smash before, though, so I guess that's cool.
--Jack Kieser
Super Smash Bros. Brawl
in General Discussion
Posted
I'm going to assume that the movie isn't really only 1.5 seconds long, and that the site is just WAY to overloaded.
By the way, sendspace blows; is there a more reliable place the movie is at?
--Jack Kieser