|
Post by zzz on Jun 1, 2009 22:59:03 GMT -5
Naw, man, s'all cool.
And dude, Power Instinct is fucking awesome (off topic, I know).
|
|
|
Post by kal on Jun 2, 2009 1:54:08 GMT -5
But we are in agreement I think that the article is too lean on game content. I'm all for articles of however but if they're going to be *the* article on a game they should at least talk about the game a little.
Also thinking about it Bloodstorm also had other then whats been mentioned...that odd Power Obtainment thing like Megaman for winning a battle as well as that funny password system.
|
|
|
Post by zzz on Jun 2, 2009 2:40:22 GMT -5
Stupidity + blood + guts + crap + inane attitudes that dominated pop culture in America circa 1992 = All of the content of Time Killers.
Sequel to Time Killers + more of the same crap = All of the content of Bloodstorm.
Entire Ninja Clowns section = Totally off topic WTF.
So no, I don't think it's too lean on game content, per se. If it ain't genuinely relevant then it doesn't need to be mentioned. And there really ain't anything else that's genuinely relevant about Time Killers.
Now if he feels that the Bloodstorm section could stand a spit shine then I'm all for that. But if he does do that then I think it's important to keep the style and tone of the article consistent and to stick to what's actually interesting about the game. But hey, that's just me.
And as several people have mentioned, the Ninja Clowns part is lean on not sucking. That, and it's very rarely on topic. I personally never would have even written it, but that, again, is just me.
|
|
|
Post by dooz on Jun 2, 2009 6:39:40 GMT -5
He made light of Rihanna getting beat up, too. That's the trouble with "edgy" material. More often than not, it isn't funny and you just end up looking bad. Actually, I thought it was hilarious. I think that perhaps a little more about the game should have been revealed in the articles, but over all they suited the games perfectly. Really there isn't too much to be said about them other than that they are gory and totally immature. So was the article. I guess what I'm trying to say is that people take this shit too seriously. Or maybe that I'll never grow out of dick jokes. However, the addition of Ninja Clowns makes the article more about the company, rather than TIme Killers/Bloodstorm, and I think the title should reflect that.
|
|
|
Post by zzz on Jun 2, 2009 7:04:49 GMT -5
Really there isn't too much to be said about them other than that they are gory and totally immature. So was the article. I guess what I'm trying to say is that people take this shit too seriously. This pretty much says it all. The underlined part especially.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 2, 2009 7:15:19 GMT -5
But we are in agreement I think that the article is too lean on game content. I'm all for articles of however but if they're going to be *the* article on a game they should at least talk about the game a little. Also thinking about it Bloodstorm also had other then whats been mentioned...that odd Power Obtainment thing like Megaman for winning a battle as well as that funny password system. There are parts of the article I like, and I can appreciate the underlying point of it (trying to elicit a response...mission complete). But for everyone saying "well, the games are shitty, so there's nothing more he needs to say," that's bullshit and you know it. Make no mistake, these are terrible games that weren't worth playing when they were new, but it would have been nice to see at least a little objectivity. Shitty game or not, there were features in them that hadn't been done yet, and had been incorporated later in other games, or not at all; yet, there's no comparisons. Anytime, one-hit kills were possible in Time Killers long before Guilty Gear, but were cheaper and more arbitrary. And like kal just said, Bloodstorm had passwords well before Mortal Kombat 3. Not revolutionary per se, but worth mentioning. There were also the gauntlets, which could be stolen from other characters to take one of their moves. And this is just shit off the top of my head, and I don't even like the games. This stuff was ripe pickings for a comparison of how other games used similar concepts to a much better effect, but it all died on the table. None of that stuff was mentioned at all; just a bunch of jokes that made sense and were in-context only if you understood the reference, which accounts for nerds like me and people that googled the reference (by which time the joke's no longer funny). I liked the "Bill and Lance" sequence because I always thought they were gayer than George Michael french kissing the corpse of Freddie Mercury, but I'm fairly certain a lot of people just know them as "blue pants" and "red pants" and wouldn't know who you're talking about, thus rendering it a big non-sequitur. And then there was the story about Pesina, and how it affected Mortal Kombat 3's roster. IMO, it's fun reading about how people do stupid shit and ruin their careers (like John Romero)...in this case it was mentioned, but as an offhand reference that maybe 5% of the people got. Correct me if I'm wrong, but this site is about informing people about games they might have missed, and piquing interest in checking them out, right? You know, it's easy for me to criticize because I haven't written anything for the site yet. But if I did, I'd hope it came off something like the "Siren" and "Secret of Evermore" articles. The former got me to play a game that I really could not stand the first time through; and although I can't say I agree with the author on many things, the article helped me find the mindset that made it enjoyable. As for "Evermore," the article gave me a newfound respect for a game that I'd dismissed out of weeaboo prejudice. I dunno, it just kind of reads more like something from i-mockery or somethingawful; trying to talk about how shitty something is rather than a broader view of the subject. It fits in more with the "Cranky Gamers" section, if anything. But anyway, this article's fine, but here's hoping more people don't start going postmodern across the board. If that's the case, you might as well go to insert credit and read some train wreck where Tim jerks himself off to overcompensate for his lack of self-esteem instead of talking about the game you wanted to read about.
|
|
|
Post by zzz on Jun 2, 2009 7:40:35 GMT -5
But for everyone saying "well, the games are shitty, so there's nothing more he needs to say," that's bullshit and you know it. No it's not bullshit, and no we don't know it. The reason there's nothing else to say about the games is because there's nothing else to say about the games. There are plenty of really horrible games that there's lots to say about, but these ain't those games. Make no mistake, these are terrible games that weren't worth playing when they were new, but it would have been nice to see at least a little objectivity. Shitty game or not, there were features in them that hadn't been done yet, and had been incorporated later in other games, or not at all; yet, there's no comparisons. Anytime, one-hit kills were possible in Time Killers long before Guilty Gear, but were cheaper and more arbitrary. And like kal just said, Bloodstorm had passwords well before Mortal Kombat 3. Not revolutionary per se, but worth mentioning. There were also the gauntlets, which could be stolen from other characters to take one of their moves. The original version of the Article Submission Guidelines thread that you see stickied above in this forum had a quote that went something like this: "When writing an article ask yourself 'What makes this game interesting?'"I'd say that's pretty good advice for writing any kind of article. If it ain't interesting to read then maybe it doesn't really need to be written.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 2, 2009 7:56:50 GMT -5
But for everyone saying "well, the games are shitty, so there's nothing more he needs to say," that's bullshit and you know it. No it's not bullshit, and no we don't know it. The reason there's nothing else to say about the games is because there's nothing else to say about the games. There are plenty of really horrible games that there's lots to say about, but these ain't those games. Make no mistake, these are terrible games that weren't worth playing when they were new, but it would have been nice to see at least a little objectivity. Shitty game or not, there were features in them that hadn't been done yet, and had been incorporated later in other games, or not at all; yet, there's no comparisons. Anytime, one-hit kills were possible in Time Killers long before Guilty Gear, but were cheaper and more arbitrary. And like kal just said, Bloodstorm had passwords well before Mortal Kombat 3. Not revolutionary per se, but worth mentioning. There were also the gauntlets, which could be stolen from other characters to take one of their moves. The original version of the Article Submission Guidelines thread that you see stickied above in this forum had a quote that went something like this: "When writing an article ask yourself 'What makes this game interesting?'"I'd say that's pretty good advice for writing any kind of article. If it ain't interesting to read then maybe it doesn't really need to be written. Obviously you don't know it, because you apparently ignored the second part of my post that you quoted (and made a completely unrelated comment in response to). In fact, I'm pretty sure you didn't bother reading anything I said before leaping to a response. So I will do a national library of congress abstract for you: HE COULD HAVE TALKED ABOUT THE VERY FEW NOTABLE THINGS ABOUT EACH GAME, AND HOW OTHER GAMES DID THEM MUCH BETTER IN BETWEEN ANECDOTES. Otherwise, why bother writing an article for this site and not a humor site? Hell, why bother writing an article in the first place? **EDIT: If the point of the article was to discuss an ugly trend in the 90's, why not do just that? There were a ton of MK knockoffs that had even less to offer than the two Strata games; if you're going to mock that mindset and type of game, why not mock them all? It's not like it's going to take much effort. Anyway, I'm not going to bother arguing with you because better men than I have tried and died against your zealot-like, Conan the Barbarian fervor when you have your mind set on something.
|
|
|
Post by zzz on Jun 2, 2009 8:46:35 GMT -5
Obviously you don't know it, because you apparently ignored the second part of my post that you quoted (and made a completely unrelated comment in response to). My (very related) comment was saying that those things aren't interesting. HE COULD HAVE TALKED ABOUT THE VERY FEW NOTABLE THINGS ABOUT EACH GAME , AND HOW OTHER GAMES DID THEM MUCH BETTER IN BETWEEN ANECDOTES. But this isn't about any other games. Why would this or any other article have to make comparisons to games that it isn't about?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 2, 2009 9:13:57 GMT -5
Obviously you don't know it, because you apparently ignored the second part of my post that you quoted (and made a completely unrelated comment in response to). My (very related) comment was saying that those things aren't interesting. Actually, it came off more as a defense of his unorthodox writing style if anything. Anyway, that's your opinion, and you're welcome to it. Then again, based on your posts, all you seem to find interesting is anything that blindly praises Nintendo. For me, I like trivia. We all have different tastes.
|
|
|
Post by zzz on Jun 2, 2009 9:20:45 GMT -5
Then again, based on your posts, all you seem to find interesting is anything that blindly praises Nintendo. This is off topic, but... What??
|
|
|
Post by TheGunheart on Jun 2, 2009 14:29:53 GMT -5
My (very related) comment was saying that those things aren't interesting. Then why the hell did you write a detailed article on Pit Fighter? Those things about Time Killers sound far more interesting than the stuff you pointed out about that game. Really, all your "points" have effectively been plugging your ears and screaming the same trite argument that somehow it's exempt from the same standards that are held for other game articles. You haven't provided a single good point except that you yourself claim there's nothing more to say, despite other users backing up their claims to the contrary.
|
|
|
Post by Shellshock on Jun 2, 2009 14:58:40 GMT -5
Let's take bets on in which page the thread gets locked.
|
|
|
Post by Reiji-kun on Jun 2, 2009 16:11:58 GMT -5
Let's take bets on in which page the thread gets locked. I say this one. I bet 30 buckazoids.
|
|
|
Post by lvbrown on Jun 2, 2009 17:03:14 GMT -5
the only thing I want to see added to the article is more comparison shots between the arcade release and the Megadrive version. I always find those to be the most interesting part of HG101's articles.
|
|