Its not just me, games used to be better

[Seanspeed]

Sounds like you favour SystemShock, BioShock, Deus Ex ect

Those are some of my favorites, yea. Love myself an FPS with that immersive sim/RPG-lite element to them.

That said, I'm still down for some classic Doom/retro shooters and whatnot. But again, those weren't as mindless as people might assume on first thought. Doom had complex maps and lots of secrets and whatnot - things that stimulated my brain outside of just 'aim gun and shoot things'. Games like Dusk, Prodeus, Amid Evil, Forgive Me Father - they all have other things going for them. Or what I think is the king of the modern retro-shooter - Turbo Overkill, which is just super creative in its aspirations, straying well outside any idea of just shooting things.

Like, one of my biggest complaints(and I wasn't alone) about Doom 2016 was that in the second half of the game, it felt like it was throwing too many arena fights at you. Which can be fun in moderation, but I much preferred the old Doom formula where the encounters were more spread around throughout the level. Doom Eternal unfortunately doubled down on arena fights, and as well designed as the gameplay was in that, it felt a bit disjointed in how it went from 'no enemy platform/exploration section' to 'arena battle' and back and forth constantly, which again I feel is far inferior to the more mixed formula of the originals.

So yea, just action alone doesn't cut it for me. I need games to at least be two dimensional in terms of things it brings to the table.

 

[Tkumpathenurple]

It wasn't meant to be insulting, just pointing out that there's more to video games than just 'action'.

I like good gameplay as much as anyone, but games can and should be more than just big explodey action.

There's more to the medium, sure, no-one expects non-stop action in Broken Sword, but you weren't just pointing out that there's more to them than just action, you were being condescending regarding games that *are* just action.

I agree that games can be more than just action, but I think it's totally wrong headed to state that they should be. They should be allowed to be, but if they want to just be explosions, that's fine too.

I'm fine with criticizing how well a game like Tomb Raider does in humanizing Lara or something, but I definitely dont like hearing the idea that games just shouldn't have that kind of stuff.

You didn't at all discuss the degree to which humanising Lara was done well. You went straight to sneering.

And the most that was said was that a character crying after an action set piece isn't appealing. Which, in the context of TR3, I very much agree with: it's ham-fisted nonsense written by half-witted autists "and then there's a helicopter, and Lara has to fight it, and then it explodes, and then Lara's upset, and then Lara cries."

JFC writers, spend some time with actual people FFS. And don't try giving me social commentary or emotional depth when you've just had me FIGHT A HELICOPTER! If you're going to make me do silly things, accept that you're dancing in the realm of the silly. Predator didn't need an Arnie soliloquy on the evils of foreign interventionism.

I really dont, no. Same with movies.

If I'm not invested into the characters or story, some big spectacle set piece does absolutely nothing for me. And even sometimes when I am invested, if it takes away too much control or has some boring gimmick(like a turret section or something) then I might also be ready for it to be over ASAP. I need some kind of drama, not just spectacle.

Also, we're talking action/adventure games. For me, the adventure part is usually the bigger draw.

Then action isn't really the genre for you. You seem not to like it on its own merits. Which is fine - I don't like country music or puzzle games, for example. But don't earnestly criticise a genre for being itself.

It's like disliking Indian food, going into an Indian restaurant, and then complaining that it's not pizza.

 

[Seanspeed]

Your whole post ignores basically ALL the context in which I made my comments.

I merely pushed against the idea games should be more than just 'action'. That's all. It shouldn't be remotely controversial.

You didn't at all discuss the degree to which humanising Lara was done well. You went straight to sneering.

I actually did both. And propagandists like you were never going to be happy with either.

Then action isn't really the genre for you.

It's crazy how you guys have no ability to think critically at all.

 

[Tkumpathenurple]

Your whole post ignores basically ALL the context in which I made my comments.

I merely pushed against the idea games should be more than just 'action'. That's all. It shouldn't be remotely controversial.

There you go again with your proscriptive attitude, acting baffled that anyone might take umbridge with it.

"Hey, all I did was call people stupid for not liking exactly the same things as me, why's that controversial?"

I actually did both. And propagandists like you were never going to be happy with either.

Quote where you did either.

And "propagandist!?" Laughable, feeble, false ad hominem.

It's crazy how you guys have no ability to think critically at all.

Stop copying insults you've read on Twitter and applying them erroneously.

And who might "you guys" be? People capable of having interactions without getting on their high horse?

 

[ZebMacahan]

I'm fine with criticizing how well a game like Tomb Raider does in humanizing Lara or something, but I definitely dont like hearing the idea that games just shouldn't have that kind of stuff.

Humanizing the protagonist is good for some games (like last of us or a plaugue tale) but not for others. Bungie got it real right when they said they deliberately made Master Chief an empty vessel for the player to put themselves in. 343 messed up the series in a bunch of way. One was wanting to flesh out master chief as a charcter, totaly missing the point.

I havent played much Tomb Raider so I dont know much about the franchise, but I always saw her as a female Indiana Jones. So having her have an emotional breakdown after a big epic action set piece where she fights a freaking helicopter is very unfitting because
*the type of game it is, lighthearted treasue hunter adventure
*the fact that its right after an action set piece
*as pointed out earlier she has killed hundreds of people before this, at close range, buy strangeling them or killing them with her climbing axes. The way she does it is made to look cool, not brutal and desperate like in last of us.

And aside from these points, I dont think its done very well anyway. It just feels contrived and ham-fisted with her bursting out crying. I found it much more heartbreaking in Mass Effect when Mordin

Spoiler

decides to sacrifice his own life to be able to cure the genophage, and he sings his little song to calm him self before his imminent death.

As opposed to "if she cries alot then people will know she hurts alot". Sometimes less is more.