|
|
View previous topic :: View next topic
|
| Author |
Message |
boojiboy7
narcissistic irony-laden twat
Joined: 04 Dec 2006
Location: take me on a blatant doom trip.
|
 Posted: Thu Apr 08, 2010 6:32 pm |
  |
|
| I'm looking forward to Portal 2, actually, as long as Valve can avoid falling into the meme-pit formed by part 1. |
|
| Unfilter / Back to top |
|
 |
boojiboy7
narcissistic irony-laden twat
Joined: 04 Dec 2006
Location: take me on a blatant doom trip.
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 08, 2010 7:34 pm |
|
|
| ... |
|
| Unfilter / Back to top |
|
|
boojiboy7
narcissistic irony-laden twat
Joined: 04 Dec 2006
Location: take me on a blatant doom trip.
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 08, 2010 11:59 pm |
|
|
| Mr. Toups wrote: |
| The point about Half Life 2 is that it creates an appealing and effective illusion. I feel like most criticisms of the game boil down to pointing out the many (often obvious) ways in which it's an illusion. You go into the experience knowing it's an illusion. That's what's fun about it. |
the problem for me in HL2 could be basically summarized as almost all of the mechanics of the game do nothing but shatter the illusion for me, and most of the things people point out to as maintaining the illusion only make the illusion more apparent and jarring for me. The "seams and lines" as Touran puts it, become more apparent to me with each second I play the game.
I can go into more on this, but nobody wants me to talk about HL2 really.
I generally find myself with Dinghy so much on this topic, though. |
|
| Unfilter / Back to top |
|
|
boojiboy7
narcissistic irony-laden twat
Joined: 04 Dec 2006
Location: take me on a blatant doom trip.
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 09, 2010 11:41 am |
|
|
| bloody heartland wrote: |
| Cocaine Socialist wrote: |
Valvonaut Resistance Force:
Booji
Moose
James
Atlus |
Please. Dude. Please.
I'm astonishingly fond of Team Fortress 2, which seems less like a complete game and more like a wacky testbed for idle FPS concepts. It's also got some of the most endearingly ambiguous/archetypal character design and backstory since pixel art went out of style. |
Yeah, I love how if you hate HL2 around here, you apparently hate everything else Valve does, no matter how much you say otherwise. I agree with you on TF2, though I generally thought Portal was fun (though it outlasted its "fun" factor as an internet joke a day after it came out). L4D is fun enough as well, despite the horrid title. The Source engine still feels "off" to me, which I have detailed before and could detail more, but there's no point in that really.
And yeah, I think Steam is great blahblahblah.
HL2 is still a shitty, overly praised game, though. |
|
| Unfilter / Back to top |
|
|
boojiboy7
narcissistic irony-laden twat
Joined: 04 Dec 2006
Location: take me on a blatant doom trip.
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 12, 2010 12:42 pm |
|
|
Just to be clear, of course I don't blame Portal itself for the annoying habits of nerds. That is stupid, though one could point out by making the"cake" such a central point of the game (I have no idea how many times Gladdos offers it to you, but it's a pretty large number), and then turning it into a joke, the writers probably knew what they were doing. But that is fine. It was amusing enough when I played the game, and it just gave me another thing to ignore on the internet for a few months.
No, my previous comment on Portal 2 was mostly just the hope that they don't bring the popular jokes of Portal back for the sequel. I will be entirely happy if there is no mention of cake or companion cubes for all of 2, though I am betting the cube at least will probably show up, which will make me rather sad. Would love to be proven wrong, though. |
|
| Unfilter / Back to top |
|
|
boojiboy7
narcissistic irony-laden twat
Joined: 04 Dec 2006
Location: take me on a blatant doom trip.
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 12, 2010 2:35 pm |
|
|
| That would make me happy, at least in terms of the story. No one has been able to fix my general unease with the Source Engine itself, but I have largely been able to just ignore it (or at least just take it as a given and move on). |
|
| Unfilter / Back to top |
|
|
boojiboy7
narcissistic irony-laden twat
Joined: 04 Dec 2006
Location: take me on a blatant doom trip.
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 19, 2010 7:30 pm |
|
|
| Whereas I saw that as a boring box puzzle in 3d, and was more annoyed by the lack of precision afforded by doing a box puzzle in that way. |
|
| Unfilter / Back to top |
|
|
boojiboy7
narcissistic irony-laden twat
Joined: 04 Dec 2006
Location: take me on a blatant doom trip.
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 20, 2010 11:53 am |
|
|
| DJ wrote: |
| You can kinda see why they ditched that approach if you look at how incredibly fucked-up the development of that game was. A ton of stuff wound up getting radically altered, and a lot of the designs for the worldbuilding were a lot more ambitious. What you have now is that kind of stripped down. |
Yeah, that stuff interests me a lot more than the actual game that came out. Even the stuff that is in Raising the Bar (or whatever the title is) interests me because it looks like the HL games were going to be a lot different than what eventually came out. There was the one monster whose job it was to literally rape the player, which I can't say I particularly like, but it would've been interesting to see where it went. It's been awhile since I looked it over though, so I can't remember more weird examples.
Also, agreeing with Harvey about the physics puzzles. They would've been annoying enough, except that the game basically screamed at you when they showed up, which only made them more annoying for me.
I do however, as DJ said, like the little details of the world that are set up. The first bombed house you come to on the boat is probably my favorite part of the game, even if the rest of it is a let down. Ravenholm and me never got along. |
|
| Unfilter / Back to top |
|
|
boojiboy7
narcissistic irony-laden twat
Joined: 04 Dec 2006
Location: take me on a blatant doom trip.
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 20, 2010 5:22 pm |
|
|
| Does Gordon weigh less than a washing machine? He's a pretty effing tiny dude, then. Or that is a ridiculously heavy washing machine. |
|
| Unfilter / Back to top |
|
|
boojiboy7
narcissistic irony-laden twat
Joined: 04 Dec 2006
Location: take me on a blatant doom trip.
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 20, 2010 5:25 pm |
|
|
| Mr. Toups wrote: |
| they were a little garish but they were mostly grounded in the story of the game (ie, they seem to be intentionally designed checkpoints in a shackled-together underground railroad that could quickly be broken down at notice)... |
How is that ramp effective as a checkpoint? Would the Combine just not be able to figure out how to do it? Or would they just, you know, get in their helicopter and fly past it? The puzzles seemed incredibly illogical most of the time, like there was no reason for them to be there other than the game wanted them there.
The elevator puzzle would not be a puzzle at all if like 4 guys were present, or if anyone weighed more than a washing machine (so, let's say about 100 pounds). |
|
| Unfilter / Back to top |
|
|
boojiboy7
narcissistic irony-laden twat
Joined: 04 Dec 2006
Location: take me on a blatant doom trip.
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 20, 2010 7:00 pm |
|
|
| Quote: |
| The idea isn't that it's a checkpoint but that at first glance it does not look like a useable path... the railroad is designed to be disguised so the combine can't predict their movements, while still allowing for rapid travel through difficult terrain. |
And yet, they aren't very well disguised, since it's not like you would ever fail to realize what they are after about 30 seconds, if that.
| Mr. Toups wrote: |
| Washing machines are pretty fucking heavy. Have you lifted one lately? It's definitely easier to pick another human being up, anyway. |
Actually, most sites put the average washing machine wight at about 175 lbs. Now, gordon would wieght less than that, possibly, but not as much less as that video would indicate, and Gordon + metal barrel would weigh significantly more, I would think.
Last edited by boojiboy7 on Tue Apr 20, 2010 7:04 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Unfilter / Back to top |
|
|
boojiboy7
narcissistic irony-laden twat
Joined: 04 Dec 2006
Location: take me on a blatant doom trip.
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 20, 2010 7:10 pm |
|
|
| DJ wrote: |
| If it was the latter, I'd agree they kinda failed. I recently re-played HL2 and both Episodes, and the two episodes are just as linear but much, much speedier/coherent/involving than the original game. |
I think this might be why the puzzles stick out even more for me. They feel non-coherent with the game (here, run from the evil dudes, now stack some cinder blocks!) and slow everything down.
Vision, you are right that it wouldn't make sense for Gordon to function as the machine in that puzzle, but that puzzle highlights the problem of Gordon's physicality, in that it is not consistent with the rest of the world. If it were, that puzzle wouldn't work, but I think that is an inherent problem of the puzzle itself. |
|
| Unfilter / Back to top |
|
|
boojiboy7
narcissistic irony-laden twat
Joined: 04 Dec 2006
Location: take me on a blatant doom trip.
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 20, 2010 7:45 pm |
|
|
| I tested that when I played it awhile back, and sadly it doesn't, or at least not to any great degree that I noticed. I still am (forever) trying to figure out why I don't get the same sense of physicality from gordon that so many people seem to, though. |
|
| Unfilter / Back to top |
|
|
boojiboy7
narcissistic irony-laden twat
Joined: 04 Dec 2006
Location: take me on a blatant doom trip.
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 20, 2010 8:08 pm |
|
|
| oh my god immaculate wrote: |
| Do you approach every videogame like this? |
When I don't like something, and a lot of people do like said thing, yes, I do take the time to figure out why. Whoops. |
|
| Unfilter / Back to top |
|
|
boojiboy7
narcissistic irony-laden twat
Joined: 04 Dec 2006
Location: take me on a blatant doom trip.
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 20, 2010 8:12 pm |
|
|
| DJ wrote: |
| It's also worth pointing out that games didn't DO physics before Half-Life 2 hit. |
Interestingly, Halo 1 (and many games before it) did in fact contain internal physics systems in them. Granted, they were usually less complicated (and in Halo's case ridiculously flawed/easy to mess with (grenade jumping), but as none of them made such systems their big feature, nobody noticed. |
|
| Unfilter / Back to top |
|
|
boojiboy7
narcissistic irony-laden twat
Joined: 04 Dec 2006
Location: take me on a blatant doom trip.
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 21, 2010 10:07 am |
|
|
| oh my god immaculate wrote: |
| boojiboy7 wrote: |
| oh my god immaculate wrote: |
| Do you approach every videogame like this? |
When I don't like something, and a lot of people do like said thing, yes, I do take the time to figure out why. Whoops. |
Except that pointing out that something in a videogame doesn't work exactly like it would in the real world (even though it was closer than you were) doesn't mean anything. |
Except that the driving feature of the game is theoretically physics that work like the real world. So that when they don't (and I have no clue what "it was closer than you were" is supposed to mean), I think it is perfectly valid as a complaint about why the world is less convincing.
As with most times though, you only show up in KOP to argue. You basically function as James at his worst, except with less insults though magically saying less as well. This is not a virtue. If you (and others) don't like what is being talked about in this thread, you can leave it alone, just as you tell others to do. Choosing not to do so does not mean you ar some great arbiter of discussion. |
|
| Unfilter / Back to top |
|
|
boojiboy7
narcissistic irony-laden twat
Joined: 04 Dec 2006
Location: take me on a blatant doom trip.
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 21, 2010 11:49 am |
|
|
| CubaLibre wrote: |
| The question is whether HL2 is successful at its suspension under its own terms, which in this case are more demanding than Doom's. Booji thinks it doesn't, I think it does. |
Yeah, this is pretty much it exactly, though I don't credit it to "myopia" the way you do, more to the "uncanny valley" type though DJ was talking about. Basically, as HL2 approaches being more "real" (as its physics are trying to), the (really fairly minor, despite my quibbling about them in this thread) inconsistencies of its "reality" when compared to what it is trying to simulate become more problematic for me.
What ends up happening with me and HL2 is that a bunch of minor problems add up to the game become just so-so, instead of the masterpiece it gets called. So I end up trying to figure out as specifically as possible what those problems are. This does tend to come off as me blowing those problems out of proportion, and I should say that each problem I have, if on its own, wouldn't be a big deal, but they work in tandem with other problems to make me generally not like the game.
As DJ pointed out, TF2 gets around this, in a very basic way, just by setting itself up as a cartoon, so when the physics in TF2 don't line up with the way physics work (like the double jump), it doesn't trigger any uncanny valley-ish feeling.
I think L4d actually does a pretty good job of this too, but mostly by working around the issues that cause the UV feeling in the first place. Though there are physics in l4d, and they can be used as part of the game (baracades and such), they are not specifically highlighted very often. The game doesn't make you stop and play with physics; it just takes them as a given.
Similarly, the AI of individual enemies (always a sticking point for me when I play HL2, especially since it came out post Halo) is not a problem for l4d because all the enemies are zombies, and all of them are relentless in their hunting you, so I never notice that they don't dodge bullets or grab cover, because they never should.
I also think the level structure of L4D, which implicitly acknowledges the "game-ness" in a way that is much less jarring than, say, HL2's loading bars (while performing the same basic function), helps avoid the valley as well.
The valley isn't just an issue for FPS designers, of course. The valley is even used to wonderful effect sometimes (Silent Hill 2).
Last edited by boojiboy7 on Wed Apr 21, 2010 12:16 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Unfilter / Back to top |
|
|
boojiboy7
narcissistic irony-laden twat
Joined: 04 Dec 2006
Location: take me on a blatant doom trip.
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 21, 2010 12:13 pm |
|
|
| DJ wrote: |
| L4D2 takes this one step further; while you can't turn off the game-like design of the levels, you CAN turn off pretty much all of the rest of it with Realism Mode. |
As soon as Valve has one of those awesome Steam sales on L4D2, you just made me buy it. Thanks. |
|
| Unfilter / Back to top |
|
|
boojiboy7
narcissistic irony-laden twat
Joined: 04 Dec 2006
Location: take me on a blatant doom trip.
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 21, 2010 3:22 pm |
|
|
| Oh, I am betting it is, just on what I liked in the first one. I just don't have much time to devote to it right now, so I might as well wait for a sale (something Steam is wonderful for). |
|
| Unfilter / Back to top |
|
|
boojiboy7
narcissistic irony-laden twat
Joined: 04 Dec 2006
Location: take me on a blatant doom trip.
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 21, 2010 6:34 pm |
|
|
| Oh, that is helpful, Toups. I would ask you to explain that, but clearly you don't feel like it. |
|
| Unfilter / Back to top |
|
|
boojiboy7
narcissistic irony-laden twat
Joined: 04 Dec 2006
Location: take me on a blatant doom trip.
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 21, 2010 7:45 pm |
|
|
Why are people so interested in killing conversation? I genuinely want to know what Toups means. It would be greatly appreciated if people who were only going to post here to try to end the thread (immaculate and now CS), would kindly not bother.
Thanks. |
|
| Unfilter / Back to top |
|
|
boojiboy7
narcissistic irony-laden twat
Joined: 04 Dec 2006
Location: take me on a blatant doom trip.
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 22, 2010 11:59 am |
|
|
Apologies in advance for the super long post with a lot of quotes.
| amadeus3000 wrote: |
| Because if those driving physics were anything like the real world, your computer would do an instant crash. Real world driving physics have so many variables, that one needs dedicated simulations (and of course machines) for it. It's just something your computer can't pull off while he also handles graphics, AI and what not. |
While this is true, it again falls into the "uncanny valley" problem. The more the physics in the game attempt versimilitude (thanks, Cuba, for that term. It's good to differentiate between "realism" and "versimilitude" in games, but I'll specifically address your post in a bit), the more closely they are compared to real physics, and the more little differences (which the washing machine was meant to be an example of) stick out. Again, by attempting to simulate versimilitudinous physics in a world that attempts to look/feel versimilitudinous, it can cause reactions such as my own.
| Quote: |
Do you really believe
| Quote: |
| that the driving feature of the game is theoretically physics that work like the real world |
? |
Given that the main new weapon in the game is devoted to playing with those physics, and that said weapon is the focal point of two entire large areas of the game, and that the game specifically reminds you of its physics on a regular basis (starting with the can-toss, but continuing on through box puzzles and near-forced gravity gun usage)? Yeah, I consider it a pretty important part of the game. Even Valve has said, in their book on the game, that the creation of the engine was the first/primary concern in making the game, and the physics are a large part of the engine.
| CubaLibre wrote: |
| The keyword is verisimilitude, not realism. HL2's physics are self-consistent. They resemble the real world's not out of an inherent desire for "realism" (contrast ArmA or Rainbow Six) but simply as a shortcut to help visually indicate how things interact. But those shortcuts are imperfect and eventually you must discover how objects interact in Half-Life World. The gravity gun is a great tool to help you explore this. The key is that this process of discovery should be immersive instead of distracting. I found it immersive. |
Again, thank you Cuba, for actually engaging in this conversation. You are right in that there is not necessarily and inherent desire for realism, in that the game is using real-world physics as a convenient referent more than as a desired goal (which is different from R6, or in a different genre altogether, Gran Turismo and its ilk). My issue with the physics then probably comes from how they don't match the referent in ways I would expect (again, the washing machine was meant as example). Unlike you, however, I found the figuring out how they work to be entirely distracting, as in my expectation of them being similar enough to real physics, I expected to be able to use them without specifically thinking about them. This meant that when they didn't, it felt like the game getting in my way.
That the game then creates puzzles around them, which specifically highlight the physics, and which highlight (for me) how they fail at their basic verisimilitude becomes a major problem.
| oh my god immaculate wrote: |
| Booji, you ended the thread ages ago. You don't care what toups has to say, you don't care what anyone has to say. |
No, I genuinely do. As hard as I know it is for you to believe, I have not posted in this thread in any disingenuous nature. I have been very interested in people's thoughts (see my responses to Cuba, DJ, some of Toups, and vision) and discussing them.
| Quote: |
| If you had solid reasons for hating HL2 they've been lost to the 60 threads that came before this one. All of this just feels like you scrambling to prove something that nobody gives a shit about but you. |
There have been (last i recall checking, which was last time you made this accusation) about 6 threads that I have actively talked about HL2 in. However, you've apparently decided I am not allowed to talk about it any more, but thankfully you are in no position to enforce such a decision, so I will continue to discuss it with people if they are willing to discuss it. I have nothing to prove, nor am I trying such, as much as I am attempting to discuss and figure out why I reacted to a game the way I did. Examining one's opinions is usually a good exercise, and pretty valid.
| Quote: |
| Is there anything about HL2, besides the fact that you can't seem to stomach the idea that so many people enjoyed something that you didn't, that really justifies the amount of flack it's singled out for? Singling HL2 out over all the other shitty, patronizing, utterly insulting videogames out there smells like petty bullshit. |
Even in this very thread, I praise a few of the things I fell the game does well, and acknowledge it is not the worst game ever or anything like that. There are plenty of other games out there far more worthy of bile and contempt. However, not many games of any quality are as discussed and thought about as HL2, and so I feel that in talking about it with other people, I can figure more out not about just my views on the game itself, but on my views of games as a whole.
In its own strange way, HL2 might be one of my most personally influential games, in that because of it, I have begun to examine games differently, and become more conscious of what influences my opinions on a game. You can call this "petty bullshit" if you want, but I prefer to call it and investigation of my own opinions.
| Jam wrote: |
| It really is an important work in the development of video games, and I find discussion about it invariably interesting. At least until it reaches that inevitable tipping point of internet snark. |
This exactly. HL2 is a huge and influential force in game development, and like anyone who loves a particular medium (or whatever you want to call games), I feel a good examination of it is important. A movie critic may dislike a specific important film, but should still examine what makes it up, and simultaneously examine why such elements don't always work for that critic.
| sarsamis wrote: |
(only read this page)
How many times have you played it? |
Quite a few, actually. I've probably (given far-too-numerous restarts to count) put in at least 25 or 30 hours on the game. I will admit to not having finished it yet, though I plan to at some point in the future. Even if I had only barely played it, this is not a valid defense of the game at all though, if you are intending it as such.
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
| Except that the driving feature of the game is theoretically physics that work like the real world. |
Has this really been your belief these past 6 years? |
Given the aforementioned priority Valve placed on the engine, it's not exactly far fetched. However, I should probably revise the statement, however, and say that physics are a driving feature of the engine (along with facial expressions, which I definitely agree are still tot his day quite good), while the journey and real-time exposition are the driving forces of the single-player game design. I do have problems with how both of those are executed, but that was not the direction this thread was going in, so I didn't discuss them. The physics could be tied into problems of those though (like how the enemy stops chasing you so you can solve a box puzzle).
| bloody heartland wrote: |
HL2 gets shit because it's a critical darling (for fatbeard critics)
Kinda wish I didn't have Booji in my corner for this one. Serious crybaby gripes about washing machines. Jesus. Booji, what you should be complaining about is more tangible shit, like how the first hour of episode 2 involves dealing with abhorrent characters before crawling around the same boring tunnel shooting the same boring antlion enemy for what feels like forever. But no. Washing machine physics. Christ. |
Actually, James, the washing machine problem is the very definition of (in-game) tangible, being a very specific object with very specific problems. Moreover, though, it was meant as an example of the problems of the physics engine, which is why it was discussed as such. Given the prominent role physics play in the engine on the game itself, and in the "puzzles", a problem with them could eventually feel like a big problem with the game itself. Sorry if this seems intangible to you, but it seems pretty relevant to me.
Moving on though, I have not played episode 2, so I cannot comment on what you discuss there, but I definitely have had similar issues with the main game. Alyx's character, the boat level, and more could definitely be good things to discuss, if you feel that is an avenue worth going down. |
|
| Unfilter / Back to top |
|
|
boojiboy7
narcissistic irony-laden twat
Joined: 04 Dec 2006
Location: take me on a blatant doom trip.
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 22, 2010 1:55 pm |
|
|
| amadeus3000 wrote: |
| boojiboy7 wrote: |
| Apologies in advance for the super long post with a lot of quotes. |
Never apologize for writing. Makes it look as if you're pretty unsure about what you're going to say. |
You are taking this far too seriously. I was just warning of a really long post man, damn.
| Quote: |
| Stop differentiating. There's the real world and there's the simulation of it in the game (may be good or bad, also a varieties of degrees of complexity – and no, no one needs names for all of those degrees). You're making it hard for yourself. All those differences, all those small degrees cloud your main problem – you didn't like certain aspects of the game's mechanic. |
The differentiation is ESSENTIAL, as the discussion in this thread shows. HL2 is a game that was built with a degree of verisimilitude inherent in the game, and appeals to that verisimilitude. To dismiss it entirely is to say that HL2 exists completely separate of any influence from reality, which is pointless.
| Quote: |
| Now you're saying 'those' physics aka 'those' of the game. That's not what you said in the beginning. 'Even Valve has said...' – don't believe the hype. |
What are you even trying to say here? Yes, the physics of HL2 are different from the physics of reality. Hence the need for differentiation. What hype are you talking about?
| Quote: |
| You know that movie critics write books or longer articles about a whole film, and do not use the same length for one aspect of the movie? So far that wasn't a good examination. You are neither clear about your definitions, neither about your main problems. Compile them in an article, make it clear to yourself what your problem is and then post it. Don't start guessing around, associating or linking thoughts while posting. |
You do know that many critics in any medium will discuss the work in question before writing down their definitive views on it, right? In fact, many critics (let's take Ebert and his "great movies") will alter, having written a review of the work initially, go back to write a later piece on it taking into account the discussion and influence of the work itself? Did it ever occur to you that someone might discuss things before writing an article, possibly on a discussion board? I feel no obligation to have come to a final opinion on anything before posting on a message board. Hell, if I had, there would be no point in trying to discuss it other than to yell my own opinion out loud. |
|
| Unfilter / Back to top |
|
|
boojiboy7
narcissistic irony-laden twat
Joined: 04 Dec 2006
Location: take me on a blatant doom trip.
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 22, 2010 3:13 pm |
|
|
They start discussing with someone before writing the article long before they have a complete opinion on the entire thing. They may have a "yeah, that movie isn't very good, and here are a few quick reason why" opinion, but not one that takes into accounts the full depths of issues with the movie, as those tend to be explored in conversation, which is what I am trying to do here. Anyhow, moving on.
| amadeus3000 wrote: |
The difference is being made. But this 'Again, by attempting to simulate versimilitudinous physics in a world that attempts to look/feel versimilitudinous, it can cause reactions such as my own' is what I'm talking about. First off, it is verIsimilitudinous. Then, what does verisimilitudinous means? It is the appearance of being true or real. So you're saying that 'Again by attempting to simulate physics, which appear to be true, in a world that attempts to look/feel 'appears to be true', it can cause reactions such as my own'??
I might be wrong here, but to me that doesn't make sense. So. Making these elaborate differences has led to more confusion. If we would stick to reality and the simulation of it in the game we wouldn't have gotten there in the first place. |
Maybe my wording was a bit off, so let me try it a different way. The physics of HL2 attempt to simulate (and admittedly, by necessity, simply) real-world physics to some degree. The areas in which they don't match up with real-world physics causes a level of cognitive dissonance for me, in that I expect them to act one way (due to the knowledge that they should simulate physics) and they act in a different way. What I was trying to say in the bit you quoted was that this dissonance is heightened by the game also attempting to look "real" as well (as "real" as the setting and the stylistic choices of the game will allow, in that there is no City 17 and that the games graphics can attempt "realism" but will never be able to match reality itself). This was really a summary of the similar thought expressed by DJ in his post on TF2.
| Quote: |
| You didn't make that difference in the first place. That was my problem. |
I'm sorry, I guess I again wasn't clear. I thought the separation of the two sets of physics was implicit in the whole thing. The problem for me (with the physics, as again, there are a lot of other potential issues of the game to discuss) comes in how separate they are, really.
| Quote: |
| As for the 'hype' I was referring to the sentence 'Even Valve has said, in their book on the game, that the creation of the engine was the first/primary concern in making the game, and the physics are a large part of the engine.' It was my understanding that you concluded from it, that physics in HL2 were as in the real world. Hence your problem with 'the driving feature of the game is theoretically physics that work like the real world' |
Actually, I read Valve's thing about the engine well after playing the game. My conclusions as to the intent of the physics was mostly just based on my experience with the game prior to that. |
|
| Unfilter / Back to top |
|
|
boojiboy7
narcissistic irony-laden twat
Joined: 04 Dec 2006
Location: take me on a blatant doom trip.
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 22, 2010 3:40 pm |
|
|
| Not necessarily. I mean, you are right in that it is disappointing, but that's not what I was trying to get at, really. The game itself encourages such disappointment in how it presents the physics and the world they are used in. Additionally, the physics are part of what makes the whole game feel 'off' to me (off being a generic term here, that I am attempting to define through conversation and such). What's strange to be about this 'off'-ness is that so few other people experience it at all. |
|
| Unfilter / Back to top |
|
|
boojiboy7
narcissistic irony-laden twat
Joined: 04 Dec 2006
Location: take me on a blatant doom trip.
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 22, 2010 5:06 pm |
|
|
| Yeah, I understand that. That's part of its nature as a simulation, it's an illusion. I just found the ways it didn't match up very jarring in a way that broke the illusion. |
|
| Unfilter / Back to top |
|
|
boojiboy7
narcissistic irony-laden twat
Joined: 04 Dec 2006
Location: take me on a blatant doom trip.
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 22, 2010 5:35 pm |
|
|
| Go for it. If it helps continue the conversation, that's pretty awesome. It might make me even finish the actual game (maybe). |
|
| Unfilter / Back to top |
|
|
boojiboy7
narcissistic irony-laden twat
Joined: 04 Dec 2006
Location: take me on a blatant doom trip.
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 23, 2010 11:48 am |
|
|
Yeah, I would be on board for at least commenting on the screenshots and such. I've made it farthest in the 360 version, but I own a PC copy of the main game, but none of the episodes. I would have to redownload the game to my PC , but thanks to Steam being awesome, that's no big deal.
Seriously, I do love Valve as a business for Steam, even if I sometimes have problems with their games.
It's gonna have to wait until at least next weekend to do that though. And I might just finish the 360 version and not bother with screenshots if everyone else is doing screens. The thought of going through the boat section again gets me so mad. As for the person who asked how far I've gotten, as I recall I am just past the whole Nova Prospeckt area, though it has been awhile. |
|
| Unfilter / Back to top |
|
|
boojiboy7
narcissistic irony-laden twat
Joined: 04 Dec 2006
Location: take me on a blatant doom trip.
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 23, 2010 1:34 pm |
|
|
Were this about 3 years ago, when I had (way) more free time, I would've been all over it. As it is now, my time is taken up by way too much other stuff, unfortunately. Working full-time sucks like that. I'm really interested in doing it, but being able to have the time to log in and actually play more than like an hour a day would be pretty rough.
As it is, though, I am interested in doing these types of things for any game, really. I wish grabbing console screens was easier, as that is what I do most of my gaming on. |
|
| Unfilter / Back to top |
|
|
boojiboy7
narcissistic irony-laden twat
Joined: 04 Dec 2006
Location: take me on a blatant doom trip.
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 23, 2010 5:02 pm |
|
|
| Yeah, I think that is fair, so that we get a new person, someone with a dislike of the game, and a few guys who like it in on the project. |
|
| Unfilter / Back to top |
|
|
boojiboy7
narcissistic irony-laden twat
Joined: 04 Dec 2006
Location: take me on a blatant doom trip.
|
| Posted: Fri Apr 23, 2010 5:07 pm |
|
|
| I thought it was supposed to happen when the new steam store rolled out, which would be Monday, but I could be making that up. |
|
| Unfilter / Back to top |
|
|
boojiboy7
narcissistic irony-laden twat
Joined: 04 Dec 2006
Location: take me on a blatant doom trip.
|
|
| Unfilter / Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
