Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Based on what? Who you prefer?It doesn't work that way. However, since you have nothing to add, perhaps you should just go talk about which pixellated females/males are good looking and leave the debates to people who can, rather than chiming in with irrelevant one liners. At least the people here are formulating arguments of some kind.
-AC
Once again, you lose. 🙂
Woah, how does that make me a hypocrite? If I told you to leave the thread, then my bad. I'm pretty sure I told you that you shouldn't have gone into it since you were so discontent of hearing people praise Halo as much as they do.
No, it doesn't. I'm just aware that it pisses you off so I say it just for fun.
Originally posted by shin_gear
Woah, how does that make me a hypocrite? If I told you to leave the thread, then my bad. I'm pretty sure I told you that you shouldn't have gone into it since you were so discontent of hearing people praise Halo as much as they do.No, it doesn't. I'm just aware that it pisses you off so I say it just for fun.
It doesn't, I enjoy it. If it pissed me off I'd report you, it's funny, and rather endearing. Please, continue. I'm flattered I'm worth the attention.
-AC
Wait, AC, you report people just because... they annoy you? If that was valid grounds for reporting, I don't think anyone would be posting.
I do congratulate you though, for so perfectly missing the point. The game is easy, and the main reason is the Vita-Chambers. You can't say that's dependent on a style of play, because the game was built expecting the player to use them. Otherwise, they wouldn't be there. Sure, you can set limitations for yourself or play well enough to not die, but your preference does not change the fact that the Vita-Chambers were designed to be used.
Originally posted by General Kaliero
Wait, AC, you report people just because... they annoy you? If that was valid grounds for reporting, I don't think anyone would be posting.I do congratulate you though, for so perfectly missing the point. The game is easy, and the main reason is the Vita-Chambers. You can't say that's dependent on a style of play, because the game was built expecting the player to use them. Otherwise, they wouldn't be there. Sure, you can set limitations for yourself or play well enough to not die, but your preference does not change the fact that the Vita-Chambers were designed to be used.
As for the first part, I congratulate you for so perfectly missing the point, and to explain it would ruin the desired effect I achieved, so I'll move on.
The game isn't the hardest I've played, but I don't consider it an easy, all around game. I'm waiting on proof as to why, because many agree, it's somehow being accepted that it's a factually easy game. That's not the case, you realise. I find Resident Evil's easy, many do not.
I'm not denying that they were designed to be used, and people suggesting it took away the tension for them personally; that's fine by me. I take issue with people like H.S.6 who put forth the remarkably odd argument that the Big Daddies were not IMPOSSIBLY (Key word) hard to kill, yet...they were a challenge, but somehow...they were too easy. I think what most people are trying to get across is, if you have it in mind subconsciously that you can just respawn, it may affect tension. Whilst I can see why that would happen, I didn't experience such, that's personal preference, and I appreciate that it dampened the experience for most.
Let's just remember that this has been only applied to fighting the Big Daddies, to suggest the game is without tension is a ludicrous idea, in my opinion.
-AC
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
The game isn't the hardest I've played, but I don't consider it an easy, all around game. I'm waiting on proof as to why, because many agree, it's somehow being accepted that it's a factually easy game. That's not the case, you realise. I find Resident Evil's easy, many do not.I'm not denying that they were designed to be used, and people suggesting it took away the tension for them personally; that's fine by me. I take issue with people like H.S.6 who put forth the remarkably odd argument that the Big Daddies were not IMPOSSIBLY (Key word) hard to kill, yet...they were a challenge, but somehow...they were too easy. I think what most people are trying to get across is, if you have it in mind subconsciously that you can just respawn, it may affect tension. Whilst I can see why that would happen, I didn't experience such, that's personal preference, and I appreciate that it dampened the experience for most.
Let's just remember that this has been only applied to fighting the Big Daddies, to suggest the game is without tension is a ludicrous idea, in my opinion.
-AC
It doesn't apply just to the Daddies, they're simply used as the example because you're far more likely to die at the hands of one of them than even a large group of Splicers, who start out as a decent challenge in groups and about midway through the game become more minor annoyances than anything else.
I agree that the game has tension, a great amount of it. But that tension is achieved more through atmosphere than the actual fighting of Splicers. It's the echoing mutters and scattered footsteps that make you pause before moving into the next room, not a horde of enemies standing in front of you.
Really, BioShock is a well-told interactive story. The only part that falls somewhat is the gameplay, because despite all that disconcerting atmosphere battle simply is not a challenge. If you win unscathed, great. If someone offs you, ah well, you've respawned a couple rooms away anyway, with no loss except time. You cannot lose, and despite that being for the sake of a good story, it hurts the gameplay.
Originally posted by General Kaliero
It doesn't apply just to the Daddies, they're simply used as the example because you're far more likely to die at the hands of one of them than even a large group of Splicers, who start out as a decent challenge in groups and about midway through the game become more minor annoyances than anything else.
Well, find me a game where regularly seen enemies continue to pack their original intimidation.
Zombies and ganados do not, even in a game like RE and RE4. When you FIRST EVER see a zombie in RE, as I remember from buying it when it first came out on the PS, that is one of the most intense, panic-riddled moments of my gaming experience. It's a single zombie, nothing more.
As time goes on, they give us new ways to jump or have fear inspired by the enemies, but as for games of themselves, it's hard for any group or type of enemy to maintain that. You get bombarded by them toward the end of RE4, but it doesn't actually match up to the village at the beginning. You get used to them, like you get used to anything. It's hardly a Bioshock flaw.
Originally posted by General Kaliero
I agree that the game has tension, a great amount of it. But that tension is achieved more through atmosphere than the actual fighting of Splicers. It's the echoing mutters and scattered footsteps that make you pause before moving into the next room, not a horde of enemies standing in front of you.
But then what? You'd end up getting bored of the horde of enemies that would eventually become a minor annoyance. If your argument is that ALL games developers need to find a way to rectify this, fine, but don't act as if Bioshock is the very first.
Originally posted by General Kaliero
Really, BioShock is a well-told interactive story. The only part that falls somewhat is the gameplay, because despite all that disconcerting atmosphere battle simply is not a challenge. If you win unscathed, great. If someone offs you, ah well, you've respawned a couple rooms away anyway, with no loss except time. You cannot lose, and despite that being for the sake of a good story, it hurts the gameplay.
I don't feel that it did hurt the gameplay, but that's the beauty of gaming experiences I suppose.
-AC
you cannot lose in many games, almost every game has you respawn, and if it doesnt its got the save option which is just the same as the respawning, only worse becuase you can approach diffrently but the game "could" become difficult ,for example if you dont just load up a save if you use your resources and keep getting beating youll end up with little resources and when big daddies or tough fights come you wont be able to handle it, also it would spoil your enjoyment if you had to keep respawning over and over, you need a hefty amount of eve and maybe first aid depending on the daddy and what plasmids you have to take one down
indeed, someone who has no skill at the game could end up expending all their resources...so what if the thing gives you back some eve, it doesnt give you ammo or i havnt found it does so far and the small amount of eve it gives you is doubtfully going to be enough to defeat anything major, and then you end up getting killed over and over again
Originally posted by Burning thought
you cannot lose in many games, almost every game has you respawn, and if it doesnt its got the save option which is just the same as the respawning, only worse becuase you can approach diffrently but the game "could" become difficult ,for example if you dont just load up a save if you use your resources and keep getting beating youll end up with little resources and when big daddies or tough fights come you wont be able to handle it, also it would spoil your enjoyment if you had to keep respawning over and over, you need a hefty amount of eve and maybe first aid depending on the daddy and what plasmids you have to take one down
No, take Final Fantasy for example. You are battling a required battle and you lose. You have to start all over. The enemy's health doesn't remain the same but returns to what it was.
Unlike Final Fantasy though the health of the enemies in BioShock remains what you took it down to. If they did reset the health of the enemies it would add more challenge to the game.
Well, some people call it a flaw that you can restart from a save point, doing the same part until you get it right.
These things aren't flaws, they are just preferences of the particular player.
If it annoys people that much, they should go back to the save point, not use the Vita Chamber and then say 'I ****ing hate using these'.
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
My point being; your point is silly and it makes no sense, so my conclusion is that you're looking for something to complain about. Let's break your point down;1) The Big Daddies weren't challenging cos you could respawn if you wanted to.
2) They weren't impossible to take down without dying.
3) You aren't asking for impossible to kill enemies.
So, if they weren't IMPOSSIBLY hard to kill, and that's your flaw, then the only logical conclusion is that you would want them impossibly hard to kill. Unless you mean harder to kill, in which case say what you mean, not the direct opposite.
Secondly, if you try, and if you're good enough, you can kill them without dying. Why, Ush claims to be able to beat a Big Daddy in about fifteen seconds, so evidently the respawning couldn't have been that much of a hinderance for him.
There's a lot of contradictory, we-want-everything complaining going on with you.
-AC
My point:
1) Big Daddies are challenging to kill without having to respawn.
2) With respawn chambers, Big Daddies are incredibly easy.
3) Without respawn chambers, the game would actually create some kind of feeling of difficulty or tension, since Big Daddies are challenging to kill without having to respawn. (see point #1 for further reference)