Game News Tyranny Released

[pomenitul]

I doubt any CRPG's, including the Codex's very own current top 10, could withstand the kind of inquisitorial scrutiny some of you are (ironically?) applying to Tyranny. A priori much?

Don't get me wrong, combat in particular is a slog throughout (see PJ's elucidations above), but that's hardly enough to sink the game as a whole, unless Brian Ferneyhough and, say, William H. Gass are your yardsticks in matters of light escapism, in which case you need to get the fuck off this forum and abjure vidya gaemz forever lest you turn into a dreaded Philistine yourself.

 

[Delterius]

Edit: this kind of thing is really unusual in cRPGs these days, especially from relatively prominent studios. That and the production values have me thinking this is likely to be a cult classic. There are people who really don't care about shit gameplay (as it's also easy and therefore won't frustrate them) but really do care about story-based replay value. They will be playing this game for a long, long time, and I think there are enough of them to make a little cult.

Given your spoilered example, I'm starting to think the original review's only real problem was language. I see where you are coming from, but feel that your value judgements are too much. There's no real way to identify a classic. Those are born out of time. Likewise, pointing out Tyranny's story branching appears to be more than fair. Doing so in a way that ponders how this is a game from a prominent studio and not a hobbyist is as well. Once upon a time these forums praised Dragon Age: Origins just for that. But comparing it to the queen of CYOAs might be perceived as false advertisement.

 

[prodigydancer]

the Archons were a lot like the Ascendants

With one important difference: the Ascendants in Malazan tend to become gods if they survive long enough, while the Archons simply die sooner or later (with the exception of Tunon - all accounts seem to agree on that he's no longer a mortal being).

Curiously, there are no religions in Tyranny. Attempts to worship Kyros are mentioned but apparently the practice is strictly prohibited. Nobody ever talks about any kind of faith or cult - not even the Tiersmen and they were free people not so long ago.

 

[Sentinel]

Wait, let me get this straight - something was leaked prematurely and Infinitron and Bubbles were involved?

If so, alarming, but fortunately this is just the first time, so there's hope it will not become a habit.

Prima Junta made a review about Tranny and mentioned AoD without having played it. We all know that some special individuals here, like Bubbles, are autists and they can't get their heads around the idea that someone can know from hearsay. Thus, the review can't be published until PJ removes the line about AoD or play it.

TLDR Because autism

lol if everyone trusted hearsay TES 5 would be the greatest RPG of all time.

 

[Prime Junta]

comparing it to the queen of CYOAs

We already went over this. What I did counts as comparison only by the most autistic of criteria.

That said, had I realised how triggering the mere mention of AoD would be to the Codex...

Spoiler

I would either have dropped it, or worded it for even greater butthurt while retaining plausible deniability. As it is, the trolling is entirely unintentional.

What's the point of a review if it doesn't have value judgments? Games aren't household appliances, you can't reduce them to "objective" lists of features and performance numbers while still saying something meaningful about it. They're to be enjoyed, and if a review doesn't say anything about whether a game is enjoyable, what about it is enjoyable and what is not, or what kind of person is likely to enjoy or not enjoy it, what's the point of writing one? That'd be like writing a concert review by saying that the conductor played a tempo that's 5% faster than average, the violin section's deviation from ideal pitch was 2% at two sigma, and the public applauded for 1 minute, 33 seconds. I write the kinds of reviews I'd like to read: they inform, yes, but they also make value judgments while being as transparent as feasible about personal preferences, experiences, and what have you.

Even Darth Roxor ought to be able to glean something from them: at the very least, if I like it, he knows he'll hate it.

 

[Delterius]

What's the point of a review if it doesn't have value judgments?

You are moving sideways. Never did I say that you aren't allowed to make value judgements. Only that your pretense lacked in substance. Calling something a cult classic is only a matter of fact years after its publication. Anything else comes off as propaganda.

This is just an editorial issue.

 

[Aenra]

With one important difference: the Ascendants in Malazan tend to become gods if they survive long enough

(out of topic, but) No. Absolutely nothing to do with surviving, only with:
i) attracting believers/followers and maintaining them in ever larger numbers
and/or
ii) being a primal (read: elder) force and as such responsible for physically influencing a plane

If inferring is difficult, you could at least have noticed that most of the Ascendants in his books are tens or hundreds of thousands of years old and yet are not Gods.

Reading teh hard? Should it have escaped your notice, i would inform you that newer Malazan collections come with pictures. Do try.

 

[Prime Junta]

What's the point of a review if it doesn't have value judgments?

You are moving sideways. Never did I say that you aren't allowed to make value judgements. Only that your pretense lacked in substance. Calling something a cult classic is only a matter of fact years after its publication. Anything else comes off as propaganda.

This is just an editorial issue.

<sigh>

I didn't call it a cult classic. I said I thought it has the makings of one, and I explained why.

Also it's also a bit late for editorial feedback, no? You guys had a week but I didn't hear a peep. I would have welcomed it then.

 

[Delterius]

Don't look at me, I'm on Decado's level.

 

[Fairfax]

The cult classic thing wasn't a joke? Holy shit, Cunta.

 

[Prime Junta]

Don't look at me, I'm on Decado's level.

And what level is Decado on? I don't even know what the levels are.

You appear to be discussing the review as if you actually read it, which implies that you were either extremely quick on Bubbles' leak, or do have privileged access of some sort.

 

[Prime Junta]

The cult classic thing wasn't a joke? Holy shit, Cunta.

Nope. That was the bit I was expecting to trigger the Codex. Guessed wrong.

 

[King Crispy]

 

[Lurker King]

lol if everyone trusted hearsay TES 5 would be the greatest RPG of all time.

That is just a figure of speech. What I was saying is that you can attest a basic game feature using many ways that don't involve playing or an exaustive analysis, e.g., reading other reviews, developers' interviews and updates, whatching LPs, trailers, etc. Having low standards is retarded and I don't trust PJ judgment - the fact alone that he wasn't engaged by AoD, but is making a review about Tyranny speaks volumes of him. But elevating the standards to austitic levels, i.e., to the point you can't state a known fact about a game unless you played, is foolishness.

 

[Sentinel]

lol if everyone trusted hearsay TES 5 would be the greatest RPG of all time.

That is just a figure of speech. What I was saying is that you can attest a basic game feature using many ways that don't involve playing or an exaustive analysis, e.g., reading other reviews, developers' interviews and updates, whatching LPs, trailers, etc. Having low standards is retarded and I don't trust PJ judgment - the fact alone that he wasn't engaged by AoD, but is making a review about Tyranny speaks volumes of him. But elevating the standards to austitic levels, i.e., to the point you can't state a known fact about a game unless you played, is foolishness.

So are you okay with that PCGamer reviewer who said Tyranny's writing is close to rivaling PS:T but then admitted he never played PS:T?

 

[Kev Inkline]

lol if everyone trusted hearsay TES 5 would be the greatest RPG of all time.

That is just a figure of speech. What I was saying is that you can attest a basic game feature using many ways that don't involve playing or an exaustive analysis, e.g., reading other reviews, developers' interviews and updates, whatching LPs, trailers, etc. Having low standards is retarded and I don't trust PJ judgment - the fact alone that he wasn't engaged by AoD, but is making a review about Tyranny speaks volumes of him. But elevating the standards to austitic levels, i.e., to the point you can't state a known fact about a game unless you played, is foolishness.

So are you okay with that PCGamer reviewer who said Tyranny's writing is close to rivaling PS:T but then admitted he never played PS:T?

OT but can you point me to that confession? I didn't find it on the review or comments.

 

[Fairfax]

lol if everyone trusted hearsay TES 5 would be the greatest RPG of all time.

That is just a figure of speech. What I was saying is that you can attest a basic game feature using many ways that don't involve playing or an exaustive analysis, e.g., reading other reviews, developers' interviews and updates, whatching LPs, trailers, etc. Having low standards is retarded and I don't trust PJ judgment - the fact alone that he wasn't engaged by AoD, but is making a review about Tyranny speaks volumes of him. But elevating the standards to austitic levels, i.e., to the point you can't state a known fact about a game unless you played, is foolishness.

So are you okay with that PCGamer reviewer who said Tyranny's writing is close to rivaling PS:T but then admitted he never played PS:T?

OT but can you point me to that confession? I didn't find it on the review or comments.

It's in the reddit thread.

 

[Sentinel]

lol if everyone trusted hearsay TES 5 would be the greatest RPG of all time.

That is just a figure of speech. What I was saying is that you can attest a basic game feature using many ways that don't involve playing or an exaustive analysis, e.g., reading other reviews, developers' interviews and updates, whatching LPs, trailers, etc. Having low standards is retarded and I don't trust PJ judgment - the fact alone that he wasn't engaged by AoD, but is making a review about Tyranny speaks volumes of him. But elevating the standards to austitic levels, i.e., to the point you can't state a known fact about a game unless you played, is foolishness.

So are you okay with that PCGamer reviewer who said Tyranny's writing is close to rivaling PS:T but then admitted he never played PS:T?

OT but can you point me to that confession? I didn't find it on the review or comments.

It was in the reddit thread about his review of the game. Someone asked him if he had ever played PS:T. I'm gonna try to find it.
Nevermind that cuck got it.

 

[Lurker King]

So are you okay with that PCGamer reviewer who said Tyranny's writing is close to rivaling PS:T but then admitted he never played PS:T?

That is a completely different issue. To actually know whether PS:T has good writing, you have to play it and analyze the writing with attention. To know that AoD is C&C focused you just need to read a few updates or watch one LP. My personal inclination is also autistic, i.e., that he shouldn’t be allowed to talk about games he doesn’t know and should be told to take a hike, since he is such a whiner popamole, but by these standards, a positive review of PoE or Tyranny shouldn’t be published in the first place. Either we demand higher standards and every review should be in the same level of Roxors’ PoE or Bubbles FO4, or we forget about it. Complaining about these minutiae all of a sudden just because some crook name drop PS:T is nitpicking. I guess my point is that editorial standards are more coercive regarding content than you guys expect them to be. Real standards wouldn’t allow some reviews to be published, having the reviewer played the games quoted or not.

 

[Sentinel]

So are you okay with that PCGamer reviewer who said Tyranny's writing is close to rivaling PS:T but then admitted he never played PS:T?

That is a completely different issue. To actually know whether PS:T has good writing, you have to play it and analyze the writing with attention. To know that AoD is C&C focused you just need to read a few updates or watch one LP. My personal inclination is also autistic, i.e., that he shouldn’t be allowed to talk about games he doesn’t know and should be told to take a hike, since he is such a whiner popamole, but by these standards, a positive review of PoE or Tyranny shouldn’t be published in the first place. Either we demand for higher standards and every cRPG should be in the same level of Roxors’ PoE or Bubbles FO4, or we forget about it. Complaining about these minutiae all of a sudden just because some crook name drop PS:T is nitpicking.

1) You don't need to play PS:T to know it has good writing either, you just have to watch an LP.
2) It's not a completely different issue. Both are people talking about games they've never played and just reproducing the most popular opinion. If you're gonna write a review, know what you're talking about, don't make baseless comparisons.

 

[pomenitul]

So are you okay with that PCGamer reviewer who said Tyranny's writing is close to rivaling PS:T but then admitted he never played PS:T?

Totally, incontrovertibly, irrefutably the same thing. Likewise, I've never been to Antarctica, so why should I believe that it's ice cold down there? I've never rested my hand on a burning stove so who's to say that it would hurt? How can I know that others exist apart from my perception? Is this all a simulation? Verily, unfathomable are the depths of this autistry.

 

[Mustawd]

just post review plz.

 

[Kev Inkline]

I've dabbled in it over the years but my god is that game demanding, and it hasn't aged as well unfortunately. I still think about forcing myself through it every few years though.

 

[Lurker King]

You don't need to play PS:T to know it has good writing either, you just have to watch an LP.

That depends. Are we talking about a gigantic LP were the player reads every single dialogue or piece of writing? If that is the case, then he could. But we know that someone who didn’t play PS:T would not watch a gigantic LP and make a proper analysis. So that is a non-issue.

 

[Sentinel]

You don't need to play PS:T to know it has good writing either, you just have to watch an LP.

That depends. Are we talking about a gigantic LP were the player reads every single dialogue or piece of writing? If that is the case, then he could. But we know that someone who didn’t play PS:T would not watch a gigantic LP and make a proper analysis. So that is a non-issue.

Then you can't judge AoD's C&C, world-building and story without playing it either.
Unless, of course, you watch a gigantic LP were the player reads every single dialogue or piece of writing and completes every single path possible.
But, alas, we know that someone who didn’t play AoD would not watch a gigantic LP and make a proper analysis.