well MG would not be so bad if not for the damn 20 min codec talks with talking heads. I like MGS games and man them long ass codec talks bore me to tears too.
Big Name Games with Little Gameplay
- Thread starter Intellivision
- Start date
well MG would not be so bad if not for the damn 20 min codec talks with talking heads. I like MGS games and man them long ass codec talks bore me to tears too.
I'm glad Intelli was able to mask the thread to bash the Order since he's banned from the Sony area.
Excluding the MG: Revengeance demo (not a real MGS game), the last one I played was MGS1 on PS1!
I remember reading about the issue with MGS 2 being that you didn't even play as Snake much. Didn't bother with #3 and never had a PS3 to play #4. Didn't bother with that $30 demo game either.
Last edited:
nah seems other users turned it into a nice thread.
On topic I know one game I liked on Sega CD was one of those games of video but you were in a fighter jet it was pretty cool. s*** if i remember the name however. Even my dad liked it. HA find it thank you Google Tomcat Alley.
I never played Asura's Wrath but I think it belongs here from what I have seen.
And also The Order 1886.
And also The Order 1886.
Personally, I'm okay with it, as long as it doesn't become a discussion about The Order. We've already got a thread for that.
Yikes. That gave is 3/4 cut-scenes, 1/4 canned gameplay. And I thought any games out there that are 50/50 gameplay/cut-scenes was bad.
Cut him some slack. He bought the wrong console and now he's going through buyer's remorse. Let him hate. The rest of us will be playing the best exclusive this year come tomorrow. The Order: 1886 will restore order to the kingdom. Sony's back and in a big way baby. Greatness awaited and it's about to deliver.
I think Five Nights at Freddy's has plenty of gameply, it's just a very specific type of game.
I've never heard of this Freddy game until this thread.
Never the less, the thing about gameplay is that gameplay isn't measured in clicks or moving a mouse or analog stick. A game like chess has people sitting there thinking for minutes or hours before a move. That is still gameplay, even though the actual movement of a piece takes 3 seconds.
Cut-scenes are not gameplay. You just sit there and watch. If a game let's you skip the cut-scene (most allow you to), it makes no difference to the actual game. And that makes sense since it has nothing to do with gameplay. In Chess or any turn-based game, skipping a turn is lethal. It will make or break your chances at winning as you just gave up your chance at gameplay.
Agreed, though if used in the correct amount cut-scenes add a lot to games. I for one like them, just to give myself a little break and get more background on the story and characters.
True. But for me, I don't mind lengthy dialogue scenes if the rest of the game is solid and has plenty of content. I typically skip cut-scenes, but in Mass Effect and Elder Scrolls games sometimes I'll listen to the voiceovers. ME is important as you have the dialogue tree though and yo got to pick the right dialogue answer you want.
The problem with unskippable cut-scenes is if the game is light on content to begin with. So the dev forces upon cut-scenes to make the game feel longer, while skimping on gameplay. Two bad no-nos.
I've never understood skipping cutscenes in a story based, single player game unless you are on multiple playthroughs.
Never understood that either. The cutscene is there for a reason. I've probably had more experiences with gameplay portions I wish I could skip than cutscenes. I can remember a couple instances where I felt the cutscene went on too long, but generally they are well used and provide some variety, flesh out the characters/story, etc..
Personally, I've always thought the distinction between "gameplay" and "cutscenes" was a little over-simplified. Gameplay is not just about twiddling sticks and pushing buttons, as Intelly points out in the chess analogy above. "Gameplay" also includes thinking. For example, thinking about how the game is currently set up -- where the pieces are on the board, how the pieces interact, what might be possible strategies, what might be the consequences if I do X or Y, etc..
Cutscenes, meanwhile, are described as passive activities the player "just sits and watches." But is that true? Do you cease to think during a cutscene? In adventure games or RPGs, a cutscene will often serve to arrange "how the game is currently set up -- where the pieces are on the board, how the pieces interact, what might be possible strategies, what might be the consequences if I do X or Y, etc.."
Granted, not all cutscenes are like this -- many of them do play out as passive viewing activities and just serve to take the story from point A to point B. But I've seen plenty of cutscenes (typically in RPGs, adventure, or action/adventure games) that have made me think about how the "game board" is set up, how the "pieces" interact, what my strategies might be, rethink my next moves, etc. So, cutscenes aren't necessarily just passive viewing. Sometimes they involve active thought about alignments, moves, choices/consequences, etc. within the "gameplay" itself.
Personally, I've always thought the distinction between "gameplay" and "cutscenes" was a little over-simplified. Gameplay is not just about twiddling sticks and pushing buttons, as Intelly points out in the chess analogy above. "Gameplay" also includes thinking. For example, thinking about how the game is currently set up -- where the pieces are on the board, how the pieces interact, what might be possible strategies, what might be the consequences if I do X or Y, etc..
Cutscenes, meanwhile, are described as passive activities the player "just sits and watches." But is that true? Do you cease to think during a cutscene? In adventure games or RPGs, a cutscene will often serve to arrange "how the game is currently set up -- where the pieces are on the board, how the pieces interact, what might be possible strategies, what might be the consequences if I do X or Y, etc.."
Granted, not all cutscenes are like this -- many of them do play out as passive viewing activities and just serve to take the story from point A to point B. But I've seen plenty of cutscenes (typically in RPGs, adventure, or action/adventure games) that have made me think about how the "game board" is set up, how the "pieces" interact, what my strategies might be, rethink my next moves, etc. So, cutscenes aren't necessarily just passive viewing. Sometimes they involve active thought about alignments, moves, choices/consequences, etc. within the "gameplay" itself.
I'd say that the game-play related cut-scenes (the ones that affect how you approach a situation in a meaningful way as opposed to setting the scene for it) are not nearly as common as the other.
That said, if you skip the cut-scene/story, you might as well just play the multiplayer. I guess some people just like the structured, scenario-focused bot-battling of campaign modes.