Honestly, I'm a bit skeptical about this game

#61appleturnover87Posted 3/18/2012 7:32:00 PM
sephiroth_1012 posted...
Long story short, lack of a real ranking system.

And that. As I said all that stuff was just off the top of my head.
---
What's love got to do, got to do with it?
#62Bowser05Posted 3/18/2012 9:43:41 PM
I do play to win though. I just have no problem with losing as long as I'm enjoying myself. To be fair you need to understand because I work retail majority of people I personally deal with are CoD players who must win and losing is not an option. The angry little rage kids, if you will. So I realize my perception is flawed but that's how I see the majority of players being to be honest. So you may say that playing to win AND having no problem with losing are a normal combination for somebody to have in which case at least you understand where I'm coming from and why I said what I did.

Now, that being said, that's fine if you see casual as being that way (though I don't agree with it at all), but this goes back to what I said earlier about competetive being very much about personal feelings. I find CoD to be EXTREMELY unbalanced and full of core flaws that destroy skill based gameplay (no offense CoD players...just my opinion), but the majority of CoD players that I know are EXTREMELY competetive players. Regardless of whether they do or don't see the core issues of the game the point is they play to win and they have FUN. So are you telling me that those players who DON'T see the flaws but are competetive aren't really comptetetive are also casual? That is preposterous. I play to win, I have fun, but I don't care if I lose. That does not make me casual nor does it make me unable to see the flaws because of my play style. I don't say this to be mean but I honestly feel like your definition of casual is extremely flawed.

Going back to the main point, thank you for finally putting out the points. Now that you mention it I have noticed almost all of these issues. Jet packs do tend to make me angry and I used to love armor lock but I have found myself using sprint or roll the most lately. So yes, I do see the flaws, I am aware of them, and for fully balanced tournament play I wouldn't say it does that well (reminds me of UMvC3...I love that game but I don't think it is a very good fighting game overall), but that is one part of the whole package. The multiplayer is still fun and I still find the campaign to be beautifully done...so while now that you actually made me think about the issues I just ignored I agree with some of what you said....but I still don't think that means the game is bad. I still think it was good.

To be fair, I have a better understanding and know why people don't like it as much as the others. I'm mainly a campaign player at heart though and judge mostly based on that...so of course my opinion on the game is a little one-sided in that manner. Heck I even enjoyed Duke Nukem Forever's multiplayer with how terrible it was so I should also mention I'm easy to please.
---
Playing:Dragon Age 2,LBP,K:CC,FFXIII,Gears3,Borderlands,PkMnW,DKCR,Halo Reach,Assassin's Creed
Still waiting for Nintendo to release Mother 3 in the US...
#63appleturnover87Posted 3/18/2012 10:12:32 PM
Bowser05 posted...
I do play to win though. I just have no problem with losing as long as I'm enjoying myself. To be fair you need to understand because I work retail majority of people I personally deal with are CoD players who must win and losing is not an option. The angry little rage kids, if you will. So I realize my perception is flawed but that's how I see the majority of players being to be honest. So you may say that playing to win AND having no problem with losing are a normal combination for somebody to have in which case at least you understand where I'm coming from and why I said what I did.

Now, that being said, that's fine if you see casual as being that way (though I don't agree with it at all), but this goes back to what I said earlier about competetive being very much about personal feelings. I find CoD to be EXTREMELY unbalanced and full of core flaws that destroy skill based gameplay (no offense CoD players...just my opinion), but the majority of CoD players that I know are EXTREMELY competetive players. Regardless of whether they do or don't see the core issues of the game the point is they play to win and they have FUN. So are you telling me that those players who DON'T see the flaws but are competetive aren't really comptetetive are also casual? That is preposterous. I play to win, I have fun, but I don't care if I lose. That does not make me casual nor does it make me unable to see the flaws because of my play style. I don't say this to be mean but I honestly feel like your definition of casual is extremely flawed.


I cut out the last part since we're pretty much in agreement there. Addressing your first paragraph:

I think you misunderstand what I mean by "competitive" and "casual" which is why you disagree. Allow me to clarify. I only use these terms in the context of how they pertain to gameplay, not the literal definition necessarily. See you bring up CoD kids who live or die over it, I consider that casual. These terms kind of developed in a weird way around the boards, and it's kind of hard to explain what I mean. The terms aren't meant to encompass anything other than how you see the game I guess. Like, you can be the most serious person ever when you're playing and rage over losses, but if you don't understand the mechanics of the game and don't care about balance, that's what I consider casual. Alternatively, you can be a bad player and brush off a loss like nothing and continue on enjoying yourself, but you understand the game and you want it to be as balanced and skill based as possible. I would consider that player "competitive." The term "competitive" doesn't just mean you play seriously, it represents a player who understands the game and wants it to be as BS free and skill based as possible, even if they aren't great players.

Second paragraph:

CoD IS extremely unbalanced and full of core flaws that ruin competitive play. That's why i consider it casual. You can take it as seriously as you want but it will never be a competitive game because it fails on a competitive level. Based on how you describe yourself I would consider that a competitive mindset. I don't know how much sense all this will make to you but I tried to explain it as best I could.
---
What's love got to do, got to do with it?
#64Bowser05Posted 3/18/2012 10:23:40 PM
Hm. I suppose that makes sense...distinguishing the difference between competetive play versus competetive mindsets. I guess that's where we differ...since I think about mindset first while you think about play first.

Still, while we are mostly on the same page now, I'd like to point out that your definitions are a little too cut and dry for my tastes. I know I'm being picky at this point but nothing is as black and white as 'casual' or 'competetive'...I think that's the main reason why hearing 'casual' irritates me.

Anyway, to be fair to the TC, I will go back to the OT and say that I'm actually extremely excited for Halo 4 and while I am a bit skeptical as well...I am going to give 343 a chance because if they deliver with what they say they are trying...things look very promising.
---
Playing:Dragon Age 2,LBP,K:CC,FFXIII,Gears3,Borderlands,PkMnW,DKCR,Halo Reach,Assassin's Creed
Still waiting for Nintendo to release Mother 3 in the US...