I don’t mind the Desmond arc; it’s a fine enough anchor for the rest of the action. They could stand to end an AC game on something other than a cliffhanger, though… it’s sad that the thing I’m most looking forward to in Revelations is a bit of closure.

I don’t think it’ll take long to gather enough haters here who’ll vouch for me not being the brightest bulb in the room.
But I am stupendously astonished each and every time people seemingly have elaborate difficulties in comprehending and wresting control over some of the mechanics and controls of some games. I’m not talking about being good at a the game, just about figuring out the basics of it and how to do things or how things are done or what button does what.
Maybe it’s because I’ve been gaming since I was little on both computer and console, maybe it’s the broad genre of games that I’ve had experienced, maybe it was because I played games at a time where the word tutorial wasn’t a part of the concept…I have no idea.
But time and again I find people facing severe dilemma on how to operate a game whereas to me the understanding of its mechanisms and manipulation seems to come almost naturally.

Are game designers doing something ostensibly wrong or is there some new breed of gamers that simply lack something that some of us had gotten in the ‘way back when’ and missed recognition of its existence/taken for granted?

Kinda how I feel about it. I’m not the biggest Yahtzee fan in the world but for this one he hits the nail on the head. Saint’s Row 2 was just about perfect for me. Loads of fun to be had everywhere but enough immersionist elements I could play things fairly straight if I wanted to. GTA IV bored me to tears. SR3 looked so silly I steered entirely clear. SR2 is the sweet spot for me.

You’re not the only one. Wasn’t thrilled with the weird ‘2012’ levels from AC:R, but I like the overall 2012 storyline.

So what you’re saying is that sometimes people don’t grasp some things on the first go round? Forgive me, but yes. Also, the sky is blue. Different things are obvious to different people. Personally, I made my peace with this when I spent a good chunk of my professional life doing tech support.

I think you can take just about anything and find someone on this planet who just won’t “get it”. And no, I don’t think that makes them an idiot.

It’s hard to talk about this in generalities, IMO, but… part of it might be how much a game has been focus-tested… part of it might be time pressure causing the player to panic (ever blow a test even though you totally knew all the answers?)… part of it may be wrong assumptions by the player. That sort of thing.

Think of it as what you encounter every day when you attempt to communicate in human-speak. The problem is that you’re using an imagined level of competence as a metric for anything other than mental illness. Game developers and the “new” breed of gamers are just fine.

Well, it’s not someone when there are several. Also, no one called them idiots.
I think the road between getting confused with how a game’s mechanics work and being an idiot is lengthy enough to have a distinctive abyss separating the two.

Hmm, true.

That’s a bit unrelated but I suppose that’s a possibility and good word in general.

This week: Zelda: Skyward Sword.

Rather less ecstatic than most of the reviews out there (surprise!)

He really does make it sound godawful, though. That can’t just be generalized bitterness; if any of what he says is true, the game is a mere travesty.

Wind Waker fans (and Yahtzee clearly is one) generally have the most negative reactions to Skyward Sword. Wind Waker was a game with a lot of free exploration set in a world that felt very big. Skyward Sword is shamelessly on rails and the map areas don’t really feel big even when it takes forever to get across them.

Skyward Sword is just an extremely divisive game, it’s really comparable to Zelda II in that regard (right down to the recurring arguments about whether the controls are shit or not). People who click with the game seem to enjoy it a very great deal, some even calling it the best of the 3D Zeldas. Everyone else seems to end up thinking it’s terribly flawed, at best.

While I don’t think Skyward Sword is a bad game, Yahtzee’s criticisms are pretty dead on for the most part.

I would call this a borderline indefensible opinion. There’s no way Skyward Sword is in the same league as the N64 titles.

I would tend to agree. Skyward Sword lacks the cohesion of Ocarina or Majora’s Mask. To me it feels like a stripped-down version of whatever game the developers actually set out to make.

You tend to get the “best 3D Zelda ever” reaction from people who really, really like the motion controls and want to view them as a great leap forward for game design.

Serious Sam 3: Butt Fondling Everyone

I don’t miss Doom II style shooters. Even leaving aside most of the current innovations in shooters which I like, going whole-hog mindless has been pretty much passé since Valve killed it with Half Life in 1998. So much of what Yahtzee is supposedly wishing for falls flat for me.

As someone who actually fell asleep due to boredom while playing Painkiller, I agree with Gus.

Falling asleep playing one of the most balls to the wall arcade style shooters made, what.

Unless you’re some wacky narcoleptic that falls asleep skydiving explain, sir.

Fall asleep during Painkiller??? How…I mean…what…er…huh?!

It’s boring and repetitive. I really hated Painkiller.

I mean, maybe in like 1997 or something.

I can’t even…I don’t…bluh…crumples in to a fetal position, drooling

Yup, this. There was just nothing in that game to interest me at all. I had done it all before, and just having physics wasn’t enough to make it fresh again. I do enjoy Serious Sam for what it is, but Painkiller left me completely cold.

Further sacrilege: Bulletstorm is so much better than Painkiller it’s hard to believe it was made by the same people.