Firstly,
this is about the most prolific video game movie actors in Hollywood.
Two are supermodels.
The Saboteur is, to me, an incredibly enjoyable game that isn't actually all that good. While its controls are horrendous and certain aspects of the design make no sense (death has absolutely no consequence, for instance), it highlights something far, far more open world games should be doing: making the act of dicking around in the game world equally as fun (if not more so) than the linear, scripted missions.
In something of the same way that Red Faction Guerilla's "control" meter worked (where you were free to lower control by doing anything yo uwanted, be it blowing up propaganda signs or taking out huge-ass military installations), I like that the side-stuff in The Saboteur isn't completely divorced from the main gameplay save for cash rewards (as is the case in GTA, Assassin's Creed, 99% of all sandbox games). When you blow up a sniper tower in The Saboteur, it feels like you're not just doing it for the shit of it -- you're doing it to lower the Nazi presence and make it easier to handle that area.
Granted, this is what the game wants you to think, and not the reality -- once your alarm level gets high enough, one more sniper tower doesn't mean shit -- but I like the fact that more games are trying to unite the overworld and the game proper, rather than going the GTA route and just throwing linear missions in a nonlinear environment.
On an unrelated note, the simple act of escaping alarms, especially if you're going for the gold hiding-from-stuff perk, can be fucking epic. Successfully evading a level five alarm was one of the most enjoyable things I did in the game, and none of it was scripted.
That, really, is what appeals to me; putting the player in a position of power to determine what sort of experience they wish to have, and how, and when, and then complicating those intentions with enemies and varied terrain and so on and so forth. Games like The Saboteur and Red Faction Guerilla are a step in the right direction where open-world games are concerned. They're not there yet -- I still want to see a sandbox where the "main" missions and the supplementary ones are all but indistinguishable -- but for a game that suck as much as the Saboteur does, I'm having an awful lot of fun with it.
If that's not an oxymoron I don't know what is. Seriously Anthony, do you even like games that are not indie ones? I'm not trying to troll you here because I have respect for you as a writer but 98% of the time you just shit on everything. Or pontificate on how the majority of games suck because they aren't up to your personal standards of perfection.
Sometimes games are just a cool way of dicking around nd having fun. Everything doesn't have to gel or be logical or make sense because they're just videogames bro.
"While its controls are horrendous" What is so bad about the controls? I haven't played it, and This is a game that has piqued my interest.
The saboteur, I'm gonna let you Finnish, but Fallout 1/2 are some of the best open world games of all time.
"I'm not trying to troll you here"
Could have fooled me.
If you notice, I didn't complain that the game was bad because it was too fun, or didn't have a level where you grow old and have to pay taxes or something -- I said the game sucks because the controls are awful (literally ALL of the controls, from the unresponsive driving to the awkward platforming to the infuriating shooting and sabotage controls) and for a game that seems to imply that it's important to run away from the Nazis, death has absolutely no consequence. As a result, it's easy and profitable to just run around suicide-bombing stuff, which gets boring.
I'm getting especially tired of lazy people confusing "Anthony is capable of criticizing shitty design aspects" with "Anthony is incapable of liking fun games." The Saboteur is shitty because much of its design is NOT fun, when it is trying to be. It is also highly enjoyable, despite much of that design.
GamesAreArt:
You'd have a hard time finding anyone, myself included, who didn't absolutely hate the Vita-Chamber system in BioShock. It's different in The Saboteur, however, because (A) Saboteur doesn't have an engaging story, fantastic atmosphere, and enjoyable controls and basic combat mechanics to fall back on, and (B) as Saboteur is an open world game that encourages the player to use strategic thinking (stealth, distractions, long-range weaponry mixed with disguise and infiltration) to take out Nazi installations, which is completely antithetical to the idea of consequence-free death (as, again, you can just hurl yourself into Nazi bases, plant semtex near a tower, and blow it up while standing next to it and you'll still get the cash bonus); BioShock, the big daddy fights notwithstanding, is somewhat less reliant on that sort of high-level strategic thinking.
Hooray!
Six weeks later, he blew himself up in a homemade space rocket because he thought UK version of NASA were taking 'too bloody long' with trips to the moon.
Sad day indeed...he's going miss the new Doctor Who episode and everything now. Cuh.
It reminds me a lot of the new Prince of Persia. I call them "infatuation games". If you fall in love with The Prince and Elika too hard to realize that the game is one giant collectathon QTE with no depth, you'll love it.
You know you don't permanently lose it, right? That you can put it back as soon as you find a plasmid switching-out station?
Magnalon:
Setting had nothing to do with it.
At least, I'm referring to Jim, who completely fell in love with not only the setting, but the artistic style, which he talked about at great length.
Yes, I would.
Aside from the medium trolling (Just because its indie doesn't mean he gives it a high score), I feel you and its one of the things that irks me about Anthony's style as well. His critique style is based on Theoretical Game Perfect, which doesn't exist, but could, if all of these games were different in some way. As a basis for critique, it makes alot of sense and is probably pretty healthy for the industry at large with regards to constructive criticism.
The side effect is that it sounds like he doesn't enjoy games, even if he gets some good times out of them.
Iunno. Sometimes I loves me a Rev Rant, because its good theorycraft for a guy that wants to see the best games being made possible. Othertimes, I could use a Chad Concelmo getting stupid hype over a fluff game, because he seems o voice his opinion directly from his pleasure sensors, to palpable detriment of critical content.
Clearly, I spend too much time at Destructoid. :)
I know you can have more slots, but it sort of killed the joy for a moment and gave it a hiatus. i'll be back on it when i have the mood.
Oh, come on! Who doesn't love those games? But I guess you have a point.
They served the same purpose at regular intervals and I'm pretty sure you didn't have the choice to opt out, unlike the 'no vita-chambers' option. I mean, I really came to rely on it when it came to getting that Brass Balls achievement and Hard mode was a joke because of it.
She's fucking hideous.
Now I love linear games, I dont mind he developer holding my hand, I like that idea actually. It makes life simple I know where to go, and the action usually never stops because there is rarely travel time. Anyways that's just me.
This sentence alone pretty much just sold me on the game. I'm buying it tomorrow.
This is exactly what I though about Mercenaries 2, it was buggy, the story made no sense, controls were pretty awful. But dammit it was really fun, especially co-op, even through it just made the game even more buggy, that in itself made the game more fun, laughably so, but fun nonetheless.
RIP Pandemic.
For as many flaws as it definitely does have, it's a remarkably fun game.