Why is the new God Of War so revered?
- Thread starter Black Chamber
- Start date
- Status
So say a game has objectively bad voice acting. Like, the actor is abysmal at reading the lines with any kind of emotion. Because someone isn't bothered by it, it's therefore not an issue? You're really gonna try and say something doesn't have flaws because it's always an eye of the beholder thing?
Whenever I see threads like this I am reminded of the Family Guy episode where they are trapped in their panic room that is flooding during a home invasion. It ends with Peter's last words being he did not like Godfather 2. He just offers that opinion on his own and without being asked. When confronted by Lois and Chris, Peter relates that it was dull and it "insists upon itself". Also admits he didn't finish it. Lois and Chris continue to provide counter points while Peter remains firm.
And then he ends with "I love the Money Pit."
Link
And then he ends with "I love the Money Pit."
Link
Last edited:
Yes. Deciding if voice acting is bad is subjective. Deciding if it detracts from the experience is subjective. Some people actually enjoy bad voice acting. Is it a flaw to them?
Because it's God of War which is the far better game. Too bad you don't like it. But just as always: Not every great game has to be for everybody. You didn't like the Game of the Year 2018 (even game of the generation imho). That's okay. Play the games you like. Not much to understand here.
And I was just thinking that complaint and some others, like someone said about combat, can apply to alot of games.It is literally
The game.
I think the OoT comparisons make even more sense now.
I loved the combat, story and visuals. Honestly, besides RDR2, I can't think of a game that was more of an technical marvel this generation......or any other generation for that matter. When I really started to look at everything that went in to this game, it just blows my mind that it all came out flawlessly. SSM pulled it off spectacularly.
I think it's a masterpiece in the art of interactive entertainment.
I think it's a masterpiece in the art of interactive entertainment.
I thought it was one of the wackest AAA titles to get critical acclaim. I don't believe in the Sony AAA exclusive meme but it hit all the check marks for "Oscar bait"
If something lacking sticks out when comparing it to the rest, it's a weak point or flaw, like boss and enemy variety in GoW, it is probably going to be better done in GoW 2 too.
Now there is stuff which can be considered a flaw by some, but not others, like too much combat, I think something like that comes purely down to how much you enjoy the combat, more than anything, like I'd consider that a flaw of RDR2 for example, but wouldn't for something like Uncharted, even if it sticks out in both.
Everything it set out to do it excelled at. No other game in recent memory has hit every note so precisely, with such fidelity. It is polished and precise. It's gorgeous from every aesthetic point of view. The combat is challenging, fun to master, and rewarding. Chaining attacks with mutliple weapons and special abilities can reach euphoric heights and produce absolute fireworks. There's a great sense of feedback. I could go on.
My one lingering issue with the game probably doesn't echo the consensus. I felt that the game ended kind of abruptly, as if the game was setting up more of a balanced second half adventure, to mirror the ambitions of the first half. It felt distinctly incomplete. Notably the final two worlds are shorter and rely on repetitive grinding, replacing more story & puzzle-driven level progression. It's as if they just had to end it, but were forced to prematurely, due to poor planning or maybe drying up resources. (I know the real answer, but what I'm trying to convey is the sense I had at the end of the game.. from just the context of the game itself).
It mars what otherwise felt like a nigh-(and super rare) perfect game experience.
If in fact anyone ever asked me to nomintae an example of a perfect game, God of War would be in the conversation.
My one lingering issue with the game probably doesn't echo the consensus. I felt that the game ended kind of abruptly, as if the game was setting up more of a balanced second half adventure, to mirror the ambitions of the first half. It felt distinctly incomplete. Notably the final two worlds are shorter and rely on repetitive grinding, replacing more story & puzzle-driven level progression. It's as if they just had to end it, but were forced to prematurely, due to poor planning or maybe drying up resources. (I know the real answer, but what I'm trying to convey is the sense I had at the end of the game.. from just the context of the game itself).
It mars what otherwise felt like a nigh-(and super rare) perfect game experience.
If in fact anyone ever asked me to nomintae an example of a perfect game, God of War would be in the conversation.
While I should probably try it before forming an actual opinion, I loooooooved the original trilogy but couldn't even be bothered to try this one because it was so different in tone and style. Looked boring as hell and seemed like it was suddenly up its own butt in trying to be more like serious titles like Last of Us or what have you(and I love TLoU, but it's not what I want out of an action series like GoW).
Someday I'll try it, but it just screams cliche the further it gets from its roots to try and be something else.
Someday I'll try it, but it just screams cliche the further it gets from its roots to try and be something else.
Boss or enemy variety is not an objective flaw. Example: it didn't bother me one bit in God of War. That doesn't mean that it bothering you isn't 100% valid. That's how opinions work. "God of War has X number of enemy types" is a fact. "God of Wars lack of enemy types is a flaw" is not. This shouldn't be that difficult.
Hard to explain exactly without going into hyperbole. But it was basically the perfect game...Outstanding music, combat, cutscenes, characters...The whole package. The single-take was the coolest thing I've seen in games this generation. I just couldn't stop playing. Only other game to do that this gen was BotW and Nier: Automata.
New GoW takes itself less serious than old GoW. It actually has humor this time.
The only boss I enjoyed was the
dragon
In fact I thought the opening one was one of the most overrated bosses I've ever faced, given that it is little more than a QTE.
It is so revered because it has high production value, the graphics are insane, and it has a mature story that people love to eat up. It is the equivalent to a Michael Bay movie all flash no substance. The combat was passible (not a compliment), enemy variety was complete shit, and there are hardly any boss fights that are any good ( awesome cutscenes with quick time events don't make a boss fight good). As game with such a big budget they sure did spend most of it on those pretty graphics.
The third person camera, the gritty/realistic style, slower-paced and more down to earth combat, and sappy father/son story beg to differ.
I miss the Zeus-bashing, over the top stuff from the originals...
Not really, its one of the only games that made me laugh out loud in recent memory.
The flaw exist regardless of if it bothers you or not, that's what I was saying. It's not like it starts and ends at the flaw, it can for some or be a non factor for other, but it's still a flaw.
I don't mean serious as in NOT FUNNY, I mean serious as in, trying to have a grounded, emotion-provoking story. The very fact that Kratos now cares about another human is a huge difference in character.
Again, I can't speak from experience, but is it actually as satisfying as all the build up the trilogy gives you by the time you get to Zeus? Or really any of the annoying gods.
They never forget the roots, and they play a huge part of why it works so well.
No? We aren't talking about a subset who gets a kick out of it. We're talking about someone literally unable to put out emotion for a scene that requires it. A writer writes a scene and the actor's delivery doesn't match the dialogue or tone. There's nothing subjective about it. It's not good because it doesn't match. Enjoyment of the poor performance is something else.
That you can look past or even enjoy what the consensus deems a flaw doesn't rise it above reproach.
The idea that flaws don't exist and that everything is subjective is one of the most annoying and toxic ideas that populate current gaming critisism. A door that requires a sign to indicate if you have to pull it or push it is worse than a door which design doesn't require of such information and people just use it correctly intuitively.
Good design and bad design exist, good story telling and bad storytelling exist, good art and bad art exist. If everything was subjective and objective quality didn't exist every piece of media would recieve the same acolades. the truth is that objective quality exist even tho subjective enjoyment is also a factor when we interact with a piece of media.
Discussing and examining the objective qualities of media and art, trying as best as we can to minimize our subjective enjoyment in the equation (although having it present) may help people understand why they enjoy a piece of media more than others or didn't enjoy a piece of media at all. Whether you agree or not with an argument for the quality of x, dismissing it as "it is just your opinion" "everything is subjective" "flaws don't exist" is extremly reductive and disrespectful. I don't know why some of you participate in a thread that pretends to discusse those aspects if you are going to adopt this mentality.
Good design and bad design exist, good story telling and bad storytelling exist, good art and bad art exist. If everything was subjective and objective quality didn't exist every piece of media would recieve the same acolades. the truth is that objective quality exist even tho subjective enjoyment is also a factor when we interact with a piece of media.
Discussing and examining the objective qualities of media and art, trying as best as we can to minimize our subjective enjoyment in the equation (although having it present) may help people understand why they enjoy a piece of media more than others or didn't enjoy a piece of media at all. Whether you agree or not with an argument for the quality of x, dismissing it as "it is just your opinion" "everything is subjective" "flaws don't exist" is extremly reductive and disrespectful. I don't know why some of you participate in a thread that pretends to discusse those aspects if you are going to adopt this mentality.
I'm gonna stop chiming in just because I haven't played even a minute of it, I guess I just miss the old combat and style and because of that the new one doesn't appeal to me.
He cared about people in the old games too, just this time Kratos is a far better written character.
Again who decides whether that is bad? Who decides whether that detracts from the experience? You? That is not objective.
Because the game is that good.
I don't understand this term, "this thing is trying to be good and win prizes!"
I don't understand this term, "this thing is trying to be good and win prizes!"
Thing is, I never tuned in to the old GoW because of Kratos' character. The rage and combat style alone was catharsis enough that I didn't need Kratos to be very interesting.
Also, I absolutely loved all the old dungeons/temples, etc, and the style of the gameplay really suited that stuff. It was like hyper-action Zelda.
The example you gave, about enemy variety, is not an objective flaw. If it doesn't bother me, how the fuck is it a flaw? Who decides what number of enemy types is the right amount?
It a very satisfying game, probably it's greatest strength is how satisfying the combat is imo, excellent sound and animation. It's not as over the top though, like you can't infinitely Zeus-bash people.
You should try it, it's actually pretty funny sometimes, the "mood" is nothing like TLOU.
Even watching all the cutscenes (and some gameplay with dialogue) edited together into a movie on YouTube I found the lack of bosses/enemy variety really disappointing. I was actually shocked by how few enemy types there are.
There's this scene about half way through the game where something's trying to break down a huge door and the game really tries to build it up, make it all tense... and it's just another troll, the first boss in the game.
The combat also looked pretty repetitive/not something I'd be into (watch is why I watched the story on YouTube).
Was the best game I played last year, by far. It's one of those rare gems that I didn't want to end.
But I get where you're coming from. I felt the same way about RE4. The new formula didn't click with me at all.
But I get where you're coming from. I felt the same way about RE4. The new formula didn't click with me at all.
I will give it a try sometime.
Did either of you like the original trilogy, and is there stuff from the originals that you prefer to the new game?
Variety doesn't just mean a higher number of enemy types, it could have the same amount and still have more variety in their designs and how you have to deal with them (this is true for most games though), I don't really care about the boss variety, but the enemy variety could've done with either a couple more enemy types per faction or less Humanoids, it wasn't a deal breaker or anything for me, but I'd expect more from 2.
because it's one of the best games this gen if not ever. My personal GOTG.
AMAZING combat system, the best axe, really interesting story/narration/characters, insane environments..like holy shit that lake and how it changes over time
So yeah, it deserves all the praise and then some
AMAZING combat system, the best axe, really interesting story/narration/characters, insane environments..like holy shit that lake and how it changes over time
So yeah, it deserves all the praise and then some
If the majority of people playing laugh at a scene instead of cry when the intention is to draw out sad emotions, it's an objective failure of the intended goal.
To be fair, you can describe half of all AAA games and Hollywood movies like this.It is literally
The game.
There are not and God of War has many objective flaws like a completly useless equiment system that only exist to give an excuse for "exploration" of beautiful linear corridors, bad camera that gets in the way of te combat, repetitive enemy encounters, bad story structure ("you need another macguffin to advance" the game) with a lackluster climax, impossible to fail QTE that could be perfectly a cutscene and can break inmersion if you decide not to follow them, story inconsistencies like Artheus change of character that gets weird if you have left side misions for that moment, the underminding of the no cuts camera system by the menues and death screens, the enemies in "Give me god of war" being damage sponges, incosistency in some attacks that interact with the terrain, and much much more.
You may not have a problem with some of them and that is fine but to say that they don't exist or that aren't flaws because for you they aren't is extremely ignorant, pedantic and disingenuos if you want to have any kind of gaming dicussion.
But well, the majority of the posts i see from you are just hyperbolic statements without any argumentation just laying down your opinion as fact and you seem to be pretty dogmatic about your opinion so i don't think any of this will change your mind. I just don't see why you take part on threads if your only goal is for people to agree with you or just not even bother because your opinion is absolute.
I really like the original trilogy, and prefer the boss battles. They are awesome in GOW, but few.
I don't understand this thread.
You've basically just created a who likes it who doesn't?
Same can be said for every game.
You've basically just created a who likes it who doesn't?
Same can be said for every game.
God Of War has a great story, great writing, great characters, great gameplay, great pacing, a great world to explore and great graphics.
I don't think any other game delivered as complete of a package as God Of War this year.
Considering all these things most people can look past some of the minor flaws like the relatively low number of boss fights.
I don't think any other game delivered as complete of a package as God Of War this year.
Considering all these things most people can look past some of the minor flaws like the relatively low number of boss fights.
Because it was absolutely incredible in every way. Story telling, characters, world building, action,lore and lore delivery through a head. No loading. I can keep going.
- Status