Love and Respect for Mar 3 Podcast
Added 2023-02-27 20:00:04 +0000 UTCIt's time to get your questions in for this week's podcast. Type your question, topic, or game in the comments below. Be sure to include your preferred name if you don't like the one here on Patreon.
Please submit your entries by Wednesday at 7:00 PM Pacific. If your entry is not selected, feel free to submit it again the following week. We appreciate your support and are grateful for each and every submission, if we're able to include them in the podcast or not.
L&R
Bloodworth
Comments
Do we allow one great element of a game to write off its flaws? From its first minutes, I was infatuated with Breath of the Wild… the sense of wonder, discovery, and learning how your tools impact the world around you was exhilarating. But after ten hours when the initial luster was no longer as bright, certain aspects of the game became frequent irritations. No surprise, though, this happens with a lot of media after the first impression. What was surprising, however, is how even the most glowing reviews were quick to call out numerous shortcomings. “Well, the story isn’t great,” “Yeah, the Shrines are all kinda samey”, “You know, those dungeons are pretty weak”, “Honestly, I don’t love the weapon degradation system”, “Performance isn’t the greatest…” Yet in the same sentence, it’s celebrated as a modern pinnacle of game design. But with its issues well-known and numerous, can it truly be a masterwork? Breath of the Wild is just a single example, but it's something I’ve seen time and time again. A game’s story is so good, you forgive its repetitive gameplay. A game’s combat is so stellar, you overlook its technical shortcomings. A masterpiece doesn’t have to be perfect, but there’s a difference between a game with flaws and a flawed game. Do we too often allow ourselves to ignore faults in a game because another aspect is significantly stronger, or is criticism of games more than a sum of individual parts?
G the Finger
2023-03-02 21:00:39 +0000 UTCHey Allies, When you have a number of games in your list of 'Want To Play', whether they are games you are excited for as a definite play or are curious about, when's the point you turn round and say 'No' to a game to make room for others please? Last year, I played about 63 games in total, mostly from recent releases to a year or 2 old due to curiosity and around a 3rd of those games I ended up abandoning because I didn't personally enjoy them for various reasons. Almost all of those games this happened to, were ones that I had some curiosity towards playing thinking it would be for me, even after doing research on them. This year, I made a pact with myself. Unless I have full confidence in myself that said future game release regardless of what it is, is something I really want to play or excited about playing, I've decided to say 'No' to it. Now my upcoming list of games is currently smaller than the last couple of years and feels healthy as a result of that (Around 8 high budget titles so far over the next couple of years are on my list now for example). Sure new games will likely get shown off that will give me the confidence to definitely play them, but having a smaller list means I can give myself time to replay older games if I want to, have some non pressured time to check out some DLCs coming out this year for games I know personally I enjoyed and even on odd occasions, check out some retro games with less stress and worries due to limited time. Thank you for taking the time to answer my question folks.
Anthony Stevens
2023-03-01 16:26:49 +0000 UTC
