Jump to content
IGNORED

Edge 138


Mr Do 71
 Share

Recommended Posts

So what you're saying is that this is a genre of "Mecha" because they were inspired by mecha? That's the most ridiculous definition of "genre" I've ever heard. I had an idea for a game this morning - it's about Space Pirates who travel through time and force cavemen to fellate them. I had the idea when I was on the bog this morning - does this make it a "Shit" game? If you want a more serious example, take Star Fox. That takes clear and obvious inspiration from Star Wars, and also from various science fiction. Is it a "Sci-fi game"? No. It's a fucking shoot-em-up. Because you define a game by how it plays, not by what it's wrapped in. And anyway, you said that Metal Arms had Mecha gameplay, but you ALSO said it didn't take inspiration from Mecha. So what's up with that then?

Yet the specifics concepts that inspired Gigantic Drive, for example, are inexorably linked to early super robot anime (something the development team openly admit to as well). The same can be said for Armored Core, Virtual On and even ZOE. Those games wouldn't exist without the creative impetus of the mecha aesthetic.

Moreover, it's not just a "license" affair, because there are thousands of different incarnations of mecha (not only in anime but also in manga). It's an integral part of another creative medium. It's not just Bond.

I also find it amusing that you've had this fairly relevant article sitting on your webspace for ages - and you just remembered to mention it now! It's a good thing you didn't mention it earlier, as it contained many ideas and concepts that I would mention myself! Anyway, I'm not that bothered, it's really badly written, and at any rate it's basically irrelevant. The argument is about how you define mech games, I'm saying the question is pointless.

I only remembered it because Simon brought it up in a conversation recently (and he is a cracking writer, very insightful...ask Zy). My site is pretty voluminous when it comes to content, and that article was an addendum an update I did almost a year ago (so it's hardly surprising I didn't remember it). If I really was so embarassed by it, I would have bothered to either link or quote it.

As for the question itself, why is it pointless to define mecha games? They exist, in vast numbers and of many disparate types, denying that is surely worse than at least to attemp a definition?

And as for Valken, FM, and VO, no, they are just their normal genres. But with robots in. The presence of a big robot doesn't take the game to some new plane of conciousness, it just gives you a cool little robot to play as.

Indeed, but the games would not have been conceptualised in the first place without the aesthetic inspiration of mecha. The unique game mechanics of Virtual On were created solely to express what Juro Watari envisaged in his mind about mecha.

If you removed the subtle nuanced handling from GT, the game wouldn't suddenly stop being a racing game, it would just be a bad racing game. The problem with your idea of handling in mecha games is that despite the best efforts of your wet dreams, Mechs don't actually exist. Rather than being a "finer art" it's a far less precise art, as they can basically make it handle however they feel like. The handling doesn't make it a "Mecha" game, it just makes it a game with that sort of handling. A platformer with a big clunky character doesn't suddenly become a Mecha game, it's just a platformer. And for the last time, there's no reason that big clunky controls = mechs (and similarly, why can't you have an agile mech?).

Whilst the handling in GT could be modified and made worse, the handling would still make it feel like a car game. By the same token, some mecha games have good and bad handling but they all feel like mecha games. As for the fact they don't exist and that the developers can create mecha games how they like, that is only half true. The likes of Tekki is heavily influenced by the likes of Gundam, not only from the identical opening premise but also on how the VT's handle.

You can have an agile mecha, such as Viper II in Virtual On or a HUESO leg setup in Armored Core 3, they still handle like mecha though.

Human things like firing lasers out of her arm and jumping 20 feet in the air? I can't see how you could see a difference between Samus' suit and the "chibi-mechas" of Gotcha Force. Samus doesn't jump 20 feet in the air, she tells he suit to. The pilots of Gotcha force don't fire big cel shaded beams at their opponents, they tell their suits to. Yeah, a massive difference there.

Samus is a human being inside power armour. You command Samus to fire her weapon and she then controls her suit to that (within the context of the game's setting). In Gotcha Force the chibi mecha are not piloted within the game. YOU, the player, are the pilot. This cypher based distinction is the important part and one that you are consistently misunderstanding.

I think we've hit the crux of your mecha argument here. Despite the fact that you know it's stupid (which can be evidenced by the fact that you know that a game like Metal Arms must qualify as a mech game), in your heart of hearts, you think of "A Mecha game" as "A game that is either actually liscenced on, or clearly rips off, mech animes." And that's not a fucking genre. And it's also ridiculous to have an obsession around. Just imagine if someone turned up on this forum and only ever talked about games that are either liscenced from or are clearly based on the Bond franchise. Constantly talking about how good Tommorow Never Dies is and complaining that Edge didn't give Everything Or Nothing a high enough score because "Edge ignores Bond games". Sounds like a twat, eh?

I have already answered this above, mecha is not a "license" like Bond. It's a distinct aesthetic artefact (and one that has thirty years of artistic history attached to it). I talk about it because, as an individual, I have a free will to discuss whatever matters interest me. Many people here have found my insights useful and positive, as the increasing number of ethusiastic e-mails attests to. It's just the Findus few, or ones that want to be, that have problems with me.

I also always said that Metal Arms was a mecha game.

What the fuck? No, go on, tell us what you'd like to hear when people talk about Ico then. Remember that not everyone is employed as a journalist (although - neither are you!).

I'd like to hear a unique and individual perspective for a change (so me giving instructions on what I specifically want to hear would be moot).

No, that PA comic offended the game, or maybe Bungee. It didn't offend the reader. Now, for the last fucking time.

1) THE FACT THAT IT'S HALO THAT YOU DON'T LIKE IS IRRELEVANT.

2) NO ONE IS ACTUALLY OFFENDED BY THE FACT THAT YOU DON'T LIKE HALO, OR WHAT YOU DISLIKE ABOUT IT.

I've said this what feels like 4 million times now, and I'm sure you'll fail to grasp it this time too. But hey, maybe you'll actually fucking read what I write this time.

The problem is not that you don't like Halo, it's your assertation that anyone who DOES like Halo must actually be wrong. They don't actually enjoy it because it's they think it's a good game, they only think that because marketing/Edge told them to. Can you not see how fantastically offensive this is? It's like someone telling you that you Armoured Core is in fact shit, you only think you like it because the Japanes told you to. I'm sure you'd find that pretty insulting.

...it's no less insulting than Penny Arcade's consistent, and fair, chastisement of the game. More importantly, Armored Core 2 and Armored Core 2 Another Age are shit.

Well, it could mean that, or it could mean that the creator of that image likes Edge, and thinks it's better than Games TM. What a bastard, eh?

It's more than that though, it's a faux elitist club based on very little but bluster (most of the EDGE acolytes aren't really that knowledgeable, and those that are knowledgeable are conveniently chastised as "geeks"...hence the term "middlecore").

You know what, you like to think you are some kind of Che Guvara fighting the cause for big robots against the evel forces of Edge. You're not. You're a pathetic (though admittedly slightly more literate than most) fanboy dangerously obsessed with an obscure corner of geekdom, and you're so insecure that you have to invent ludicrous and convoluted scenarios that to explain why the world doesn't work around you the way you want it to. All  joking aside, I genuinely suggest councilling or some kind of psychiatric help.

It's not so much about big robots though, more a principle on smiting exclusive behaviour (this means I have to also exude a level of exclusivity, but you lot are mostly arseholes so I don't lose any sleep over it).

One important thing about Gigantic Drive is that it's out-of-stock in the major online shops. The other important thing is that the NTSC-UK review doesn't mention anything about a language barrier.

The language barrier wasn't a problem for me, so I didn't highlight it. However, the likes of Yoshinoya et al, do have a sizeable language barrier (as in having almost everything in Japanese). Considering that you are the only person to have mentioned it, I am not sure it is that much of a problem (though the review can be easily changed if people so wish).

Also, that Shevek topic was hilarious and Cacky is a poo.

:wub:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did anyone else notice that 3 screen racing game(Forza?) in Edge, running on 5 linked xbox's, how awesome would that be to setup at a meet.

I thought 5 machines for just two extra screens was a bit over the top really I would have thought a machine per screen made more sense (and it would be easier to setup). Didn't GT3 have somehting similar over the i-link on PS2? definately meet tastic though!

Cheers

Quexex

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This cypher based distinction is the important part and one that you are consistently misunderstanding.

i.e. The Mecha genre is entirely about context. And lumps together games in a way that tells you nothing about how they play.

Which means it isn't really a genre in the way that racing, or FPS or RTS games are a genre at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Talking of Friends, didn't Chandler say 'The rules are, there are no rules' to Monica in the episode where her boyfriend wanted to become the Ultimate fighting Champion

And didn't Wendy James bellow it in some Transvision Vamp song? I don't know why I'm asking, I know she did. It was Trash City.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought 5 machines for just two extra screens was a bit over the top really I would have thought a machine per screen made more sense (and it would be easier to setup). Didn't GT3 have somehting similar over the i-link on PS2? definately meet tastic though!

Cheers

Quexex

It seems a bit like overkill - how often outside of meets are you ever going to get 5 Xboxes in the same room to play 1 single player game?

I liked the idea of that Capcom colouring game though :wub:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hurrah! The Harrison interview implies playing video from memory stick on PSP:

I think you could easily imagine a scenario in the future when you're at a wi-fi hotspot selecting the two hours of film content that you want to watch when your plane's in the air, or whatever you want to store on your Memory Sick- which might be a couple of episodes of Little Britain, the Nine O'Clock News and the Bloomberg Financial Report- whatever content is attractive.

Just gotta hope that you can transfer from PC too. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd rather have 25 pages of discussion and opinion on the content, articles and lots more posts of the quality of wong fei hung than what is being served up.

:D

Can someone just confirm that myself and Valiant do not share the same IP address? I'd hate to be accused of 'doing a Cacky'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cacky's pile of shit

Due to the fact that I think everyone is tired of this, and I really can't be bothered to start another post that takes an hour+ to write, I'm not going to do a massive point by point breakdown of your post. At any rate, pretty much all of your post was made up of purposefully misunderstanding what was meant, and just plain sidestepping the issue. I'm just going to wrap up my argument.

The point is Cacky, is that your whole Mekky thing would be acceptable if you were reasonable about it. If you just said "What can I say - I love big robots!" and left it at that, no one would care. But it's the fact that you think that the world must legitimise your little hobby for you. We must understand that your little obsession isn't just a bizzare catagory in games but that it's a proper and fully fleged genre. That the magazine you are also dangerously obsessed with (in a different capacity) should give more recognition to your subject. Why should they? It's not like a large proportion of their readership share your passion. They review the games, and give them appropriate scores (though, of course, for the wrong reasons). They don't give them a huge amount of page space simply because not that many people are interested in them. It's not Edge's job to promote your obsession, so why should they? When it comes down to it, you're a fanboy, You love big robots in anime (I'm sure in manga too), and you love them in video games. There's nothing intrinsically wrong with that, but to stomp about on these (and other) forums and jump up and down about robots like they're the only thing that matters and insisting that everyone care as much about them as you do is a massive sign of insecurity, and it's also fucking annoying.

I know I wasn't going to go into your post point by point, but I have to bring up Halo. I've never seen anyone ignore the point quite so obviously in my life. Berhaps you have had hypnotherepy to ignore it kind of how they make people forget that the number four exists. But I will condense my point into two scentences to see if this works:

It's not what you said about the game that was insulting, it's what you inferred upon those who liked it. Penny Arcade insulted the game, you insulted us.

Finally, I'll come to your general conduct on these forums. You know, I don't think you realise how deluded you sound. You know, there are plenty of people on here who don't like Edge. This was more true in the Curran/McCarthy era, but there's still a fair few about. Sure, I'd say probably the majority enjoy Edge, but what a surprise, this used to be the Edge forum. But still there are those who dislike Edge. But, strangely, they don't act like twats! The fact is Cacky, is that NO ONE treats Edge like some infallible tome. They've made plenty of mistakes through their history (Gunstar Heroes a 6, Turok 2 a 9). People are perfectly capable of disagreeing with Edge, as can be shown by the fact that even when you don't stick your giant metal oar in, the Edge threads still become pretty heated. Your own personal delusions tell you that you=right, rest of world=wrong, and so you come on here and start ludicrous arguments so that the entire board turns against you, which reinforces your delusion. Get over it. Sometimes, the popular view is popular because it is true. People like Halo because they enjoy it, they're not interested in Armored Core Nexus because that type of thing doesn't interest them.

Oh and the idea that the only people who don't like you are the Findus lot is absurd. Apart from your little band of po-faced followers (who's IP addresses we should really check) everyone on this forum hates you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i.e. The Mecha genre is entirely about context. And lumps together games in a way that tells you nothing about how they play.

Which means it isn't really a genre in the way that racing, or FPS or RTS games are a genre at all.

It's definitely the case that 'mecha' games that have been cited - across several genres - are informed by the same 'ethos' and conventions though. It's not obvious that the theme of a game should affect the rules and focus across otherwise unrelated games in a consistent way. This isn't strictly a genre or a setting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's definitely the case that 'mecha' games that have been cited - across several genres - are informed by the same 'ethos' and conventions though. It's not obvious that the theme of a game should affect the rules and focus across otherwise unrelated games in a consistent way. This isn't strictly a genre or a setting.

Well, sure, it's like fantasy games- you expect the physically weak wizard with good magic whether you're playing Gauntlet or FF Tactics. It's a setting-inspired cliche of game design, although it's not univeral, it's something you tend to see coming.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, sure, it's like fantasy games- you expect the physically weak wizard with good magic whether you're playing Gauntlet or FF Tactics. It's a setting-inspired cliche of game design, although it's not univeral, it's something you tend to see coming.

Yay! Its settled then. Mechy isn't a genre, its a cliche!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's definitely the case that 'mecha' games that have been cited - across several genres - are informed by the same 'ethos' and conventions though. It's not obvious that the theme of a game should affect the rules and focus across otherwise unrelated games in a consistent way. This isn't strictly a genre or a setting.

Ethos / Narrative Conventions are all well and good.

But we don't tend to talk about this kind of thing in Cacky's Mech Threads .

We end up shouting about why games which are entirely different in mechanics and in play (but which may feature some of the same ethos - look there's a robot!) should be directly compared because, well, Cacky says they should.

(As opposed to comparing their ethos, narrative or implementation of same - because that would involve real thought - see Ed's thread on storytelling in Discussion somewhere...).

Anyhow - Comrade's got it about right.

Q: If everyone thinks you're a tosser, but you...

(i) Are the bunch of strangers ganging up on you because they're scared of disagreeing with one another?

(ii) Or are you a tosser?

Given every other thread on the forum contains disagreement, I think Cacky has to fall into category (ii).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Comrade: Please don't assume that your pages and pages of increasingly arrogant, condescending, obsessive bile (what were you railing against Caco doing again?) speak for everyone here.

Comrade speaks for me, anyone else?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doesn't speak for me. I don't hate the guy either, but Comrade's points about Edge's coverage of Japanese robot games are absolutely correct.

The Western gaming press doesn't devote the coverage to them Cacophonous wants because nobody else gives a shit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doesn't speak for me. I don't hate the guy either, but Comrade's points about Edge's coverage of Japanese robot games are absolutely correct.

The Western gaming press doesn't devote the coverage to them Cacophonous wants because nobody else gives a shit.

Nah, i don't hate him either. I think his singlemindedness is rather endearing, actually.

and it's true - noone gives a shit about mecha games, in general. And why should anyone be forced to? I don't see Ollie defending Japan's right to ignore the majority of games that we ship over there. And the X box.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doesn't speak for me. I don't hate the guy either, but Comrade's points about Edge's coverage of Japanese robot games are absolutely correct.

The Western gaming press doesn't devote the coverage to them Cacophonous wants because nobody else gives a shit.

Edge does it deliberately, to wind him up ^_^

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No - I didn't agree with Redeye. In fact, it was the weakest part of the issue. I mean, apart from to serve some smartass parallel that the company is 'just like' one of the buildings it owns, it a) said nothing some otaku EA prejudice hasn't before B ) was seemingly misjudged. It seems a bit OTT to start slamming The Urbz when the company was just as cringeworthyily trying to be cool with The Sims 'Bustin' Out' with its horrible dropped g and waky logo. Why did Redeye not take arms against them a year ago for that? And the accusation of EA 'ruining' the 007 licence actually trails right back to my grievance with the review of 007:EON - (that misinterpreted the game as some huge artistic statement, when it was just popcorn gaming with in fact a very very old fashioned underlying structure that served it well) - and I don't think the game was played by Redeye at all from what was said, so I'd wager he wasn't fit to judge and use it 'evidence for the prosecution' style.

I'm finding it really disconcerting that Biffo is consistently outperforming the other columnists in terms of how interesting his column is, despite the fact that his major tricks consist of A) slagging off Sonic Adventure and B ) bigging up Pillage. I quite liked his column, and wanted to disagree with it (something that I like to do with things I like), but even he takes the idea of plot-orientated gaming as implicitly bad, which doesn't give much room to debate his points if you believe the opposite is true.

Of course, I'm not sure that we can criticise Redeye too much for saying "EA has no soul". That's just popcorn reading, isn't it? ^_^

Comrade doesn't necessarily speak for me either*. And I'm sure Cacophanus, like so many nasty internet characters, has the potential to do a lot of good. But he really, really isn't doing it here.

* Personally, I prefer magazines that I disagree with - I gave up reading PC Zone, couldn't be bothered with GamesTM and got bored of Edge for a while because they refused, at the time, to challenge my worldview. I'm not too sure what is meant by a Curran/McCarthy era either - isn't "Curran" still on the contributors list?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sure Ollie is perfectly fine in real life.

But the *constant* derailment of threads (about Edge, Games TM, or perfectly innocent threads about games) into insults about how we're all a rllmuk hivemind coupled with the unbridled arrogance and mecha-worship grates.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, OK, perhaps saying that everyone hates Cacophanus is putting it strongly, but I'd say that his behaviour as described in my previous posts is being found to be very tiring by the majority of people on here.

And certainly, I wouldn't like to put words in other people's mouths, but there is clearly far more animosity towards him than "just the Findus lot".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Comrade doesn't necessarily speak for me either*. And I'm sure Cacophanus, like so many nasty internet characters, has the potential to do a lot of good. But he really, really isn't doing it here.

* Personally, I prefer magazines that I disagree with - I gave up reading PC Zone, couldn't be bothered with GamesTM and got bored of Edge for a while because they refused, at the time, to challenge my worldview. I'm not too sure what is meant by a Curran/McCarthy era either - isn't "Curran" still on the contributors list?

Well, for the Curran/McCarthy stuff, I mean back before Mott was editor (the second time). This isn't something I agree with incidentally - I enjoyed the magazine back then and felt the duo (since for some reason Joao never seemed to attract any critiscism) got an undue amount of slagging. But that's a seperate issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.