Christ Centered Gamer

So, back on topic: How about that Nathan Drake?

I don't know how he can sleep at night, seeing as millions of lives have been lost at Drake's hands by the acts of millions of gamers.

It was fresh seeing a main character that wasn't a bald space marine.

ArchAngel wrote:

Chozon1 wrote:I tentatively do as well. I mean, it's not just a number physically; it's gold, or salt, or chocolate, or (if you happen to be a silly American) paper or digits.

But metaphorically? Totally agree.

Silly american? What first world nation isn't on a fiat currency?

It isn't even just metaphorically "just a number." Money has value, in fact, money IS value. It's a representation of all obtainable goods and services.

And age. Age isn't just a number. It's a measurement of the length of life lived, and as it turns out, that matters immensely, especially if you consider with the right angle that it's all we have in this world.

Now, to pause the rant, I get the point. Money or age is often given more importance by some than due, but this doesn't excuse swinging completely to the other side and claiming it's an arbitrary number. There is significant importance behind each of these concepts.

Material value tho, my point is that material value is no true value at all.

You're going to have to elaborate on what you mean by material value.

I love how every time I make a thread, it usually spirals terribly off course.

Favorite scene from the console trilogy thus far?

First time entering Shambhala in Uncharted 2. It was so beautiful, and the final boss fight was excellent.

I didn't like the final boss fight myself. It seemed cliche. The boss fight from the first game was a thing of beauty though: it was well constructed firefights with smartly designed choke points and the most clever kill I've ever seen in Uncharted. I don't wanna spoil it for you, but it involves a 2,000 pound golden statue and a helicopter.

ArchAngel wrote:You're going to have to elaborate on what you mean by material value.

I'm talking about the relation between monetary value and material value. As in, when you have money, that money is used for material gain. Now, that material gain might be entirely necessary, but under my doctrine that's a necessary detriment, not an additive.

So you're doctrine compels you to only get stuff when necessary?

ScotchRobbins wrote:I love how every time I make a thread, it usually spirals terribly off course.

Favorite scene from the console trilogy thus far?

'S not your fault amigo. I apologize for it though. At least my part of it. Though for my part, I want to give the Uncharted series a shot, but have no PS3. Looks awesome though. XD

ArchAngel wrote:So you're doctrine compels you to only get stuff when necessary?

Pretty sure Jester isn't doctrine. Dr. Awesome maybe. And I think what the Doc is trying to say is the things that are physical really aren't that valuable, and having to gain or use them is just another brick you've got tied to your ankle from real life.

Or may he's full ascetic. Dunno actually, but there's nothing wrong with that. I love my video games though.

ScotchRobbins wrote:I didn't like the final boss fight myself. It seemed cliche. The boss fight from the first game was a thing of beauty though: it was well constructed firefights with smartly designed choke points and the most clever kill I've ever seen in Uncharted. I don't wanna spoil it for you, but it involves a 2,000 pound golden statue and a helicopter.

I have a very bad memory of the first game. All I remember is . Main reason why, I think, is because the game wasn't really that good. I remember getting really mad during that game. The sequel was amazing, to say the least.

Reminds me of the Assassin's Creed franchise, where the first game was mediocre at best, but the second game was mindblowingly awesome.

Chozon1 wrote:

ArchAngel wrote:So you're doctrine compels you to only get stuff when necessary?

Pretty sure Jester isn't doctrine.

Well played. That's a frequent typo of mine, I always mix homonyms up when righting.

Krytae wrote:

ScotchRobbins wrote:I didn't like the final boss fight myself. It seemed cliche. The boss fight from the first game was a thing of beauty though: it was well constructed firefights with smartly designed choke points and the most clever kill I've ever seen in Uncharted. I don't wanna spoil it for you, but it involves a 2,000 pound golden statue and a helicopter.

I have a very bad memory of the first game. All I remember is

Spoiler:

the scene with the zombies

. Main reason why, I think, is because the game wasn't really that good. I remember getting really mad during that game. The sequel was amazing, to say the least.

Reminds me of the Assassin's Creed franchise, where the first game was mediocre at best, but the second game was mindblowingly awesome.

The second one was a better experience overall, but the ending of the first one was better in my opinion. And yeah... the whole zombie thing will hold you up for a while if you don't have much gumption. Took me months to go for it. The ending is ENTIRELY worth it.

ArchAngel wrote:

Chozon1 wrote:

ArchAngel wrote:So you're doctrine compels you to only get stuff when necessary?

Pretty sure Jester isn't doctrine.

Well played. That's a frequent typo of mine, I always mix homonyms up when righting.

I no. I dew that sew much.

ScotchRobbins wrote:

Krytae wrote:

ScotchRobbins wrote:I didn't like the final boss fight myself. It seemed cliche. The boss fight from the first game was a thing of beauty though: it was well constructed firefights with smartly designed choke points and the most clever kill I've ever seen in Uncharted. I don't wanna spoil it for you, but it involves a 2,000 pound golden statue and a helicopter.

I have a very bad memory of the first game. All I remember is

Spoiler:

the scene with the zombies

. Main reason why, I think, is because the game wasn't really that good. I remember getting really mad during that game. The sequel was amazing, to say the least.

Reminds me of the Assassin's Creed franchise, where the first game was mediocre at best, but the second game was mindblowingly awesome.

The second one was a better experience overall, but the ending of the first one was better in my opinion. And yeah... the whole zombie thing will hold you up for a while if you don't have much gumption. Took me months to go for it. The ending is ENTIRELY worth it.

It has nothing to do with gumption.

I frequently cite Uncharted: Drake's Fortune as an example of bad design in gaming. There are some truly majestic moments there, but the entire last act of the game is made significantly longer by the difficulty of the combat encounters. And I'm not talking about just with the zombies (though the sequence in the factory is probably one of the best examples of how "not" to do tension in level design and enemy encounters). Enemies regularly take more than a headshot to bring down. They're bullet sponges. And it's a problem if I can lob a grenade at a dude, it lands at his feet and explodes, and he gets up and comes back for more. That was a regular occurrence in Uncharted 1, and it happened throughout the game.

Uncharted 2 and 3 were both far more balanced in that respect.

A lot of this could come from the developer's relative lack of experience with shooters when they made the first game.

Either way, in my opinion, the first game was a massive letdown on a number of levels, not the least of which was the ending.