• Daily Deal - Spec Ops: The Line, 75% Off
    99 replies, posted
It was a fun game, the story did a few things differently which was a nice change. Gameplay wise it's about as generic of a third person shooter as you can get. Worth the price.
In terms of video games it has a very refreshing story... I don't understand why there's people above comparing it to Apocalypse Now. Great as it is, it's a movie, not a video game. Video games are saturated with shit stories, so when something like this comes along it gets blown up to be incredible. Obviously by movie standards it's pretty average, but by game standards it blows most stuff out the water. I wish it wasn't the case, but that's the way it is. It's worth the money.
Mediocre third person shooter with overrated story that's delivered from the end of a mallet rather than any real finesse. Spend your money on a copy of Apocalypse Now.
It's not an incredible and flawless game, but overall it's pretty good and worth the price. The story is good and the gameplay is decent although it is sometimes infuriating. For example, your teammates' AI is terrible, they will get wounded and you'll have to go heal them right in front of the enemy (you have to do it pretty quickly otherwise they die and it's a game over).
[QUOTE=don868;40538129] As a story, it's incredible. The best story game I have ever played.[/QUOTE] The best story is a shoddy recreation of Heart of Darkness? You should play more video games. [editline]5th May 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Super Muffin;40538201]Hotline didn't emphasize anything about storytelling. They just didn't focus on a story. Hotline gets more exaggeration of its artistry and intentions than even Spec Ops does.[/QUOTE] Hardly. Hotline Miami gets overanalyzed for sure but I haven't seen the kind of mental gymnastics used to defend Spec Ops: The Line's overall mediocrity used for any other game before. The idea that the moving and shooting mechanics are purposefully done poorly as some kind of clever deconstruction of the shooter genre is ridiculous. They could have easily told a good story and criticized the genre without being an entirely derivative third person shooter with garbage AI.
[QUOTE=Anthracite;40537665]yeah gameplay wise it's an awfully generic third person cover shooting game but story wise it's excellent. the graphics are pretty cool too. for 5€ it's not a bad deal.[/QUOTE] This post sums the game up pretty well.
[img]http://i.imgur.com/Q9Zcs60.jpg[/img] Never seen this pop up on Facepunch before, and not a single other thing from the main page was showing it. :v:
It's worth the $7.49.
Wait, so you guys hate a genuinely decent game with an above average story because it's over hyped? christ you're worse than the people that buy in to the hype in the first place.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;40538916]The best story is a shoddy recreation of Heart of Darkness? You should play more video games. [editline]5th May 2013[/editline] Hardly. Hotline Miami gets overanalyzed for sure but I haven't seen the kind of mental gymnastics used to defend Spec Ops: The Line's overall mediocrity used for any other game before. The idea that the moving and shooting mechanics are purposefully done poorly as some kind of clever deconstruction of the shooter genre is ridiculous. They could have easily told a good story and criticized the genre without being an entirely derivative third person shooter with garbage AI.[/QUOTE] I love Spec Ops and I think the whole shooting being generic on purpose for the plot is ridiculous :v: the gameplay is fun at moments though so I wouldn't say it's poor but it's nothing special. Yeah so people don't buy this expecting amazing combat or if you can't stand generic combat.
[QUOTE=junker|154;40538271]What I heavily disliked is that the gamelplay was so generic and overthetop. It tries to have this really intense story about how they just fuck up in this mess, right from the bat you mow down enemies like flies. It seriously destroyed my immersion.[/QUOTE] [sp] That is kind of the point of the game [/sp] -edit- [sp] No I am serious, there is even a part where the radioman says "There were 2000 (Don't remember the actual number) people alive in Dubai. How many do you think are alive now? [/sp]
Recommending Spec Ops is difficult because what's great about the story contains twists and spoilers. So I'll give you three summaries with various levels of spoilers (but never more than I deem necessary). To me replaying hasn't lessened the impact a lot, so even with spoilers I think you can have the experience the game wants you to have. Heck, first time I played it I was about at spoiler level 2 and now I like it enough to write all this. Definitely do not play it if you're in a "pah everyone says the story really affected them, I won't give up my virginity that easily!" mindset. Spec Ops is not the best thing to come out since sliced bread, not even if you only concentrate on the writing, but it's damn good in my opinion: [b]1 - No spoilers, superficial[/b] [b]Mechanics:[/b] Your usual cover-based shooter mechanics. Ammo is a bit scarce, there's a few stealth sections and bits where the desert environment comes into play, but otherwise it's your usual TPS cover shooter. There are a few very cool scenarios where you make very different decisions all with a single shot. Fully integrated into gameplay, no radial menu conversation options or something. It's still a linear game at the end of the day tho. [b]Story:[/b] Captain McGeneric and his two buddies ComedicWhiteDude and BigBulkyBlackMan are sent to investigate a Dubai that's been isolated from the rest of the world by terrible sand storms and earthquakes. A battalion was ordered to go there months ago, but they vanished behind the storm wall as well. Time to solve mysteries with bullets! Setting's not "Russia invades" levels of generic and you actually don't get to shoot as many brown people as you'd expect, but it's not exactly out-of-this-world either. The gunplay's not bad, but what makes Spec Ops shine is context, characters and narrative. [b]2 - rough spoilers, general reason why people play it[/b] [sp]Spec Ops is meta. It wants you to expect it's another brown shooter, but it's actually disgusted at its genre in general and you specifically. Spec Ops is mature, dark and gritty. Not Warhammer 40k's style of darkgrim, but the kind that causes its characters at least as much emotional pain as physical one. You'll get to ("hopefully") experience cognitive dissonance and even a small whiff of PTSD. By the time you see a totally-not-40k promotional statue ingame, you'll shake your head at how juvenile and detached from reality that stupid little fantasy really is. You know that FC3 mission where you burn people alive in drug fields while WUB WUB WUB numbs your brain and your protagonist can barely contain his laughter? And if you take a step back you briefly notice how completely psychotic and against your morals it actually is, before you make another step forth and continue? Spec Ops takes that step back and doesn't budge an inch. At the end of a Spec Ops run I always feel as exhausted, fucked up and burnt out as the devs want me to, and the first time I played it I was about this spoiled.[/sp] [b]3 - more specific spoilers, more details[/b] [sp]McGeneric was sent for quick recon, but presses on because the head of the battalion that vanished there once saved his life. Inspired by his heroism McGeneric is determined to save that guy along with the rest of the city. In the process of doing so, the unstoppable killing machine that is always you in shooters, ends up dooming Dubai completely. You'll wipe out the battalion. You'll burn and bomb civvies. You'll let them all die of thirst and destroy all communications Dubai has left. And the entire time you and Walker will be chanting "I had no choice". While being completely wrong of course and continuing the mission because of the same reasons. McGeneric especially will go to great lengths to justify the atrocities you both commit, which is where his rotting mind starts to affect the world and things get a tiny bit psychological. Around the finale even the loading screens start breaking the fourth wall, and the finale's dialogue is directed as much at Walker as it is at you. It contains probably by favorite wham line, tho it gains momentum through the context the game has built up at that point:[/sp] [sp]You're here because you wanted to feel like someone you're not:[/sp][sp]A hero.[/sp] If you want to go into even greater detail with spoilers, feel free to send me a PM.
[QUOTE=The very best;40539288]Wait, so you guys hate a genuinely decent game with an above average story because it's over hyped? christ you're worse than the people that buy in to the hype in the first place.[/QUOTE] Who said this?
[QUOTE=papaya;40537606]£5.. i've heard its a good shooter, is it that good?[/QUOTE] No, it's a mediocre shooter. It's a good story and setting though. Worth the price easily. [QUOTE=LeonS;40537607]watch as everyone says its bad even though they didnt even try immersing themselves into it when it is infact one of the better games this decade[/QUOTE] Stop disliking what I like!
shit game with a really cool story. buy bioshock infinite instead
[QUOTE=meppers;40539770]shit game with a really cool story. buy bioshock infinite instead[/QUOTE] "don't buy this 8$ game, it has shitty gameplay. buy this 60$ game with very generic bleh gameplay instead"
Is it an amazing game? Probably not. Did I genuinely enjoy the story? Yes. And I feel it's definitely worth $15 or less.
I don't get why people give the gameplay so much shit. It's fairly solid, and it does what it wants to do well. The developers clearly didn't intend to reinvent the TPS when they made this game. I really liked how the AI reacted, the guns, the way that the sand works occasionally, and the enemy types.
[quote=Raidyr]Mediocre third person shooter with overrated story that's delivered from the end of a mallet rather than any real finesse. Spend your money on a copy of Apocalypse Now.[/quote] Assuming you've actually read Heart of Darkness and watched Apocalypse Now, please enlighten us on how Spec Ops has anything to do with Apocalypse now other than the antagonist being named after the writer of Heart of Darkness and the primary conflict of the book being a plot point. The primary conflict of Apocalypse is only a background element in Spec Ops. Guy goes against command to help locals and doesn't leave. Other than a dark tone, that's it. Apocalypse Now and Spec Ops are conveying completely separate messages. Best way to put it is that both are paralleled derivations of Heart of Darkness. As end results, comparing Spec Ops to Apocalypse Now is an improper comparison. That lumps Apocalypse's point on the atrocity of war with Spec Ops focus on PTSD as consequence of violence / Desensitivity. tl;dr: Internet said it's Apocalypse Now, gonna say watch Apocalypse Now
I see the words 'Mediocre' and 'Garbage' being thrown around in regards to the gameplay; having played the entire Uncharted series as well as a good chunk of Gears 3, I found the gameplay and controls in SO:TL to be at least on par with those. What mythical Third Person Shooters have you all been playing, that renders this trash? Please let me know, I want to play them.
[QUOTE=Maxjes;40540097]I see the words 'Mediocre' and 'Garbage' being thrown around in regards to the gameplay; having played the entire Uncharted series as well as a good chunk of Gears 3, I found the gameplay and controls in SO:TL to be at least on par with those. What mythical Third Person Shooters have you all been playing, that renders this trash? Please let me know, I want to play them.[/QUOTE] People can't come up with legitimate reasons to hate Spec Ops so they say it's bad because the gameplay is average.
[QUOTE=milkandcooki;40539853]I don't get why people give the gameplay so much shit. It's fairly solid, and it does what it wants to do well. The developers clearly didn't intend to reinvent the TPS when they made this game. I really liked how the AI reacted, the guns, the way that the sand works occasionally, and the enemy types.[/QUOTE] Agreed, the gameplay is fine, nothing ground breaking, and it certainly wouldn't be worth a buy without the story, but the gameplay mechanics are all very solid, you won't see very much new in them, but by no means will you see anything bad in them either. The mechanics don't really add much of anything, but they don't detract at all either.
or that its a "poor mans Heart of Darkness" oh fuck off if I wanted to read the book i wouldve done so by now, and i might in the future but i really liked Spec Ops execution and presentation so i get the gist of what its about already. and Apocalypse now? spent like what, 3-4h watching that pile of crap. ok its not a pile of crap but i was thoroughly bored by it with the exception of a few parts. Michael Sheen was great in it and Marlon Brando was on par with a wet tree branch in a swamp
[QUOTE=LeonS;40540169]or that its a "poor mans Heart of Darkness" oh fuck off if I wanted to read the book i wouldve done so by now, and i might in the future but i really liked Spec Ops execution and presentation so i get the gist of what its about already. and Apocalypse now? spent like what, 3-4h watching that pile of crap. ok its not a pile of crap but i was thoroughly bored by it with the exception of a few parts. Michael Sheen was great in it and Marlon Brando was on par with a wet tree branch in a swamp[/QUOTE] anybody who says it's a "poor mans heart of darkness" has never read heart of darkness. it alludes to it, but you're pretty dumb if you think that spec ops is its videogame adaptation
It does not go nearly far enough in my own opinion, but then again it probably wouldn't make a profit if it did because of the game market.
[QUOTE=The very best;40539288]Wait, so you guys hate a genuinely decent game with an above average story because it's over hyped? christ you're worse than the people that buy in to the hype in the first place.[/QUOTE]Nah the gameplay itself is genuinely horrible. The shooting galleys of modern warfare are preferrable imo.
behind the very average TPS gameplay is a story that is somewhere between good and bad, and while not 100% original is at least worth a try. it's only $8. it's also Yager's first game since their namesake game which was also pretty mediocre.
[QUOTE=milkandcooki;40539793]"don't buy this 8$ game, it has shitty gameplay. buy this 60$ game with very generic bleh gameplay instead"[/QUOTE] Infinite doesn't have groundbreaking gameplay but I actually had fun whilst playing it. Now Spec Ops on the other hand...
[QUOTE=zeldar;40540412]Infinite doesn't have groundbreaking gameplay but I actually had fun whilst playing it. Now Spec Ops on the other hand...[/QUOTE] I thought Infinite's gameplay to be a chore to the point where I really don't want to play it anymore, but I digress
[QUOTE=LeonS;40540169] and Apocalypse now? spent like what, 3-4h watching that pile of crap. ok its not a pile of crap but i was thoroughly bored by it with the exception of a few parts. Michael Sheen was great in it and Marlon Brando was on par with a wet tree branch in a swamp[/QUOTE] Jesus christ, no wonder gamers think Spec Ops is the pinnacle of storytelling achievement, they have no fucking taste.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.