The Errant Signal Thread

[Duckard]

I like Errant Signal even he does tend to get a bit too into the literary-analysis type thing (yeah, I don't know how to articulate what I mean here) sometimes. Still better than Extra Credits where it's all about "We have to demand that game are taken seriously as a medium! Look a Mass Effect for example!".

 

[Helly]

Hum...
Guess i'll give him a try.
The only other one i found correct is Spoony until now.
Thank you anyhow !

 

[sea]

One thing I think he missed out on was a discussion of level design. What made the 2D Sonic games work so well wasn't just speed, it was about levels which were constructed specifically in ways that allowed you to move fast and survive with split-second reflexes. Things were set up specifically so that, if you were good, you could get through most levels without ever really slowing down or stopping (especially in Sonic 2 and 3), and often reflex action would take you farther than thinking too much about a given scenario.

This is also why I hated the Sonic Rush games - they were fast to a fault, with level design that required you to take your time and move slowly. Instead of being able to reflex your way through, most of the time that kind of behaviour would just get you killed. It just wasn't fun, and to me is proof that 2D isn't a recipe for speed working - you still need the rest of the game to actually accommodate that aspect of play.

Otherwise, great video. Didn't touch as much on raw mechanics as I expect but still a very nice analysis and really captured the spirit of what made Sonic work and not work over the years.

 

[Infinitron]

One thing I think he missed out on was a discussion of level design. What made the 2D Sonic games work so well wasn't just speed, it was about levels which were constructed specifically in ways that allowed you to move fast and survive with split-second reflexes. Things were set up specifically so that, if you were good, you could get through most levels without ever really slowing down or stopping (especially in Sonic 2 and 3), and often reflex action would take you farther than thinking too much about a given scenario.

This is also why I hated the Sonic Rush games - they were fast to a fault, with level design that required you to take your time and move slowly. Instead of being able to reflex your way through, most of the time that kind of behaviour would just get you killed. It just wasn't fun, and to me is proof that 2D isn't a recipe for speed working - you still need the rest of the game to actually accommodate that aspect of play.

Otherwise, great video. Didn't touch as much on raw mechanics as I expect but still a very nice analysis and really captured the spirit of what made Sonic work and not work over the years.

I think an acknowledgement of the accommodation of the games' level design to different styles of play was basically implied by his description of the games. He could maybe have been more explicit about it.

 

[sea]

Yeah, he did definitely imply some of that, especially regarding momentum control. I think a more detailed breakdown of a specific stage or scenario would have worked well to illustrate the point, though I guess the video was more intended as a general overview than a precise deconstruction of what makes Sonic good or bad.

 

[Condiments]

Yeah this is some good shit. I especially enjoyed his 'Violent in Videogames' level. This is much better than extra credits.

 

[Peter]

So does anyone know any similar stuff to this? Extra Credits is complete derp and Rev Rants was kinda okay while it was still around a couple of years ago, but these are really the only 3 web series I know that get analytical about vidya.

 

[Infinitron]

So does anyone know any similar stuff to this? Extra Credits is complete derp and Rev Rants was kinda okay while it was still around a couple of years ago, but these are really the only 3 web series I know that get analytical about vidya.

Try to convince sea to start a video blog.

 

[Peter]

sea, start a video blog.

 

[sea]

Writing is faster. Also I'm one ugly motherfucker and I have a girl voice, so that doesn't help.

 

[Damned Registrations]

I like this guy's videoes too, but he makes some mistakes. For one, Sonic definitely had timers for their stages. They were only 3 minutes in fact, iirc. Mario generally had longer timers (and shorter stages.) There were also a number of things in sonic that DID encourage going fast; various jumps that could only be made at speed, and things like invincibility or the speed boost that would wear off after only a few seconds, encouraged you to get as far as possible before they ran out. Sonic didn't require speed, but it certainly rewarded it quite well in many cases. You even get extra lives for being fast enough on most stages. And being faster was the only way to finish the game faster. Mario had warp zones from the very first iteration.

I think he landed on some really good points about the conversion to 3d and why it worked better for Mario than Sonic however. Going really really fast doesn't work well in 3D space unless that space is totally open (which would be boring as fuck for a platformer.) or you're on rails, which is also a bad method. The biggest part of Sonic that got lost was the branching paths through levels. They have some parts where they branch off, but usually for only short portions of the level, and only once or twice in the level. The early Sonics had tons of that shit.

I mean, I sure as hell wasn't this good at the game, but I could definitely finish the first several levels in under a minute each:



Feels good man. This is how you're supposed to play Sonic.

 

[Cowboy Moment]

Seven threads on the first page of GG, Infinitron. Where will it end, Infinitron?

 

[Infinitron]

U jelly of my postcount?

Perhaps I should start my own dedicated thread.

 

[Cowboy Moment]

Just think of what posting all those Matt chat threads brought upon J_C. You don't want to be exposed as a rogue personality of Ian Miles Cheong, do you?

 

[Phage]

Hmm, somehow I didn't notice this one. He didn't post about it on his blog.

Terrible video in many ways.

His other ones are pretty decent though

 

[Infinitron]

Video reviewer crossovers = autofail

 

[Carrion]

The guy has some good points on some of his videos, but overall he just comes off as a bit preachy when he starts talking about (lack of) morality in games or other such shit. The Far Cry 2 video was almost painful to watch. I still like the guy more than all the angryjoes in the world because he seems kind of honest and doesn't include stupid shit in his videos like almost everyone else.

Can't comment on Sonic because I haven't played it for more than ten minutes in my life.

 

[thesoup]

He claims that DX: HR is better than DX in every possible way, but that DX is still a better game because it's smarter.
He also claims that Duke Nukem Forever shouldn't be hated because it's a shit game, but because it's morally repulsive.

He's probably very popular on reddit.

 

[CrimsonAngel]

He claims that DX: HR is better than DX in every possible way, but that DX is still a better game because it's smarter.
He also claims that Duke Nukem Forever shouldn't be hated because it's a shit game, but because it's morally repulsive.

He's probably very popular on reddit.

So is your mom, because shes a whore.

Any way are you saying he is wrong??

 

[thesoup]

I thought that was obvious, Mr. reading comprehension.

 

[Infinitron]

http://www.errantsignal.com/blog/?p=275



Love the subtle dig at Extra Credits

 

[Destroid]

Gamification is fucking stupid.

 

[CrimsonAngel]

Yeah it is fucking stupid.

The idea that i will stay longer in a place because it has a achievements or a lvl'ing up mechanics is stupid or that it would make me work harder and things would be fun. Like working out or doing house work really needed a tiny little icon that told me "you have cleaned 20 somethings" you are now a lvl 5 cleaner is some how making the fact that i am doing the dishes some how FUN!...

 

[Damned Registrations]

Except for the fact that it does work and has already been used to good effect before.

Why the fuck do you think education involves such an elaborate grading system of points and distinct levels and various awards (especially for younger students)? Because people give a fuck about that shit more than if they just had a % pass/fail at the end of the year. Ditto for shit like 'Employee of the Month', collecting stamps when you go to subway, and all kinds of marketing bullshit with coupons and such like McDonalds Monopoly and Pepsi points.

The point isn't to make it more fun than an actual game, it's to make it less tedious than it was before. Which it does.

His only decent point in the video was the fact that it's being pushed a lot right now as the next big thing by people who stand to profit from it. It could certainly stand to be used more than it is now in relation to work and especially education and health (and budget/savings as well for msot people), but it's not that new, just easier to implement with the cheapness of information management in this era. Tracking a bunch of employee or student achievements on paper would be a nightmare, but it can be pretty damned easy with a computer. It's so easy these days that we can do really elaborate shit like xp bars or achievement systems with varied rewards instead of simple shit like gold stars or air miles.

 

[Roderick]

i'm liking this guy's videos