Aliens: Colonial Marines

[Jarhead0331]

^I wasn't even focusing on you. Guilty conscience, perhaps? Thanks, but I do not need your help with anything.  I didn't ignore anything you posted, your point was just a ridiculous one, I believe I made that abundantly clear in my reply. You're the one with the problem here dude.

Just for the record, I'm not arguing that A:CM is a great game.  I'm merely arguing that it is not nearly as bad as the vast majority of the uninformed (yes, that's you) are claiming it to be.  The graphics are not as bad, the AI is not as bad, the story is not as bad, the dialogue is not as bad, the sounds are not as bad, the action is not as bad...I stand by this 100%.  In fact, I'm so confident in it that I'm willing to make anyone this offer:

You buy the game from any retailer, digital or otherwise. You play it. Beat the campaign and play at least a few hours on MP.  If you do not walk away from it thinking it really is not as bad as everyone is saying, I will refund your cost of purchase, excluding tax/shipping, etc. This means generally, you would rate the game above a 4.5, which seems to be the generally accepted rating around the internet.

Here is the catch though.  you have to have demonstrated to me a sincere interest and enjoyment of FPS games.  You have to be able to show that you actively buy and play these types of games.  CoD, MoH, Crysis, Ghost Recon Future Soldier/Advanced Warfighter,  Farcry, etc. You also have to demonstrate that you are a fan of sci-fi and the Aliens movies.  This is critical, because I think this makes a real difference as to how much enjoyment one will get out of this particular game.

The first person to PM me and satisfy this criteria gets the job.  I'm only posting this in this website.  I generally know that everyone who posts here is a serious, honest gamer.  If you lie, I'm a mod, and can find out where you live.

i suppose now's the time to ask because its puzzled me for years now - how is EVERYONE, bar a few crazy exceptions, allowed to discuss openly their views, disagree with each other, argue even to the point of capitals and swearing and general 'i need to leave here for a few days and take a deep breath' - except you?

From an educated, professional, legal, military mind (yours not mine!) i find it exceptionally odd out of all of us here that youre the only one to stomp on anyones posts with terms such as ridiculous, irrelevant, and accuse me of having a problem with you or what you said because, and lets put it plainly, i disagree with you.

I dont understand why you imply i should be guilty? id look forward to anything you can put forward that brought you this conclusion

I dont want to argue with you here because i have more respect for this site than that, either PM me for more slanging matches or lets just leave it alone

So you're going to make it personal now and then say, "but I don't want to argue about it."  Yeah, nice undercovergeek. I have not attacked you personally at all, and I've repeated at least three times that you are free to post whatever you want.  Am I not allowed to state my point that unless you play the game yourself, your opinion is not worth much in my view?  Why do you find this point so God damn offensive.  I think its clear that you just have a personal problem with me, and its not the point I'm making you disagree with, you just don't like me.  Fair enough.  If you want to PM, you can PM me...to apologize.

[Jarhead0331]

But are you saying the objective evidence and claims being made by other reviewers who have played the game are wrong, or anyway significantly less wrong on the PC version?

Yes. It is not OBJECTIVE evidence...it is SUBJECTIVE, and in many cases it is inaccurate and over-exaggerated. I stand by that 100%.

Okay, in your first impressions comment (apparently about halfway through the game at that time) you were talking about the graphical glitches reported on consoles not appearing on your PC version. Those aren't subjective evidence and problems, those are objective, but they don't show up (or anyway not on your rig) for the PC. Nevertheless, wouldn't those have to be seriously objective problems to be reckoned with on a console version, worthy of contributing to the 4.5 score?

A number of people have complained that the dialogue generator does goofy things, and that a number of the scripted lines don't make sense in context of the situation. The first would be an objectively discernable problem (one not unique to A:CM of course), the latter could arguably be as well. But leaving the latter aside, are you saying the dialogue generator hasn't glitched on a noticeably regular basis on your PC version?

Some reviewers have noted that the friendly AI not only does things so stupid that they had to be rendered invulnerable to friendly fire, but actually teleports into place (with a spawning electrical pop) rather than moving through doors. They also reportedly clip through objects in order to do foolish AI things. (I'll assume the clipping is one of the graphical issues that don't show up on the PC version from what you said.) These would be objective complaints; have they occurred on your PC version?

From what you've said, the Alien AI does better on the PC than what has been not only reported but visually (thus objectively) archived on gameplay videos already. But some reviewers have noted that the game cheats in spawning the Aliens from nowhere, in such a way that it violates the purpose of the iconic motion detector. That's a claim of an objective problem--have you noticed that on the version you played?

Several reviewers have complained that the game design results in an unacceptably high proportion of enemy mercs compared to xeno action. Supposing that's a subjective assessment in a game marketed on fighting xenos with space marines in a canonical sequel to Aliens, what are your impressions on that? Perhaps also subjectively, reviewers have complained that the occasional xeno vs. merc fighting isn't handled by the game engine well. Your impressions?

Many reviewers have complained that the graphics (not counting console glitches and even on the PC's superior hardware) are not as good as they could and should have been for a current generation game. Leaving aside whether they are subjectively immersing and pleasing to a player anyway, I noticed you generally agreed with that assessment, which seems like an objective complaint (if perhaps to be expected for a game that has been in development as long as the current console generation has even existed). "The graphics are definitely not as good as they could have been."

Many reviewers have also complained that some weapons feel waaay overpowered for what, even in the movie Aliens, should be a survival horror genre; while other weapons were underwhelming for what they ought to have been capable of doing in the circumstances. I can't tell from your first impressions if you (subjectively?) agreed or not about the tone not matching genre expectations (although you seem happy as an Alien fan with the feel overall--and I daresay most of us here are fans of the property, myself included :) ), but you did agree that some weapons were underwhelming and some were overpowered. Maybe those are entirely subjective judgments, but you shared them in principle with reviewer complaints.

In the end, professional reviewers have, for the most part, elected to disrecommend the game except maybe after the price drops a lot. You wrote, "Notwithstanding the above, I'm not going to recommend this game.  It remains to be seen whether it is worth full price.  If it was $29.99, I'd say to go for it." That synchs up, although I'd say the general tenor of reviews has been don't even pay $30 for it.

You note that it doesn't seem fair to diss A:CM for things that the COD series has been notorious for doing recently. That seems like a fair judgment to me, but it also involves tacitly agreeing that there are a substantial number of objective game design and implementation factors shared demonstrably by both games which people are complaining about in one case thus unfairly not complaining about in the other case: if the issues were totally subjective, it wouldn't be unfair to complain about them in one game but not in the other.


In conclusion, there are objectively detectable and documented issues about the game, which many reviewers have been complaining about, some of which apparently only show up in the console versions so shouldn't be held against the PC, but a significant number of which complaints you actually agree about yourself: enough so that you wouldn't recommend the game yourself until it reaches around half-price, except maybe to fans of the property who might be willing to overlook the (objective) problems out of (subjective) enjoyment of the property. I really would be interested, as a fan of the property, too, in hearing from you or anyone else whether the objective problem-claims from reviewers that you haven't mentioned yet just haven't been a problem for the PC in your experience (thus explaining why you haven't mentioned them).

But I have to disagree about the complaints being only subjective and not, to a significant degree, also objective.

This deserves a thorough response, but I need to get to Court now.  I will say in the interim, that I don't disagree with some of what you're saying with respect to the objective technical issues that have been raised. My comment regarding subjective evidence has more to do with AI, plot, dialogue, action, etc.

[undercovergeek]

Fair enough.  If you want to PM, you can PM me...to apologize.

i see what you did there

and its that kind of oneupmanship i refer to - this isnt a competition, nor some 'hen party who has the last word' arguement, you made it personal implying i was irrelevant, ridiculous and guilty of something (which remains to be explained), i only questioned your need to do so

i can read all kinds of arguements here from all different kinds of people - only one person subjects them to an attempt at ridicule as opposed to reasoned debate

I do like you, i read your reviews, i read your comments, i sympathise with lifes shitty turns that we all get from now and then, and like someone else i know down the pub im allowed to disagree with you without you throwing my beer in my face and pushing the table over

Please lets stop as Jason has shamed at least me with better literacy and a proper discussion

[Jarhead0331]

Fair enough.  If you want to PM, you can PM me...to apologize.

i see what you did there

and its that kind of oneupmanship i refer to - this isnt a competition, nor some 'hen party who has the last word' arguement, you made it personal implying i was irrelevant, ridiculous and guilty of something (which remains to be explained), i only questioned your need to do so

i can read all kinds of arguements here from all different kinds of people - only one person subjects them to an attempt at ridicule as opposed to reasoned debate

I do like you, i read your reviews, i read your comments, i sympathise with lifes shitty turns that we all get from now and then, and like someone else i know down the pub im allowed to disagree with you without you throwing my beer in my face and pushing the table over

Please lets stop as Jason has shamed at least me with better literacy and a proper discussion

Yeah...I like you too. We're arguing about a game. Its not personal to me.  I wish you wouldn't make it so.

[bboyer66]

To wrap things up so far.

Jarhead: Thinks the game is getting slammed a little too hard in the reviews. Feels that the game has flaws but can be fun especially if your a fan of Aliens. Does not think undercovergeeks opinion on the game carries much weight as undercovergeek has never played the game.

Undercovergeek: Feels that it is not fair for Jarhead to say that his opinion is irrelevant based on him not  ever having played the game. Undercovergeek compares his Aliens analysis to his analysis of the War in Afghanistan. Challenges Jarhead to a duel to protect his honor.

Jason Pratt : Wrote an excellent article on the use of the words subjective and objective, Bayonetbrant should really enjoy this. Me not so much, I dozed off somewhere in the middle.

[undercovergeek]

Fair enough.  If you want to PM, you can PM me...to apologize.

i see what you did there

and its that kind of oneupmanship i refer to - this isnt a competition, nor some 'hen party who has the last word' arguement, you made it personal implying i was irrelevant, ridiculous and guilty of something (which remains to be explained), i only questioned your need to do so

i can read all kinds of arguements here from all different kinds of people - only one person subjects them to an attempt at ridicule as opposed to reasoned debate

I do like you, i read your reviews, i read your comments, i sympathise with lifes shitty turns that we all get from now and then, and like someone else i know down the pub im allowed to disagree with you without you throwing my beer in my face and pushing the table over

Please lets stop as Jason has shamed at least me with better literacy and a proper discussion

Yeah...I like you too. We're arguing about a game. Its not personal to me.  I wish you wouldn't make it so.

as a great man once said:-

"Some people believe football is a matter of life and death, I am very disappointed with that attitude. I can assure you it is much, much more important than that".

[Gusington]

Boyer you disappear for months on end and this is the thread you resurface in? Are you some kind of glutton for punishment?

[bboyer66]

 Im always around Gus.  Have just learned most internet debates are pointless because I cant bash other peoples heads against a wall to see my side of things.
Also I dont have a lot to bring to the table as I am pretty much just playing Bordrlands 2 and World of Tanks currently. Not a whole lot in strategy gaming to get me all that excited. Played Crusader Kings II and found it a snooze fest, which means I am the one person in the entire world that does not enjoy it.


 

[JasonPratt]

To wrap things up so far.
[...]

Jason Pratt : Wrote an excellent article on the use of the words subjective and objective, Bayonetbrant should really enjoy this. Me not so much, I dozed off somewhere in the middle.

;D That's no doubt my metaphysics hobby kicking in.

"Suppose that a great commotion arises in the street about something, let us say a lamp-post, which many influential persons desire to pull down. A grey-clad monk, who is the spirit of the Middle Ages, is approached upon the matter, and begins to say, in the arid manner of the Schoolmen, 'Let us first of all consider, my brethren, the value of Light. If Light be in itself good--' At this point he is somewhat excusably knocked down." -- G. K. Chesterton.

[JasonPratt]

It occurs to me that a comparison with Dead Space 3 (and/or its predecessors) might be appropriate. Which I can't do, not having played either game yet (or any game in the DS franchise, although I've had my eye on it for a while). But I have noticed that despite some reported problems (subjectively and objectively ;) ) with DS3, reviewers have been generally very much in favor of it.

DS3 (and its priors) is very obviously based on Aliens tropes (mixed with some Event Horizon), and it could be basically construed as a COD action-shooter with an Aliensesque mod.

(I declare "Aliensesque" to be a real word.  :P )

[JudgeDredd]

Well I for one like (need) to read what other people have found on the web here.

I don't really look around much...only here, Matrix very, very occasionally, wargamer occasionaly and SimHQ.

So I need people to regurgitate what they've read on the interwebs to save me money.

Thx UCG.

[JudgeDredd]

To wrap things up so far.

Jarhead: Thinks the game is getting slammed a little too hard in the reviews. Feels that the game has flaws but can be fun especially if your a fan of Aliens. Does not think undercovergeeks opinion on the game carries much weight as undercovergeek has never played the game.

Undercovergeek: Feels that it is not fair for Jarhead to say that his opinion is irrelevant based on him not  ever having played the game. Undercovergeek compares his Aliens analysis to his analysis of the War in Afghanistan. Challenges Jarhead to a duel to protect his honor.

Jason Pratt : Wrote an excellent article on the use of the words subjective and objective, Bayonetbrant should really enjoy this. Me not so much, I dozed off somewhere in the middle.

Love it - and required. As full as the information was from all protaganists - some of it was getting lost - so very nice summary.  ;)

[undercovergeek]

Well I for one like (need) to read what other people have found on the web here.

I don't really look around much...only here, Matrix very, very occasionally, wargamer occasionaly and SimHQ.

So I need people to regurgitate what they've read on the interwebs to save me money.

Thx UCG.

You're welcome, and thanks too to JH as he's stood in the other queue offering his different opinion too

Looking at it now the main point I should have brought was that this wasn't my opinion, I was just posting news found elsewhere, albeit negative

Still, were all friends and I'm off round to jarheads for a game of twister and some punch

[FarAway Sooner]

Im always around Gus.  Have just learned most internet debates are pointless because I cant bash other peoples heads against a wall to see my side of things.
Also I dont have a lot to bring to the table as I am pretty much just playing Bordrlands 2 and World of Tanks currently. Not a whole lot in strategy gaming to get me all that excited. Played Crusader Kings II and found it a snooze fest, which means I am the one person in the entire world that does not enjoy it.

This thread has been going on for 8 pages now.  I think what he's saying, Gus, is that he's a glutton for gluttony.

[eyebiter]

Haven't finished the last aliens vs predator game yet.. Want to finish that one before getting ACM.

Even if the single player campaign is lame, usually the multiplayer on these Alien games is worth it.  Just wait a few months for the inevitable 75% off sale.