Swimmin in 7s



  • @chocobop said in Swimmin in 7s:

    How about Syndicate (2012). The fun FPS reboot with too much bloom. Still felt like a cool sci-fi shooter campaign and -- darn it -- I enjoyed that it was attached to the Syndicate IP! Also contains a legendary music remix by Skrillex. I never got to play the multiplayer (which was actually a quirky, 4 player class-based cooperative thing) but I've seen people get really into it.

    Ghost in the Shell: SAC on the PS2 is another one that I really like but seems to get remembered as just a standard 3rd person shooter with unusual acrobatics. Heck, throw in the PS1 GITS game as long as we're at it, although I think that game's legacy has turned out to be quite favorable as an underrated gem.


    Surprisingly, coming up with swimming-in-7 examples is giving me a lot of pause even though I've always enjoyed hearing the Allies talk about their personal Si7s. I think it is because the way I internally rate my games naturally makes these games higher than a "7" for me, and part of my brain doesn't want to climb down from that higher level of praise just so I can fit it into the thread.

    It's like, for a game to be a "7" in the widely understood sense it has to meet and stay within some kind of middle-of-the-road level of expectations, but when that game is worth bringing up as a "swimming in 7s" that also means it was a favorite for you in particular, and that you still think about (if not still replay it). A game might be a legit 7, and you might have legitimately beat it and enjoyed it, but if it passes through you and gets largely forgotten then it isn't a Si7. That's kind of my problem: games where that enjoyment sticks with me are special enough that I can't call them sevens.

    Gosh, well said. I was trying my hardest to think of a few answers as well, but I couldn't come up with anything really.

    Something like Singularity is a good 8.5-9 game as far as I'm concerned. Am I supposed to go by metacritic? By budget behind the game? By how overlooked it is?

    I mean I actually quite enjoyed The Last of Us. The game had a plethora of problems, but overall I think it's a decent 7/10 game. When I've stated this in the past though, all I got was pointed at metacritic.

    "legit 7/10" doesn't really exist.



  • Yeah like The Last of Us was a 10/10 when I first played it and a 7.5/10 after repeated playthroughs. I don't consider it a 'Swimmin in 7s' cause it goes so far and beyond what I or anybody else would deem the usual 7/10.

    Like when I think of 'Swimmin in 7s' I think about a game with mild to low ambition that gets the job done, or a highly ambitious yet flawed game that is still enjoyable, but I don't think about a highly ambitious game that DOES get they job done, has satisfied millions, is considered an all time classic, but also has a bunch of stuff that annoys me so I personally rate it 7/10.



  • But I don't consider TLoU to have gotten the job done. I don't rate it a 7 due to some petty annoyances, I genuinely consider it a rather mediocre game for a lot of reasons. Everyone rates a game personaly, that's the problem with this question. It seems like it would be more appropriate to ask for games considered underrated here.

    Out of curiosity though, how was TLoU ambitious as a video game?



  • @chocobop said in Swimmin in 7s:

    How about Syndicate (2012). The fun FPS reboot with too much bloom. Still felt like a cool sci-fi shooter campaign and -- darn it -- I enjoyed that it was attached to the Syndicate IP! Also contains a legendary music remix by Skrillex. I never got to play the multiplayer (which was actually a quirky, 4 player class-based cooperative thing) but I've seen people get really into it.

    That game was released at the wrong time, if something like it was released nowadays it would get a lot more traction. I feel like the FPS fatigue back then hurt it quite a bit, even though it's a solid game.



  • @sheria said in Swimmin in 7s:

    Out of curiosity though, how was TLoU ambitious as a video game?

    I respect the fact that you don't like it. I also struggle with the game throughout the years. Especially because it's outright boring for the first hour or so. But do I really need to point out why it was ambitious? Is it not obvious or are you trying to make a point?



  • @dipset said in Swimmin in 7s:

    @sheria said in Swimmin in 7s:

    Out of curiosity though, how was TLoU ambitious as a video game?

    I respect the fact that you don't like it. I also struggle with the game throughout the years. Especially because it's outright boring for the first hour or so. But do I really need to point out why it was ambitious? Is it not obvious or are you trying to make a point?

    Why you consider it more so than most games? yeah, I'm genuinely curious. I mean, forget how good a game it may or may not be, I just fail to see what area it was being overly ambitious in.



  • @paulmci27 Bro, Remember Me is a fuckin' bop. I love that game.

    @Sheria While I'm not Dipset, and I don't have the same reverence for TLOU as a lot of people, I still understand why it gets so much praise and how it has become such a beloved classic to so many.
    It's a game that is arguably more than the sum of it's parts. If you just want to focus on gameplay then yeah it doesn't really do all that much more or better than its contemporaries, but as a total package it is elevated to greatness. It was one of the first games that really blew people away with its combination of atmosphere, tone, and performance. For games have relationships as convincing as Joel and Ellie did in Part 1.



  • @el-shmiablo said in Swimmin in 7s:

    @paulmci27 Bro, Remember Me is a fuckin' bop. I love that game.

    @Sheria While I'm not Dipset, and I don't have the same reverence for TLOU as a lot of people, I still understand why it gets so much praise and how it has become such a beloved classic to so many.
    It's a game that is arguably more than the sum of it's parts. If you just want to focus on gameplay then yeah it doesn't really do all that much more or better than its contemporaries, but as a total package it is elevated to greatness. It was one of the first games that really blew people away with its combination of atmosphere, tone, and performance. For games have relationships as convincing as Joel and Ellie did in Part 1.

    That's all fair. I'm not here to hate on the game or anything, I just don't see it as an ambitious one, even with what you've said there.

    Elite, Ultima Online, Shenmue, No Man's Sky, even the recent RDR2 which I don't like very much, these are just a handful of games where I could be on board with them being called ambitious (for their time) . I just don't see it with TLoU, that's all.



  • @jdincinerator
    I....remember....something.

    From the same Developer Vampyr is also pretty good.



  • @sheria said in Swimmin in 7s:

    Why you consider it more so than most games?

    I don't consider it more ambitious than most games who go out there and try something new but I do think TLOU was ambitious.

    The big one for me is the seamless gameplay flow between stealth, sprinting, melee, and gunplay. I would argue TLOU has the most free flowing and aggressive combat in a video game up to that point. Every level has a different shape and size, and within every level offers a ton of opportunities to ammo up, heal up, and equip new weapons all the while enemies are trying to kill you.

    Another part that adds to the emergent gameplay is how there isn't a snap-to-cover system. You're always flowing around the combat area with threats surrounding you. You can pop up for a few shots with your revolver, run out of ammo, Ellie whips a brick at your enemy, and you sprint up to melee him. The camera changes into this dramatic OTS low angle and you horrifically pummel the enemy, then the camera returns to normal and you can go back to your stealth / cover shooting.

    On-the-fly game play has been attempted before but never executed this well. I think about the Hitman series and how well it does the stealth sandbox, but even in its newest versions, you still feel like you're in a new off balanced mode when your cover is blown.

    I'd even argue that the only game after TLOU to really nail emergent /aggressive / dynamic combat is Metal Gear Solid V, which released at least 2 years later. It's a tough thing to nail and ND didn't really nail it because the AI had problems, but they still did it better than anybody up to that point.