Let's get started

beerinabox:

the-borealis:

beerinabox:

hotdogheroine50:

the moment you knew this was going to be the best fucking game you ever played

It wasnt even that great

GET THE FUCK OUT

While I do appreciate your concise reasoning and skillfully crafted diolouge I would like to ask you to:

It’s pretty much inarguable what an amazing game Portal was, the concept was new and fresh, the pacing was great, the difficulty curve was welled inclined and of course the writing was phenomenal; and for a game that wasn’t met to be anything more than padding, it went well beyond its call of duty (see what I did there? ) and exceeded any expectation.

And then we have Portal 2, good game, not great. We return to Aperture (actually we never left) and are thrown back into the puzzles and mishaps of the first, Glados comes back to life and deems fit to torture chel while the new character wheatley tries to help chel- and yada yada yada you know what happens next. 

The problems I had with Portal 2 was mainly with the pacing, one of the things that was great about the Original Portal was that it didn’t overstay its welcome- it was short, but not too short as to leave the player dissatisfied but not so long that the puzzles seem to drag on. Each puzzle alluded the story and the story worked to motivate the player to complete the puzzles. It was a very symbiotic relationship between story and gameplay that you only get when the pacing is just right. Portal 2 on the other hand didn’t do too well in this respect the story overlapped the gameplay, right around the time when wheatley goes crazy,  and the pacing really falls apart. Why? The difficulty curve of the game starts jumping around, some puzzles are frustratingly difficult to decode because when you get shoved underground the game developers seemed to have confused “difficult” with “big” - they seemed to have decided to put important panels far away on opposite sides of the map just to make the puzzles on a more grandeur scale in lieu of actually developing particularly difficult puzzles. SO if you weren’t perceptive enough to spot the panel or what have you could take much longer to solve a relatively simple puzzle while the next puzzle a few “rooms” later would be stupidly easy to throw together. The worst part about this is that this isn’t confined to a few specific puzzles, no, each player will find specific things about each puzzle that make them stop and go wtf?

“But wait isn’t that the point of a puzzle?”

Yes if the thing causing difficulty is the players inability to solve it, so that when you figure it out you get to go “yay” and NOT when the difficulty comes from the developers hiding shit. A puzzle is someone dumping pieces in front of you and going ‘put that together’ not dumping a bunch of pieces and then revealing that they actually withheld an essential piece and going “ok… NOW figure it out.”. Not to mention a lot of the puzzles themselves had REALLY stupid solutions to them.

Seriously. A really simple solution to the pacing issue would be to cut out a few of the puzzles, and not going “okay so you solved a bunch of puzzles using one type of gel- your reward is…. solving puzzles with ANOTHER TYPE OF GEL”  instead of actually using the gameplay to progress the story. The worst part is literally the old aperture tests where it seems like the developers are going LOOK AT THESE COOL NEW THINGS WE ADDED TO THE GAME? OH WHAT? STORY? NAH JUST PLAY WITH THESE FOR AWHILE. Which would be good if portal wasn’t a HEAVILY story based game.

“But Eric, we got to learn about Cave Johnson and Caroline and all of THAT was a part of old aperture?”

Which would be great IF Cave Johnson and Caroline were characters… and not just plot devices. Its like getting cheez whiz on a pizza at an Italian restaurant, its cheese but its not. Or moreso, what was wrong with Cave and Caroline was that they did nothing for the story, it was gameplay based on a tangent… a sidequest if you will.  Sure we learned a little bit more about the company that has ensnared us and ULTIMATELY find out that Caroline was converted into the A.I. Glados which isn’t really all that great of a pay off considering Glados literally deletes Caroline from her memory banks; which in my mind is just as much of a middle finger to chel waking up and finding out it was all a dream. If anything it fleshes out Glados JUST enough- BUT that doesn’t do much for the gameplay.

If I were to give my honest review and try to say what I think they should have  been done to improve Portal 2? MORE RATTMAN. His presence is highly evident within the first stages of the game but then he sort of just drops off (unless you also found the rat holes) and the game could have benefited greatly if we literally saw more of him. No direct confrontations so to speak, because the developers clearly want chel to have no interactions with other humans (and thats good) but maybe we see a silhouette of him just off to the side, we get a cube thrown out of the shadows that we need to help finish a puzzle, we hear mutterings, see scampering of the Rattman, and we’re chasing him up old aperture, hes a physical character that would progress gameplay by leading us where we need to go, helping us along the way, and maybe - JUST MAYBE- help chel deal the final blow to wheatley. What would the pay off be then? Seeing this mysterious stranger who has been helping us AND by indirect means showing the history of aperture instead of “yea i was human once get the fuck out of here”. The ending I actually liked, but the build up was choppy and dragged on….

I think I included all the important bits, hm.

EDIT: If you liked Portal 2 and found it an enthralling game then good for you, I respect you no less and value you your opinions for it no less.

If you have said “the cake is a lie” more than once within a few days time, I respect you less.

Your analysis is okay, but there is one fault to the argument.  According to the story, Doug Rattman dies between Portal 1 and 2 trying to get Chel in cryogenic sleep. That was the help that he gives Chel.  Unfortunately, since the turret fire was lethal on the schizophrenic scientist, he could not help her in the future game.  Plus, considering how long after the first game it would have been, he would have died from natural causes anyway

(Source: straighttohelvetica)

arcsin:

Also spraying Luminol everywhere. I was a real 100% ace attorney.

ryttu3k:

aninterestingproposal:

feministdisney:

fuckyeahbodypositivity:

vingardiumlesbiosa:

juicyjacqulyn:

THE SAME COMPANY RUNS BOTH

Just a friendly reminder that while the “real beauty” campaign has the right idea, and that video that’s circulating seems awesome, that they don’t actually practice what they preach.

Not to mention there are still a lot of issues in regards to inclusion and what bodies aren’t even making it into the “real beauty” ads. 

Ok; carry on.

will do anything for some more numbers in their bank accounts, disgusting.

both campaigns essentially demonstrate that Dove views women’s bodies as a prop to sell soap.

cosigned

Although these are both a part of the same corporation, they are not at all related.  These are different divisions with different people in charge.  It would be like Craft and Heine’s  Both of those brands are owned by the same company, but they are not run by the same people.  It’s just that the company is headed by the same group WAY at the top.  At the part that would never even see these ads.

Dove products include firming creams (released at the same time as the original Campaign for Real Beauty) and skin bleaching creams.

Dove’s casting calls for the Campaign for Real Beauty requested women from age 35-45 (just turned forty-six? Sorry, you’re too old to be beautiful) that had ‘flawless skin’ with ‘no tattoos or scars’ (acne? Scars? Sorry, not beautiful), ‘not too curvy not too athletic’ (got muscles? Got body fat? Naturally thin? Sorry, not beautiful)… real beauty? Only if you fit into a very small box.

Dove products include things like palm oil (which is featured in an Onslaught parody, look up ‘Onslaught(er)’).

And that’s just for Dove. It’s plenty problematic just on its own, without ever needing to mention Axe/Lynx…

That’s a legitimate gripe, but to say that it is wrong because they are a part of the same company is not.  Also, it’s basic economic practice for a company to make money, so that’s also not an adequate gripe either.

feministdisney:

fuckyeahbodypositivity:

vingardiumlesbiosa:

juicyjacqulyn:

THE SAME COMPANY RUNS BOTH

Just a friendly reminder that while the “real beauty” campaign has the right idea, and that video that’s circulating seems awesome, that they don’t actually practice what they preach.

Not to mention there are still a lot of issues in regards to inclusion and what bodies aren’t even making it into the “real beauty” ads. 

Ok; carry on.

will do anything for some more numbers in their bank accounts, disgusting.

both campaigns essentially demonstrate that Dove views women’s bodies as a prop to sell soap.

cosigned

Although these are both a part of the same corporation, they are not at all related.  These are different divisions with different people in charge.  It would be like Craft and Heine’s  Both of those brands are owned by the same company, but they are not run by the same people.  It’s just that the company is headed by the same group WAY at the top.  At the part that would never even see these ads.

(Source: drunkonstephen)

lochnesie:

You fuckin up America

They’re all holding illegal firearms.  If you’re going to do an ad campaign like this, use guns that aren’t illegal.  Even if those guns weren’t illegal, All of those children are under the legal age to handle firearms.  The parents would be arrested for just holding them like that in any environment.

(Source: solsticeretouch)

pinklikeme:

rifa:

edwardspoonhands:

judhudson:

awkward-elevator:

Swedish Chef Ramsay

Oh god, I’m in tears, specially the last one.

I would watch this.

Lord help me I am crying and falling over and cant breathe

SFMKLDMLFK