Okay, this is just a general gripe session, feel free to pitch in, offer explanations as to what's wrong with gaming today in terms of features, or lack therof, or just plain omissions by developers. This is just my opinions, though, so feel free to agree/refute at your discretion.
Here we go.
Let's face it, folks, the age of the silent protagonist is over, Gordon Freeman will be the last -true- silent protagonist, imo. This is especially true for RPG's, where your character "talking" is part and parcel of the experience, Mass Effect proved you could have a protagonist that was anything but silent and fully voice acted.
this one's fairly evident, Trespasser started it, But Halo is most noted for it, the ability to look down and see your -feet-, i mean it's not that much of a stretch to actually look down and see the rest of your body in an FPS, right?
Bethesda's guilty of this one, truth be told, having good voice actors and under-utilising them, and over-using the same voices for the countless other faces you see in both Oblivion and Fallout 3, again Bioware used their top billed voice actors correctly in their later RPG's. Bungie did right by us with Halo ODST, short as it was, the voice acting was superb.
is it so much to ask for a game that isn't an RPG to have a fairly solid length these days? i know that dev cycles are fairly constrained these days, but overall it tends to feel that length is being shirked in favor of Multiplayer components and so on. There is no love for the single player campaign anymore, sadly.
Okay, this is more a personal gripe than a general one, but with digital distribution becoming more and more widespread, it fails to make sense to me these days to stagger release dates per chunk of planet.
- Bring them back, bring them all back
I'm talking about a couple of Genres you don't see very often these days, the classic point and click adventure game, and to a greater extent, the Space sim.
Yeah i know telltale's been doing their fair share to bring back the fun adventure plots, but it just doesn't seem enough, i'm glad that services like GoG is bringing back the classics like Space Quest, etc so people can get back to the nostalgia.
As for Space sims? In my heart Freespace 2 was the last, Great space sim, no matter how many ways you cut it, Starlancer and Freelancer didn't come close. I remember hearing somewhere that it might be because space is "too easy" but to be honest it's more a blank canvas that one can introduce life and story to create something truly epic.
I'd like to see a resurgence of the epic space RTS on that note, too. Looking at you, Relic.
[/list]
I quite agree about the silent protagonists! :mowtongue Games are supposed to be re-latable, what person is this day and age isn't as loud or as expressive as crap! >O< I mean if I was a video game character there would be an advisory alone for my mouth! XD
With voice actors I think they should bring in some fresh new people to work regularly and mix them with the veterans, if they can't afford to hire the big and fancy celebrities to do it. Let's face it not every game company can be loaded.
I think if an RPG's length is gonna be sacrificed for other options, then there should be enough options for plenty of replay value, so it doesn't feel as if you wasted your money for a cheap thrill. If not then definitely make the length of the game worth it. We pay to have a decent adventure not a quick romp with the system. D:<
Release dates, I say just tell people to stand in the middle of the street and have a giant plane fly over head and have it rain from above as it circles the world. Seriously, what does it matter if one country releases it first before another one does. If you think its a clever marketing ploy to make you're country seem cooler, I'm sorry but you have nothing but epic fail. Now it can be understanding able, if it was a matter if there were major errors spotted that would cause it to release latter. I mean France releases the game first only to have complaints, while America delayed it to fix said errors and avoided said complaints. In that regard, I can let it slide. I'd like to have a good working game over getting it sooner and having it be buggy.
As for FPS's feet, I don't really play those times of games myself, so not really my area to say my view; since I haven't experienced it for myself. And as for the other stuff I've briefly heard of that stuff, but not in detail, so again no first had experience, so not fair for me to say an opinion myself.
*explodes in a technicolour display in the middle of the thread at all the dissing of silent protagonists, who are meant as such to represent the player and thus don't rely on putting words in his mouth at all.*
Plot holes.
I realize, I'm a bit of an MST3K fan, and I apply that philosophy (for lack of a better word) to my gaming.
but if I'm in any sort of storied game, and I spend a significant amount of time wondering "Why on earth are they doing that? Why is everyone so stupid" etc, it's not fun.
All I ask is that the developers spend a little time thinking about the in world effects of PC and NPC action. Otherwise, you wind up with things like the UIX display case glass. (The items in the museum were stolen twenty years ago. We still haven't cleaned up the broken glass)
Quote from: Turnsky on February 20, 2010, 12:50:17 AMis it so much to ask for a game that isn't an RPG to have a fairly solid length these days? i know that dev cycles are fairly constrained these days, but overall it tends to feel that length is being shirked in favor of Multiplayer components and so on. There is no love for the single player campaign anymore, sadly.
This one, I think I can relate to. From what my software engineering teachers have told me, managers who don't listen to their software developers seems to be becoming more common. Part of that, I think, is that the technology involved in making games has made a relative explosion, graphics, systems, etc. It means that these games take more time to make. Programming in every little feature, getting graphics to have every detail, optimizing performance so that the game doesn't slow to a crawl, makes it take longer to make. Quality work takes time.
But I find that companies just aren't willing to make those sacrifices in time. Usually it involves 'Release now! Release early!' Hard deadlines are also a problem, it's almost impossible to gauge how long exactly a programming project will take to complete, and usually, the deadlines are made by a businessman, not a programmer. Hopefully, they will have *some* input from their programmers, but optimistic and/or just outright unrealistic expectations on programmers are a problem. And what's worse, the programming team always takes all the flak if they aren't able to fulfill their requirements. Some of this might be justified, like what happened with Duke Nukem forever, where they spent loads of time and money and never did anything. In this case, the software development team does take most of the accountability. But more often than not, I find it's a case of demanding that they hold to an unrealistic promise.
Obviously, programmers don't want pay cuts or being fired, usually what happens when they don't fulfill inane requirements, or get rushed on the job. So, they cut corners. Usually, the engine is developed first. (Hopefully anyways). Games like this show their colors very easily, take KOTOR II as a great example. (Or almost any EA game actually). Past a certain point in the game, the plot stops making sense, gameplay gets dull, and it shows, which is a shame because it would have otherwise been a great game. This is a really classic case of the development team being rushed, being pushed to release when they're not ready. And it shows.
I suppose however, there is profit motive to factor into this. Is it better to release 5 passable games that all cost $50 or so, or take the same time to make 1 very good game that costs the same amount. The company may very well end up with more money by rushing and releasing bad games. I suppose this philosophy has been working for the EA, after all. (Release during holiday season, regardless of whether the game is finished or not). I suppose they've also been putting on a few other tactics to squeeze more money out of gamers (such as paid for downloadable content), but that's veering off topic.
From what I gather, it's becoming an ever more common occurrence as well. But... that's my take on the situation. Managers not listening to their software development team = problems.
I'm not sure what exactly some of your points are complaining about, sorry, but some commentary from me, regardless.
Quote from: Turnsky on February 20, 2010, 12:50:17 AM
Let's face it, folks, the age of the silent protagonist is over, Gordon Freeman will be the last -true- silent protagonist, imo. This is especially true for RPG's, where your character "talking" is part and parcel of the experience, Mass Effect proved you could have a protagonist that was anything but silent and fully voice acted.
Chel from Portal, and she came later than Gordon.
I'm not entirely clear, are you complaining that there aren't any being done well, or that they shouldn't be used any more at all?
Quote from: Turnsky on February 20, 2010, 12:50:17 AM
Okay, this is more a personal gripe than a general one, but with digital distribution becoming more and more widespread, it fails to make sense to me these days to stagger release dates per chunk of planet.
eh, arguably the reason for staggered release dates is because of localization delays... for instance, all the censoring of blood in German localizations, not to mention translation and possibly re-recording the voice acting.
My complaint about digital distribution is that the companies are charging the same price for a direct digital download as you would pay if you walk in to a store and buy a box... it's possible to find a game in physical from for less than the downloaded version. Digital distribution cuts out a lot of distribution costs and middlemen, and the price should reflect this... and, as an old school gamer, I feel I am getting less when I don't get a pretty box, printed manuals, and potentially a ton of extras (which is why I love collectors' editions) which means I am paying more money for less return.
Quote from: Turnsky on February 20, 2010, 12:50:17 AM
- Bring them back, bring them all back
I'm talking about a couple of Genres you don't see very often these days, the classic point and click adventure game, and to a greater extent, the Space sim.
Yeah i know telltale's been doing their fair share to bring back the fun adventure plots, but it just doesn't seem enough, i'm glad that services like GoG is bringing back the classics like Space Quest, etc so people can get back to the nostalgia.
As for Space sims? In my heart Freespace 2 was the last, Great space sim, no matter how many ways you cut it, Starlancer and Freelancer didn't come close. I remember hearing somewhere that it might be because space is "too easy" but to be honest it's more a blank canvas that one can introduce life and story to create something truly epic.
I'd like to see a resurgence of the epic space RTS on that note, too. Looking at you, Relic.
[/list]
This.
Quote from: Reese Tora on February 20, 2010, 02:45:19 PM
I'm not sure what exactly some of your points are complaining about, sorry, but some commentary from me, regardless.
Quote from: Turnsky on February 20, 2010, 12:50:17 AM
Let's face it, folks, the age of the silent protagonist is over, Gordon Freeman will be the last -true- silent protagonist, imo. This is especially true for RPG's, where your character "talking" is part and parcel of the experience, Mass Effect proved you could have a protagonist that was anything but silent and fully voice acted.
Chel from Portal, and she came later than Gordon.
I'm not entirely clear, are you complaining that there aren't any being done well, or that they shouldn't be used any more at all?
Quote from: Turnsky on February 20, 2010, 12:50:17 AM
Okay, this is more a personal gripe than a general one, but with digital distribution becoming more and more widespread, it fails to make sense to me these days to stagger release dates per chunk of planet.
eh, arguably the reason for staggered release dates is because of localization delays... for instance, all the censoring of blood in German localizations, not to mention translation and possibly re-recording the voice acting.
My complaint about digital distribution is that the companies are charging the same price for a direct digital download as you would pay if you walk in to a store and buy a box... it's possible to find a game in physical from for less than the downloaded version. Digital distribution cuts out a lot of distribution costs and middlemen, and the price should reflect this... and, as an old school gamer, I feel I am getting less when I don't get a pretty box, printed manuals, and potentially a ton of extras (which is why I love collectors' editions) which means I am paying more money for less return.
Quote from: Turnsky on February 20, 2010, 12:50:17 AM
- Bring them back, bring them all back
I'm talking about a couple of Genres you don't see very often these days, the classic point and click adventure game, and to a greater extent, the Space sim.
Yeah i know telltale's been doing their fair share to bring back the fun adventure plots, but it just doesn't seem enough, i'm glad that services like GoG is bringing back the classics like Space Quest, etc so people can get back to the nostalgia.
As for Space sims? In my heart Freespace 2 was the last, Great space sim, no matter how many ways you cut it, Starlancer and Freelancer didn't come close. I remember hearing somewhere that it might be because space is "too easy" but to be honest it's more a blank canvas that one can introduce life and story to create something truly epic.
I'd like to see a resurgence of the epic space RTS on that note, too. Looking at you, Relic.
[/list]
This.
with the silent protagonists, i'm more complaining that they aren't being done well, Truth be told RPG's with unvoiced protagonists that apparently do speak although we don't hear a single word kinda breaks up the mood, Imo...
Nintendo have also done the 'silent protagonist' angle well with Link.
I loved Freespace 2, but I do have a fond spot in my heart for Freelancer as well. Yeah, the side missions sucked, but it had some *wicked* cool systems to explore out in the fringes! Go off the beaten path, explore, and you'll find some truly awesome stuff!
Quote from: Turnsky on February 20, 2010, 09:34:29 PM
with the silent protagonists, i'm more complaining that they aren't being done well, Truth be told RPG's with unvoiced protagonists that apparently do speak although we don't hear a single word kinda breaks up the mood, Imo...
Offhand I can think of three scenarios:
1. System Shock, where the player has nothing to say since everyone is either dead or talking to him via a one-way link (Doom also does this)
2. Oblivion, where the player can and does talk to people, but you never actually hear their voice
3. Deus Ex and Ultima Ascension, where the player is fully voiced
...In addition you have Ultima 7 and 8, where only deities are able to speak and the voice is supposed to be inside your head, but that's a corner case really.
I'm assuming that your beef is that (3) should replace (2), because having the player communicating by telepathy is kinda silly. In many ways I agree, but on the other hand that usually restricts you to a preset character like Denton.
See, in classic RPGs, the idea was that the player was really supposed to be
you, hence the ability to pick different hair colour, skin colour, gender and so on.
There was a game, 'Corporation' I think, where you could send the studio a photograph and they'd send you back a texture map and various other datafiles with your face on it.
So, having the player set up with a customised portrait and your own name and then hearing them speak with some weird redneck accent would also kind of break the mood as well >:3
Also, having full VA means the name is never used either - I miss being able to name my character "your Holiness" or "you dickhead" :<
Anyway, recording the lead voice for Oblivion would be bad enough just with the 7 default races, though it could have been done relatively well in that case (the fact they only have about 4 VAs would actually help). Recording something like that with accent localisations... Well, I suppose you might be able to sell them separately or something.
i'll concede to those points, tape.. but overall it really depends on the writing as well.
Quote from: Turnsky on February 21, 2010, 11:07:05 AM
i'll concede to those points, tape.. but overall it really depends on the writing as well.
This is true. You can work around almost anything with a skilled enough writer.
Quote from: Turnsky on February 20, 2010, 12:50:17 AM
this one's fairly evident, Trespasser started it, But Halo is most noted for it, the ability to look down and see your -feet-, i mean it's not that much of a stretch to actually look down and see the rest of your body in an FPS, right?
I will agree with you wholeheartedly on this one. There are far too few games which you can look down and see a body. IIRC, you can do this in Frontlines Fuel of War and Thief Deadly Shadows, and those are the only two I can think of off the top of my head. They're not even all that new, but still, it adds a level of immersion that other games don't have.
Quote from: Turnsky on February 20, 2010, 12:50:17 AM
Bethesda's guilty of this one, truth be told, having good voice actors and under-utilising them, and over-using the same voices for the countless other faces you see in both Oblivion and Fallout 3, again Bioware used their top billed voice actors correctly in their later RPG's. Bungie did right by us with Halo ODST, short as it was, the voice acting was superb.
Unless I've missed the mark here, if there were a unique voice actor for every character in Oblivion, the cost of the game would have skyrocketed. Every last voice actor would have to be paid, and that money comes from sales. I think in most cases, it is a cost saving measure, and at least for me, one that I'm willing to live with.
Quote from: Turnsky on February 20, 2010, 12:50:17 AM
Okay, this is more a personal gripe than a general one, but with digital distribution becoming more and more widespread, it fails to make sense to me these days to stagger release dates per chunk of planet.
From what I'm able to understand about this particular problem is the fact that different countries have different customs when it comes to media of any form. Committees need to review the original release for any cultural items that may need to be removed or changed. This takes time, and often, money which ends up raising the price of the game overseas.
Quote from: Turnsky on February 20, 2010, 12:50:17 AM
- Bring them back, bring them all back
I'm talking about a couple of Genres you don't see very often these days, the classic point and click adventure game, and to a greater extent, the Space sim.
Yeah i know telltale's been doing their fair share to bring back the fun adventure plots, but it just doesn't seem enough, i'm glad that services like GoG is bringing back the classics like Space Quest, etc so people can get back to the nostalgia.
As for Space sims? In my heart Freespace 2 was the last, Great space sim, no matter how many ways you cut it, Starlancer and Freelancer didn't come close. I remember hearing somewhere that it might be because space is "too easy" but to be honest it's more a blank canvas that one can introduce life and story to create something truly epic.
I'd like to see a resurgence of the epic space RTS on that note, too. Looking at you, Relic.
Well, everything comes back in style, even retro games. I particularly liked what TellTale did with Sam 'n Max, and LucasArts' remake of Monkey Island. I don't see anything wrong with doing this, though it does end up being hit-and-miss... much like everything else in the gaming industry.
What's wrong with games today is that executives deside what the public wants, and not the creative geniuses of yesterdecade. Try marketing a game with a plot line like this: an Italian plumber from Brooklyn gets sucked into a kingdom full of mushrooms and has to save the princess from a giant spiky fire-breathing turtle and his minions.
Yet this is the story of the single most successful franchise in the video game business. Nintendo is smart enough to let their insane genius (Shigeru Myamoto)do his thing, but who else has this sort of brilliant fucked-up-ness in their games? It's the reason why I still buy a Nintendo console, and no other one. The games that appear on the Xbox360 and the PS3 fall largely in 2 categories: "it's available on the PC" and "I don' t really like that brown rip-off of another brown game". There's the odd nugget there (Ratchet & Clank) but mostly it's full of sports, brown/gray games with space marines/law breaking immigrants/rapper wannabe's/other burly dudes/masturbatory fantasies in the forms of anime-esque girls set in a brown/gray world fighting brown/gray bad guys/fucking hookers/swearing excessively/doing other 'adult' things.
To me, making everything brown/gray, making the setting devoid of imaginative stuff, having cookie-cutter burly male/sexpot chick protagonists and aiming for 'realism' do not necessarily make for an appealing game setting. All the stuff that pushes the boundaries of imagination, or at least goes beyond 'space marine shoots the aliens' is in the indie games, and they don't get any budget at all.
Quote from: Vidar on February 22, 2010, 03:57:58 PM
The games that appear on the Xbox360 and the PS3 fall largely in 2 categories: "it's available on the PC" and "I don' t really like that brown rip-off of another brown game".
Na na, nanana na na na na katamari damashii~
Trying too hard to be theatrical by devoting times to making games more like movies. It's just a personal pet peeve, but I realize people are investing more time in making a game look spiffy than more important things like gameplay, controls, and the actual fun factor. Pretty-looking games are great, but I buy them for the gameplay, and I'd rather touch than look, because if I wanted pretty graphics without interesting gameplay, I'd just look at the screencaps.
Rolling around in the developers' pretentiousness isn't fun. D:
Also, Turnsky, don't diss the Silent Protagonists :< The Lone Wanderer was pretty awesome, but he/she probably doesn't count because he/she's supposed to represent yourself and he/she can be customized. On second thought, Nintendo makes that trope its bitch.
One thing that I forgot to mention as a side-note regarding Oblivion is that it is actually possible to make the lead character talk, and no, this is not supposed to happen. IIRC it involves using the SETSCALE command to make the player half-size, get on a horse, then make the player double-size and try to dismount the horse.
The game will freak out something shocking and you'll hear someone saying one of the default greetings, "How can I help you?" etc. The player is now talking to himself and you get a set of stock conversation options depending on what you've done.
For example, you can talk about rumours and the player will give the latest rumours in the Khajiit voice (or whatever race your character is). You can also ask about the Thieves' Guild, Mage's Guild etc, whichever organisations you belong to.
If you ask about the Blades when you're a Khajiit, you'll get the subtitles only and no voice because there are no Khajiit Blades so they didn't bother to record the voices. I suspect the same goes for Argonian and probably Bosmer characters as well.
Quote from: Vidar on February 22, 2010, 03:57:58 PM
What's wrong with games today is that executives deside what the public wants, and not the creative geniuses of yesterdecade. Try marketing a game with a plot line like this: an Italian plumber from Brooklyn gets sucked into a kingdom full of mushrooms and has to save the princess from a giant spiky fire-breathing turtle and his minions.
Yet this is the story of the single most successful franchise in the video game business. Nintendo is smart enough to let their insane genius (Shigeru Myamoto)do his thing, but who else has this sort of brilliant fucked-up-ness in their games? It's the reason why I still buy a Nintendo console, and no other one. The games that appear on the Xbox360 and the PS3 fall largely in 2 categories: "it's available on the PC" and "I don' t really like that brown rip-off of another brown game". There's the odd nugget there (Ratchet & Clank) but mostly it's full of sports, brown/gray games with space marines/law breaking immigrants/rapper wannabe's/other burly dudes/masturbatory fantasies in the forms of anime-esque girls set in a brown/gray world fighting brown/gray bad guys/fucking hookers/swearing excessively/doing other 'adult' things.
To me, making everything brown/gray, making the setting devoid of imaginative stuff, having cookie-cutter burly male/sexpot chick protagonists and aiming for 'realism' do not necessarily make for an appealing game setting. All the stuff that pushes the boundaries of imagination, or at least goes beyond 'space marine shoots the aliens' is in the indie games, and they don't get any budget at all.
I love nostalgia goggles, because honestly, it blinds people from the truth.
The 90s saw a veritable flood of "Cool" And "Hip" Mascot platformers. Only a few of them are remembered today, such as Sonic, Crash Bandicoot, Spyro, etc. However, there were quite a few that, let's be honest here, were terrible, Like Bubsy 3D, Awesome Possums, and quite a few others. Also, you seem to forget the PC itself is clogged with brown realistic FPS games. And let's be clear here, the NES library had a lot of bad games. The Seal of Quality was little more then a license. You only remember the good titles like Mario and Zelda because you have fond memories of them. Don't forget games like Deadly Towers bore the Seal and still sucked royally
As for Indie games, well, Sturgeons Law still applies here. And innovation =/= fun, execution is everything. You can have a setting and gameplay concept nobody's tried before, release it...and watch it tank miserably because your new, innovative control scheme is unwieldy, awkward, and unresponsive. I don't want to have to flick my controller to perform a task that can be completed with a simple button press, because the developers think the motion controls will add a deeper sense of immersive when in reality, it adds nothing. Let's bring Deadly Towers back again. The game itself was actually kind a ambitious, the Developers clearly worked hard on it, and were proud of it. It used a lot of mechanics and game play elements that we had never seen before, and wouldn't be used until later. That doesn't change the fact the game sucked. Innovation is nice, but you can't hide behind innovation and expect the game to be
good.
Finally, there were innovative, great games of yesterdecade nobody played. Earthbound was one of them, and the Turbo Grafx's Japanese library is another good example, and hell, some of the best games of the 80s and 90s never left Japan until after the new millennium, if at all. Thank God for ROMs and Fan Translations in the other cases.
I have to agree with Keaton's point regarding making games theatrical. Really, how many times have you watched a fight scene and thought, "Man, wouldn't this fight be a lot of fun... if only I could play right now... you know I'm supposed to be controlling that character. This could be a really fun fight sequence and I will never know."
Quote from: ShadesFox on February 23, 2010, 12:44:46 AM
I have to agree with Keaton's point regarding making games theatrical. Really, how many times have you watched a fight scene and thought, "Man, wouldn't this fight be a lot of fun... if only I could play right now... you know I'm supposed to be controlling that character. This could be a really fun fight sequence and I will never know."
The opposite is being able to do that fight and realising that the control system is full of crap and you wouldn't be able to execute all the flashy moves being pulled off -anyway-.
Quote from: ShadesFox on February 23, 2010, 12:44:46 AM
I have to agree with Keaton's point regarding making games theatrical. Really, how many times have you watched a fight scene and thought, "Man, wouldn't this fight be a lot of fun... if only I could play right now... you know I'm supposed to be controlling that character. This could be a really fun fight sequence and I will never know."
Interestingly enough this reminds me of a movie tie in game that was actualy good... course thats probably because the game was made years and years after the movie. I'm talking about the game The Warriors. While it had cut scenes and sybimatic scenes this was never aproblem and the combat system was versatile enough that it was pretty damn cool just to watch a fight
I'm only going to mention the ones that bug me; the rest would probably have something like "THIS" attached to them. :B And I apologize for missed typos; my comp's acting... weird... with typing. :| Namely, it shoots me back to the top whenever I type something. I don't even know.
Quote from: Turnsky on February 20, 2010, 12:50:17 AM
Let's face it, folks, the age of the silent protagonist is over, Gordon Freeman will be the last -true- silent protagonist, imo. This is especially true for RPG's, where your character "talking" is part and parcel of the experience, Mass Effect proved you could have a protagonist that was anything but silent and fully voice acted.
I like silent protagonists. Or at least protagonists where you can choose what they would say, and not feel the urge to repeatedly smash your head into the wall in frustration over the intense DERP of the PC. I also hate BUT THOU MUSTs as well. Why not give me a legit choice? I want to TRY to do the smart thing, not get my butt handed to me because the PC is forced to be as bright as a brick.
QuoteBethesda's guilty of this one, truth be told, having good voice actors and under-utilising them, and over-using the same voices for the countless other faces you see in both Oblivion and Fallout 3, again Bioware used their top billed voice actors correctly in their later RPG's. Bungie did right by us with Halo ODST, short as it was, the voice acting was superb.
I. HATE. VOICE ACTING. You want to know why? because 90% of everything is crap, that's why. I have no desire to turn off the volume for a game that have very nice music. See Baten Kaitos: Eternal Wings and the Lost Ocean. Dawn of the New World, too. UUUUGGGH.
Okay, this is more a personal gripe than a general one, but with digital distribution becoming more and more widespread, it fails to make sense to me these days to stagger release dates per chunk of planet.
[/quote] As has been mentioned, not only do you need to translate, you need to edit things for verious chunks of the planet. I hate the prices, though. But that's why physical games exist. <3
The last game I've played with a Silent protagonist was Metal Saga, and after that was Persona 3 Fes. Seriously, the main character can't get any quieter... Which is especially odd because he builds up friendships without ever saying a word... Well, except for the occasional dialogue choice...
And where the frig are you guys looking for games at? IT'S DANGEROUS TO GO ALONE! TAKE THIS!
http://www.indiegames.com/blog (http://www.indiegames.com/blog)
http://www.tigsource.com/ (http://www.tigsource.com/)
http://sc2.sourceforge.net/ (http://sc2.sourceforge.net/) (Star Control 2: The Ur-Quan Masters. Heck, you linux users can prolly find it in the repos.)
http://www.agdinteractive.com/ (http://www.agdinteractive.com/) (Quest for Glory 2 remake anyone?)
Seriously, I miss Freelancer though... Yeah, the plot was boring, but it was fun to explore, and it's one of the precious few games where I found myself firing torpedoes at traffic... (Hey! That transport started shooting at me first!)
Plus, the mouse-based control scheme... I've played many space-flight games, and lemme tell yah, keyboard-based movement is annoying, and joysticks are a pain. (What have i played? Wing Commander Armada sound familiar? No? Man, you missed out...) If you learned how to abuse the controls right, you could be nigh-untouchable from enemy fire. (The trick was to move the mouse enough to throw off the computer's tracking, but not anough to really move your ship.)
Voice acting is pretty tough. I'm sure the people who run the radio program here can attest to that.
But you can't also just blame the VA. It seems to have a lot with how badly the script was written, and if the VA was actually given any direction when they were recording his/her lines. I suspect, they are just handed a script and say, here, read these into this microphone. Which then, they come out pretty monotone. You may have a hi-profile excellent actor, but take the camera away and nothing visual to look at (like the redubbing voice/overs) it's totally different.
I don't care for the ship it now, and patch it later mentality that games are jumping onto. I just played bioshock on the ps3 for the first time, but before I could play it, it had a 5GB download to do first! What was on the disk? Anything? I don't mind the occasional patch to fix errors, but when you have to download a pile of stuff to play the game in the first place? Really? Ship a completed game first! not a half-assed one!
Quote from: Turnsky on February 20, 2010, 12:50:17 AM
I'd like to see a resurgence of the epic space RTS on that note, too. Looking at you, Relic.
This (http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/relic-definitely-looking-at-homeworld-3) may be of interest. It's from 2008, but it gives me hope yet. 40k is fine and all, Relic, but PLEASE OH PLEASE bring us Homeworld 3 at some point. Nexus just ain't the same.
What ever happened to games like X-com and Jagged Alliance, anyhow? GOG and Steam and the like are doing a good job of bringing older stuff like this back. If not for GOG I wouldn't have Freespace 2 or Hostile Waters; besides, the only real beef I have with digital distribution is how long it takes to download stuff with my awful connection. I'm worried as to how much attention services like GOG have been getting outside of the nostalgia crowd and people like myself who want to play the old classics. Most of the people I know would sooner be back playing the latest multiplayer shooter than give these sorts the time of day.
All that said, I'm very glad for the existence of Indie developers at the moment. Iji, anyone?
QuoteRe: What's wrong with games these days..
EA, for starters... Ubisoft.
*cough* Anyways... I have to disagree on the single player suffering from the use of multiplayer. Multiplayer is almost always just an added thing just so you don't get bored off your butt after you beat the story mode. If the multiplayer mode IS bigger than the story mode, well then we know which mode was the one to be focused on. (See: Smash Bros)
The biggest and truest problem is now that it's so easy to make a game, everyone is making games left and right and tossing them onto the shelves instead of actually taking the time to create a game, save for a select few, that is actually worth getting. I call it the PS1 Syndrome. 90% of those games were randomly cranked out crap.
Sturgeon's Law, Kenji.
Quote from: Kenji on February 24, 2010, 06:25:42 PM
QuoteRe: What's wrong with games these days..
EA, for starters... Ubisoft.
*cough* Anyways... I have to disagree on the single player suffering from the use of multiplayer. Multiplayer is almost always just an added thing just so you don't get bored off your butt after you beat the story mode. If the multiplayer mode IS bigger than the story mode, well then we know which mode was the one to be focused on. (See: Smash Bros)
Really though... On the Wii, most games have some form of multiplayer. Admit it, it's fun beating the crap out of other people. (Heck, Ghostbusters has multiplayer on the Wii!) However, with Brawl, I've seen that a hefty single-player game lurks inside there. (just a heads up.)
And yes, AGES ago, it took a considerable amount of time to set up multiplayer within a game, ESPECIALLY when using the internet or a network as you have to figure out WHAT data is sent for each system to keep a game in sync, and make sure it works.
And take a
very good look at what kinds of games are being produced and on what systems. Games with pretty graphics? Xbox and PS3. Quirky titles with multiplayer? Wii. Lower tech games that can't have flash so the makers have to increase substance? (Hey, one can hope, okay?) DS. Pretty RPGs and somewhat lower-hardware stuff? PSP. Anything and everything else but often gets the shaft due to piracy? PC.
So many designers are failing to focus on the most important aspect of the game itself: Fun. Seriously, that's it. If it ain't fun, nobody likes it. Pretty graphics may get a game noticed and make players cream their pants in anticipation, but if it isn't fun to play, the player feels ripped off and usually just stops playing the game.
To make things worse, "Fun" isn't a universal term. For one person, shooting their friends in the face is great fun, but it gets boring after a while. For me, I've played lots of different games. From spaceflight sims (Some of the Wing Commander games, but my fave is Freelancer.) to adventures (Day of the Tentacle, anyone?) to RPGs. (Too... Many... To... List... Highlights: Quest for Glory, Skies of Arcadia Legends, Star Ocean 3, Metal Saga, Tales of Symphonia, Lunar, .hack//GU, Metroid/Castlevania, Mana Khemia, Atelier Iris, The Bard's Tale, P3F, Summon Night, etc...) to things that don't even HAVE a genre they fit into! (Disgaea, Metal Gear Solid, Zone of the Enders, Ratchet and Clank, Sly Cooper 2 & 3, Overlord, many Zeldas, etc.) And to me, "Fun" is darn hard to describe and also depends on my mood. But, I'll tell ya what I DON'T like anymore... "Select, wait, select, wait, etc." RPGs unless they've got something REALLY interesting that I can't find anywhere else. (On that note, while Ar Tonelico 2 should be on that list, I HATE game-freezing glitches with a serious passion, ESPECIALLY after deciding which love interest I'm going after. Yeesh, I'm the HERO dammit! Gimmie the HAREM ending already!)
Oh, and for those that are wondering why NONE of the Final Fantasy games are among my choices, I've never played 'em. Seriously, I got the GBA remake of the first few and for some bizarre reason, I just don't like it... Maybe because I've already played both Lunar games... Oh crap... I never finished Lunar 2 either... Just great, now everyone's getting out the flogging gear... I'M OUTTA HERE! *Jumps off the screen, GAME OVER.*
Finish lunar, heathen!!! :U
DIVE, DIVE, DIVE!!! There goes Drayco84.............
Although, I do agree with his point about a game having to be fun in order to truly enjoy it. I've played quite a lot games myself (not gonna name them......:sweatdrop) Some were fun, some weren't; but what I can tell you is I DEFINITELY remember the ones that were fun to me! :3
Like Bayonetta............... :love2 mmmmmmmmm dancing montage by a hot girl was definitely fun for me....... >:3 Hee hee hee....
Quote from: Kenji on February 24, 2010, 06:25:42 PM
QuoteRe: What's wrong with games these days..
EA, for starters... Ubisoft.
*cough* Anyways... I have to disagree on the single player suffering from the use of multiplayer. Multiplayer is almost always just an added thing just so you don't get bored off your butt after you beat the story mode. If the multiplayer mode IS bigger than the story mode, well then we know which mode was the one to be focused on. (See: Smash Bros)
The biggest and truest problem is now that it's so easy to make a game, everyone is making games left and right and tossing them onto the shelves instead of actually taking the time to create a game, save for a select few, that is actually worth getting. I call it the PS1 Syndrome. 90% of those games were randomly cranked out crap.
Activsion is way worse now then both of those companies combined. EA is at least trying to regain some of the gaming cred they once had.Activsion, on the other hand, seems to be under the impression that all the criticism leveled at EA is not only a good, but didn't go far enough. Tony Hawk ha likely seen his last game if Ride is any indication, and Guitar Hero is getting staler then a week old bowl of Lays chips.I reckon it's only a matter of time before IW gets tired of Call of Duty.
You're kidding,right? It's easy to make a game now? There's so much wrong with that statement. if anything, it's harder to make a game these days. Back in the day of the Atari 2600, every damn company and there dog had a video game development division, like Quaker Oats for Nyarlathotep's sake! It was considered that six guys was a large Development Team, and some were even coded by a single guy. Now? You need six guys just make sure the physics work properly, at most of the time two different companies, One to make the game and the other to publish.And most 360 and PS3 games are expensive to make, so unless you have the money or talent to catch the publisher eye, you're not going anywhere, code monkey. Sure, you can still be indie, but in this day and age it's not that easy to rub arms with the big boys.
Quote from: Kafzeil on February 25, 2010, 12:15:52 AM
You're kidding,right? It's easy to make a game now? There's so much wrong with that statement. if anything, it's harder to make a game these days. Back in the day of the Atari 2600, every damn company and there dog had a video game development division, like Quaker Oats for Nyarlathotep's sake! It was considered that six guys was a large Development Team, and some were even coded by a single guy. Now? You need six guys just make sure the physics work properly, at most of the time two different companies, One to make the game and the other to publish.And most 360 and PS3 games are expensive to make, so unless you have the money or talent to catch the publisher eye, you're not going anywhere, code monkey. Sure, you can still be indie, but in this day and age it's not that easy to rub arms with the big boys.
Agreed! D: Although, it should be said it's very hard to make a
successful game. Sure you can make a game yourself, but that game can only go as far as you can go. If all you can do is stick figures and some low programming, that game will go only so far........believe me. I've had so much drilled into my head (still more to go) by my game department teachers and they know what they're talking about! (One of our heads of the department designed "MechAssult")
The more complex games are the more complex it takes to make them. Does that mean they have to be complex? Not at all! The only reason a lot of them are is because of competition. Plain and simple competition is a never-ending and constant thing that will occur in the video game industry.........However, in the end it boils down to the consumer, the player, us; we are the ones who will buy them and play them. They should be learning more from there consumer market, then paying attention to how great they can outflash their competitors! :3
Quote from: Turnsky on February 20, 2010, 12:50:17 AM
- Bring them back, bring them all back
I'm talking about a couple of Genres you don't see very often these days, the classic point and click adventure game, and to a greater extent, the Space sim.
Yeah i know telltale's been doing their fair share to bring back the fun adventure plots, but it just doesn't seem enough, i'm glad that services like GoG is bringing back the classics like Space Quest, etc so people can get back to the nostalgia.
I'm gonna call you out on old Sierra titles because they really, really have not aged well. At all. The only reason I'll sort of give the Space Quest and Leisure Suit Larry games a pass is because they're funny, but things like King's Quest and Police Quest can go straight to hell.
I think the problem is that adventure games really had no way to innovate themselves after a while. For like a decade, it was "move cursor around, find small object two pixels wide, use inventory on everything." FPSes evolved with multiplayer, RPGs became more action oriented, and action games offered more and more interactivity, but adventure games pretty much languished in the same old formulas. And when adventure games were bad/unfair/stupid, they generally stood out more than bad games from other genres. Example: Amazon: Guardians of Eden (http://lparchive.org/LetsPlay/Amazon/Update%201/index.html), for its sheer level of "fuck you for playing our game."
Quote from: Kafzeil on February 25, 2010, 12:15:52 AM
You're kidding,right? It's easy to make a game now? There's so much wrong with that statement. if anything, it's harder to make a game these days. Back in the day of the Atari 2600, every damn company and there dog had a video game development division, like Quaker Oats for Nyarlathotep's sake! It was considered that six guys was a large Development Team, and some were even coded by a single guy. Now? You need six guys just make sure the physics work properly, at most of the time two different companies, One to make the game and the other to publish.And most 360 and PS3 games are expensive to make, so unless you have the money or talent to catch the publisher eye, you're not going anywhere, code monkey. Sure, you can still be indie, but in this day and age it's not that easy to rub arms with the big boys.
Companies crank games out like no one's business anymore because game engines are shared freely amongst developers, for the most part. Most companies just abuse the same engine and give it new clothes to call it their own.
Quote from: Tipod on February 25, 2010, 11:34:06 PMRPGs became more action oriented
I'm gonna call you out on RPGs; the action RPG is it's own genre, including games such as Legend of Zelda for quite some time... and, TBH, the non action RPG genre seems to be dying off, which I think is a sad thing. The major staples of regular RPGs that I grew up on, like Final Fantasy and Breath of Fire have either moved away frmo classic RPG play (Final Fantasy) or died off (Breath of Fire... seriously, 5 was awful, and I doubt that we'll see a 6 because of how poorly it did)
Quote from: Tipod on February 25, 2010, 11:34:06 PM
Quote from: Turnsky on February 20, 2010, 12:50:17 AM
- Bring them back, bring them all back
I'm talking about a couple of Genres you don't see very often these days, the classic point and click adventure game, and to a greater extent, the Space sim.
Yeah i know telltale's been doing their fair share to bring back the fun adventure plots, but it just doesn't seem enough, i'm glad that services like GoG is bringing back the classics like Space Quest, etc so people can get back to the nostalgia.
I'm gonna call you out on old Sierra titles because they really, really have not aged well. At all. The only reason I'll sort of give the Space Quest and Leisure Suit Larry games a pass is because they're funny, but things like King's Quest and Police Quest can go straight to hell.
I think the problem is that adventure games really had no way to innovate themselves after a while. For like a decade, it was "move cursor around, find small object two pixels wide, use inventory on everything." FPSes evolved with multiplayer, RPGs became more action oriented, and action games offered more and more interactivity, but adventure games pretty much languished in the same old formulas. And when adventure games were bad/unfair/stupid, they generally stood out more than bad games from other genres. Example: Amazon: Guardians of Eden (http://lparchive.org/LetsPlay/Amazon/Update%201/index.html), for its sheer level of "fuck you for playing our game."
You think "click on the object two pixels wide" is bad? I've got two words for you...
Text... Parser... 'Nuff said.
I've played King's Quest, which I'll admit I wasn't fond of, but not Police Quest. I'll freely admit that the old-school adventure games were kinda fun, but
very annoying if you couldn't figure out what the friggin' hell you were supposed to do next. (Day of the Tentacle, anyone? Heck, how about the entire Quest for Glory series? Back then, an internet connection was scarce, and -I- certainly didn't have one... Talk about wandering around aimlessly for HOURS, geez!) And mind you, at least ONCE on EVERY Zelda game I've gotten stuck because of something that would be blatently obvious to someone else. Then again, starting pointless conversations with everyone you see and swiping everything that isn't nailed down is kinda fun, but eventually you exhaust the dialogue trees and run out of stuff to swipe...
Quote from: Reese Tora on February 26, 2010, 01:03:02 AM
Quote from: Tipod on February 25, 2010, 11:34:06 PMRPGs became more action oriented
I'm gonna call you out on RPGs; the action RPG is it's own genre, including games such as Legend of Zelda for quite some time... and, TBH, the non action RPG genre seems to be dying off, which I think is a sad thing. The major staples of regular RPGs that I grew up on, like Final Fantasy and Breath of Fire have either moved away frmo classic RPG play (Final Fantasy) or died off (Breath of Fire... seriously, 5 was awful, and I doubt that we'll see a 6 because of how poorly it did)
Yes, and tell me, who in their right mind would call playing part of the game, starting ALL OVER AGAIN, playing slightly past the first reset point, and getting reset AGAIN could be considered FUN? Still, Capcom is well-known for milking a series until it drops. (Mega Man, Mega Man X, Mega Man Zero, Mega Man Battle Network, MMBN series 2...) And remember that they're not the only ones that said "Well, this sounds like a good idea! Let's not bother to playtest it and just force it onto the players!" (Poor, sad Working Designs... You will be missed...*Weeps.*)
I should open up the DS Lunar game... I mean, the HP ticking away could be overlooked, but NOT a combination of "blow into the microphone to run away from combat!" and "Running away from a boss fight? That'll cost you a turn!" (Nevermind the fact that the thing is supposedly ultra-sensitive to noise.) But to NOT allow you to pick which enemy they attack? (Well, P3F is tolerable, despite the somewhat dumb AI, and Fuuka! Please Fuuka, SHUT UP! I like you and all, but please, JUST SHUT UP! You're worse than Navi, dammit!) And combine breakable weapons PLUS having to pick between XP or items? Ugh... Just, ugh...
I know that there's a fine line between "challenge" and "break your controller/handheld out of frustration", but still... Seriously, some quirks can really make a game unique, but others just annoy players to the point of walking away. And, they may tell OTHERS of their kind about their experiences. So, if they didn't have fun, they will say so. If they had a great time playing the game, they will say so.
Oh, and for those that think making games is easy, consider this. Some game titles SURPASS THE BUDGET OF MAJOR MOTION PICTURES! Yeah, think about that for a second.
Police quest had all the fun of "oops you missed picking up some doodad two hours ago guess you're screwed" mixed with having to follow actual police procedures in the manual. It sounded cool on paper (awesome, I'm doing a drug bust JUST LIKE REAL COPS DO) but when you realize your gun doesn't hit anything because you didn't adjust the sight on it all the way back at the range, get killed for not securing your pistol before taking suspects to lockup, and get other officers killed for not thinking to search the guy wearing only his skivvies, you just say "this game sucks ass" and boot up Doom or Quake.
And once adventure games crossed into FMVs... that was kind of the point that I gave up on the whole genre. Having photorealistic sets and actors actually felt more fake than using pixel art.
Quote from: Tipod on February 26, 2010, 02:15:58 AM
Police quest had all the fun of "oops you missed picking up some doodad two hours ago guess you're screwed"
Otherwise known as "Everything Sierra ever made."
Quote from: Drayco84 on February 26, 2010, 01:29:59 AM
Yes, and tell me, who in their right mind would call playing part of the game, starting ALL OVER AGAIN, playing slightly past the first reset point, and getting reset AGAIN could be considered FUN? Still, Capcom is well-known for milking a series until it drops. (Mega Man, Mega Man X, Mega Man Zero, Mega Man Battle Network, MMBN series 2...) And remember that they're not the only ones that said "Well, this sounds like a good idea! Let's not bother to playtest it and just force it onto the players!" (Poor, sad Working Designs... You will be missed...*Weeps.*)
Oh, no, I completely agree that the 5th installment sucked royally, I was just trying to be nice and not point out the fact that it didn't do well because Capcom screwed it up, rather than from any lack of interest.
Heck, the official strat guide ended up being vaporware(atleast EB games refunded my $5...).
Quote from: Janus Whitefurr on February 26, 2010, 02:43:33 AM
Quote from: Tipod on February 26, 2010, 02:15:58 AM
Police quest had all the fun of "oops you missed picking up some doodad two hours ago guess you're screwed"
Otherwise known as "Everything Sierra ever made."
Sierra has it's own section on TV Tropes for the Unwinnable tropes. All three of them.
Seriously. See for yourself! (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Unwinnable)
Quote from: Janus Whitefurr on February 23, 2010, 01:17:42 AM
The opposite is being able to do that fight and realising that the control system is full of crap and you wouldn't be able to execute all the flashy moves being pulled off -anyway-.
WET?
I think that was the first thing that came to mind for me.
Quote from: Kenji on February 26, 2010, 12:59:13 AM
Companies crank games out like no one's business anymore because game engines are shared freely amongst developers, for the most part. Most companies just abuse the same engine and give it new clothes to call it their own.
But if developers didn't do this,
nothing would get done. If you ha to build up a unique game and physics engine for each new game, that'd chew up a lot of development time. And publishers, and the public, doesn't like it when a game takes too long in it's development cycle. Take Duke Nukem Forever, and Daikatana. Daikatana actually switched game engines mid development, Pushing the game's release date further back, earning mockery from the press, and causing most of the dev team to quite in disgust. Duke Nukem Forever took this up to 11.
Time is crucial to the development of games. Yes, you can argue that with the Evil Publishers forcing release date on the Developers, games would be much better. But if Duke is any indication, game might not even get finished at all.
Quote from: Kafzeil on February 26, 2010, 05:04:16 PM
Quote from: Kenji on February 26, 2010, 12:59:13 AM
Companies crank games out like no one's business anymore because game engines are shared freely amongst developers, for the most part. Most companies just abuse the same engine and give it new clothes to call it their own.
But if developers didn't do this, nothing would get done. If you ha to build up a unique game and physics engine for each new game, that'd chew up a lot of development time. And publishers, and the public, doesn't like it when a game takes too long in it's development cycle. Take Duke Nukem Forever, and Daikatana. Daikatana actually switched game engines mid development, Pushing the game's release date further back, earning mockery from the press, and causing most of the dev team to quite in disgust. Duke Nukem Forever took this up to 11.
Time is crucial to the development of games. Yes, you can argue that with the Evil Publishers forcing release date on the Developers, games would be much better. But if Duke is any indication, game might not even get finished at all.
There's a reason games that take years to make are considered classics and the rest get forgotten.
Quote from: Kenji on February 26, 2010, 05:41:33 PM
There's a reason games that take years to make are considered classics and the rest get forgotten.
Define Classic. Everyone's idea of a classic is different, and there's no general consenous of the best games ever. I've hated games, movies, anime, comics, books, and TV shows that people said where amoung the best, most likley due to the amoung of hype it's fanbase generated. Games tend to age worse then other mediums anyways. Again, I'll point out adventure games. Nostaslgaic fans will admire the stories and characters, but modern fans will likely just see medocrce to decent stories and twists, and game play that defines Save Scumming. The few Adventure game sI'll argue deserve the praise are the Lucasarts games and a handful of Sierra's games, more so the comedic stuff.
Quote from: Kafzeil on February 26, 2010, 06:40:23 PM
Quote from: Kenji on February 26, 2010, 05:41:33 PM
There's a reason games that take years to make are considered classics and the rest get forgotten.
Define Classic. Everyone's idea of a classic is different, and there's no general consenous of the best games ever. I've hated games, movies, anime, comics, books, and TV shows that people said where amoung the best, most likley due to the amoung of hype it's fanbase generated. Games tend to age worse then other mediums anyways. Again, I'll point out adventure games. Nostaslgaic fans will admire the stories and characters, but modern fans will likely just see medocrce to decent stories and twists, and game play that defines Save Scumming. The few Adventure game sI'll argue deserve the praise are the Lucasarts games and a handful of Sierra's games, more so the comedic stuff.
Classic as games worth playing despite being aged.
There's a general list of games that people define as classic. I don't care to list them however.
Quote from: Robbychu on February 26, 2010, 12:57:21 PM
Quote from: Janus Whitefurr on February 26, 2010, 02:43:33 AM
Quote from: Tipod on February 26, 2010, 02:15:58 AM
Police quest had all the fun of "oops you missed picking up some doodad two hours ago guess you're screwed"
Otherwise known as "Everything Sierra ever made."
Sierra has it's own section on TV Tropes for the Unwinnable tropes. All three of them.
Seriously. See for yourself! (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Unwinnable)
Better link: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Sierra (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/Sierra)
Yup, they've got their own section.