Welcome to The Future
by Ian Smithers · in General Discussion · 03/01/2005 (5:58 am) · 30 replies
The more I read gaming news nowadays, the more depressing it is. It seems that all people can do, is increment the digit on the end of a titles name and then they are set for a new hit. We are in a world of sequels and addons, where are the new titles, the new IPs and worlds to explore? I remember aaaaages back, that most every game being released was new, interesting and unique. Each trying to forge new ground.
Games are getting dumber. I hate to pick on Ion Storm in light of their recent closure, but Deus Ex 2 was abysmal. Especially when considering people are trying to do the same version on multiple platforms, whenever this happens and one of those platforms is the PC, the game suffers. I watched my housemate spend days playing with Thief 3 .ini files trying to make the game HUD and shopping system, a little more bearable and friendlier to PC users.
So we get stuck with a swarm of average mass-market titles. Stupid games, for stupid people. The killer thing about it, is that these titles are still making money.
Just from today's gaming news we have:
EQ 2
SWAT 4
New Cossacks 2
Hidden Stroke 2
DOOM 3: RoE
Halo 3
Championship Manager 5
The Settlers 5
Dungeon Siege 2
Hearts of Iron 2
Sims 2: Uni
Tekken 5
Where are the original titles, the new IPs and how about a real sequel? What about a new Syndicate or Magic Carpet game? All I see here is "rehash/money... rehash/money... rehash/money..." and only a handful of those titles are worthy of a sequel, in my humble opinion at least.
I guess this is me just peeved with the state of the industry and ranting about it. I think the industry needs a new genre, something fresh to explore and new unproven groud with no prior milestones to beat. This won't solve sequalmania-syndrome, but it will serve as a nice distraction, and hopefully result in an influx of new original IPs.
Ian
P.S. Do you really think this guy should keep trying?
Games are getting dumber. I hate to pick on Ion Storm in light of their recent closure, but Deus Ex 2 was abysmal. Especially when considering people are trying to do the same version on multiple platforms, whenever this happens and one of those platforms is the PC, the game suffers. I watched my housemate spend days playing with Thief 3 .ini files trying to make the game HUD and shopping system, a little more bearable and friendlier to PC users.
So we get stuck with a swarm of average mass-market titles. Stupid games, for stupid people. The killer thing about it, is that these titles are still making money.
Just from today's gaming news we have:
EQ 2
SWAT 4
New Cossacks 2
Hidden Stroke 2
DOOM 3: RoE
Halo 3
Championship Manager 5
The Settlers 5
Dungeon Siege 2
Hearts of Iron 2
Sims 2: Uni
Tekken 5
Where are the original titles, the new IPs and how about a real sequel? What about a new Syndicate or Magic Carpet game? All I see here is "rehash/money... rehash/money... rehash/money..." and only a handful of those titles are worthy of a sequel, in my humble opinion at least.
I guess this is me just peeved with the state of the industry and ranting about it. I think the industry needs a new genre, something fresh to explore and new unproven groud with no prior milestones to beat. This won't solve sequalmania-syndrome, but it will serve as a nice distraction, and hopefully result in an influx of new original IPs.
Ian
P.S. Do you really think this guy should keep trying?
#2
It's been coming for a while. To much demand, to little imagination and costs skyrockting just to get in. It's the driving force behind the indie movement. I don't let it get me done though. Once you realize those large brain dead companies are actually making it easier for us day by day, it kinda makes you want to see if what the put out next is even crappier than the last one, lol. Seriously. Volume is everything, and when the masses start to come, to giants will start to crumble. Bet on it.
Absolutely! He's got a long row to hoe for damn sure, but he is on the right track. Ponder if you will my "Theory of content value". For the most part, information and data have pretty much been more valuable than money. Pressing CD's of music artists is really nothing more than printing your own form of currency and tading it for Goverment backed currency. But now, we have information overload. There is so much to see, hear, learn, and do, that we as a society are wanting more and more info, input, and stimulation. When demand increases, so does competition, and prices go lower. We are standing at the threshold of the "Disposable Data Age"(
03/01/2005 (6:58 am)
Way to start my day, now I'm to depressed to do anything. NOT!It's been coming for a while. To much demand, to little imagination and costs skyrockting just to get in. It's the driving force behind the indie movement. I don't let it get me done though. Once you realize those large brain dead companies are actually making it easier for us day by day, it kinda makes you want to see if what the put out next is even crappier than the last one, lol. Seriously. Volume is everything, and when the masses start to come, to giants will start to crumble. Bet on it.
Quote:P.S. Do you really think this guy should keep trying?
Absolutely! He's got a long row to hoe for damn sure, but he is on the right track. Ponder if you will my "Theory of content value". For the most part, information and data have pretty much been more valuable than money. Pressing CD's of music artists is really nothing more than printing your own form of currency and tading it for Goverment backed currency. But now, we have information overload. There is so much to see, hear, learn, and do, that we as a society are wanting more and more info, input, and stimulation. When demand increases, so does competition, and prices go lower. We are standing at the threshold of the "Disposable Data Age"(
#3
"New ideas are risky" - Thats what my friend was told at his publisher. Promptly after they asked what film he would license for the game idea. You know what, I really don't think new ideas are that risky. Because you can take an old proven idea, to a new studio and have them totally botch it. I think its the people with the new ideas that are risky. What if instead of having sequel after sequel after addon, you instead had a system where the studio was the name people looked out for, not the game name. When they see the studio name on a product, they are sure its a fun title, because in the past that studio has done other high quality products. So now you have the value placed on the team, which is where it should be, not on the IP. Check the subtitle of the 'Game Ideas' forum. "Game design has stagnated. Ideas are cheap, so why do we keep seeing the same games?". Thats the key right there, 'Ideas are cheap'. So why are they worth so much? -_-
Moving on, I rarely buy any games based on reviews anyhow, unless everyone gives it below average, otherwise I make my own mind up. I'm not saying its good/bad one way or another, but I own a few games which I consider to be excellent, but reviewers slated. Lets remember that 90% of the review sites out there, are those catering to the mass market. Gamespy, IGN and their kin are the reviewing equivalent of the publishers that keep churning out the generic cash cows.
@Gonzo
About the phantom, in principle I agree, however I sort of wish that the candidate in question had somewhat more a positive reputation, that alone would fill me with more confidence and I would want to back him. I would really love someone to break out a brand new console that would put some serious pressure on the competition. I just get the impression he is the sort of person who will make millions, and then just up and disappear leaving users floundering. I have read alot of articles on him and so far I have only found a few positive comments, most of which were about the Phantom, not him. But hey, time will tell.
In regards to the masses coming to indie development, I dunno about this. I would love to think it was possible, to sway people from the grasp of mass market titles, to original and unique titles, but I can't see the marketing power of the giants giving up so easily.
Ian
03/01/2005 (7:42 am)
@Alan"New ideas are risky" - Thats what my friend was told at his publisher. Promptly after they asked what film he would license for the game idea. You know what, I really don't think new ideas are that risky. Because you can take an old proven idea, to a new studio and have them totally botch it. I think its the people with the new ideas that are risky. What if instead of having sequel after sequel after addon, you instead had a system where the studio was the name people looked out for, not the game name. When they see the studio name on a product, they are sure its a fun title, because in the past that studio has done other high quality products. So now you have the value placed on the team, which is where it should be, not on the IP. Check the subtitle of the 'Game Ideas' forum. "Game design has stagnated. Ideas are cheap, so why do we keep seeing the same games?". Thats the key right there, 'Ideas are cheap'. So why are they worth so much? -_-
Moving on, I rarely buy any games based on reviews anyhow, unless everyone gives it below average, otherwise I make my own mind up. I'm not saying its good/bad one way or another, but I own a few games which I consider to be excellent, but reviewers slated. Lets remember that 90% of the review sites out there, are those catering to the mass market. Gamespy, IGN and their kin are the reviewing equivalent of the publishers that keep churning out the generic cash cows.
@Gonzo
About the phantom, in principle I agree, however I sort of wish that the candidate in question had somewhat more a positive reputation, that alone would fill me with more confidence and I would want to back him. I would really love someone to break out a brand new console that would put some serious pressure on the competition. I just get the impression he is the sort of person who will make millions, and then just up and disappear leaving users floundering. I have read alot of articles on him and so far I have only found a few positive comments, most of which were about the Phantom, not him. But hey, time will tell.
In regards to the masses coming to indie development, I dunno about this. I would love to think it was possible, to sway people from the grasp of mass market titles, to original and unique titles, but I can't see the marketing power of the giants giving up so easily.
Ian
#4
03/01/2005 (3:09 pm)
Quote:Where are the original titlesRight here in the indie game dev community, I hope!!
#5
Occasionally they'll surprise you, and that's when you can take the world by storm. But that's 90% luck, and you had BETTER be on the ball with the remaining 10%.
The problem that WILL bite these publishers in the butt is that eventually people WILL tire of the same ol', same ol', and if they've been doing NOTHING but milking the old cash cow until she's dry, they are gonna be left flapping in the wind without anything else.
I was once told the marketing strategy of a major publisher... I can't remember who it was, I think Activision. They basically broke it into a 2 x 2 matrix, divided into technology / game mechanics on one axis, and IP / Franchise on the other. That pretty much broke up their desired publishing ratio:
1 game that used existing IP and existing technology... a "pure sequel" (or expansion). A sure seller. Quake 2, Madden 200x, etc.
1 game that introduced new IP, but used an existing technology & gameplay. Like Interstate 76 using the Mechwarrior 2 engine (back in the day...)
1 game that was within a popular existing IP but introduced new technology (or, rarely, new gameplay). A sequel with an all-new game engine, for example (Doom 3, Half-Life 2).
1 game that was a risky combination of new IP and new technology.
This sounds to me like a healthy ratio, but that was years ago. I don't know if that strategy has been abandoned in favor of riding a few existing horses into the ground and then buying someone else's horse later.
03/02/2005 (11:26 am)
Originality is overrated - at least with respect to the marketplace. People don't WANT something completely fresh, original, and new. It scares them. They want something comfortable and familiar, yet with enough new ideas and twists to keep the experience different enough. There ARE some new, original titles being released by even these major publishers... but they aren't being bought. They aren't in the news. They don't have the big marketing money behind them. What sells (usually) is the tried and true.Occasionally they'll surprise you, and that's when you can take the world by storm. But that's 90% luck, and you had BETTER be on the ball with the remaining 10%.
The problem that WILL bite these publishers in the butt is that eventually people WILL tire of the same ol', same ol', and if they've been doing NOTHING but milking the old cash cow until she's dry, they are gonna be left flapping in the wind without anything else.
I was once told the marketing strategy of a major publisher... I can't remember who it was, I think Activision. They basically broke it into a 2 x 2 matrix, divided into technology / game mechanics on one axis, and IP / Franchise on the other. That pretty much broke up their desired publishing ratio:
1 game that used existing IP and existing technology... a "pure sequel" (or expansion). A sure seller. Quake 2, Madden 200x, etc.
1 game that introduced new IP, but used an existing technology & gameplay. Like Interstate 76 using the Mechwarrior 2 engine (back in the day...)
1 game that was within a popular existing IP but introduced new technology (or, rarely, new gameplay). A sequel with an all-new game engine, for example (Doom 3, Half-Life 2).
1 game that was a risky combination of new IP and new technology.
This sounds to me like a healthy ratio, but that was years ago. I don't know if that strategy has been abandoned in favor of riding a few existing horses into the ground and then buying someone else's horse later.
#6
03/04/2005 (7:08 am)
Well I think Doom 3 is a ground breaking game, the engine is incredible. It seems like a spiritual sequal in that it retains that scare the junk out of you gameplay while being a completely different experience then Doom ][. A sequal that contains a new engine or major new gameplay elements is still inovation in my book.
#7
I really don't agree that people don't want something innovative and new. We all have genre constraints to adhere too, but I think it is equally possible to excel within those areas, without doing the same old tried and tested routine. I don't want a new genre every month, but how about some games that don't end in a digit?
Ian
03/04/2005 (4:26 pm)
Yeah I loved Doom 3 too.I really don't agree that people don't want something innovative and new. We all have genre constraints to adhere too, but I think it is equally possible to excel within those areas, without doing the same old tried and tested routine. I don't want a new genre every month, but how about some games that don't end in a digit?
Ian
#8
03/04/2005 (5:37 pm)
Bottom line, main stream game industry will continue to follow the path already traveled by the movie industry. As said before so many times, studios go with what they know will sell. And I'm tired of seeing movie remakes advertised and I'm not going to take it anymore! Adam Sandler and Chris Rock will not pull me in to see The Longest Yard! 
#9
Yeah, the start of these games were truly great. Now they want it the safe way and go with their already established IP's. Magic Carpet and Syndicate, what a great examples of good old games. Both by Bullfrog, which nowadays ain't very active in the games industry (not to say they are not working, just that they are not as visible as before).
03/04/2005 (5:46 pm)
Wow, nice post Ian!Yeah, the start of these games were truly great. Now they want it the safe way and go with their already established IP's. Magic Carpet and Syndicate, what a great examples of good old games. Both by Bullfrog, which nowadays ain't very active in the games industry (not to say they are not working, just that they are not as visible as before).
#10
03/04/2005 (9:37 pm)
Two words: Katamari Damacy. I've been wanting to play this for a long time, and my friend picked it up for me as a birthday present. It's bar none the most bizarre, most cracked out game ever made. It's also one hell of a lot of fun. You do find original stuff, but it's usually not from the big established publishing houses, since they're looking at the risk/cost-benefit factors. They're looking for something safe (sequels, film/TV tie-ins), since they're always looking for the latest in graphical gee-whiz, which takes time and money, something they don't see worth investing in a wacky title that the marketing team can't pidgeonhole for their media spin. It's unfortunate, in ways, but it just means that original ideas will go to smaller publishing houses. They exist, it's just that they don't have the profile.
#11
Take FPSs for example. There has been a steady stream of games that have moved things along at an acceptable pace since the days of Doom. Starting with Doom, or Wolfenstein 3D if you prefer, we got Quake, which gave a true 3D environment with the possbility of hardware graphical acceleration. Following Quake we got games such as Quake 2, and Half-life. One a polished version of its predecessor, the other breaking new ground on just how a FPS can be designed. Next we get the likes of Quake3 Arena and Unreal. These two games really took a leap foreward in multi-player action and pure graphical excellence, shaders anyone? By this time we see the genre spawning a whole new section of multi-player games with Unreal Tournament, Tribes/Tribes 2, and the paragon of multi-player, Battlefield 1942. All the while solid FPSs like Medal of Honor: Allied Assault are furthering the single-player game. Now we have games like Call of Duty, Half-Life 2, the Jedi Knight series and the upcoming Battlefield 2, which looks to totally re-write the way we play with other people.
It is to be expected that for every good game that comes out there are 3-5 crap ones. The cycle seems to be about every 2-3 years for a game the is a real mover and a shaker in the industry, which is just about the perfect time to move from one game to another. To say that companies are just rehashing the same old stuff is really unfair. If you can cut through the din, you'll see that there really is cream that rises to the top.
P.S.
I'm tired and I don't feel like proof reading, so I'm sorry for any spelling/grammatical errors.
P.S.S.
Is graphical even a word?
03/04/2005 (11:20 pm)
I think you guys may not be giving the industry enough credit. I think we all understand the need of a publisher to put out a game that comforms to a certain standard, but I see games coming out a fairly regular intervals that either kick butt for bein extremely polished or really push genres forward.Take FPSs for example. There has been a steady stream of games that have moved things along at an acceptable pace since the days of Doom. Starting with Doom, or Wolfenstein 3D if you prefer, we got Quake, which gave a true 3D environment with the possbility of hardware graphical acceleration. Following Quake we got games such as Quake 2, and Half-life. One a polished version of its predecessor, the other breaking new ground on just how a FPS can be designed. Next we get the likes of Quake3 Arena and Unreal. These two games really took a leap foreward in multi-player action and pure graphical excellence, shaders anyone? By this time we see the genre spawning a whole new section of multi-player games with Unreal Tournament, Tribes/Tribes 2, and the paragon of multi-player, Battlefield 1942. All the while solid FPSs like Medal of Honor: Allied Assault are furthering the single-player game. Now we have games like Call of Duty, Half-Life 2, the Jedi Knight series and the upcoming Battlefield 2, which looks to totally re-write the way we play with other people.
It is to be expected that for every good game that comes out there are 3-5 crap ones. The cycle seems to be about every 2-3 years for a game the is a real mover and a shaker in the industry, which is just about the perfect time to move from one game to another. To say that companies are just rehashing the same old stuff is really unfair. If you can cut through the din, you'll see that there really is cream that rises to the top.
P.S.
I'm tired and I don't feel like proof reading, so I'm sorry for any spelling/grammatical errors.
P.S.S.
Is graphical even a word?
#12
03/04/2005 (11:46 pm)
Graphical is a word. But I'd put the crap games at close to 30-50 when it comes to replicants.
#13
Also another area that apparently 'wasn't fun' was the character develeopment. Its all gone in DE:IW. You can pick up an assault rifle, crossbow or sniper rifle and use them all equally well. That totally sucked. The Sneak, Hack, Shoot thing they kept going on about, IT WAS ROOM BASED! Man, I can't remember how much that pissed me off. Plus everything got a giant glowly particle effect added to it, I remember using a Modtool to hack a code, whilst a guard was next to me with his back turned. The thing lit the room up like a firework, but he didn't notice. I personally blame these things on the XBox version of DE:IW being ported to the PC and yes, it was that way round. It was primarily developed for the console, then ported. Shock horror, the port was underwhelming when compared to the first game.
But hey, this is just one title. I understand publishers and developers are businesses, they have to be profitable. Sure, thats a given. What I don't understand is, out of the shere volume of titles we see, why such a small percent of them are like Katamari Damacy. I'm not saying sequels are bad, god forbid if we never had a Half Life 2, Warcraft III or Doom 3. I would just like to browse the news headlines, or the 'Coming Soon' sections of game sites, and see things that I have no idea about. See things where I have to visit a website and lookup stuff about the game, because I have never heard of it.
Anyhoo, I have to get back to 3D Game Programming All In One, or else I will never get a shot at changing this. ;)
Ian
03/05/2005 (8:16 am)
Did you play Deus Ex Invisible war on the PC or console? I was really looking forward to it, and read lots of developer diaries and so forth. When asked about different types of ammo in DE:IW, they said, "We basically removed everything that wasn't fun from the game. Was managing ammo fun? No, so we introduced the new all purpose ammo.". See the thing is, managing ammo actually was fun especialliy during the early stages where it was hard to come by. People hacked cabinets that contained ammo they wanted, risking discovery, you always thought, "Hmm should I shoot him with my sniper rifle, or conserve ammo and sneak up and shock him with my tazer?" as you never knew what was lying ahead.Also another area that apparently 'wasn't fun' was the character develeopment. Its all gone in DE:IW. You can pick up an assault rifle, crossbow or sniper rifle and use them all equally well. That totally sucked. The Sneak, Hack, Shoot thing they kept going on about, IT WAS ROOM BASED! Man, I can't remember how much that pissed me off. Plus everything got a giant glowly particle effect added to it, I remember using a Modtool to hack a code, whilst a guard was next to me with his back turned. The thing lit the room up like a firework, but he didn't notice. I personally blame these things on the XBox version of DE:IW being ported to the PC and yes, it was that way round. It was primarily developed for the console, then ported. Shock horror, the port was underwhelming when compared to the first game.
But hey, this is just one title. I understand publishers and developers are businesses, they have to be profitable. Sure, thats a given. What I don't understand is, out of the shere volume of titles we see, why such a small percent of them are like Katamari Damacy. I'm not saying sequels are bad, god forbid if we never had a Half Life 2, Warcraft III or Doom 3. I would just like to browse the news headlines, or the 'Coming Soon' sections of game sites, and see things that I have no idea about. See things where I have to visit a website and lookup stuff about the game, because I have never heard of it.
Anyhoo, I have to get back to 3D Game Programming All In One, or else I will never get a shot at changing this. ;)
Ian
#14
The Kotor series is great and complex for a console RPG
Fable is Brilliant even if it didn't live up to what was promised
Fightnight really pushed the boundaries with its inovative control system
Brothers in arms looks to be a ground breaking strategic FPS, with awesome team control and enemy group tactics/command system
Splinter Cell 3, just tried the demo, looks to be head and shoulders better than the previous lackluster sequel, and enhanced what went before by some considerable margin
(those are the games I got to play recently that I really enjoyed)
I hear that world or warcraft raises the bar of MMOG games.
Of course you still have your ple of crap, but thats no different than indie games which are 90+% rubbish.
Many people look over the past couple of decades with nostalgia, and only think of the great games they played then, but those were gems in an ocean of mediocrity. yOur just taking the best and sticking them on a pedestal. But those best games that you love so much probablt span the best of 10 - 20 years of gaming history.
I thik people will find that in reality things havent changed so much, just memory compreses the past and makes it seem like there was a ton of great stuff constantly coming out.
I find 5-10 awesome games are released each year. If you only swallow the hype and marketing you may be disappointed. Games like Riddick did relatively poorly compared to the BIG games, but in my opinion its better than halflife2.
was going to say something else, but forgot heh. anyway thats enough for now :)
03/05/2005 (8:59 am)
Riddick was a fantastic FPS that pushed alot of bounradies not yet trodden. The Kotor series is great and complex for a console RPG
Fable is Brilliant even if it didn't live up to what was promised
Fightnight really pushed the boundaries with its inovative control system
Brothers in arms looks to be a ground breaking strategic FPS, with awesome team control and enemy group tactics/command system
Splinter Cell 3, just tried the demo, looks to be head and shoulders better than the previous lackluster sequel, and enhanced what went before by some considerable margin
(those are the games I got to play recently that I really enjoyed)
I hear that world or warcraft raises the bar of MMOG games.
Of course you still have your ple of crap, but thats no different than indie games which are 90+% rubbish.
Many people look over the past couple of decades with nostalgia, and only think of the great games they played then, but those were gems in an ocean of mediocrity. yOur just taking the best and sticking them on a pedestal. But those best games that you love so much probablt span the best of 10 - 20 years of gaming history.
I thik people will find that in reality things havent changed so much, just memory compreses the past and makes it seem like there was a ton of great stuff constantly coming out.
I find 5-10 awesome games are released each year. If you only swallow the hype and marketing you may be disappointed. Games like Riddick did relatively poorly compared to the BIG games, but in my opinion its better than halflife2.
was going to say something else, but forgot heh. anyway thats enough for now :)
#15
Part of the reason I'm working indie, is because I finished a great game that publishers flt was too risky. And when we cane up with licences, publishers with competing products got wind of it and would buy up the new franchise at a ridiculous price.
Our first game wouldn't sell, because the genre that was big when we started ahd fallen into risky territory after the lacklustre performance of similar poorly developed titles
with a prototype demo for another game we tried licences like pitch black, warhammer redeemer series, and something like starship troopers. All got ripped from under our noses.
In the end we sold the first game but didn't quite break even and 6 of us worked for free a couple of months to get it out of the door. After which the company folded and everyone went their seperate ways. Shame as it was a great team and the engine was awesome.
03/05/2005 (9:10 am)
BTW if you have a great game and want to sell it as a console game, you had better find a good licence to tie it too. Publishers in my experiemce wont touch anything new and unknown unless you can find something with a folowing and instant recognitiion to do a large chunk of their marketing for them. It's depresing but sadly true.Part of the reason I'm working indie, is because I finished a great game that publishers flt was too risky. And when we cane up with licences, publishers with competing products got wind of it and would buy up the new franchise at a ridiculous price.
Our first game wouldn't sell, because the genre that was big when we started ahd fallen into risky territory after the lacklustre performance of similar poorly developed titles
with a prototype demo for another game we tried licences like pitch black, warhammer redeemer series, and something like starship troopers. All got ripped from under our noses.
In the end we sold the first game but didn't quite break even and 6 of us worked for free a couple of months to get it out of the door. After which the company folded and everyone went their seperate ways. Shame as it was a great team and the engine was awesome.
#16
I guess for a while, a long while, going to game section and or game stores was so depressing, 90 percent of the games looked liked rehashed ideas, or blatant clones. I had stopped purchasing games because of this phenomina. But I truely belive that a new heyday is comming, and it will be the indie market that will transition it.
One thing I like to look at in places like Target and Wall-Mart are the old games. Games that "gamers" would no longer play, but where great games in thier day and are able to maintain a shelf life because of it. For instance they had Dark Forces 2 : Jedi Knight. This game was a classic, it was the first game I attempted to mod. I think there are 2 main reasons it is still being sold.
A) it has solid game play
b) it does NOT require high end machines
Although Shaders are great, the simple fact is the vast majority of the world does not have computers capable of running them. I think a lot of young developers could learn that the FX don't make the game, the game play does.
03/05/2005 (9:22 am)
I actually I had a bit of nostalgia last night at Target. I was walking down the video game shelf, and for once there were a ton of games that looked interesting. Being able to walk down a aile and see a wide variety of games, reminded me of the heyday of PC gaming, when you would see what ever Quest series Sierra had released against tons of other games. Game that actually looked like they would be fun and unique.I guess for a while, a long while, going to game section and or game stores was so depressing, 90 percent of the games looked liked rehashed ideas, or blatant clones. I had stopped purchasing games because of this phenomina. But I truely belive that a new heyday is comming, and it will be the indie market that will transition it.
One thing I like to look at in places like Target and Wall-Mart are the old games. Games that "gamers" would no longer play, but where great games in thier day and are able to maintain a shelf life because of it. For instance they had Dark Forces 2 : Jedi Knight. This game was a classic, it was the first game I attempted to mod. I think there are 2 main reasons it is still being sold.
A) it has solid game play
b) it does NOT require high end machines
Although Shaders are great, the simple fact is the vast majority of the world does not have computers capable of running them. I think a lot of young developers could learn that the FX don't make the game, the game play does.
#17
Mafia for $10, a must for game designers for story, missions well-integrated with the story, and game play. But use a wheel for the driving! Sorry, but it's definitely a fav of mine.
03/05/2005 (2:24 pm)
Target rocks for low budget older games!Mafia for $10, a must for game designers for story, missions well-integrated with the story, and game play. But use a wheel for the driving! Sorry, but it's definitely a fav of mine.
#18
In terms of overall enjoyment, that has to rank a close second, next to Star Control 2 in my grand hall of gaming(tm). 320X240 windowed graphics, were at the time, nothing to write home about. But the sound, and animation, were so seamless it was incredible. With games nowadays I often experience a rather heavy low, upon finishing them. Its not like, "Woohoo! I finished it, damn that was awesome!". Its kinda like, "Ok, fun game, but the ending sucked." Evening Half Life 2, I wasn't overly keen on the ending, it was cool, and it definitely didn't suck, but it was sudden and didn't contain any real sense of accomplishment.
Star Control 2 had a fan-goddamn-tastic ending, as did Heart of Darkness. But as I look through my game collection, I can't really pass on that compliment to many of them.
The most infuriating has to be The Incredible Machine. 30 damn levels of the most mind bending puzzles, and I persevered, I did them ALL! Only to be greeted by a black screen, with yellow (?) text saying:
"Thank you for playing The Incredible Machine
The End."
Violent video games don't cause violence, BAD ENDINGS DO! :p
Ian
03/05/2005 (2:53 pm)
Did anyone play Heart of Darkness by Amazing Studio, published by Infogrames? Its sitting in my cd rack just next to me and just made me think a bit on a different topic sort of.In terms of overall enjoyment, that has to rank a close second, next to Star Control 2 in my grand hall of gaming(tm). 320X240 windowed graphics, were at the time, nothing to write home about. But the sound, and animation, were so seamless it was incredible. With games nowadays I often experience a rather heavy low, upon finishing them. Its not like, "Woohoo! I finished it, damn that was awesome!". Its kinda like, "Ok, fun game, but the ending sucked." Evening Half Life 2, I wasn't overly keen on the ending, it was cool, and it definitely didn't suck, but it was sudden and didn't contain any real sense of accomplishment.
Star Control 2 had a fan-goddamn-tastic ending, as did Heart of Darkness. But as I look through my game collection, I can't really pass on that compliment to many of them.
The most infuriating has to be The Incredible Machine. 30 damn levels of the most mind bending puzzles, and I persevered, I did them ALL! Only to be greeted by a black screen, with yellow (?) text saying:
"Thank you for playing The Incredible Machine
The End."
Violent video games don't cause violence, BAD ENDINGS DO! :p
Ian
#19
03/05/2005 (3:06 pm)
Did Heart of Darkness come out of Asia? If so, I think I've heard of it...does the story draw you in so much that you're on the verge of tears if not crying already?
#20
Ian
Edit - Here have a read. Ah Avault, good times. :D
*snip*
Although it is clearly the kind of game not everyone will enjoy because of its graphics deficiencies, gameplay style and odd combination of childlike and terrifying qualities in its storyline, the decisions made by the game designers seem to suit me just fine. The more I got into the game, the more I began really to care that Andy find his dog, and the more my heart was truly touched by the epic nature of the adventure and the unique mixture of dark and light elements that make the game so truly fun.
*snip*
03/05/2005 (3:45 pm)
Heh no not quite. Its about a young boy whose dog is snatched away by evil shadow creatures. Its kind of disney, but has some startling adult qualities to it, that kind of shock you in areas. Most of the death scenes are quite brutal heh. ;)Ian
Edit - Here have a read. Ah Avault, good times. :D
*snip*
Although it is clearly the kind of game not everyone will enjoy because of its graphics deficiencies, gameplay style and odd combination of childlike and terrifying qualities in its storyline, the decisions made by the game designers seem to suit me just fine. The more I got into the game, the more I began really to care that Andy find his dog, and the more my heart was truly touched by the epic nature of the adventure and the unique mixture of dark and light elements that make the game so truly fun.
*snip*
Alan Kantz
Sequels are safe.