"Soulslayerzx" said ...This video sums up your complaints I think: [youtube:vy1oa177]nvK8fua6O64[/youtube:vy1oa177]
I know the idea of an mmo gets boring quickly, but seriously there's no good online multiplayer games anymore. Most of these rpg's are just cheap advertisements with hot ladies and then ingame it's just quest, grind, and that's pretty much it.
"Soulslayerzx" said ...This is the part where I start to question your sanity and age. (read: I don't agree with you at all) (also, I'm guessing you're about 16)
Back then, when Maplestory and Runescape were good games... :(
"Soulslayerzx" said ...Welcome to 2005, the year every MMO tries to recreate that WoW style grind.
I mean, Vindictus was cool but it gets repetitive.
"Soulslayerzx" said ...Maplestory and Runescape were addicting because they allowed you to, in a way, make your own fun. There weren't any WoW style mechanics yet.
I remember maplestory and runescape used to be so addicting cuz everything wasn't so dumbed down and easy.
"Soulslayerzx" said ...I never got enjoyment out of MMO's. I've tried WoW, Guild Wars and EVE many times, but after so many attempts to like it, I ended up avoiding the genre entirely.
Anyone know of any good MMO's.
"Soulslayerzx" said ...You have got to be kidding me. This year is probably one of the best years for PC gaming in quite some time. In the past few months, there have been several quality game releases. Let's name a few: Bioshock Infinite, Crysis 3, Dead Island: Riptide, Dead Space 3, DmC, Starcraft 2: Heart of the Swarm, Tomb Raider and just today, Far Cry 3: Blood Dragon. Now, each of these games has problems of their own, but they were all solid games, each and every one of them. How you could call "most of them" shitty, is beyond me.
Or actually video games in general. Most of the new games suck.
"Soulslayerzx" said ...That's why you should never watch trailers and don't read reviews. Trailers are carefully crafted videos by the publishers that are meant to get you hyped up about their product and reviews these days are no different from paid advertisement. When you go in with unrealistic expectations as a result of letting yourself get hyped, you will surely always be disappointed in life. Watch gameplay videos. Don't pre-order the game based on trailers, but wait for someone to actually show you the final product.
Most of the games with good trailers end up to be disappointing.
"Soulslayerzx" said ...Skyrim is as long as you want it to be. Skyrim is actually a pretty shallow game, unless you're good at suspending your disbelief at will. Dungeons are pretty much recycled, the main quest can be completed fairly quickly, only three or four major side quests (mage college, dark brotherhood, thieves guild, companions) and the rest is just dynamically generated missions to pad the running time. The world doesn't react to you in any meaningful way. They only have things like "NPC complements you once skill x of your character is above 60" or "NPC spouts line of dialogue once you have completed this part of the main quest". Skyrim's length and depth is artificial. Doesn't mean it's a bad game, but it's not nearly as good as people claim it is. You think Skyrim is the best thing ever? Try Morrowind. Now THAT is a game with some depth.
Skyrim is like the only game that was actually pretty damn good with an insane amount of game length.
"Soulslayerzx" said ...You don't even know what you're talking about. We're about to witness the last few breaths of a dying generation that's been holding back innovation and development of hardcore games for the past 4 years. We've come to the point where new, more powerful consoles will allow for better graphics and larger scale. We as PC gamers will benefit from this as well. In the past few years, games have been developed for shitty hardware like the Xbox 360 and PS3. When the game is done, they port them over to PC as well. Even though most PC's are capable of more than those consoles, we still get the same ugly dysfunctional game that the console owners get. A new generation might finally reset this stagnation. Indie developers have embraced the PC simply because they can release games without being dependent on big publishers. Sure, being on Steam helps, but breakout hits like "Papers Please" have show that you can gather a lot of attention for your new and creative idea without even having a finished product. As a big surprise to everyone in the industry, Sony has opened up their PS4 console to indie developers. Sony realises that they need new and exciting games for their new platform, or otherwise they're going to have a product that nobody is willing to buy. (the exact problem Nintendo is having with the Wii U) In addition, in the last year, we've seen developers take the PC seriously again. Not just indie games, but big releases, especially optimized for PC. Sleeping Dogs, Hitman Absolution and several of the games I mentioned earlier. Throw in new hardware like the Oculus Rift and we're in for a whole new exciting generation. And I can't wait. If you think that games like RuneScape and MapleStory are examples of a great gaming generation, I personally don't want you to be a part of the next one.
This new generation of games suck. lol.
"Predator" said ...Dead Island: Riptide has a long enough campaign to justify the price. They just used the same engine and characters but advanced the story to a new environment. With the environment come new weapons, new vehicles and new enemies. If you were looking for more or thought the price was too much, that's fine. Just wait until it goes on sale and pick it up for half price. In my opinion it has more legitimacy than the endless rehashes of Call of Duty.
Another thing, Dead Island Riptide was over-priced dlc, seriously, they barely added anything new (same graphics, 1 new character).
"Ganonmaster" said ...Anything has more legitimacy than the endless rehashes of Call of Duty XD My opinion on CoD is probably the most complex. I like 1,2,4, and 5. I thought black ops was ok, and black ops II was also ok, but MW3 and MW2 were absolute garbage.
In my opinion it has more legitimacy than the endless rehashes of Call of Duty.
"Predator" said ...In my opinion CoD 2 was the last good one. After that, they started pandering to the console/frat boy demographic."Ganonmaster" said ...Anything has more legitimacy than the endless rehashes of Call of Duty XD My opinion on CoD is probably the most complex. I like 1,2,4, and 5. I thought black ops was ok, and black ops II was also ok, but MW3 and MW2 were absolute garbage.
In my opinion it has more legitimacy than the endless rehashes of Call of Duty.
"Soulslayerzx" said ...Not clones of eachother but clones of WoW. Watch that video I posted. I'm gonna have to disagree with you on several games.
Yea, most mmo's are clones of each other.
"Soulslayerzx" said ...It's surprising to how you could use "extremely wacky" and "boring" in the same sentence, but whatever I get where you're coming from. A lot of people don't like the crazy turn that the game took, but part of that comes down to preference. You should recognize that the game's fundamentals and mechanics are sound. You can choose to follow the storyline which has good mission variety, or you can choose to go out, do side missions (which can get repetitive) or just cause mayhem with your friends in co-op. I don't usually care about the latter two, but the storyline was so cheesy that it kept me guessing at whatever crazy concept they were going to bring in next. And if you're looking for validation outside of my personal preference, it has generally received positive reviews. For most people who hate the game, the "crazy" story is the turn off, but like with Far Cry 3: Blood Dragon, for some people it's a selling point.
Saints Row Third, it looked cool in the first 30 minutes, but it got extremely wacky and boring after the first hour.
"Soulslayerzx" said ...Surprised you felt like such a badass in the first hour of Tomb Raider, because in the first hour, the story and character actions gave me the feeling of being vulnerable and avoiding full on combat where possible. After the first hour of sneaking, the gameplay transitions into more aggressive gunplay which does fall in line with Lara's character arc. While I agree Lara's character transition in the story is somewhat hindered by the fact that, outside of the story sequences, you make her murder tons of dudes with guns, the writing itself is very solid. I would also like to mention that this game is a prime example of PC port done right. Improved graphics over consoles, many customization options, keybinds and all that jazz.
Same about Tomb Raider, it was fun in the first hour where you felt like a total badass hunting and shit, but after an hour... [snip] The story was alright, but nothing special. Everyone's going to say it was very very emotional on how Lara goes from an innocent loli into an aggresive hardcore bitch. Well, I don't think so as the story doesn't present that concept in a clear manner.
"Soulslayerzx" said ...Going to have to disagree with you again. Backtracking has been around in games since the 80s, and is not per definition bad game design. It can be a tool for letting a player solve puzzles or approach a problem they were previously incabable of solving in a different manner. Take Portal for example. Near the end of the game, you re-visit one of the earlier test chambers. The big difference is that this time, you have no cubes, but the ability to shoot two portals instead of just the blue one. You are basically backtracking to an old area, but with your new abilities, you can get creative and solve the problem in a different way. Other games like Zelda and Metroid are almost completely built around that concept and a lot of people, including myself enjoy those games quite a lot. In Tomb Raider, I encountered similar concepts and mechanics most of them revolving around upgrading your weapons with new abilities. The pickaxe you find is upgraded later on to be used for climbing (allowing you to explore new areas of the old levels) and the machine gun gets a grenade launcher attached to it, allowing you to clear away debris to access loot you previously couldn't get. Say what you will, but these mechanics are solid and thought out. I enjoyed the game quite a lot as a result.
The storyline wasn't that great, the gameplay becomes extremely repetitive and along with backtracking. I FUCKING HATE BACKTRACKING, that's my biggest bias against the game.
"Soulslayerzx" said ...I liked the part where Vaas explained the definition of insanity.
Far Cry 3 was decent, the coolest part was probably getting all your enhancements with hunting.
"Soulslayerzx" said ...As I said before don't watch trailers. Don't get hyped up. You'll always be disappointed.
Deus Ex: Human Revolution, one of my most anticipated games after seeing the trailer,
"Soulslayerzx" said ...I'd like to see you back that up with some actual arguments. The story and lore were probably my favorite aspects of the game. It's cyberpunky goodness. You're constantly second guessing the motivation of the main characters throughout the story, and there is the constant social commentary on corporate/media influence and the ethics of body augmentation.
story is shit
"Soulslayerzx" said ...People complaining about long loading screens. Did you know that's a problem that's been around since the inception of big videogames? I know that this game had longer loading times than average, but I really don't see it as a valid criticism of the game itself. For one thing, it's completely dependant on your PC's capabilities and the game had good graphics and reasonably large levels. Speaking of graphics, this was a PC port by the same company that ported Tomb Raider, and as a result has better fidelity over consoles, rebindable keys, fov adjustments and a plethora of other customizable features.
loading screen is extremely long(google it if you don't believe me), etc.
"Soulslayerzx" said ...I know it's bad. The Fable games have always been hyped up by Peter Molyneux. Fable: Lost Chapters was very enjoyable and refreshing at the time, but if you look at the later games in the series, you see Peter Molyneux trying to design "grand concepts" that fall flat because of poor implementation and technological limitations. It's an example of why Peter Molyneux is a great "idea man", but like with George Lucas, you need other creative input to carry the seed of an idea to fruition
Fable 3, worst game don't want to talk about it, go see AngryJoe's review if you don't believe me.
"Soulslayerzx" said ...While some games are blatant clones, the gaming industry is based on iterative development. If you trace back the evolution of FPS games for example, you can see that a lot of games build on the concepts of the previous generation. If you're looking for innovation in FPS, the best example is Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2! No, wait my bad. Quake 4. No wait, go back earlier: Half life 2! Oh no, even earlier: Doom 3! Pardon me, Halo: Combat Evolved! The first Half Life! Doom! Wolfenstein 3D! See where I'm going with this? All these game are built on the foundations of the games that came before it, while most of them are unique in some way and bring new concepts to the already established genre. Some more than others. Some games even design in elements that break down the foundations on which the genre was built resulting in a worse experience. The trend in the past couple of years has been to pander to the frat boys and casual gamers and as a result, there have been attempts to condense and simplify game concepts to the bare minimum and divide gameplay into smaller sections. I agree that this is a bad thing, but on the other end, games like Dark Souls and Metal Gear Rising are games specifically targetted at the hardcore crowd that like twitch action gameplay while games like The Witcher 2, Torchlight 2 give the RPG fan some love with explorable worlds, long storylines and lots of loot.
Most of these modern games are dumbed down, linear, and boring fps/rpgs/tps that clone each other.
"Soulslayerzx" said ...Everywhere. It's just that not enough people are buying the good stuff, and as a result, developers take their business elsewhere. It's good that Kickstarter allows for certain innovative ideas to get made. If you have trouble finding creativity, you can always look in the "indie" section. There's plenty to go around.
Where is the fucking creativity.
"Soulslayerzx" said ...Classic example of too many cooks spoiling the broth. When you would ask someone 13 years ago "How they could possibly fuck Duke Nukem up", they would've said that it would be impossible. However, lack of a unified vision, studio and engine changes caused it to be a complete failure. the only selling point of the game was nostalgia and silly humor. And the thing is, those selling points could have made it work. Far Cry 3 Blood Dragon is what Duke Nukem Forever should have been. An unapologetic high octane nostalgia trip built on top of solid gameplay mechanics.
Duke Nukem forever, fail piece of shit that tries to crack puns and fucking around with scripted events.
"Soulslayerzx" said ...Oh man, I completely agree with you. No, who am I kidding, that's not entirely true. Both of them are fucking amazing games, but if you look at Deus Ex for example, it's essentially Half Life meets Thief meets Fallout. They combined existing game concepts from different genres. Bit of First person shooter, bit of stealth, bit of RPG. When it comes to Portal, it's simply a combination of a first person shooter with a puzzle game. Let me stress this again. Both games are fucking amazing, even though they contain no new concepts by themselves. Remember what I said earlier about games being iterations on previous generations? You just gave a perfect example yourself. None of these concepts by themselves were original ideas at the time, but they combined them to create a unique and innovative concept. And that applies to a lot of games.
I mean the most creative games would probably be portal and deus ex
"Soulslayerzx" said ...I get why you might think that people don't want play deep games anymore, but that's simply not true. It's like assumming people don't want movies with a profound message anymore simply because Transformers 3 made billions of dollars. As I said before there has been a focus by big companies on the casual market with games like CoD and other generic shooters, but while major companies neglect the core gamers, there are new, smaller studios out there taking chances. There are tons of people like you and I, who appreciate a deep roleplaying experience and recent Kickstarter projects can back that up. Here's a couple examples: Shadowrun Returns, Torment: Tides of Numenera, Wasteland 2. Want point and clicks? Double Fine Adventure! Want cRPG? Divinity: Original Sin or Project Eternity. Creative games are being invented all the time by indie studios. Try Kentucky Route Zero, Papers, Please, Routine, or whatever. Just browse Steam Greenlight and see what you'll find. Buy random indie bundles. There's so much good stuff out there, that it's impossible for me to list it all.
As I said before, nobody plays a game for its story as that's not up to the 12 year old standard of hardcore cod battles and people lack creativity.
"Soulslayerzx" said ...You have to understand that that's not exactly the reason why Bethesda lets you do that. It's a feature that they are offering. Their mindset isn't "We want people to make it better and fix all of our bugs", but rather "We can give people a reason to buy copies of our old games, long after we've moved on to develop new ones". It's not only a friendly gesture to their fans, it's also a part of their business plan. It's the same reason why Valve introduced the Steam Workshop for TF2 and Dota2. They let the fans make content, and take a hefty share when they sell it in the Workshop. They hardly have to spend any money on making new content for TF2. Their fans are creating hundreds of items every month for only a small portion of what a professional artist at Valve makes. Modding can be a clever part of your business model that benefits both parties, but the company's incentive to allow modding is never as pure as "we want our fans to make the game better" or "we want our fans to create their own unique game".
which is why I like how Bethesda let people mod the shit out of their game to make it better and delete the retarded bugs.
"Soulslayerzx" said ...Story and gameplay are exclusive to old games, you heard it here first! Read what I wrote above about story driven games. It's popular.
I preferred the classic games that had story and gameplay.
"Soulslayerzx" said ...Fable was a good action RPG, but the story was in no way exceptional. The writing was servicable and witty, but largely unaffected by major choices you make. I don't think I'd say that Fable has a profound story. I'd put it in the same category as Zelda or Final Fantasy. Average story arcs, likable characters and at times whimsical and witty. It's nothing special we haven't seen before. Fable is once again, a game that builds on the strenghts of other games in the genre. It's good, but I don't think many people would bring it up as "that classic game with the amazing story and gameplay".
But I guess the most memorable one would be Fable 1/Fable: The Lost Chapters. Despite I crashed 40 times on it, I still played 3/4 of the game because it was immersive, emotional, and
"Soulslayerzx" said ...Coming from the guy who said Saints Row 3 was "extremely wacky and boring".
I didn't mind the cheesiness that every wannabe-cool kid nowadays pretends they hate.
"Soulslayerzx" said ...This statement shows how little you know about the game development process. The first step is finding funding for your game, and that's where new and creative ideas fall flat on their face. In the past few years, developers have been sruggling to get funding for their games due to investors being more cautious due to the ongoing economic instability. When you're an investor you want to minimize the risk you take with your money, so when you get the choice between funding a risky new game or a generic sequel of a popular franchise that will surely sell millions, you never pick the risky new idea. When a new creative idea does get the green light, it's still up to the development team to craft that idea into a working game. Considering that you're dealing with large teams of writers, concept artists, 3d artists, level designers, gameplay programmers, sound designers, engine programmers, marketers and managers, it should be quite apparent that creating a game is no picknick. It's never as simple as "blending together story and gameplay" there is way more involved.
Most of the time, not many games can blend together story and gameplay as it requires lots of creativity which many game developers do not have.
"Soulslayerzx" said ...I don't even know what you mean by that.
I honestly wished they made more quality games over quantity of pixel games.
"Soulslayerzx" said ...Says the guy who also said that "these modern games are dumbed down, linear, and [clones]", even though Hitman Absolution is exactly that.
Hitman Absolution was creative. I liked it even though it was quite dumbed down.
"Soulslayerzx" said ...If by seamless you mean that gameplay was interrupted by cutscenes all the time, then yes.
Max Payne 3 was probably one of the most unique games before tomb raider. Max Payne 3 mainly seemed like a gfx promoter as it was amazing and was one of the first notable games to uphold seamless transition cutscenes into gameplay.
"Soulslayerzx" said ...Try playing Journey. You could call it deep, but I'd settle for profound.
I wouldn't call any games shallow anymore since all of them are and none would be classified as deep.
"Soulslayerzx" said ...I'm glad we agree, because if you read my post, I never said it was bad.
Skyrim is an overrated game, but just cuz a lot of people like it, doesn't mean it's bad.[/url]
"Soulslayerzx" said ...Not sure what your point is here. Are you saying that the modding community made the game good?
It's not innovational, but on a large scale a lot of effort is seen and creativity is at hand with their modding tools they released. I even made severals mod with it.
"Soulslayerzx" said ...Far Cry 3: Protagonist + friends get taken hostage on an island, protagonist becomes rambo to save his friends and helps the locals fight their insurgence. Hitman Absolution: Protagonist goes rogue in order to save a genetically modified girl from becoming a super soldier for the Agency. Max Payne 3: Alcoholic and pain killer addict protagonist becomes bodyguard who needs to save his client from the clutches of the local maffia. Tomb Raider: Research expedition goes horribly wrong, as our inexperienced protagonist has to scramble to survive, while a series of supernatural events and insane cultists prevent them from returning home. I fail to see the striking similarities here. These games' stories are very unique and the only thing they have in common is that you use guns to shoot at dudes.
As for tomb raider, I probably do have bias against because before I played far cry 3, hitman absolution, and max payne 3 right before playing it so the concept,gameplay, and even story all seemed very familiar.Stuck on an island with crazies,
"Soulslayerzx" said ...Again, not sure where you're getting this from. All of these games have cutscenes that abruptly stop gameplay in their tracks. If you mean in-engine rendered cutscenes, that's not true for Hitman Absolution which had several pre-rendered sequences.
seamless cutscene transitions into gameplay,
"Soulslayerzx" said ...Only in Tomb Raider and Far Cry 3 do these elements appear, and I would say the only one where it is a vital part of gameplay is Tomb Raider.
craft using loot but at a lower level,
"Soulslayerzx" said ...Far Cry 3 is a first person shooter, Hitman Absolution is more of a stealth game rather than a straight up first person shooter. The other two are indeed third person shooters at the core, but both take a different approach. Max Payne has the straight up combat with bullet time approach, while Tomb Raider goes the action platformer approach. These games, even though they overlap in certain places all have their unique style and execution. A lot of it comes down to preference, but simply discrediting the work of thousands by saying that you think "It's shit" and "want to piss on all these games" just isn't going to cut it with me. This industry is constantly attempting to innovate and we should applaud the studios and publishers who are doing it right or taking steps in the right direction. The gaming industry has been a breeding ground for bad business practices and shameless pandering and in the last two years, we have been able to see the first signs of change for the better. The good games are out there, and more are on the horizon. You're just not looking properly. /rant
and typical third person shooter.
The trend in the past couple of years has been to pander to the frat boys and casual gamers and as a result, there have been attempts to condense and simplify game concepts to the bare minimum and divide gameplay into smaller sections. I agree that this is a bad thing, but on the other end, games like Dark Souls and Metal Gear Rising are games specifically targetted at the hardcore crowd that like twitch action gameplay while games like The Witcher 2, Torchlight 2 give the RPG fan some love with explorable worlds, long storylines and lots of loot.I agree with this. The thing is that I've never been into those 2d games. A pattern I've been noticing is a lot of games that turn bad have easter eggs. It shouldn't affect it, but just coincidental. I mean skyrim has a bunch of easter eggs but it's still decent.. It doesn't matter that they didn't have original origins. I think it just matters how the game's final product is presented. In the way you described it, it sounds like Portal is just a sloppy hybrid. That's where I agree with you. But it's not like the typical shooter at all. It's puzzles using momentum (mainly in first one). Momentum is what attracted me to portal. The technology that no other game had. It was fun and creative. Thinking back, I don't agree with deus ex being creative anymore now that you've pointed some stuff out. Just another cyberpunk game. I'm mainly pissed cuz I log onto steam and see these games that look uninteresting to play and it's like fucking power ranger colors. Yea, I guess I just miss the nostalgic old games. Like in Fable 1, where your village gets raided and burned to the ground and with twists where the person who saved you was actually trying to kill you. etc Corny humor and cheesy the chosen one. I mean it is overrated like skyrim, but as long as the game is at least decent to play. I'd buy it.
Coming from the guy who said Saints Row 3 was "extremely wacky and boring".What. Sr3 wasn't cheesy, just wacky. Another thing is that I liked the old gta games better. Somehow gta iv got too serious for me, hard physics system to get used to(driving), annoying ragdolls physics(funny at first), but if you get bumped by a car goign at like 1 mile per hour, you land on the floor. The story was aight.
This statement shows how little you know about the game development process. The first step is finding funding for your game, and that's where new and creative ideas fall flat on their face. In the past few years, developers have been sruggling to get funding for their games due to investors being more cautious due to the ongoing economic instability. When you're an investor you want to minimize the risk you take with your money, so when you get the choice between funding a risky new game or a generic sequel of a popular franchise that will surely sell millions, you never pick the risky new idea. When a new creative idea does get the green light, it's still up to the development team to craft that idea into a working game. Considering that you're dealing with large teams of writers, concept artists, 3d artists, level designers, gameplay programmers, sound designers, engine programmers, marketers and managers, it should be quite apparent that creating a game is no picknick. It's never as simple as "blending together story and gameplay" there is way more involved.Not really, most of these BIG companies only make several good games. Just cuz a movie or game used a lot of money to make, doesn't mean it's good. And no, I have tried developing a game before with a bunch of friends. Making eveything from scratch is a ton of work, excluding a custom game engine written. And there are risks of course. All the modeling,texturing, storyboarding, level design, sound directing is essential in making an original game. I think you missed my point. I'm saying that many games only have one or the other. Either they have fun gameplay, but no story. Or full story and no gameplay like The Walking Dead, mainly cutscenes. I guess Max Payne 3 is in the middle, although it does get repetitive as a 3rd person fps shooting terrorists and stuff. At least it's funny. Lol.
I honestly wished they made more quality games over quantity of pixel games.Quality/Quantity. The real one. Hitman Absolution was creative to me because after playing the old games. It took a new turn having a storyline instead of killing random people. I hated it because everything was dumbed down with the fiber wiring which required practice in the old games simply to be just a press of a button in this new one. I thought the series would die off, but I was happy when the VA came back for Agent 47 and the gfx were stunning. Story was kinda shitty though. Voice acting was great. Hitman Absolution wasn't a great game, but it was fun for me because it had the nostalgia of Agent 47. That's all I liked about it, not much of anything else. Hey, Max Payne 3 cutscenes were funny. Journey. I've seen videos on it. I'm not sure, but I'll give it another shot. I was talking to the other dude for the skyrim thing. Yes, the modding communtiy did make the game good. There's so much more to skyrim with mods. Graphics enhancements make everyone look so much better, especially the boobs/ass, along with new stories. The Skyrim world does get boring after a while with everyone saying omg your dragonborn. Also, many bugs on early releases were fixed for me because of mods. That was just on this side. Actually, one game I did like was Darkness 2. I thought it was interesting with the story and the mental hospital portion. haha. The story was okay, just didn't like how a mafia boss kept crying over his dead girlfriend. Jesus christ, but cool cuz then u get ambushed when you're hallucinating. I said it up there about Tomb Raider and Far Cry 3. There's just so many similarities in the story and gameplay. Hunting, killing terrorists(bad guys), stuck on and island, craft shit. But maybe, it was trying to make a successful game using another great game's mechanics. The current gaming industry honestly isn't doing that great of a job. Tired of these movie-licensed game too.
"Soulslayerzx" said ...That's still a very subjective thing.
Overall, most of these games just aren't that great. I log onto steam and can't find anything I want to play.
"Soulslayerzx" said ...Well yes. But that's the same with other genres as well as in movies and TV shows. Being lost on an island is a solid foundation for a story. The protagonist finds him/herself in an unpleasant situation, and tries to escape. What happens inbetween "getting lost on an island" and "the end" usually involves overcoming obstacles. The drama in the story is the result of us rooting for them to succeed. Just because they start with the a same premise, doesn't immediatelly imply that the story is shit. When you generalize, you could start drawing a lot more parallels between FC3 and other stories told in games and movies that would matter just as much.
As for the similarities, it's the story of accidentally getting trapped on a island inhabited by savages, then becoming strong, looting the area to upgrade your stuff and then escaping. Far Cry 3 and Tomb Raider 2013 share that.
"Soulslayerzx" said ...That's something games have done since the beginning of 3D. Mario and Zelda are some of the first games that come to mind. It doesn't eliminate loading screens, so much of a technical achievement it is not.
As for the seamless thing, I was talking about how there could be a cutscene playing in Max Payne 3 or Tomb Raider 2013, but seamlessly your gameplay starts without a black screen appearing.
"Soulslayerzx" said ...The structure is at least solid: 1.Gang leaders lose all of their power (exposition) 2.Gang leaders want to take revenge on the fuckheads who took their power (motivation) 3.Gang leaders fight the baddies (rising action/drama) 4.Gang leaders defeat the baddies (dÃ©nouement/resolution)
For Sr3. It was obviously supposed to be wack which I didn't mind until I played sr2 and kinda felt awkward. But the boring part in sr3 was the gameplay and story for me. After like an hour I got hella bored.I don't mind a crazy story, but it just needs to be good.
"Soulslayerzx" said ...The motivation of the "savages" is obviously not to get pussy. They are the Solarii Brotherhood, which is basically a religious cult. These men would organise in worship of the Sun Queen, abstain from earthly desires and not hesitate to use violence on their enemies. Women would usually be sacrificed to the Stormguard warriors or be used in their ceremonies to find the Sun Queen successor. Their motivation makes sense in the story.
I might have several kinks. But before I played Tomb Raider 2013, I actually saw the controversy regarding how Lara would be raped and I of course went to check out the trailer and was dissapointed cuz there's no sex since it's an American game. So whenever a situation felt kind of "rapey" like when a random Russian dude grabs you and you have to do quick time events to get him off. I always let Lara die at first cuz the dudes looked hella horny like they wanted some pussy. But dissapointed, realized they always kill you. That was pretty unrealistic too, a bunch of men on an island for so many years and killing the only fresh and young pussy they find. wtf Must be gay. Any grown men, especially savages like them would rape people. Must be cultural or idk.
"Soulslayerzx" said ...This game was bad because I was expecting sex, but there wasn't any. Sensible attitude. Maybe check the ESRB rating next time to see if the game features nudity or sexual themes before you get unrealistic expectations into your head.
[...]was dissapointed cuz there's no sex.
"Soulslayerzx" said ...So you're seriously saying that you couldn't stand the short walk between the level hub and the tombs, which I remind you are an optional objective? I guess soaking up 1 minute of atmosphere is too much for people these days. These sequences contribute to the pacing of the game and indicate a transition between the two types of gameplay. I didn't mind it at all.
Hold up, your example of backtracking is completely different from this tomb raiders. In this one, if you go through all the caves to get the treasure. You have to walk all the way back out and there's no challenge in doing it, no monsters respawn, but just sitting there holding w.
"Soulslayerzx" said ...Yup, exploring and loot whoring. Most of the times there are easy signs in the environment that make it easy to remember where to go when you finally get the ability to do a certain thing. And there's fast travel between certain camps, so it's pretty quick and easy to do as well.
As for the second time of backtracking where they purposely don't give you the tools to do something until you progress in the story, I guess that's for explorers who really want to find out what the game's about. The thing is that the story doesn't force you to go back to these areas which may be bad/good, but meh. I don't like backtracking too often. Fetch quests man.
"Soulslayerzx" said ...That's not even a story issue. They place you back on the island for gameplay reasons. Some people want to do all the side quests, hunting missions and find all the collectibles after they finished the storyline. It's the same reason why they place you back on the Normandy after you've finished Mass Effect 3.(to let you play all the dumb DLC they want to sell you)
Far Cry 3. The story had an okay start, it was cool. Loved Vaas's personality. Although didn't know why he wasn't the main antagonist... I fucking loved the game besides some story issues. First of all if you didn't beat the game, don't read the spoiler. [spoiler:114v5kpj]Both endings don't make sense in how you can still explore the island. First one, kill Liza then get stabbed in the stomach by Citra. Feel fucking betrayed and somehow tribe shit. Then, you go back to island after dying. wtf. lol. Second ending, you know it already. You leave the island, how the fuck do you still explore the island?[/spoiler:114v5kpj]
"Soulslayerzx" said ...You already got to see Citra's tits after the acid trip boss fight. If you need a second helping, the game basically punishes you for thinking with your dick. (and rightfully so) On a related note: not every videogame has to have some sort of sex scene shoehorned into it. If people want porn of their games, that's what this site is for.
Also didn't like how you had to die in order to get a sex scene.
"Soulslayerzx" said ...Yup, that's what I'm saying man. These companies spend millions on marketing. You got hyped up to the point of unrealistic expectations.
Alright, Deus Ex Human Revolution's story was shit. The game was short and simple. I mean I used to watch the trailer everyday, might be affecting my opinion on the game cuz it didn't match up. But trailers are meant for you to get the game, jesus fuck these trailer makers.
"Soulslayerzx" said ...I guess you missed the part where they talked about the Illuminati. Maybe this will refresh your memory.
There's not any BIG conspiracy they're talking about in the game. Instead, it's just. Company gets pwned by terrorists, steal augmentation scientist, you track them down to china, and find out it's just a lady who wants to dominate the world. It's just that conspiracy seems like too big of a word for something as minor as a kidnap plan. In fact, I'd just call it kidnapping. Not a conspiracy. Someone wants to know more about augmentations, kidnap the scientist.
"Soulslayerzx" said ...Technical limitations. They could have added a shitzillion NPCs to their levels but that wouldn't have run very well on consoles now would it?
Detroit only seems to have like 30 people total in population, same with China.
"Soulslayerzx" said ...You didn't pick up on the subtlety of the elements I'm guessing. There's several quests where you are confronted with people who are dealing with augmentations. There are several examples. There is this one lady who gets a brain augmentation because it's the only way for her to stay competitive and keep her job. There are several homeless people on the street dealing with rejection sickness. And don't even get me started on the countless emails and documents on the subject you can read on the in-game computers.
I was honestly expecting a deeper and more meaningful story about society and how the future would affect us. I mean it is presented in the end about Albert Einstein in every ending you choose. But in the game...
"Soulslayerzx" said ...Did you ever consider that it may not be a literal revolution but a metaphorical one? Shocking, I know.
There's nothing about a human revolution.
"Soulslayerzx" said ...Well that's the point of tension. Nothing necessarily needs to happens. There is a looming threat of "bad shit" and a glimmer of hope. The outcome is either "bad shit happens" or the hopes get realised and everyone is happy. In Human Revolution, the situation starts with small protests, and eventually escalates to civil disorder. This is presented to us through cutscenes as well as the riot police walking around Detroit. But thenagain, that atmosphere is only there to support the main story. Your purpose is to deal with the company heads and organisation leaders orchestrating this crisis, not to deal with everyman in the street.
The constant social media tension wasn't really alive. Nothing really ever happens. The only part is when the people go psych cuz of the augmentations. The riot was just like 10 punks writing on cars like augmentations suck.
"Soulslayerzx" said ...Funny. I hardly ever killed anyone in the game. The result of sneaking around and trying not to get noticed also helped build the tension I experienced a great deal. I can imagine that playing through the game shooting everyone like a CoD fanboy, would be boring as all fuck.
I didn't feel immersed at all when playing the game. You're just this spy dude going around killing people.
"Soulslayerzx" said ...I was so disappointed the first time I got to play Zelda: A Link to the Past. It didn't match up to the trailer at all. See how nonsensical that attitude is? Judge a game for what it is, not what the trailer made it out to be.
In conclusion, the game didn't match up with the trailer, its ideas, events(a lot of stuff didn't happen in the game).
"Soulslayerzx" said ...That's a shame. Can't imagine how you survived the early 90s.
The thing is that I've never been into those 2d games.
"Soulslayerzx" said ...From Portal 2's singing turrets, to Diablo II's cow level, to Duke Nukem 3D's crushed Terminator. Its really coincidental.
A pattern I've been noticing is a lot of games that turn bad have easter eggs. It shouldn't affect it, but just coincidental. I mean skyrim has a bunch of easter eggs but it's still decent..
"Soulslayerzx" said ...If you read closely, I never said that. You, on the other hand, said something along the lines of Deus Ex and Portal being the most innovative games, while no game can really be called an original idea.
It doesn't matter that they didn't have original origins. I think it just matters how the game's final product is presented. In the way you described it, it sounds like Portal is just a sloppy hybrid.
"Soulslayerzx" said ...Viewpoint, gun placement and controls are identical to every first person shooter. You can clearly see the origins.
But it's not like the typical shooter at all.
"Soulslayerzx" said ...You're bringing up momentum as a technology that no other game had? It usually comes with having a physics engine. Look at Half Life 2. It had physics based puzzles as well and there are many other examples of games where momentum factors into gameplay. In addition, the player isn't introduced to 'flinging' and 'momentum' until test chamber 10. The primary innovation is in the ability to traverse the environment in a different way.
It's puzzles using momentum (mainly in first one). Momentum is what attracted me to portal. The technology that no other game had.
"Soulslayerzx" said ...If the movie/game brought in a lot of money, the investors will be happy and will usually continue the support the companies that made those games. That's the point I meant to make. It never was about the quality of the game in proportion to the money used to make it, or the money it brought in for the studio. Eventually the production costs for making the same thign over and over will become higher than the actually income, and by that time, the studio/publisher retires the franchise to bring it back years later to appeal with extra nostalgia factor. Good example of this are the Police Academy and Call of Duty franchises.
Not really, most of these BIG companies only make several good games. Just cuz a movie or game used a lot of money to make, doesn't mean it's good.
"Soulslayerzx" said ...So you should understand that it's harder than you made it out to be in your original post.
And no, I have tried developing a game before with a bunch of friends. Making eveything from scratch is a ton of work, excluding a custom game engine written. And there are risks of course. All the modeling,texturing, storyboarding, level design, sound directing is essential in making an original game.
"Soulslayerzx" said ...That's a really silly thing to say. In some games, experiencing the story is the gameplay. Say what you want about the Walking Dead, but it's got gameplay in the form of choices and QTE's. For some people that's not enough, for some people it is. Either way, it's interaction with the game that manifests itself in social elements in the form of statistics and minor story variations. A game like Dark Souls has no big story in the form of cutscenes, but has a lot of lore that can be experienced through examining the enemies and environments, even though it isn't immediatelly apparent from the surface.
I think you missed my point. I'm saying that many games only have one or the other. Either they have fun gameplay, but no story.
"Soulslayerzx" said ...I'm not a native english speaker, so you'll have to excuse me, but I'm still not sure what you mean by this. The sentence structure is kind of confusing to me.I honestly wished they made more quality games over quantity of pixel games.Quality/Quantity. The real one.
"Soulslayerzx" said ...If you consider substance abuse funny. A lot of serious tones in that one. Some action hero type moments, but not particularly funny. Serious, not funny.
Hey, Max Payne 3 cutscenes were funny.
"Soulslayerzx" said ...Just note that Let's Play videos don't cut it for this one. Make sure you actually play the game. Soak up the environments. Otherwise the nuance is surely lost on you.
Journey. I've seen videos on it. I'm not sure, but I'll give it another shot.
"Soulslayerzx" said ...Again with the sex in videogames... Can't you go five minutes without masturbating? On a more serious note, the ability to improve graphical fidelity doesn't really make Skyrim a good game in of itself.
Yes, the modding communtiy did make the game good. There's so much more to skyrim with mods. Graphics enhancements make everyone look so much better, especially the boobs/ass,
"Soulslayerzx" said ...To my knowledge, there are few mods that actually add narrative to the game. (Moonpath to Elsweyr, Descent into Madness, and Sea of Ghosts, to name the big ones I know of) Is this is at the core of what made Skyrim good? In my opinion, what made Skyrim good was that it offered a vast environment to explore. You never knew what you were going to run into next.
along with new stories.
"Soulslayerzx" said ...The industry right now is in a state of flux. We've had a rough couple of years that's true, but I'm really curious how we will look back on this time period five year from now.
The current gaming industry honestly isn't doing that great of a job.
"Ganonmaster" said ...I'd jsut like to say that Ganonmaster will link a fifteen minute video and say it "sums up" a post you could read in three. XD Stay classy.
This video sums up your complaints I think: [youtube:1y9akimz]nvK8fua6O64[/youtube:1y9akimz]
"nonoon" said ...In my defense, his post only explained the dissatisfaction a lot of people are experiencing, while the video sums up the cause of that dissatisfaction."Ganonmaster" said ...I'd jsut like to say that Ganonmaster will link a fifteen minute video and say it "sums up" a post you could read in three. XD Stay classy.
This video sums up your complaints I think: [youtube:o7kp885v]nvK8fua6O64[/youtube:o7kp885v]
"Soulslayerzx" said ...I don't think that Albert Einstein quote can be applied to videogames in the way you just did.
Well, "Technological progress is like an axe in the hands of a pathological criminal." Hopefully, better games get released.
"DesoPL" said ...You are writing off an entire genre on the basis of one game? I know that 90% of the games in the genre try to copy the success of WoW, but that doesn't mean that MMORPG's are the worst games out there. Just because the latest Call of Duty is bad, that doesn't mean all first person shooters are bad. That's a pretty shortsighted attitude. As previously mentioned, MMO's are not my thing, but I can at least see what they're trying to do and why it might appeal to some people.
MEGA SPLOWPOKE! I think, the MMORPG's are the worst games what we can play, why? First take a look to Blizzard and World Of Warcraft.
"DesoPL" said ...Blizzard does exactly what it needs to do to keep making money. You don't want to change the game in a way where the core game mechanics change. The core game experience is built on grind and monotony but balancing it with enough small new things to keep the core player base subscribed. The game was never about "fun", but about having people playing long enough to keep them forking over a monthly fee.
Soon WoW will be pass 10 years of activity, but game is old enough and players starts seriously leave game. What is a reason? There is several reasons, but most popular is. 1: Every expansion to WoW or patch, give no new things to WoW, players feels bored. For each expansion WoW give some interesing features like for example. [...]
"DesoPL" said ...Have you played Dota 2, League of Legends, EVE Online or Counter Strike before? Communities for online games will always have toxic players in them that will ruin your enjoyment of the game. And that's when you need to think to yourself: "Do I like the good parts of the game enough to the point where I will put up with the bad things just a bit longer?" At some point you won't be interested enough in the good parts to put up with it anymore. Either because the novelty has worn off, your friends stop playing or you want to play something else. Why the game is losing players at this point isn't because of poor decision making in these expansions, it's because over time people lose interest. I think it's referred to the Police Academy equation. They keep making the same movie with some alterations and the audience was halved for each sequel. When the cost of making a new sequel would be lower than the projected income, they stopped making sequels. This is the same with WoW and other games like Call of Duty. They keep making the same game, they keep selling them, and with each one, some people drop off. People move on to other things. That's WoW's problem. But by the looks of it, they can still keep making these expansions for a couple of years.
2: The second thing, why WoW is bad... Is community! In some realms like Argent Dawn EU, people are very ugly and negative, for me is most important reason why i deciede to finish with WoW.