True Gaming Why did old games have so much more content and throwaway mechanics |
- Why did old games have so much more content and throwaway mechanics
- Thoughts on limited timed content in games?
- What do you guys think about (vr-) fantasy games that focus on storytelling and exploration?
- Why haven't we seen many adaptations of Shakespeare in video games? Can you name any examples?
- Question to folks that have played classic Double Fine adventure games...
- Another Witcher 3 Discussion: Plot Progression & Characters
| Why did old games have so much more content and throwaway mechanics Posted: 06 Feb 2018 01:57 AM PST My prime example would be comparing GTA: San Andreas (2004) to GTA V (2013). San Andreas took two years to develop, beginning right after the launch of Vice City. Rockstar packed a ridiculous amount of content into that game compared to GTA 3's and VC's respective development cycles. The game let you do virtually anything, and even entertained basic RPG mechanics like working out, improving your gun handling and skill in a vehicle. You could even attend driving school, boat school, motorcycle school, and flight school. Every street corner in that game had a little bit of something for you to do. Rockstar even modeled different physiques for CJ; if you pigged out you'd get fat, if you worked out you'd get jacked. What compelled Rockstar to throw every idea on the wall and let it stick? They got shit done in those two years. It seems like they had so much fun working on that game. Even with all the cut beta content I never craved for more. It's probably the only decade-old game I revisit occasionally. Then GTA IV comes out four years later, on a new engine, and on new consoles. Everything on the graphical level was a huge leap, but the amount of content and side activities were barebones compared to SA. Even GTA V's singleplayer didn't come close to the amount of content we got in SA. Why was Rockstar so ambitious with the amount of activities we got in San Andreas? Did they simply have to focus on the newer and more difficult technology to work with in the HD GTA's? Before GTA V got delayed, Rockstar said there would be no barber shops, vehicle customization, stats, or any other relic mechanics from SA. Then in April 2013 R* announced all those things would be in the game. It seems like Rockstar made a last minute decision to add more content in the game. Originally it seemed GTA V would be like IV in a sense; a technological marvel of an open world game, but with a scarce amount of content. San Andreas is such a charming and memorable game, it seems like Rockstar's philosophy was completely different when they made that game. Now they seem more "mature" and cynical. [link] [comments]  |
| Thoughts on limited timed content in games? Posted: 05 Feb 2018 11:25 PM PST I've seen numerous topics involving loot crates, micro transactions, season passes, and early access games, but I don't often see the topic of limited timed content brought up and discussed. Content like this primarily revolves around online games, but it has started appearing in single player games as well, (Correct me if I'm wrong, I haven't played the game, but from my understanding the latest Hitman game has featured content that is no longer accessible and will not return in the future.) What are your thoughts on content in games that is only available for a limited time and once it's gone there's a high possibility it won't return? I play a lot of Blizzard games and they are notorious for this tactic. Each month Hearthstone has a card back to earn, if you miss out you'll never receive it. Heroes of the Storm, Overwatch, and Diablo 3 all have seasons with exclusive rewards, get them now or never. WoW, the guiltiest of them all to do this, has had thousands of things removed from the game. An MMO is supposed to be ever evolving, so sometimes it makes sense, but there is still plenty of content featured for only a limited time and then removed. Personally, systems like this have turned me off from playing some games. It feels like a tactic developers use to create that FOMO sensation and keep players from taking breaks from playing their games. I love it when developers continue to create new content for their games, but I want to feel rewarded for my time invested, I don't want to feel like a hostage to the game and that if I don't play it I will regret it later. It might seem like a silly prospect to some people, but I believe there's a lot of gamers who are negatively affected by systems like this. I also think it can be daunting and turn off new players from a game. I love collecting things, achievement hunting, and grinding out rewards in games, but anytime I'm curious about trying a new game that has been out for a while and come to find out it is full of content no longer available, I'm immediately turned away from it. I like the idea of being new to a game and seeing a veteran who has something that looks awesome, and I want it, so I look up online on how to achieve it and find this instead: "This item has been removed from game." That was one of my great experiences first playing WoW. I started playing WoW a year after release, so I've experienced a great deal of content, but one of fondest earliest memories was seeing high level people with cool gear or mounts I hadn't obtained yet. I still had every opportunity to get them myself, and it gave me the motivation to keep playing and earn them. Now when you log on WoW you see so many mounts, armor sets, weapons, titles, etc. that it's overwhelming, and if you want to hunt them down and earn them yourself there's a good chance it's no longer obtainable. Content like this also brings about a sense of entitlement and superiority. When this subject is brought up about some specific item in a game I've seen the discussion unravel into toxicity where a player feels like they deserve something and nobody else should have it. It hurts the community of the game and, once again, creates a daunting and overwhelming feeling for new players. Limited timed content has it's place in gaming. It brings incentive to players and gives them a reward they can be proud of. But, I think games are completely over doing it right now and taking the fun away from getting those rewards. Earning a card back in Hearthstone each month isn't rewarding, it's exceptionally easy to do, so it ends up just feeling like you are forced to get on and play even when you aren't in the mood. On the other hand WoW had a 10th anniversary event where they brought back a raid and let players go through and experience content a lot of people probably never had, as well as earning yourself an extremely cool mount for doing so. If you weren't playing WoW at the time and missed the event, you missed the mount, but they still allow you to receive it another way, albeit a fairly expensive way using a system called the Black Auction House which has players bid on items for a lot of gold. I'm OK with a system like this, I think it's fair and rewarding. I don't feel entitled to my mount, or any of my other items I own in WoW that have been removed, and I think others should have a chance to earn them. It might not be the same way I did, it might even be more difficult, but at least they have the chance. Ultimately, I want more systems like that. I think removing content from games is a negative experience for everyone, and developers should allow rewards to be earned in different ways if the content is no longer relevant. What are your thoughts? [link] [comments]  |
| What do you guys think about (vr-) fantasy games that focus on storytelling and exploration? Posted: 06 Feb 2018 11:19 AM PST We're working hard on our first game called ‚Return to Nangrim' which is settled in our fantasy universe called Arafinn. We're working on the background of this universe for 9 years now (family trees, kingdoms, world map, metrics, languages..) so we have a lot of stories to tell. Now my question is: would you play a game that focuses more on story and exploration than combat, leveling etc? And what are the prerequisites you'd do so? Return to Nangrim Trailer [link] [comments]  |
| Why haven't we seen many adaptations of Shakespeare in video games? Can you name any examples? Posted: 06 Feb 2018 09:30 AM PST Hello, I am currently doing some writing about Shakespeare, one of the most influential writers in the English language, and see how he might have effected video games as an artistic medium. I want to try and cover my bases as best as I can, so I want to research and play as many Shakespearean games as I can. Some games I am in the process of researching are Alaware's game Hamlet!, Tin Man Game's *To Be or Not To Be, Golden Glitch's Elsinore, and the failed MMO Arden: the World of Shakespeare. I know that some have compared Killzone: Shadowfall to Romeo and Juliet and references to his various plays in The Witcher and Elder Scrolls series, though it seems that for all of the Bard's influence on most culture, it seems strange that video games have had a very minimal presence. Many people consider Shakespeare one of the few examples of a universal writer, in which his storylines, characters, and themes have been adapted into nearly every artistic medium and nearly every genre of storytelling. Why do you think this is an especially hard process for video games? [link] [comments]  |
| Question to folks that have played classic Double Fine adventure games... Posted: 05 Feb 2018 04:59 PM PST I just recently finished Broken Age. My first ever point n click adventure game. The writing was great and the story was cool, but especially in the latter half I found the puzzles to be absolutely ridiculous at times and the only thing that kept me going was to see how it all concluded. Overall it was probably a bad introduction to the genre, because I don't ever want to spend half a game looking at online guides like that again. My question is, does this problem come up in his classics? Day of the Tentacle, Grim Fandango etc... I own a few of them, but I'm timid about starting them after my experience with Broken Age. Can anyone reassure me that isn't going to be the case in his older games? [link] [comments]  |
| Another Witcher 3 Discussion: Plot Progression & Characters Posted: 05 Feb 2018 08:27 PM PST I finally got around to playing Witcher 3 these past couple weeks. Nearly done with the epilogue. While I have definitely enjoyed the game, I'm trying to figure out why it didn't quite click with me, the way it has with so many. One element of W3 I want to discuss, is the way the plot is revealed. Geralt is essentially playing a detective throughout the story, retracing Ciri's steps, cutting to flashbacks, etc. A medieval film-noir almost. The game's main events are being revealed to you, rather than created by you. This has the effect of a netflix-binge, more than what I expect from a game. Compare this to Dragon Age Inquisition, while still mostly linear, the choices the player makes change and actively create the world you are playing e.g. choosing templars vs mages, companions flirting with or leaving your party. Now you might say the W3 is not intended to be malleable, Geralt is Geralt, has his own backstory and ways. I actually enjoyed this; It's fun to see beyond the gruff exterior with certain character interactions. But none of the important characters really do anything to make me care about them. Everyone in Novigrad basically: Dandelion, Zoltan, Triss. Everything is told from this cliffhanger angle of "wait, come help me out and then I'll tell you about Ciri, just one more thing, okay so Ciri..." which I feel is kind of cheap storytelling, and mostly depends on associations from the previous games. Essentially, I want to ask fans of the game, open world aside, do you feel that the passive nature of the story-telling in W3 takes away player-agency? Does this matter to you? What characters were you invested in & who seemed mostly obligatory? Was the development of Geralt / Ciri the main priority? [link] [comments]  |
| You are subscribed to email updates from For those who like talking about games as much as playing them.. To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
| Google, 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, United States | |
Post a Comment