Forums → Games → What do YOU think makes a good game?
| 93 | 18669 |
Do YOU like violence, action, horror, car chases, wars......?
Do YOU like games in the past, present or future?
- 93 Replies
Because they are fun to play? the concept is intriging making you actually get the game? It's hard to answer what makes games good, it's like I'm asking you "Define fun."
Precisely. The "job" if you will of any game is to be fun. As such, to find what makes a game fun, we need to examine the most popular and successful of games (since the best selling games are obviously the ones that are fun to more people than not-selling ones). And if we do that, we find none of them rely on a narrative to carry the game, indicating that a games story is in no way responsible for making a "good" game. Simple pattern recognition really.
Go do that if you would choose movies and books instead of a video game story. I don't care where you would look for a story.
I admit I phrased it a little awkwardly, but I actually had a much bigger point.
If we already have mediums that are so heavily based on storytelling (books and movies), then why do have games follow in the same path instead of deviating from them, in turn being something more unique?Storyline games or not, it's obvious the main-stream loses interest the more games try to resemble movies instead.
Lol, I never sead that the story is all important, but since you said that the storyline isn't really needed (which for some games aren't) I just made an argument proving otherwise.
You called my argument "the same **** people with graphics talk sell to me" and then implied story is above both, making you sound *exactly* like the people you quoted.
Look at it this way; game designers if making a game with a good story and good gameplay it would sell for people who like good stories with a good gameplay. If game desingers make a no story game with only platformer jumping evolved, people will buy it who like platformer games. Like I said, it all comes down to preference.
And why should they focus on a story line, when it's a fact that the most successful of games didn't need one? Why would you not try and make a game similar to those, since there's obviously a bigger market?
There are many elements that make a game a good game, story is but one of them.
Show me a game that was successful mainly because of it's story. Your statement implies a game can get away with bad gameplay if the story is good.
I won't bother. You play games you like and by your standards deserves the title of a good game (or a descent game), I will play games that I like. There is no point whatsoever into making you, I dunno, love super mario games because this, that, so on...by convincing you this game is good.
So when I ask you why a story is needed in a game, you'll just raise the opinion card? How boring.
If story were essential to video games, the ones without them shouldn't be successful.
There are always exeptions. If you like something why change it? Sure, new games need to be new(lol) but a game making a sequel, if people enjoyed the first one, not much will change, actually it will, but it would never deviate from it's previous sequel, ya know?
That depends. There have been a lot of cases that a good franchise was ruined because the developers tried to be "original" with a sequel.
I heard that line from somewhere so I decided to use it, but understand that all these elements (gameplay, replay value, ease of play, etc...) would be nothing without the storyline, and vice versa (talking about games with storylines).Of course, games without a storyline can live without, well, storylines, but without even one element that specific game has; soundtrack, graphics, gameplay, lastability, etc...the game is not to it's full potential, therefore not as popular or good. so a storyline cannot be beat or beaten, if that makes sense.
I've said it before and I'll say it again. If it relies on a big narrative structure to the point of absolutely needing it, then it's no longer a video game.
Take Heavy Rain and GTA4 (both obviously storyline-games).
What happens if you remove the story of GTA. Does it stop being a game? Nope.
What if you remove the gameplay instead? Is it no longer a game? You bet.
Now try the same thing with Heavy Rain. Notice any differences?
Now look at which game was more successful.
All is equal in making a good game, but how well those elements are done is what define the outcome of the game.
How can you say every aspect is the same? Are you really suggesting graphics are equally important as gameplay? Or that story is as important as replayability?
If that were the case, the best games would be the one that are equal in all those qualities, yet none of the new industry games manage to outsell Super Mario Brothers, a game that is now more 25 years old.
A game, mind you that had neither good graphics nor a story apart from a very basic premise (and I've said before that's the only thing you need a "story" for - a basic premise). If all those things are so important, how come no one is able to be as successful?
Never underestimate the power of music. Ever.
I'm not sure how high on the pedastool of gaming music is but I
Sorry, stupid keyboard uses the "Tab" button to... well yeah.
Never underestimate the power of music. Ever
I'm not sure how high on the pedastool of gaming music is but I really do see it's effects, it's one of those things which is a necessity -- be fair, if a game had no music you'd point it out in the first 10 minutes and lose immersion even if it had no storyline. But the thing is when it is so well done the effect is amplified, with things that have a necessary requirement (would you consider a certain level of graphics is required?) you don't always have the "amazement" rise as the level does.
Compare Crysis 2 to Bad Company 2 -- I think there's no question that Crysis 2 wins in graphics, but the detail including in Bad Company 2 made all the difference if you ask me (explosions, destructible ground, etc).
Same with those games like Space Invaders, not really a great deal of graphics but it's all the bullets and mayhem going everywhere which gives it its atmosphere... that and the music.
Just think about it, the most memorable part of our games is in fact the music. Look at the Halo theme, Still Alive, the Mario and Zelda themes and the list goes on for a looooong time.
I'd just like to throw this out there.
Oh, and also the music is one of the most important parts of trailers as well, imagine this without the music.
Infact this "thrilling" music is quite easily the thing that masks the bull that is actually in games when you see the awesomesauce in trailers. Not saying Mass Effect 2 is bad in any way - it's one of my favourite, but hey -- imagine that trailer without the music.
I don't like it. :P
Music can affect a player in a variety of ways (even to set up "drama" and tension without the need to ever show a single cutscene).
The best moment of this for me was when I played the demo for Bad Company 1. Remember... spoilers, btw >.>
Remember when you can charge the trenches after it was struck by air (I think), dust everywhere, guns and MUSIC blazing and for me it all synchronized and felt nearly real, getting into cover as the music slew through me and my bullets into the enemies (yes, this sounds pretty spiritually gay, what's your point?), one of the best gaming moments ever.
From a demo >.>
Imagine having a game WITHOUT music......it's disastrous. While obviously not as important as other things I mentioned, the game music is the next most important thing.
Pretty much this. Music is the best thing for setting up an atmosphere second to not having a stupid setting in comparison to the plot (A toy store in a serious-themed Zombie Apocalypse game?), it may go as far to say the story isn't even as important since music is what makes it worthwhile - you don't need a story to make music worthwhile (Again - Space Invaders games)!
Being a "masterpiece" is irrelevant in the long run if history forgets it compared to other, much more strongly selling games.
Being "different" doesn't make it a masterpiece anyway if you ask me, yeah it's a massive + but being able to develop from a fanbase of a specific genre and grow its own branch is pretty amazing in its own sense (destructible stuff in Operation Flashpoint / Battlefield, the Adaption of Crysis / Halo: Reach, the fast-paced fighting of CoD, etc).
The story is far from the most important aspect. Sure, as a gamer you'd like those elements, but none of the massively popular Main Stream games have those (I mean the likes of Tetris, Donkey Kong, Pacman, Wii Sports, Super Mario Bros. and the original Legend of Zelda) and they still ending up being massively successful.
I'd actually say the music is more important than the story.
In the story's defense, the story is usually what makes a game epic in your memories, the thing you can chat about very easily (to others who've played it) and is, although a bit of a hit against the replayability of a game in many cases, the thing that makes the first time so awesome -- Amnesia: The Dark Descent. I'm not the biggest fan of the story and Horrors aren't made for that but the presentation in correlation with it is so outstanding.
Think of it this way, what if all the expensive mods where fresh takes on the genre in the same way as Dota or TOwer Defense? To get people to buy a fan-created MOD, you'd have to really do something interesting to get people to buy it.
Of course, paying 10 bucks for just new maps and slight alterations would be not a smart strategy ;D
I'm looking on it at a very suspicious, being ripped-off side of things, almost definitely there will be things worth the money but I want a way to efficiently decide that before buying.
both of which are not very original when you think about it. Sure, focusing it ONLY on bosses was somewhat unique, but just imagine how good it could have been if you had epic battles against normal enemies, and could explore the land for hidden goodies. You can certainly do much more with the concept.
Growing from some pretty basic traits of a game, hell, even developing it into a full one, it's pretty amazing in its own sense (anyone see wut I did thar?)
Just to add:
- Pretty much every RTS ever made
- Pretty much every fighting game ever made
- Counter Strike and about a million other FPS games
- Pokemon (maybe?)
I should've added Dragonball Z and Tekken, those would be the othetr two games I've played with a Skirmish mode.
I'm probably forgetting others, but the point has been made.
Side note: Magicka is AWESOMEEEEEEE
As much as I normally hate DLCs, I'm tempted to buy every single one just because Magicka deserves to get the support (and it's actually fairly awesome DLC).
I don't know if I went on about the moral parts of gaming but hey -- Magicka was the full package from the start, the DLC's are after release if I remember correctly and are awesome. :P
Magicka: Vietnam anyone?
I wanna get it :P
But all those games you've mentioned have other elements, do you think people play those games solely on their soundtrack? Didn't think so. Sure there are games like guitar hero and other music games where the music is the biggest part of the game, but mostly game designers include other elements in a game to make the game interesting, fun to play and long lastability.
Firstly, "Didn't think so" often implies hostility and yes - that is the way I perceived it and probably others reading, if you didn't intend it that way I suggest you don't use that phrase in the future as it does give that certain feeling.
Second, I think I mentioned that music in games where it's main element is NOT music amplifies the primary element.
You wouldn't play the same thing over and over and over, right? So originality = something new and interesting.
If people were smart this would be the case - but 3 words (1 name) blow this out of the water.
Call of Duty
Am I one to fall for it? Hell noaw. Originality can be a pretty small thing, including having a unique story -- if Mass Effect 3 was for the most part the same game with only an extension of the story (being as good as it was imo) then I may indeed buy it. Point being it doesn't take an insane amount of originality if the replayability is good enough -- ME's replayability is infact very little (aside from the classes) and it's mostly the story which holds it back - doing the same thing, big deal >.>
So story isn't a big part of a game? Like I said, I'm bad with examples but for instance, would you people, in general, play dead space 2 without the storyline? same goes for other storyline games. No, they woudn't. Don't ever, ever, EVER underestimate the power of a storyline. ever.
Funny you'd say that. What makes you think that, really? If you'd played most games with a storyline, you would still think that the "music" is better? that's the same sh!t people with graphics talk sell to me; "No, no, the graphics are whats important! nothing else but graphics!" which is ridiculous to say the least.
I think the usual case that music is a NECESSITY makes it so good. You don't need graphics styles, but it helps if you have them, you don't need music, but be fair - it's a huge downer. You need different kinds of music to suit the emotion and make emphasis on it, but the graphics is what sets the emotion if thats it's focus (would you call Space Invaders a game with graphics focus? :P ). Tie the music and graphics from this trailer -- does it not make it seem like everything goes so well? That everything is bright and awesome?
You would be wrong my including the majority of people, but if it's something you look for in a game, so be it. If it's your kind of taste in games, I won't argue with that.
I can't really say anything without looking like an arse, but nonetheless. It's the passive benefit music makes, people don't look that far and realize "Wow... Music is quite a big deal, huh?".
It's more or less something we should bring to peoples attention before making an assumption for them. Maybe it is the majority -- maybe it isn't, as of yet it's not something with a great deal of focus made by them if you ask me.
Wow, I just made an assumption for people in an attempt to get people not to make an assumption for people >.>
You would be suprised if people found a game with an exceptional storyline, people would wan't the same charcter, basic fundamental gameplay and continuing the storyline from where they left of from the previous game. Nothing beats a good storyline!
I like how I said that when replying to previous parts of your post and then you say it.
I mean look at movie soundtracks.
One of the most emotional parts of movies (in this case a miniseries - but not the point) is the soundtracks, what would this give you an impression of without the music?
Or hell even this soundtrack - do I need to explain what it is trying to portray? It's a style of music so apparent to people nowadays that well... Yeah, you kind of HAVE TO have this sort of music otherwise it's not the atmosphere people expect.
You wouldn't even need cutscenes if your music is good enough.
General chatting between "team members" or something whilst music is playing reflects equal value (or higher) than that of a high-budget cutscene, mostly because you're still playing and paying attention I would assume.
If something was good the first time around.......why not? *Originality* in sequels ultimately leads to developers going crazy and killing what made those games good in the first place.
Originality alone can never sell a game concept. It's the other factors I mentioned that do.
Especially since a vast majority of successful game concepts have already been done. Originality needs it's limits but I also think it has a minimum.
Nope.
I'd say it depends, ME has a large amount of story, and it structures a large deal of the gameplay (especially that of the decision making etc).
If your *game* falls apart if you remove the narrative, then it's not a game.
Answer me this: If story is such an important factor, why did Wii Sports sell? Why did Wii Fit? Why did Mario? Why did Pokemon? (just a reminder, I don't mean "story" as in the basic setup - become the best Pokemon Trainer, I mean "story" as in a structured story telling narrative which Pokemon clearly doesn't have).
Why did every single one of those outsell all those "epic story games"?
I'd like to ask you not to use the "These sell better" debate, because then I'd have to rave about human stupidity. :P
In all seriousness, do people look at games the same way we do? Look at CoD, I doubt people actually look at what they're playing, they know it's fast-paced fun and that is essentially all they need to play it. It's not a bad philosophy at first guess but in no way is it a good one for the game industry and a game standard.
my point that story is not important.
Not in context but I get this message in context nonetheless. Stories matter -- take a look at Amnesia: The Dark Descent. Granted, the audio is outstanding a is the biggest part of what makes it scary but the story helps immerse you in what you're trying to do and why. You can't exactly be waltzing around a Castle waiting to be scared, can you?
And this AFTER you said people don't want the same thing over and over >_>
I'd like to point out that that doesn't seem like a positive attitude (Not gonna argue whether you should or shouldn't be in one because that's not my point) and if you're trying to have fantasy4life reconsider, doing so in such a manner quite often won't be very convincing. :P
Not speaking for fantasy4life, but I'm just looking at what I would do from his perspective, I wouldn't be so open to admitting I was wrong to a guy who's lame about it.
Because they are fun to play? the concept is intriging making you actually get the game? It's hard to answer what makes games good, it's like I'm asking you "Define fun."
Or explaining humor. I think the point is the story can immerse you but that's when you get into it, it isn't necessarily the biggest selling point of a game because it requires (in good stories) a fair amount of dedication to get through it all.
Look at it this way; game designers if making a game with a good story and good gameplay it would sell for people who like good stories with a good gameplay. If game desingers make a no story game with only platformer jumping evolved, people will buy it who like platformer games. Like I said, it all comes down to preference.
Again, I don't speak for a large amount of people (as in I only speak for myself) but when people play something they generally like a reason within the game. "Why am I doing this?" is a simple question answered through story, especially for a younger playerbase I'd imagine.
but a game making a sequel, if people enjoyed the first one, not much will change, actually it will, but it would never deviate from it's previous sequel, ya know?
If it ain't broke don't fix it.
Right there. At most they should change the rusty cogs (broken or less successful mechanics), add a few on (to keep the story alive, as well as keeping it relatively new) and maybe give a shine (graphics update) on them.
since I don't review what I wrote (dumb part on me),
I don't review what I write O.o
the game is not to it's full potential,
The lack of context can actually be a serious bonus. Multiplayer doesn't always use context or a story -- infact that can be rare, but it doesn't make it any worse.
Not everyone would appreciate being the bad guy, or be happy with what is going on in the backround whilst you try ripping an extreme guitar solo. What's more important - the score, or the fact that Andy is riding your toy car into the cat hole in the door over a ramp?
Bad quality story but nonetheless, no story shouldn't be considered as such. A story is a positive, a lack of story is a lack of a positive - not a negative.
Makes sense?
Simple pattern recognition really.
Given that the collection of data is flawless. That is a lot of separate debates entirely.
Storyline games or not, it's obvious the main-stream loses interest the more games try to resemble movies instead.
I think ME2 was well received. Dragon Age is also coming in and furthermore story is one of the most difficult things to execute properly - mostly because as I said before, it takes more effort to appreciate the possible complexity it holds.
And why should they focus on a story line, when it's a fact that the most successful of games didn't need one?
Taking a risk? It's an aspect which can easily be built upon and is quite easily a very easily unique one - granted, it's also a hard one to make effective but nonetheless it has a lot of potential.
Show me a game that was successful mainly because of it's story. Your statement implies a game can get away with bad gameplay if the story is good.
I can't say the gameplay for ME2 was top notch. It was satisfactory and certainly unique - but that's the main reason for it being acceptable, it doesn't compare to something that focuses more on the shooting.
If story were essential to video games, the ones without them shouldn't be successful.
Subjective opinions doesn't make an objective result, despite what their influences may be (which in this case is sales).
That depends. There have been a lot of cases that a good franchise was ruined because the developers tried to be "original" with a sequel.
I think that's the point fantasy4life was trying to make. It will (and should) maintain key concepts which make the game unique or special to the players but nonetheless the additions / changes are almost certainly required to ensure a sell of the next game of a sequel (the third game :P ).
I've said it before and I'll say it again. If it relies on a big narrative structure to the point of absolutely needing it, then it's no longer a video game.
Depends what you mean by "big narrative structure", the addition of stories isn't a bad thing, and if the game has gameplay then... well it's in the word - gameplay. It steadily bridges the definitions of movies and video games but in no way does it ever stop being a game if it is able to be interacted with (Scene it? Is indeed a game), pretty much anything can be twisted into a game -- I'd say it's more or less the intention of the story that decides what it should be considered. Would you interact with an interactive movies to "lay" them or out of curiosity?
It's still a fair question, honestly. Out of the entire deal though, a big narrative structure that a game relies on still is not breaking away from the concept "game" -- unless you'd like to elaborate because I am assuming it can go as far as "A story behind EVERYTHING in a game".
and I've said before that's the only thing you need a "story" for - a basic premise
I don't mean "story" as in the basic setup - become the best Pokemon Trainer, I mean "story" as in a structured story telling narrative which Pokemon clearly doesn't have
... Perhaps the second one should be put in context or somehow further explained, otherwise you went against your word :P
If all those things are so important, how come no one is able to be as successful?
Do people think on this level? I really don't think so, I don't do it when I look at a game, I think about the story but I look at everything and what I'm given in previews. Not much to develop from in relation to opinion on the story more often than not.
That, and I think I mentioned before how subjective opinions do not equal objective results - in a way it does (AKA Gameplay has been more successful than story), but it also doesn't (Gameplay is more successful than Story -- bare in mind the HUGE lack of context within that sentence). I'm just saying that success should be thrown away and look more on more solid grounds -- peoples ACTUAL opinions on what matters more, instead of what game sales say or are interpreted as :P
- H
having a reason for reaching a higher level. ie: sexy looking skills, armors, story, better guns, more game attributes, etc.
The best games are simple. They need to be replayable. It also needs an addicting tune. Classics never die: Tetris, Missile Command, Pac-Man, Galaga, Dig-Dug, Pole Position...
Before I start, let me clear up a few things:
When I talk about "story" I try to seperate term (though some of my posts kinda failed at that so I apologize for any confusion ).
Similar to how Chillz seperated between "Graphics" and "Aesthetics", I think a similar distincion is needed for story.
When I say "story" I'm talking about the bare bones, basically the summary you'd read on the box art. In essence, that's the bare reason for WHY you should play the game and gives a basic set-up (Examples include "Rescue the Princess" or "Save the World". I would argue a game never really needs much more beyond this point.
When I say "narrative", I'm referring to what you guys consider a "story", basically the full-blown thing the game tells you, including rising-action, climax, falling action, epilogue, all that stuff.
While certainly neat in it's own way, there are many possible traps one can fall into when basing your game around a narrative(I'll try to explain them as I go along).
I'm not sure how high on the pedastool of gaming music is
In my highly unprofessional opinion, it would be along the lines of this:
- Accessibility (think the "easy to learn, hard to master" concept, though I admit this is incredibly hard to design well)
- Replayability/Gameplay (I really can't properly rank either as more important because both options seem wrong, so I'd say they are equally important)
- Music
- "Narrative" (if you REALLY must have it)
- "Story"
- Graphics
The last four are somewhat arguable as I've noticed, though I don't see how you could place any of them above (or equally as important for that matter) as the first two.
be fair, if a game had no music you'd point it out in the first 10 minutes and lose immersion even if it had no storyline.
Agreed, this is important ESPECIALLY in a non-story centric game because a player is more likely to directly focus on the games story, another possible reason why the Mario and Tetris are so memorable.
I'd just like to throw this out there.
Epic music is epic. Fun Fact: It's actually made by a company that makes music specifically for trailers. o-0
This is true for a lot of movie trailers also. Also here's an extended version. ;D
Being "different" doesn't make it a masterpiece anyway if you ask me, yeah it's a massive + but being able to develop from a fanbase of a specific genre and grow its own branch is pretty amazing in its own sense (destructible stuff in Operation Flashpoint / Battlefield, the Adaption of Crysis / Halo: Reach, the fast-paced fighting of CoD, etc).
I'd imagine this is a big part for why most new games are FPS-centric. They have a relatively big install base, so it's safe from a business standpoint to make them.
In the story's defense, the story is usually what makes a game epic in your memories, the thing you can chat about very easily (to others who've played it) and is, although a bit of a hit against the replayability of a game in many cases, the thing that makes the first time so awesome -- Amnesia: The Dark Descent. I'm not the biggest fan of the story and Horrors aren't made for that but the presentation in correlation with it is so outstanding.
But what if there was no narrative, and instead an open ended experience (or at the very least, a story-line with many branching paths i.e Mass Effect)? Talking about unique things in your game is much more effective than recounting scripted sequences. And doesn't Amnesia live from more from YOUR fear and the atmosphere of the game, instead of "story"? Mind you, I never played it myself so I can't answer that myself ;D
I'm looking on it at a very suspicious, being ripped-off side of things, almost definitely there will be things worth the money but I want a way to efficiently decide that before buying.
A valid point. I guess that just means reading user reactions will be more important than ever ;P
Growing from some pretty basic traits of a game, hell, even developing it into a full one, it's pretty amazing in its own sense (anyone see wut I did thar?)
You mean the obvious contradiction I made? >.<
But still, I'd say one original spin on things shouldn't be enough to consider the game as a whole "completely original". And having epic battles with enemies that aren't brainless moving targets would always be a plus.
I don't know if I went on about the moral parts of gaming but hey -- Magicka was the full package from the start, the DLC's are after release if I remember correctly and are awesome. :P
Magicka: Vietnam anyone?
I wanna get it :P
Yep. Magicka makes sure not to add gameplay required content as DLC, and more fun little challenge maps. But they do start to go the route offering several new mage outfits with unique weapons(that add somewhat of a small class system) for variety. As long as they can keep making non-generic DLC (and not silly hats - I'm looking at you Valve >_>, I'm happy ;P
Having a brother to play the game locally is an amazing upside btw ;D
ME's replayability is infact very little (aside from the classes) and it's mostly the story which holds it back - doing the same thing, big deal >.>
Though you can try different approaches, the nice guy and the bad guy routine ;D
See, the reason people like Mass Effect is really because it doesn't focus on Shepard, but the player itself. His personality is filled in by the player, making the game feel much more epic that way. It's YOU who is the ****** that saves the universe, not a predefined character.
General chatting between "team members" or something whilst music is playing reflects equal value (or higher) than that of a high-budget cutscene, mostly because you're still playing and paying attention I would assume.
The difference is that a cutscene ultimately forces you to be a "watcher", but talking with team members (assuming you have ways to impact the dialogue) is an interaction with the game, which is why those are preferable.
Especially since a vast majority of successful game concepts have already been done. Originality needs it's limits but I also think it has a minimum.
Which is why it's not a shame to take inspiration from old concepts. The problem I think, is that a lot of times developers don't realise what made a game good (even if they developed it themselves !), which often leads to failed sequels and bad design choices.
Of course, new IPs are never a bad thing though people either don't take ENOUGH risks, or be too overly "creative".
I'd say it depends, ME has a large amount of story, and it structures a large deal of the gameplay (especially that of the decision making etc).
I'd say ME is more centered around giving the player a personalized experience, instead of the narrative itself, thereby allowing for more chances for the player to *interact* with the world itself.
I'd like to ask you not to use the "These sell better" debate, because then I'd have to rave about human stupidity. :P
In all seriousness, do people look at games the same way we do? Look at CoD, I doubt people actually look at what they're playing, they know it's fast-paced fun and that is essentially all they need to play it. It's not a bad philosophy at first guess but in no way is it a good one for the game industry and a game standard.
Let me explain myself a little more clearer. If we are just looking at the audience of the HD consoles, basically the audience of the most popular "industry games"(or the hardcore if you prefer, even though I had that word with a passion), then you are absolutely correct in saying that "sales don't equal a better game".
Let's face it, the AAA industry itself these days is heavily centered around hyping the crap out of their games(and in turn, covering for flaws the game might have). Most of the sales an "industry game" makes, are usually around the first two weeks it is out......at best. After that time, most games disappear from the shelves entirely.
Is that a good direction to head into? I'd say not. Especially since it raises questions on how good the game is, if very few people buy it after the initial hype phase (and be honest, you'd only buy a game if you know you'll like it).
Would you agree that instead, a good game (in terms of sales) is one that keeps solid sales numbers over time, thereby indicating there is continuous interest in the game?
From a pure business sense (basically a publisher view), a good game is one that sells very strongly, for obvious reasons.
When I talk about game sales, I'm more talking about the mainstream (and not the "gaming" mainstream, but the people that don't play games to begin with). If you manage to sell a game to THEM, the non-gamers, then you need to obviously need to have a game of exceptional quality (since why would a non-gamer care about COD 4343?). Hype simply doesn't work for this audience.
Now look at the original Super Mario Bros. Back then, there WAS no game industry to speak of (it was after the crash of 83 and video games were considered dead). It still managed to sell 40 million units, a number that to this day hasn't been matched by a non-Nintendo game.
Does this not indicate the game has something that makes it different from all modern games? That makes it "better" in the sense that it sells to all kinds of people and not just the traditional gamer?
My main point is, a "good" game would be one that manages to appeal not just to traditional gamers. The ones that do ultimately make it into pop-culture popularity (again, EVERYONE knows Mario or Pokemon, even non-gamers, even my friggin GRANDMA knows what a Pikachu is :S)
Don't misunderstand me. I'm in no way saying a game is bad if it has low sales numbers. When I talk about a "good" game, I'm referring to games appealing to the mainstream. Needless to say, this makes the Wii an interesting case. And for THOSE specific games, stuff like a big narrative,cutscenes,graphics or all the other stuff is simply detrimental,because the mainstream simply won't care.
It's much simpler to get someone to play Wii Sports, instead of Black Ops for instance ;D
Not in context but I get this message in context nonetheless. Stories matter -- take a look at Amnesia: The Dark Descent. Granted, the audio is outstanding a is the biggest part of what makes it scary but the story helps immerse you in what you're trying to do and why. You can't exactly be waltzing around a Castle waiting to be scared, can you?
Does Amnesia even have a "narrative" or does it have more of a "story"? What I'm asking is, can someone enjoy the game even by ignoring the story entirely?
I'd like to point out that that doesn't seem like a positive attitude (Not gonna argue whether you should or shouldn't be in one because that's not my point) and if you're trying to have fantasy4life reconsider, doing so in such a manner quite often won't be very convincing. :P
Not speaking for fantasy4life, but I'm just looking at what I would do from his perspective, I wouldn't be so open to admitting I was wrong to a guy who's lame about it.
Point taken. Sometimes I get to be.....agressive in my argumentation, though I never mean to come off as insulting or arrogant. My apologies. xP
(Though it was a slight contradiction )
Or explaining humor. I think the point is the story can immerse you but that's when you get into it, it isn't necessarily the biggest selling point of a game because it requires (in good stories) a fair amount of dedication to get through it all.
To get immersed in a story, you would first need to be accepting to GET immersed. If a story (narrative really ;P) is bad, it's very easy to completely destroy all sense of immersion a player might have, which makes a big narrative much more of a risk.
Not to mention it's even easier to immerse a player if you just let them do his own thing, let him tell his own story. This is why games like Fallout 3 or the Elder Scrolls games are liked. Bethesda knows to give players a big world to explore and play around in.
Again, I don't speak for a large amount of people (as in I only speak for myself) but when people play something they generally like a reason within the game. "Why am I doing this?" is a simple question answered through story, especially for a younger playerbase I'd imagine.
Why not let the player answer this question for themselves by giving the player lots of viable choices? Let the player set their own goals, I'm sure they won't mind.
Minecraft works a lot like this ;D
Right there. At most they should change the rusty cogs (broken or less successful mechanics), add a few on (to keep the story alive, as well as keeping it relatively new) and maybe give a shine (graphics update) on them.
The adding part is where a lot of games go bad. Most of the time, the new changes prove to be too big or "unlike" for what would fit the game.
I don't review what I write O.o
Neither do I xD
At best, I briefly skim over my post.
Given that the collection of data is flawless. That is a lot of separate debates entirely.
Naturally, this being the internet, 100% correct data gathering is impossible. However, getting somewhat accurate sales data in this day and age is not hard.
story is one of the most difficult things to execute properly - mostly because as I said before, it takes more effort to appreciate the possible complexity it holds.
That's exactly the thing. The art of story telling is insanely complex and goes back hundreds of years o-0
Which is why it's so easy to screw up your game by making an "epic" story (or god forbid basing it on nothing BUT story; I hate you FF13 <_<
Taking a risk? It's an aspect which can easily be built upon and is quite easily a very easily unique one - granted, it's also a hard one to make effective but nonetheless it has a lot of potential.
Since when does the game industry like taking risks?
COD and EA Sports should be the best proof of the industry trying to avoid risks. ;P
I can't say the gameplay for ME2 was top notch. It was satisfactory and certainly unique - but that's the main reason for it being acceptable, it doesn't compare to something that focuses more on the shooting.
I was more talking about bad in the sense of not fun. Since people liked the ME2 shooting, the gameplay obviously wasn't bad.
Subjective opinions doesn't make an objective result, despite what their influences may be (which in this case is sales).
In the grand scheme of things, that being the non-gamer mainstream, it's not opinion but actually an observation. Sales numbers aside, noone can deny the Wii was massively successful and sold to a lot of people not previously involved with games. And let's just say Wii Sports is far from an oscar worthy story, if you catch my drift. ;D
I think that's the point fantasy4life was trying to make. It will (and should) maintain key concepts which make the game unique or special to the players but nonetheless the additions / changes are almost certainly required to ensure a sell of the next game of a sequel (the third game :P ).
But people that bought the first game obviously liked it as is. It goes to follow that they'd like the sequel even if you changed nothing at all.
and if the game has gameplay then... well it's in the word - gameplay.
Is it a game even if the "gameplay" just serves to move along the narrative? To me it would mean, the focus was not on making a game, but a movie instead.
It steadily bridges the definitions of movies and video games but in no way does it ever stop being a game if it is able to be interacted with (Scene it? Is indeed a game)
Of course, but Scene It? doesn't rely on a story of any kind, unlike say Heavy Rain.
Would you interact with an interactive movies to "lay" them or out of curiosity?
I would say you interact with the interactive *movie* to watch your movie.
"A story behind EVERYTHING in a game".
A "mythos" or a "mythology" of the game world is not part of the narrative. Heck, even Mario has it's own mythos of the Mushroom Kingdom with it's own rules. Looking at the original Mario Galaxy, even after Miyamoto told them NOT to, the developers put in a back-story to a new character into the game. This is part of the "narrative" and the game certainly didn't need it.
The narrative is basically how the games "story" plays out from beginning to end (like it would in a movie).
I don't mean "story" as in the basic setup - become the best Pokemon Trainer, I mean "story" as in a structured story telling narrative which Pokemon clearly doesn't have
That's what I meant by screwing up. >_____<
Yes, in that instance my choice of words was wrong. I meant to say Pokemon does not have a "narrative".
Do people think on this level? I really don't think so, I don't do it when I look at a game, I think about the story but I look at everything and what I'm given in previews. Not much to develop from in relation to opinion on the story more often than not.
I still find it's a viable and very interesting question. Why is the original Super Mario Bros still nearly unmatched (it has long since been outsold by Wii Sports but meh), considering it is 25 years old? Answering this question could lead to a lot of answers for what makes a "good" game.
I'm just saying that success should be thrown away and look more on more solid grounds
But aren't those more solid than opinions which are clearly subjective? Sales numbers at the very least indicate consumer interest. And understanding consumer behavior obviously leads to the answer what causes gaming phenominons the likes of Pokemon and Mario.
The best games are simple. They need to be replayable. It also needs an addicting tune. Classics never die: Tetris, Missile Command, Pac-Man, Galaga, Dig-Dug, Pole Position...
Couldn't have said it better myself.
The last four are somewhat arguable as I've noticed, though I don't see how you could place any of them above (or equally as important for that matter) as the first two.
I'd say what the focus of the specific game gives it a bigger "flare" for different things.
Epic music is epic. Fun Fact: It's actually made by a company that makes music specifically for trailers. o-0
This is true for a lot of movie trailers also. Also here's an extended version. ;D
Nice,
My favourite band is infact a band who makes music for movie Trailers, but instead I'll link an edited version in a CoD4 montage instead.
I'd imagine this is a big part for why most new games are FPS-centric. They have a relatively big install base, so it's safe from a business standpoint to make them.
If they reintroduce RTS' I fear for them. As much as I love the PC and some of their playerbase I really doubt there's enough to make such a profitable business point.
But what if there was no narrative, and instead an open ended experience (or at the very least, a story-line with many branching paths i.e Mass Effect)? Talking about unique things in your game is much more effective than recounting scripted sequences. And doesn't Amnesia live from more from YOUR fear and the atmosphere of the game, instead of "story"? Mind you, I never played it myself so I can't answer that myself ;D
The story is a partially immersive aspect of the game, or rather something which attempts to keep you focused as the audio is what frightens you - your fear can keep you playing easily, but I wouldn't be surprised if someone got into it enough to want to know what happened next.
A valid point. I guess that just means reading user reactions will be more important than ever ;P
I love the playerbase of SCII but not all of it... :P
Meh, I think I'll just go for the free ones and use the lack of mods as an incentive by actually playing some League Games :P
But still, I'd say one original spin on things shouldn't be enough to consider the game as a whole "completely original". And having epic battles with enemies that aren't brainless moving targets would always be a plus.
Yeah, not all of the situations you can make from what I said are actually going to work - it's like making a game that is simply Survival Mode and that's it.
Kind of boring since you have nothing to push for, it's just brainless fighting -- which is another aspect of gaming.
Having a brother to play the game locally is an amazing upside btw ;D
I'm jealous :P
I have pretty much no one to play it with, the only sad thing is I still have Amnesia, Starcraft II, Battlefield Bad Company 2 and other games to play and have more than enough entertainment from them.
Man, I need to get to Amnesia, I bought it for £6.50 and haven't played it.
Though you can try different approaches, the nice guy and the bad guy routine ;D
See, the reason people like Mass Effect is really because it doesn't focus on Shepard, but the player itself. His personality is filled in by the player, making the game feel much more epic that way. It's YOU who is the ****** that saves the universe, not a predefined character.
It still relies a great deal on the story :P
Replayability is brought in by RPG elements and so is the "YOU did it" feeling. It's kind of lame how RPG's aren't an even bigger genre. You can't make the same feeling of "Wow... can't believe I could do that O.o" if it were Minecraft if it were Mass Effect - the story can change how big or how you effect things.
I'll have to get back to you, I have to go :<
- H
Music, Story(or Multiplayer), and Gameplay.
I say story or Multiplayer because sometimes I want ot just sit back, relax, and play through a game with a great story and great characters and sometimes I want to pull out my trusty tryhard pants and pwn some noobs online. It just has to have good gameplay though.
Nice,
My favourite band is infact a band who makes music for movie Trailers, but instead I'll link an edited version in a CoD4 montage instead.
Since when does Globus do movie trailers? o-0
I've not seen a single official one that had their music.
If they reintroduce RTS' I fear for them. As much as I love the PC and some of their playerbase I really doubt there's enough to make such a profitable business point.
The the obvious downfall of the RTS is that it simply doesn't work well on consoles without dumping it down in a lot of areas.
The story is a partially immersive aspect of the game, or rather something which attempts to keep you focused as the audio is what frightens you - your fear can keep you playing easily, but I wouldn't be surprised if someone got into it enough to want to know what happened next.
I see. Though this suggests that getting involved with what happens next seems to be an afterthought to the player, compared to say the atmosphere created by the horror and the music.
I love the playerbase of SCII but not all of it... :P
Meh, I think I'll just go for the free ones and use the lack of mods as an incentive by actually playing some League Games :P
It's possible there will be places that focus around finding worthwhile mods ;P
Or maybe you check for youtube videos once they come out.
Yeah, not all of the situations you can make from what I said are actually going to work - it's like making a game that is simply Survival Mode and that's it.
Kind of boring since you have nothing to push for, it's just brainless fighting -- which is another aspect of gaming.
It's funny you'd say that because that DOES sound exactly like Minecraft and how it is right now ;P
Of course, there are a lot more elements that make Minecraft what it is, but one of it's basic premises is survival without any predetermined goal.
Granted, the next coming update will introduce an Adventure Mode and other things.
Man, I need to get to Amnesia, I bought it for ã6.50 and haven't played it.
I can totally relate. My Steam collection has like 45 games (I always make sure to grab the dirt cheap indie collections :3) and I still haven't gotten around to actually playing all of them for very long. Though the gems I HAVE found, I've played extensively.
Replayability is brought in by RPG elements and so is the "YOU did it" feeling.
Not just RPG elements, but Arcade gameplay can lead to lots of Replayability (and I say "can" because it isn't a sure-fire recipe for success, same goes for RPG elements ). Look at Tetris, a game that is basically different every time you play, leading to lots of replay value.
It's kind of lame how RPG's aren't an even bigger genre.
They WERE a much bigger genre. The SNES is practically known for it's mass of awesome RPGs.
It's just that over time, RPGs of that time have generally been in decline (mostly the JRPGs, because they moved away from what made the games fun in the first place. Now we have FF13, which is basically a straight corridor with cutscenes and a battle system. And no that is not an exaggeration) to the point of becoming more of a niche market.
The reason Mass Effect still stays popular is because it isn't completely reliant on RPG elements and has a strong action portion as well.
If you compare both the western RPG and the JRPG, the western RPG is much more healthy than the JRPG nowadays.
You can't make the same feeling of "Wow... can't believe I could do that O.o" if it were Minecraft if it were Mass Effect - the story can change how big or how you effect things.
Speaking from experience, you -CAN- achieve this feeling in Minecraft just as well. It just works a little differently than an RPG.
Just look at this picture. If you make something like that yourself, you'd feel like a boss for doing so. I would know, since I've done a lot of Pixelart on Classic mode too (and mine are even bigger than that picture o-0).
The feeling of Mass Effect comes from the amazement of how you, the player, affect the world around you.
The feeling of Minecraft comes from the amazement of your own creative achievements (Seriously I could show you some user made things that would blow your mind, because they are so ridiculously awesome).
Since when does Globus do movie trailers? o-0
I've not seen a single official one that had their music.
My bad, Immediate Music does music for trailers -- Globus is a sect of Immediate Music that act as its band.
The the obvious downfall of the RTS is that it simply doesn't work well on consoles without dumping it down in a lot of areas.
It's more of a trait, not a downfall because I'm fairly sure RTS is the most difficult (reasonably) of all genres. Made properly you'll always be doing something and competition between players can be incredibly fun / difficult. There's only so much you can do if you were in FPS.
I see. Though this suggests that getting involved with what happens next seems to be an afterthought to the player, compared to say the atmosphere created by the horror and the music.
Yes, but it's the passive effect, as I've said that if you had not a story and you was just playing... a Horror game, there's no context, you'll be "aware" of things, and there isn't much to pull you through because you see no point - going around to literally scare yourself in a game is pretty dull if you ask me
It's possible there will be places that focus around finding worthwhile mods ;P
Or maybe you check for youtube videos once they come out.
Here's an example of an awesome mod (in my opinion).
It's funny you'd say that because that DOES sound exactly like Minecraft and how it is right now ;P
The beauty with Minecraft is that you can make your goals, that is not apparent in Left4Dead where you're limited by only being able to wield a weapon and hit stuff with it (for the most part). :P
Of course, there are a lot more elements that make Minecraft what it is, but one of it's basic premises is survival without any predetermined goal.
Granted, the next coming update will introduce an Adventure Mode and other things.
Also, a large deal of Minecrafters can probably find a goal set in specific maps or something made by other players. Jesse Cox is running a huge Minecraft project and my god does it look awesome.
I can totally relate. My Steam collection has like 45 games (I always make sure to grab the dirt cheap indie collections :3) and I still haven't gotten around to actually playing all of them for very long. Though the gems I HAVE found, I've played extensively.
Actually the things brought to my attention by Totalbiscuit is usually what I've gotten -- Magicka and Amnesia included. I'm even considering getting Frozen Synapse because... Well hey - it's like Chess, it's not exactly my most favourite genre but nonetheless I may enjoy a psychological war with a random dude.
Not just RPG elements, but Arcade gameplay can lead to lots of Replayability (and I say "can" because it isn't a sure-fire recipe for success, same goes for RPG elements ). Look at Tetris, a game that is basically different
True, that's one of the reasons Multiplayer in games is awesome, even in Starcraft II higher level games where quite often the same thing can be seen you can observe specific traits each player has -- Drewbie Drops, IdrA macro, White-Ra being... Well an all rounder... Select Drops, Spanishiwa No Gas play...
Etc. :P
The reason Mass Effect still stays popular is because it isn't completely reliant on RPG elements and has a strong action portion as well.
That tends to help, blending different gameplay styles is very interesting and is one of the reasons I appreciate Battlefield - thinking of strategy and applying teamwork (above the standard of any randoms you meet) can be so beneficial.
straight corridor with cutscenes and a battle system.
lol, Sounds like how TB explained Duke Nukem Forever - except it was more or less "a linear shooter with too many cutscenes and minigames" -- that you didn't get to actually shoot some bad guys every once in a while, that it was too scripted, that you couldn't explore like in previous games.
Speaking from experience, you -CAN- achieve this feeling in Minecraft just as well. It just works a little differently than an RPG.
Just look at this picture. If you make something like that yourself, you'd feel like a boss for doing so. I would know, since I've done a lot of Pixelart on Classic mode too (and mine are even bigger than that picture o-0).
No no, what I mean is you have the same feeling of accomplishment etc but through different triggers. You can't say "I can't believe I was able to *something related to the story*" when there obviously isn't one, Minecraft is for the most part (unless there's an Adventure map with a story) "I can't believe I could make that / do this / think of that, etc!"
The feeling of Mass Effect comes from the amazement of how you, the player, affect the world around you.
The feeling of Minecraft comes from the amazement of your own creative achievements (Seriously I could show you some user made things that would blow your mind, because they are so ridiculously awesome).
Or you could just explain that for me
Also, something rediculously awesome. How about a hollow Earth?
Or Mewtwo? (Yes -- the Pokemon >.>
Pretty awesome, and Jesse Cox's videos still stands as rediculously awesome if you ask me. :P
- H
It's more of a trait, not a downfall because I'm fairly sure RTS is the most difficult (reasonably) of all genres. Made properly you'll always be doing something and competition between players can be incredibly fun / difficult. There's only so much you can do if you were in FPS.
Well I meant "downfall" in the sense of selling to a console audience. I'm in no way saying RTS are bad or anything like that (I do like them, though I don't play them much because I suck xP), but them being so very "customized" to a Keyboard and Mouse seitup ultimately leads to them having a hard time selling on consoles.....without butchering the sense of micromanagement and control that is.
Yes, but it's the passive effect, as I've said that if you had not a story and you was just playing... a Horror game, there's no context, you'll be "aware" of things, and there isn't much to pull you through because you see no point - going around to literally scare yourself in a game is pretty dull if you ask me
I think a game like that COULD work, if you just give a player a tiny goal to work for instead of backstory (i.e "Escape the dungeon". Might be a little dependant on taste though.
The beauty with Minecraft is that you can make your goals, that is not apparent in Left4Dead where you're limited by only being able to wield a weapon and hit stuff with it (for the most part). :P
I'd imagine that's why Left4Dead is so focused on its Multiplayer.
Also, a large deal of Minecrafters can probably find a goal set in specific maps or something made by other players. Jesse Cox is running a huge Minecraft project and my god does it look awesome.
So it's massive community building? That's awesome.
Actually the things brought to my attention by Totalbiscuit is usually what I've gotten -- Magicka and Amnesia included. I'm even considering getting Frozen Synapse because... Well hey - it's like Chess, it's not exactly my most favourite genre but nonetheless I may enjoy a psychological war with a random dude.
Frozen Synapse just happens to be one of the games I own, but just haven't gotten around to playing more than the tutorial ;P
Some very complex stuff to be had there, and I generally like complex board and card games too (Risk anyone?).
True, that's one of the reasons Multiplayer in games is awesome
Multiplayer is ESSENTIAL, I mean even the original Tetris had it xP
By adding amazing Multiplayer, you can increase the longevity of a game by a LOT, which is why it's a shame some games have the Multiplayer as an afterthought (a common complaint I hear for Civilization).
Just imagine if neither Halo nor CoD had Multiplayer ....or Starcraft for that matter o-0
That tends to help, blending different gameplay styles is very interesting and is one of the reasons I appreciate Battlefield - thinking of strategy and applying teamwork (above the standard of any randoms you meet) can be so beneficial.
Blending gameplay styles can lead to very interesting results......if those are compatible. Combining Turn-based strategy with FPS for instance would be........weird to say the least (and I can't think of a way to make it functional)
lol, Sounds like how TB explained Duke Nukem Forever - except it was more or less "a linear shooter with too many cutscenes and minigames" -- that you didn't get to actually shoot some bad guys every once in a while, that it was too scripted, that you couldn't explore like in previous games.
Remember this picture? I think it also applies to a lot of modern JRPGs. Just add a few more dead ends with treasure chests and you'd literally have Final Fantasy 13.
No no, what I mean is you have the same feeling of accomplishment etc but through different triggers. You can't say "I can't believe I was able to *something related to the story*" when there obviously isn't one, Minecraft is for the most part (unless there's an Adventure map with a story) "I can't believe I could make that / do this / think of that, etc!"
Yes, and both should be more incorperated into games of today (where applicable obviously ;P).
Also, something rediculously awesome. How about a hollow Earth?
Always a classic.
Have you seen the Enterprise?
Or Mewtwo? (Yes -- the Pokemon >.>
He should really switch over to classic mode for sprites, because that one generally allows for bigger maps.
And while I'm not the type to brag normally, this,this,this and that one.
And I must say, I'm mighty proud of them.
Well I meant "downfall" in the sense of selling to a console audience. I'm in no way saying RTS are bad or anything like that (I do like them, though I don't play them much because I suck xP), but them being so very "customized" to a Keyboard and Mouse seitup ultimately leads to them having a hard time selling on consoles.....without butchering the sense of micromanagement and control that is.
I feel like such a muppet. I knew what you meant when I replied but I felt you used the word "downfall" a little more aggressively, it is, ultimately a trait and using "downfall" in your case was actually justified... Maybe just a bit inaccurate on my interpretation :P
I think a game like that COULD work, if you just give a player a tiny goal to work for instead of backstory (i.e "Escape the dungeon". Might be a little dependant on taste though.
Indeed, maybe it doesn't need a narrative and rather just a basic goal -- not even a story, just a goal lol.
Oh, now I have no points for stories. xD
I'd imagine that's why Left4Dead is so focused on its Multiplayer.
Aside from the ever-changing situations of endless waves on undead, it has little backing up. Let's be fair - L4D wouldn't be so replayable even with the complete randomness, playing with friends adds a more organic atmosphere (pun not intended), and the more individual changes between who you play with etc can easily make it unique.
So it's massive community building? That's awesome.
Err... I had videos for a reason.
He has multiple videos about his RPG world, I suggest you check it out since it is difficult to go into - especially not being given half of the information on it. It is pretty amazing if you ask me, and no, it's not a community building, I'm fairly certain it's a citadel with Stormwind Castle influence (from World of Warcraft) -- as mentioned in the video.
Frozen Synapse just happens to be one of the games I own, but just haven't gotten around to playing more than the tutorial ;P
Some very complex stuff to be had there, and I generally like complex board and card games too
Is it weird if I am a fan of them but don't like playing them that much? I just feel I could using my time more productively...
Obviously by posting on this :P
Just imagine if neither Halo nor CoD had Multiplayer ....or Starcraft for that matter o-0
The mods would be crippled without Multiplayer too... Wow.
Yeah, Multiplayer is a huge bonus.
Didn't I mention that in my last post?
Something about Starcraft II progamer strategies or something. Could it have been on a different thread? XD
It's the same idea, in any case.
Blending gameplay styles can lead to very interesting results......if those are compatible. Combining Turn-based strategy with FPS for instance would be........weird to say the least (and I can't think of a way to make it functional)
Haha yes, maybe I should've pointed that out
Remember this picture? I think it also applies to a lot of modern JRPGs. Just add a few more dead ends with treasure chests and you'd literally have Final Fantasy 13.
Yes -- I remember that picture
I am not one to question Final Fantasy, being a player of none of them and barely involved in its story / gameplay etc. :P
And yeah, that is how it seems to have gone. :/
Yes, and both should be more incorperated into games of today (where applicable obviously ;P).
Definitely. It may not be intended but it's what I get in Starcraft II - especially if the player is Zerg like me. I get a sense of accomplishment in that there was NOTHING unbalancing the game or making one of us have an edge, I won, flat out... pretty awesome feeling sometimes.
I have a 50 minute game of me being on the backheel for the large majority of the game, then I get fed up, build 7 Barracks and just mass marine him with my 10,000 minerals (I was a very poor player at the time, and I saw that gameplay style from Viperskwa earlier that month I believe).
Always a classic.
Have you seen the Enterprise?
Yes indeed I have... Extraordinary piece of work... There really isn't much to say it's just so awesome lol... :P
I'm actually pretty upset I didn't remember that one - maybe because it's only stuck on its frame for the most part.
He should really switch over to classic mode for sprites, because that one generally allows for bigger maps.
I'm not a Minecraft pro -- "sprites"?
And while I'm not the type to brag normally, this,this,this and that one.
And I must say, I'm mighty proud of them.
You should be proud of them! My god man... how long did it take you to do all of those?
Also, nice nostalgia from the games before <3
Woop woop, I actually kinda appreciate Minecrafts graphics style for that, as you've shown very well, it can replicate older graphics
- H
I feel like such a muppet. I knew what you meant when I replied but I felt you used the word "downfall" a little more aggressively, it is, ultimately a trait and using "downfall" in your case was actually justified... Maybe just a bit inaccurate on my interpretation :P
Like I said, I never really want to come off as super agressive, my choice of words is just pretty bad sometimes xP
Aside from the ever-changing situations of endless waves on undead, it has little backing up. Let's be fair - L4D wouldn't be so replayable even with the complete randomness, playing with friends adds a more organic atmosphere (pun not intended), and the more individual changes between who you play with etc can easily make it unique.
Of course, but this is true for even the most popular of Multiplayer games. I can't imagine playing the likes of Mario Party or Wii Sports alone xD
Is it weird if I am a fan of them but don't like playing them that much? I just feel I could using my time more productively...
Obviously by posting on this :P
A lot of times, while I love strategic games. It's hard to actually motivate myself to actually start and get into them. I even got Civilization 4 for a discount because I heard some very good things about it.......but haven't played it yet xD
The mods would be crippled without Multiplayer too... Wow.
Yeah, Multiplayer is a huge bonus.
Didn't I mention that in my last post?
Something about Starcraft II progamer strategies or something. Could it have been on a different thread? XD
It's the same idea, in any case.
Something that I dislike about modern games is that a lot of times, people don't seem to give -local- Multiplayer more consideration. Even if you have an online mode, having a local MP option would be fantastic.
Especially since I enjoy playing with people in the same room much more than over the Internet.
Not to mention LAN support for PC games is slowly starting to die out. A shame if you ask me.
I am not one to question Final Fantasy, being a player of none of them and barely involved in its story / gameplay etc. :P
And yeah, that is how it seems to have gone. :/
Well I'm more the type that likes Platformers and RPGs more than FPS games, so obviously I would be a small bit more knowledgable about that. ;D
Definitely. It may not be intended but it's what I get in Starcraft II - especially if the player is Zerg like me. I get a sense of accomplishment in that there was NOTHING unbalancing the game or making one of us have an edge, I won, flat out... pretty awesome feeling sometimes.
I have a 50 minute game of me being on the backheel for the large majority of the game, then I get fed up, build 7 Barracks and just mass marine him with my 10,000 minerals (I was a very poor player at the time, and I saw that gameplay style from Viperskwa earlier that month I believe).
A head-to-head match will ALWAYS be more intense if you are atleast of equal skill. Even if you are weaker, struggling to beat a strong foe is an exciting experience too (unless he like destroys you in 5 minutes xD).
I'm not a Minecraft pro -- "sprites"?
It's more of a general game developement term for 2D graphics. In that sense, a sprite sheet would be a single file containing several in-game graphics. For instance, here's a Mario sprite sheet. Each of those is a sprite.
You should be proud of them! My god man... how long did it take you to do all of those?
I've played on that server ever since.....December or so.
And yes those took a lot of time, pretty much all of them taking several hours each. But to be fair, I had a lot of helpful tools on that server (for example I had a fill command similar to Paint so I din't have to place a black background literally block by block - which would have driven me insane o-0). Apart from that, all the other things were done by hand.
Woop woop, I actually kinda appreciate Minecrafts graphics style for that, as you've shown very well, it can replicate older graphics
That's because when doing Pixel Art in Minecraft, you just have to regard a single block as one Pixel and work from there. Given enough space and effort, you could make pretty much any sprite in Minecraft (if you accept an occasional loss in quality because it obviously doesn't have every colour ever).
But really, there's even dedicated servers just for Pixel Art like this. Our server even has Pixel Art of the Crysis suit, but it was never completely finished (you can see parts of the head on the left side of the last picture I posted)
Btw, my next project is a Minecraft rendition of this.
And yes, it obviously won't looks AS awesome, but I'm fairly sure you'll still be able to make out most of the details once I finish.
Like I said, I never really want to come off as super agressive, my choice of words is just pretty bad sometimes xP
Learn from your mistakes xD
I'll try to as well
A lot of times, while I love strategic games. It's hard to actually motivate myself to actually start and get into them.
I actually have the same problem with SCII. Since I started upping my mechanics from Day[9]'s 252nd daily I haven't played ANY League Games and it is pretty frustrating -- I want someone to constantly fight against, I used to, but he's taking a break off games and I'm waiting for him to snap out of it
He will eventually,
Something that I dislike about modern games is that a lot of times, people don't seem to give -local- Multiplayer more consideration. Even if you have an online mode, having a local MP option would be fantastic.
Especially since I enjoy playing with people in the same room much more than over the Internet.
Not to mention LAN support for PC games is slowly starting to die out. A shame if you ask me.
100% Agree, I am very upset that there is no LAN in Starcraft II - I don't even have anyone to play SCII with on LAN but it's the tournaments taking the hits. B.net in Starcraft II is pretty dire and not required if you ask me. :/
It has good traits, but a load of unnecessary bad ones - lack of LAN, difficult to set up games, etc. :<
Well I'm more the type that likes Platformers and RPGs more than FPS games, so obviously I would be a small bit more knowledgable about that. ;D
For the record I'm not a fan of FPS, just that's it's generally the widest genre at the moment. RPG for me has been Fable, and recently Dragon Age / Mass Effect. RTS has mostly been Age of Empires / Mythology, moving onto Age of Empires Online and Starcraft II, others are... well whatever really. Dragonball Z for fighting.
Final Fantasy I don't have 2 iotas of knowledge about.
Except that it has "Final" and "Fantasy" in it.
Does that count as two iotas?
A head-to-head match will ALWAYS be more intense if you are atleast of equal skill. Even if you are weaker, struggling to beat a strong foe is an exciting experience too (unless he like destroys you in 5 minutes xD).
It is very fun indeed. Being destroyed in five minutes will rarely ever happen - of course I don't think you mean that literally but at my level (I'm Gold) I no longer face players who I can win against in my first assault.
I generally don't fight actually, I just go all-macro, but I scout to ensure my units are the correct ones to go for and still maintain an early military advantage as a result, awesome.
It's more of a general game developement term for 2D graphics. In that sense, a sprite sheet would be a single file containing several in-game graphics. For instance, here's a Mario sprite sheet. Each of those is a sprite.
Aha! I get it now! > Thanks man
Apart from that, all the other things were done by hand.
Actually kind of annoying in Minecraft, making large-scale things (which make them higher-resolution from a distance, essentially) is very time consuming and is pretty unnecessary in some cases. :<
And yes, it obviously won't looks AS awesome, but I'm fairly sure you'll still be able to make out most of the details once I finish.
It's Minecraft, not "make your own Pixel Art" XD
Very well done job mate, I wanna make a small tunnel network like in Jesse Cox's videos. The only pain is that I actually have to mine the things that require it - all the trees, the stone, etc. >.<
Oh well, I shall prevail! I won't really.. I'll just do it when I'm VERY bored.
- H
You must be logged in to post a reply!