In todays gaming society, everyone has their own opinion on what games are "good" and what games are "bad." Everyone has their own idea of the "erfect" game. Here, I'd like to see what your opinions are on "good", "bad" and "erfect" games. (Remember, the words good, bad and perfect are in quotations because they won't apply to everyone, fee free to disagree with me, but no flaming or trolls, alright?)
************MY OPINION: GOOD, BAD, AND PERFECT**********
In todays market, there are several "bad" games, such as CoD, Halo, Resistance, and Need For Speed.
There are several "good" games, though, including Assassin's Creed, Fallout 3, Resident Evil, and Gears of War.
I tend to look for the following values when I buy a game, as these seem to be what makes a "good" game.
STORY When I buy a game, I want the writers to be bold enough to make major changes to the story. Gears of War excelled here. Epic's writers purposely made groundbreaking changes to the game, and really made you feel a higher level of connection to the characters. When a cutscene starts up, and you see your buddy get gunned down, (or gun himself down) and then the cutscene ends, and you find yourself in a gunfight against the things that just caused one of the games staple characters to just die off, then that third person game gets alot more immersive than any first person game. Bungie's writers need to stop drawing out a primose path for Master Chief to skip down, and kill off someone like Sergeant Johnson. BEST: Gears of War 2 WORST: Halo
INTENSITY Not the same as STORY, INTENSITY refers to in game intensity. Whether it's the tactical chess game of ammo conservation (RE series), or the sheer fright factor (Dead Space), intensity alone can make a game "good". Fallout 3's otherwise exciting gameplay is destroyed by VATS. Any game where you can pause time and line up shots wherever you feel simply cannot get intense. BEST: Dead Space WORST: Fallout 3
CHOICES I simply hate "Point A to Point B" style games with no room to stretch your toes. A game should give you the option to do good or bad, wrong or right, and those desicions should impact the game. Not every desicion is supposed to be a no-brainer answered in a cutscene. BEST: Fallout 3 WORST: CoD/Halo 3
REALITY Now, I'm a tad sketchy about this. I don't mean REALITY as in the game makes sense, or a game that has a completely valid premise. No, a game that features Alien Space Puddings could get top marks for REALITY, in my opinion. By REALITY, I mean I want the game to feel real. The sun don't 24/7, people have their own lives; they need to eat and sleep and have opinions, and not hover around the mission marker waiting for you to finish running people over so you can do their dirty work (I mean you, Mr. Bellic.) I want a game that lives and breathes. BEST: Fallout 3 WORST: CoD
ORIGINALITY I can only serve in WW2 a thousand times or so before things get old. I want games to be unique, in one way or a thousand ways. I prefer one outstanding difference, like Assassin's Creeds free-running, or Dead Risings various weapon choices. BEST: Assassin's Creed WORST: CoD
DLC Sequels take time, (Unless your Valve!) and DLCs are a way to keep players interested in the series. I don't count Map Packs, I mean actual campaign extensions and things. And dob't put up weird sh*t like Gun Packs and extra enemies. DLCs should only really come out once every six months or so, and be worth the money asked. I don't mind spending 20 bucks on a DLC, as lond as it's worth 20 bucks. BEST: GTA IV WORST: Halo 3
So, out of those six factors, the "erfect" game would have a Gears 2 caliber story, Dead Space intensity, choices and reality from Fallout 3, Assassin's Creed-like originality, and GTA IV's DLC team. The closest game to "erfect" in my opinion, is Fallout 3, and the farthest is CoD.
