SuntannedDuck2 said:
If a new comer I guess so, the variety of genres and types of games, the graphics are good enough. Like there are enough city builders, simulator titles to hobby stuff to just yeah more cinematic/easy to play if understand enough of the design in the games things. For prices or PC/Mobile/console and such probably I assume, depends probably per customer/player and what region they are and all that or what type of person they are or if have a gamer type to get them started. Even seeing Razbuten gaming for a non gamer videos to me were enough for me to go oh these had fair demonstrations then the 'I just like to fit in' type response that made me go sigh, of course you'd say that that I had casuals say, they wouldn't about other hobbies but for some reason that validation. To then just whatever hype game comes to get them to play, the series got boring real quick for me then the better tests of the past and what we already knew of into building games and other stuff, like that answer was already clear by now yet milk for views of hype game gamers play.... what a video series. Even the 90 degree turn level design to other things were better and more clear for if casuals pay attention to gaming language cues we do as gamers of white/yellow paint to the Last of Us fire near the beginning and the zombie gets you aka 90 degree turn if your not good with 3D game cameras, to red is explosive in certain cases to whatever else or how buttons or gyro or stylus/touchscreens in games then how apps and mobile games swipes/taps/pinches work. I paid attention to the touchpad has 2 halves and found out from Nier Automata and have from PS2 or other classics, casuals may not even know or understand it and I know as experienced it with someone that had no idea. But not everyone needs to do that level of research or remembers a classic doing that as they just play other games with other hobbies/other familiar things then too much world building and things beacuse real life things easier to understand. Like for history reenactments I get it or dad games (heard term using it). Which many are fair. I enjoy a city builder/strategy game no matter what even if play less of them than other genres. Like sitcoms/romcoms I still watched them besides action/fantasy/sci-fi/other types of shows/movies and is just that corner of things I don't always think about then do. es so like simulators of things sure but in other cases it's like really a tv show you can take this (if they do then just dramas/contemporary settings) but in a game you won't????? Uh ok then Even if combat or just interest in the game or not.
To me it's less so (going very gameplay odd examples here if you feel different by all means play whatever you feel works for you but for me they just don't hit for me really). Like comments like Layton's to me sometimes sort of fit the way I feel. I can go from a niche low budget title to a AAA like game and notice some odd details I probably over analysis due to playing or researching so many games, devs/pubs via wikipedia and paying attention to gameplay WAY too much. If people can analyse story/graphics or a song's lyrics I'll do the same with instruments/samples and gameplay in a watching kind of way not a actual breakdown kind of thing from a creator's point of view that in-depth. But a what I sort of seek from them way. So to clarify my weird way of seeing things I guess.
AAA are graphics/story focused and the gameplay has just disappointed me more and more. So I find myself going well this is made for casuals, which is fine but in terms of 'fun factor' with being 'gamey' I find them incredibly boring because they have to be so different in a translate to reality kind of way they feel for me at times when seeing them.
Or going oh Foamstars has 2 modes other games have but tweaked..... While I had a surfboard mode, foam clean up map mode, foam building contest, chemicals to mix with the foam, traps. All that by the trailers announcement and that's without even prototyping for more depth. I repeat this A LOT on some article sites when I see how boring modern gaming is as to me that's the problem is modes, prioitiries of skins, graphics/story telling I don't find that compelling really and gameplay takes a nose dive for me personally. Some like Pikmin 4 just didn't sit right with me, by the character creator trailer I was not interested in the title, so from the gyro aim being more restrictive I just ignored the feature the whole game yet enjoyed it in 1 & 3 (got 2 on Switch so never played it with gyro) to how flowers/Pikmin worked and felt padded for a change that made no sense at first I had to boot up Pikmin 3 to see what I missed as it was confusing to just acquire new PIkmin types in 4 then how 1-3 work to get them which really annoyed me. I played 3 a while ago, then 1 then 4 close to each other then 2. So Oatchi taking 5 days of padding to learn how to swim WHY? This ruins the first map and progress for repeat playthroughs so much, the night mode was ok but a bit underbaked, Ice Pikmin to me were the only thing I wasn't disappointed in. Upgrades which I mean do all modern games have to have upgrades or the game is too dull or something? Can we not have the Mertoid/Zelda approach still to 'find them' more then put points into things with skill trees or upgrade shops. Is it too easy to make a menu or is what devs say true of making menus last? At least used to be the case when they are so deep in skill trees and more these days but they won't change the world design to add upgrades as finalised or too much to tweak as that's even more time to manipulate things? TOTK not played but the story repeated all times seemed a bit of a waste to me they could have had dialogue/insight from all sides but nope what a way to tell the story the same way. But the other stuff looked cool at least in gameplay.
Diofield to me I can compare Valkyria Chronicles 4 being slightly improved in some areas and not then 1 from 2010 (has more world building story 4 doesn't have) and for a 2018 title of 4 it had more going on of tasks and what I was doing with units then Diofield feeling like it had the character restrictions of Chapter 4 as it's highlight then went lets repeat ourselves, spam attacks, upgrade gear a bit and do that till the end and I was like, I'm so over this. I platinumed it like I planned as I knew it was an easy platinum but even still.
BIomutant I which had animal traits so swim instead of forcing you to do the Jet Ski unlocking mission. If Sims can have traits as a core mechanic and Space Station Silicon Valley an N64 game can have different robot animals with different movesets and a different approach then DK64 did of the barrel for how to change characters/lead them to then convert to them. Like did modern game devs forget that we have experienced more than anthropomorpic animals in an apocalyse and would like more solid gameplay not the bare minimum to dumb games down for audiences? Like the vehicles were fine and the gas immunity part is even part of the character creator besides the good/bad system starting but no animal traits for level design or easy of access. Instead of the glider why not offer a flight trait. Like I said with swimming, offer a swim trait besides the Jet Ski mission. Why do these devs not offer options yet the games feel empty then 'expanding of options' I don't see I see generic characters basic to play and the gameplay creativity sucked out of the game if moveset variety is too much effort to make or too complex for casuals, I assume the former but I wouldn't put it past many devs.
Let alone even if Goose game/Little Kitty Big City are fair to me just regular animals and cosmetics doesn't cut it. A goose/cat is recognisable but if they still aren't using their honk or certain other eleemnts well in the level design I'm just not interested.
In Pitfall Lost Expedition he is human and Indy like explorer yet you can use Gasmask, TNT, Pickaxes for ice climbing or a spin around attack for spin around enemies, a canteen with a up and down to drink and fill up state among, wooden shield, inner tube riaft and a slingshot. Like to me that game is a Metroidvania of sorts close in release to Metroid Prime 2 but yet we get characters with fair times a grapple or weapons and combat pushed so far or a Ratchet with many gadgets yet still other priorities in the games/ Why? Too many set pieces to make and so they make more recreations or generic locations then a video game level with more playground touches to the game that I find more fun personally then whatever boring recreation of a city or desert or whatever to be planets or otherwise.
Like if Sunset Overdrive can be about soda zombies and have bouncing umbrellas that aren't always that great but still enough cartoony bounciness to it, same with No Straight Roads I felt it somewhat too. Why do these so 'cinematic games' just feel so boring in their reality/cinematic angles and nothing to me feels fun at all about them.
Indies to me are hit and miss I find them to be a mix of unique (not all can have a Witness or Game and Watch type movement, if you know you know about the dots or the calculator pressing buttons type inspirations they don't have to be but I do find some games sometimes put a spin on things and others lack any prototype something randomness just tracing whatever was popular while I play old games and get inspired FOR random itdeas to prototype even without code. Yet I don't see that with some Indies just direct copies to sometime a bit shaken up of a spin on their favourite games. I find it sad and boring. Coming up with ideas is hard.
But even on an article I went well we could have instruments or a banana and the banana is a spear/sword and the peel shealths. Is it stupid absolutely but I mean like my Foamstars ideas of 'foam' what can you do with it. I seem to not see a lot fo that type of out of the box thinking really in the space as much. I mean formulas that work sure but it is kind of sad.
Even if Insomniac had devs that played Nintendo games of course they didn't just recreate a Zelda or much they had aspects you can see comparisons to but they still experimented with a LOT of things back then in yearly Ratchet releases with puzzles, to whatever animations enemies had to play rock paper scissors to whatever the case, compared to now other priorities of course. Different times for sure and other contexts but for Indies I don't see that B grade design or out of the box thinking I wish we saw more from some Indies, instead of what 1-5% maybe. Like I said with Foamstars modes, it's not great ideas but it's still well we have a ok base idea of foam and surfboard, what can we do with it. Even as stupid as a banana sword/ranged weapon as a random prototype idea. That's without even saying whether it's a food world type game or not.
I had these ideas in PowerPoint, not all of them survived my dead hard drive but even still instruments that are weapons came from Doctor Who S1&2 Xmas episodes or I thought just looked cool. To whatever cleaning/evil vegetables or whatever. A whole number of dumb ideas.
If Splatoon can go from tofu to squids with reaload, travel, stealth in and firing ink as a simple but easy to uttilise in many ways I think that says a lot about easy to understand but hard to master like many other games do offer as well that are said to be so.
Even if the grapple in 2 (not played 3 yet) in it's campaign was fun to me by the level design and how challenging/well designed it was. Uncharted 4 I though the grapple was fair and I like Uncharted not because it's cinematic but how they paced puzzles, calm movements and combat more. But I find some games don't do momentum that well, not because not realistic just in fun ways really but I have to look at more. I've seen some and not played them and they do a fair job. Others seem like gap fillers to use then effective. Probably hardware limitations or interesting ideas to implement for a grapple in the distance or so/communicating it to the player something harder but even still it just seemed disappointing sometimes in some games.
Glove isn't much but for a ball of different weights to a crystal for x2 score to the glove animations. I'm like wow. It's the little things. I'm not an N64 fan these games are just on my mind of their design that's all.
Kya Dark Lineage compared to BOTW/Wind Waker/that Isle of Gyst I think it is in Phantom Hourglass how they use wind in interesting ways.
The Club, generic title, yet a fair modern playing but arcade shooting gallery type experience. That's unique, never seen it again because why would we. Among sure Singularity, Legendary (played and the creatures were cool, the healing and 'powers' were ok not that great but still different then any other modern contemporary shooter), Fracture, Inversion, Vanquish (played and loved the movement features of that game, same with Wet, getting around to Stranglehold as own it, will get to Max Payne I have 3 I don't have 1 & 2 yet) and more aren't the most amazing games probably but I still want to play them because of their mechanics. I don't know yet as I've researched them I don't own them to know how I'll actually feel about them.
Sure I don't need to be gamepaly focused but to me it's what makes gaming gaming, not just 'oh I can move around in these what ifs' it's how we can expand on the what ifs and what possibilities to make fun crazy worlds and characters more than just I control a human/car in the most movie like games ever........ wow if I knew that back in PS1 days I'd be disappointed or normalised to it not sure. But if I see a N64/PS1/Saturn, etc and see a Little Kitty Big City I'd go is that what that are would be like to introduce 3D or is it just too focused on reality and casual easy to understand ideas and animal cuteness with ok tasks then the experimentation we used to have even when 3D was new or effects and voices and more for 2D games even to expand on those even back then.
Design has changed, in some cases fair in others I just find very boring. Let alone how some may be able to do parody of themes, or ask questions yet the dialogue or stories are usually too serious or don't always ask questions and just move around the concepts but not enough in their stories. It varies per game/writer and their intentions or what jokes/tone and so on.
Even Mario, Yoshi, Wario, Peach, Luigi, Toad and more all have completely different ways they feel to play or their own games it says a lot Nintendo can stretch characters so far doesn't it even in the same universe but still make them feel different among each of them that's weird right? Regardless of the marketability, or favourite characters or whatever that they still think gameplay first even besides the marketability there?
Why do other studios not do this it's really weird) to some too copy paste/tracing their favourites as inspiration but I see either 1 different mechanic or I see basically the exact same ideas it's just new originla assets but thje same concepts are there so I find them not appealing in the slightest AT ALL. Yeah may have new conext for them sure but some are so clone focused why even bother to some are yes context different but too much 'we need to copy this close enough for audiences to be interested and not put a spin on it really' that I just don't care to even look at the products on offer at this point.
I'm playing old gen at this point with the AAAs AA/B grades and their mechanics.
The shooters/racing/platformer competition trends of the past and going these have more exciting mechanics/structure and while some are COD or Gears/Uncharted cover based trend following (then when 24 the game or Dead to Rights/Killswitch started it) clones or other things I find them still different enough in their other areas to still be FUN and worth my time to pick up.
Old racing games with 'actually more than 'racing' or drift/time trial modes' wow. Like sure Wreckfest has a derbies mode and a motorised sofa but Flatout 2 had throwing your driver type events.
Dirt 3 had more variety of obstacle course type events and a small expandable area to do tasks in. Dirt 5 has like what 2 obstacle course events I've done so far and 99% racing. Like I get some people may not like the variety but playing Dirt 3 or WRC 3 I had a blast with the variety in mode/events types not racing for like 100% of the title and going well this was boring not much changed, not much mattered.
In Gran Turismo 7 I have problems with it's GT5 like level system pushed too far and Forza Motorsport 6 like roulette system as well but even it has fuel is low events to cone events and more. Stuff even GT6 had and I found fun besides not liking 5 & 6's physics or their comfort tires push in events making the cars not feel right and I couldn't change it while GT1-4 even if I suck at 1, 2-4 I got used to the better feel of normal to racing tires and fair variety of event restrictions even if just 'racing'. Also the fantasy element in tracks for realism just isn't for me. I also don't care for how good the tires/AI are I'm still finding the games boring to play. Games can be 'whatever you want' yet we recreate cities and how cars work and more and for some games it makes sense like Mudrunners that's part of the challenge but in others I find it incredibly boring and not exciting.
In open worlds I'd say because they aren't playground enough I find them incredibly boring to play in, the NPC tasks are just generic to play because of how you use the characters. We don't need superhumans/superheros but if Zelda has had items in it's series for years and makes even boring chest rewards fun for me to use an ice block or whatever to get to it the same way I'd work out a hidden passage to then fly all the way over to an Orb in Spyro 2 or even the supercharge in Tree Tops. Those are extremes of how would you know to do it but at the same time they still feel like I tried to work something out or had fun doing it then yeah do some boring everyday generic stuff.
Like Sunset Overdrive I found the challenges mixed with generic missions pretty fair of balance and the tower defence segments over outposts. Which is why I didn't like Spiderman 2018 is the getaways to outposts and more just wasn't fun for me. The lab puzzles people hate I love because they are in past Insomniac games all these sorts of different puzzle designs and I find them very fun. Gravity Rush combat/point a to b challenges were fun besides the NPC quests. The ground pound/laser grid side missions aka 2 in the whole game I actually liked or the task master challenges were more fun for me.
Infamous Second Son I found spray painting even besides the fair use of the gyro to shake the paint can really fun or spotting cameras or First Light some ring stuff. I don't like only old school design but I can't help it sometimes. I could make comparisons for days and still say how they prototype the gameplay basically like I do in articles, like I've made these same points in a way in a different VGChartz forum thread but my point is gameplay to me just isn't sitting right for 1st/3rd parties from PS/Xbox sides or in general. Xbox has the variety but they just aren't selling me on it. PS5 I didn't like many of the PS4 first parties, as in changes to some IP and the new ones and they push them so much while the niche ones I liked didn't do well or got at least 1-2 titles so..... yeah..... pass they just aren't for me. So sales wise sure they may have games that work but for me it made me go full Nintendo and my PS4/Xbox One even if not getting as much use as my PS2/Wii/PS3/360/DS/PSP, Wii U I need to use that bit more for Wii titles or the few Wii U titles I have to finish digital or physical.
PS4/Xbox One are sort of there with titles I still enjoy, I don't mind seeing how the 2022-2024 titles are on 8th gen as same done with a few PS3/360 titles or how PS2/Wii/PSP versions were in comparison to PS3/360/PC and I in some cases prefer the lack of presentation and more fun gameplay on old gen of that time for some cases. Like I don't have to buy a PS5/Series X, family have them but I don't want to play anything on them the enhancements make sense but the games I want to play on them are not on 1 hand like at all. Some catch my eye but not enough for buy a system for myself or interesting enough to play other than look at them and go that's cool, moving on. As they just aren't strong enough of impact/appeal for me those few on current gen only the ideas just feel still like PS4/Xbox One titles to 'enhance' then the PS3/360 type ideas I miss. I wanted gameplay not graphics so instead we got the PS3/360 gen Part 3 but with refinements or changes and the exciting ideas of 7th gen are just gone from my experience looking around as different priorities of leadership or staff ideas it seems.
Like I can let Space Marine 2 pass but I was going why not have the classes as prep for the Operations mode? SW Outlaws the reptuation system it does a fair job but I thought it looked too restrictive of dialogue at first, like how Watch Dogs Legion had so many perks but it's so open ended it's also so kind of who cares to use anything as the outcomes aren't that exciting for each new path you open but it varies. To me Mario Rabbids Sparks of Hope I binged like half the game and I wasn't into the world design compared to other tactics games (as in level design as preferred jump menus/hub/jump in and out of levels approach Japanese ones mostly have) or characters or anything but playing the first game it's lack of refinements similar to how I see Red Steel 1 & 2 oh the 2nd games are so much better in refined ideas and series let go as didn't sell well. The niche experimental titles I enjoy from Ubisoft, just like any other publishers Japanese or US/EU and so on with some niche titles (or how Prince of Persia Forgotten Sands on Wii is then the other versions the Wiimote use is really fun in that game) I enjoy their ideas and the big titles keep going which makes sense but their ideas seem to keep making me less interested in them the more they come out. | 
