By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - LET'S AGREE TO DISAGREE...

Ezquimacore on 09 January 2015
jetforcejiminy said:
Zekkyou said:
jetforcejiminy said:

think about it. every game lately is some combination of gta 3 sandbox (gta iv, v, watch dogs, the crew)/call of duty 4 multiplayer-with-no-story (titanfall, ghosts, black ops i+ii, advanced warfare)/ac 2 map-clearing (ac unity, shadow of mordor)/es5 skyrim open-world rpg (witcher 3, dragon age inquisition)... it's disturbing.

better yet, each new iteration of the same old nothing comes with ever more win buttons, requiring essentially vegetative input from the "player" and no skill whatsoever. i mean, those assassin's creed acrobats who do all sorts of stuff after a single button press...

Call of Duty does have a story :p They're not particully long (or that great), but they provide a few hours of high budget action. Can't really expect much more from a series people buy almost entirley for the MP.

Anyway, there's nothing particularly disturbing about any of this. The industry has always cycled through whatever the market is currently most interested in. Currently the most popular push has been in making games more "open". Once the market becomes bored of any particular design choice, or becomes interested in a new one, the industry will just move on to making lots of the new thing. It's no different than how for several years "mascot" titles were being made by the bucket load. Now there are barley any (outside of Nintendo).

you're right about it being a cycle, it's just not really a virtuous one. gaming history is littered with the overextension of certain game types... think of the (2d) platformer fest of the late nes, early snes era. everything was a platformer. then that gave way to (j)rpgs being dominant for a good bit of the nineties, then the platformer made a comeback except in 3d and that lasted into last decade (jak and daxter, ratchet and clank, "taz the tasmanian tiger" and all the other bizarre mascots, which were all in some way ripoffs of banjo kazooie)... and then open-world games and shooters and open-world shooters caught on with gta 3 and halo the same year (2001), and it's been smooth sailing ever since, right?

i think openworld games have potential, it's just none of it is in evidence right now.

also, i've always wanted to say this: watch dogs, the true crime of 2014. (just to prove how stuck we are in the same infinite loop of shit)


Maybe I'm just a delusional fanboy, but I don't know why I think that Nintendo is going to do something different and progressive for the open world genre with Zelda U.



Around the Network
Ezquimacore on 09 January 2015


I don't like Playstation because I think it made games less arcadeish, and more like "immersive experiences" with a lot of narration and story and cinematics. I don't like those trends in gaming. I will still buy a PS4 if Virtua Fighter is not put by Sega on Steam.


 I really understand, they're doing the "cinematic experience" too much.



Zekkyou on 09 January 2015
jetforcejiminy said:

you're right about it being a cycle, it's just not really a virtuous one. gaming history is littered with the overextension of certain game types... think of the (2d) platformer fest of the late nes, early snes era. everything was a platformer. then that gave way to (j)rpgs being dominant for a good bit of the nineties, then the platformer made a comeback except in 3d and that lasted into last decade (jak and daxter, ratchet and clank, "taz the tasmanian tiger" and all the other bizarre mascots, which were all in some way ripoffs of banjo kazooie)... and then open-world games and shooters and open-world shooters caught on with gta 3 and halo the same year (2001), and it's been smooth sailing ever since, right?

i think openworld games have potential, it's just none of it is in evidence right now.

also, i've always wanted to say this: watch dogs, the true crime of 2014. (just to prove how stuck we are in the same infinite loop of shit)

It may not be entirely beneficial but it's also completely unavoidable. Gaming is an incredibly competitive business, and often comes with a lot of risk. I can't blame developers/publishers for either following market trends or sticking with the same "safe" IP for years on end.

I think open world games have already proved themselves several times over. There are plenty of mediocre ones (like any genre), but recent games like FarCry 4, Dragon Age; Inquisition and GTA5 have all made excellent use the genre. Future titles like Zelda U and The Witcher 3 look like they'll continue that trend. I think we're edging towards having too many, but i'm happy enough with how things are right now.

It's also nice to see series like Uncharted open themselves up more, while still maintain high degrees of visual fidelity (all dat sweet sweet foliage). Horaah for new hardware :p



Zekkyou on 09 January 2015
Ezquimacore said:

Maybe I'm just a delusional fanboy, but I don't know why I think that Nintendo is going to do something different and progressive for the open world genre with Zelda U.

There's really not much they can do that others haven't already tries. The core concept of a game being "open world" is pretty simple. The only thing that no one has been able to (successful) achieve yet is having a fully dynamic/'living' world, which isn't something possible on the WiiU's hardware. I doubt it's possible on the PS4/X1 either, outside of limited scales.



Ezquimacore on 09 January 2015
Zekkyou said:
Ezquimacore said:

Maybe I'm just a delusional fanboy, but I don't know why I think that Nintendo is going to do something different and progressive for the open world genre with Zelda U.

There's really not much they can do that others haven't already tries. The core concept of a game being "open world" is pretty simple. The only thing that no one has been able to (successful) achieve yet is having a fully dynamic/'living' world, which isn't something possible on the WiiU's hardware. I doubt it's possible on the PS4/X1 either, outside of limited scales.

 

 

yeah I know, the core concept is open world, and the dynamic/living world is easier with the art style and fantasy style of zelda wii u, although the witcher 3 looks dynamic, coherent and alive. Anyway, that's not what I mean. Knowing Nintendo, they will develop other structure, different than the already established missions-quests open world, even Aonuma said that it's not going to be like western open worlds-sandbox games. I don't know how to explain it, but I have some crazy ideas.



Around the Network
alternine on 09 January 2015
jetforcejiminy said:
Zekkyou said:
jetforcejiminy said:

think about it. every game lately is some combination of gta 3 sandbox (gta iv, v, watch dogs, the crew)/call of duty 4 multiplayer-with-no-story (titanfall, ghosts, black ops i+ii, advanced warfare)/ac 2 map-clearing (ac unity, shadow of mordor)/es5 skyrim open-world rpg (witcher 3, dragon age inquisition)... it's disturbing.

better yet, each new iteration of the same old nothing comes with ever more win buttons, requiring essentially vegetative input from the "player" and no skill whatsoever. i mean, those assassin's creed acrobats who do all sorts of stuff after a single button press...

Call of Duty does have a story :p They're not particully long (or that great), but they provide a few hours of high budget action. Can't really expect much more from a series people buy almost entirley for the MP.

Anyway, there's nothing particularly disturbing about any of this. The industry has always cycled through whatever the market is currently most interested in. Currently the most popular push has been in making games more "open". Once the market becomes bored of any particular design choice, or becomes interested in a new one, the industry will just move on to making lots of the new thing. It's no different than how for several years "mascot" titles were being made by the bucket load. Now there are barley any (outside of Nintendo).

you're right about it being a cycle, it's just not really a virtuous one. gaming history is littered with the overextension of certain game types... think of the (2d) platformer fest of the late nes, early snes era. everything was a platformer. then that gave way to (j)rpgs being dominant for a good bit of the nineties, then the platformer made a comeback except in 3d and that lasted into last decade (jak and daxter, ratchet and clank, "taz the tasmanian tiger" and all the other bizarre mascots, which were all in some way ripoffs of banjo kazooie)... and then open-world games and shooters and open-world shooters caught on with gta 3 and halo the same year (2001), and it's been smooth sailing ever since, right?

i think openworld games have potential, it's just none of it is in evidence right now.

also, i've always wanted to say this: watch dogs, the true crime of 2014. (just to prove how stuck we are in the same infinite loop of shit)

Watch Dogs was an amazing game. To each their own.



"Say what you want about Americans but we understand Capitalism.You buy yourself a product and you Get What You Pay For."  

- Max Payne 3

Lafiel on 09 January 2015
BraveNewWorld said:
I don't hate any company related to gaming. They all do things to piss me off as a consumer and fan of their products, but nothing to make me perpetually hate them. I mean, Sony has done really dumb things recently, like selling a new Walkman for $1200, but I don't hate them for it.

the device is focussed on a niche that is very audiophile, wants the best of the best components and has the disposable income to afford it

if Sony manages to make a profit with the devices then this is not a "dumb" decision, but trying to sell another mainstream priced device which never generates any profits due to lots of competition from companies that can produce at even lower costs would imo be pretty "dumb" at this point



Conegamer on 09 January 2015

I don't hate any company anywhere. I love them all for different reasons. Sure they may have their quirks but there's something great that I could say for every console.

And indeed I do, quite often. 



 

Here lies the dearly departed Nintendomination Thread.

Mike_L on 09 January 2015
alternine said:
jetforcejiminy said:
Zekkyou said:
jetforcejiminy said:

also, i've always wanted to say this: watch dogs, the true crime of 2014. (just to prove how stuck we are in the same infinite loop of shit)

Watch Dogs was an amazing game. To each their own.

Second that. I enjoyed it a lot.



Zekkyou on 09 January 2015
Ezquimacore said:

yeah I know, the core concept is open world, and the dynamic/living world is easier with the art style and fantasy style of zelda wii u, although the witcher 3 looks dynamic, coherent and alive. Anyway, that's not what I mean. Knowing Nintendo, they will develop other structure, different than the already established missions-quests open world, even Aonuma said that it's not going to be like western open worlds-sandbox games. I don't know how to explain it, but I have some crazy ideas.

That's not the kind of "alive" i mean. I don't mean titles that use hundreds of scripted NPC movements and events to give the impression of an active world, i mean one that properly adapts and reacts to the player's actions. We don't have anything like that right now. It's the only real frontier left for traditional open world games. Unless Nintendo plan on going down that road (which they won't), all they can really do is refine pre-existing formulas, like they did with Skyward Sword.

You never know though, they might come up with some grand new ideas that no one else has thought of, but i really doubt it. Expecting such things usually leads to disappointment in my experience.