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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - The Factors that make a game great

RolStoppable said:
kirby007 said:

But how do you cope with the fact that nintendo doesnt have consoles anymore

It's easier to accept than your continued than/then errors.

or your standards have shifted to accept the lower quality nintendo delivers since the wii days more easily



 "I think people should define the word crap" - Kirby007

Join the Prediction League http://www.vgchartz.com/predictions

Instead of seeking to convince others, we can be open to changing our own minds, and seek out information that contradicts our own steadfast point of view. Maybe it’ll turn out that those who disagree with you actually have a solid grasp of the facts. There’s a slight possibility that, after all, you’re the one who’s wrong.

Around the Network

Sound and music are very important to me for the enjoyment of games.
Long loading times are a turn off.
Difficulty settings that can be changed at any time are a big plus.
Only being able to 'save' at checkpoints is a turn off. Don't hold me hostage while playing.
Instant restart, reset, retry is a huge positive.
Not being able to pause at any time, bad.
Responsive controls are very important.
A good story is a plus but not necessary, but if it's there it better be acted well.

Game play has to be good of course but is harder to nail down what makes a game great. Freedom in game play is very important. Linear games are perfectly fine as long as you have the freedom to tackle the game play sections the way you want. RDR2 was very bad in that regard with its tightly restrictive, instant fail when going the 'wrong' way, scripted story missions. Tlou while a linear game has great game play. The best games give you great game mechanics to experiment with while leaving it up to you to decide how to go through the game. Botw is brilliant in that regard (but falls a bit flat in the linear dungeons)

And of course the number one factor to make a great game, numbers that always go up. XP, Levels, Money, Materials, Mana, Damage, Stars, Bolts, Seeds, whatever. I doubt there will ever be a successful "balance the budget" game in a shrinking economy :)



The_Liquid_Laser said:

You left out the most important factor of all: content.  Imagine a game with the best graphics, music, story, and gameplay.  It's over after 1 hour.  Now the game is really disappointing.  On the other hand if you have a super long game without much variety then that gets old too.  Content is actually what people are looking for when they buy a game, both quantity and quality of content.  

(You also left out challenge, but content is even more important.)

I might swap out the word "content" for "value". I think value does a good job at unpacking the usefulness of the content of the game.



Yep you summarized most of the relevant elements for a good game. And that is more or less how they were graded in the gen 4 and 5 reviews.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

Veknoid_Outcast said:
The_Liquid_Laser said:

You left out the most important factor of all: content.  Imagine a game with the best graphics, music, story, and gameplay.  It's over after 1 hour.  Now the game is really disappointing.  On the other hand if you have a super long game without much variety then that gets old too.  Content is actually what people are looking for when they buy a game, both quantity and quality of content.  

(You also left out challenge, but content is even more important.)

I might swap out the word "content" for "value". I think value does a good job at unpacking the usefulness of the content of the game.

"Content" and "value" are closely related, but they aren't the same thing.  Content is what determines value when we are talking about entertainment.  An interesting 10-page novel for $20 is a bad value.  A boring 1000-page novel for $20 is also a bad value.  An interesting 1000-page novel for $20 is a great value.  But the value is not the content.  The content is what you actually experience when you read the book.  The content is the reason why you buy.

For a book, the content is closely related to the story.  But games are much more than just a story.  The best word for games is just content.

kirby007 said:
The_Liquid_Laser said:

You left out the most important factor of all: content.  Imagine a game with the best graphics, music, story, and gameplay.  It's over after 1 hour.  Now the game is really disappointing.  On the other hand if you have a super long game without much variety then that gets old too.  Content is actually what people are looking for when they buy a game, both quantity and quality of content.  

(You also left out challenge, but content is even more important.)

Content and challenge is under gameplay

Content is different from gameplay.  Mario Kart, 2D Mario, 3D Mario, Mario RPG, and Mario + Rabbids all have very different gameplay.  The content of these games is very similar.  In any of these games I can experience Mario, Bowser, Goombas, Peach's Castle and all of the other parts of the Mushroom Kingdom.  The way I experience it is the gameplay.  But the actual world and the stuff in it are the content.

Graphics are experienced with the eyes.  Music is experienced with the ears.  Gameplay is experienced with the hands.  Content is experienced with the mind.



Around the Network
The_Liquid_Laser said:
Veknoid_Outcast said:

I might swap out the word "content" for "value". I think value does a good job at unpacking the usefulness of the content of the game.

"Content" and "value" are closely related, but they aren't the same thing.  Content is what determines value when we are talking about entertainment.  An interesting 10-page novel for $20 is a bad value.  A boring 1000-page novel for $20 is also a bad value.  An interesting 1000-page novel for $20 is a great value.  But the value is not the content.  The content is what you actually experience when you read the book.  The content is the reason why you buy.

For a book, the content is closely related to the story.  But games are much more than just a story.  The best word for games is just content.

kirby007 said:

Content and challenge is under gameplay

Content is different from gameplay.  Mario Kart, 2D Mario, 3D Mario, Mario RPG, and Mario + Rabbids all have very different gameplay.  The content of these games is very similar.  In any of these games I can experience Mario, Bowser, Goombas, Peach's Castle and all of the other parts of the Mushroom Kingdom.  The way I experience it is the gameplay.  But the actual world and the stuff in it are the content.

Graphics are experienced with the eyes.  Music is experienced with the ears.  Gameplay is experienced with the hands.  Content is experienced with the mind.

But is it really? For example is in a racing game the world content or the cars/karts or actually both?
Waluigi has different stats in a kart vs toad on a bike making it gameplay but also content



 "I think people should define the word crap" - Kirby007

Join the Prediction League http://www.vgchartz.com/predictions

Instead of seeking to convince others, we can be open to changing our own minds, and seek out information that contradicts our own steadfast point of view. Maybe it’ll turn out that those who disagree with you actually have a solid grasp of the facts. There’s a slight possibility that, after all, you’re the one who’s wrong.

kirby007 said:
The_Liquid_Laser said:

"Content" and "value" are closely related, but they aren't the same thing.  Content is what determines value when we are talking about entertainment.  An interesting 10-page novel for $20 is a bad value.  A boring 1000-page novel for $20 is also a bad value.  An interesting 1000-page novel for $20 is a great value.  But the value is not the content.  The content is what you actually experience when you read the book.  The content is the reason why you buy.

For a book, the content is closely related to the story.  But games are much more than just a story.  The best word for games is just content.

Content is different from gameplay.  Mario Kart, 2D Mario, 3D Mario, Mario RPG, and Mario + Rabbids all have very different gameplay.  The content of these games is very similar.  In any of these games I can experience Mario, Bowser, Goombas, Peach's Castle and all of the other parts of the Mushroom Kingdom.  The way I experience it is the gameplay.  But the actual world and the stuff in it are the content.

Graphics are experienced with the eyes.  Music is experienced with the ears.  Gameplay is experienced with the hands.  Content is experienced with the mind.

But is it really? For example is in a racing game the world content or the cars/karts or actually both?
Waluigi has different stats in a kart vs toad on a bike making it gameplay but also content

The content is the world and the characters and the karts.  So Mario Kart does have a little bit of unique content from the other Mario games (the karts), but it's mostly the same.

Content is not the stats.  The stats are really part of the gameplay.  Game mechanics and controls are all gameplay.  At a certain point during any game, you've learned the controls and mechanics well enough that you don't even have to think about them anymore.  All of that is second nature and you experience what the game is really about.  That is the content.

Dynasty Warriors and Hyrule Warriors have almost identical gameplay.  Maybe the characters that you can choose in one game have similar stats to the other?  I don't know.  I focus on the content.  One game takes place in Hyrule and the other in a fictional version of ancient China.  The content of the two games is pretty different even though the gameplay is extemely similar.



that explains why i feel that each DLC or seasonpass i pay for is ripping me off, they dont have content



 "I think people should define the word crap" - Kirby007

Join the Prediction League http://www.vgchartz.com/predictions

Instead of seeking to convince others, we can be open to changing our own minds, and seek out information that contradicts our own steadfast point of view. Maybe it’ll turn out that those who disagree with you actually have a solid grasp of the facts. There’s a slight possibility that, after all, you’re the one who’s wrong.

kirby007 said:

that explains why i feel that each DLC or seasonpass i pay for is ripping me off, they dont have content

Why do you buy DLC if it doesn't have content?  All of the DLC I've ever gotten has tons of content.

Gameplay = how you experience the game.
Content = what you experience.

When I buy DLC it rarely changes how I play the game, but I usually get new things to experience.  I get new content but not new gameplay.



The_Liquid_Laser said:
kirby007 said:

that explains why i feel that each DLC or seasonpass i pay for is ripping me off, they dont have content

Why do you buy DLC if it doesn't have content?  All of the DLC I've ever gotten has tons of content.

Gameplay = how you experience the game.
Content = what you experience.

When I buy DLC it rarely changes how I play the game, but I usually get new things to experience.  I get new content but not new gameplay.

because it adds gameplay in the form of faster cars, being able to fly planes, new operators, looks etc
but yes what you can do within the world and what and which world that is i still view as largely integrated



 "I think people should define the word crap" - Kirby007

Join the Prediction League http://www.vgchartz.com/predictions

Instead of seeking to convince others, we can be open to changing our own minds, and seek out information that contradicts our own steadfast point of view. Maybe it’ll turn out that those who disagree with you actually have a solid grasp of the facts. There’s a slight possibility that, after all, you’re the one who’s wrong.