Why don't game developers create pleasant, satisfying, limitless games?
Before I explain what I mean I must say that I watch films and play games only for one purpose: [b]to feel good[/b]. I know that most people have a different attitude but I don't want to discuss here the purpose of watching films or playing games.

I would like to focus on:

Why there are so few games that leave you satisfied?


I'm 30 and I've been playing games for almost 20 years. While I don't agree that violence in games and films makes us more violent as human beings, I would say that games definitely have some influence on us.

I love multiplayer in BF3 - I'm not a hardcore player but I tend to spend about 1 or 2 hours playing it daily. I have noticed that most of the time when I finish playing I'm really pissed off and even when I'm not I could hardly call my emotions positive.

This example is easy to explain and is closely connected to what your kill/death ratio is.
It's obvious that when you win someone else looses - that's the flaw of the system. It's impossible for everyone to be happy as a result of playing this game.

But what about single player? I've been also experiencing negative emotions while (or after) playing such games as:

- Alan Wake
- F.E.A.R.
- Dead Space 1 & 2
- L.A. Noire
- Limbo
- Mirror's Edge
- Need for Speed - probably all the series
- Rage
- Crysis - all parts

and many more.

Now, when I say I am feeling bad I don't mean I get depressed and I wanna kill myself.
It's more like I am irritated, disappointed, bored or I don't get this satisfaction I am looking for in a game and my satisfaction is closely connected with being free to do whatever I feel like in the virtual reality.
For example:

When I come back from work I would like to rob a bank - something I would never do in real life. I would like to have a possibility to get into this bank - before the robbery - talk to people inside, create my own plan, then choose a getaway car, a wheelman, people to work with, guns, disguise etc. After all the preparations I would like to choose the time of the robbery and do it my own way. After successful robbery I would like to be able to go to a chosen hideout where I could lay low, split money and plan the next assault.

INSTEAD, I get a game like Payday The Heist, which is mostly about brainless shooting and killing waves of law enforcers and THAT'S IT! You can't do any of the things I have mentioned above.

So why is it like that?
A game is not a film. The only limit is imagination, but it seems that most game developers have their imagination underdeveloped. (Obviously I don't take into consideration money and hardware limits - this is a different story.)

One of the few games that is really satisfying for me is Mass Effect (1 & 2). Maybe because it's not only about killing but you can also make [b]choices [/b]that influence your in-game future.

The other ones include:
- Fallout 3 and New Vegas
- Deus Ex Human Revolution
- GTA - all parts since GTA 3
- Hitman - all parts
- Test Drive Unlimited 2
- and maybe Just Cause 2

(I'm not listing all the games - I just want to give some general examples and please, notice I am NOT talking about whether I like the game or not - I like most of the ones I have mentioned - I'm talking about satisfaction of doing things you want, positive feelings and emotions.)

It seems that everything is possible in the virtual world, so why do we keep getting products that are so limited while they should be limitless?
Before I explain what I mean I must say that I watch films and play games only for one purpose: to feel good. I know that most people have a different attitude but I don't want to discuss here the purpose of watching films or playing games.



I would like to focus on:



Why there are so few games that leave you satisfied?





I'm 30 and I've been playing games for almost 20 years. While I don't agree that violence in games and films makes us more violent as human beings, I would say that games definitely have some influence on us.



I love multiplayer in BF3 - I'm not a hardcore player but I tend to spend about 1 or 2 hours playing it daily. I have noticed that most of the time when I finish playing I'm really pissed off and even when I'm not I could hardly call my emotions positive.



This example is easy to explain and is closely connected to what your kill/death ratio is.

It's obvious that when you win someone else looses - that's the flaw of the system. It's impossible for everyone to be happy as a result of playing this game.



But what about single player? I've been also experiencing negative emotions while (or after) playing such games as:



- Alan Wake

- F.E.A.R.

- Dead Space 1 & 2

- L.A. Noire

- Limbo

- Mirror's Edge

- Need for Speed - probably all the series

- Rage

- Crysis - all parts



and many more.



Now, when I say I am feeling bad I don't mean I get depressed and I wanna kill myself.

It's more like I am irritated, disappointed, bored or I don't get this satisfaction I am looking for in a game and my satisfaction is closely connected with being free to do whatever I feel like in the virtual reality.

For example:



When I come back from work I would like to rob a bank - something I would never do in real life. I would like to have a possibility to get into this bank - before the robbery - talk to people inside, create my own plan, then choose a getaway car, a wheelman, people to work with, guns, disguise etc. After all the preparations I would like to choose the time of the robbery and do it my own way. After successful robbery I would like to be able to go to a chosen hideout where I could lay low, split money and plan the next assault.



INSTEAD, I get a game like Payday The Heist, which is mostly about brainless shooting and killing waves of law enforcers and THAT'S IT! You can't do any of the things I have mentioned above.



So why is it like that?

A game is not a film. The only limit is imagination, but it seems that most game developers have their imagination underdeveloped. (Obviously I don't take into consideration money and hardware limits - this is a different story.)



One of the few games that is really satisfying for me is Mass Effect (1 & 2). Maybe because it's not only about killing but you can also make choices that influence your in-game future.



The other ones include:

- Fallout 3 and New Vegas

- Deus Ex Human Revolution

- GTA - all parts since GTA 3

- Hitman - all parts

- Test Drive Unlimited 2

- and maybe Just Cause 2



(I'm not listing all the games - I just want to give some general examples and please, notice I am NOT talking about whether I like the game or not - I like most of the ones I have mentioned - I'm talking about satisfaction of doing things you want, positive feelings and emotions.)



It seems that everything is possible in the virtual world, so why do we keep getting products that are so limited while they should be limitless?

#1
Posted 02/23/2012 07:51 PM   
Do you go see a horror film to feel "good"? Different genres are meant to make you feel differently and people go see different genres of films or play different genre games to make them feel something different. In the Alan Wake thread you mentioned how the game didn't make you feel good. Alan Wake was not meant make you feel good. It was meant to make you feel scared and paranoid and sometimes people like to experience those feelings without actually being in a real similar situation. You say you get negative emotions when you play games which contain dark or depressing subject matters, but that's the whole point. When you play a depressing or horrifying game or watch a similar themed film, you'll most likely feel "bad", but if you're even close to a normal person, you'll know those feelings are temporary and soon after the experience, the real world will actually feel a whole lot better. Be it a horror, romance, tragedy or a mystery game/film, the whole point of them is to make you escape your real world. So why should one game be "limitless", when in one you can get one sort of an experience and in another you'll get a different one. So in fact it is you who is making the limits by limiting your choices of entertainment.
Do you go see a horror film to feel "good"? Different genres are meant to make you feel differently and people go see different genres of films or play different genre games to make them feel something different. In the Alan Wake thread you mentioned how the game didn't make you feel good. Alan Wake was not meant make you feel good. It was meant to make you feel scared and paranoid and sometimes people like to experience those feelings without actually being in a real similar situation. You say you get negative emotions when you play games which contain dark or depressing subject matters, but that's the whole point. When you play a depressing or horrifying game or watch a similar themed film, you'll most likely feel "bad", but if you're even close to a normal person, you'll know those feelings are temporary and soon after the experience, the real world will actually feel a whole lot better. Be it a horror, romance, tragedy or a mystery game/film, the whole point of them is to make you escape your real world. So why should one game be "limitless", when in one you can get one sort of an experience and in another you'll get a different one. So in fact it is you who is making the limits by limiting your choices of entertainment.

Intel i5 2500K @ 4.5GHz
Asus P8P67 PRO
Corsair XMS3 DDR3 8GB
nVidia GTX 660 SLI + nVidia 3D Vision
Asus Xonar Essence ST with AKG K601/Sennheiser HD 595
Corsair Force GT 120GB SSD + 5TB HDD Storage
Corsair AX 850 PSU
Coolermaster HAF 932 Case


HELIX MOD - A must for any 3D Vision gamer

#2
Posted 02/24/2012 12:33 AM   
I believe you're looking for a free roaming rpg wherein you can basically do anything and everything has a cause and effect. Which is actually not possible. A game should always have a set plot or story, game type for your target audience. It will always be limited either by hardware and software/engine. The only thing that I could think of which closely matches your preference is GTA but that is still limited and 1 thing that sucks about the the 4th installment is the lack of things you can do even though the game is free roaming. GTA V is just around the corner, probably that would fix that problem but being a console game I wouldn't get my hopes up too high.

Or you can try The Matrix.. Jk :D
I believe you're looking for a free roaming rpg wherein you can basically do anything and everything has a cause and effect. Which is actually not possible. A game should always have a set plot or story, game type for your target audience. It will always be limited either by hardware and software/engine. The only thing that I could think of which closely matches your preference is GTA but that is still limited and 1 thing that sucks about the the 4th installment is the lack of things you can do even though the game is free roaming. GTA V is just around the corner, probably that would fix that problem but being a console game I wouldn't get my hopes up too high.



Or you can try The Matrix.. Jk :D

Currently playing: BF3 - DotA 2

CPU Phenom II X4 965 - 3.6ghz

RAMS Team Xtreem Dark DDR2 1066 4GB

Mobo Asrock 780gm-le

Graphics GTX 460 1GB

Monitor 22" Samsung LCD 1920x1080

PSU Antec TruePower New 750W

Case NZXT Gamma

KMS Logitech G15v1, A4tech x7 XL-747H



9800xt - 2600xt - hd3870 - hd4850 - gtx460(768mb) - gtx570 - gts450 - gtx460(1gb)



Image

#3
Posted 02/24/2012 12:51 AM   
What about games like The Sims? It would be too tame for you, given the example of robbing a bank, but that's the kind of game where there's no ending and you have a lot of freedom to do what you like.
What about games like The Sims? It would be too tame for you, given the example of robbing a bank, but that's the kind of game where there's no ending and you have a lot of freedom to do what you like.

#4
Posted 02/24/2012 01:07 AM   
Try Borderlands and Torchlight, both are very good games which may suit your taste and Torchlight has a nice demo you can try as well. Both games are very cheap now including the Borderlands GotY edition which includes all the DLC.

I can't wait for Torchlight 2 and Borderlands 2 to come out D: (Both come out this year with Borderlands 2 being released in September.)
Try Borderlands and Torchlight, both are very good games which may suit your taste and Torchlight has a nice demo you can try as well. Both games are very cheap now including the Borderlands GotY edition which includes all the DLC.



I can't wait for Torchlight 2 and Borderlands 2 to come out D: (Both come out this year with Borderlands 2 being released in September.)

Custom built PC | Intel Core i7 920 @ 2.66GHZ | ASUS P6T Motherboard | 6GB DDR3 1600 RAM | 2x 500GB SATA2 HDD's | Auzentech Forte S/C | Gainward Geforce GTX 560Ti "Phantom 2" 2048MB | Windows 7 Home Premium: Service Pack 1 - x64 | Thermaltake 750watt Toughpower Power Supply | Thermaltake Armor+ MX case.

#5
Posted 02/24/2012 01:30 AM   
I feel stressed out when i play Dead Space games, but that's the extent of my negative emotions. I don't feel anger except for the odd moment, being TK'ed for someones pleasure at being a self-centered **** who's never put themselves into the shoes of others; that usually does it. So it was kind of strange to hear that your angry all the time. I would recommend not focusing on kill/death ratio or your place on the leaderboard, because so much of it depends on how you play and what your doing. The things people do to get points to me are often a waste of your life and incredibly boring, like gunning in a helicopter, which is slightly more realistic than space invaders. I like realism and/or believability and i don't pay 'much' attention to score. I like stealing enemy helicoptors sometimes because its fun and requires stealth and planning and timing, but unless the gunner/pilot combo was doing a very good job, that effort doesn't help the team much and my score is low. If all i do is go straight for flags, i'll be on top sometimes, but it gets repetitive after awhile. I often try to play like im there in real life, with not dieing at the top of my priority list, which i find exciting. I usually make my way carefully to a flag, then take it at just the right time, or stop and wait on the outskirt until a team member comes to help out if there are a bunch of enemies there.

I think humans get bored because 'we' had to have some mechanism to stop starring at amazingly shinny rocks that caught our attention when we were evolving. Thus it might be a good thing to figure out some new things you like doing.

For liner games, you have to approach the game as a story. Your a character on a mission and this is the way you chose to go. That said your opinion that an open world would be better is perfectly valid. I think the industry is going to learn a lesson here pretty shortly, that not only are gamers pretty old (with the average being like 34 or something), were getting older and games are going to have to get gradually better as we get older or otherwise its going to be time for a new hobby. If they keep focusing on game elements, themes, characters, situations and general quality which attracts new and young gamers, older gamers are just going to having increasingly large backlogs (and wait 2 years before they buy a game for $5 on Steam) and eventually find things that more interesting to do.
I feel stressed out when i play Dead Space games, but that's the extent of my negative emotions. I don't feel anger except for the odd moment, being TK'ed for someones pleasure at being a self-centered **** who's never put themselves into the shoes of others; that usually does it. So it was kind of strange to hear that your angry all the time. I would recommend not focusing on kill/death ratio or your place on the leaderboard, because so much of it depends on how you play and what your doing. The things people do to get points to me are often a waste of your life and incredibly boring, like gunning in a helicopter, which is slightly more realistic than space invaders. I like realism and/or believability and i don't pay 'much' attention to score. I like stealing enemy helicoptors sometimes because its fun and requires stealth and planning and timing, but unless the gunner/pilot combo was doing a very good job, that effort doesn't help the team much and my score is low. If all i do is go straight for flags, i'll be on top sometimes, but it gets repetitive after awhile. I often try to play like im there in real life, with not dieing at the top of my priority list, which i find exciting. I usually make my way carefully to a flag, then take it at just the right time, or stop and wait on the outskirt until a team member comes to help out if there are a bunch of enemies there.



I think humans get bored because 'we' had to have some mechanism to stop starring at amazingly shinny rocks that caught our attention when we were evolving. Thus it might be a good thing to figure out some new things you like doing.



For liner games, you have to approach the game as a story. Your a character on a mission and this is the way you chose to go. That said your opinion that an open world would be better is perfectly valid. I think the industry is going to learn a lesson here pretty shortly, that not only are gamers pretty old (with the average being like 34 or something), were getting older and games are going to have to get gradually better as we get older or otherwise its going to be time for a new hobby. If they keep focusing on game elements, themes, characters, situations and general quality which attracts new and young gamers, older gamers are just going to having increasingly large backlogs (and wait 2 years before they buy a game for $5 on Steam) and eventually find things that more interesting to do.

46" Samsung ES7500 3DTV (checkerboard, high FOV, highly recommend!) - Metro 2033 3D screens - Mass Effect 1 3D scenery - Metro LL filter realism mod - Flugan's Deus Ex:HR Depth changers - Nvidia online tech support - Nvidia Support number: 1-800-797-6530 - Marissa Alexander has received a new trial :)
.
.
Post here for support for 3D in BF4, BF devs will see it

#6
Posted 02/24/2012 03:38 AM   
I agree, there is just so many repetitive games out. Im at the point where i just get bored so quickly and find i finnish less games now than ever before. There are more unfinnished games in my collection than finnished, lots of triple A titles too. San Andreas was a fantastic game, i honestly wore the disk out, not kidding, that disk spun so long in my ps3 it actually stopped being able to be read....i bought another which worked fine. Zelda was also an amazing game, older but still. I have high hopes for the new hitman and for the new gta but gta im not holding my breath on, seems that last few have been a let down. Maybe im just too spoiled and cant be impressed anymore, played too much. I really cant see anything groundbreaking in the future as every thing you can make a game about has been done, the good ones copied and explited to death.



Whatever, just my thoughts
I agree, there is just so many repetitive games out. Im at the point where i just get bored so quickly and find i finnish less games now than ever before. There are more unfinnished games in my collection than finnished, lots of triple A titles too. San Andreas was a fantastic game, i honestly wore the disk out, not kidding, that disk spun so long in my ps3 it actually stopped being able to be read....i bought another which worked fine. Zelda was also an amazing game, older but still. I have high hopes for the new hitman and for the new gta but gta im not holding my breath on, seems that last few have been a let down. Maybe im just too spoiled and cant be impressed anymore, played too much. I really cant see anything groundbreaking in the future as every thing you can make a game about has been done, the good ones copied and explited to death.







Whatever, just my thoughts
#7
Posted 02/24/2012 03:46 AM   
Read my reply in the Alan Wake thread. Essentially no one cares what you want, gaming is like a fashion industry, but not couture, mainstream. If enough people buy it, than a small step towards innovation may or may not be taken and something with the same or similar formula comes out in the shortest amount of time. This is why quest games ( and I believe this is the genre you are lacking) are now extinct, since not enough people nowadays want to or have the time to go through all the planning of robing a bank, most of them just want to get straight to the robing part to get the thrill the easy way. The thinking gamer is slowly but surely being replaced by a shoot first and ask questions later kind of consumer.
Read my reply in the Alan Wake thread. Essentially no one cares what you want, gaming is like a fashion industry, but not couture, mainstream. If enough people buy it, than a small step towards innovation may or may not be taken and something with the same or similar formula comes out in the shortest amount of time. This is why quest games ( and I believe this is the genre you are lacking) are now extinct, since not enough people nowadays want to or have the time to go through all the planning of robing a bank, most of them just want to get straight to the robing part to get the thrill the easy way. The thinking gamer is slowly but surely being replaced by a shoot first and ask questions later kind of consumer.
#8
Posted 02/24/2012 09:49 AM   
Thanks for answers - some good points you've got there!

I've played all the games you have mentioned apart from Torchlight, but I don't want to focus on particular games.




[quote name='Artox' date='24 February 2012 - 09:49 AM' timestamp='1330076966' post='1374285']
Essentially no one cares what you want, gaming is like a fashion industry, but not couture, mainstream. If enough people buy it, than a small step towards innovation may or may not be taken and something with the same or similar formula comes out in the shortest amount of time. This is why quest games ( and I believe this is the genre you are lacking) are now extinct, since not enough people nowadays want to or have the time to go through all the planning of robing a bank, most of them just want to get straight to the robing part to get the thrill the easy way. The thinking gamer is slowly but surely being replaced by a shoot first and ask questions later kind of consumer.
[/quote]

Well, it is said that people nowadays have shorter attention span than before. They like watching short films on YouTube, browsing through the twits, jumping from one webpage to the other - generally less people are focusing on longer activities such as reading a book.

Perhaps game creators consider this as a reason to make games like Payday The Heist, with lot's of plain shooting, but no real thinking, but the thing is, we've already gone through this type of games in the 80s and 90s. Did we like it? Well, at the time I did, but I was always imagining a game of the future that would suck me into its world and kept me there with its attractiveness, diversity and creativity for many hours.

It's true people haven't got much time these days, but you can always pause the game any time. Moreover, there are also arcade games for really casual gamers they can play in their web-browser for example.
The thing is we don't get too much choice and there are only few really immersing titles.

[quote name='Joohan' date='24 February 2012 - 12:33 AM' timestamp='1330043608' post='1374125']
So why should one game be "limitless", when in one you can get one sort of an experience and in another you'll get a different one. So in fact it is you who is making the limits by limiting your choices of entertainment.
[/quote]

Not really - I'm not limiting my choices cause I play most of the games that come out. (I only give up on fantasy games - I love sci-fi but fantasy is not for me.)
The thing is, the more freedom a game gives the more it is interesting.
Don't you agree?

Why was GTA 4 such a success? Because you could do a whole bunch of diverse things in it: you could robb a bank, play in casino, fly a plane, go on a date etc.

The same with Battlefield. People like it cause you can do almost anything in it:
you can drive, fly, kill, heal, snipe, destroy, repair, hide in the bushes, flank and kill enemies with a knife or a gun with suppressor, blow 200 bullets at advancing enemy to suppress them, make traps and so on.

(BTW, the only major disadvantage to me in this game is a lack of system that would match players with a similar skill. Instead, you can be thrown in a game with noobs in your team and eagles only in the other.)

Talking about GTA4 I once had an idea while playing, a dream - more likely.
I dream that one day someone will create something I call a cross platform - it would be a map of e.g. New York with Jersey (just an example) - a vast area - beautiful in graphics and really detailed - and lots of different "little games" will take place there.
So, it would have a form of a kind of a hybrid where GTA, Second Life, Sims, Need For Speed, L.A. Noire etc. would happen in the same place and time and all the people you met in the streets were real people behind their computers.
Of course it wouldn't be GTA anymore - you wouldn't kill pedestrians while driving cause the police would quickly hunt you down. If you killed someone then somebody else would be a detective chasing you, somebody else would be a taxi driver, a medic, a girl from night club etc.

You get the picture...
Now, it's currently impossible because of the hardware limits - not everyone has a good enough computer - but soon all the processing power will be located down there on servers and we will not need graphic cards in our homes anymore, so the only thing we will need is an internet connection.

[quote name='Libertine' date='24 February 2012 - 03:38 AM' timestamp='1330054698' post='1374193']
That said your opinion that an open world would be better is perfectly valid. I think the industry is going to learn a lesson here pretty shortly, that not only are gamers pretty old (with the average being like 34 or something), were getting older and games are going to have to get gradually better as we get older or otherwise its going to be time for a new hobby. If they keep focusing on game elements, themes, characters, situations and general quality which attracts new and young gamers, older gamers are just going to having increasingly large backlogs (and wait 2 years before they buy a game for $5 on Steam) and eventually find things that more interesting to do.
[/quote]

Some gamers get old and some are being born - generally the percentage of people playing games is constantly increasing.
If my vision comes to reality then game developers wouldn't have to focus on creating a game from scratch. They would have this "base" - the map with all the locations - the game engine - and they would focus more on content.

But nowadays what you are saying is a good idea - to wait 2 years for the games to be cheap - we would save loads of money not only on titles but also on hardware.




[quote name='cravinmild' date='24 February 2012 - 03:46 AM' timestamp='1330055189' post='1374196']
I agree, there is just so many repetitive games out. Im at the point where i just get bored so quickly and find i finnish less games now than ever before. There are more unfinnished games in my collection than finnished, lots of triple A titles too. Maybe im just too spoiled and cant be impressed anymore, played too much.
[/quote]

And here's a really good point. I have exactly the same.
There's a bunch of games I have stopped playing because they gradually got boring.
There are also these little things that spoil the fun.

For example, let's take L.A. Noire - I was impressed when I played it for the first time, but then it got repetitive and the thing that is quite irritating is that you CAN'T STORE CARS! It's such a cosmetic change to add this possibility. Why haven't they thought about it? What's the point of finding these hidden, exotic cars if you can't store them in a garage and use them later?
Thanks for answers - some good points you've got there!



I've played all the games you have mentioned apart from Torchlight, but I don't want to focus on particular games.









[quote name='Artox' date='24 February 2012 - 09:49 AM' timestamp='1330076966' post='1374285']

Essentially no one cares what you want, gaming is like a fashion industry, but not couture, mainstream. If enough people buy it, than a small step towards innovation may or may not be taken and something with the same or similar formula comes out in the shortest amount of time. This is why quest games ( and I believe this is the genre you are lacking) are now extinct, since not enough people nowadays want to or have the time to go through all the planning of robing a bank, most of them just want to get straight to the robing part to get the thrill the easy way. The thinking gamer is slowly but surely being replaced by a shoot first and ask questions later kind of consumer.





Well, it is said that people nowadays have shorter attention span than before. They like watching short films on YouTube, browsing through the twits, jumping from one webpage to the other - generally less people are focusing on longer activities such as reading a book.



Perhaps game creators consider this as a reason to make games like Payday The Heist, with lot's of plain shooting, but no real thinking, but the thing is, we've already gone through this type of games in the 80s and 90s. Did we like it? Well, at the time I did, but I was always imagining a game of the future that would suck me into its world and kept me there with its attractiveness, diversity and creativity for many hours.



It's true people haven't got much time these days, but you can always pause the game any time. Moreover, there are also arcade games for really casual gamers they can play in their web-browser for example.

The thing is we don't get too much choice and there are only few really immersing titles.



[quote name='Joohan' date='24 February 2012 - 12:33 AM' timestamp='1330043608' post='1374125']

So why should one game be "limitless", when in one you can get one sort of an experience and in another you'll get a different one. So in fact it is you who is making the limits by limiting your choices of entertainment.





Not really - I'm not limiting my choices cause I play most of the games that come out. (I only give up on fantasy games - I love sci-fi but fantasy is not for me.)

The thing is, the more freedom a game gives the more it is interesting.

Don't you agree?



Why was GTA 4 such a success? Because you could do a whole bunch of diverse things in it: you could robb a bank, play in casino, fly a plane, go on a date etc.



The same with Battlefield. People like it cause you can do almost anything in it:

you can drive, fly, kill, heal, snipe, destroy, repair, hide in the bushes, flank and kill enemies with a knife or a gun with suppressor, blow 200 bullets at advancing enemy to suppress them, make traps and so on.



(BTW, the only major disadvantage to me in this game is a lack of system that would match players with a similar skill. Instead, you can be thrown in a game with noobs in your team and eagles only in the other.)



Talking about GTA4 I once had an idea while playing, a dream - more likely.

I dream that one day someone will create something I call a cross platform - it would be a map of e.g. New York with Jersey (just an example) - a vast area - beautiful in graphics and really detailed - and lots of different "little games" will take place there.

So, it would have a form of a kind of a hybrid where GTA, Second Life, Sims, Need For Speed, L.A. Noire etc. would happen in the same place and time and all the people you met in the streets were real people behind their computers.

Of course it wouldn't be GTA anymore - you wouldn't kill pedestrians while driving cause the police would quickly hunt you down. If you killed someone then somebody else would be a detective chasing you, somebody else would be a taxi driver, a medic, a girl from night club etc.



You get the picture...

Now, it's currently impossible because of the hardware limits - not everyone has a good enough computer - but soon all the processing power will be located down there on servers and we will not need graphic cards in our homes anymore, so the only thing we will need is an internet connection.



[quote name='Libertine' date='24 February 2012 - 03:38 AM' timestamp='1330054698' post='1374193']

That said your opinion that an open world would be better is perfectly valid. I think the industry is going to learn a lesson here pretty shortly, that not only are gamers pretty old (with the average being like 34 or something), were getting older and games are going to have to get gradually better as we get older or otherwise its going to be time for a new hobby. If they keep focusing on game elements, themes, characters, situations and general quality which attracts new and young gamers, older gamers are just going to having increasingly large backlogs (and wait 2 years before they buy a game for $5 on Steam) and eventually find things that more interesting to do.





Some gamers get old and some are being born - generally the percentage of people playing games is constantly increasing.

If my vision comes to reality then game developers wouldn't have to focus on creating a game from scratch. They would have this "base" - the map with all the locations - the game engine - and they would focus more on content.



But nowadays what you are saying is a good idea - to wait 2 years for the games to be cheap - we would save loads of money not only on titles but also on hardware.









[quote name='cravinmild' date='24 February 2012 - 03:46 AM' timestamp='1330055189' post='1374196']

I agree, there is just so many repetitive games out. Im at the point where i just get bored so quickly and find i finnish less games now than ever before. There are more unfinnished games in my collection than finnished, lots of triple A titles too. Maybe im just too spoiled and cant be impressed anymore, played too much.





And here's a really good point. I have exactly the same.

There's a bunch of games I have stopped playing because they gradually got boring.

There are also these little things that spoil the fun.



For example, let's take L.A. Noire - I was impressed when I played it for the first time, but then it got repetitive and the thing that is quite irritating is that you CAN'T STORE CARS! It's such a cosmetic change to add this possibility. Why haven't they thought about it? What's the point of finding these hidden, exotic cars if you can't store them in a garage and use them later?

#9
Posted 02/24/2012 11:58 AM   
I don't know if you've played the Legacy of Kain series, but I would suggest that you play Soul Reaver 1, if you don't mind the outdated graphics, The whole series is great, but when you get to Legacy of Kain Defiance (fifth game in the series) you see how the gameplay has changed in order to appeal to a more casual, action-oriented crowd. The puzzles go from generic but hard to execute (SR1) to complex and hard to execute (SR2) to just generic in Defiance and combat goes from hard, but rewarding (SR1) to hard-rewarding-versatile(SR2) to easy-plain-button-mashing (Defiance). Exploration goes from hard rewarding and sometimes even boring (SR1) to easier but versatile (SR2) to needless and plain (defiance). Thankfully the story stays strong throughout the whole series. This series is the perfect example, since it's been out from '97 to '03 and things haven't gotten better in the gameplay department since '03 and by better I mean oriented towards smarter gameplay styles.

On the topic of limitless games, I've never been a fan. Games are more like movies than tv series nowadays, meaning that you spend 2hrs, get out of the cinema and 5 hours later you don't even think about that movie (which also shows what kind of crappy movies are made). Personally I prefer great story telling to in-game freedom, I don't like the concept of being lost even more in a game than I am now, because there won't be enough time to live in the outside world. So 5-10-15 hours per game is usually enough for me. Of course they have to be toppled with something meaningful, not mindless wandering with nothing interesting to do. I have to say that Skyrim is the only open-world game that has managed to captivate me enough and this is not due to the story or quests or characters but the areas, they are so vast, that just wandering around is an experience.
I don't know if you've played the Legacy of Kain series, but I would suggest that you play Soul Reaver 1, if you don't mind the outdated graphics, The whole series is great, but when you get to Legacy of Kain Defiance (fifth game in the series) you see how the gameplay has changed in order to appeal to a more casual, action-oriented crowd. The puzzles go from generic but hard to execute (SR1) to complex and hard to execute (SR2) to just generic in Defiance and combat goes from hard, but rewarding (SR1) to hard-rewarding-versatile(SR2) to easy-plain-button-mashing (Defiance). Exploration goes from hard rewarding and sometimes even boring (SR1) to easier but versatile (SR2) to needless and plain (defiance). Thankfully the story stays strong throughout the whole series. This series is the perfect example, since it's been out from '97 to '03 and things haven't gotten better in the gameplay department since '03 and by better I mean oriented towards smarter gameplay styles.



On the topic of limitless games, I've never been a fan. Games are more like movies than tv series nowadays, meaning that you spend 2hrs, get out of the cinema and 5 hours later you don't even think about that movie (which also shows what kind of crappy movies are made). Personally I prefer great story telling to in-game freedom, I don't like the concept of being lost even more in a game than I am now, because there won't be enough time to live in the outside world. So 5-10-15 hours per game is usually enough for me. Of course they have to be toppled with something meaningful, not mindless wandering with nothing interesting to do. I have to say that Skyrim is the only open-world game that has managed to captivate me enough and this is not due to the story or quests or characters but the areas, they are so vast, that just wandering around is an experience.
#10
Posted 02/24/2012 03:41 PM   
I haven't tried Skyrim, but I've just finished playing the Darkness 2, which is amazing. It's quite short - I'm sure I haven't played more than 10 hours and although it doesn't offer many choices to make (apart from one in the end) it does bring you a really immersing experience and a great advantage is that it looks astonishing in 3-D. I can't wait to see Mass Effect 3.
I haven't tried Skyrim, but I've just finished playing the Darkness 2, which is amazing. It's quite short - I'm sure I haven't played more than 10 hours and although it doesn't offer many choices to make (apart from one in the end) it does bring you a really immersing experience and a great advantage is that it looks astonishing in 3-D. I can't wait to see Mass Effect 3.

#11
Posted 02/25/2012 11:32 PM   
Scroll To Top