quote: Original post by Oluseyi
Metal head: Get over it.

Keep movin'', folks! Nothing to see/learn/gain here...

Amen.

I wanna'' ride on the pope mobile.

quote: Are long complicated games fun?

You betcha! I couldn't get enough of Sundog, Dungeon Masters I & II, XCOM, and Starcraft!

quote: Do more hours, harder stages, difficult puzzles (that make no sense) and a complicated design (to where you need a clue book) make a videogame better? No, it does not!

So what you're really saying is badly designed games suck, not necessarily long and complicated ones? Of course, badly designed games suck, and cranking up the difficulty just to make it last longer and sell strategy guides is lame: Nintendo is surely the king of this practice.

quote: It only makes a game frustrating and playable only ones, and yet I see every pro game like this.

Yeah man, I hated how I needed that invincibility code in _The Sims_! And I almost threw my computer through the window trying to figure out the the vacuum-ality in _Startopia_. Might I suggest you extract your head from the awful place it appears to be dwelling and take a good long look at what's happened to videogames since 1995?

quote: It seems that the main thing in a game is if it looks good and how much violence and blood lust there is.(mortal combat) The only interesting part in a game is to see the new technology in sound and graphics (and what happens when that reaches its limit?).

Or perhaps, like Tom Cruise in _Vanilla Sky_, you were frozen for the past few years while _The Sims_, _Black and White_, _Ico_, _Super Monkey Ball_, _Halo_, _Starcraft_, _Freespace 2_, _Roller Coaster Tycoon_, _Jet Grind Radio_, _NFL 2K_, _The Evan Chan Murder Mystery_, _Soul Calibur_, and a bunch of other great games brought smiles to millions of faces?

quote: I like a challenge but there’s a fine line between challenging and ball busting. Whatever happened to video games designed with fun factor in mined? Does the game industry design video games to be used with clue books and cheat codes? (zelda64)

*Cough* Nintendo *Cough*...

And it works, so I see no sign they're going to stop. Meanwhile, they also produce some really interesting stuff like _Pikmin_ and a minority of the rest of the industry is producing great stuff as well. Open eyes, insert information, really, soon you'll be much happier.

quote: The problem with the industry is that it’s run by fucking pencil neck corporate suit leaches, which don’t like or play video games and get 95% of the profits.

No on both accounts. The industry is driven by the console makers and the retailers, followed by the publishers (if they aren't console makers themselves), who collectively rape developers on a daily basis. I understand what it takes to put out a great game, and I really respect those who pull it off.

quote: There is a lack of creative originality, and when there is some thing original it usually sucks.

That's just Sturgeon's Law: 90% of everything is crap. That's true of everything.

quote: It's because the companies copy from one another and don't improve or incorporate a new technology in the game.

Since most technology is gone within 6 months, they'd be nuts to do this. OTOH all the game developers chase DirectX updates because they know they can trust it to be around in a year.

quote: People (game players) have no say at what they want or like, the companies decide when, what and how you should play video games.

Actually, the free market of our society more or less controls what's being developed. Low sales == no sequel.

quote: Take for instance emulators like MAME. Why should they care if I download and play an old arcade game? There not selling it or making any money on it, so what's their problem? Their problem is that they are control freaks.

Because they have no choice but to care. If they let a single copyright slide, then a competitor can challenge them in court on any of their other copyrights, and usually win.

Nevertheless, they've been less effective than even the RIAA at stopping the trading of their IP.

quote: People should be able to get a chance to be able to make a game they want and not just level editors. I think, their needs to be a good game making program that is easy to use for anyone that doesn't know programming and if u know programming so not to consume your time. Then you can see some original games that you will never see in a narrow minded game industry.

Sounds like it's time for you to found a company and develop this magical product. Thanks, you rock! Think you'll have it out for Xmas 2002?

quote: Also it’s not what you know it seems but who you know. The industry is a private clique. And the odds are that if you are not friends with somebody in the company you can’t get in.

1. Everywhere you go, it's who you know, not what you know.
2. If you know where the compile button is in Visual Studio,
you can get a job somewhere in the video game industry.






Edited by - varelse on January 27, 2002 7:21:50 PM

I''m sorry, but just because there is a hint book out for something, it doesn''t mean you need it to play it. The Legend of Zelda: The Ocarina of Time was a bad example, if you ask me.
I found it incredibly enjoyable, and I didn''t want it to end when I did beat it. I regretted having told some of my friends that I was playing it since they automatically assumed I wanted them to tell me how to play it. They also thought that they were superior since they beat it in 3 days (woo). I beat it in however many days it took because I didn''t want to rush through it. I found it to be a great game that was enjoyable to play.

Anyway, lots of Nintendo games were made with fun in mind.
Anyway again, I agree that a complicated design that requires a clue book is wrong. Difficult puzzles that make no sense WITHIN the game are also wrong.
If there aren''t clues that tell me that the key to the door is encoded in octal, and I can only find out by guessing or getting a book (separate from the game, meaning extortion...ok that might be harsh), then the game is a bad game.

Of course, a lot of people obviously liked Myst. I might just have to give that game a decent go though, since I couldn''t really play it when I did (I had a friend who insisted that he had to play everything for me).

Still, I think you are discrediting a lot of good games, as has been pointed out on this forum.
You talk about how there is a lack of originality, and when there is something original, it usually sucks. I would like to know what it is you refer to here. Original games tend to be innovative in some way, and afterwards, people complain that every game made afterwards is unoriginal since you can only have one first ground breaking game. I think originality is sometimes given too much importance when judging the quality of a game.



-------------------------
(Gorgeous graphics)+(beautiful sound effects)+(symphonic music)+(no gameplay) != Good game

Is it just me or do the people who complain on this forum about nothing (understatement) sound like they have a big capital "L" on their foreheads? Maybe it''s just me.

<i>Dwarf with Axe: "IMO, games should be created to improve the individual."</i>

Ahem...

--

Come on. A game is a game. Quit complaining and quit with the weird viewpoints. No one really cares how long a _video game_ is. They''re that way because I don''t like _PAYING_ $50 for a game that lasts 3 hours. There are exceptions, yes-- Super Metroid lasted 3 hours and is one of my favorite games. All depends on the person, really.

And let me tell you something about emulators from MY viewpoint (I''ve heard enough from yours, okay buddy). They''re only there _BECAUSE_ people are defiant of the law and prefer to be. They say the same thing, too: "We''re not hurting anybody; Why is everyone after us?" And they try to turn the tables around. About video games... They did it with drugs, sex, rock&roll... they did it with everything-- and now they''re doing it with video games. Sounds dumb to me, but you do whatever you want.

Just don''t get played like a deck of cards.

Other than that, I agree with you... not.

quote: Because they have no choice but to care. If they let a single copyright slide, then a competitor can challenge them in court on any of their other copyrights, and usually win.

I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice, but I am pretty certain that you are confusing copyrights and trademarks. You only stand the chance to lose the right to a trademark if you do not actively defend it, and even then you just lose the right to the particular trademark that you do not defend, not any others that you might have.

quote: Original post by varelse
2. If you know where the compile button is in Visual Studio,
you can get a job somewhere in the video game industry.

There''s a compile button? Whoa...

Imagine putting that on your resume! :D



Dave Mark
Intrinsic Algorithm Development
"Reducing the world to mathematical equations!"

I have played games for a fairly long time. I've had pong that attached to a tv, with two little analouge controllers. I've had two ZX-Spectrums (you need two to play some submarine game - I forget the name). I've had a variety of PC's and played a variety of games, from older ones such as Doom, and Indiana Jones, through to newer ones (I'm at Uni now, so the most recent game I have been able to buy was RTCW.) My favourite game? I have two. Civilistation II, and Half-Life.

Civilisation II is an great game (I'll probably buy Civ III soon anyway) and is probably the ultimate victory of substance over style. It's dynamic and scale will appeal to anyone with a strategically orientated design.

Half-Life blew me away. I'd only just finished QII when I brought it, but it was amazing. Ok, it has an unoriginal veiwpoint and style, which has remained largely unchanged since Doom (except for 3d). The story is nothing special. But the telling of that story, coupled with some great AI, level design and scripting, made it a gripping game, one of the most exiting, challenging and memorable at the time. It still plays as good as anything else today.

When Half-Life came out, it was cutting edge with things such as graphics and sound, and it wouldn't surprise me if I learnt that a lot of money had been spent on its production.

The point is, that things such as good graphics and technology don't always kill gameplay, it's just more of a balancing act. Recent games, such as Max Payne, and Black and White, have also pulled off good gameplay with good graphics.

It is a shame that hint books are needed for some people; a greater range of difficulty settings in a game would definately help less gifted players enjoy games more, but I have never needed tham, and few of my game playing friends have need them, and I guess that some games are made more difficult to try and keep the regular player like me buying games. I like more complicated games. Solving puzzles is fun. Coming up with killer strategie is fun. At least for me anyway.

The gaming industry doesen't suck; it's built on firm principles with a growing audience worldwide. I for one do not want to go back to playing 'Manic Miner' on the Spectrum, regardless of the novelty of it when I was young. There are enough great games out there, and the are lots more on the way.

Edited by - Focus on January 28, 2002 2:37:19 PM

quote: Original post by InnocuousFox

Original post by Metal Head
Are long complicated games fun? Do more hours, harder stages, difficult puzzles (that make no sense) and a complicated design (to where you need a clue book) make a videogame better? No, it does not! It only makes a game frustrating and playable only ones, and yet I see every pro game like this.

quote:
Perhaps this is not a universal problem but something specific to a certain, less capable class of user? You have used a few subjective terms there… long, complicated, harder, difficult (making no sense), and complicated. Those terms are all specific to an individual player. If we designed all games so that people with IQs of 80 and the attention span of a goldfish could use them, I think that the other 95% of the population would quickly tire.

I don't think you quite get see whole message of what Metal Head wanted to tell, although I have to admit that he expressed the problem in a less than ideal way. He is right that games tend to be bloated in content nowadays, partially even overly complicated, just trying to simulate something as "real" as possible, though I agree with you that games should not become easier overall. Games are long relative to what their systems have to offer. Take Baldur's Gate. RPG fans care about the story, but the gameplay is repetitive like in most RPGs, and developers overstretch it. Some people like the stories and that is ok, it surely has its customer base. But sometimes I really think that they sometimes should put the time somewhere else…

People should be able to get a chance to be able to make a game they want and not just level editors. I think, their needs to be a good game making program that is easy to use for anyone that doesn't know programming and if u know programming so not to consume your time. Then you can see some original games that you will never see in a narrow minded game industry.

quote:
And people should be able to build their own cars, houses, and airplanes so that we can have exactly what we want. How come no one has created a simple way of designing and building your own custom car without any knowledge of engineering? Maybe you would see some better cars! And why should I be stuck with the airplanes that Boeing, Airbus, Raytheon, etc. crank out? They should provide me with a way of making my OWN plane from scratch!

There you are only partially right. I agree that it would not improve cars, since cars and planes are necessarily highly technical and expensive with todays assembly methods. "Everyone should be able to make music" is actually a better comparison in my opinion. It is a more volatile medium, and basically unexpensive, but also needs technical skill (every artform does in some way). I really believe that it could help to design more abstract gameplay methods, to let people experiment more quickly and easily, which would certainly aid in the difficult quest for the small margin between chaos and stability. There are some high level langugaes already, like Blitz3D, but of course then you have less control, it just depends if you really need it, and most modern games actually really would not need it in terms of gameplay, but its nice to look at anyway.

quote: Do what you want! Don't do what the trend is!
No one is stopping you. Create your own company, son! I did.

Why always so sarcastic? This is something I find terrible about forums like this, they become an annoying place to discuss, since it is only destructive.

quote:
Dave Mark
Intrinsic Algorithm Development
"Reducing the entire world to mathematical equations!"

Good luck in your quest

Edited by - kralizec on January 28, 2002 2:55:23 PM

Edited by - kralizec on January 28, 2002 2:57:02 PM

Edited by - kralizec on January 28, 2002 2:58:42 PM

Edited by - kralizec on January 28, 2002 3:00:39 PM

So I''m reading a book today and I came across a quote that I thought I''d share. It half applies, half doesn''t, but hey, it''s fun.
"Complete amatures whose only relevant skill is programming undertake to design games with no further preparation than their own experience as game players. Those who overrate their own understanding undercut their own potential for learning."

Bonus points to anyone who can identify the book

quote: Original post by Kralizec
Why always so sarcastic? This is something I find terrible about forums like this, they become an annoying place to discuss, since it is only destructive.

I agree. A lot of people come looking for answers, and a lot of responses tend to be sarcastic and unhelpful. Sometimes it is funny to read, but other times you feel sorry for the people who have actual questions that don''t get answered.


-------------------------
(Gorgeous graphics)+(beautiful sound effects)+(symphonic music)+(no gameplay) != Good game