The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
Please vote in the Forum Structure Poll. Polling will close at 2PM EST on January 21, 2025.

"The gaming industry unimaginative, and trivial due to games like BlackOps" says dev

1235»

Posts

  • MachismoMachismo Registered User regular
    edited November 2010
    Henroid wrote: »
    Machismo wrote: »
    Plenty of room for innovation, just a lot of it will fail.

    "Fail" doesn't mean what it should, sadly. I think the concept of failure means not being on the top 5 of a top 10 chart, or not selling millions. But anyway that's another discussion.

    Ya, I mean a financial failure. It needs to pay off the development costs and management costs for the publisher and come out ahead. You see EA and such making XBLA games because the costs are low enough that a 50k sales will cover everything.

    You can't make a BLOPS scale (in cost and development size) version of Minecraft. People won't be willing to 'try' it for $60. So 10 euro works out.


    Just another reason for why retail games should have a whole spectrum of prices at release. Alan Wake, if sold for $40 would have been picked up more readily. Instead, people skip it for Red Dead Redemption (not a bad choice) and never look at Alan Wake until they see it for sale for $20 on Amazon.

    If the decision was $40 for Alan Wake or $60 for Red Dead Redemption, I think both games would have gotten nice sales figures.

    Machismo on
    steam_sig.png
  • TurkeyTurkey So, Usoop. TampaRegistered User regular
    edited November 2010
    The developer claimed that the game was completed early this year. What stops them from releasing it independently?

    Turkey on
  • Delta AssaultDelta Assault Registered User regular
    edited November 2010
    Machismo wrote: »
    Ya, I mean a financial failure. It needs to pay off the development costs and management costs for the publisher and come out ahead. You see EA and such making XBLA games because the costs are low enough that a 50k sales will cover everything.

    You can't make a BLOPS scale (in cost and development size) version of Minecraft. People won't be willing to 'try' it for $60. So 10 euro works out.


    Just another reason for why retail games should have a whole spectrum of prices at release. Alan Wake, if sold for $40 would have been picked up more readily. Instead, people skip it for Red Dead Redemption (not a bad choice) and never look at Alan Wake until they see it for sale for $20 on Amazon.

    If the decision was $40 for Alan Wake or $60 for Red Dead Redemption, I think both games would have gotten nice sales figures.

    Yep. I said the same exact thing when Mirror's Edge and PoP '08 came out. Good games, but not a great proposition at 60 bucks.

    Delta Assault on
  • HenroidHenroid Mexican kicked from Immigration Thread Centrism is Racism :3Registered User regular
    edited November 2010
    Agreed with Machismo 100%.

    Henroid on
  • DacDac Registered User regular
    edited November 2010
    A game that's a good GAME doesn't necessarily need to be art. Examples include Tetris, Angry Birds, breakout, bejeweled... There are tons of other examples.

    But art that's good ART doesn't necessarily need to be a good game, either. It's just a lot harder to do, and I can't think of too many examples off the top of my head (Silent Hill 2 maybe?).

    It's generally in trying to straddle both qualities that most games end up falling short. While making a great game that's also great art is possible, true examples are very few and far between.

    I think the gaming industry in general would be better served if developers stuck to their fundamental goals in a game. By that I mean, if a developer isn't concerned with the plot of a game, they shouldn't have to feel as if they need to shoehorn some dramatic structure in just because it's what has settled into the collective consciousness as 'what you do.' If you throw a half-assed, poorly written story into an otherwise great experience, it takes away from it, not adds.

    Imagine if, in God of War, every boss fight we had to sit through a couple minutes of cinematics where we were forced to watch Kratos and some feminine love interest engage in poorly written romance.

    Dac on
    Steam: catseye543
    PSN: ShogunGunshow
    Origin: ShogunGunshow
  • The Reverend Dr GalactusThe Reverend Dr Galactus Registered User regular
    edited November 2010
    Does anyone have any figures on development budgets for major-publisher, new-IP games versus major-publisher, popular-IP games? I wonder if the more restricted budgets for non-franchise games combined with the pressure of coming from a triple-A publisher sometimes results in the unevenness in awesome-but-flawed games like Mirror's Edge.

    Alternatively, it seems that a lot could be solved in the industry with an adherence to the simple rule that if you deploved a game MAKE IT WITHOUT ANY PROBLES.

    The Reverend Dr Galactus on
    valar-moreshellus.png
    PSN:RevDrGalactus/NN:RevDrGalactus/Steam
  • NuzakNuzak Registered User regular
    edited November 2010
    rRootagea wrote: »
    Jaunty wrote: »
    It's like saying it's sad that some people play soccer instead of joining an acting troupe, the comparison is completely without merit. Games can fill any number of niches, and I'd be hard-pressed to rank them in terms of validity.

    This, right here, is the fundamental paradox of the gaming medium.

    It's two completely different, thousands-of-years-old traditions coexisting in a single medium. The ancient tradition of participatory sport, with its emphasis on competition and skill, and the ancient tradition of the bard, with its emphasis on characters and plots. For centuries, sport and art existed separately, but in the late 20th Century, they came together. The relationship has been uneasy ever since.

    The thing is, in the world of gaming, you can't separate them. You can't have a game that doesn't at some level involve skill and competition, and even for games purely focused on gameplay dynamics with no story or characters to speak of, some element of art and creativity has to be there for the game to have any staying power.

    Gaming is a strange medium.

    I just heard the Idle Thumbs podcast discuss how the length of games and level segmentation encourages convoluted plot lines similar to that of serial tv shows, while the best stories in games are simpler plots not so much told but explored in a meaningful way.

    e.g.
    for Portal: "You get a neat gun, but you are a disposable guinea pig, so you outsmart the malicious AI"
    for SoC: "You must slay 16 giants, but killing them makes you a bad person, so you die"

    Basically less scripted sequences, more evocative play mechanics or setting makes for "good story" in games I guess.

    this is true, but i'm not sure i would like all games to go completely minimalist with their story. i still liked GTA4's story, despite the amount of scripting it had.

    Nuzak on
  • rRootagearRootagea MadisonRegistered User regular
    edited November 2010
    All I remember about GTA4 is driving everywhere and shooting everyone.
    To me the City setting, with all its faults and fidelity, was the story; moreso than Niko's gang drug money problems.

    Scripted sequences was probably the wrong word (since games run on scripts) . I meant intrusive writing or dialogue directed at the player to convey events, like in a cutscene where something random downs your chopper or you are told to go to this oddly vital location.

    rRootagea on
  • JauntyJaunty Registered User regular
    edited November 2010
    Jaunty wrote: »
    It's like saying it's sad that some people play soccer instead of joining an acting troupe, the comparison is completely without merit. Games can fill any number of niches, and I'd be hard-pressed to rank them in terms of validity.

    This, right here, is the fundamental paradox of the gaming medium.

    It's two completely different, thousands-of-years-old traditions coexisting in a single medium. The ancient tradition of participatory sport, with its emphasis on competition and skill, and the ancient tradition of the bard, with its emphasis on characters and plots. For centuries, sport and art existed separately, but in the late 20th Century, they came together. The relationship has been uneasy ever since.

    The thing is, in the world of gaming, you can't separate them. You can't have a game that doesn't at some level involve skill and competition, and even for games purely focused on gameplay dynamics with no story or characters to speak of, some element of art and creativity has to be there for the game to have any staying power.

    Gaming is a strange medium.

    I agree that today gaming is often the convergence of sport and story-telling, but I disagree that you can't separate the two and still have worthwhile games. Interactive fiction and adventure games are not a matter of skill, purely one of story. Certainly not stories crafted in the traditional fashion, but stories none the less. On the opposite end of the spectrum you have games of pure skill, where story is either completely omitted or utterly irrelevant.

    In between the two extremes, those two elements are combined infinitely varying ratios. My point is that a game cannot be judged just on how much of each it tries to include. Something that's more story than sport is not intrinsically better than something that's nearly all sport, or entirely story.

    edit: and those aren't even the only elements that exist in gaming. More and more, gaming is becoming about showing you something new just visually. Things like Mirror's Edge or Zeno Clash, where the aesthetic is just as important as story or skill (if not, more so).

    Jaunty on
    qcklw92m98s0.png
  • The Reverend Dr GalactusThe Reverend Dr Galactus Registered User regular
    edited November 2010
    Jaunty wrote: »
    Jaunty wrote: »
    It's like saying it's sad that some people play soccer instead of joining an acting troupe, the comparison is completely without merit. Games can fill any number of niches, and I'd be hard-pressed to rank them in terms of validity.

    This, right here, is the fundamental paradox of the gaming medium.

    It's two completely different, thousands-of-years-old traditions coexisting in a single medium. The ancient tradition of participatory sport, with its emphasis on competition and skill, and the ancient tradition of the bard, with its emphasis on characters and plots. For centuries, sport and art existed separately, but in the late 20th Century, they came together. The relationship has been uneasy ever since.

    The thing is, in the world of gaming, you can't separate them. You can't have a game that doesn't at some level involve skill and competition, and even for games purely focused on gameplay dynamics with no story or characters to speak of, some element of art and creativity has to be there for the game to have any staying power.

    Gaming is a strange medium.

    I agree that today gaming is often the convergence of sport and story-telling, but I disagree that you can't separate the two and still have worthwhile games. Interactive fiction and adventure games are not a matter of skill, purely one of story. Certainly not stories crafted in the traditional fashion, but stories none the less. On the opposite end of the spectrum you have games of pure skill, where story is either completely omitted or utterly irrelevant.

    In between the two extremes, those two elements are combined infinitely varying ratios. My point is that a game cannot be judged just on how much of each it tries to include. Something that's more story than sport is not intrinsically better than something that's nearly all sport, or entirely story.

    edit: and those aren't even the only elements that exist in gaming. More and more, gaming is becoming about showing you something new just visually. Things like Mirror's Edge or Zeno Clash, where the aesthetic is just as important as story or skill (if not, more so).

    You make a good case. Maybe I'm defining both ends of the spectrum too narrowly, though -- skill (of the sporting variety) may not exactly be what you're using in an interactive story, but you are still calling upon some sort of personal resource to make your decisions. Likewise, a game that has no story, setting, or anything apart from abstract visual feedback, is definitely not calling upon the dramatic tradition at all, but it still can't happen without some kind of creative decisions from its author.

    Mirror's Edge is one of those games that is fascinating to me because of how much it is and isn't about its story. The actual narrative, and the way it's delivered, is incredibly clumsy and borders on trite -- yet somehow, the world the story takes place in, conveyed by every minute you spend in a freshly-painted hallway or leaping across sunny rooftops, feels unforgetabbly alive and vibrant.

    The Reverend Dr Galactus on
    valar-moreshellus.png
    PSN:RevDrGalactus/NN:RevDrGalactus/Steam
  • HallowedFaithHallowedFaith Call me Cloud. Registered User regular
    edited November 2010
    People should just smoke more pot.









    What.

    HallowedFaith on
    I'm making video games. DesignBy.Cloud
  • rRootagearRootagea MadisonRegistered User regular
    edited November 2010
    Games are really hard to make.
    Complexity exponentially increases the amount of time needed to tame it.
    The more complex games gets, the harder it is to deviate from known/unimaginative implementations.
    I think game developers are already working as hard as they can.

    For instance, if you wanted to make a 3d game engine with molecule-based models instead of polygons, then you'd pretty much have to write your own directX instructions to load and display them. And directX started out when?

    We all want creative and impressive games, but it's not even a commercial issue, its a building-a-submarine-when-all-you-have-are-lamborghinis sort of problem.

    rRootagea on
  • JauntyJaunty Registered User regular
    edited November 2010
    Jaunty wrote: »
    Jaunty wrote: »
    It's like saying it's sad that some people play soccer instead of joining an acting troupe, the comparison is completely without merit. Games can fill any number of niches, and I'd be hard-pressed to rank them in terms of validity.

    This, right here, is the fundamental paradox of the gaming medium.

    It's two completely different, thousands-of-years-old traditions coexisting in a single medium. The ancient tradition of participatory sport, with its emphasis on competition and skill, and the ancient tradition of the bard, with its emphasis on characters and plots. For centuries, sport and art existed separately, but in the late 20th Century, they came together. The relationship has been uneasy ever since.

    The thing is, in the world of gaming, you can't separate them. You can't have a game that doesn't at some level involve skill and competition, and even for games purely focused on gameplay dynamics with no story or characters to speak of, some element of art and creativity has to be there for the game to have any staying power.

    Gaming is a strange medium.

    I agree that today gaming is often the convergence of sport and story-telling, but I disagree that you can't separate the two and still have worthwhile games. Interactive fiction and adventure games are not a matter of skill, purely one of story. Certainly not stories crafted in the traditional fashion, but stories none the less. On the opposite end of the spectrum you have games of pure skill, where story is either completely omitted or utterly irrelevant.

    In between the two extremes, those two elements are combined infinitely varying ratios. My point is that a game cannot be judged just on how much of each it tries to include. Something that's more story than sport is not intrinsically better than something that's nearly all sport, or entirely story.

    edit: and those aren't even the only elements that exist in gaming. More and more, gaming is becoming about showing you something new just visually. Things like Mirror's Edge or Zeno Clash, where the aesthetic is just as important as story or skill (if not, more so).

    You make a good case. Maybe I'm defining both ends of the spectrum too narrowly, though -- skill (of the sporting variety) may not exactly be what you're using in an interactive story, but you are still calling upon some sort of personal resource to make your decisions. Likewise, a game that has no story, setting, or anything apart from abstract visual feedback, is definitely not calling upon the dramatic tradition at all, but it still can't happen without some kind of creative decisions from its author.

    Mirror's Edge is one of those games that is fascinating to me because of how much it is and isn't about its story. The actual narrative, and the way it's delivered, is incredibly clumsy and borders on trite -- yet somehow, the world the story takes place in, conveyed by every minute you spend in a freshly-painted hallway or leaping across sunny rooftops, feels unforgetabbly alive and vibrant.

    That was exactly how I felt about Mirror's Edge. It definitely had a story, and had a pretty big focus on skill and timing, but in the end it was just what the world looked and felt like that really stuck with me and kept me coming back to it.

    Jaunty on
    qcklw92m98s0.png
  • override367override367 ALL minions Registered User regular
    edited November 2010
    Drake wrote: »
    SvK wrote: »
    splash wrote: »
    Mirror's Edge was a good game but it was kind of niche. If it was expanded, using the same theme, to be a fuller game experience such as Thief or Beyond Good and Evil I think it could be excellent (and more mainstream).

    You may get your wish.

    I'm just going to take a moment out from the discussion at hand to say oh... My... GOOOOOODDDDDDD!!!!!!!

    YEEEEEEESSSSSSS!!!!!!!!!!!

    JADE! I LOVE YOU JADE!

    Looks 100% fake

    override367 on
  • DrakeDrake Edgelord Trash Below the ecliptic plane.Registered User regular
    edited November 2010
    Drake wrote: »
    SvK wrote: »
    splash wrote: »
    Mirror's Edge was a good game but it was kind of niche. If it was expanded, using the same theme, to be a fuller game experience such as Thief or Beyond Good and Evil I think it could be excellent (and more mainstream).

    You may get your wish.

    I'm just going to take a moment out from the discussion at hand to say oh... My... GOOOOOODDDDDDD!!!!!!!

    YEEEEEEESSSSSSS!!!!!!!!!!!

    JADE! I LOVE YOU JADE!

    Looks 100% fake

    That'd be a lot of effort for a fake.

    Drake on
  • SynthesisSynthesis Honda Today! Registered User regular
    edited November 2010
    Drake wrote: »
    SvK wrote: »
    splash wrote: »
    Mirror's Edge was a good game but it was kind of niche. If it was expanded, using the same theme, to be a fuller game experience such as Thief or Beyond Good and Evil I think it could be excellent (and more mainstream).

    You may get your wish.

    I'm just going to take a moment out from the discussion at hand to say oh... My... GOOOOOODDDDDDD!!!!!!!

    YEEEEEEESSSSSSS!!!!!!!!!!!

    JADE! I LOVE YOU JADE!

    Looks 100% fake

    Why do you have to kill [strike]our[/strike] his childlike innocence? Why?

    Actually, I'd be happy enough if this was a goal video for something that was still pursing the goal. I don't need it to look this good, I just want the damn sequel.

    Synthesis on
  • DrakeDrake Edgelord Trash Below the ecliptic plane.Registered User regular
    edited November 2010
    I'm gonna go cut myself now.

    Drake on
  • SynthesisSynthesis Honda Today! Registered User regular
    edited November 2010
    If you do that, Override wins.

    Synthesis on
  • SpoitSpoit *twitch twitch* Registered User regular
    edited November 2010
    i buy most games purely for aesthetics/artstyle. this has resulted in enormously varied results.
    It's a shame that it's been more than 3 years and there are still barely any games which approach Crysis level of shininess. Mirror's Edge PC is one of them. Maybe Metro 2033.

    But other than that, AAA titles are full of muddy textures and UE3's lack of good AA

    Spoit on
    steam_sig.png
  • curly haired boycurly haired boy Your Friendly Neighborhood Torgue Dealer Registered User regular
    edited November 2010
    Spoit wrote: »
    i buy most games purely for aesthetics/artstyle. this has resulted in enormously varied results.
    It's a shame that it's been more than 3 years and there are still barely any games which approach Crysis level of shininess. Mirror's Edge PC is one of them. Maybe Metro 2033.

    But other than that, AAA titles are full of muddy textures and UE3's lack of good AA

    well iunno man, Just Cause 2 is damnnnn pretty

    curly haired boy on
    RxI0N.png
    Registered just for the Mass Effect threads | Steam: click ^^^ | Origin: curlyhairedboy
  • SpoitSpoit *twitch twitch* Registered User regular
    edited November 2010
    Spoit wrote: »
    i buy most games purely for aesthetics/artstyle. this has resulted in enormously varied results.
    It's a shame that it's been more than 3 years and there are still barely any games which approach Crysis level of shininess. Mirror's Edge PC is one of them. Maybe Metro 2033.

    But other than that, AAA titles are full of muddy textures and UE3's lack of good AA

    well iunno man, Just Cause 2 is damnnnn pretty

    Oh yeah, forgot about that. For a typically console oriented company, Square Enix is doing a much better job with managing PC ports for it's developers than Edios ever did

    Spoit on
    steam_sig.png
  • override367override367 ALL minions Registered User regular
    edited November 2010
    Synthesis wrote: »
    If you do that, Override wins.

    It's my goal to daily crush at least one person's dreams

    override367 on
  • Pablo the PenguinPablo the Penguin Registered User regular
    edited November 2010
    Synthesis wrote: »
    If you do that, Override wins.

    It's my goal to daily crush at least one person's dreams

    Congratulations! You have unlocked the Dream Crusher Perk:
    Dream_Crusher.png
    The chances of an enemy critically hitting you have been reduced by 50%

    Pablo the Penguin on
  • JauntyJaunty Registered User regular
    edited November 2010
    don't you mean increased by 50%

    Jaunty on
    qcklw92m98s0.png
Sign In or Register to comment.