It's Getting Harder To Impress Me With

Off-Topic
21

First: I haven’t read any of the replies, so don’t arrest me if I say anything that has already been said, but…

The GOOD thing about the graphics reaching a peak, is that the developers realize that “hey, since we can’t make better GRAPHICS, we have to make better GAMEPLAY.”

And, since games are getting more and more expensive to produce, (due to the graphics work and so forth which takes ages, to make the games look more and more real) only the best ideas will pass through the developers eyes.

Although, this is also something which can result in game companies only going for sequals of success-games.

What I’m saying is that game-developers will think twice, maybe thrice before trying to create something “new”, because there might be too much money involved in the project to gamble on.

Viva Wee!

22

That spore game takes my fancy, pretty damn impressive stuff, and absolutely huge (far beyond good old Elite/Frontier etc). I think there might be a lot of my time wasted playing that from November!

23

Here are some examples of what I mean: http://www.infraxes.com/kizzume/artwork.html

Granted, the engine I was working with was very poor.

24

I agree with the whole ‘realism’ push…didn’t we originally play games to escape reality? Games try too much to emulate movies but with a controller attatched. I don’t care for this.

I also don’t care for graphics being the focal point and when I’m in a game store and hear someone in the store saying a crappy game looks good and he wants to get it, it makes me shudder…they are the reason this trend continues.

I’ve REALLY wanted to see what a game running on, say the PS3, with nothing but as many flat shaded polygons (not even garoud shading) as the machine can handle while maintaining 60fps would look like…they could even write some strange story as to WHY everyone looks like that and have some kind of play mechanic involving the poly’s somehow…

There’s so many options and doors people simply won’t go through, sacrificing creativity for realism…sad, really.

25

One thing I’m surprised there isn’t more of are games that support 2 players on 2 separate screens & controllers (as opposed to split screens). Today’s modern systems should easily be capable of providing the ability to have 2 ‘cut down’ versions of a game on one machine surely?

26

Possibly, but who would use this anyway?
I consider having two instances of the same game running on the machine (because that is what you more or less are doing on a dualscreen machine) might eat too much cpu power to take it. Seriously the GPU would probably not be capable of taking that amount of power.
Unless you have a double GPU board construction like some Main boards support.

27

All the time, all the time… at parties or with friends. It is a much more social way of playing video games… rather than having to have your own console and screen…

28

splinter cell chaos theory had a “coop” mode which I never played because I don’t know anyone who wants to play this game, a pity. And splinter cell in general is a great game, mainly because of the “stealth” stuff, in a normal FPS you see an enemy, click your mouse and he is dead (after a while), while in splinter cell it’s more about avoiding or stunning enemies without anyone noticing. This means that the adrenaline-rush is much more sustained, sometimes you hide in a corner for a minute and fear being detected all the time … very intense.

and as for gameplay vs. graphics, after reading an old review recently I have just decided to sink some of my precious time into playing deus ex again.

Oh, and stalker is quite cool, but I managed to fxxx my savegame up after about 20 hours of playing, started from scratch, got frustrated and deleted it. The running around sucks, it takes ages to get from a to b. But I will possibly give this another try in a few weeks or months, because it is really good, I just managed to ruin it for me.

29

There is a trainer for Stalker if you are that desperate.

30

Nah, I am never cheating. Or atleast only if I am really, really fed up with a game and just want to see the endsequence. And a trainer can’t bring back the things I accomplished (and missed) and Stalker is pretty nonlinear, it’s not like “play for a few hours to get to the point where I was”.
I really just plan to forget about the game and then just play it again, when I can do missions I did before without getting frustrated (because I did them before).

And as I said, though I am not really the huge gamer (suddenly lost interest in this a few year ago) I will look through my old boxes for deus ex, I am pretty sure I never sold/traded that one.

31

You should have a look at armed assault. This goes directly against the overly realistic argument though, but more with actual gameplay… its essentially a military simulator
(oh, if you do look at this, a) the single player is a joke, go online b) the AI is amazingly improved in the latest patch. Make sure you dont form an oppinion based on the boxed version. c) be prepared to shit your pants a few times and have multiple heart attacks. Its scary in a realistic way…)

32

Since ETF (enemy team fortress, a mod for enemy territory) more or less died (PITY! ROCKS!) I reinstalled RTCW, and to my surprise it’s a blast, even unpatched (the server side mods ar pretty advanced). Of course the graphics aren’t bad, but totally irrelevant. It’s the gameplay that rocks. I think what adds to he fun is the sound though, especially the voice chats haha.

If you know of anything comparable to this please tell me… in the meantime I just won’t bother, I don’t have patience for the slow stuff kids play today :P

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1mS5XpjUyd8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yNNvG52OIZ0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EJT8Ydas7xA

33

you might try out “Psychonauts”. Personally, i didn’t like it , but it’s very critically acclaimed. it’s a 3rd person action platformer for PC, in which a large portion of the game takes place inside of peoples’ minds.

34

i dunno if this is mentioned.
http://www.secondlife.com/ .

i’ve seen some very meticulously created models in second life.
a buddy of mine was greeted by a person the other day using a 07’ Transformer. the guy was so big he couldnt go into the building my buddy built, he didnt know which transformer it was, an i havent seen it yet, but the mecha, anime mecha & vehicles get pretty damn impressive!

i also read recently in a mit pub that google is intending to pair up with second life somehow. i guess it will pretty much become the 3d internet we’ve been awaiting.

35

the funniest thing about second life is something i read about how somebody created a machine that was capable of reproducing itself automatically. as soon as he unleashed it, it multiplied exponentially, filled the entire gameworld with itself, and crashed all the servers…

HAHAHAH

36

I’ve been on Second Life for about a year now. Fmeh Tagore is my handle on that. Don’t play it much anymore though–there are too many people who take the world too seriously as if it’s real life, and get offended at just as silly of things as they do in real life. Too many prudes there–but if you find the right places, it can still be fun.

37

Here’s a new terrain I’ve been working on:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nshJg01BSz4

flying through it at low quality:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h7GJKlQoVw0

38

What? Does anyone care about ANYTHING (games concerned) except the freakin’ graphics?
Bhuh!

The last exciting and worthy FPS was Return to Castle Wolfenstein. Now THAT was a game.

Before that, the last thing I remember was Clive Barker’s Undying.

The last playable (still have it installed on my PC) 3-d game was Silent Storm (and its excellent 3 mods), by russian producers Nival.

Now I may enter a CD-shop, close my eyes, wave a hand around and point my index finger onto ANY new release and say ‘This is a load of hogwash, not a game worth byuing.’
And I’d hit the target in 99.9 cases out of 100.

Because game designers have been blindly trying to impress me with newer and catchier types of ‘graphic realism’ instead of creating a unique game world which can’t be seen in reality.

Stalker? The game it took my GSC (my former employers, btw) 6 (!!) years to make just to impress me with ‘realistic’ views of 3d Chernobyl? Do I wanna play ‘rapid-mouse-clickin’ arcade, and avoid the ‘radioactive pigs’ while shooting some silly jumping figurines in a grey dump?
It don’t even make me smile. It’s dead. Dead and not moving.
If you want to experience real ‘stalking’, read ‘A Highway Picnic’ by brothers Strugatzki. The said computer game is just a lame attempt at building some kind of thrill from that outstanding book. Attempt failed for me, because I read that book. It’s no match for computer games.

The art of game design? It seems to be past stagnation, a rotting corpse.
The first symptoms of fatal infection were to notice when 3d was introduced into gaming world (I remember suspecting the bleak future ahead when I saw Hexen 2 in 1998) allowing faster design scheme and people started to care more about the ‘looks’ than about the ‘rules’. The designers more and more seemed to forget that its the logic of the game that makes it an exciting thing, not the ‘looks’ only.

Nowadays the art of game design seems to have turned into a sort of zombie driven by ‘magic’ of corporate managers who (oh, joy!) discovered a ‘scheme’ for quick revenue: four months in development, one month sales, bury and forget, start another one.

‘Realistic graphics’, ‘real-world physics’, shaders, polygons, mip-maps - screw all that. It killed off the joy of gaming, because no one cares about the art anymore. It’s just about the sales now. Sell the graphic cards, sell the motherboards, sell the games.
Screw that.

I read the book instead, and use the the ‘shaders’ of my own mind.
And trust me, your graphic accelerator is no match for that. Not today, nor tomorrow.

39

Total disagreement in all areas from me, I’m afraid.

40

bioshock is supposed to be pretty good. i haven’t had a chance to try the demo, due to miscellaenous issues such as not enough time & computer problems.

but as a reply to 0l3ks4 about what games are fun… the most fun games to me are ones that have simple premises, but are difficult to master and require lots of dexterity and timing. for example, i was recently addicted to “kuru kuru kururin” for gameboy advance

which is similar to one of those arcade games where you have to move the metal ring along the track without touching the sides, except in this game, your stick is constantly spinning … very addictive and very fun, and the graphics don’t make a bit of difference. hell, they could be wireframe and it would still rule :D :D :D

and also can i get a witness for marble madness clones??? these provide hours of enjoyment… and i seem to better like ones that are harder to control – i.e. have more ball momentum going on, because it requires more precise movement and trial and error to navigate it across narrow areas without falling off

anyway … to address your concern directly, i don’t think there are very many people at all that only play games for the graphics… if you think back to the early 1990’s at the rise of CD-ROM drives, think of all the “interactive movie” style games coming out for PC and late generation 16 bit cd based consoles. most of them were sucky, nobody liked them, and the genre quickly died off by 1995. this is proof not only that

  1. graphics don’t make the game
    but also
  2. most people understand that

i don’t mind good graphics at all, they serve only to enhance the experience of a game with an already good foundation :)

plus, you have to take into consideration that there is a market for every play style and every type of gamer. for example, you probably don’t play the same type of games now that you did 10 or 20 years ago, do you? there are people now (kids) who are new to the experience of gaming, and simpler, less dynamic games are more suited to their tastes and gameplay preferences.

the market is flooded with releases… but look at it this way: 90% of games are probably considered crap by 100% of people… or you could say it the other way around: every game is considered crap by someone. you just have to search to find the ones that suit your tastes, whatever that be. if you’re burned out and you can’t find anything good to play anymore, that’s too bad :( but maybe it’s time to move on to doing something else other than playing games?

me personally, i’ve also lately been playing a lot of insanely hard super mario bros 1 custom levels that give you hundreds of lives and you have to basically memorize the entire level to be able to get through it… because it’s challenging and fun for me. i’m a 2d platformer junkie and i have recently come to appreciate the perfection that is the super mario bros 1 engine. there aren’t any other games (not even mario 2 or 3) that have such a sense of momentum (think about how long it takes to run up to full speed). most other 2d platformers, if they even have a “run” button at all, it is just to turn it on and off… not to accelerate so gradually. anyway, this makes timing difficult jumps incredibly fun (i’m talking levels where there’s no ground and it’s just a bunch of 1 block platforms :D ). in fact, now i’m compelled to make a video just to show why i love it so much!

p.s… i have to disagree about return to wolfenstein. quake 3 engine was crap. i could never get vsync to work with it. at the time i was playing other fps’s like thief & no one lives forever :)