Playstation 4 and the importance of E3 2015

[XtremelyBaneful]

there's a reason the last of us is considered by some to be the greatest game of all time.

 

[jmc]

As other have said it seems more a gaming industry problem than a Sony issue. I can appreciate that games are really trying to be this in-depth, slow burn type of thing, it's actually very compelling to play through. At the same time though I think things are starting to get a little muddied and that gameplay for some titles has started to give way to the story. It's a delicate balance I understand but I feel as if there's too much trying to be something it isn't. Video games aren't cinema and they shouldn't strive to be. If you want to make a movie then make a movie. I do think an element of fun has slowly been taken out of the games and I think this has been a mistake. Not everything has to be this sprawling epic or taken deadly seriously, and not everything has to be first person shooters or massive open worlds. I think things have gotten far more complicated than they frankly needed to be. Maybe going back to the basics a bit more will help.

 

[XtremelyBaneful]

As other have said it seems more a gaming industry problem than a Sony issue. I can appreciate that games are really trying to be this in-depth, slow burn type of thing, it's actually very compelling to play through. At the same time though I think things are starting to get a little muddied and that gameplay for some titles has started to give way to the story. It's a delicate balance I understand but I feel as if there's too much trying to be something it isn't. Video games aren't cinema and they shouldn't strive to be. If you want to make a movie then make a movie. I do think an element of fun has slowly been taken out of the games and I think this has been a mistake. Not everything has to be this sprawling epic or taken deadly seriously, and not everything has to be first person shooters or massive open worlds. I think things have gotten far more complicated than they frankly needed to be. Maybe going back to the basics a bit more will help.

I understand what you're saying, but I think this issue is being highlighted a lot as an after effect to the order 1886. in fact, i'd argue that most games these days in the industry strive much more to refine gameplay than story. i see very few games placing emphasis on story and a cinematic feel. unless of course that is the main point of the game.

at the end of the day, these products are video games, so gameplay is the most important thing but for me personally - I like to like the story of a game. just like with a film, I like to like the story behind it, not just the characters and what's all going on behind them/beautiful effects and cgi and what not. well, that is a little different because a movie can have a ton of beautiful effects but no one is gonna like if the movie itself is a mess.

but i mean something like... avatar which, is the most cliche example to use here - i didn't like the story although i was very excited about the movie because of the sci fi but scene after scene it became so extremely predictable that i just could not like it, although i respect it for the groundbreaking cgi it uncovered.

 

[jmc]

I think the issue is some games are worried too much about how things look at not about how they actually play. Maybe The Order is the unintentional whipping boy, but maybe it's because it represents a course that gamers don't actually want. I can't comment on the gameplay, I was all ready to buy it but reviews and feedback from others said it was more movie than a game, so I didn't waste money on it. Having watched the Let's Plays on youtube I can see what they were saying, things like the aspect ratio being 2.35:1 makes no sense given the medium it's on. You've got to get the balance right between story and interactivity if you want to emphasis the story aspect of the game. Perhaps we're at a point now where that type of game has simply run its course, at least for the time being, and that maybe studios needs to look at alternatives, even looking back to games kids played 20-30 years ago. Just go back to the basics and give that a shot. There's no reason some fun platform game can't be the best game of the year.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

there's a reason the last of us is considered by some to be the greatest game of all time.

Because they have only played one game in their lifetime?

 

[XtremelyBaneful]

Because they have only played one game in their lifetime?

No.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

I understand what you're saying, but I think this issue is being highlighted a lot as an after effect to the order 1886. in fact, i'd argue that most games these days in the industry strive much more to refine gameplay than story. i see very few games placing emphasis on story and a cinematic feel. unless of course that is the main point of the game.

at the end of the day, these products are video games, so gameplay is the most important thing but for me personally - I like to like the story of a game. just like with a film, I like to like the story behind it, not just the characters and what's all going on behind them/beautiful effects and cgi and what not. well, that is a little different because a movie can have a ton of beautiful effects but no one is gonna like if the movie itself is a mess.

but i mean something like... avatar which, is the most cliche example to use here - i didn't like the story although i was very excited about the movie because of the sci fi but scene after scene it became so extremely predictable that i just could not like it, although i respect it for the groundbreaking cgi it uncovered.

Gameplay refinement is coming with Indy games, not the AAA titles.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

No.

I love The Last of Us. Beat it a good 5 times now. It is not even the best game Naughty Dog has made. The gameplay isn't what one would call refined. That being said, I do love it.

 

[XtremelyBaneful]

Gameplay refinement is coming with Indy games, not the AAA titles.

maybe refine wasn't the right word. I just meant most priority-heavy emphasis. you get the idea

 

[XtremelyBaneful]

I love The Last of Us. Beat it a good 5 times now. It is not even the best game Naughty Dog has made. The gameplay isn't what one would call refined. That being said, I do love it.

I shouldn't have said refined. it's late, and stuff.

and hey yo, everyone's entitled to their opinion - i'd say what tlour has done for gaming it may very well be their best work to date, but everything's subjective. my favorite products from them are crash team racing and Uc2.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

maybe refine wasn't the right word. I just meant most priority-heavy emphasis. you get the idea

And that just isn't true. This is the exact reason why so many big games have run like crap. The focus has been on the pretty for years now, because that is what sells it to the masses. I don't like it, but it is true. If it wasn't graphics would be sacrificed for at least 60fps.

 

[XtremelyBaneful]

And that just isn't true. This is the exact reason why so many big games have run like crap. The focus has been on the pretty for years now, because that is what sells it to the masses. I don't like it, but it is true. If it wasn't graphics would be sacrificed for at least 60fps.

I think ISS had solid gameplay. there could've been more to it but I had fun with it, and the graphics were really good. that's just the first game that came to mind.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

I think ISS had solid gameplay. there could've been more to it but I had fun with it, and the graphics were really good. that's just the first game that came to mind.

ISS isn't exactly an a jump from Infamous 2. But say I give it to you, would you like to add another? Because that is one in a sea of you know what.

 

[XtremelyBaneful]

ISS isn't exactly an a jump from Infamous 2. But say I give it to you, would you like to add another? Because that is one in a sea of you know what.

In terms of what? I happen to think infamous1 was the best of them all and the only thing I feel ISS didn't step up on in terms of gameplay was the parkour.

I haven't played a previous dragon age game but I was playing inquisition for a little while and while the graphics are nothing to really gloat over they're still good and the gameplay was also nice as well.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

In terms of what? I happen to think infamous1 was the best of them all and the only thing I feel ISS didn't step up on in terms of gameplay was the parkour.

I haven't played a previous dragon age game but I was playing inquisition for a little while and while the graphics are nothing to really gloat over they're still good and the gameplay was also nice as well.

Inquisition has average gameplay, arguably behind Origins. But that is the the thing. We should be living in the era of beautiful, refined gameplay. But honestly, what AAA title over the last 5 years has gameplay on part with Mega Man X? Bayonetta 2, Revengeance, and ....

 

[XtremelyBaneful]

Inquisition has average gameplay, arguably behind Origins. But that is the the thing. We should be living in the era of beautiful, refined gameplay. But honestly, what AAA title over the last 5 years has gameplay on part with Mega Man X? Bayonetta 2, Revengeance, and ....

gta5? this is gettin pretty subjective man.Me2 as well, if you're saying the last 5 years and that game is not only one of the goats but my all time favorite going back and forth with Uc2.

I also said i never played dragon age before and the gameplay in 3 as a newcomer to me was good. a little hard to get used to but that's for any high caliber franchise game you jump into.

 

[Tron Bonne]

Inquisition has average gameplay, arguably behind Origins. But that is the the thing. We should be living in the era of beautiful, refined gameplay. But honestly, what AAA title over the last 5 years has gameplay on part with Mega Man X? Bayonetta 2, Revengeance, and ....

Few with believe it, most will deny it, but Resident Evil 6. Maybe not quite on that same level and marred by other issues, but the actual combat is up there. It's hard to get down, but once you do, it's crazy.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

I find the combat in RE 6 more then a few paces behind 4 and 5. One thing that is neglected when it comes to gameplay is that it isn't only about how you move, but how the enemy interacts with you and the environment. The bosses and enemies in general were poor, the stamina bar was a huge misstep imo. Most importantly, very poor hit detection and bad level design.

 

[Tron Bonne]

Can't say I agree, but I know my opinion isn't popular. I don't consider it behind 4 & 5, since I consider what it was going for was a much different approach than either of those.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

gta5? this is gettin pretty subjective man.Me2 as well, if you're saying the last 5 years and that game is not only one of the goats but my all time favorite going back and forth with Uc2.

I also said i never played dragon age before and the gameplay in 3 as a newcomer to me was good. a little hard to get used to but that's for any high caliber franchise game you jump into.

I have played the hell out of UC2 and ME2. Love them, though I prefer ME's combat system to the sequel. Not refined in the least, but it held on to the more RPG feel. ME2 went full on chest high wall shooter, and the level and enemy design suffered.

And it really isn't subject. Combat, enemy design, level design, etc. all kind of objective. Whether you enjoy it is another matter. I bring up a game like Mega Man X because of how perfect it is from a game design POV. It is ridiculous.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Can't say I agree, but I know my opinion isn't popular. I don't consider it behind 4 & 5, since I consider what it was going for was a much different approach than either of those.

In what way? They tried to capture three different styles of the past games, while holding on to the co-op element from 5. How were they taking a "different approach"?

 

[XtremelyBaneful]

I have played the hell out of UC2 and ME2. Love them, though I prefer ME's combat system to the sequel. Not refined in the least, but it held on to the more RPG feel. ME2 went full on chest high wall shooter, and the level and enemy design suffered.

And it really isn't subject. Combat, enemy design, level design, etc. all kind of objective. Whether you enjoy it is another matter. I bring up a game like Mega Man X because of how perfect it is from a game design POV. It is ridiculous.

all those things added together which make up gameplay and what ultimately accounts for it to be good or bad is pretty much subjective. as for ME, I played through Me1 once I didn't get to play the crap out of it like I did with Me2, but I didn't like the heat based combat. I didn't like Me3's combat much either even though most people find it to be an improvement over Me2.

 

[Tron Bonne]

In what way? They tried to capture three different styles of the past games, while holding on to the co-op element from 5. How were they taking a "different approach"?

Eh, I'm not going to argue about it to be honest. It's not something I have a huge investment in, if you don't see it then you don't see it, agree to disagree.

 

[XtremelyBaneful]

Subjectivity

 

[Iceman]

I have played the hell out of UC2 and ME2. Love them, though I prefer ME's combat system to the sequel. Not refined in the least, but it held on to the more RPG feel. ME2 went full on chest high wall shooter, and the level and enemy design suffered.

And it really isn't subject. Combat, enemy design, level design, etc. all kind of objective. Whether you enjoy it is another matter. I bring up a game like Mega Man X because of how perfect it is from a game design POV. It is ridiculous.

Not sure I follow that. Are you talking about intricacy/complexity of combat, enemy design and level design? Otherwise anything to do with style differences of those is down to preference. Explain more if you want to as I don't think I got the gist.