PDA

View Full Version : Gaming confessions.



Pages : [1] 2

BobsLawnService
08-11-2011, 02:37 PM
1. I can't get to grips with cover systems in games. No matter how hard I try cover systems just never do what I expect when I push the take cover button either I get stuck to the crate when I want to do something else or I end up vaulting over the cover or something. Cover is to the modern FPS what ladders were to 90's first person shooters.

2. I miss porno games like Strip Poker and Girlfriend Vida, etc. They were basically porn but porn in which nudity is a reward for winning and let's face it, who doesn't like looking at naked women or being rewarded? (Except for straight women, homosexual men and people raised by hippies?)

sinister agent
08-11-2011, 02:47 PM
1. I told Baroness Greenfield that games made me the way I am. Sorry everyone.

Drake Sigar
08-11-2011, 02:49 PM
2. I miss porno games like Strip Poker and Girlfriend Vida, etc. They were basically porn but porn in which nudity is a reward for winning and let's face it, who doesn't like looking at naked women or being rewarded? (Except for straight women, homosexual men and people raised by hippies?)

I don't like to work for my nudity.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LB7cdOOKVOo

KauhuK
08-11-2011, 02:53 PM
1. Mass Effect games are a prime example of cover system done wrong. In first it doesnt always cover you and you end up dying because one pixel of your head is above the cover. In second you en up vaulting over the cover too often.

2. Wont you think of the children?

But for real, sex in games is kinda failed attempt. Also Japanese are quite ahead of western games for this but then again those games are mainly centered around sex. I would like sex in a game like skyrim but also with love (not just sex). Those are hard to make to work the way ppl want and because market for games that have sex in them is very small. People are ashamed of sex games.

metalangel
08-11-2011, 03:42 PM
Flash seems to have taken over a lot of the sex game side of things. It's crude, but this street racing entry in the MeetnFuck series (NSFW!!) (http://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/473331) is more compelling than I expected it to be.

BobsLawnService
08-11-2011, 03:55 PM
MetalAngel - That isn't porn. Cartoon nudity isn't really my thing.

Kuahuk - Love and gaming can't work. It's just a bit creepy to think of falling in love with 1's and 0's. Porn also has nothing to do with love, it's all about visual stimulation.

Vexing Vision
08-11-2011, 04:00 PM
Kuahuk - Love and gaming can't work. It's just a bit creepy to think of falling in love with 1's and 0's..

You have obviously never played Planescape.

*sighs* Oh Annah...

metalangel
08-11-2011, 04:09 PM
MetalAngel - That isn't porn. Cartoon nudity isn't really my thing.

Even with bit with graphic depictions of sex? Are you genuinely after having to play a game to unlock naked photographs of a girl?

Wooly Wugga Wugga
08-11-2011, 04:12 PM
You have obviously never played Planescape.

*sighs* Oh Annah...

I have played Planescape and I am yet to fall in love with a game character. Then again I did once watch a documentary about women who fall in love with archery bows and the Eiffel Tower so I supose anything is possible.

It's not just games where it is extremely dificult or unlikely to fall in love with a character, I can't even fall in love with a film character. I can buy two good actors falling in love with each other on screen but it's a fantasy vs. reality argument. You can only fall in love with something real.

thegooseking
08-11-2011, 04:20 PM
1. Mass Effect games are a prime example of cover system done wrong. In first it doesnt always cover you and you end up dying because one pixel of your head is above the cover. In second you en up vaulting over the cover too often.

It's interesting you should say that, because Ernest Adams calls magic perfect cover (http://designersnotebook.com/Columns/103_Bad_Game_Designer_X/magiccov103_bad_game_designer_x.htm) an element of bad design.

1. I very nearly got involved in a youtube comments argument about whether Doctor Eggman was originally called Robotnik last night. I typed up a big reply (well, as big as youtube comments are allowed to be) referring to page 7 of the original Japanese manual of the first game, where he's called ドクター エッグマン (Doctor Eggman) before I thought, "What the fuck am I doing?" and closed the tab without submitting. In my defence, I'm sick and not thinking straight.

BobsLawnService
08-11-2011, 04:20 PM
MetalAngel - That is exactly what I mean. It's all about playing a game to see naked pictures of women.

Wooly Wugga Wugga - Yeah, something like that.

metalangel
08-11-2011, 04:23 PM
MetalAngel - That is exactly what I mean. It's all about playing a game to see naked pictures of women.

Fair enough. I find searching LobsterTube and other places to be time consuming enough of a game, though it does remind me a bit of being a kid because friends sometimes text me with 'you won't believe what I found, look at HER!' like in the good old days of finally beating level six or something.

thegooseking
08-11-2011, 04:23 PM
You can only fall in love with something real.

I'd say you can fall in love with something abstract, like an ideal. It's not a stretch to say you can fall in love with a fictional representation, embodiment, anthropomorphisation or symbol of that ideal.

Heliocentric
08-11-2011, 04:31 PM
Unless you are psychotic, those guys have all the fun.

1. I ruin scary games for myself, gamma up, lights on, played at day spamming quick save.

2. I'm addicted to grind. I hate grind, but I have spent more than half of the time I ever gamed grinding, maybe leveling up in an RPG, slow but steady against AI in a strategy game or playing an action game on a too hard difficulty. Such a waste.

3. I spend more time reading about games than playing them, I'll read whole faqs about games just for the path of least resistance, a demo can be available and I will still read 6 reviews and I love to read forums heartedly discussing games when they raise valid arguments to each other but feel very little reason to join in.

Wooly Wugga Wugga
08-11-2011, 04:31 PM
I'd say you can fall in love with something abstract, like an ideal. It's not a stretch to say you can fall in love with a fictional representation, embodiment, anthropomorphisation or symbol of that ideal.

You can embrace and be passionate about an ideal but is that love? The same thing you'd feel for a parent, your child, wife or husband?

Skeletor68
08-11-2011, 04:42 PM
3. I spend more time reading about games than playing them, I'll read whole faqs about games just for the path of least resistance, a demo can be available and I will still read 6 reviews and I love to read forums heartedly discussing games when they raise valid arguments to each other but feel very little reason to join in.

I am definitely guilty of the above. I've read most of the Dark Souls walkthrough just to get a feel for it without having any intention of buying it!

On the topic of love, I frequently fall in love with Anne Hathaway's face. Am I weird?

On my own gaming confessions, I played all the way through Freelancer modded to God mode. AND I LOVED IT!

On the flashgame/pron thing I played Speedmaster at newgrounds which is fantastic absurd shooty fun, with a hilarious narrator and took quite a while to complete every time. It was quite fun to play drunk with friends just to have a weird photo reveal at the end.

pakoito
08-11-2011, 04:47 PM
3. I spend more time reading about games than playing them, I'll read whole faqs about games just for the path of least resistance, a demo can be available and I will still read 6 reviews and I love to read forums heartedly discussing games when they raise valid arguments to each other but feel very little reason to join in.I'll follow a game from announcement to release post by post, devdiary by devdiary, to play it just a couple of hours on release and leave it forever.

Xercies
08-11-2011, 04:53 PM
I'm really really kind of rubbish at games really, FPSs i can litrally have the guy right in front of me and I will miss him, several times if its a machine gun. Thats why I've probably love those stealthy games a little bit more, they play to my strengths of games, i.e no bloody fast time reactions.

I love point and click games because they have no gameplay to them, I know its just like a movie but solving puzzles, thats the perfect thing for me.

AlonePlusEasyTarget
08-11-2011, 05:06 PM
I still don't get the difference between JRPG and turn-based rpg.

Tikey
08-11-2011, 05:13 PM
I play strategy games on easy as I feel troubled if I'm not ahead of my enemies. Only a few games made me turn the difficulty up (galciv 2, homeworld series and sots)

Wizardry
08-11-2011, 05:26 PM
I still don't get the difference between JRPG and turn-based rpg.
JRPGs are made in Japan and feature little gameplay outside of the combat. Turn-based RPGs are often open-ended and full of player freedom but with turn-based combat.

TomxJ
08-11-2011, 05:27 PM
I smugly taunt my aging father for playing games on easy mode because i feel inferior to my baby sister who has nailed torchlight whereas i just cannot beat the final boss

acidtestportfolio
08-11-2011, 05:27 PM
1: i don't like people

2: i think the AAA gaming industry is a dinosaur stuck in the tar that is slowly sinking and using their customers more and more as leverage

3: i have not said one bad thing against modern warfare 3 (if you ignore that i gave that game a mediocre review by not even playing it)

metalangel
08-11-2011, 05:28 PM
We used to call difficulty level 1 on the Colecovision (all games had a standard 4 levels of difficulty... 3 was considered arcade level) the 'baby level' in my household. Then Wolfenstein came out with 'Can I play, daddy?'. Now I always play on HARD.

lasikbear
08-11-2011, 05:35 PM
I am definitely guilty of the above. I've read most of the Dark Souls walkthrough just to get a feel for it without having any intention of buying it!

On the topic of love, I frequently fall in love with Anne Hathaway's face. Am I weird?

On my own gaming confessions, I played all the way through Freelancer modded to God mode. AND I LOVED IT!


On the topic of Ann Hathaway, my girlfriend hates her to an unreasonable degree and often loudly exclaims things like "You are just a Vassar drop-out and you aren't that good looking" any time she shows up in anything. Also does this for people who look like Ann Hathaway.

On the subject of Dark Souls, I do the same thing for a lot of games and often ruin them if I am actually playing them. There have been so many Roguelikes that I read the wikis for and start imagining how great it would be to get to some really advanced stage that I end up giving up after my first stupid death.

I am also a huge stockpiler in games and will generally try to save every item just in case I need it later. Generally this means I struggle through tough fights trying to save my items and end the game with a huge back of unused items/ammo/potions etc

Nalano
08-11-2011, 06:24 PM
1: i don't like people

2: i think the AAA gaming industry is a dinosaur stuck in the tar that is slowly sinking and using their customers more and more as leverage

3: i have not said one bad thing against modern warfare 3 (if you ignore that i gave that game a mediocre review by not even playing it)

1) Yes
2) Any industry that spends more time punishing its customer base for not buying its products instead of developing better products is an industry not long for this world.
3) I think that marks the fact that you simply don't care about IW's games any more. This is probably a good thing.

sinister agent
08-11-2011, 06:29 PM
I still think "Shakespeare!"* whenever I hear "Anne Hathaway". I've little idea who the modern one even is. I gather she was in a film at some point, but that's about it.

*Which isn't as wanky and showy-offy as it probably sounds; I used to work near her cottage, is all.

Mohorovicic
08-11-2011, 06:51 PM
2. I miss porno games like Strip Poker and Girlfriend Vida, etc. They were basically porn but porn in which nudity is a reward for winning and let's face it, who doesn't like looking at naked women or being rewarded? (Except for straight women, homosexual men and people raised by hippies?)

I'll never understand the idea of a porn game. Either you want to play the game or masturbate, and both are mutually exclusive (Yes I know some of the jap eroges have "hands free mode" but they're not games so nyah)

coldvvvave
08-11-2011, 06:54 PM
1. I hate Blizzard for reasons that have nothing to do with their games.

2. I saveloaded through X-com and JA2, even though those are my favourite games.

3. I used to duel people in CS 1.4 for money when I was in school( like, the loser pays approximately 4$).

4. I was addicted to CS.

5. I lost all the duels.

jryan
08-11-2011, 06:59 PM
1. I have ruined a few good games by getting frustrated and cheating. I always tell myself that I will only cheat through this one spot where the game is OBVIOUSLY bugged and out to get me, but it becomes crack and soon I am phasing through walls and shooting big-headed security guards like it's a job.

2. I play some games that I have mastered (Galactic CIV 2 especially) just to ruin the day of all the little Trons living their innocent lives in my laptop. In a similar personality quirk to #1 I always tell myself that I will be the nice guy this time out, but by midway I am clear cutting whole solar systems because I just can't be bothered to manage them.

3. Every time I jump on Ventrilo I wonder what I am doing with my life that I am managing an IT department by day and taking orders from an 11 year old by night.

imirk
08-11-2011, 07:27 PM
1. I play all games on easy, I am a tourist.

2. My favorite multiplayer FPS Maps are fy_iceworld, Shipment, and Killhouse.

pakoito
08-11-2011, 07:30 PM
2. My favorite multiplayer fps maps are fy_iceworld.you monster!

thegooseking
08-11-2011, 07:43 PM
1. I play all games on easy, I am a tourist.

Me too. It's not that I'm averse to difficulty; it's just that most games do difficulty wrong. Or "wrong" as it applies to my tastes. It's not so much that I have a problem with the challenges presented in games as I have a problem with the penalty for failure. I don't even have a problem with the challenge/reward structure (although I think people too often see it as the only way of making a game interesting, when it's in fact one of many). What I have a problem with is that the game is only fun if I succeed, and failure is resolutely Not Fun. Like I said, I don't have a problem with the challenge/reward structure, but I do have a problem with the reward being 'fun'. The game should be fun whether I succeed or fail; the rewards I get for succeeding should be something else. I paid for the game, and while I don't have a problem with having to earn certain things in games, fun should not be one of them.

Nalano
08-11-2011, 07:49 PM
Me too. It's not that I'm averse to difficulty; it's just that most games do difficulty wrong. Or "wrong" as it applies to my tastes. It's not so much that I have a problem with the challenges presented in games as I have a problem with the penalty for failure. I don't even have a problem with the challenge/reward structure (although I think people too often see it as the only way of making a game interesting, when it's in fact one of many). What I have a problem with is that the game is only fun if I succeed, and failure is resolutely Not Fun. Like I said, I don't have a problem with the challenge/reward structure, but I do have a problem with the reward being 'fun'. The game should be fun whether I succeed or fail; the rewards I get for succeeding should be something else. I paid for the game, and while I don't have a problem with having to earn certain things in games, fun should not be one of them.

Reminds me of the first 'difficult' section in BF3's SP campaign. You're told to man an LMG that's sitting on a highway footbridge - which is a singularly open position devoid of cover (and probably why the LMG's owner died in the first place) - and use it to personally kill off a wave of AI opponents (because your AI teammates can't hit for shit) who approach in a 135 degree arc, completely ignore all your AI teammates in favor of shooting you, and have no concept of suppression.

I'm not sure if it was just bad design or if EA/DICE really just wanted to say "fuck you, player. You want hard? We'll give you hard!"

Keep
08-11-2011, 09:01 PM
It's not so much that I have a problem with the challenges presented in games as I have a problem with the penalty for failure.

I think in terms of mechanics, how death/failure gets dealt with is really bizarre. If you don't do well enough in the game, you're punished by...having to play the game more?

Death'd be something I'd be much more interested in engaging with and challenging if dying meant you miss out on parts of the game. As it is, the incentive to quit, or cheat, or check a walkthrough gets damn strong. "Shove your stupid game, I'm getting it out of the way as soon as possible".


And I think - for me - part of what's going on pyschologically is that what I want, my desire, is to complete the game, whereas I figure other gamers like the experience of facing a challenge for what it is, rather than as a means to an end.
That might be to do with an inner relation to to the idea failure. That I feel I shouldn't be failing at all, ever. Other people can understand failure as a necessary step toward success.


Dunno really.

thegooseking
08-11-2011, 09:33 PM
Well, Fable 2 isn't necessarily the best example of a game that does difficulty right (although it is a game that feels harder than it is, which leads me to another thought...), but there are tangible penalties for failure there (scarring) without interrupting the game. Maybe the penalties there aren't harsh enough -- I don't know. But I think it's a good idea to explore the alternatives. And I think Fable 3 maybe got that wrong (although I'm not sure). I got through Fable 2 with a few scars, but I've finished Fable 3 twice and I still don't even know what happens when you do run out of health. Fable 2 lightened the penalties for failure, which was interesting, but Fable 3 made it so you were unlikely to fail, which was less interesting.

The other thought I had was about the idea of "fake difficulty". Actually, what got me thinking about this was an article I read the other day about rethinking challenge in games, and at one point there was the suggestion that BioShock had "fake engagement", like the game was somehow tricking you into being engaged. And I wondered what that even meant. You're either engaged with the game or you're not. Whether that's achieved by trickery or not isn't very relevant. I thought about films, which are all about manipulating the audience's emotions with, yes, tricks. We like being tricked by a film into feeling something; what we don't like is when the manipulation is obvious or heavy-handed.

With fake difficulty in games, as well, Fable 2 gives the impression of having faced a great challenge, even though you didn't, really - and although Fable 3 was even easier than Fable 2, it somehow gave the impression of being harder (which is why I'm not sure Fable 3 got it wrong). The problem with Fable is the trickery isn't universal. Some people felt like it was harder than it was, but others only felt how easy it really was. I think that's related to suspension of disbelief, in a way. Just as I was able to believe Fable's Albion existed even though I know it doesn't, I was also able to believe the game was hard even though I know it wasn't. But I know not everybody did. And that may have something to do with, like Keep says, whether you focus on the challenge as a challenge in itself, or whether you focus on the challenge in the context of the journey.

Rath
08-11-2011, 09:43 PM
I play the same skirmish game in Homeworld 2 on the same map with the same settings, and use the same tactics every single time. I don't even bother with other game modes anymore. Just me against the AI on the Jadeth map. Every time. Almost to the point of an absurd OCD.

Hanban
08-11-2011, 09:49 PM
I hate losing, in games, to a degree where I will fight against absurd odds for a prolonged amount of time by save-loading until I have beaten it. This usually in games where a defeat once in a while is not a problem.

Usually it leaves a bitter taste in my mouth and I'll end up leaving the game because I feel it's tedious.

Vandelay
08-11-2011, 09:51 PM
Speaking of difficulty, I must confess to finding the combat in Dragon Age to be completely unfathomable. I see many a people complaining about it being incredibly easy, but my experience was of death stalking me in every battle. Abilities that used to work would suddenly become completely impotent, whilst my strongest characters would fall to their knees after single handedly taking on half the Blight, but unable to kill a lonely wolf. The random encounters when travelling would make me weep for a while, whilst at the end of the Werewolf quest made me want to smash my keyboard into the monitor, as I limply ran around in circles.

I don't normally find games to be too difficult, or, at least, have the perseverance to battle my way through repeated attempts, but this just became too much and I had to stop not even half way through the game.

coldvvvave
08-11-2011, 09:59 PM
1. I spent 1000+ hours in DoW 2 and expansions 1v1 multiplayer

2. I still have no idea how the game works becauese I only play as Orks and I never cared to actualy do some research or play as another race

3. My main strategy is to rush all of my units into battle, burn enemies generators and wait for tanks

4. I spam Looted Tanks

5. I was in top-50 for almost a couple of months

moth bones
08-11-2011, 11:20 PM
Vandelay - I couldn't get that realtime squad tactical stuff at all. I'm OK with realtime combat for first-person games, but in party-based RPGs give me turn-based every time. I've ground to a halt really early in Baldur's Gate for the same reason. I know these games are pausable but for some reason that doesn't help me much - I lose track of what all the characters are doing and it just turns into a hackfest.

I find a lot of games really hard from the off and put them aside 'for future reference' quite quickly; happened with STALKER, M&B Warband, AI War and Rock Of Ages (couldn't even get past the second tutorial!). Yet I can quite happily devote hours to slowly getting to grips with Dwarf Fortress, which I've seen people cite as the hardest game to get into. Maybe it's because every game is different.

Heliocentric
09-11-2011, 12:43 AM
I play the same skirmish game in Homeworld 2 on the same map with the same settings, and use the same tactics every single time. I don't even bother with other game modes anymore. Just me against the AI on the Jadeth map. Every time. Almost to the point of an absurd OCD.

Totally, torpedo frigates in dust clouds?

TailSwallower
09-11-2011, 01:14 AM
1. I secretly hated all my friends for abandoning Action Quake 2 for stupid lame Counter Strike.

2. First time around I could never finish the final Brood War campaign, so I just satisfied myself with watching the end cutscenes. (Second time around I still haven't finished it, but I think I could now if I didn't keep getting distracted by other games.)

3. I find the CoDs really boring, but apparently I'm good at them. Played BlOps on hardcore on Xbox with 7 other people at a LAN and kept on coming in first place even though I was bored. 2 of the guys are major CoD fans and 1 of the other guys is generally the best at every game ever, but I still beat them all. It was the first time I ever played BlOps, second time I ever played any of the CoDs. I had to just get up and leave (it was late anyway) to avoid having to play more...

Juan Carlo
09-11-2011, 01:46 AM
-I LOVE trolling in L4D2. Being annoying or playing silly characters to see how people react amuses me. Of course, I did say "trolling" not "griefing" (there's a difference).


-When I was in highschool I was brutally gang raped at a party by "Gabriel Knight 2" and "Grim Fandango." I've never spoken about it before, though, as I was too ashamed (they told me I was asking for it).

pakoito
09-11-2011, 01:58 AM
3. I find the CoDs really boring, but apparently I'm good at them. Played BlOps on hardcore on Xbox with 7 other people at a LAN and kept on coming in first place even though I was bored. 2 of the guys are major CoD fans and 1 of the other guys is generally the best at every game ever, but I still beat them all. It was the first time I ever played BlOps, second time I ever played any of the CoDs. I had to just get up and leave (it was late anyway) to avoid having to play more...CoD is quite an easy game to play if you have any experience with any FPS. A friend couple had it and they both played to sargent captain whatever level 2000 when they challenged a "FIFA" friend and me 2v2. We moped the floor with their asses from the second match onward, with pads.

sabrage
09-11-2011, 02:02 AM
I kind of suck at video games.

pakoito
09-11-2011, 02:21 AM
I kind of suck at video games.Just say you don't have enough time to improve anymore. I'm quite sure I was better 10 years ago.

sabrage
09-11-2011, 02:45 AM
No, I have a lot of time to play video games, I just spend too much of it playing League of Legends. Which I suppose is the real confession here: I play League of Legends to the exclusion of games that I know are better.

westyfield
09-11-2011, 02:47 AM
I'm a bit rubbish at RTS games. I can't deal with formulating plans on-the-fly and responding to threats in anything other than multiplayer FPS games (e.g. 2142). I'd love to be amazing at something like SupCom or Total War, but no matter how hard I try I always end up charging my units in one mass towards my enemy's defences whilst my economy collapses.

I'm really nervous and way too polite about giving orders in multiplayer FPS games (again, e.g. 2142).
Squad member: "So what's the plan?"
Squad leader (me): "Uuuuh, so if you could go support please that would be just lovely, and then if you can, some covering fire on Comm Tower would be nice so the rest of us can move up and cap it. If that's ok with you guys? It is? oh, great. Thanks! Right, let's go. Uh, you're on point please. Yeah, cheers."

pakoito
09-11-2011, 02:57 AM
No, I have a lot of time to play video games, I just spend too much of it playing League of Legends. Which I suppose is the real confession here: I play League of Legends to the exclusion of games that I know are better.LoL is a good game to be hooked to. HoN and Dota are just better :p

Juan Carlo
09-11-2011, 03:23 AM
I'll also add that I really love achievements, even though it's kind of uncool to admit as much.

Not all of them, mind you, but the well done ones--I.E. ones that award you for playing on harder difficulties or for playing in certain unique ways.

acidtestportfolio
09-11-2011, 04:26 AM
I'll also add that I really love achievements, even though it's kind of uncool to admit as much.

Not all of them, mind you, but the well done ones--I.E. ones that award you for playing on harder difficulties or for playing in certain unique ways.

i also love achievements

especially when they point out ways you could play the game differently

also i am also rubbish at RTS games, and regard the people who are competitive players as inhuman desk sitters

agentorange
09-11-2011, 05:22 AM
I really like 4x and grand strategy games, but I can very rarely see a scenario out to its conclusion.

TailSwallower
09-11-2011, 05:29 AM
CoD is quite an easy game to play if you have any experience with any FPS.

Oh, definitely. The main thing when coming to a new FPS is just making sure the control scheme is what you're used to - especially on games where you choose your load-out and don't have to worry about finding your own weapons.
I just thought it was funny how I kept coming out on top when these guys were full-on CoD fans.

soldant
09-11-2011, 06:32 AM
1. I don't mind cover systems or ironsights so long as they're done properly and within the context of the game.

2. I know it's entirely optional content and everything, but when TF2 started getting crazy with the items is about the time I stopped playing and stopped having fun. And I blame Valve and the community, even though more free content should equal more fun.

3. I hate The Witcher and the sequel. I just can't get into them, I don't like the story or the gameplay. I can't find any redeeming factors at all. Sorry.

Mohorovicic
09-11-2011, 06:43 AM
2. First time around I could never finish the final Brood War campaign, so I just satisfied myself with watching the end cutscenes. (Second time around I still haven't finished it, but I think I could now if I didn't keep getting distracted by other games.)

I never finished Brood War as well. Not as much because of the difficulty, but because of the sheer bullshit the game throws at you in late parts of Zerg campaign where "here's humongous map, your tiny little base and three gigantic enemy bases of all three races, good luck" becomes the norm. That's just not fun. But well, that's the bane of expansion pack for RTS games in general and a different story.

On topic... I'm a massive powergamer. Once I finish the game, assuming I liked it, I want to know everything about it - position of every item, power-up, enemy, and so on. I will happily spend hours analyzing weapon/unit statistics and things like DPS/accuracy charts. If the game has RPG elements, I will immediately try to create a perfect, optimized build to 100% the game second time around. Yes, even if it's Torment.

Berzee
09-11-2011, 07:33 AM
in BUNX NO X-ING NO MID
you guys, sometimes I went to mid...sometimes I even x'd

acidtestportfolio
09-11-2011, 07:35 AM
i think the starcraft soundtrack is awful

the terran music sounds like a bad rush impersonation
the zerg sound boring
and i can't for the life of me remember the protoss because i've effectively blocked them out

Arona Daal
09-11-2011, 08:07 AM
I play the same skirmish game in Homeworld 2 on the same map with the same settings, and use the same tactics every single time.

Try the "Complex Mod" for hw2,makes skirmish even better.

I for my part must have played the skirmish campaign (with Ai mod) for DOW:Soulstorm at least a three Times for *each* Faction.

As DOW 2 was a shallow Disappointment,i now get my Skirmish RTS kicks out of Zero-k and Company of Heroes.

I even managed to beat Zero-k on "1P vs Insane Chicken" once,by pausing and micromanaging my hundreds of units.

metalangel
09-11-2011, 08:51 AM
I just don't understand how people work out good character builds or equipment in MMORPGs. People show me these amazing fittings in EvE and I don't know how they come up with them.

DigitalSignalX
09-11-2011, 08:51 AM
Forgive me, for my sins are many and it's been many GPU's since my last confession:

I have never owned or played on a console for any significant time. This year I finally got a controller, which makes me feel like I'm giving up on my PC roots. However, it leads me straight to item one:

I can only use a 360 pad for driving. Any kind of two-stick move/shoot combo makes both my hands and head ache almost immediately. I can play piano with both hands, but I can't do this for some reason.

I dream about video games. Often.

If a game doesn't get me interested in the first 10 minutes I'll drop it and very likely never play it again. Up to about 3-5 years ago, this would never have happened, they were too few and far between. Now they're queued up and it takes me months to whittle down the pile. What's amazing is, I play *more* hours per week then I did back then.

I'll also drop almost immediately it if the GUI and controls are clearly a exceptionally lazy port. Last weeks example, Dungeons and Dragons Daggerdale (http://img695.imageshack.us/img695/7307/dndgame2011110612475674.jpg)

I despise gaming with strangers, I hate (most) other people. But I like MMO's because it allows me to be social on my terms. I'm that old guy in chat who doesn't type like a high school kids text message log.

agentorange
09-11-2011, 09:10 AM
If a game doesn't get me interested in the first 10 minutes I'll drop it and very likely never play it again. Up to about 3-5 years ago, this would never have happened, they were too few and far between. Now they're queued up and it takes me months to whittle down the pile. What's amazing is, I play *more* hours per week then I did back then.

I have a problem similar to this: if I die in a game, and that death means I have to replay a significant amount of content, I may drop the game and not pick up it again for a long, long time. It rarely happens in PC games, since I save-whore like a coward, but it often happens in console games, especially JRPGs. Most recently (about 4 months ago) it was a boss fight where, before encountering the boss actual, you have to mow through 100 waves of his minions; I died after grinding that for about half an hour, and haven't touched the game since.

Flint
09-11-2011, 09:31 AM
I like cutscenes. In some games, I even love them. When overused (eg MGS4's first moments where you literally have a few seconds of gameplay between yet MORE cutscenes) they can be a pain, but generally I find them very pleasant. After a tight action scene they can act as a great breather and even a reward, they allow for so much more story possibilities than having you stay inside the character's head and fully in control at all times, etc. I don't mind control being taken away from me every now and then when it results to a better overall experience.

I also prefer easier difficulties and generally wuss out on really difficult ordeals in games. I don't mind challenge and in some games I adore it (the L4D series for example is at its best when on Expert) but generally I play games for the experience and enjoyment, and getting stuck on one point that you have to repeat over and over and over again isn't my idea of a fun gaming experience. It's hard to explain but I don't mind challenge, I just dislike difficulty. Thus, I rarely go beyond medium difficulty in games. Hell, I hardly ever even played D2 beyond the normal difficulty despite sinking countless hours into that thing. This is also the reason why I'm a staunch defender of allowing quicksave in games. Sure, I press the button in nearly every damn room but it doesn't kill the fun, quite the opposite in fact.

I don't mind achievements either. They can get a bit stupid in some games (by their requirements or by generally being there), but at the end of the day I like collecting stuff and I like seeing the row of higlighted icons grow. I rarely push myself through to actually get all of them though, I tend to deliberately pass on the most difficult ones due to paragraph 2.

I'm sure there's more and I'll be posting again later on.

Xercies
09-11-2011, 10:32 AM
Ok heres one I think might have you screaming, I don't mind Quick Time Events at all, in fact I think they are pretty awesome, allowing me and the character to do things that would be difficult to do gameplay wise. It came from loving Shenmue, though I have to say Shenmue was a bit nicer then a few modern QTE's where you could fail a few times before failing completely.

thegooseking
09-11-2011, 10:47 AM
Ok heres one I think might have you screaming, I don't mind Quick Time Events at all, in fact I think they are pretty awesome, allowing me and the character to do things that would be difficult to do gameplay wise. It came from loving Shenmue, though I have to say Shenmue was a bit nicer then a few modern QTE's where you could fail a few times before failing completely.

I think QTEs have their place. Cutscenes have primed us with an "expectation of cool" that's often hard to manage in a typical gameplay engine, but, related to what I said before about fake engagement and fake difficulty, fake interaction is often (though not always) better than no interaction. Certainly on the toybox I think the Tarantino-esque Wet would have been a lesser game for a lack of QTEs -- it's pretty hard to imagine any Tarantino-esque game without them.

airtekh
09-11-2011, 11:38 AM
I dislike strategy games, and aside from very rare exceptions, I don't play them.

I also have a dislike for games set in fantasy worlds (i.e with orcs, elves and the like) which means it's impossible for me to get excited about games like Witcher 2 or Skyrim.

Dugular
09-11-2011, 12:16 PM
I like cutscenes. In some games, I even love them.

I'm joining you on that one. And adding that I want my ending cutscenes to be extremely long, or else I'm left disappointed.

Now for mine:

With any game that has multiple weapons (Most FPSs, 3rd person action-adventures, etc), once I beat the game I then have to play through it with cheats using just the first weapon for the ENTIRE game, and then the second, third.. etc. This takes up too much of my time and I have even resorted to a crappy Access database to keep track of which weapons I'm up to in games. (Currently, I'm playing through HL: Opposing Force with the Crossbow).

Because of the above, and the fact I have to always start with the weakest weapon and move upwards, I can claim the following:

I have crowbar'd my way through Half-Life
I have axed my way through Quake.
I have used that pathetically weak pistol through ALL of Quake 2.
I have punched my way through SIN, Doom and Doom 2.

Mohorovicic
09-11-2011, 02:23 PM
I just don't understand how people work out good character builds or equipment in MMORPGs. People show me these amazing fittings in EvE and I don't know how they come up with them.

Several hours worth of time with a character planner, if you know all the mechanics that is.

Mmmm, planning builds. Tasty.

Flint
09-11-2011, 02:39 PM
I'm joining you on that one. And adding that I want my ending cutscenes to be extremely long, or else I'm left disappointed.
Yes, definitely. I want a sense of closure and accomplishment, I want to be rewarded with a long cutscene to wrap the story up after I've finished the game, instead of being given a 10-20 second snippet (that half the time ends in a cliffhanger). It's one thing I especially enjoy in Japanese game design: they really go out their way to finish games with a proper ending.

Xercies
09-11-2011, 04:06 PM
It's one thing I especially enjoy in Japanese game design: they really go out their way to finish games with a proper ending.

Thats why io quite like JRPGs sometimes, sure the gameplay is a bit lacking but their stories are pretty great and they have endings to them. I mean now a days we get games which just end with "theres going to be a sequel"

justagigolo
09-11-2011, 04:35 PM
A few confessions, ranging from minor to semi-blasphemous.

I love to plan character builds. Any game that lets me peak inside and see how the mechanics and numbers are crunched is almost certain to worm its way into my subconscious. Planning out a build to develop the most efficient or overpowered setup, then watching it all come to fruition tickles all the right happy glands.

RTS games just do not work for me. At all. On any level. Period. As mentioned earlier in the thread, the best strategy that I can wrap my mind around is build up a hulking squad, and flood the target. Consequently despite my best efforts, I have bounced right off of warcraft, starcraft 1/2, and countless others. DOW 2's single player campaign however, fit me just right by charging me with purely managing the three units without the hassle of base building and what not.

Now for the biggest confession. A lot of pc gaming's finest moments bounced off of me the first time round, and I have yet to really catch up on them. Thief, Deus Ex, Diablo, Baldurs Gate, Fallout, Hitman, and the aforementioned Starcraft. To some degree I have tried to make amends. I have completed Fallout, and put in some rather enjoyable time with Diablo 2, but I abandoned my Planescape adventure about 20 hours in, and feel a bit dirty about it. The original Deus Ex I am trying to force my way through, after the huge excitement that I had from Human Revolution, I felt that I owed it more time than I originally gave it so many years ago.

Wooly Wugga Wugga
09-11-2011, 05:14 PM
I think QTEs have their place. Cutscenes have primed us with an "expectation of cool" that's often hard to manage in a typical gameplay engine, but, related to what I said before about fake engagement and fake difficulty, fake interaction is often (though not always) better than no interaction. Certainly on the toybox I think the Tarantino-esque Wet would have been a lesser game for a lack of QTEs -- it's pretty hard to imagine any Tarantino-esque game without them.

The only issue with QTE's I find is that I spend so much time looking at the onscreen prompts that I miss the action. I too like cut scenes.

Althea
09-11-2011, 05:34 PM
1. I would kill for a Sims-esque game with the same level of customisation, but less complexity. I don't like the way the Sims plays, as it feels it punishes you for doing anything that isn't eating, sleeping, working, showering or taking a piss.

2. I can't play old games. They either annoy me, are impenetrable or something else. I played a little bit of M&M7 earlier and the combat seemed insane. The first "dungeons" on the initial island were insane, and basically everywhere was a death trap. The earlier Might & Magic games just feel insanely hard/directionless, and I just can't do Fallout without dying within no time at all.

3. I want a "proper" RPG. Not one with fixed characters, but one like the older days with more character customisation and stuff.

Wooly Wugga Wugga
09-11-2011, 05:37 PM
1. I would kill for a Sims-esque game with the same level of customisation, but less complexity. I don't like the way the Sims plays, as it feels it punishes you for doing anything that isn't eating, sleeping, working, showering or taking a piss.


My issue with the sims is that it feels like time is too compressed and there is never enough time for anything. I'd really like a difficulty slider that allows activities to take a shorter time or for time to move slower so that you could get more done at a more leisurely pace.

pakoito
09-11-2011, 05:38 PM
1. I would kill for a Sims-esque game with the same level of customisation, but less complexity. I don't like the way the Sims plays, as it feels it punishes you for doing anything that isn't eating, sleeping, working, showering or taking a piss.
LESS? try facebook or google "wardrobe game"


3. I want a "proper" RPG. Not one with fixed characters, but one like the older days with more character customisation and stuff.Like...all of them? Stop playing JRPGs or Dragon Age?

Althea
09-11-2011, 05:57 PM
Like...all of them? Stop playing JRPGs or Dragon Age?
I don't play JRPGs and I've not played Dragon Age since probably last year. There's very few AAA fantasy RPGs with the "old level" of customisation.

Mohorovicic
09-11-2011, 06:24 PM
I just can't do Fallout without dying within no time at all.

Wait, what?

Althea
09-11-2011, 06:31 PM
Wait, what?
Random encounters.

Wizardry
09-11-2011, 06:44 PM
2. I can't play old games. They either annoy me, are impenetrable or something else. I played a little bit of M&M7 earlier and the combat seemed insane. The first "dungeons" on the initial island were insane, and basically everywhere was a death trap. The earlier Might & Magic games just feel insanely hard/directionless, and I just can't do Fallout without dying within no time at all.
No offence but the Might and Magic series was always a "newbie friendly" RPG series. Difficulty could always be overcome by leveling up somewhere else.

Smashbox
09-11-2011, 06:46 PM
Some of my most absolutely mind-bustingly beloved games are not in fact games, but rather toys.

Nalano
09-11-2011, 06:49 PM
I love to plan character builds. Any game that lets me peak inside and see how the mechanics and numbers are crunched is almost certain to worm its way into my subconscious. Planning out a build to develop the most efficient or overpowered setup, then watching it all come to fruition tickles all the right happy glands.

In any of the BioWare DnD 3.5 games I can honestly say that I've probably spent more time tweaking the build at the character screen than I have actually spent playing the game.

Althea
09-11-2011, 06:52 PM
No offence but the Might and Magic series was always a "newbie friendly" RPG series. Difficulty could always be overcome by leveling up somewhere else.
Bit hard when you go into the cave system after killing everything else bar the dragon, and you end up being followed by five-six spiders, a handful of bats and a swarm of rats.

Wizardry
09-11-2011, 06:55 PM
In any of the BioWare DnD 3.5 games I can honestly say that I've probably spent more time tweaking the build at the character screen than I have actually spent playing the game.
I don't think BioWare have made a 3.5E game.


Bit hard when you go into the cave system after killing everything else bar the dragon, and you end up being followed by five-six spiders, a handful of bats and a swarm of rats.
Which cave system was that?

sinister agent
09-11-2011, 06:55 PM
Random encounters.

Not your fault, and not perfect, but difficult encounters are usually a sign that you're exploring in the wrong direction. There are some areas of the map that are vastly more dangerous than others.

Vexing Vision
09-11-2011, 06:57 PM
In any of the BioWare DnD 3.5 games I can honestly say that I've probably spent more time tweaking the build at the character screen than I have actually spent playing the game.

Me too. I LOVE building characters. That is why I dislike most MMOs which only give me a class/race combination and then a linear progression.

Indeed, I have a lot more fun building characters for pen & paper sessions of any moderately complex system than I actually have playing the game. The same goes for tabletop games like Warhammer - building armies is SO MUCH MORE FUN.

coldvvvave
09-11-2011, 06:57 PM
No offence but the Might and Magic series was always a "newbie friendly" RPG series. Difficulty could always be overcome by leveling up somewhere else.
True, M&M6-7 to me were far more noob-friendly than pretty much any other RPG I played, thats why I liked MM so much.

On topic:

I never played an MMO game.

I enjoyed Gears of War port very much and I cctually liked the characters, dialogues and voice acting.

I think Human Revolution is a worthy successor to original Deus Ex.

Grizzly
09-11-2011, 07:25 PM
I don't think BioWare have made a 3.5E game.

Neverwinter Nights 2. Miiiiight be made by Obsidian Entertainment.

coldvvvave
09-11-2011, 07:28 PM
I thought Limbo was scary, stopped right after encountering dat giant spider.

Althea
09-11-2011, 07:32 PM
Not your fault, and not perfect, but difficult encounters are usually a sign that you're exploring in the wrong direction. There are some areas of the map that are vastly more dangerous than others.
I was going where the game told me. I got a random encounter with three blokes, I got knocked down after my first turn and died before my second.


Which cave system was that?
The one which you go into to get a floor tile for the scavenger hunt.


Neverwinter Nights 2. Miiiiight be made by Obsidian Entertainment.
It's Obsidian.

Wizardry
09-11-2011, 07:48 PM
The one which you go into to get a floor tile for the scavenger hunt.
Wait, you're on Emerald Isle still? That's the introduction area!

Nalano
09-11-2011, 08:05 PM
It's Obsidian.

Okay, fine, Obsidian. (Like they're not incestuous enough as it is.)

3.0, 3.5; the only difference I've noticed was my ability to multiclass to a fourth class and the flipping of a couple prestige class requirements.

Althea
09-11-2011, 08:07 PM
Wait, you're on Emerald Isle still? That's the introduction area!
I'm fully aware of that, what's your point?

Grizzly
09-11-2011, 08:09 PM
Okay, fine, Obsidian. (Like they're not incestuous enough as it is.)

3.0, 3.5; the only difference I've noticed was my ability to multiclass to a fourth class and the flipping of a couple prestige class requirements.

Try doing the Ranger with both.

Nalano
09-11-2011, 08:10 PM
Try doing the Ranger with both.

Never liked bow-dominant classes in DnD. Always felt horrifically underpowered compared to just stabbing something multiple times or, worse, just calling in the heavens and killing everything at once.

sinister agent
09-11-2011, 08:12 PM
Try doing the Ranger with both.

Out-of-context quote of the week.

Nalano
09-11-2011, 08:13 PM
Out-of-context quote of the week.

Rangers do it with their pets?

Wizardry
09-11-2011, 08:16 PM
I'm fully aware of that, what's your point?
Just that you've still got so much of the game to see. Once you leave the Emerald Isle the game really kicks off and opens up. I wouldn't give up on the game just yet.

Althea
09-11-2011, 08:22 PM
Just that you've still got so much of the game to see. Once you leave the Emerald Isle the game really kicks off and opens up. I wouldn't give up on the game just yet.
Didn't say I was giving up, just that I can't get past that area.

Drake Sigar
09-11-2011, 09:02 PM
As soon as I heard the name 'Obsidian' I ran here as fast as I could (actually I clicked here, but ran is so much more dramatic and exciting) to make sure nobody was bashing them.

Nalano
09-11-2011, 10:25 PM
As soon as I heard the name 'Obsidian' I ran here as fast as I could (actually I clicked here, but ran is so much more dramatic and exciting) to make sure nobody was bashing them.

I sometimes conflate Interplay, Black Isle, Troika, Bioware and Obsidian as something of a hydra. But really, can anyone blame me?

Wizardry
09-11-2011, 11:10 PM
I sometimes conflate Interplay, Black Isle, Troika, Bioware and Obsidian as something of a hydra. But really, can anyone blame me?
Spot the odd one out.

imirk
09-11-2011, 11:14 PM
Spot the odd one out.

Is it Troika?

Drake Sigar
09-11-2011, 11:21 PM
Is it Troika?
I thought Wiz was referring to each studio's death, but Bioware and Obsidian are still kicking around. Plus he would have missed the opportunity for a children of the Hydra reference, so that can't be it.

Nalano
09-11-2011, 11:27 PM
Bioware shares history with Black Isle with the development of the Baldur's Gate series, which shares Bioware's engine with Black Isle's Planescape and Icewind Dale.

Black Isle also did the sequel to Interplay's Fallout, and former members of them and Interplay moved on to create Troika, which dissolved and former members of that went on to join Obsidian.

Meanwhile, Bioware made Neverwinter Nights, which was originally supposed to be published by Interplay before they went under, and whose sequel was made by Obsidian.

They've shared the same general design philosophies, had common professional relationships, eventually had many of the same designers and, until Bioware sold their rights to the DnD universe, a love affair with the Forgotten Realms.

In a sense, I view them as part of the same amorphous entity. They, for the most part, have developed quite a bit of what I've grown up to define as the Western RPG.

Wizardry
09-11-2011, 11:40 PM
Bioware shares history with Black Isle with the development of the Baldur's Gate series, which shares Bioware's engine with Black Isle's Planescape and Icewind Dale.
Yes.


Black Isle also did the sequel to Interplay's Fallout, and former members of them and Interplay moved on to create Troika, which dissolved and former members of that went on to join Obsidian.
Obsidian was created before Troika closed down, though at least you didn't specify otherwise.


Meanwhile, Bioware made Neverwinter Nights, which was originally supposed to be published by Interplay before they went under, and whose sequel was made by Obsidian.
Yes.


They've shared the same general design philosophies, had common professional relationships, eventually had many of the same designers and, until Bioware sold their rights to the DnD universe, a love affair with the Forgotten Realms.
BioWare didn't sell their rights to D&D video games. They never had the rights to begin with. Interplay did. Also, Troika never made a Forgotten Realms game.

My point is that Interplay, Black Isle, Troika and Obsidian all have significant developer crossovers, where as BioWare are rather self contained. That is all.

imirk
09-11-2011, 11:42 PM
Damn I was wrong...

Nalano
09-11-2011, 11:49 PM
My point is that Interplay, Black Isle, Troika and Obsidian all have significant developer crossovers, where as BioWare are rather self contained. That is all.

You're right. They're self-contained.

Except for Interplay and Black Isle having published Bioware's Baldur's Gate, Baldur's Gate 2 and MDK2.

And Obsidian making sequels to Bioware's Knights of the Old Republic and Neverwinter Nights.

And Black Isle and Obsidian using Bioware's Infinity and Aurora game engines.

And how almost all their games use modified DnD systems.

No, you're right. No connections at all. Like ships passing in the night...

Wizardry
09-11-2011, 11:50 PM
Did you even read my post or did you decide to skip over the "developer crossovers" bit?

Nalano
09-11-2011, 11:51 PM
Did you even read my post or did you decide to skip over the "developer crossovers" bit?

Have you ever heard the term "minor point rebuttal?"

Wizardry
09-11-2011, 11:53 PM
Have you ever heard the term "minor point rebuttal?"
These aren't minor points.

Nalano
09-11-2011, 11:54 PM
These aren't minor points.

No point with you is a minor point.

But, honestly, that's your problem.

DigitalSignalX
10-11-2011, 04:23 AM
1. I hate Blizzard for reasons that have nothing to do with their games.


This is curious. Former employee in accounting, HR or something?

Skalpadda
10-11-2011, 04:46 AM
1. I'm very easily terrified by games. I still have no idea how I got through Stalker, I switched the difficulty of the Ravenholm level in HL2 to easy, most of my alchemy skill in Oblivion came from making silly amounts of light potions whenever I went to a dungeon, I get nervous when exploring cave systems in Minecraft, I played the Thief games with the lights on. I'm a baby. On the other hand Doom 3, Dead Space and FEAR, all designed to actually be horror games didn't scare me at all beyond the odd cheap jumpy scare. I own Amnesia but I haven't even installed it and probably never will.

2. Someone mentioned reading more about games than actually playing them. Definitely guilty of that these days.

3. I really miss WoW sometimes.

imirk
10-11-2011, 04:51 AM
2. Someone mentioned reading more about games than actually playing them. Definitely guilty of that these days.


Particularly EVE

Malawi Frontier Guard
10-11-2011, 05:06 AM
1. I'm very easily terrified by games. I still have no idea how I got through Stalker, I switched the difficulty of the Ravenholm level in HL2 to easy, most of my alchemy skill in Oblivion came from making silly amounts of light potions whenever I went to a dungeon, I get nervous when exploring cave systems in Minecraft, I played the Thief games with the lights on. I'm a baby. On the other hand Doom 3, Dead Space and FEAR, all designed to actually be horror games didn't scare me at all beyond the odd cheap jumpy scare. I own Amnesia but I haven't even installed it and probably never will.

You need to talk a walk alone through a forest on a dark Sunday night. Fixed that for me. Puts things in perspective.

Alternatively, find a psychopath to stalk you.

sinister agent
10-11-2011, 05:29 AM
You need to talk a walk alone through a forest on a dark Sunday night. Fixed that for me. Puts things in perspective.

Alternatively, find a psychopath to stalk you.

Cows. Being ambushed by a herd of cows in a snowy field at night.

For such enormous and heavy creatures, they are amazingly stealthy. And in the dark, they can surround you in seconds. And stare at you. Tonnes and tonnes of animal just silently surrounding you and staring, in the dark, as you realise you're a long way from the nearest human, and nobody knows where you are.

Brrr.

Skalpadda
10-11-2011, 05:29 AM
You need to talk a walk alone through a forest on a dark Sunday night. Fixed that for me. Puts things in perspective.

I'm quite often out walking when it's dark and it's never felt scary, except once when I almost walked into a moose.

SMiD
10-11-2011, 05:36 AM
I feel like AAA developers should fuck off from gaming and go make movies, since that's what they seem to want most; no real choice or, just hold forward/W and left-click/push "whatever fucking button it is". Their version of gameplay is to move you through set-pieces as THEY want you to experience them.

I have been drinking this evening.

coldvvvave
10-11-2011, 06:56 AM
Only modern FPS reboot of a classic-but-dead ip I actually disliked from first announcment was XCOM. Syndicate I consider ok since it keeps the setting, music and more or less a genre( original wasn't really a strategy, duh). Fallout 3 was fine in my opinion and New Vegas was almost great. All three oiginals are among my most favourite games.

Oak
10-11-2011, 07:13 AM
I have bad taste. Or low standards. Or I'm easily amused. Whatever the case, I have a history of enjoying games that were seen as flops, disappointments, and also-rans. Not artsy underground games or unfairly-ignored indie gems, mind you, just...stuff like S.W.A.T. 2. Or Zoo Tycoon. And I'm still wondering why Brink didn't set the world on fire.

thegooseking
10-11-2011, 07:23 AM
I feel like AAA developers should fuck off from gaming and go make movies, since that's what they seem to want most; no real choice or, just hold forward/W and left-click/push "whatever fucking button it is". Their version of gameplay is to move you through set-pieces as THEY want you to experience them.

I have been drinking this evening.

Speaking of which, I spend far too much time defending 'cinematic' games like BioWare's titles for someone who's supposed to be an expert on emergent narrative.

exenter
10-11-2011, 07:44 AM
I feel like AAA developers should fuck off from gaming and go make movies, since that's what they seem to want most; no real choice or, just hold forward/W and left-click/push "whatever fucking button it is". Their version of gameplay is to move you through set-pieces as THEY want you to experience them.

I have been drinking this evening.

All games, including move-like games, are still much more entertaining than actual movies.

Bristoff
10-11-2011, 08:53 AM
All games, including move-like games, are still much more entertaining than actual movies.

I don't think I've ever read a more retarded statement in my life. And that's saying a lot in the days of the internet.

sabrage
10-11-2011, 09:04 AM
I'd rather watch a Michael Bay marathon than play this turd again:
http://img560.imageshack.us/img560/9404/gish.jpg

ado
10-11-2011, 09:25 AM
I've never completed the following games that are widely considered classics: Planescape: Torment, Deus Ex, Baldur's Gate, Fallout 1 and 2, Morrowind and a few more. You might recognize a pattern there.

I really like some of the olden 3rd person action games like Heavy Metal FAKK2 and Rune. Yeah they're kinda shit, but they're also kinda fun...

Also, Metal Gear Solid is better than Thief at the whore stealth thing. Actually the MGS series is better than a vast majority of other games. Yes, I am that guy!

/runs

Mohorovicic
10-11-2011, 09:29 AM
No need to run, I doubt after reading the first paragraph many people would take rest of your post seriously.

Nalano
10-11-2011, 09:39 AM
Also, Metal Gear Solid is better than Thief at the whore stealth thing. Actually the MGS series is better than a vast majority of other games. Yes, I am that guy!

/runs

You can run but you can't hide! Especially not behind that conveniently placed cardboard box!

Xercies
10-11-2011, 09:48 AM
I actually don't mind EA or the like rebooting franchises and turning them into FPSs especially if those FPS seem interesting to me. Like X-Com sounded really interesting last year with all the pre-realease while x-com fanboys were frothing at the mouth at a trailer which really showed not that much of the gameplay. I'm kind of looking forward to it, I might even get the original just to see how good it really is.

Althea
10-11-2011, 09:54 AM
I actually don't mind EA or the like rebooting franchises and turning them into FPSs especially if those FPS seem interesting to me. Like X-Com sounded really interesting last year with all the pre-realease while x-com fanboys were frothing at the mouth at a trailer which really showed not that much of the gameplay. I'm kind of looking forward to it, I might even get the original just to see how good it really is.
I'm getting the reboot, definitely.

The problem with reboots as FPS games is that it adds to a genre that is already oversaturated, and very few of those games actually do well. Look at the latest Red Faction, at Homefront and others of the genre. They're coming out, and they're falling flat on their faces at launch. I can pick up either for about £6 each on PC now, which is ridiculously low for such recent games. I know UK prices drop quick, but that's more of a plummet than a drop.

There's so many gaps in the market, and every FPS reboot or new franchise doesn't help fill those gaps. Homefront might have done better were it an RTS game with the same theme, for example.

The way I see it, publishers are making what they consider to be the less-risky moves, and are in fact doing the opposite.

ado
10-11-2011, 09:57 AM
No need to run, I doubt after reading the first paragraph many people would take rest of your post seriously.

Why not? Because I'm being honest?

Mohorovicic
10-11-2011, 10:20 AM
Yes, we don't take kindly to honest people around here.

c-Row
10-11-2011, 10:31 AM
Given the current outcry over the upcoming sequel and the numerous flaws people hurry to point out about it despite a highly positive WIT including a comment thread full of praise 18 months ago, I feel like I have to stand up lonely and confess that I really enjoyed Mass Effect 2. I never got past the first chapter of Neverwinter Nights 2, though.

ado
10-11-2011, 10:37 AM
Yes, we don't take kindly to honest people around here.

So, since you don't like honesty can I presume that this was a dishonest comment? :P

Also, I've played all those games from that 1st paragraph. Just haven't completed any of em...

Edawan
10-11-2011, 11:27 AM
Given the current outcry over the upcoming sequel and the numerous flaws people hurry to point out about it despite a highly positive WIT including a comment thread full of praise 18 months ago, I feel like I have to stand up lonely and confess that I really enjoyed Mass Effect 2.
It's just that the people who liked the game don't feel the need to reaffirm it every time the game is mentioned. I loved it too, best game of 2010 for me !

sinister agent
10-11-2011, 11:34 AM
Mass Effect 2 is terrific fun, and much better overall than the first one.

Theblazeuk
10-11-2011, 11:40 AM
I really enjoyed Mass Effect 2.

Me too guys, me too.

I've also been looking forward to an FPS xcom since Alliance, which sounded like the coolest game in the world when I was 11. Shame it never came to light but this new spin looks interesting - and I love the art direction for the aliens, trippy.

Vexing Vision
10-11-2011, 11:42 AM
Mass Effect 2 is terrific fun, and much better overall than the first one.

Yup. While I enjoyed individual bits and mechanics much more in ME1, ME2 was definitely the better game overall. To me, at least.

Drake Sigar
10-11-2011, 11:46 AM
Also, Metal Gear Solid is better than Thief at the whore stealth thing. Actually the MGS series is better than a vast majority of other games. Yes, I am that guy!

/runs
As someone who completed Metal Gear Solid twelve times, I approve of this.

The rest of the series sucked though.

coldvvvave
10-11-2011, 12:22 PM
I liked MAKO parts of Mass Effect and while I enjoyed second game, I think first one was better.


I started to like synthpop because one of the music guys of Unreal Tournament( Andrew Sega) is in a synthpop band( it's called Iris). I liked it so much that I even went to their live show, also I own a hoodie with their logo and couple of CDs.

c-Row
10-11-2011, 12:44 PM
I started to like synthpop because one of the music guys of Unreal Tournament( Andrew Sega) is in a synthpop band( it's called Iris). I liked it so much that I even went to their live show, also I own a hoodie with their logo and couple of CDs.

Nice story. If I should ever write a "Gaming Made Me" article, it would be "Game Music Made Me" instead.

agentorange
10-11-2011, 12:49 PM
I started to like synthpop because one of the music guys of Unreal Tournament( Andrew Sega) is in a synthpop band( it's called Iris). I liked it so much that I even went to their live show, also I own a hoodie with their logo and couple of CDs.

You might like this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dmhtc5S4atU

c-Row
10-11-2011, 01:01 PM
Well, I certainly do. :) Trackers are the DAW of manly men whose chest hair has it's on whiskey destillery.

Dugular
10-11-2011, 01:19 PM
As someone who completed Metal Gear Solid twelve times, I approve of this.

The rest of the series sucked though.

I normally recommend people play Metal Gear Solid 3 and pretend it's the only game in the series.

The Mechanical Aggressor
10-11-2011, 02:02 PM
1. I thoroughly enjoyed Neverwinter Nights 2 original campaign. I didn’t get halfway through Mask of the Betrayer.

2. I don't particularly enjoy Valve's games, yet I own everything they've released since HL2. I bought L4D2 on day one and have only played it for 8 hours. I only finished Portal a few weeks before Portal 2 was released.


3. I frequently buy games on release day, play them for 2 hours and then don't touch them for months. By the time I get back to the game, it can usually be bought for half the price I bought it for.

4. I'm hopeless at multiplayer manshoots. The first one I bought was Quake Wars and 80% of my playtime was against bots. My skill rating in BF3 is -200 after 7 hours playtime. My most played classes in TF2 are Medic and Pyro. I avoid multiplayer in general. I bought Demigod on release and probably played it online less than 10 times. Same goes for Left 4 Dead. I've never played a multiplayer RTS game despite reading multiplayer guides for Supreme Commander, C&C3 and World in Conflict.

5. In a shocking and most heinous betrayal of the Glorious PC Master Race, I owned an Xbox 360 and partook in such evils as Gears of War and Halo. After realizing the error of my ways, and being disgusted with the depraved creature that I had unwittingly become, I purged myself of console filth by smiting my Xbox 360 and casting it’s ruined husk into the sea.Thus there was much rejoicing as I returned to the PC Gaming fold.

But it was not to be. A few months later I succumbed to the Playstation 3 Sony Entertainment System and played heretical titles such as God of War 3 and Killzone 2. And the worst part was that I enjoyed it. Even though I could feel the disapproving stares on my back every time I left the house, I would still return to the PS3 like a crack addict to cocaine, sinking ever deeper into my depravity. In the end, it was The Witcher 2 that saved me, its glory piercing through the fog of my PS3 –addled brain. Years of neglect had turned my once mighty Personal Computer into a weedy word processor and internet browser, but being filled with the renewed vigour granted to me by the Witcher 2, I nursed it back to health until it once again became a Player of the Latest Electronic Personal Computer Video Entertainments.

exenter
10-11-2011, 03:00 PM
I don't think I've ever read a more retarded statement in my life. And that's saying a lot in the days of the internet.

So, enjoying games more than movies makes you a retard? Please kill yourself.

sinister agent
10-11-2011, 03:55 PM
It is customary to refrain from feeding them.

fiddlesticks
10-11-2011, 05:07 PM
I love to plan character builds. Any game that lets me peak inside and see how the mechanics and numbers are crunched is almost certain to worm its way into my subconscious. Planning out a build to develop the most efficient or overpowered setup, then watching it all come to fruition tickles all the right happy glands.
I'm guilty of this. In fact, I probably spent more time trying out different build combinations in Neverwinter Nights 2 than I did actually playing the game. I get past the first few areas and then decide I want to try out something completely new. So I roll up a new character and reach a similar point before deciding to restart again.

Which sort of ties into my other confession; I actually like RPGs that aren't all that long. To me Fallout 2 or Planescape: Torment have pretty much the perfect length. Enough content to keep it continually fresh but not so much that you get tired of it by the end. In contrast, Mass Effect gave me a lot more actual playtime, after about 20 hours I just wanted to get it over and done with. It certainly doesn't help that more playtime usually means you get to experience the same dungeon over and over again.

sabrage
04-12-2011, 11:27 PM
I have no idea what the phrase "emergent gameplay" means

Drake Sigar
04-12-2011, 11:46 PM
I'm guilty of this. In fact, I probably spent more time trying out different build combinations in Neverwinter Nights 2 than I did actually playing the game. I get past the first few areas and then decide I want to try out something completely new. So I roll up a new character and reach a similar point before deciding to restart again.
"So many years ago today..."

Nalano
05-12-2011, 12:28 AM
I have no idea what the phrase "emergent gameplay" means

Anything not expressed by the rules.

For example, there's nothing in the manual for Monopoly that requires you to kick the plastic hotels in frustration, throw the deck of cards at your cousin and refuse to speak to that side of the family for four months, but that's usually how the game ends.

Ravelle
05-12-2011, 10:10 AM
I love fighting games like Street Fighter IV, BlazBlue, Guilty Gear, I buy them at launch and play em for couple of weeks and ever touch em again.

thegooseking
05-12-2011, 10:31 AM
I haven't played a PC game since the middle of last week.

DeathPig
05-12-2011, 10:43 AM
I haven't played a PC game since the middle of last week.

I haven't played a game since I registered here. That's saying something.

Wizardry
05-12-2011, 03:51 PM
Anything not expressed by the rules.

For example, there's nothing in the manual for Monopoly that requires you to kick the plastic hotels in frustration, throw the deck of cards at your cousin and refuse to speak to that side of the family for four months, but that's usually how the game ends.
No. It's using the rules in an unintended way, not doing something outside the game, because that would mean kicking my monitor to the floor while playing Mass Effect would make Mass Effect an "emergent game".

It's all about the player being able to combine rules of the game to complete tasks in ways unintended or not specifically planned for. Emergent gameplay itself can be planned for in the sense that the developer can provide the player with lots of toys to play around with and set goals instead of paths. Goals can then be completed in any way the player can think of involving the toys at his or her disposal. With linear paths that the player has to go down to reach a goal, this isn't possible.

Nalano
05-12-2011, 03:53 PM
No.

Humor... isn't your strong point, is it?

gundrea
05-12-2011, 04:28 PM
Sentence pauses you, use them... like Shatner!

Nalano
05-12-2011, 04:48 PM
Hey, there are worse people to... emulate.

squareking
05-12-2011, 05:04 PM
1. I am pretty much hopelessly addicted to shmups/shoot-em-ups in the traditional arcade sense. Bigger titles from Cave and Raizing and indies like Crimzon Clover and Hellsinker are just sublime. Guilty pleasure.

2. I keep trying to get my fiancee, a one-time console RPG fan, to play stuff with me (Orange Box, recently Terraria), but she won't have any of it. She's cool with watching me play a few, mostly story-oriented things (Amnesia, Lost Odyssey) but no sandboxy games. Supreme sadface.

magnolia_fan
05-12-2011, 05:59 PM
I own Amnesia but I haven't even installed it and probably never will.

That's so not nice :O

Ok...
I suck at platformers
Have never played an MMO
I don't play multiplayer games other than Halo and party games with my friends. So I don't play online multiplayer at all.
I never play games as soon as they are released.
I hate military shooters and thus a big part of the current gaming trends (I still want to puke every time I remember that thing about "a new bioware studio, a 'new direction' (yeah right), a new game!" from a couple of weeks ago).
I can't tell the difference between Battlefield and Modern Warfare by screenshots alone.
Never played any The Elder Scrolls game.

PeopleLikeFrank
05-12-2011, 06:13 PM
Sentence pauses you, use them... like Shatner!

I think Shatner would need more than a simple elipsis. All the nuances of the strange rhythms requires an almost musical notation. Demi- and Quarter-Shatners in addition to the dramatic Full-Shatner.

Nalano
05-12-2011, 06:37 PM
I think Shatner would need more than a simple elipsis. All the nuances of the strange rhythms requires an almost musical notation. Demi- and Quarter-Shatners in addition to the dramatic Full-Shatner.

Are you saying that we need a full Shatner notational method?

Lambchops
05-12-2011, 08:14 PM
That's so not nice :O
Never played any The Elder Scrolls game.

I played Morrowind (bought in a Steam sale) and didn't get on with it despite feeling I should like that sort of thing. At least it saved me from getting needlessly excited when everyone has been going on about how brilliant Skyrim is; I just no it's not for me and don't have to pay to find that out!

Though my main confession is that I often end up using walkthroughs for adventure games. Oh the shame!

DigitalSignalX
05-12-2011, 08:50 PM
I always thought emergent gameplay was when you ended up spending a lot of time doing something completely unrelated or unintended to the developers main goal of the game. Like decorating your house in Oblivion. Practicing bunny jumping the Mako in Mass Effect. Arranging bodies to form huge words for passing vertibirds to read in Fallout Vegas. Using a potted plant to kill every NPC in Deus Ex. Normal stuff like that?

Berzee
05-12-2011, 09:03 PM
I always thought emergent gameplay was when you ended up spending a lot of time doing something completely unrelated or unintended to the developers main goal of the game. Like decorating your house in Oblivion. Practicing bunny jumping the Mako in Mass Effect. Arranging bodies to form huge words for passing vertibirds to read in Fallout Vegas. Using a potted plant to kill every NPC in Deus Ex. Normal stuff like that?

Yep, but to take the Oblivion thing as an example:

If they actually made a house-decorating screen in Oblivion (with a Sims-like interface) then that would be a simple Mini-game instead of Emergent Gameplay. The reason it's Emergent Gameplay is because it is a form of entertainment that *emerges* from the fact that they added some object physics to Oblivion allowing you to move them around and stuff. Same with using potted plants in DX -- they added some general *simulation* into the game world and you created a makeshift weapon out of it.

So your definition is pretty good but, but some not-actually-emergent things might slip through in that definition (for example, spending more time playing an arcade game in the waiting room in some larger game than actually doing missions in said game).

We are deciding the future of the English language here. Take a moment of silence to appreciate our contribution.

db1331
05-12-2011, 09:07 PM
I've been a PC gamer for around 20 years now, and RPGs are my favorite genre, but I've never played Planescape: Torment or the first Baldur's Gate.

Nalano
05-12-2011, 09:08 PM
We are deciding the future of the English language here. Take a moment of silence to appreciate our contribution.

This is the internet, where "epic" is used as an adjective for everything. We are deciding the future of the English language, and that scares me.

TheRed
05-12-2011, 09:47 PM
I often play games I can't really be bothered with on easy, or use cheats, to get through them for the story. This applies in cases such as Fallout 3 and NV. I could have got through them fine, but didn't care enough about the gameplay to get through. They were rnjoyable anyway. On the other hand, I wouldn't have cheated in Mass Effect 2 or Splinter Cell Conviction because I found the dynamics more fun.

Keep
05-12-2011, 11:46 PM
I always thought emergent gameplay was when you ended up spending a lot of time doing something completely unrelated or unintended to the developers main goal of the game. Like decorating your house in Oblivion. Practicing bunny jumping the Mako in Mass Effect. Arranging bodies to form huge words for passing vertibirds to read in Fallout Vegas. Using a potted plant to kill every NPC in Deus Ex. Normal stuff like that?

We need a word for that! Unfortunately, "emergent gameplay" isn't it.

TailSwallower
06-12-2011, 12:13 AM
We need a word for that! Unfortunately, "emergent gameplay" isn't it.

I think it's called, "making your own fun".

But yeah, I always thought that emergent gameplay was "still attempting to complete your goals/quests, but making up your own rules to do so". Of course the rules you make up might have been planned for by the developers in the first place, but if you still think it's your own idea then I they've done their job perfectly. For reference, see the puzzles in Portal 1 versus 2. In one you always felt like you were forging your own path. In 2 you always felt like you were trying to find the prescribed solutions.

PeopleLikeFrank
06-12-2011, 12:23 AM
Are you saying that we need a full Shatner notational method?

I am! Our culture is only poorer without it. Think of it, the symphonies of soliloquy that could be composed! The orchestral oration!

I'll stop now.

Re: Emergent gameplay. I'd say that it has to emerge from other elements of gameplay. "Doing whatever because you can" doesn't necessarily count. It would have to be things that aren't explicit in the rules, but come from those rules nonetheless. Rocket jumping is a pretty good example.

sabrage
06-12-2011, 12:32 AM
It's all about the player being able to combine rules of the game to complete tasks in ways unintended or not specifically planned for. Emergent gameplay itself can be planned for in the sense that the developer can provide the player with lots of toys to play around with and set goals instead of paths. Goals can then be completed in any way the player can think of involving the toys at his or her disposal. With linear paths that the player has to go down to reach a goal, this isn't possible.
Thief is the only game I've ever played that fits this description, and while it's a fascinating little game I haven't gone back after the first level because it's so exhausting.



So your definition is pretty good but, but some not-actually-emergent things might slip through in that definition (for example, spending more time playing an arcade game in the waiting room in some larger game than actually doing missions in said game).

I think this pretty much sums up my time with Starcraft 2.

DigitalSignalX
06-12-2011, 01:00 AM
... being able to combine rules of the game to complete tasks in ways unintended or not specifically planned for. Emergent gameplay itself can be planned for in the sense that the developer can provide the player with lots of toys to play around with and set goals instead of paths.


It seems contradictory. Planning for the unplanned? So in a Half Life episode they give you a goal of say "obvious high place you need to reach" and then give you a gravity gun and a level full of various objects to stack. How is that emergent? Valve might never *plan* on what combination of shit I'll use to get to it, but they did plan on me figuring out some way.

Now what if I end up breaking the collision mesh with an object (sort of like the first radio in portal 1) and can repel myself through a wall and up to the destination? That's what I'd call emergent gameplay.

Nalano
06-12-2011, 01:05 AM
I think it's called, "making your own fun".

It's called "throwing out the toy and playing with the box." :P

jaheria
06-12-2011, 01:39 AM
I solo MMOs. All those other people running around in dire need of my help might as well be NPCs for all I care.

Wizardry
06-12-2011, 01:47 AM
It seems contradictory. Planning for the unplanned? So in a Half Life episode they give you a goal of say "obvious high place you need to reach" and then give you a gravity gun and a level full of various objects to stack. How is that emergent? Valve might never *plan* on what combination of shit I'll use to get to it, but they did plan on me figuring out some way.
Not really, because the developer planned you to get up there using the gravity gun by stacking objects. If, on the other hand, you still had these jump boot things from earlier in the game and you used them to jump up to a small ledge on a cliff, which allowed you to use a tree climbing mechanic to climb up this plant on the cliff face to get within jumping distance of your goal, and the developer didn't specifically put that ledge there, or that tree there in order for you to get up that way, that's emergent gameplay. It does require an element of "natural" level design to allow toys to be used in unplanned situations. Invisible walls are a massive hindrance to emergent gameplay.


Now what if I end up breaking the collision mesh with an object (sort of like the first radio in portal 1) and can repel myself through a wall and up to the destination? That's what I'd call emergent gameplay.
Sounds like a bug. The above stuff with the jump boots, cliff and plant could also be considered a bug if there was a specific developer crafted way to get up to your goal. If the developer just makes a level and dumps in various goals, without specifically crafting unique ways to go about reaching them, it results emergent gameplay. It's why the Hitman games fail at this, because there's clearly a few ways to take out your targets that the developer specifically built into the levels for you to use.

thegooseking
06-12-2011, 05:03 AM
The trouble with "emergent gameplay" isn't that 'emergent' is poorly defined. It's actually very well defined. The trouble is that 'gameplay' is poorly defined. If you look at emergent narrative vs. embedded narrative, the difference is pretty unambiguous.

But 'gameplay' is a weird catch-all term we use to describe whatever isn't covered by the language we'd use to describe other media. And it may mean different things to different people, so while some people might prioritise the rules (which can be separated into ludic rules and simulative rules, either of which will have their own adherents), others might prioritise the feel of the control system, and others still might prioritise the level design.

DigitalSignalX
06-12-2011, 09:11 AM
...the developer planned you to get up there ... [contrasting] ... the developer didn't specifically put that ledge there, or that tree there in order for you to get up that way, that's emergent gameplay.

The above stuff with the jump boots, cliff and plant could also be considered a bug if there was a specific developer crafted way to get up to your goal. If the developer just makes a level and dumps in various goals, without specifically crafting unique ways to go about reaching them, it results emergent gameplay.

Again, seems contradictory. The goal of getting somewhere the developer intends for you to get to (or in Hitman's case, execute someone) using whatever means at your disposal. Your boots trick sounds just as valid as my build a see-saw jump with random junk. But boots might be a bug because it was "unintended... or emergent gameplay"... lol. In hitman's case, it would be a bug if you could use your characters body to simply collision push someone off the side of a balcony. But if the game allowed you an actual "push" command, then it's part of the games design. Just like the boots you're using in the "wrong place."


The trouble with "emergent gameplay" isn't that 'emergent' is poorly defined. It's actually very well defined. The trouble is that 'gameplay' is poorly defined. If you look at emergent narrative vs. embedded narrative, the difference is pretty unambiguous.


This is a MUCH better explanation. Scripted or intended sequence vs. crazy guy doing a 180 but getting the same result without breaking game physics/rules.

Nalano
06-12-2011, 09:21 AM
This is a MUCH better explanation. Scripted or intended sequence vs. crazy guy doing a 180 but getting the same result without breaking game physics/rules.

I was thinking of a good example of what I would consider "emergent gameplay," and what sprang to mind was modding the gravity in UT2k4 to have a ridiculous high-flying, bouncy CTF on a map with bottomless pits. It was incredibly stupid fun, and not one of the standard game modes, but extended the life of the game for all the players involved.

Zetetic
06-12-2011, 09:34 AM
Again, seems contradictory.
Or it's the terms are, at best, vague and most likely subjective. Given that many games implement a vast array of systems, we've most likely reached the point where one man's 'emergent' use of mechanic could well be another man's exploit of a bug.

Consider how the Adams brothers approach Dwarf Fortress and how they react to the various surprises that are thrown up during development. They'll often accept an 'emergent' outcome if they have little trouble making sense of it within the world (or narratives if you really want) of DF, but will reject outcomes (and seek to amend the mechanics accordingly) if they can't or feel that such outcomes deleteriously affect playability.

Edit: I'm not entirely convinced that the issue is entirely to do with definitional or use issues with 'gameplay', since there clearly are issues with non-games and establishing whether particular aspects of a given narrative were truly emergent. If we really think it's something down that route, I could imagine it's much more to do with the difficulties in anyone establishing the precise nature of an author or designer's intention.

gundrea
06-12-2011, 09:56 AM
Thief is the only game I've ever played that fits this description, and while it's a fascinating little game I haven't gone back after the first level because it's so exhausting.


Aye. Thief doesn't have a difficulty curve in that you start out weak and end up powerful. In Thief you're always fragile, always hiding. The suspense and stress is neverending because of this and the game never loses its edge.

FuriKuri!
06-12-2011, 10:34 AM
Emergence is definately something of a fuzzy term and even some professional games developers have trouble fully understanding what it means (personal experience). For my money there are two types of emergence;

1) Intended emergence - Doors in Deus Ex are a good example of this. You can smash them, blow them up, lockpick them, find the key, bypass via alternate route, etc. While the set of choices available may be more (or less) limited, the player has freedom to choose the path they wish. They may even choose multiple options but only effectively execute one (e.g. find the key, lockpick regardless).

Furthermore, execution of these may in itself offer emergent options. For example, knowing a door may be blown open a player can just use a grenade for the job. However, they may also carry an explosive crate from elsewhere in the level to the door and shoot that and achieve the same effect. This is a highly emergent behaviour as it adheres to the intended rules whilst being a non-obvious solution. It isn't really an exploit although designers need to be somewhat careful (deliberately withholding grenades from the player so they can't blow open a critical door for example, would fail as a restraint in this case). This emergence may limit itself to choices the player has made which can further increase the non-obviousness of it, e.g. the explosive crate may be too heavy to carry without the player having invested in his strength.

2) Unintended/exploitative emergence - This would be your old 'stacking objects to bypass a door' sort of jobby. This may be intended as a mechanic in places, although usually this will be heavily signposted with obvious objects to stack (such as crates of convenient incremental sizes ;)). However, if the player is stacking plant pots, office chairs and watercoolers then it's a safe bet that this is far from the intended behaviour.

Developers dislike this sort of thing because it's hard to predict and can cause bugs (e.g. falling out the level) and, particularly, issues with progression (aka sequence breaking). This doesn't necessarily need to involve using objects in the environment in unpredictable ways, it may purely be player movement related exploitation such as bunnyhopping and rocket jumping in the original Quake (reach areas of the level you weren't expected to) or mockballing in Super Metroid (to get access to weapons earlier than you should). These two games are a fascinating study in this sort of thing by the way, check out some exploit speedruns for these games on youtube.

Sometimes these exploits will become so popular that the developer will fully embrace them in future games (as was the case with rocket jumping).

gwathdring
06-12-2011, 03:34 PM
I am addicted to looting things in RPGs. In Fallout, I routinely Z-Carried massive objects very long distances, putting them into my inventory at every door--just for some extra cash. At one point, in Oblivion, I found myself with way too much loot in a particular area after a bandit ambush. My solution to this was to load one of the corpses with miscellaneous equipment and z-drag it all the way to the nearest town. It was a sad, sad day ... I've gotten better since then. But I still make room for every last item I can in Dragon Age. I've resolved not to do this if I ever get around to Skyrim someday when my computer can handle it properly.

Smashbox
06-12-2011, 03:44 PM
My solution to this was to load one of the corpses with miscellaneous equipment and z-drag it all the way to the nearest town. It was a sad, sad day

Now that's a gaming confession!

Tikey
06-12-2011, 04:21 PM
My solution to this was to load one of the corpses with miscellaneous equipment and z-drag it all the way to the nearest town. It was a sad, sad day

That's.... quite brilliant actually.

Anthile
06-12-2011, 07:41 PM
I'm a terrible hoarder. When I play a game, I usually finish being a billionaire, carrying around hundreds of medpacks, full ammo and gear for every possible situation that will never occur because the devs are lazy.
If there is a melee weapon in a FPS, I will use it ruthlessly.

Tikey
06-12-2011, 07:44 PM
I'm a terrible hoarder. When I play a game, I usually finish being a billionaire, carrying around hundreds of medpacks, full ammo and gear for every possible situation that will never occur because the devs are lazy.
If there is a melee weapon in a FPS, I will use it ruthlessly.

I'm exactly the same. I've defeated bosses with the stock weapon (the one with the infinite ammo) in case I need the grenade launcher for something bigger.

Nalano
06-12-2011, 08:01 PM
I'm a terrible hoarder. When I play a game, I usually finish being a billionaire, carrying around hundreds of medpacks, full ammo and gear for every possible situation that will never occur because the devs are lazy.
If there is a melee weapon in a FPS, I will use it ruthlessly.

I used to time how long it would take to spend ALL the ammunition from full to zero in Doom.

The shotgun took twice as long as everything else combined.

Knowing how trigger-happy I was (and am), the shotgun then became my primary, most efficient weapon.

Dare_Wreck
07-12-2011, 03:39 AM
Speaking of difficulty, I must confess to finding the combat in Dragon Age to be completely unfathomable. I see many a people complaining about it being incredibly easy, but my experience was of death stalking me in every battle. Abilities that used to work would suddenly become completely impotent, whilst my strongest characters would fall to their knees after single handedly taking on half the Blight, but unable to kill a lonely wolf. The random encounters when travelling would make me weep for a while, whilst at the end of the Werewolf quest made me want to smash my keyboard into the monitor, as I limply ran around in circles.

I don't normally find games to be too difficult, or, at least, have the perseverance to battle my way through repeated attempts, but this just became too much and I had to stop not even half way through the game.

Sorry for the late reply (I don't peruse the forums much), but I had a very similar experience. I just couldn't wrap my head around the combat in Dragon Age. The tactics system doesn't give you enough options to play with in the beginning to make them very useful, so I found that I would usually just spam the same 3 or 4 abilities mapped to hotkey numbers. This made the combat very repetitive and boring, and I eventually gave up on the game. I really enjoyed Star Wars: KOTOR, so I can't quite figure out why the tactics in DA:O never clicked with me. And the inventory system drove me crazy also! I found no easy way to adjust my characters' equipment in a way that maximized their benefit. I ended up spending more time with indie games that I could play for 5-30 minutes at a time and get more enjoyment out of them.

For my other confessions:

I can't stand Magicka's gameplay. It reminds me too much of a Mortal Kombat-like fighting system, where I can remember a limited number of "moves" at one time, and if I try to learn a new move or magic, I end up pushing one out of my mind. The end result is that I end up spamming the same 3 or 4 spells over and over again which ends up getting incredibly tedious and boring. Plus, I always play Magicka in single player, which, being a game that is very much designed around multi-player, is incredibly frustrating. I tried it for the first time in about 6 months after the recent checkpoint-save update, and I STILL found it unbearably frustrating.

Lastly, I've come to realize that I am turning into more of a game collector than a game player. Thanks to the responsibilities of being grown up and having a family now, I usually can only devote at most one hour to gaming a day (two on the weekends). That is decidedly NOT going to help me complete all the role playing games I've bought during terrific Steam and GOG sales over the last year, including ME, ME2, The Witcher, multiple Fallouts (1, 2, Tactics, and NV), and all the DND games at GOG. Of all those I listed, it's taken me a year to dedicate enough time to ME to finally travel to my first world after the Citadel! I think I've amassed something like 30+ games at GOG, many of which I purchased simply because they are classics that I never played them back in the day, and I thought it would be really cool to buy them during a sale in case I ever had time to play them (such as Independence War 1 & 2, Painkiller, Star Control, all the aforementioned DND games). And this is not even considering all the games I've picked up in the Humble Bundles and Indie Royale deals. Of all those, I've probably only played 4 or 5 of the 20+ games I've picked up for terrific prices (though, I suppose I'm not counting the handful of games in the bundles that I did already have and played). I'm getting really tempted to play the Lottery in hopes that I'll win and can quit my job, just so that I have time to catch up on all these games!

The JG Man
07-12-2011, 03:59 AM
[Magicka] reminds me too much of a Mortal Kombat-like fighting system, where I can remember a limited number of "moves" at one time, and if I try to learn a new move or magic, I end up pushing one out of my mind. The end result is that I end up spamming the same 3 or 4 spells over and over again which ends up getting incredibly tedious and boring. Plus, I always play Magicka in single player, which, being a game that is very much designed around multi-player, is incredibly frustrating. I tried it for the first time in about 6 months after the recent checkpoint-save update, and I STILL found it unbearably frustrating.

Oh good lord that! I've made very little progress in the single player, reaching half-way through level 2 or something. I'll be happy to just sit down and complete the game at some point and have done with it.

For my own: Whilst, tactically, I'm pretty savvy with the combat in the Total War series, I have tremendous difficulty generating income on the board. I can do everything 'right', but I just can't get enough. The result is, the only time I've won any campaign in any of the games has been when I've cheated, generally through giving myself more money and giving the freedom to then do with that as I choose.

Obtusely, whilst I'm tactically good with the TW combat, I cannot go online with any RTS. I'm one of the slow-builder/turtlers that wants to have that big base and then attack in one fell swoop. Perhaps I haven't found the right game for me, but I last tried it with Command and Conquer 3 and soon abandoned it (although that game had other issues and balancing problems for some time). I've tried to get on board again with DoW 2: Retribution, but it's a slow and arduous process and given the choice, I just go and play other games, even though I enjoy a spot of the armchair general every so often. Perhaps over the incoming holiday I'll set some time aside from playing Skyrim and the rest of the backlog to trying to get into Retribution's MP.

Nalano
07-12-2011, 04:18 AM
For my own: Whilst, tactically, I'm pretty savvy with the combat in the Total War series, I have tremendous difficulty generating income on the board. I can do everything 'right', but I just can't get enough. The result is, the only time I've won any campaign in any of the games has been when I've cheated, generally through giving myself more money and giving the freedom to then do with that as I choose.

Step 1: Abuse the fuck outta overseas trade routes
Step 2: If your army's not fighting somebody, it's losing money

If you play TW like you do RTSs, the problem is that your cash flow is severely hampered by having to feed a huge army that's spending too much time recuperating and perfecting itself and not enough time conquering new territories.

DigitalSignalX
07-12-2011, 09:10 AM
Emergence is definately something of a fuzzy term ...

1) Intended emergence ...

2) Unintended/exploitative emergence ...

Thank you!

ps: love the avatar, "I mean say what you like about the tenets of National Socialism Dude, but at least it's an ethos."

FuriKuri!
07-12-2011, 11:13 AM
Of course now I realise my original reply was to further the derailment of the thread, and I'm yet to confess to anything.

"Dude are you fucking this up?!"

I suppose my biggest confession at the minute is that I'm using a gamepad for games that are more traditionally "mouse + keyboard" affairs.

Because, quite frankly, it is the only way most modern games pose a challenge any more.

Other than that - my favourite game ever is a console title, although it is so niche and far removed from the big three manufacturers that I'm not too embarassed to share it - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y1jKpKMcYRw.

Vexing Vision
07-12-2011, 11:16 AM
With the upcoming DOA, I also have a confession to make: I am very much looking forward to and will play the new Dead Or Alive for the mechanics, not for the gratuitous T&A-distribution.

Apparently this makes me abnormal. So be it!

Drake Sigar
07-12-2011, 12:12 PM
Obtusely, whilst I'm tactically good with the TW combat, I cannot go online with any RTS. I'm one of the slow-builder/turtlers that wants to have that big base and then attack in one fell swoop. Perhaps I haven't found the right game for me, but I last tried it with Command and Conquer 3 and soon abandoned it (although that game had other issues and balancing problems for some time). I've tried to get on board again with DoW 2: Retribution, but it's a slow and arduous process and given the choice, I just go and play other games, even though I enjoy a spot of the armchair general every so often. Perhaps over the incoming holiday I'll set some time aside from playing Skyrim and the rest of the backlog to trying to get into Retribution's MP.
The problem with RTS multiplayer games is they're not high on my list. I get them months after release, and by that time all the average players have been driven from the game by droves of shortcut-memorising 12 hour a day hardcore players with preteen reflexes.

thegooseking
07-12-2011, 01:17 PM
I am very much looking forward to and will play the new Dead Or Alive for the mechanics, not for the gratuitous T&A-distribution.

We believe you about as much as you believe this.

db1331
07-12-2011, 02:34 PM
Of course now I realise my original reply was to further the derailment of the thread, and I'm yet to confess to anything.

"Dude are you fucking this up?!"

I suppose my biggest confession at the minute is that I'm using a gamepad for games that are more traditionally "mouse + keyboard" affairs.

Because, quite frankly, it is the only way most modern games pose a challenge any more.

Other than that - my favourite game ever is a console title, although it is so niche and far removed from the big three manufacturers that I'm not too embarassed to share it - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y1jKpKMcYRw.

Holy crap. You should have put a seizure warning before that link. I only watched it for 10 seconds and I can still see it when I close my eyes. Does it ever go away?

coldvvvave
07-12-2011, 02:34 PM
My first PC game was Barbie - Super Model. It was actually pretty good.

Vexing Vision
07-12-2011, 02:44 PM
We believe you about as much as you believe this.

But it's true! Street Fighter is about learning character-specific supercombos. MvC is about button-mashing. Tekken is kind of nice, and that other strange fighting game with Yoda or Luke Skywalker is all about timing.

But DoA is all about the flow. Combos can be countered at any time, and not only do the counters and countergrabs look utterly gorgeous, they're also amazing fun and come very naturally to pull off. I cannot wait for the next installment of the series!

Oh, and the girls look kind of nice, too, I suppose. But who cares! :P

sabrage
07-12-2011, 10:20 PM
Actually, Tekken is about button mashing, MvC is all about character-specific supercombos, Street Fighter is kind of nice, and BlazBlue is all about flow.

I've never played DoA but I think it'd be even more embarrassing than Soul Caliber. In a genre that's by nature alienating to women, they are literally not even trying to welcome them back in. With Itagaki out doing Valhalla now, I don't really have much faith in Team Ninja anymore.

Althea
07-12-2011, 10:31 PM
FlatOut 3 Actually Seems Kinda Cool
I've got Ultimate Carnage, and I sort of liked it in a really weird way. I can't play much of it in one go and the limited soundtrack drives me nuts, but there's a strange charm to it. I watched the trailer and it looks absolutely terrible, but unlike a lot of games that get almost "rebooted" each time, FlatOut 3 seems to retain the core aspects of the series. It looks like it continues with both game modes, i.e. racing and rather sadistic mini-games, and that's pretty cool. I also like how you're getting a choice of player character, which is something UC really lacked - You had these characters with different style, yet you were stuck as some rather nameless and dull twit with no customisation for you or your car's paint, which really sucked.

I would have preferred a trailer which is less of a the-devs-are-shit-at-playing-games gag reel, though.

gwathdring
07-12-2011, 10:49 PM
I haven't played Blazblue or DoA, but I felt MvC (at least the older PS2 ones) were a lot of button mashing. There were particular tag-team characters that were better combinations (I seem to remember spider man had a great, fast off-screen special even though he wasn't as good in the fight proper) and so forth and the specials were different for each character ... but a lot of the effective combos were fairly similar in execution (though not in effectiveness) from character to character.

Soulcaliber was less about the moves than the timing as far as I remember, so I agree with Vexing Vision there.

I can't say much for Street Fighter. My only experience with it is against one of my room-mates. We played a bit of Street Fighter IV and I remember some pretty obtuse combos. Twirl the stick 720 degrees while pressing these buttons ... twirl the stick 270 and press these other buttons ... not only does the result of a given button combination vary from character to character (that's a good thing) but each character has a laundry list of unique button combinations to pull off even some of the more basic maneuvers. I found it an impenetrable system as you weren't learning the system and discovering the intricacies of the various characters. You had to sit down and go very carefully over every new character you wanted to play just to be able to DO things and then you could go through the typical discovery process to find out what combos work where, which characters are best for controlling which parts of the screen and so forth.

I know people who love it for exactly that reason ... so to each their own. I don't remember much about Tekken. It's been a while.

I think Yomi is my favorite fighting game. It's easy to learn, you don't have to worry about direction and screen-control as much, and which moves counter other moves is clearly laid out beforehand so you don't have to try it and guess only to get beat into the dust. As in all fighting games, I find a successful throw the most satisfying feeling in the game ... something about them just feels awesome. The various super-combos are pretty neat too. Finally, timing isn't as important as in most fighting games. It's a bit on the expensive side if you want all of the characters, I but highly recommend giving it a try. Here's the publisher website (http://www.sirlingames.com/pages/games), and here's the dev site (http://www.fantasystrike.com/game/index.php) where you can try it out for free.

sabrage
07-12-2011, 11:14 PM
I think that it can be argued that any fighting game is a "button masher" at low-level play (see: Zangief's Double Lariat) but you'll get your ass handed to you (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Ceb-IOpZrU&feature=related) by a competent player if you button mash in a Capcom fighter.

My favorite fighting game is, of course, Sumotori Dreams:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O8KAUoW0Juo

gwathdring
08-12-2011, 04:24 AM
I love Sumatori Dreams! Torribash is pretty amazing as well, but it has a crazy learning curve. My friend and I have been mucking around in Torribash recently and I keep getting all of my limbs removed. Sometimes I'll still manage to trip him with my dislodged limbs and win anyway. :P Not often though. He's been playing for ages.

Subatomic
08-12-2011, 08:19 AM
I love Sumatori Dreams! Torribash is pretty amazing as well, but it has a crazy learning curve. My friend and I have been mucking around in Torribash recently and I keep getting all of my limbs removed. Sometimes I'll still manage to trip him with my dislodged limbs and win anyway. :P Not often though. He's been playing for ages.

I think I haven't played a fighting game since... One Must Fall 2097? (which was awesome!).

c-Row
08-12-2011, 08:24 AM
My solution to this was to load one of the corpses with miscellaneous equipment and z-drag it all the way to the nearest town. It was a sad, sad day ...

Now if we could actually stuff corpses into corpses, we would have an infinite inventory system. Or at least a very weird necrophilia simulator.

imirk
08-12-2011, 05:45 PM
Now if we could actually stuff corpses into corpses, we would have an infinite inventory system. Or at least a very weird necrophilia simulator.

A Macabre Bag of Unlimited Holding!

Net_Bastard
10-12-2011, 06:36 PM
I like modern military shooters. I also like old-school shooters, and I have played them before I played modern military shooters.

I never played an Elder Scrolls game.

c-Row
12-12-2011, 09:12 PM
I totally suck at twin stick shooters. Just played another few rounds of the Geometry Wars demo, and I am still unable to properly coordinate the movement and the shooting at the same time.

gganate
12-12-2011, 09:19 PM
I've never played a Blizzard game beside Diablo 2 and then only for a couple of hours.

I can't figure out how Morrowind is better than Oblivion.

Age of Empires is the only strategy game I've ever really enjoyed.

Although I've played and enjoyed every Valve game, I still don't think they've surpassed the original Half-Life.

I haven't played as many of the classics as I should have. My gaming experience started in 1997 and was for about three years limited to first person shooters.

Knights of the Old Republic was my first RPG.

All right, I don't think the above are that bad.

Keep
12-12-2011, 09:41 PM
I can't figure out how Morrowind is better than Oblivion.

I've not played Oblivion but I think it's to do with the 'alien'-ness of the world. Oblivion is generic Tolkien/Dungeons & Dragons fantasy fare.

Morrowind was...unique. The plant life alone was enough to suck me deep into its world.

...Actually given how wooden the NPCs were...and how frustrating combat could be...it's all due to the plant life actually. Hrm.

Nalano
12-12-2011, 09:48 PM
I've not played Oblivion but I think it's to do with the 'alien'-ness of the world. Oblivion is generic Tolkien/Dungeons & Dragons fantasy fare.

Morrowind was...unique. The plant life alone was enough to suck me deep into its world.

...Actually given how wooden the NPCs were...and how frustrating combat could be...it's all due to the plant life actually. Hrm.

+1

Tho, the funniest part of Morrowind was the necessity to have a mod to stop it looking like the women stuffed socks in their pants.

zookeeper
04-01-2012, 03:50 AM
Two things:

- I've never played starcraft (or warcraft) (or world of warcraft, but that's another story)

- I have no idea what this DotA thing is that everyone is going on about. Not a clue. (though everytime I see the acronym I think it means this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K2Sse7eYUL0))


Probably not my worst gaming sins, but the best/worst I can think of at the moment.

LordHuggington
04-01-2012, 05:59 PM
Well, I can't stand competitive gaming, like all these MLG and such. They're extremely boring to watch, and just seem to feed into the "serious business" crowd, who I find utterly unpleasant to deal with when playing something online, and completely un-fun lot in general.

thegooseking
04-01-2012, 07:34 PM
Well, I can't stand competitive gaming, like all these MLG and such. They're extremely boring to watch, and just seem to feed into the "serious business" crowd, who I find utterly unpleasant to deal with when playing something online, and completely un-fun lot in general.

Extra Credits did an episode on that. They pointed out that in any other sport (motorsport driver cams notwithstanding), the audience doesn't see the same thing as the players see. So what the audience sees is more interesting to the audience, and what the players see is more interesting to the players. This doesn't happen in video games. That's mainly because MLG doesn't use bespoke games. Generally, the pro level uses existing games that are interesting to play without really worrying about whether or not they're interesting to watch. I wonder if, now that MLG is a thing, people will start thinking about designing games that are interesting to play and to watch, and just how they'll manage that.

PeopleLikeFrank
04-01-2012, 08:45 PM
Extra Credits did an episode on that. They pointed out that in any other sport (motorsport driver cams notwithstanding), the audience doesn't see the same thing as the players see. So what the audience sees is more interesting to the audience, and what the players see is more interesting to the players. This doesn't happen in video games. That's mainly because MLG doesn't use bespoke games. Generally, the pro level uses existing games that are interesting to play without really worrying about whether or not they're interesting to watch. I wonder if, now that MLG is a thing, people will start thinking about designing games that are interesting to play and to watch, and just how they'll manage that.

It's beginning to happen that way already. The POV for SCII is the same for spectators, but the announcer can see everyone's units and can flip between player-specific views. TF2 has a mod that's used for showing pro games which is in a third-person arial camera, with HUD elements showing the status of players on each team.

There are still problems arising from action happening in more than one place, while the spectator view is necessarily constrained, so yeah, it'd be interesting to see it beginning at the design level. Not sure whether it would be solvable though, without constraining the action to a particular object (like in most televised sports), or within a well defined arena (as with most sports).

JohnnyK
05-01-2012, 12:18 AM
I have had an unopened boxed copy of Skyrim sitting on my desk for a month, and I am not sure I even want to try it. Never got into Oblivion, never was a huge RPG fan.

Same with NFS:The Run and Driver:SF, but those aren't as hyped as Skyrim... (and have yet to finish AssRev and Saint's Row 3).

Althea
05-01-2012, 01:16 PM
I have had an unopened boxed copy of Skyrim sitting on my desk for a month, and I am not sure I even want to try it. Never got into Oblivion, never was a huge RPG fan.
So why did you buy Skyrim? ;)

Skyrim is better than Oblivion, though still flawed in many ways. I won't say it's Morrowind 2.0, but I will say Skyrim is definitely one of the better games I've played from this year - and I'm nowhere near finishing it.

neema_t
06-01-2012, 02:31 AM
My timing sucks but only if I'm trying to time something right. I can never drift around a corner on Saints Row without hitting the building occupying the apex if I WANT to, but if I'm just casually fart-arsing around I can drive like a pro. Best example of that is earlier on, driving to a target car for a SaintsBook thing, I stole a car, drove absolutely perfectly on the way there, and I mean perfectly, arrived at the target, stole it and crashed into everything possible whilst getting it back to the chop shop. Oh well. It gets worse when it comes to driving sims, especially as the physics are actually realistic and I theoretically know what I'm doing, but I still manage to mash the throttle way before I'm supposed to when exiting a corner.

Another thing SR3 has made me acutely aware of: When weapons have an overheat bar, I will absolutely, positively always just sit there firing it until it overheats, then continue to stand in the open whilst it cools down for me to use again, even though I get shot, loads. This is from a person who used to be pretty damn good at the first Ghost Recon and I also play Arma II on occasion, neither of which are games that allow you to stand in the open, and I understand why, yet in a lot of games I do just do it anyway and I don't know why.

Other, more general things:
I can't stand RPGs where it's all magic, swords and elves. Yeah, that means I won't ever play Skyrim. I tried Oblivion, and it was fun, but I just couldn't stand the lack of guns. That might say more about my personality than the games, but I much prefer Fallout 3, or New Vegas; I had a big thing about the sniper rifles in that game. My character had a pistol in the first quick slot and from there onwards it was just a selection of semi automatic or bolt action rifles numbered according to the range or size of the target, starting with a varmint rifle and ending with an anti materiel rifle loaded with match ammo... Much more my style.

I've finished Half Life, HL2 and started HL2 Ep1, but I have no desire to finish it, nor start Ep2. I know as soon as Ep3 or HL3 is out I'll get motivated, but I just don't know if I can go on unspoilered as I have been for that long. That is also why I won't be revisiting this thread, for fear of ruiners ruining my life.

My last confession for now: I loved Medal of Honour (2010). The campaign was better than Call of Duty 4's (or any of the weird DLC's that inexplicably cost loads and came on a disc), BF3's and, dare I say it, ANY military shooter in which you save the world. Or indeed most games where you save the world, which is most games, really. I was watching a lot of Band of Brothers at the time, but I really, truly loved the fact that it was a story that could feasibly happen (except for that one bit, but even that brought a genuine tear to my eye, until I realised that it was pretty ludicrous) and it was about you and your mates, not you, some guy shouting at you, the big bad enemy bloke and his private army that he somehow managed to keep a secret until one day when he felt like taking over the world with a nuke/two nukes/a nuclear missile silo/an EMP/two EMPs/a satellite/a boat/some other WMD. No, MoH was more modest than that, and I loved it for that reason.

TL, DR (the D is for Don't in this case)

JohnnyMaverik
06-01-2012, 02:41 AM
I've never gotten past the second level of Deus Ex despite starting that game more than 5 or 6 times, cuz it's way too hard and I get way too frustrated, even with the game set on easy, yet I have held it up as an "example of what games should be" in gaming related debates and discussions countless times.

pmh
06-01-2012, 03:07 AM
I've never gotten past the second level of Deus Ex despite starting that game more than 5 or 6 times, cuz it's way too hard and I get way too frustrated, even with the game set on easy, yet I have held it up as an "example of what games should be" in gaming related debates and discussions countless times.

Why not just use god-mode et al to get past it?

Nalano
06-01-2012, 03:15 AM
Other, more general things:
I can't stand RPGs where it's all magic, swords and elves. Yeah, that means I won't ever play Skyrim. I tried Oblivion, and it was fun, but I just couldn't stand the lack of guns. That might say more about my personality than the games, but I much prefer Fallout 3, or New Vegas; I had a big thing about the sniper rifles in that game. My character had a pistol in the first quick slot and from there onwards it was just a selection of semi automatic or bolt action rifles numbered according to the range or size of the target, starting with a varmint rifle and ending with an anti materiel rifle loaded with match ammo... Much more my style.

I thought I was like this, but then something in my head snapped and now I'm utterly bored by hitscan weapons. Gimme ballistics! BC2 and BF3 (and, a long time ago, UT2k4) have been great fun for me when I found out that hitting a target was more difficult than just getting the crosshairs over it. Leading targets and fiddling with ballistics are much more interesting than CoD-style point-and-shoot.

It's for reasons like this that the preceding methods of approximating gunfire are annoying to me. I could accept that FO3 and FONV had a completely different system for weapons in and out of VATS - where you could hit impossible shots in VATS that weren't physically possible out of it, or where VATS would render even the simplest point-and-shoot a lesson in frustration thanks to the gods of dice - and I could accept that weapon spread was a direct result of skill in Guns, but that the automatic weapon would fire faster and each bullet would do more damage got ridiculous.

But I digress. I get that all that shit - like lowering the damage on projectiles and turning enemies into bullet-sponges - is done because we've all gotten so used to mouse aiming that hitscan is painfully easy, but we have the power not to fake it any more!

JohnnyMaverik
06-01-2012, 04:29 AM
Why not just use god-mode et al to get past it?

Because that just feels cheep I guess? Not sure... I suppose I just feel like I should be able to do it, and I want to be able to do it, so every time I give it another go I think "ok, this time we're guna do it", and then I get stuck again. It's partly my inability to be good with anything other than the sniper rifle in that game, which isn't very well suited to the second level which quite quickly descends into enclosed spaces and tight corridors, which is where I get stuck.

I watched TB play is and tried to copy him, but try and I might the only way I can get past the first level with out quick saving after every enemy is with that sniper rifle.

One day I'll just sit down and grind through it, not sure I could stomach using god mode, not the worst suggestion and while saying "deus ex is a great game" after having blown through it on god mode is more genuine than saying it despite having never seen the vast majority of the game, it still doesn't come off as genuine enough, and I doubt I'd go back through it playing properly once I'd seen the story unfold, so that'd be that.

Berzee
06-01-2012, 05:06 AM
in any other sport (motorsport driver cams notwithstanding), the audience doesn't see the same thing as the players see. So what the audience sees is more interesting to the audience, and what the players see is more interesting to the players. This doesn't happen in video games.

For some bizarre reason, I spent a bit of time in the past watching some TF2 tournaments with commentary; it was all in spectator mode with a floating camera and rather good to watch actually! Not sure if they did that live or did some video editing stuff for it later with the recorded game, but either way it was certainly better than watching it from someone's 1st-person perspective the whole time.

zookeeper
06-01-2012, 06:18 AM
My last confession for now: I loved Medal of Honour (2010). The campaign was better than Call of Duty 4's (or any of the weird DLC's that inexplicably cost loads and came on a disc), BF3's and, dare I say it, ANY military shooter in which you save the world

I'll go with you on this one, but not quite so far as "loved". I quite enjoyed the small-scale of the story, that it took place in the space of about a day (right?), and in a small setting. Parts of it were pretty ridiculous (and the epilogue was painfully bad), but overall I wish more games would bring in the focus like MoH did. I almost want to make an analogy to Bergman and chamber drama, but... well it's Medal of Hono(u)r for fuck's sake. EA didn't put nearly that much thought into it, so I certainly won't. Anyway, scale: good, story and characterization: oh god, make it stop.

Theo
06-01-2012, 04:59 PM
I love RPGs yet have never played through Planescape: Torment nor Deus Ex, when I got around to playing them (last year) I just couldn't get into it and eventually gave up.

Caleb367
06-01-2012, 05:40 PM
I hate puzzles. I HATE HATE HATE puzzles and their hipster cousin Tower Defence. I never played Plants vs Zombies and never will because of this. I threw out Resident Evil after the third idiotic puzzle involving red keys and moonlight sonatas. Yet, I love investigation puzzles and played the whole Sherlock Holmes series to hell and back. 'cause those puzzles make sense and don't sound like they've been glued with spit.

Anthile
06-01-2012, 05:53 PM
I hate puzzles. I HATE HATE HATE puzzles and their hipster cousin Tower Defence. I never played Plants vs Zombies and never will because of this. I threw out Resident Evil after the third idiotic puzzle involving red keys and moonlight sonatas. Yet, I love investigation puzzles and played the whole Sherlock Holmes series to hell and back. 'cause those puzzles make sense and don't sound like they've been glued with spit.

...what? Tower Defense is a sub-genre of real time strategy. What has that to do with puzzles?

Stardog
06-01-2012, 06:31 PM
I don't like Starcraft. I find it very boring. That goes for DotA too.

Althea
06-01-2012, 06:44 PM
...what? Tower Defense is a sub-genre of real time strategy. What has that to do with puzzles?
I'd honestly say TD has more in common with Anno than a puzzle game. :D

Caleb367
06-01-2012, 08:13 PM
I'd honestly say TD has more in common with Anno than a puzzle game. :D

I'll elaborate: since TD waves come in established patterns more often than not, and tower space is limited, I've always had the feeling it all boiled down to mix-and-matching towers not entirely unlike Tetris had you mix and match blocks. No strategy to be seen anywhere, at least in the non-Starcraft "memorize set of actions and repeat verbatim as fast as possible" sense.
Or, an example: horde of fast-movers coming in = fast shooting turret rack in every corner. Slow tank = slow shooting turret in every corner. It's just pre-established counters not unlike leaving a 4-tile deep hole in your Tetris wall waiting for that particular piece falling.
I know it sounds odd, and lemme tell ya a thing that'll probably make it sound even odder: I'm an avid strategy player, I've been playing every kind of game from Starcraft to Jagged Alliance 2 to Hearts of Iron to TOAW. And in every single game I play defensive, and when I can I rely heavily on turrets. Gimme enough time to lock down an area in Supreme Commander and you'll probably need a nuke or two to break through. Sure sounds like TD should be perfect for me, huh?

FuriKuri!
06-01-2012, 10:18 PM
TDs come in quite different flavours, I wouldn't be so ready to write all of them off. Some are indeed very 'puzzle like' in that you'll get a set wave and you're pretty much encouraged to defeat it in the most efficient way possible (Defence Grid). Others are a lot more random, time-critical and can rely more on an overall strategy which can vary from map to map (Plants vs Zombies). Some offer a good blend of action with tactical placement of defences being the icing on the cake (Sanctum, Dungeon Defenders).

While it's a genre I thought I was pretty sick of about 3 years ago when I played Desktop Tower Defence (http://www.kongregate.com/games/preecep/desktop-tower-defense-1-5) it's nonetheless one that has surprised me in its flexibility and innovative blending of other genres. So don't write it off so readily, you may be cheating yourself out of a very enjoyable evening or two.

sabrage
07-01-2012, 12:24 AM
I've yet to see a tower defense as fun as the ol' Warcraft 3 mods I used to play. In particular, Sprout TD (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YsYplccXgl8) and the Line Tower Wars style of games deserve to be fleshed out. I honestly hate that the genre is moving more towards action because of the success of Orcs Must Die, Sanctum and particularly Dungeon Defenders.

Nalano
07-01-2012, 03:27 AM
Back to confessions:

I've played BF1942. I've played BF:V. I've played BF2, BF:BC2 and BF:BC2:V. I've now played BF3 for 50 hours before I realized that F2 puts me in the gunner seat of a vehicle if nobody else is in said vehicle.

I miss game manuals.

augustuskent
07-01-2012, 03:59 AM
yep yep, first post, lurking anyway.. I just had to!

1. I cheated in Brytenwalda (Mount and Blade) once, and I felt the worst I've ever felt about a game.

2. I own two copies of Skyrim on PS3, but I pirated the PC version. I have never experienced a single glitch or bug in any single one of them. Is something wrong? (On release too)

3. I have lost most of my passion for most games, and find them boring, but I keep playing them because I have nothing better to do.


Oh and I think Demon Souls/Dark Souls looks like the most rigid piece of monochromatic poop I have ever seen, and I hate Portal 2.


Ahhh!

deano2099
07-01-2012, 05:11 AM
Because that just feels cheep I guess? Not sure... I suppose I just feel like I should be able to do it, and I want to be able to do it, so every time I give it another go I think "ok, this time we're guna do it", and then I get stuck again. It's partly my inability to be good with anything other than the sniper rifle in that game, which isn't very well suited to the second level which quite quickly descends into enclosed spaces and tight corridors, which is where I get stuck.

The early levels are the most frustrating as you don't have any decent skills or augs. It gets far, far better. You'd only have to grind through the first few levels. I think I was similar to you in that I sucked at anything but the sniper rifle, so I went for that and then melee weapons, and crept about either sniping (in open levels) or cattle-prodding/stabbing from behind in more closed levels.

JohnnyK
12-01-2012, 09:47 AM
So why did you buy Skyrim? ;)
Because it was 50% off on Amazon for a few hours and I thought I wanted it (firstworldproblem, I guess).
The main problem is time, really; when I have time to play, I play BF3 for the social aspect.

Gozuu
12-01-2012, 09:51 AM
I've yet to see a tower defense as fun as the ol' Warcraft 3 mods I used to play. In particular, Sprout TD (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YsYplccXgl8) and the Line Tower Wars style of games deserve to be fleshed out. I honestly hate that the genre is moving more towards action because of the success of Orcs Must Die, Sanctum and particularly Dungeon Defenders.

Oh yes. Warcraft 3 mods has to be the most successfull platform of ideas and innovations leading to many games today. Just seeing that DotA brougth a whole new genre to the world tells you something. Wintermaul, Pokemaul, Azure Tower Defense, oooh the lots of them were great!

Similar
12-01-2012, 12:06 PM
I've had Hostile Waters for about ten years and have never figured out how to play it (I even read the manual, I think).
I've had Homeworld Cataclysm for about as long and have never installed it.
I played Morrowind for about five minutes and never went back to it, even though I like such games and I'm pretty sure I would enjoy it.
I never got past the starting area of Planescape Torment.

JohnnyMaverik
12-01-2012, 12:33 PM
I'm playing Human Revolution atm and loving it, but yea, I think your right, because even with that game (immeasurably easier than Deus Ex, playing it on Normal, easier than Deus Ex on easy) I had a bit of trouble at the start, but pretty much did what you suggested and have become an incapacitating machine of doom (tranq rifle is much better in this game so I'm using that as a non-lethal alternative to a sniper rifle). Will definitely force myself to get through the original game some time this year now.

Fumarole
12-01-2012, 11:43 PM
I played Morrowind for about five minutes and never went back to it, even though I like such games and I'm pretty sure I would enjoy it.
I never got past the starting area of Planescape Torment.My brother from another mother.

Miker
12-01-2012, 11:55 PM
I secretly wish the DotA genre never became popular. And this is as someone who enjoys playing LoL. It's because all of my friends play LoL now. It's what they *play*. They don't really play anything else, and they're all level 30 in the game. Now, when I play LoL with my friends, it's an exercise in frustration. I'm level 22, with only 100 wins under my belt because I'm a relatively casual player, and when I queue with my friends, I'm left solo top versus some dude who has 1300 wins. I lose my lane, and my friends and I lose the game more or less as a result of that. This happens almost every time I play with my friends. Yes, I'm bad, I should buy wards, l2p, etc, but I'm a casual LoL player, and I don't want to make it my sole game. But because I don't, I just can't keep up with my friends, and I end up dragging them down. The only solution is not to play.

sabrage
13-01-2012, 12:02 AM
Just start every game of LoL with the assumption that this is going to be the most terrible 40 minutes of your life, and you'll have a good idea what you're up against.

LoL's community is so bad that I've unanimously written off competitive, team-based games. There is literally nothing fun about loading up a game and immediately making enemies with every member of your team, every single game.

Oh, and while I'm here, I absolutely loathe Sonic games. I hate how fast they are, I hate that half the levels seem to run on autopilot, I hate that if you fuck up it shreds any sense of momentum and fun that you were having, I hate the weird lock-on combat mechanics... I don't understand the fixation at all.

Roufuss
13-01-2012, 11:35 PM
Ha, I just remembered this one today.

My first adventure game was Beavis and Butthead: Virtual Stupidity. I remember it being exactly like the television show in both looks and story line and that, for a licensed game, it was actually really well done.

Keep
29-02-2012, 02:49 AM
I've never played Baldur's Gate. Or 2.

Correction: I played the first ten minutes of 1 a few times, disliked its mechanics, couldn't get very far anyway.

And now I think D'n'D systems are a crock of shit so I'll likely never go back to it. Yay.

Wizardry
29-02-2012, 02:58 AM
And now I think D'n'D systems are a crock of shit so I'll likely never go back to it. Yay.
That's a terrible thing to have to confess. I'd go into hiding if I were you.

Keep
29-02-2012, 03:06 AM
That's a terrible thing to have to confess. I'd go into hiding if I were you.

Soz dude. You going to hold it against me?

agentorange
29-02-2012, 05:51 AM
I've never played Baldur's Gate. Or 2.

Correction: I played the first ten minutes of 1 a few times, disliked its mechanics, couldn't get very far anyway.

And now I think D'n'D systems are a crock of shit so I'll likely never go back to it. Yay.

Mm, this is common with D'n'D system games. There's a long stretch at the beginning where you are terribly underpowered and ill-equipped, making fighting even the weakest of enemies a blunderfuck; I don't blame you for giving up, but it DOES get funner once you gain some levels and your mages can cast more than 2 spells in a day.

Nalano
29-02-2012, 06:04 AM
Mm, this is common with D'n'D system games. There's a long stretch at the beginning where you are terribly underpowered and ill-equipped, making fighting even the weakest of enemies a blunderfuck; I don't blame you for giving up, but it DOES get funner once you gain some levels and your mages can cast more than 2 spells in a day.

And then, because you planned your character in advance, you're almost immediately overpowered, since your mages can now rewrite space/time to their fancy.

Memph
29-02-2012, 07:18 AM
Mages just completely steal the show in the DnD crpgs i've played actually. Melee run in and autoattack, ranged do shooty and bar maybe some emergency moving about that be it. It's down to the casters to break out the fun stuff with their massive assortments of spells. Sure you can multiclass and 'play it properly' etc.. but from a new user's pick-up and play perspective where most would try for the staple combo of healer/tank/dps with base classes, only the casters brought any real sense of tactics and options to the table.
Compare with say, Mass Effect (oh yes he did), where every character has a more active role in the combat. One Impact shots a shield down, another lobs a Singularity, then the third can further CC or lead the gunfire for the finish. Noone's there just as filler dps, buffbot, or damage sponge, or the one geezer with any real offensive capability. My team and I were a well oiled ass-kicking machine chaining shield then armour then health draining combos, but in IE games I spent most of the time using my 2 casters to either kill everything or keep the other useless buggers alive (this is also similar to something I find inherently wrong with today's now archaic MMO combat model bytheby).

The cover-shooting comments intrigued me and playing Deus Ex at present, I have to agree that magical invinci-cover can feel a bit rubbish. Mass Effect 2's combat stayed charged because there wasn't too often that enemies couldn't move to a position where they could still hit you. You could survive for a time, but you'd have to reposition eventually (spinning disc platforms on the Collector vessel comes to mind in particular). Whereas in Deus Ex: HR, it seems (so far at least) as long as you stay behind cover, nothing can hit you whatsoever. And if anyone does come sniffing too close during combat, you just spam Q to pull the animationality on them soon as they round the corner. They don't even have to be close.
Although i'm dying far more often in Deus Ex without my darling biotics team, it's never when on the defensive. Only when I make a move am I vulnerable, thus the combat's only exciting when taking risks. Hence so far, i'm piling all my points into guns and hacking, then trying to stealth through with stabby takedowns. I kinda fear for the cloak upgrades breaking any stealthing challenge as much as in Alpha Protocol.

On difficulty; one thing playing Tomb Raider: Legend and Anniversary lately has re-taught me is games being bastard hard (though not unfairly) can be bloody good fun. By the end of Anniversary I'd almost wanted to smash my pad to smithereens and hadn't loudly spewed such volcanic abuse at my screen since I dunno when, but dammit, if I didn't really feel like i'd accomplished something afterwards. At first I thought having me shoot a switch, jump to a sliding ledge, change direction and leap to a pole, change direction and leap to another pole, then a ledge, then another pole, then jump and grapple to wall-run to jump off at a right-angle to grapple to wall-run again, to grab a ledge to climb out of a lava pit before all the ledges, poles and grapple nodes retracted was just taking the bleedin' smeg, but on the other hand, the game had simply expected me to get good at it by then. I'd done all the moves before, now it wants it all done in one go, with no balls-ups. This to me is where most, if not all RPGS fall flat on their face. No collection of stat-spangled gear, no powered-up 'skills', or bag full of pots to get by with. You just gotta get good motherfucker. And dammit I eventually did. And I loved them for that. Yet previous attempts to play through it had me loathing it and shunting it aside, blaming Lara for dodgy grip and shitty auto-aiming for me not wanting to persevere. Dunno what changed tbh, but i'm very glad I gave them a chance again. And yes I know there's some blatant troll-baiteriffic genre-crossing babble in there, but in my defense i'm something like 22 hours sans sleep running on coffee and nicotine. There may be a point in here somewhere. Or maybe i'll DLC one later after some kip.

Heliocentric
29-02-2012, 09:31 AM
Soz dude. You going to hold it against me?

He hates all of us heretics evenly anyway.