|
Post by The Great Klaid on Dec 24, 2014 14:28:56 GMT -5
Terrifying I'm sorry my point when into your wall like that. I didn't expect it to fly over your head like that. DOOM is an excellent game. But it's nowhere near perfect. Okay, it might be near. But, in like 60 levels, there are a few duds. And modern shooters aren't my forte, hence my sarcasti-quotes around fun. However, the target demographic doesn't care about level design. And they cater to the Quake 3 mentality. Hence it becomes hard to really fault them. I don't know many people who even bother with campaign anyway.
|
|
tmk
New Member
Posts: 16
|
Post by tmk on Dec 25, 2014 19:00:19 GMT -5
Once I started playing DOOM II on ultra violence and a certain set of rules (die at the start of every new level - you start again with a pistol and full health) I started to enjoy it even more. The level design is a masterpiece and you see it in a really different light if you do this: you only get the stuff you need, you have to cope with absurd situations. Damn great stuff. Hate The Pit and stuff like that, though
|
|
|
Post by fullspectrumwarrior on Dec 26, 2014 22:37:40 GMT -5
For me the easiest way to describe the difference between the older game design & new game design is older game design allowed you to play and new game design forces you to watch.
Of course this is a generalization but the fact of the matter is older games did not constantly shove narrative & cutscenes down your throat and taking control away from the player like most modern games do today. Even the best games today are a chore because of the constant need of the developers to take control away from the player to show you another set piece or another cutscene this just like the thousand you've seen before.
Obviously this trend applies more to shooters & action games than anything else as role playing games were always about story. But even those today like the Mass Effect series have become conversation simulators over anything else.
Personally I'm sick this trend of game developers trying their hardest to turn games into movies because if we wanted to watch movies that's what we would do. Games are different than movies because you control everything that happens, or at least you used to.
Even games like Wolfenstein the new order that was called old school by apparently the modern masses was nothing like an old school game other than the shooting felt hefty. The obscenely linear level design, constantly being bombarded with cutscenes every 5 minutes & the focus on story & narration from the main character instead of open abstractlevel design made the game feel like some type of middle ground between old and new and in the end other than a few people that enjoyed it for what it was it ended up appealing to almost no one. Honestly those guys made much better games back when they made the Chronicles of Riddick and the Darkness. I expected a lot more from them.
|
|
|
Post by loempiavreter on Dec 27, 2014 13:54:29 GMT -5
Action games used to be about repetition, simple patterns, and endurance. Not really. Depending on genre. Beat'em ups are about Crowd Control combat (the super famicom titles excluded, because they only generate 2 enemies on screen), ninja gaiden like action platformers are about memorisation, I would hardly call them 'simple' patterns. If anything playing a video game should feel more like playing within a toy box right now(especially with the Microprose Pirates! series, and GTA having existed for years). Not more linear storytelling... Not a fan of that idea, I prefer stage design over 'empty' map to toy around. What I'm more suprised about is how the linear narrative wins over non-linear one in videogames. There's so much oppurunity to play around with non-linear narrative in videogames, yet there are only a few that play around. Indirect narrative (Soul series, Killer7 etc.) and i also liked The player as imaginary friend (Deadly Premonition) approach, but other then that there's pretty much a linear approuch.
|
|
|
Post by fullspectrumwarrior on Dec 28, 2014 0:36:36 GMT -5
Action games used to be about repetition, simple patterns, and endurance. Not really. Depending on genre. Beat'em ups are about Crowd Control combat (the super famicom titles excluded, because they only generate 2 enemies on screen), ninja gaiden like action platformers are about memorisation, I would hardly call them 'simple' patterns. If anything playing a video game should feel more like playing within a toy box right now(especially with the Microprose Pirates! series, and GTA having existed for years). Not more linear storytelling... Not a fan of that idea, I prefer stage design over 'empty' map to toy around. What I'm more suprised about is how the linear narrative wins over non-linear one in videogames. There's so much oppurunity to play around with non-linear narrative in videogames, yet there are only a few that play around. Indirect narrative (Soul series, Killer7 etc.) and i also liked The player as imaginary friend (Deadly Premonition) approach, but other then that there's pretty much a linear approuch. It seems like everything is going open world now just because that's the trend that developers think everyone wants. The problem is most of them don't know how to make a cohesive open world game and like one of the other posters said it's just a big empty sandbox to toy around in with really nothing to push you forward. These types of games usually include pointless fetch quests, collecting the same crap over and over, taking over outposts and climbing towers to unlock new parts of the map, ad nauseum. This is literally the design of every single open world game out on the market now for the most part and its lazy design at its finest. It's basically a developer saying we don't know how to or can't be bothered to construct a fun game so we will give you a big lazy open map and you'll have to find a way to make it fun yourself. This is why you have abominations like Watchdogs, whatever the hell the new Assassins Creed is called and games like Farcry 3 & 4 which honestly are interchangeable and I don't know which one I'm looking at when I'm watching it on YouTube. Open world games used to be innovative about the time that Grand Theft Auto 3 &San Andreas came out but since then they've all used the same lazy half assed design over and over and over in every single one of them.
|
|