Lack of quality

Rockstar*

Lately ive been scouring through websites looking for decent games to buy...ive realised something(in my opinion) that the likes of ign and gamespot are nothing to go by when reviewing games---maybe its just me but games like Pirates,mafia,world of warcraft and most of the other games amongst their top ratings are just very very average with little lastability

recently i bought farenheit on recommendation but was disappointed by it as i found the gameplay repetitive and cut scenes far too long and frequent...

this might sound a little narrow minded to some but i was thinking of what games i enjoyed most of al time and it was probably a toss up between final fantasy 7 and grand theft auto vice city bot on the ps2-followed closely by monkey island 1&2 pc!!

just seems to me that theres a serious lack of imagination and depth in games lately--are the developers just being lazy or what?!

Retr0gamer

Seven words that will solve your problems.

Shadow of the Colossus, We love Katamari.

Don't think about it, buy them.

Chumpski

I agree with you, some developers are being lazy in bringing new ideas to games. No doubt about that.

Can you blame the developers of Fifa for throwing out a game a year though with only minor changes if it sells by the truck load?

I suppose special games are rare, just like special movies are. Most games that get high scores on gamespot or gamespy are genuinly good. Its just they may not have that extra bit of magic like FF7 or whatever to make them really enjoyable.

If you want some original games then look no further than the 2 games in the previous post.

muppetkiller

well you could always just invest in il2 Forgotten Battles/Pacific fighters Platinum pack thats due out soon ...I got that game about 5 years ago and still can't stop playing ...

truely a huge game a I don't think i'll ever finish all the missions/campaigns

other than that Silent Hunter 3 and Pro Evo should keep everyone going for a while..

rainbow kirby

Retr0gamer wrote:

Seven words that will solve your problems.

Shadow of the Colossus, We love Katamari.

Don't think about it, buy them.

Quoted for truth.

saado

Don't forget Psychonauts

Lex_Diamonds

You are growing out of gaming. Probably not what you wanted to hear, but if you are getting diminishing returns from supposedly top class titles, it may be something to consider.

ObeyGiant

I had absolutely no interest in Pirates until I picked it up second-hand before Christmas and played it for 8 hours in one sitting. I can't remember the last time a game did that for me.

Fair enough if you don't like Pirates, but at least play it before you write it off as not being a quality game.

Retr0gamer

Lex_Diamonds wrote:

You are growing out of gaming. Probably not what you wanted to hear, but if you are getting diminishing returns from supposedly top class titles, it may be something to consider.

Happens to me a lot but there is always a game that comes along that renews my love for them. Shadow of the colossus most recently for me.

Lex_Diamonds

Yeah I was probably being a bit cynical. I think people just get more discerning.

Vegeta

No he's right, game length and depth are missing big style nowadays. Black for example can be finished in roughly 7 hours and doesn't have multiplayer, that is just a crime for a modern day FPS. At the end of the day graphics will impress me for 15 minutes but unless it offers some serious addictive or enjoyable gameplay i'll prob never play it again.

I'm currently playing BF2 and its different every night, yeah sure all ya do is shoot ppl every night but its coming up with spots on the maps to get a good sniping position or unlockin a new weapon that keep me comin back to that game.

A game i like the look of is Oblivion as it has a serious amount of potential for both a great playing experience and one which offers hours and hours of gameplay, also if you pick a different class you will probably get a different set of missions. That's the kind of thing i'm after and I agree with the OP

Rockstar*

obey--i actually got a lend of pirates off someone i work with only last week--i asked him for it because i had read some impressive reviews of it and also i vaguely remembered playing it on the amiga 500 many years ago as a kid....unfortunatly i found it repetitive and not very adventurous

---

i dont think im losing interest in gaming though for whoever suggested it and pro evos class aswell

anyone got civ4-whats it like?

Retr0gamer

Vegeta wrote:

A game i like the look of is Oblivion as it has a serious amount of potential for both a great playing experience and one which offers hours and hours of gameplay, also if you pick a different class you will probably get a different set of missions. That's the kind of thing i'm after and I agree with the OP

Oh hgreat oblivion. Running around hacking at nerdy rabbits to increase your level like an uber nerd. Sounds like more fun than getting beaten off my pinhead.

steviec

Retr0gamer wrote:

Oh hgreat oblivion. Running around hacking at nerdy rabbits to increase your level like an uber nerd. Sounds like more fun than getting beaten off my pinhead.

In some ways I'm inclined to agree with you, but it's the freedom to do what you want when you want that's the key. Personally I'd much prefer it in a more original setting but I'm still looking forward to the game. Assuming it's just for nerdy fantasy types is kind of like assuming people play GTA cos they like violence.

Retr0gamer

wow! the reedom to beat rabbits to annihilation. thats so interesting. why can't a developer make a sand box with things that are actuakly interesing to do in terms of tasks. TBH I'm waiting n that Sega Yakuza sim to be released in the west. Even ifit is lonear as fook it has to better than the mess san andreas is.

Gizzard

THere is loads of great PS2 games out at the moment RE4, Black, Shadow of C, ICO if you have not got it already, PC has CIV4 which is totally excellent, d&d online might be worth a look on the mmorpg frot, xbox360 has a very meh lineup and live is ****e for games, nothing really on it unless you pay for everyhing, gauntlet is good retro though, but you have to pay for multiplayer which is lame for a 20 year old game,

I think its never been better for game for the PS2 and PC

Sand

wow! the reedom to beat rabbits to annihilation. thats so interesting. why can't a developer make a sand box with things that are actuakly interesing to do in terms of tasks. TBH I'm waiting n that Sega Yakuza sim to be released in the west. Even ifit is lonear as fook it has to better than the mess san andreas is.

Sandbox can be hit and miss, but people get tired of the guided-by-rails, set levels in sequence, boss monsters type stuff faster tbh. If I wanted a fully scripted, cinematic experience in which I had little input other than surviving until the next scene Id watch a movie. Sandbox design is accepted behind most strategy games (apart from generic RTS, which are usually level to level campaigns) and RPGs for a long time. It offers genuine replay value, because theres not one right way to do things to get to the next level. Either way, Oblivion will include a lot more freedom than running around as vermin control.

just seems to me that theres a serious lack of imagination and depth in games lately--are the developers just being lazy or what?!

Try something different then, Civ4 is refined brilliance. The only people who can say anything bad about it is though who cant get it running, and theyre (rightly) embittered about missing out on this game. GalCiv2 is out and whilst I havent got it yet, the original GalCiv was fantastic. Silent Hunter 3 if you havent got it already, I almost didnt sink a merchant ship because it was Christmas Day ingame. Almost. Feels so right to be creeping in closer and closer to an unescorted target, then inside the last few hundred meters surfacing and racing across the waves manning the deck gun. Or sneaking into the line of a convoy behind the forward destroyers, cutting the engines, allowing the convoy to pass over head and then going up to periscope depth to pick targets right from the middle of the hen house. Great game.

Retr0gamer

Posts were a bit alcohol fueled last night and i thought i was absolutely hilarious. However just don't get Elder Scrolls. Think there has to be a better system than experience.

Crucifix

If you compare everything to FF7 you're bound to be disapointed.

TheDoc

TBH if you have a pc you have the best gmaing machine available to you.

If you have broadband you have availability to the best games money can buy. Online gaming is the bees knees, as these games, are neverending.

I have been playing coutner strike since first beta, thats over 7 yrs ago, for 7 years i have been playing a game every day nvr feeling bored.

I played warcraft 3 for 4 years

Starcraft Ive been playing for years to.

World of warcraft is a big thing these days. I was playing it non stop since february but just quit it since i bought battlefield 2 and call of duty 2.

Pcs give so much more in gaming. First person shooters and strategy games, imo the best genres of gaming, can only be played properly on a pc. Call of duty2 on pc owns xbox 360 hands down.

Games in general are way to short, I'll never forget when i paid 70 euro for Metal gear solid2, and finished it in 4 hours, one istting completed, so easy. That was on normal settings, brought it back to the shop straight away.

Though there are plenty of games that will be played throughout the years to come, the call of dutys, half lifes.

My personal favourite is Max Payne, i never bought the sequel, but with the original, i reinstall it every 3 months to replay it, it is possibly the best game ever created imo.

the_syco

Retr0gamer wrote:

why can't a developer make a sand box with things that are actuakly interesing to do in terms of tasks.

Already done. A game called "The Incredible Mahine" 1, or 2. Its a bit old, but very fun.

The various versions of this game are:

The Incredible Machine: Even More Contraptions,
Return of the Incredible Machine: Contraptions
The Incredible Machine 3
The Incredible Toon Machine

It's literally a box, an objective, and tools to do so. Great. Sure, you could complete it in no time at all, but it will make you think. And there's usually two ways to do any task.

=-=

As for Max Payne, great game. If you've played it, get The Punisher. Same type of game, imo, and pretty fun for a while.

Peteee

[DM]-TheDOC- wrote:

Games in general are way to short, I'll never forget when i paid 70 euro for Metal gear solid2, and finished it in 4 hours, one istting completed, so easy.

If you finished metal gear in 4 hours, then you totally missed the point of metal gear as it cant be completed in 4 hours 'properly'

Laguna

If you completed Metal Gear Solid 2 in four hours on your first go, you must play games too much!..

GrumPy

Laguna wrote:

If you completed Metal Gear Solid 2 in four hours on your first go, you must play games too much!..

he didnt play it proper, theres at least 3 hours solid of fmv, so he skipped it all, which isnt the point of a hideo game.

stevenmu

I think the fairest thing to say is that there's a huge mix of quality out there.

This can probably be illustrated best by Ubisoft. As a quick example take LOMAC (Lock On: Modern Air Combat), which during development was touted as the best combat flight sim ever. Of course publishers always claim any game is th best game ever but the feature list for this game was seriously impressive. What ultimatly happened though was that after a few delays it was decided to drop all the features that were holding it back and just release whatever worked. in fairness the result was a pretty decent game, but it was really only a graphical update on what already existed (minus a few features and lots of detail) compared with the genre defining game promised.

An even better example would be the Rainbow 6 and Ghost Recon series. A small little development studio called Red Storm Entertainment (presumably after Tom Clancy's book "Red Storm Rising"), created a Rainbow 6 game which had some good success and critical acclaim, if never really reaching widespread attention. They follow it up with sequels and a branch off, Rogue Spear, Raven Shield and Ghost Recon all of which are instant classics. I appreciate that they're not everyone's cup of tea, but noone can deny that they're excellent games which have huge follwings and have both stood the test of time in their own rights and spanwed numerous mods. Then they get bought out by Ubisoft and they're forced to produce follow-ups (GR2 RS:Lockdown) moving towards what are basically "industry standard" FPS games with linear, story driven gameplay, hero characters and health bars and pick ups (among many, many other flaws).

This degradation of the originality, focus and even genius of the originals leads to a huge outcry by fans of the series, leading to an almost turnaroun in their policies whereby a follow on to R6:Lockdown has been announced, R6:Critical Hour, which is going to be a return to the original gamse tactical, realistic roots, and even more importantly Ghost Recon: Advanced Warrior(GRAW) which is released in a few days for the 360 and look sto be the poster game for that console, and eve nmore importantly again the PC version of GRAW which Ubisoft realised they woulf f**k up completely and handed off to indepentand developers GRIN, who have promised to return to the rots of Ghost Recon and by all accounts are doing just that (with vastly updated technology and shiny baubles, widets and high tech gadgety of course).

My point being, if we keep getting sucked into buying crappy game with a good movie license or updated year number then that's exactly what they'll keep giving us, if we take a stand and don't buy this sh*t then they'll realise they have to do something special to impress us.

Crucifix

Speaking of Sandbox type stuff...

TheDoc

I watched the fmv, and did it in 4 hours, and if you all remember the ol mgs code you got to put your time on the net, i was top 10 for absolute ages, until obviously people replayed skipping scenes, i remember most scenes in the game.

It was a brillaint game that should have been longer, and wasnt worth its money.

Like i received call of duty 2 in the post 2 days ago, dad has finished it, games shouldnt be done in 2 days, he played probably 4 hours total play?

Laguna

[DM]-TheDOC- wrote:

I watched the fmv, and did it in 4 hours, and if you all remember the ol mgs code you got to put your time on the net, i was top 10 for absolute ages, until obviously people replayed skipping scenes, i remember most scenes in the game.

It was a brillaint game that should have been longer, and wasnt worth its money.

Like i received call of duty 2 in the post 2 days ago, dad has finished it, games shouldnt be done in 2 days, he played probably 4 hours total play?

Yeah I agree that games shouldn't be able to be completed in two days, especially when you say he only played it for four hours, but I'm assuming it's not the first FPS he's ever played?, because lets face it, if you play one FPS to death and get really good at it, I think the 'skills' acquired from the previous game are transferable to the new game which'll make it easier to complete the new game faster as you're not a newbie!..

Games these days seemed to be judged by the masses on the premise of their graphical prowess, you only have to listen to someone in the age range of 12-18 (the main games playing audience) to find this out, my brothers friends (part of this age range) often come out with **** like they're holding out for PS3 because the "Graphics are far better than the 360 so that means better gameplay".

I don't know if I'm the only one like this, but when I get a new game, I purposely try not to overplay it at first so I can make it last as long as possible because I know if I sat down and played it non-stop (like a few people on Boards who complain of game longevity seem to), I would end up completing the game in four-five hours. Maybe the types of games you people are buying explains the issue you are coming across with lifespan, I'm more into games like Football Manager and Civilization that offer huge amounts of replayability, you guys are complaining that games like MGS/COD2 are easy to complete and offer little replayability, well does anyone really expect a game like COD2 to last 40 hours, RPG style?, it's an FPS, they never do!..

Flame Weilder

You know, I played Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban on GBA and completed it and got so bored after a while, so I started playing it in French... then sold it.

hairball

spore looks amazing...can't wait to have a go:)

TheDoc

no definatly, im like this too, i play new games for maybe an hour or two, in fear that i will finish it, cause games are that short.

I'm proud to say cod2 online is a good thing, and sure i bought the game new for 10 euro so cant go wrong.

Vegeta

Retr0gamer wrote:

wow! the reedom to beat rabbits to annihilation. thats so interesting. why can't a developer make a sand box with things that are actuakly interesing to do in terms of tasks. TBH I'm waiting n that Sega Yakuza sim to be released in the west. Even ifit is lonear as fook it has to better than the mess san andreas is.

You have obviously never played morrowind to the finish, that game is fantastic, in my opinion it is the best single player RPG ever. Oblivion looks even better and the devs made an effort to improve the weaker sides to the game, such as magic, playing as a thief etc.

How can you be a gaming fan and not applaude their efforts, even if RPGs aint your cup of tea you still have to give credit where credt is due.

Manic Moran

It seems to me that the games I am spending far and away most of my time on are made by small companies, practically cottage industries. TacOps was created by a single programmer. (Major Holdridge). Combat Mission (and the follow-ons) by a two-man team. Steel Beasts by a three-man team. All were released for purchase solely on the Internet. (The first two from Battlefront.com, the third from esimgames.com). Only after surprising Internet successes were they picked up by brick-and-mortar suppliers and put in boxes on shelves. It should be added, all have what would be considered to be low-quality graphics for their time. Steel Beasts was released in 2000. It used 640x480 unaccelerated graphics, which was positively archaic by the standards of the time (let alone now). Sales were nowhere near what the quality of the game deserved simply because people looked at the screenshots/box art and said 'no thanks.' Fortunately, seven or eight different militaries picked it up, and funded further development. If I rate a game by hours-played-per-dollar-spent, SB is definitely the winner.

Anyone remember the ZX Spectrum? When you had 48K of RAM to play with, and only 7 colours, gameplay was far more important than graphics.

At any rate, it seems to me that the best place to see a review of a game isn't the gaming review sites. They're too 'mass market' or else just don't know what they're on about. For example, doubtless when PCGamer (or whatever) comes out with their review of Steel Beasts Pro PE, they'll probably slate it for having graphics inferior to BF2, an outrageous price, lack of campaign, and a generally 'unfinished' feel. When you go to the 'subject matter' sites, however, such as SimHQ.com, Tank-Net.org and so on, you'll find people raving about a military-grade sim which is far and away the best at what it does which is publicly available, with a support infrastructure from a single-product team which is responsive and efficient because there are no other projects for them to move on to.

I think the quality is still out there, I'm having a look at Dangerous Waters right now, the problem is that it's not being advertised much because ultimately, quality on its own doesn't sell.

NTM