Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The missing element, what are modern games missing?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • HighlandRocket
    replied
    Quality. I think there's a minimum character requirement? Wanted to just post the word for extra emphasis.

    Leave a comment:


  • Misfit410
    replied
    The rest of the game that's been removed and stored on servers waiting to be sold as DLC.

    Leave a comment:


  • etheras
    replied
    I think that you are correct. The industry is stagnating. At the risk of sounding like an Alex Jones, I think the problem is (((( the banks )))). And by-that I mean the investor-class: Angels, Venture, and Shareholders. When you look at the ownership of a company, the same names keep popping up: Bank of America, Goldman, Citi, etc. When you have a fiduciary responsibility to maximize shareholder value, you tend to pursue whatever fills out your balance sheet for the quarter. That's why we see pushes towards MMO (MMO is actually the most profitable genre of games, mostly in China and Korea. Its about 16% of all game revenue. High engagement, retention, and often repeatable transactions like monthly fees or in-game purchases), Digital TCG (low-cost of development for the userbase), Mobile (a highly misunderstood market, very few games succeed on Mobile, but those that do tend to cash-in bigly) and Micro-Transactions.

    You see this trend in Blizzard. A game company that made its name on strong RTS franchises has put out only a single RTS game in 17 years. Why? Because the big-bucks is in WoW and their constant DLCs.

    The banks don't care if your game is good, just that it makes money, and their outlook is only a few quarters away. So they tend not to care about burned bridges to the fanbase. They are playing a different game than you are, and they want to win.

    I realize I'm probably coming off as kinda socialist, but I'm actually highly capitalistic. But you need to realize that capitalism is generally poor at making high art. This is why Hollywood's big blockbuster movies tend to be big, dumb, high-CG, popcorn movies - and there's nothing wrong with that. The same thing is happening to games, now that the banks have realized there's money to be made.

    The solution is simple to articulate, but difficult to achieve: we need more private game companies. VALVe is a great example. VALVe is not a corporation, they are a LLC, privately held, with a limited number of partners. The reason why they are not cranking out a new HalfLife every year (even if we kinda wish they'd hurry-up) is because there's nobody with leverage over them forcing them to push out a product that isn't ready. We should encourage game companies not to sell, those that are public should consider stock buyback programs, and new companies: don't IPO. If you can get away with NO INVESTORS. then do it!

    Leave a comment:


  • ryvrdrgn14
    replied
    Modern games feel like they are missing something because publishers 1) remove features to sell separately and 2) intentionally create stress points (paywalls) in games to force players to buy microtransactions. Modern game design forces your wallet to run the gauntlet at the cost of features, convenience and fun.

    Leave a comment:


  • Irritablesquid
    replied
    Fun.
    Quality.

    Both are good.
    Publishers now go for all of the money and instead of making good games they use monetization and lootboxes.
    When publishers aren't happy making 500 million in a few days then you can really begin to see a problem.
    ​​​​

    Leave a comment:


  • Ryan
    replied
    Charm and originality. That "it" factor. I just feel like games back in the day used to be exciting, new experiences. Maybe it's just the effect of the industry aging, just like movies. Hard to come up with new ideas when 'everything' has been done. Even then, where are the fun, light-hearted games like Gex?

    Leave a comment:


  • Animusisters
    replied
    Passion and soul.

    Leave a comment:


  • Spect3r
    replied
    Easy to solve, start to be more selective with the games you play and you stop facing that issue.

    Leave a comment:


  • skywalker0957
    replied
    Originally posted by Cosmocalypse View Post

    Just curious - would you be OK with a general increase in game prices if microtransactions went away? I understand some developers have taken the microtransaction and DLC model too far, but I genuinely think it started out as a way to offset rising costs. Once you factor in inflation, games are cheaper now then they've ever been and costs have only gone up. I remember paying close to $90 for N64 games in the '90s. And that was at Walmart - not some small store that inflated prices. Games have been stuck at $60 for so long now.
    I am not opposed to paying increased prices so long as I get the whole game at the start and am not nickled and dimed everytime I turned the game on. I am also not opposed to quality DLC that comes out at a later time to continue the experience I got. The model for micro-transactions have gone way to far and now I can't turn on many games without it telling me to give more money. Black ops 4 has been the most egregious for me and I have stopped playing the game all together. Every time the game is turned on the black market is displayed saying what to spend money on, I paid for the game stop asking me for more.

    Leave a comment:


  • Cosmocalypse
    replied
    Originally posted by skywalker0957 View Post
    I feel like from the AAA realm there are a few things that are missing:

    1. Games being designed to make you spend money: This is more of a recent occurrence but many many many games now are being designed to get you to spend micro transactions. Its awful, whether its slowing xp gain to promote boosters, loot boxes for anything, or very long tier list grinds that encourage you to spend money, looking at you black ops 4, I am tired of of games constantly asking me for money or asking for more than what was asked up front for the full experience. I have been playing more and more indie games lately and it has been great to just buy the game and have the whole thing right out the gate.
    Just curious - would you be OK with a general increase in game prices if microtransactions went away? I understand some developers have taken the microtransaction and DLC model too far, but I genuinely think it started out as a way to offset rising costs. Once you factor in inflation, games are cheaper now then they've ever been and costs have only gone up. I remember paying close to $90 for N64 games in the '90s. And that was at Walmart - not some small store that inflated prices. Games have been stuck at $60 for so long now.

    Leave a comment:


  • skywalker0957
    replied
    I feel like from the AAA realm there are a few things that are missing:

    1. Games being designed to make you spend money: This is more of a recent occurrence but many many many games now are being designed to get you to spend micro transactions. Its awful, whether its slowing xp gain to promote boosters, loot boxes for anything, or very long tier list grinds that encourage you to spend money, looking at you black ops 4, I am tired of of games constantly asking me for money or asking for more than what was asked up front for the full experience. I have been playing more and more indie games lately and it has been great to just buy the game and have the whole thing right out the gate.

    2. Games working at launch: This may seem like an obvious one but many AAA games coming out are just beyond broken and buggy. I understand there will be some bugs, its software and its inevitable for bugs to appear. But today the volume and frequency of bugs or exploits is just astounding. Things are being far too rushed or are putting in just way too many systems that aren't properly tested and its really ruining the experience when a bug or exploit happens every few minutes. Games that have smaller scopes and have more time to bake do not face this issue most of the time and its often very easy to tell what games are like that.

    3. Similarity and lack of originality: I think most would agree but majority of AAA games are very similar to each other in terms of design and theme. Ubisoft for example Far Cry, Assassins Creed, Division are all very very similar in design and when I play one I feel like I have played the others. Even across developers and publishers so many games are just similar and copies of each other that everything is homogenized and nothing feels different.

    That's just my thoughts.

    Leave a comment:


  • ethansito
    replied
    Originally posted by zyzygy View Post
    To list all the faults of modern games would take too long but a brief list:

    1. Unfinished games

    2. Silly, self-defeating design decisions (predatory MTs, stupid difficulty, political agendas)

    3. Unrealistic pricing of certain titles

    4. Too many flabby open-world games, leading to a fractured experience (eg. Shadow of the Tomb Raider)
    Would you mind giving some examples of stupid difficulty?

    Leave a comment:


  • Cosmocalypse
    replied
    Stop focusing so much on the negative. There have been plenty of recent games that are incredible. Some of the games I played from 2018 are the best games I have ever played.

    Leave a comment:


  • MakeGamesGreatAgain
    replied
    Ever since Mass Effect 3, I have wondered why sequels to games keep on degrading in story.

    Sure, the game play of ME 2 and ME 3 were much better than ME 1. I remember in ME 1, at times, I would be firing my assault rifle at some enemy and it takes 5-10 seconds to kill them. . .

    But the story was less in ME 2 and the ending of ME 3 was the hugest plothole I have ever seen.

    And it came to me.

    Every single time a video game company goes to make a game, it takes 6 months with their lead writer, artist, programmer and game designer to come up with everything to create the game - in every game. So after 4 years of working on a game, they go onto the next.

    I realized the major flaw in it.

    The reasons why Tolkien and Rowlings worlds seem rich and real is both of them had been writing about their worlds as lore years before they put pen to paper (or napkins for Rowling) and wrote the first book - be it the Hobbit or Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s stone.

    This is a luxury that most people in the gaming industry don’t get.

    The only one I could say doesn’t fit this mold is the Witcher Series - but it’s based upon a bunch of stories by a guy who also took years before he wrote his first Gerald of Riveria novel. The lore has been established and they are just going with it.

    Leave a comment:


  • zyzygy
    replied
    To list all the faults of modern games would take too long but a brief list:

    1. Unfinished games

    2. Silly, self-defeating design decisions (predatory MTs, stupid difficulty, political agendas)

    3. Unrealistic pricing of certain titles

    4. Too many flabby open-world games, leading to a fractured experience (eg. Shadow of the Tomb Raider)

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X