Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[umiman]

I guess you guys are getting sick of my philosophical threads by now but hey, humour me with your thoughts. This one will probably light a few flames but please try to keep it civil. Please ignore the trolls and speak your mind without fear.

I want to know what you guys consider to be a good game. To do this, I need to know your age (or age bracket if you don't want to say your age...) and what kind of games you like. The reason for this is simple: why is it that one game that is so considerably hideous in some eyes is considered a blessing of god in another.

To put it simply, and I say this knowing the full power of these words, why do some people consider Fallout 3 to be game of the year while others like myself consider it to be absolute garbage. (Yes, yes... I know.)

Keep in mind that the statement, "beauty is in the eye of the beholder" is a useless statement equivalent to "because God willed it so." It won't help any discussion by assuming it can't be understood so to reach some form of resolution, the assumption that we can understand it must be made.

The reason I'm doing this is so that we might be able to better understand one another as gamers, and maybe we can be able to appreciate games from another person's point of view.

I'm sure you all know what I consider makes a grade A game by now (hint: giant l****s). What about you guys? Did you like Fallout 3? Why so? If you could make your own game, what would you focus on? In other words, when you buy a game, what is it that you are really looking for? Replayability? Length? Gameplay?

Remember, keep it civil. It doesn't have to be about Fallout 3 if that title irks you. I just chose that title because it's the most controversial game I can think of right now.

[Servant Corps]

Keep in mind that the statement, "beauty is in the eye of the beholder" is a useless statement equivalent to "because God willed it so." It won't help any discussion by assuming it can't be understood so to reach some form of resolution, the assumption that we can understand it must be made.

Because Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder. Each person is different, and have different interests, likes and dislikes, so games have to appeal to different contradictoray niches. Some people will love a game no matter what, because these people have interests that match with that game, and some people will hate a game no matter what, because these players dislike the game because it does not appeal to their interests. Interests also change when you grow older, so a game that may be awesome in your childhood may be boring later on ("Pocky and Rocky" is an example of this for me). People are in fact different.

If you can't accept that fact, it'd be pretty hard for you to understand why other people disagree with you. Some people love FPSes, other people do not. Some people love the open world, others do not. Some people like real time, others do not. Blah, blah, blah.

As for developing a 'better' game, my view is that the goal of gaming companies to find a niche, and milk that niche for all its worth. There is no 'better' game, the point of gaming companies is to produce products and make money. If they do that, they trimpuh.

[Aqizzar]

This one will probably light a few flames but please try to keep it civil. Please ignore the trolls and speak your mind without fear.

............................................________........................
....................................,.-‘”...................``~.,..................
.............................,.-”...................................“-.,............
.........................,/...............................................”:,........
.....................,?......................................................\,.....
.................../...........................................................,}....
................./......................................................,:`^`..}....
.............../...................................................,:”........./.....
..............?.....__.........................................:`.........../.....
............./__.(.....“~-,_..............................,:`........../........
.........../(_....”~,_........“~,_....................,:`........_/...........
..........{.._$;_......”=,_.......“-,_.......,.-~-,},.~”;/....}...........
...........((.....*~_.......”=-._......“;,,./`..../”............../............
...,,,___.\`~,......“~.,....................`.....}............../.............
............(....`=-,,.......`........................(......;_,,-”...............
............/.`~,......`-...............................\....../\...................
.............\`~.*-,.....................................|,./.....\,__...........
,,_..........}.>-._\...................................|..............`=~-,....
.....`=~-,_\_......`\,.................................\........................
...................`=~-,,.\,...............................\.......................
................................`:,,...........................`\..............__..
.....................................`=-,...................,%`>--==``.......
........................................_\..........._,-%.......`\...............
...................................,<`.._|_,-&``................`\..............

I know this wasn't substantive, and I don't care.  This conversation has never gone anywhere but flamewars since the beginning of creative expression, and it never will.

[umiman]

The better graphics card is in the eye of the beholder.

Cats being better than dogs all depends on what you think.

Whether or not you think Toady One is a better game developer than Will Wright is entirely up to you.

I think whether he really deserved the death sentence or not is up to the judge.

Abortion really depends on the person aborting, don't you think? It's up to them whether they want to abort or not.

Genocide use is in the eye of the beholder.

I dislike statements that bring results no different from not saying anything at all in the first place. In other words, I don't mind if you say it so long as you add a little "because..." at the end to elaborate. Also, that wasn't the point of the thread. Please refrain from bringing it up again.

Also, are you Malaysian? Because Rocky is the Malaysian name for Pocky... hehehe. Apparently they had to change the name because it was some sort of slur in Malay but heck if I know what Pocky means in Bahasa.

Lastly, I don't care what you think corporation do to milk the people. I just want to know what you want in a game. In your words, if a company wants to milk you, what niche would you represent?

Aquizzar: I'm pretty sure it will eventually descend into a flamewar sooner or later as some newer people to the internet start to voice out, but I'm also sure we can learn something before that. In any case, I do want to know why people think current gen games deserves such praise.

It's illogical to assume that EVERYBODY who loves current gen games are idiots. There must be something that attracts them. Perhaps I can find out what that is as well.

[Wooty]

Was this thread seriously just derailed after the second post? 

For me, a game really needs to have some sort of cool experimental mess-around-with-some-stuff angle. I played Empire Earth and Age of Mythology for weeks without getting bored, just because they have awsome and easy to use editors. I don't think I played a single game where I harvested rescources, strategically built an army, fought the computer player, eventually destroyed his town center, and got the 'You're Winner!" screen. I mostly either made up weird little battles or epic castle seiges and played them, or joined multiplayer games with custom maps by other people. Games like Half-Life 2 are fun the first time you play through them, but after you've played it once you're pretty much done with it. I think I actually might have spent more time trying to survive the 'Waterfall of Doom!' mod in toribash with my head and torso intact then I spent playing HL2. Also, games where everything is destructable. Every game needs to be like Voxelstein 3D.

If a game doesn't have some sort of cool experimental mess with the physics or make random battles thing going on, it dang well better have a ridiculously long storyline, half a billion side quests, and multiple endings. I played all the recent Zelda games several times, just because the storyline and the quests were so filthy long that by the time you got to the end, the beginning was almost new again. I played Deus Ex two or three times...before I even got halfway through my first game, I already wanted to go back to the beginning and start over because I realised how many things I had missed, or wanted to do over and see how it would happen if I went the other way. I played Fallout 1&2 a few times because there were just so dang many side quests and so many different endings for the side quests and outcomes for the different areas, it didn't really matter that the 'main plot' only had one ending.

The absolute worst, worst, least fun games for me would be MMORPGS. You hit 5 damage, the monster hits 2, it dies. You level up. You hit 7 damage, the monster hits 4, it dies. Repeat for infinity. The same grind over and over and over game, and the end result of what can only be called work is a really big number next to your fake virtual name. -personal details removed-

[umiman]

Mmm... Wooty. I think we share the same tastes. Though allow me to add that it's hard bring myself to buy a game that has no replayable value. Games like RPGs are things I usually avoid because the cost for hour played is insignificant compared to something like a fighter or with a multiplayer aspect. I understand the games can be excellent, much like the Final Fantasy series, but to me, buying a game for one pass is not a good investment.

Also, haven't you ever wondered why exactly your sister enjoys KMMORPGs? Why are people attracted to grind and monotony? I have no answer to that question, so I pose the question to you.

[Hawkfrost]

Because I jump around constantly with games, never playing one for long, I need something that will bring me back.
I don't enjoy FPS's in general, but some can be ok.
RPG's are a staple in my gaming lineup, with games like Final Fantasy 1-2, and Tactics, and Disgaea, along with Oblivion, Morrowind, many many rougelikes, and The Legacy Of Kain series.

Vertical and horizontal shooters are great, I enjoy them, and I just love mech games.

I mostly like games that are random, a different thing each time, so I don't enjoy MMO's very much.

Once in a while I play a stategy game like Warcraft or AoE II, just because I like trying out different combinations of units, or building weird cities, before I crush the enemy.

Platformers, also great, ever sence Sonic 2 I have loved platformers as well, I find them pretty fun, as long as they are long enough.


For me a good game is something that keeps me going back to it, so it needs some randomness along with flexibility.

[Omath Erius]

Also, haven't you ever wondered why exactly your sister enjoys KMMORPGs? Why are people attracted to grind and monotony? I have no answer to that question, so I pose the question to you.

Sense of accomplishment, drop the "K" and you might also get a good community.

I could say for the PvP, too, but then I would be almost completly talking about MMORPGs instead of KMMORPGs (With the exception of Space Cowboy, which was the exception to every rule about Korean MMOs ((Read: It rocked))).

[Deathworks]

Greetings!

I have to admit that I have a lousy track record as far as finishing games is concerned. Persona, Persona 2 Innocent Sin, and Persona 2 Eternal Punishment are probably the first games I really saw to the end.

I am 32 years old and end up being more of a collector (I probably have not played 1% of all the freeware games I have downloaded, sigh) than a player, and there are several veins into which my interests go.

DF falls for me into the class of simulation games like SimCity, Transport Tycoon, ... . Besides the ability to design/create something, I really enjoy their unexpected responses. I always loved that in SimCity, you wouldn't build a factory but designated an area where a factory may be built - but which factory was constructed was actually decided by the game. If the game has some freedom in responding to your input, this allows me to first of all be surprised, and secondly interpret things into the game. In this vein, SimCity Societies was the disappointment of the decade for me.

As my initial examples have shown, I am also with the genre of "classic" computer RPGs. With them, the appeal lies for me in the story and the characters, so I am more with the Japanese than the American school there. However, I have to admit that I also love the Wizardry series (I am referring to the original ones, not the new ones). So, basically, RPGs are kind of fantasy novels to me, and I prefer them to have an atmosphere similar to things I know from Japanese popular culture.

The interest in the good tale is probably also what draws me to digital novels. Reading these stories and feeling sympathy for the characters is a good thing. If you are able to change the end of the story to have at least your favorite character happy, all the better. More than any other genre, I suppose digital novels are for me foremost also an aesthetic thing, although what can look good in a digital novel may actually look awful outside of it. So, digital novels need to be a completely designed thing for me.

Closing the circle, the last genre I am interested in combines the interest in the great tale/aesthetic representation with the flexibility and freedom that came up with the simulation games. The genre I am referring to is text adventures, or as they are called nowadays, interactive fiction. A good text adventure needs to be able to tell an interesting story and also allow you enough freedom of action that you really want to experiment.

In general, I expect a good game to have a working internal logic. If the design of the game makes it inevitable that some design should work in a specific way, it should work that way and not be bugged or even cause the game to crash. In other words, the game should respond to any reasonable input with a meaningfully designed response.

Personality of the characters in a game is also a very important aspect for me. The characters should have their individual quirks, habits, and so on, and the game should give them chances to show off these quirks. The most important aspect here is durability of such quirks. If you have a cowardly character, that cowardice should show in any appropriate situation until the character is cured of it. If the cowardice only shows up once and the character otherwise behaves normal without any explanation, that is a bad game in my book.

Creator's love is also something I enjoy a lot. It does not feel so common in commercial games, but with freeware games, you can often feel how much the creator cared about the game and the characters. When I have the feeling that a lot of love and devotion have gone into a game (very obvious in RPGs and digital novels), I like the game much better.

Things that spoil games for me are:

Mandatory action parts (okay, I suck at action, so anything above extra easy is a game stopper for me).

Photos of real life persons used for normal characters in the game (Don't we see enough real life persons in our normal life?)

Extensive use of 3D rendering (again, I don't need extra-realistic stuff, and very often, games with such rendering tend to neglect other aspects I care more about).

Difficult to distinguish graphics (if I can't tell different graphics apart from each other, playing the game becomes rather tedious. This is why I do not like graphic sets for roguelikes, because in most cases, I find them to be making things less clear).

Well, I think that should describe my attitudes somewhat. I hope the information you were looking for is hidden somewhere in these lines.

Deathworks

[firefly28]

I actually like these kind of discussions. In my eyes the following things define the quality of a game:

Immersion
Uniqueness
Content
Gamplay
Good Story
Open endedness
Fun
Not boring
Imagination provoking
Replay value (This is the area nearly all games on the market fail and DF actually manages to nail this aspect)

I think RPGS or RPG hybrids are the best kind of games these days, any kind of game where you get to become some person in a world filled with lore and political choices. I just started playing DF, now heres the thing I generally dont like strategy games as they are all just too similiar but DF seems to not just break the mold but smash it up into tiny pieces and thats the kind of stuff I love in games, if the devloper manages to couple fun , openendedness and non boring play with all this then you have a groundbreaking quality game.

Thats how I see it with what conforms to my personal tastes and actually if publishers actually listened to players gaming hopes and asspirations then gaming wouldnt be in such a shallow poor state that it is these days where they spend time employing ridiculous protection/3 days rental schemes rubbish at the massive expense of game quality and enjoyment.

Thats my contribution to this thread

[IndonesiaWarMinister]

Welcome back, Deathworks!

Well, my definition of quality of games:

FUN!

Of course.
I enjoy chess because it's FUN to whack the opposing player's piece one by one to death (of course, the pleasure when we wins... is just very good).
I have played many different genres of game, and I discover that I am a warmonger (really addicted to war games). I play FPS, Strategies, Arcade-Shooter (Touhou), wargames (HoI series), Simulations (DF!) because of the gameplay.
I play RPGs, Visual Novels, etc because of the story. It's like how I able to chew novels and manga so fast, because I enjoy the story.
I don't play tabletops, since no one here play any (the last tabletop I brought to play with my friends, Risk, become a disaster).

Also,
It seems that I have many things in common with Deathworks, altough I don't mind 2D and difficult graphic, or mandatory action part (Hey, I'm good in GoW!).

Consistency is ALWAYS good. Especially when the game is SF (Science-Fiction or Super-Fantasy (technically high Fantasy)).
Stories that pulls you into it are the BOMB! (TWEWY... Hell yeah!)

Oh, HoI use real life photos, so I'm a little sure that I don't mind that.

Well, this is a messy rant.

tl;dr: I'm a highly adaptable gamer who seeks consistency (? *_* I'm bad at synopsising)

[Muz]

Hmm.. I'm not going to read all the posts because I'm in a really cruddy mood and not in the mood for anything as inflammatory as it seems

But, if you want a seriously sociological, psychological outlook.. purely theoretical, of course...
We enjoy food that are nutritional to us (in the short term at least). That's why people enjoy a variety, and people with similar health enjoy similar things. They want to eat something they don't have enough of.

People are reluctant to try new food because they have no idea of its nutritional content. They will look for more food that provides a certain amount of nutrition, especially fat, sugar and carbohydrates, because it contains energy. Rice or potatoes - both have the same things.

We play games because our brain wants to train us in learning different types of things. That's why people enjoy a variety of things. They want to play something as long as it represents a challenge to them.

People don't try different genres once they find something that suits them. They will keep doing it as long as they learn from it.. people will want harder and harder games. DF is fun because you get to learn how your entire fortress collapses. Guitar Hero is only fun at the right difficulty level, not much higher, not much lower, because it's the only place you're gaining skill.

Also, there's the human instinct to be better than everyone else. The instinct to feel that you're more important than anyone else. That's a huge part of gameplay.

[Tormy]

This is a very subjective stuff actually...well to me quality means: Deep and diverse gameplay. If the features in the game are quite unique, thats a + also. [Good example: Stardock's Elemental fantasy TBS] I don't care about graphics/sound at all. 

[Fenrir]

Because I jump around constantly with games, never playing one for long, I need something that will bring me back.

I do that too! It's good to know that I'm not the only one; I always thought that there was something wrong with me.

[lambskin]

Holy crap! Deathworks is back!

Anyways, I think that the very first games that you started to play influences your preferences greatly. My first computer game that I ever had was age of empires.(At the young age of 8.) Ever since then, I've had a special place in my heart for RTS games. I also have a rather short attention span, so my favourite game changes monthly, sometimes weekly. Generally random or open ended games like dwarf fortress keep my occupied for months on end.


In my eyes the quality that a game needs to keep me occupied for at least a  week include:
Multiplayer, A good community, a degree of randomness, open endness, good modability, and the ability to run on my cruddy computer. As long as a game has these traits, then I will be happy.