Actual impact of Video Games

[ndchristie]

out of curiosity, how many people here besides me don't really play video games?  I'm much more into video games than the average person i know, and it has been literally *months* since i played a console game.  When I'm at my dad's every other week, i play a little bit of Rome: Total War, but I've had that game for 2 years and played a grand total of 2 complete campaigns (which even a lot of casual players knock out in a couple weeks).

I see though that i am probably in the minority on this board, the way people go on and on about upcoming or recent games.  When i read, however, about masses being led by video games I really just do not see it.  Almost nobody in a school of 1600 bothered with next gen consoles (literally only 4 people i know, though it's not like i know everybody), and the only time i hear about them now is people offering to sell their few-month-old console, because they never use it.  I asked my brother and he says the people he knows in Boston are pretty much the same.  If there is a huge market for video games.

Movies and music on the other hand are much more important.  Every few weeks, maybe every couple of months, movies come out that literally everyone goes to see.  For every one person that talks about video games, it seems there are hundreds talking about movies.  It feels like almost 10 people own ipods for every person like me who doesn't (my friend Caroline's little sister just turned 11 and owns an ipod).  The people who don't still have pretty good CD collections.

Is new england just a funny place that could care less about video games, or is the whole video game thing that over-hyped everywhere?

[AdamAtomic]

That's a good question...I don't actually game that much, maybe 2-5 hours a week?  I probably talk about video games more than I play them...but then I also prefer to MAKE video games, rather than play them...

But also I think the time of year has something to do with it - summer is a time for getting outdoors, and its when all the big blockbuster movies hit too.  People have limited time and money, after all (well most people anyways).  I think come November it might seem different.  Though today it feels like EVERYONE is a gamer thanks to the ubiquitous E3 coverage

[Xion]

I dunno, man, when I was a kid...well, I say that as if I'm not anymore - when I was but a wee lad, my friends and I had most of our common ground around our interest in videogames. We'd play games and stuff and talk about them and stuff...and when I started highschool, when one of the teachers organized a video-game-playing...thing afterschool, there were more people than I'd expected to who showed up, pwning in both Halo and Smash Bros. Melee. And then when I moved to Cali and all the next-gen systems were announced/came out, I'd (over)hear people just talking about which one they wanted most and stuff.
But this may all be due to the fact that my senses immediately perk up whenever anything game-related is mentioned in my vicinity, when I would otherwise be inattentive.

Hmmm...

But I wonder, when movies first came out, were they an instant hit or did it take time to get to the point where people flock to each premier? If the latter, then videogames, still in their infancy compared to both movies and especially music (which is like two thousand years old to movies' eyeblink of an existence) will of course not be as big and booming as the aforementioned industries yet, which are pretty much omnipresent in everyone's lives. Right now, there are still tons of people who could care less about games, but it's only a matter of time - ages, maybe a century or so - until they also reach the magnitude of movies as a means of entertainment.

What was the question again?

[ndchristie]

Asking how man people actually play video games (around here or in general) to see whether video games are actually a powerful and ever-present media force, or if people just act like they are, because around here, they seem to get very little attention.

[Ryumaru]

actually adarias, im exactly like you. conceit goes crazy when i tell him i havent played this or that.
im just more interested in the pixel art i guess.

[JonathanOfDrain]

I too don't play games much. Last game I played was the darkness and that was fun, but it only lasted 3 days without the multi-player. Pixel Art is more appealing to me because it's something you can do almost anywhere. Even the computers at Target have MSpaint, so I get to dick around there.
I recently have been doing a lot more pen and paper gaming (and game running) so that's even less time to video game. But I live in New England so this post is void.

[Xion]

Asking how man people actually play video games (around here or in general) to see whether video games are actually a powerful and ever-present media force.

Oh, hahaha.
No.

[robalan]

Going to a tech school, most of the people I know play video games quite avidly, discuss them constantly, and flock to stores to buy new consoles.  On one floor of one dorm, I know of at least four people who got Wiis, and I'm pretty sure there are others.  The school is sort of New England; it's in upstate NY so half the people are from there :-P  Also, most of the people I know in Boston (where I'm living and working for the summer) also game, so maybe it's just the crowd I happen to hang out with?  I dunno.  But yeah, I don't think it's New England.  You're just not talking with the right crowd of people, I guess.

[huZba]

I don't know many people who don't play games at all. Even the the least gamer types tend to go for a quick game of crash bandicoot or cooking mama if they're bored. And there's of course the masses who don't play consoles but enjoy online multiplayer browser games or those found on sites like miniclip. Gas stations and small restaurants have minigame collection machines that have mahjong, block and card games. Girls play those a lot while they hang around and chat with friends. Games like brain age, cooking mama, wii sports, guitar hero and dancing/singing games are famous with previous "non-gamers" since they don't really have any kind of learning curve for having fun. You can totally suck but still enjoy them. Then little kids play on sites like club penguin, which is in the top10 of MMO games.

In short, you find gamers everywhere.

[tocky]

I don't own a current-gen console. Currently all I got is my PC, which is too old to play last year's games, and a gamecube, which is starting to seem sort of a foolish thing to hang onto. I'm mostly into RPG/adventure style jobbies, and basically won't play anything else unless it's really excellent, so games that'll appeal are few and far between these days. I don't really keep track of what's coming out anymore. Mostly I've been flipped onto indie games and emulation. But still I'll prattle incessantly about games to anyone who'll listen, and spend a fair bit of time reading up on people's design theries, trying to come up with fun game mechanics, and stuff like that.

videogames, still in their infancy compared to both movies and especially music (which is like two thousand years old to movies' eyeblink of an existence)...

That's kind of a tetchy statement. Video games are just the currently-most-popular iteration of gaming, which is ancient. Video games are to games what pop is to music; what cinema is to drama. Gaming, like drama and music, has always been vastly popular. It's just technology, direction, and globalisation that makes them seem so different to their predecessors.

[Ed Oscuro]

I spend a lot more time writing and reading about games (or listening to game soundtracks!) than I do playing them. It's been that way for quite a long time now.

[Rox]

I play too much video games, but I know MANY people who don't touch them. But most of those guys watch TV as much as I play...

I dunno, me and games is funny. It comes and goes, in waves. For the past week or so I haven't played a lot at all. Mostly been sitting here diong other non-gamey stuff. But the week before that I spent probably 3+ hours every day with Guitar Hero 2. And the week before that, 6+ hours every day with Oblivion. I mean, I got my 360 this spring and I've played Oblivion for almost 200 hours...

I'm a casual hardcore gamer or something... When I start playing, I don't stop, and I want to get as much out of every game as possible, but it's not like I ALWAYS play games. And I never become superhumany good... Some claim I reached that stage when I used to play DDR, but that's a long time ago now...

Still, I have teachers who play games, I know people who play games with their parents, and kids surely play as much as I used to when I was little. Games do take up a huge amount of space and money. A really good game will outsell a blockbuster movie. But it's also true that people are pretty casual about games. Like the next-gen console thing. A small percentage actually bother to stay that updated with games. That's why I got a 360 this spring, instead of a year and a half ago...

[robalan]

Rox: I like your description of a "casual hardcore" gamer.  The only game that I've been playing for the past several weeks has been Kingdom of Loathing, which I play during lunch at work.  But earlier in the summer I was playing Oblivion for several hours every evening.  The whole console market updating regularly and noncompatibility is why I'm a PC gamer.  My laptop is good enough to run just about everything, despite being two years old.  I'll probably get a new one next year when the warranty on this one runs out, but I'll likely be using it for work as well as gaming and stuff.  Some console games are fun, but I never really got into them, since the only console I ever owned was an SNES, many years ago.

[Xion]

videogames, still in their infancy compared to both movies and especially music (which is like two thousand years old to movies' eyeblink of an existence)...

That's kind of a tetchy statement. Video games are just the currently-most-popular iteration of gaming, which is ancient. Video games are to games what pop is to music; what cinema is to drama. Gaming, like drama and music, has always been vastly popular. It's just technology, direction, and globalisation that makes them seem so different to their predecessors.

I never thought of it like that.

[Darien]

I play increasingly play video games less and less as I get older and realize that most of them are a waste of my time.  Sure, there are plenty that are entertaining for while you play them, but in this aspect they are like action movies to me... fun to watch, but ultimately doesn't matter.  Only a few games have affected me emotionally enough for me to consider them worthwhile (and these are the only games that I am glad I spent the time to play), but the large cluster of them that mainly involve saving the world just gets tiring.

[.TakaM]

I'm gonna post as if this were an interview..

How long do I spend gaming each week?
 - I'd estimate around 8 hours, I do an all nighter once every week with my friends, playing halo2, street fighter, mario kart, smash brothers, guitar hero etc, that accounts for about 6 hours, then I probably knock out about 2 hours by myself.

What do I play by myself?
 - Rarely anything new, I still play Super Metroid, Super Mario 64 DS, Street Fighter and some others atleast once every single week, I test out a game or two each week on DS, but they're almost always pretty meh.
I also clock up about an hour each week through Twinsen, but that's bug testing etc..

It's safe to say I spend more time reading about,talking about, and working on games than I do actually playing them.

edit-
Oh, and I'm pretty much the guru to all my friends, they always ask me what I think about certain games, if I can recommend one for X console/genre etc

[crab2selout.png]

I feel the same way, Darien. I wish it wasn't so, but I lost the special feeling or emotional attachment a good video game used to give me.

I still like to keep an eye on sites like gamespot to see what's being done and what's popular, but I may be finished with them[for the immediate future] as a pastime. I feel like I need to complete one final act before I can say goodbye to video games. Mainly I want to make my own game, hopefully something decent. I had a bunch of different plans for many different genres of games, but that's not a possibility anymore.

I find it funny how mockups are still appealing to me, though.

[ndchristie]

a good storyline or addictive gameplay can still draw me in, as well as nostalgia.  Final Fantasy Tactics can do this, as can Rome: Total War, or every once in a while a really fun old game like starcraft or conquest of the new world.  Still, i'd say it's only a few hours every other week.

I also put a bit of work into Partisan (although i've let the blog go to pot I'm still working) and Zantarni, but that's not really gaming.

[philipptr]

I lost almost all intrest in singleplayer games. I, as someone who spends alot of time infront of the pc, like to combine this time with at least a bit of social interaction so the only thing I've played much in the last year was warcraft 3 while talking to friends in teamspeak. Only problem about games like warcraft is they get boring more or less fast since there are only a hanfull of strategies, which lead to a win. Also the more you play such RTS games online, the more serious you take it, the more stressfull and less fun it gets (atleast imo). So after playing it for a year I don't play it much any more and I don't seem to play any other games.
I am waiting for starcraft 2 now. Wont play much till then

By the way: The last solo game I finished was sonic and knuckles 3 (genesis), which I liked gameplay grafics and soundwise. Grafics weren't all so intresting from a pixel art point of view, but they were still very good compared to most genesis games.

[Turbo]

In the last few months, i've (finally) finished Day of the Tentacle, played System Shock 2, playing my way through XCom Apocalypse, and Soul Reaver: Legacy of Kain. Gaming is a kind of seasonal thing for me (as is my dedication to pixel-art), sometimes i have the time and want to do it frequently, others i don't (or care) to do it as frequently. Winter tends to be a low spot for me in pixel art, high in gaming Sometimes i'll go 3-4 months without either gaming or doing art, others i do it every day.

Also, i can't upgrade to a high-end machine yet, so i'm stuck with oldies (but goodies). If i had a newer machine, i'd probably play more.

[alkaline]

I hardly play video games nowadays, but I haven't lost interest in them. Partly because my computer isn't nearly good enough to play the newest games. I do own a wii though, waiting for some good games to buy.

[Doppleganger]

Lately I've had a really difficult time getting into video games. For a while I bought a new ps2 game each week in hopes of it reinstating my joy of playing video games. When that didn't work, I went and bought a wii. Which was a sad state of affairs. I've never played a more ho-hum system in my life. Being a big fan of the Ninten, it was slightly disappointing. I'm going to buy twilight princess and see if that does it for me though. XD

I guess by spending the majority of my time making video game graphics I've lost interest in video games...I don't know.

Either way, I'm a big fan of them so, I hope that I will start enjoying them again.

Games I'll never get sick of are; Star Craft, WCIII, smash bros melee, final fantasy tactics. Their lastability is phenomenal.

[ndchristie]

i had high hopes for FFXII, but it was astoundingly sub-par in every respect except the visuals, and the design was such that you basically just used the minimap to go anywhere anyhow.  I put a post-it over that part of the screen so that i woudnt use it, but then i was distracted by the post-it.

[Doppleganger]

That's so true Adarias.

FFXII got worse and worse the more you played it. Me and my girlfriend spent about 100 hours on that game and near the end I just quit caring. She beat it just to beat it but I was hardly able to get myself up to watch the ending. Which I may as well have not done...

"Yaaaaaaaay! I'm a sky pirate!"

[Dusty]

I don't see what everyone sees in FFT. I have FFTA(if that makes a difference), and I just can't get into it. I've tried to play it a couple of times and it's just so boring, and seems pointless. All I've done in it is run from one mission to the next with no apparent point. Maybe it's 'cause I don't really get into RTS or such, but I do like RPG's, and with as much love as the game gets I thought it'd appeal to me.

[Helm]

Me and my girlfriend spent about 100 hours

 

[ptoing]

Me and my girlfriend spent about 100 hours

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/upload/news/main.jhtml?xml=/upload/news/2007/07/15/ncomputers115.xml

[Doppleganger]

In all fairness it was over the course of a good long while. In actuality it's nothing compared to what some people spend playing WoW in any given month. But on the flipside, those 100 hours were spent on a really awful game. XD

As for the starving children thing, I have no children so I'm still good. Ha!


@Dusty:
FFTA has nothing on FFT. Although I'm just one of those naysayers who doesn't think having soccer rules in a strategy game is a grand idea. But, if you've never played FFT, I would suggest it.

[ndchristie]

I'm onyl a short ways into FFXII (for those who have played, the last thing i remember is the lost princess is hiding out for now and i need to go south during the rainy season after that crystal blew up some airship fleet)

FFT has as much to do with FFTA as apples has to do with adam's apples.  They may sound like the same game, but the first game is a decently written (for the most part), in-depth, story-driven, extremely difficult strategy game.  The second is poorly written (for the most part), lacks depth, pisses on story, and is only difficult because of annoying rules put in there to distract you from how thin the rest of the game is.

Granted, FFTA is a pretty game; that's the only reason i downloaded it.  Of course, it's not pretty enough to buy.  I own the seiken densetsu series up through GBA, which i suppoes is proof that i do enjoy videogames, particularly ones that manage to be attractive and have good gameplay.

[AdamAtomic]

heh i'm stuck at the same part in XII adarias, there's some bigass frog-monster bounty that keeps whipping my ass, and preventing me from going south properly...as for FFTA, i don't remember it being difficult at all.  There were a lot of character classes that were way unbalanced, later in the game my friends and i were doing battles in under 5 minutes, one-hit kills etc.  Mostly the game was just DULL.  The environments weren't varied nearly as much as the original game, and the removal of charge time as a major gameplay factor basically neutered the entire strategy mechanic.

[Helm]

Having recently investigated on FFT by downloading the iso and playing it on emulator I can testify, to my taste at least, that this game feels very dull and pointless as well. An 'epic rpg' about kids in armor running behind the enemy and hitting them on the back for extra damage. A sacred cow for nothing.

[Turbo]

You guys only play japanese games. Other than the sporadic Blizzard title.

[Helm]

I personally don't. Here's my top10 list that I mailed to indygamer for their thing they're doing:

1. N
2. Quest for Glory 2
3. Indy and the Fate of Atlantis
4. Gabriel Knight: Sins of the Fathers
5. Captain Blood
6. Alter Ego
7. Dreamweb
8. Shinobi 3
9. Albion
10. Nikujin

Of those only Shinobi 3 and Nikujin are japanese. Before anyone asks where Shadow of the Beast is, I love it but it's not a very good game. And where is Flashback and Another World? I simply forgot about them. I'd take out Dreamweb and put Another World in there.

[ptoing]

DODONPACHI >>>:::OOO

FFT is apparently quite deep tho, so I can see why people like it. I myself quite enjoyed FFTA on the GBA and even finished that

[huZba]

Played FFXII to a part that has fran's relatives around in some enchanted forest. I mainly played it cause it's pretty looking and the voice actors are fun to listen
Put it down for a while and kinda forgot the whole game.

Really can't name one favorite game, cause there's so many, but Chrono and Xeno series are among the best ones, even though Xenogears was released only half done and Xenosaga 1 and 2 suffer from horribly paced levels and below average gameplay. The story makes it all good tho. Then there's Ninja Gaiden and Devil may cry 3, both really hard but fair. Moving away from action games,  Freespace 2 is by far the best space sim i've played and it's now open source and updated by fans, so everyone should get it.

Still some gems worth mentioning: R-type, X-wing alliance, Falcon4, Ace combat, Gran turismo, Esp.ra.de., Garou:mark of the wolves, Zone of the enders 2 aaand the Zelda Series.... and a ton more... i used to play a lot.

These days it's an hour or less a day and an occasional gaming marathon weekend. Oh and a funny note, seems like helm's top10 is the few games i haven't played, except for Indy. Flashback and another world are among my favorite games tho... haven't really bumped in a similar atmosphere after those.

[Dusty]

Just started getting into Dark Cloud 2, surprisingly addictive game. I like leveling up the weapons and such and getting the different final weapons
I think we need an off-topic video game thread!

[robalan]

1. N
2. ...

I definitely agree; N is an excellent game.  Though 88-4 still continues to confound me.  That's the only level I haven't beaten, despite having poured several hours into it.  Ah well; I'll get it eventually.

[Helm]

Let's add Real Lives (good edutainment) and Dodonpatchi to that list of good games I've mentioned, they don't have to be a top10 forever.

[ndchristie]

helm, the first chapter is not nearly as good as the rest.  still, not everone likes it.


favorite games:

1 - Suikoden 2
2 - Myst
3 - Sonic the Hedgehog 2
4 - Seiken Densetsu 3
5 - FFT
6 - Medieval: Total War (the original)
7 - Conquest of the New World
8 - Flashback (it was too short to be any higher)
9 - FF7
10 - Megaman Legends

although if it's a party....:
1 - Counterstrike
2 - Super Smash Bros
3 - Halo
4 - Halo 2
5 - Counterstrike 2 or whatever it's called

Crono Trigger was excellent, should have been on my list just above SD3 and bump everything down one, i knew i was forgetting a game.
Crono Cross was sub-par, imo
Xenegears was great, what do you mean about half finished?  Xenosaga sucked for its lack of story, gameplay, and good design.

Dark Cloud 2 almost made the list, but i was too pissed off that they wanted me to play the last dungeon without monica.  Plus, the island king sword looked too rediculous...

[Helm]

(it was too short to be any higher)

What does this mean? I don't understand this mentality. Flashback is a damn difficult game and it takes a new player 10 hours or more to finish. Why should it be any longer? It's not a LIFETIME, it's a video-game. I tell you rpgs like Final Fantasy that require 100 hours of gameplay just to finish once are more broken that short and sweet games. And Flashback isn't even short, it's medium-length. How long did you take to finish Flashback without any cheats and stuff?

[Xion]

Look what you did, Adarias, you got Helm's panties in a bunch!

Wierd how I don't like any of the games in your top ten, Adarias, except for Flashback (but I think Out of this World/Another World was better). I especially hate Myst.

Never been one for final fantasies. When games get too long I just lose interest. But then with short games I feel cheated.

[ndchristie]

Never played another world.  what's wrong with Myst?

well the thing about flashback is that it wasn't necessarily too short, although it was short, 10 hours sounds like a good estimate (there are cheats for that game? besides level passwords?, it just felt like things really didn't develop much...  The gameplay really wasn't good enough to really call it something you'ld play just for the fun of it once you knew how it went and how to get through the puzzles, which there just weren't enough of (see Myst at the top of the list? ).  The last stage just felt a little too much like the first to be any higher than 8th.  If it had any replay value, the length wouldnt matter, but it doesn't.  Besides, 8th is a good place to be!

A good rpg takes about 25-35 hours, otherwise it risks getting way too long, but a few more hours are alright if the story needs it.  Still, i've never spent more than 47 (original suikoden, it just dragged on and on....i just checked my memory cards since you got me curious). 10 hours is a breeze for a story-driven game.

The way i see it, to have a good story, a videogame needs nearly ten times as much time to tell it as a novel, because the other 90% is spent with playing the game or reminding unattentive players what was happening.  I read the grapes of wrath in 3 hours, and it was fantastic, so that a good game could take 35 hours seems pretty reasonable.

Also, i play very few games that don't offer either good strategy or good story.  I hate all shmups i've ever played, sidescrollers too except sonic (and i guess flashback, it's sidescrolleresque), i don't even like mario or metroid.

another game that should be up there is Homeworld, which managed to have both strategy and storyline.  The only real annoyance was the lack of terrain (it's in space afterall).  Strategy suffers a bit when there's only formation, no plain of battle or obstacles.  Everything is dogfight dogfight dogfight or "let's watch the frigate-line".



Does anybody but me like a good wargame?

[Zero]

About gameplay time, I don't like how RPG's get so detailed and complex. You shouldn't have to make such a complicated game for 100 hours of gameplay. I prefer the simpler, addictive games. With most RPG's, once you're done once, you're done for good. But take for example, Super Smash Bros Melee. I just checked my stats and I've played about 425 hours of it. (I've had the game for about 6 years, so don't go yelling that I have no life.) The point is, simplicity is what keeps games fun. IMO anyway. Look at Pacman, that's been aound for over 25 years now.

On the original topic of the thread, now that it's summer I play video games about an hour a day. Usually it's not that much. But I spend much more time making games.

[ndchristie]

but does anybody ever actually spend 100 hours to beat the game once?  or even half that?

As for me, it really doesn't matter what the game is, once i beat it, i almost never go back more than once, unless it's a strategy game or a party game, so i'd rather get 30 hours out of a game than 2-5, knowing that unless it is stellar or doesn't allow you to save your progress (sonic, flashback) i probably only give it one go.

I played medieval the other day for a couple of hours, and Fil sent me a link to a flash game he did that was way too fast-moving for me.  Like lv9 tetris but you had to build a staircase o.O.  He say's it's easy ^^

[Dusty]

Hmmm, RPG's. I never really got into FF7 like so many others--I haven't even beat it yet. I did enjoy FF8 though, even if I didn't beat it.
Only RPG's I've ever really got into were Kingdom Hearts, Dark Cloud 2, and FFX.
I have about 78 hours in DC2. I have a Island King+43... even though I hate that sword. I can not imagine what the hell was going through their heads when they designed it... out of all the cool designs, to make the strongest one so... ugh. Now I'm going through getting some of the cooler looking swords.
Hmm, FFX, I have an 84 hour file. I spent a lot of time after I beat the game getting the ultimate weapons, making my characters insanely strong and such. Though not to the degree people talk about on forums and stuff. I still can't beat a lot of the monsters in the Calm Arena.
And Kingdom Hearts... only 42 hours, but all level 100 characters(Sephiroth is still a pain in the ass to bear), and all the ultimate weapons.

I really do like the more action-oriented RPG's a lot(don't even get me started on Zelda!), but as for traditional RPG's... I dunno, some appeal and some don't. It seems pretty random for me. I've tried so many RPG's that get high ratings and I never get but a few hours into them and just forget about them. Even FF6 and such don't really do it for me. But I loved FF8 a lot, even though it's like the bane of all FF fans...

I agree about some games being too long. Games should give you your money's worth, but as what I wrote above shows, it should be in the extra's. All those hours I clocked in RPG's was after I beat the game. Let me beat the game and then I'll do stuff I like. Sometimes I'll beat the game, toss it aside and won't come back for a while, but when I do it's for the extra's. 100 hours to just beat a game? I'd get bored with it, especially since it's just beating the game, it's not anything extra, so won't be a lot of varying stuff, especially if it's an RPG.
...I'm pretty sure I have some insane hours on Mario Kart/SSBM/Timesplitters...

[Zero]

Okay, so I exaggerated the 100 hours part, sorry. But my point remains.

[ndchristie]

and yeah i guess i should say complete, not beat.  108 stars of destiny, best weapons, secret levels, etc, should still come in under 50 hours or it isn't worth it.

78 hours....are you just biding time now?  Why not go kick the guy's ass!  There's a whole massive final dungeon waiting for you afterwards.  Like i said though, you can only use max, no monica.  As a note: any game which removes half of its own features during the extended play is shooting itself in the foot, the face, and the testicles, with the same bullet.  I barely scratched the surface of that final dungeon before not caring anymore.

And like i said, i pretty much only play games once in the same way that i only read good books once, although there are some, mostly short-stories or plays, that i reread all the time.  "the chrysanthemums" is imo the best piece of literature i have ever read, and "death of a salesman" is always good no matter how many times i read it.  Some movies too, like "the lion in winter" and "annie hall" and "casablanca" i watch over and again, but most i don't/can't.  Some people like doing the same thing several times, but for me, unless it is beyond good, i just don't.

[Dusty]

I beat Dark Cloud 2. I do all the extra stuff AFTER I beat my games. I'm in Zelmite Mines just leveling up weapons(I've beat that too). And you can use Monica after you get so far into the mines(not that far, I believe).

[ndchristie]

oh really?  perhaps then i should think about actually playing further, i sort of assumed that once gone, she was gone for good.  still, those dungeons seem pretty boring to me, when the only thing you get is more outfits and ridepod bits.

we're OT now but i think that's allowed.

[Darien]

7. Dreamweb

Dreamweb is one of those games I was talking about that I feel are worth my time, not just something as entertainment.  I played it about a year ago and I was really surprised on how different it was from any other game I'd played in terms of atmosphere and moral ambiguity.  I don't know how much of that reaction is just a result of my own ignorance about that era of Western gaming... back then I was only playing Japanese games, and hardly an adventure game.  But it made enough of an impact on me that I consider it one of my favorites even though it may not be the best in terms of gameplay or puzzles.

Replay value and length to complete don't really enter into the equation for a good game for me, I think that so many games would be so much better if they were more compact.  Sort of in writing how you are supposed to hack out everything that is unessential.  Brevity grants you a sort of impact, I think, that you forsake when you are going for long play time (like in a short story).  I know a lot of people see a 50 plus playtime and think of all the hard numbers entertainment, but I think that there's probably 25 hours I shouldn't be spending to get to the core of the game.  I do see why people are concerned when they are shelling out 60 bucks for a game, though.

[Dusty]

oh really?  perhaps then i should think about actually playing further, i sort of assumed that once gone, she was gone for good.  still, those dungeons seem pretty boring to me, when the only thing you get is more outfits and ridepod bits.

we're OT now but i think that's allowed.

Well, there are a bit of bosses in the dungeon I believe, and at the end of it... SPOILERS!!!(highlight to read) you fight Dark Genie from the first Dark Cloud.
It depends really if you're interested in just kind of pushing a bit more into the game... DC2 never really offered much as far as making you want to get to the next part, as it was pretty redundant.

[ndchristie]

i thought things like spheda and fish-racing were cool, but underdeveloped.  If you are going to add minigames to something, at least make them, yknow, rounded out a bit instead of a total afterthought.

Harvest Moon, a series with great replay value, does this quite nicely.

[huZba]

Xenogears is missing it's second half, or rather it's replaced with a lot of text. Halfway through the story you just stop playing and it has a very long text and pictures narrative that finally jumps you straight into the final dungeon. I think Square cut off the funding for the game. After finishing Chrono Cross the team left square and formed Monolith Soft, which is responsible for the Xenosaga series, which in turn had it's own share of trouble. The first game is only 1/6 of the story, while the second game tries to leap a bit and the third game takes the series to a premature conclusion. It's the most epic videogame story imo, but it doesn't really work for the benefit of a videogame series if you have to play all the episodes in order to make sense of the new iterations.

Flashback was just right for me, not too long or too short. A tight package is better than something dragging on for no obvious reason.
Oh and agree with Adarias, SD3 is one of the best action RPGs i've played... also bonus points for having megaman legends on your list 

[miascugh]

I was only allowed to use the computer/NES/SNES/N64 on weekends up until I was thirteen or something, which made playing games an even more precious experience to me, but also kept me from playing all that much. Games that deeply impressed me were:


World Cup (NES soccer game, best soccer game ever - read: the only soccer game worth playing out there )

Monkey Island series & DotT & Grim Fandango

Civilization series (1, 2 and 3. Have yet to try 4)

Secret of Mana & Seiken Densetsu 3 (for nostalgic reasons and semi-nostalgic reasons plus improved gameplay respectively. We had to play the Japanese SD3 with an English script to keep track of the dialogues, and my English skills weren't quite up to par back then haha. The rest of the series were an ever increasing disappointment with every new incarnation) edit: almost forgot, Secret of Evermore. Basically my favorite RPG ever, but no co-op mode.

Super Mario World

StarCraft (though I wasn't very good at it or even beat all the campaigns myself, I actually still got something out of it watching my brother play)

Half-Life + Opposing Force (HL2 was awesome too of course, but not as much of an impact)

Megaman III & X (I don't think X 2 and 3 have ever been released here, but I would so have devoured them. Today I don't care much to play those too)

Earthbound (only played it later on an emulator, not sure if it even has been released here)

Zelda (I think I've played all the titles from 1 to Majora's Mask minus the GB/GBC titles. After that I stopped getting consoles. Maybe I was traumatized by the fortunes we spent on games and the N64, as my parents refused to support this plague called video games any further after Super Mario World)

Flashback was nice too, but I first discovered it rather late through Pixelation.



These days I play way too much again. Mostly DS, but I do have a CivIII relapse every once in while too. Also, I'm not a particularily good gamer, and am not intersted in getting hardcore, but yes, FFTA definitely was too easy... yet still enjoyable in my opinion.

[Helm]

The way i see it, to have a good story, a videogame needs nearly ten times as much time to tell it as a novel,

All these parallels between gaming and other sorts of art to experience like movies or book are meaningless for me. Nikujin is one of the toughest games I've played. Now that I know it well, I can finish it in about 15 minutes. However the experience has been on the whole, more full and substantial than Half-life 2 and whatnot. You really have to have a different sort of measure for videogames than other sorts of art, and it's not a measure of hours. It's a ratio of 'what is it trying to do' versus 'how much time and skill it takes to get it done' while throwing in the ubiquitus fun x factor. Generally, I think this whole '100 hours of gameplay' bullshit is the result of people playing today's japanese games which are tempoed so labouriously to kill time, most of which are very DULL to play, but have stories. So people watch the stories and press some buttons occassionally and call that a game and if it gives them room to escape for 100 hours that's awesome.

It's not. They're playing shit games. You can spend 10 minutes or 10 years of your life with N and you'll never be 'done' with its 'story'. It's just a pure, condensed video-game of awesomeness and it's not a book, nor is it a movie, nor can you quantify what you can milk from it in hours. Gameplay isn't a timetable.

[ptoing]

I fully agree here.

Good examples of stories that unfold while playing and also mostly within the player and not through narrative are ICO and Shadow of the Colossus. And both those games are beatable in under 10 hours and are two of the most emotionally engaging games.

Also as far as FF goes, I finished 6 (actually good) and 9 (meh) and played 7 for about 80 hours or so being close to the end but not beating it. All in all it is a waste of time imo. All FF stories are more or less the same with slight variations and they are not even good stories, it's really cheap, kitchy stuff when you look at it objectively. I'd rather read a good book.

[Rosse]

For me, there are two kind of stories. The one which comes from the author (e.g. HL2) and the one which comes from the player (e.g. Metroid 1). In HL2 you have a path created from the author and HE is telling the story. The says now you are going there and now you are doing this and now you find this cool item. However in Metroid 1 (or Zelda 1) you have just a introduction or a small universe which you are told. The real game story is coming from yourself. Now I'm going there, OH I found the Wave Beam - cool. Or you don't find it and complete the game without it.
Both have it's right to exist. But once you have played HL2 and you want to replay it, it is the same game over and over again. But when you play Metroid 1, YOU are making the story. You can go there or there, you can skip the Wavebeam or the VariaSuit, can skip every Energy Tank. I really miss this "non-linearity" today. I want to play the games my way. In Windwaker, why can't the player go to every island from the beginning or let me swim as long as i want? This "baby-sitter" style is killing the replay-value imo. But fortunately most games have bugs which balances this fact.
A friend of mine completed Ocarina of Time the first time without the "fire armor / suit" (German "Feuerrüstung"). Which is quite cool. Thank to a small bug in OOT, whenever I play the game I start playing Lord Jabu-Jabu and afterwards Dodongo's Cavern.
Because of this I mainly play older games. Aren't there any new games which has this "non-linearity"?

[Helm]

But when you play Metroid 1, YOU are making the story.

This is silly in my opinion. Metroid is open-ended and has optional stuff, but that doesn't mean 'YOU are making the story'. That would include leaving the mission if you so desired, not killing the bosses, doing evil deeds instead. Metroid is just good at giving you linear goals masquaraded by the premise of non-linearity through options. What you have to do is what you have to do, in the end. From a game design standpoint, Metroid is a linear game. Exploration of a compact gameworld doesn't mean a game is not linear. A game is non-linear when you can do various, disparate, mutually exclusive things according to your desires and the game has responses to them.

Alter Ego, is the pure non-linear game.

[Rosse]

You are right Helm. In Metroid you're not making the story. But you can make own decisions. Of course you have to beat all the bosses, but the game-experience can be different every time you play the game. Because you have the ability to decide. I miss this feature in new games.
I don't know many old games (I missed the NES era and never had my own console back then) so I have a little diffrent view of them as the 'old core' people.

Of course there are other genres - Sandbox games. I think SimCity goes in this direction (Spore as well?). Settlers and Anno 1602 (1602 AD in english?) has this capability as well. I really like them.

[ndchristie]

You really have to have a different sort of measure for videogames than other sorts of art

Perhaps you do, I've never found myself wanting to change the way i play or assess videogames.  My whole point is that for a good game, it doesnt matter if it takes 10 or 30 hours, which i view as within reason, but it needs to be full.  Flashback isn't quite full enough.

N is not at all for me.  Personally, I think it sucks in the sense that i do not find it enjoyable.  At all.

I can't help but feel that a lot of what people are saying about rpg's comes from not playing them, or just not enjoying the game elements that are present.  Like I said, every game I have played I have beaten in less than half the time you guys are talking about, and spent most of that time playing the game portion, not reading.  If the game portion is overcomplicated or perhaps in your opinion boring, than yes, there is no reason to play it.  On the flip side, a game with mediocre gameplay or worse, great gameplay in a style that doesn't appeal to you and no story is equally not worth playing in my mind.  If you took a story that I enjoyed, like FFT (a pretty good deviation from the typical FF story) and put it into a shmup, I would not play that game.

I;m not arguing that all games must take forever and have a massive story to be good, either.  My list again:
1 - Suikoden 2 - 27 hours by my memory card, story driven.  Gameplay is chief.
2 - Myst - GOD knows how many hours, story present but not important.  I suppose it's mostly gameplay.
3 - Sonic the Hedgehog 2 - Countless hours, still have never beaten it, essentially without story.  100% good gameplay.
4 - Seiken Densetsu 3 - 19 hours according to the emulator, piss-poor story but great game nonetheless, 99% gameplay.
5 - FFT - 38 hours by my memory card, story driven but with great gameplay.
6 - Medieval: Total War (the original) - about 12 hours now total, does not have a story.  100% good gameplay.
7 - Conquest of the New World - countless hours, does not have a story.  100% good gameplay.
8 - Flashback, 10 hours sounds like a good guess, story present but not important.  99% gameplay.
9 - FF7 - 34 hours by my memory card, story driven.  Only game here where gameplay steps aside frequently to storyline.
10 - Megaman Legends - 21 hours by my memory card, story present but not important

No 100 hours, no crappy gameplay.

MarkusRosse - Legend of Mana feigns non-linear gameplay in that you may choose the order in which you play the missions, but it's still pretty rigid.  It's hard to make a good game that is open.  The sims is open, but lacking.  Jedi Knight: Accademy offers choice of missions and in the end the choice between light and dark, but it's still pretty straight-forawrd.  Good gameplay though, one of the few games with a decent lightsaber system.



The best we can do for Partisan is to have a linear "main story" with 2 branches depending on the side you take, each with close but different mission paths, supported by as many smaller choices and casual missions as we can think of as well as a reputation system which changes how people will react to you and the allies you can choose and the quests you can accept.  Oh and nearly everyone can be killed if not at any point than after they have moved their necessary part of the story.  Still though, there is a main storyline that must be followed eventually.

Original Civilization is a great game for its time and deserves and honorary top-ten status, but Conquest is more rounded.

[huZba]

I reach for all kinds of hooks in different games. A lot of games i play for an enjoyable atmosphere alone, some for nerve twitching action or dead on precision that is required in sim-racing games. An enjoyable game can be beaten in an hour, like a lot of shmups, or it can be an 100hour RPG, if you like the gameplay. There are not many games i've spent a lot of time with though. FFX grew too tedious and i barely finished it... Then again i've played through FF7 4 times. It has good characters, tongue in cheek funnies and a well thought out yet simple battle system that can make you avoid any kind of grinding by a little bit of strategy in equipment/magic choices. I've no idea if i'd enjoy it today, so i'll just leave it as a good memory. Sometimes i enjoy a game for simple things, like the mediterranean beauty of Chrono Cross or it's battle system that keeps the player active rather than just smashing attack button.

As for linearity in games, sometimes certain constraints can make things more interesting and linearity achieves things that are hard to create with too much freedom given to the player. Often a good "non-linear" game is just well masqueraded linearity.

@Ptoing
Yesss, i remember reading an interview where the creators of ICO and Shadow of the colossus mentioned that they did write an extensive story for their games, but they only give away a fraction that gives you a nudge, from where on you make your own interpretations. Cant enjoy a mystery of a world if you know all about it 

[Helm]

I have extensive paper and pencil role playing experience, and my beef is with jrpgs, not rpgs in general.

1 - Suikoden 2 - 27 hours by my memory card, story driven.  Gameplay is chief.

I have played the first one, and it was ass. Every genre cliche in there.

2 - Myst - GOD knows how many hours, story present but not important.  I suppose it's mostly gameplay.

On the contrary, Myst is all atmosphere. Not story, not gameplay. You call a slideshow and pulling levers gameplay?

3 - Sonic the Hedgehog 2 - Countless hours, still have never beaten it, essentially without story.  100% good gameplay.

This is a genuinely amazing game that I have finished countless times and never grow bored of, so I cannot disagree here. A marvel of gameplay, nice atmosphere, good graphics, no story. You might enjoy Shinobi 3 if you enjoy this. When you're trained enough in those sort of games (and have finished Sonic 2 easily) then you'll be good enough to be able to enjoy N. Right now you're not just good enough for it. N is really demanding. Try Nikujin if you want to pull off your face too.

4 - Seiken Densetsu 3 - 19 hours according to the emulator, piss-poor story but great game nonetheless, 99% gameplay.

What gameplay? This game sucks. It has great graphics, but it sucks. I liked it when I was 12, I played it again recently and it sucks. No sacred cows anymore. Suck. Suck. Suck. Suck.

5 - FFT - 38 hours by my memory card, story driven but with great gameplay.

Can't comment, played 5 battles in it. Boring for me. And I like tactical rpgs like Fire Emblem well enough.

6 - Medieval: Total War (the original) - about 12 hours now total, does not have a story.  100% good gameplay.

Great game. We need more like it.

7 - Conquest of the New World - countless hours, does not have a story.  100% good gameplay.

Don't remember this game well, I think I liked it.

8 - Flashback, 10 hours sounds like a good guess, story present but not important.  99% gameplay.

60% pretty deep and involving gameplay (if you see me play and never get shot once on Hard you'll see how far Flashback can be pushed) 40% amazing atmosphere. The story isn't given to you very linearly or clearly, but there's enough to feel the atmosphere drive you.

9 - FF7 - 34 hours by my memory card, story driven.  Only game here where gameplay steps aside frequently to storyline.

That anyone considers this a good game is a testament to two things: a) wide spanning taste between human beings on this earth and most importantly b) how our brain sugarcoats old nostalgic memories. FF7 has an 'engaging' story for people who have never kissed a girl. Once you have, once you no longer fit into the blatant stereotype of the 'male 13 year old gamer' demographic that the game is going for, it can only be 'enjoyed' ironically for how amazingly stupid and/or japanese it is. Final Fantasy 7 is the most overrated game ever. The characters are paper-thin, the story flat and long and idiotic and the gameplay system deep only if you're some sort of obsessive-compulsive person like I guess most japanese core market people are? Suck.

10 - Megaman Legends - 21 hours by my memory card, story present but not important

Haven't played.

[ndchristie]

ah, atmosphere!  that's the word i was looking for!

suikoden 2 blows suikoden 1 out of the water.  still slightly juvenile, but a 100% better game

This is a genuinely amazing game that I have finished countless times and never grow bored of, so I cannot disagree here. A marvel of gameplay, nice atmosphere, good graphics, no story. You might enjoy Shinobi 3 if you enjoy this. When you're trained enough in those sort of games (and have finished Sonic 2 easily) then you'll be good enough to be able to enjoy N. Right now you're not just good enough for it. N is really demanding. Try Nikujin if you want to pull off your face too.

yeah, sonic is still a hard game for me.  I've "beaten" the regular game, but never gotten into any bonus anything.

FF7 might be completely nostaliga, i did play it when i was 9.  I just replayed FFT though last year and it was still great imo; it's only chapter 1 (maybe 5% of the total game) that the main characters are all whining bitches.  I couldn't get into Fire Emblem because i thought the battle system was a little too simple, considering it was the only "game" part of the game.

The main reason i liked Conquest was that its battle system managed to be both simple and fun, if a little silly (a 3x4 grid where nobody can charge ).  Also, it ran on DOS.

[huZba]

I guess Helm wouldn't like Kingdom Hearts either, forgot to put it on my list of good games. Enjoying things silly and naive is fun. Things like Dragonball Z or school romance comedy anime. At times it's good to NOT take things too seriously. I think FF7 is rated just as high as it rightfully should be. Just shouldn't try and find something that isn't supposed to be there. Red trout fillets with parsley pesto is is nice, but FF7 is chocolate cake.  and chocolate cake is awesome.

In Sonic games it's required to collect the chaos emeralds in order to reach the true final level, so you might want to try that out Adarias. Sonic 3 is great too, but i guess the levels aren't ase fluid as in sonic 2. Both still very entertaining. Finished them countless times. Still remember pretty much every single tile and detail of the levels in sonic 3

--EDIT--
this game is having quite an impact on me right now! Must have... already bought the G25 Racing wheel a year ago for this.
http://www.gran-turismo.com/jp/gt5p/screen/

[AdamAtomic]

i disagree about sonic 2, i think its a MUCH worse game than the original sonic.  more levels, which is cool, but the difficulty curve is seriously skewed.  The first time I'd picked up sonic 2 in nearly ten years I got all the way to the flying fortress stage without losing more than a life or two here or there, and then the fortress started handing my ass to me before ambushing me with like 2-4 bosses in a row all of which are insanely difficult compared to any previous boss battle.  Whereas in Sonic 1, you've got a much smoother difficulty curve, bigger levels, better music, a slightly less saturated color style, and a really wicked last zone (though the final boss was a little disappointing)...dunno, my heart will always belong to sonic 1 i guess   PLUS, no tails.  That's a big selling point for me!

[ptoing]

OMG Kingdom hearts. I actually finished that pile of shit. That game is sooooooooo stupid and not challenging at all and the last bosses are all jokes. All you need is heal and shield and just thrash the fuck out of them, no thinking needed at all. It's all brute force. All it has going for it imo is presentation, but then again all square games have good gfx and sound.

[Turbo]

-games that i found myself thinking, while playing, "this deserves top 10 status"

Tie-Fighter (less appealing to be played from the Empire perspective than from the Rebel's, but gameplay is soo much better than X-Wing. Movie ambiance replicated very well, though using dated technology).
Half-Life 1 (great creating ambience)
Max Payne (i consider this a piece of art more than a game. So many things at the same time, done so well. Story plays a strong role)
XCom 2 (yes, the one that people dislike most. The ambience on this, graphics+music+story progression is just awesome, better than the first, and difficulty is nice, certainly too hard for newbies but good for those who apreciate the style).
Warcraft 2 (Red Alert was also great. I just happened to buy WC instead of RA at the time).
Metal Gear Solid (gameplay is just awesome. Story promotes the creation of great ambience, and inserts interesting twists, which further promote gameplay).
Mario N64 (large array of different actions keep this fresh through it's long length. No story as usual with mario. Still holds as good today as the day it was published).
...probably forgot some

Also, delicious stuff like Cannon Fodder, Lost Vikings, Lemmings, Settlers, Off-Road Racing, Raptor, Terminal Velocity, Pang, Puzzle Bobble
N is nice, but i've grown to hate it from sheer frustration at the motherfucking impossible levels. Needs balancing. Gimme Shinobi
Recently i've enjoyed immensely a Castlevania (Aria of Sorrow? Fucking dumb titles ) for the Gameboy, the one with the effeminate albino hair-bang wearing dracula-lookalike, with the uber-masculine white cape/coat with fur around the neck. Awful character design and some bad graphics (what's with the fucking colored outlines? And the run cycle...), but very addictive gameplay and good graphics generally (only castlevania i've ever finished).

I excluded graphical adventures that, while being great experiences, feel a lot like trial and error, not really making the player think as much as they are expected to. Still, i love these games (Indy, DotT, Beneath a Steel Sky. Soon to play Dig, Monkey Islands, and the others).
I was addicted to Flashback when i first bought it, but after finishing it i could never replay it. I like my games to have replayability value, that's why i didn't add it. Same for Out of this world (and this one features too many arbitrary player killings that sends it from fun to hateful).

Haven't played many from Helm's list. Shinobi 3 is really good. The Rpg's from Adarias list, i've played all of them a bit i think, but never got much into them, they all tend to blend into each other much. Rpg's i remember liking were for the Genesis (the non-rpg console ), Story of Thor and Soleil, those where quite inovative. I never got much into the Phantasy Stars for the Genesis for same reasons as other generic rpgs: generic rpgosis.

- games can deserve top10 status and become boring through repetition, but they better have a damn good compensation for that repetition (good gameplay mechanics, compelling story)
- usually, gameplay fuels playing; story may fuel gameplay, inducing new gameplay elements (new levels, abilities, etc.)
- i tend to go also for whole atmosphere, feeling, etc
- cliche'd stuff drives me away unless the gameplay is really inovative, interesting. (rpg = young warrior fighting to save world against arcane evil, character's personal values based on weird cultural rules, game mechanics equal previous games from 20 years ago, etc)

does anyone read this stuff? lol

[Helm]

I do.

Max Payne (i consider this a piece of art more than a game. So many things at the same time, done so well. Story plays a strong role)

...what?! Story? What. It has bullet time. That's it.

XCom 2 (yes, the one that people dislike most. The ambience on this, graphics+music+story progression is just awesome, better than the first, and difficulty is nice, certainly too hard for newbies but good for those who apreciate the style).

I'd like to say I'm hardcore and prefer the second x-com but it's a proven fact that it did not go through proper testing and is too hard, nobody at microprose finished the game before it shipped out. If it were balanced, I'd prefer Lovecraft monstars to Mars Attacks too.

Metal Gear Solid (gameplay is just awesome. Story promotes the creation of great ambience, and inserts interesting twists, which further promote gameplay).

Not being able to look at where you shoot is good gameplay now. Constantly disrupting gameplay with 'cutscenes' is good now. The main character going '...huh?' and 'I repeat what you just said' like a total retard is good gameplay now.

Still, the metal gear games are innovative and important. Just not good games.

[ndchristie]

oh, i forgot the good shooters.  Rainbow 6 and Red Faction on hardest difficulty, among others.  No story and strange graphics, but when your mission is to sneek around shooting guys without ever being hit (ok, technically you were allowed one free hit if you were wearing the envirosuit, but you spend a lot of the game without that), it's pretty awesome anyway.



And descent deserves another honorable mention imo.

[AdamAtomic]

i disagree completely - max payne and metal gear solid would be REALLY solid games even if they were released yesterday, in presentation, story, and gameplay.  I guess you might have missed this, but in MGS, you're not supposed to shoot people.  The only times when you actually need to are with the sniper rifle and missile launcher, which is presented from a first person perspective, and during specific action scenes when you don't have time to actually aim anyways so it doesn't matter.  Ever think that maybe, just maybe the game's designers actually thought about the most basic interactions a little bit before making arguably THE masterpiece game for the playstation era?  As far as the cutscenes go, MGS is one of the VERY few games do actually do them right.  Not even the other MGS games come even close.  During the first few hours of the game the cutscenes are provided in short, bite-size pieces that only fill in background story and atmosphere elements, and all are completely skippable.  At the time of its release the voice acting was some of the best in any game ever, and the writing (though a bit silly in parts now) was a huge departure from previous games' attempts at "story" or "intrigue".  As MGS features nearly constant action and extremely intense stealth at an almost non-stop pace for the full 20 or so hours of the game, the cutscenes also provide much-needed pacing and rhythm to the game, all the while immersing you more in the world of these strange mercenaries and bleeding-edge science.

"sacred cows" and rose-colored memories aren't helping anyone, for sure, but come on!  You're making mountains out of molehills here.  Even great games have flaws, even if the flaw is unsuccessfully communicating that you're not supposed to be shooting everyone...

as for max payne, bullet time is not "it" by any stretch of imagination.  Noir story and style (a rarity in games recently), solid 3rd person shooter gameplay even if you ignore bullet time, good atmosphere and environments, solid writing, and some early forays into semi-psychological elements (like having to actually trace threads of thought in order to recover your sanity  during weird dream sequences) all make it a stand-out title even years after its release, and few if any shooters have brought as much to the genre, and none with so much style or care.

Plus, bullet time!  

Do you actually play any of these games before you form extremely strong, negative opinions about them?  Not flaming here, genuinely curious.  I have similar tendencies, I mean I DO hold it against a game if it doesn't really get my attention right away...but it seems like a lot of your judgments (and there are a lot of them) are rushed and underinformed?

[Turbo]

Max Payne: take away bullet time, and what do you get? Only the possibility to be THE HERO on the best action movie adaptation, to the time. Ever wanted to be a Norris, a Seagal, a Stallone, a Schwarzenegger, a Willis, a Reno, a Yun-Fat, a Banderas-YOU KNOW YOU DO
Also, you feel the descent of the man into misery, self destruction and madness. At the end, he is messed up, gone beyond death, and you feel it. And it couldn't be done without the story.

MGS - Yeah, that shooting thing sucks. But it's designed to happen a minimal number of times. And the auto-aiming takes you by the hand. Also, i just love the way they did the firing mechanism. I welcomed the disrupting cut-scenes, i was usually lost on the level or at the verge of a heart attack from finishing fighting the bosses. And they convey some info, other than just show pretty stuff or reality disconnected story. But some games just tend to have little things that get on our nerves, i see these got on yours. To me, the up-sides greatly compensated the shortcomings (also, it was stealth done very well, which hadn't been done to the time, and featured lots of different interactions and sub-games, which i think benefits the longevity and gameplay).

(didn't know that about Xcom2, lol )
(plus, sonics and marios, all good. Sonic3 is my favourite)

[Helm]

Adam, I've finished both Max Payne games, and Metal Gear Solid 1, 2 and 3 yes. I haven't said anything about a game on this thread that I can't back up from experience. I am opinionated yes, but I am not going out of my way to troll on people's memories. Here's me dissecting the corpse of a horse:

I guess you might have missed this, but in MGS, you're not supposed to shoot people.

As a game designer I will now point at a ten ton hammer of justice falling from above:

If you're not ment to do something by design, then don't half-assedly integrate that in the game. If you're not ment to shoot people in MGS, don't give the main character a weapon. Or if you're caught, make the game game-over. If you ARE going to put shooting in the game, then make it right. We both know it's better to not implement something than implement it badly in a game.

You have been crushed. Overpower.

The only times when you actually need to are with the sniper rifle and missile launcher, which is presented from a first person perspective, and during specific action scenes when you don't have time to actually aim anyways so it doesn't matter.

It's not just not being able to shoot right in metal gear 1 (it's significantly better in metal gear 2 with the first person option view. Oh, what, excuse me, you're supposed to shoot people in Metal Gear Solid 2?  ) it's all sorts of fucked Nintendo logic. Let's go with Fortune in 2, right? Boss-fight. My bullets get the hell out of her way, right? Fine. So I think, I'll go right into her face and kung-fu her ass. So I do so and two feet from here there is an INVISIBLE BARRIER. Not even some sort of thing I can't climb over. JUST A FUCKING NINTENDO INVISIBLE BARRIER.

Good game design? Right.

Crushed.

Ever think that maybe, just maybe the game's designers actually thought about the most basic interactions a little bit before making arguably THE masterpiece game for the playstation era?

Metal Gear is a very important game, but it's very flawed too. One doesn't invalidate the other.  Metal Gear is very responsible for the 'cinematic experience' in modern videogames. And that's what Kojima should have been making all along: Movies. Snatcher. Everybody loves Snatcher. Because of its atmosphere, immersion and presentation. The fucking game is a slideshow (like most jadventure games are). Kojima has various problems in designing gameplay, and he's trying to address some of them with every new game he does, and that's great (though others like certain Nintendo logic choices will never be extinguished) and you know what? I'm pretty certain Metal Gear 6 or so will be one fucking awesome game all-around. But MGS 1? Nnnnope.

During the first few hours of the game the cutscenes are provided in short, bite-size pieces that only fill in background story and atmosphere elements, and all are completely skippable.

You're missing the point by saying they're skippable. They're skippable for those that have played the game and remember the story. You're ment to watch those cutscenes and the ENDLESS TALKS ON THE RADIO to know what the hell is going on in the game and what your objectives are. Metal Gear is an excersize in making game immersion/breaking game immersion/making game immersion/breaking game immersion and no amount of incredulous internet stares thrown my way will make me change my mind.

At the time of its release the voice acting was some of the best in any game ever, and the writing (though a bit silly in parts now) was a huge departure from previous games' attempts at "story" or "intrigue".

Agree on both respects. This has nothing to do with gameplay. I never doubted the presentation and atmosphere of Metal Gear. I just closely study game design and don't spare no quarter.

As MGS features nearly constant action

You mean *sneak* *sneak* *RADIO* "SNAKE BE CAREFUL HERE, YOU MUST SNEAK!" *sneak* *sneak* *RADIO* "SNAKE! ENEMIES UP AHEAD!" *sneak* *shoot* *sneak* *RADIO* "GOOD JOB SNAKE!" constant, right?

the cutscenes also provide much-needed pacing and rhythm to the game, all the while immersing you more in the world of these strange mercenaries and bleeding-edge science.

Here's another game design tip: PACE THE GAME WITHOUT TAKING CONTROL FROM THE PLAYER. It's possible. Look at Half-life 2.

Crushed.

"sacred cows" and rose-colored memories aren't helping anyone, for sure, but come on!  You're making mountains out of molehills here.  Even great games have flaws, even if the flaw is unsuccessfully communicating that you're not supposed to be shooting everyone...

If we want good games, we should be equipped to tell good games from mediocre games, and mediocre games from bad games. Being strict is doing a service to game lovers.

Noir story and style (a rarity in games recently)

The story was bad in my opinion in Payne, the voice acting silly, the writing atrocious, the fucking photoshop filter comic-art cut-scenes a joke. But bullet time was cool...

solid writing

This is why videogames are not held in high regard as literary mediums. When Max Payne is considered a 'solidly written game'. Sheesh. Either hire a WRITER to write the game, or convey the story through gameplay exposition (ICO, Shadow of the Colossus).

Do you actually play any of these games before you form extremely strong, negative opinions about them?  Not flaming here, genuinely curious.  I have similar tendencies, I mean I DO hold it against a game if it doesn't really get my attention right away...but it seems like a lot of your judgments (and there are a lot of them) are rushed and underinformed?

I don't share your tendencies. These are my honest opinions after having played much-hyped games that didn't stand up to inspection. I know i'm opening a can of worms here, for there is nothing to get more overdramatic on the internet than nerd videogame fights, but here it is. I believe Max Payne and MGS are mediocre games as far as gameplay goes.

[AdamAtomic]

Fair enough!  I still disagree that MGS's (and i am ONLY defending MGS, not 2 or 3, i'm definitely not going there) radio chatter or cut scenes interfere with the gameplay, and I disagree that shooting was implemented in a half-assed way, as I said there are shooting portions of the game that are very exciting; its just not the game's sole goal.  I think in its own sly way its lesson is that deception and care and tact are much more useful than brute violence (except against helicopters?)...however I am glad to know that these are fully formed opinions in this case, I can accord them more weight in my Video Game Worldview!

EDIT - I should clarify, your views about MGS mirror my views about MGS 2 and 3 almost perfectly!  I just think all the little differences in timing and gameplay decisions (such as no aimed shooting) between this rough draft of MGS add up to a much more engaging, complicated game than either of the other 2 (which are very much movies with some FPS shooting and a bit of hiding here and there).  Now maybe I'm making mountains out of molehills though

[Turbo]

...So, Adarias, answering your question, there does seem to exist a highly dedicated part of youth's population, around the world, dedicated to gaming, nowadays and since ever, as can be sampled by observing the replies of the illustrious members of this forum

I can observe that lots of girls are playing games nowadays. And older adults seem to be playing them more as well.
At the university where i study, there are several study rooms full of people playing Warcraft 3, CounterStrike and WoW all day, happily neglecting their studies. They seem to represent the hardcore gamers, which i can only assume is a userbase that is quite alive and thriving, keeping the industry prosperous and well fed.

[Dusty]

Shadow of the Colossus is one of the top games for me, I've played it over and over. Love the gameplay, minimal chatter, and the presentation is great in my opinion.

[robalan]

I notice that in the discussion of non-linear gameplay, nobody mentioned Morrowind or Oblivion.  I haven't played much Morrowind, but Oblivion is one of the most open-ended games I've seen.  If you want to play the main storyline, good for you.  If you don't and would rather live in the wilderness, hunt deer and gather berries, you can do that too.  While the game does not specifically cater to hunter-gatherer wilderness dwellers, it is an option.  Furthermore, with the construction set and a very healthy modding community, there is a wealth of extra content, as well as the ability to create your own quests, dungeons, mountain chateaus, etc.  I've racked up more than 150 hours on my main character, and still have quests I haven't completed, places I haven't been, etc.  To preemptively respond to people who will likely complain about the 150 hours, I will remind that not nearly that much is necessary to "play the game".  I think I could have finished the main storyline in 30 or so.  But the quests on the side, the (relatively) intelligent NPCs, and the atmosphere make this a game that I have enjoyed playing for quite a while.  Also, the leveling system in Oblivion actually makes sense, unlike in most other RPGs.  As you use skills, you get better at them, instead of arbitrarily getting "experience" from killing monsters.

[ndchristie]

a lot of people don't play oblivion because it's a rather demanding game (price wise, console wise, and just time wise), despite how awesome it may be.  My brother loves it, but literally has not touched it since his girlfriend moved in with him.

[robalan]

Price wise?  Console wise?  I play it on PC, and it's about the same price as any other newish game.  But yeah, there is a large time requrement if you want to see the whole game.

[AdamAtomic]

I think what Adarias meant by price is it only runs on pretty darn new computers or the next-gen consoles, which if you don't have them already, ups the price of the game by a few hundred bucks minimum

[huZba]

I have an education in videogames and i've played them forever, but i hardly feel an urge to analyze them( unless it's for the sake of analyzing), like some of the dwerps in the tv/movie sector of the school who after a week started hunting reasons to hate everything popular and praise things niche. I play games for entertainment and learned to appreciate all kinds of different genres for various reasons.

Anyway, i'm with adam, the cut-scenes or chatter never bothered me, quite on the contrary. I see very little harm in taking control from the player if it's done in a well controlled manner and conscious of it's effects on the player. There are things you can do still retaining the player in control, but it's not the one and only way of doing it right. Cutscenes can be a cool break or just a fest of awesomeness that is the one thing some gamers are after.

My one big gripe with the MGS series is how strict and formulated it is gameplaywise. There are certain things you can and have to do at certain times with certain weapons and abilities and there are plenty of things you can do that may seem logical but make you fight windmills. The player is wrapped in tightly and a wrong move can suddenly break the barriers of the virtual world, reminding it's a game with MGS rules, breaking the immersion. Your regular gamer (that is not a gamedesigner) embraces this type of gameplay glitches as a part of the game and accept it as a part of a puzzle. I'm not saying it's a good element, but it's not bad enough to be gamebreaking for most people.

If you're not ment to do something by design, then don't half-assedly integrate that in the game. If you're not ment to shoot people in MGS, don't give the main character a weapon. Or if you're caught, make the game game-over. If you ARE going to put shooting in the game, then make it right. We both know it's better to not implement something than implement it badly in a game.

The weapons are integrated in a way that lets you use them effectively only in a manner that is designed, but you can use them in various ways that make you and the games design stumble... windmills. It's more and more evident in the sequels and i don't like it either. Though it never bothered me in MGS1, cause i only used them the "right" way.

Btw, on the harder difficulty settings it's GAME OVER the instant you're spotted, so i guess your overpower is overruled in part.
As for the battle with Fortune in MGS2, i never met any difficulties so that was well designed for me, but the windmill thing is very present all the time and there's a possibility that some players encounter them now and then. It's well designed, but not extensively enough, accounting for different patterns that different players might attempt. So a random player can bump into every single obstacle like this and curse the game for the rest of his life... major suck points for that.

Now for max payne....

hire a WRITER to write the game

They did. The same guy gave his likeness to payne as well as acted him in the cutscenes due to lack of moniez, no pro actors. The photoshop filtered comics were awesome and one of the reasons a lot of people like the game. Also a very good way of conveying things without using much moniez. The guys were working with very little pay too. I'd say a pretty darn good achievement for a company that mostly did demo stuff and the somewhat famous shareware game Death rally.

Both games are masterpieces even if flawed in some ways, praised by critics and brainless fans alike. Personally i'm no HUGE fan of either, but one can't overrule things that make them awesome. Now i didn't finish Max Payne 2 and i put down MGS3 near the end of the game due to a nasty shooting part that made me handle the controller in novel ways. I might give it a try or make my brother play past that part since i'd like MGS for Snake's manly voice alone 

soo.. uhh.. i agree with some points helm,But like has been mentioned, mountains out of molehills, little details most people don't even care about. It's a shame, cause if you can overlook minute mishaps, they're quite entertaining... a lot of games can be. I got God Hand just a while ago and it has some of the WORST things ever made, like huge mountains of monkeydong, but the good things make up for all that. I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of people totally loathe it.. it's hard to appreciate. Same thing with the demoscene type games that were the sh*t ten years ago, things similar to that N game. It can feel really cold unless you've somehow first grown to take the most out of it. N is quite nice, but not that special compared to the vast sea of demoscene games from ages past that spawned like rabbits here in my country. Maybe i'm missing something and should just try more? dunno.

OMG Kingdom hearts. I actually finished that pile of shit. That game is sooooooooo stupid and not challenging at all and the last bosses are all jokes. All you need is heal and shield and just thrash the fuck out of them, no thinking needed at all. It's all brute force. All it has going for it imo is presentation, but then again all square games have good gfx and sound.

Haha, can't argue with that  , but it had cutesy characters, soothing music and very simple and easygoing themes going on(like the themesong name suggests "simple and clean"). I felt quite relaxed playing it. I'd probably enjoy making a game like that myself. You know, something simple for a younger audience, something that might give loads of happy for all the kiddies.

Oblivion

Weird weird weird.. because when i watched my brother play it, i laughed at the random dungeons that seemed very similar to each other. The countless fights and obsession over the agility stat. I thought there was no point whatsoever in the whole game and that most characters look silly. Then i tried it for myself and played 20 hours in one weekend... SCARY cause i got so very addicted i couldn't stop playing. I guess it's the amount of free choices as well as the regular RPG stat hunting thing. I did put down the game after that and haven't touched it since. I'm not sure if i like it 

[Dusty]

The writing in Max Payne pushed me away from it... fast. It sounded like one of those old detective shows, but... a lot more cornier. The gameplay wasn't all that either, at least as far as I remember. Either way it was too bad for me to finish.
As soon as I get a computer that can run it, I'm gonna get Oblivion. I absolutely love free-roaming games like that(one of the reasons I love Zelda), and it seems like the best game to do it so far.

[ndchristie]

I think what Adarias meant by price is it only runs on pretty darn new computers or the next-gen consoles, which if you don't have them already, ups the price of the game by a few hundred bucks minimum

Yup , and I don't have a few hundred bucks to shell out for the system requirements


An overabundance of stellar cut scenes can wreck a game even faster than bad writing.  MGS2 is a prime example of TOO MANY CUTSCENES, despite the fact that they are for the most part done pretty well.  Every boss battle was cut in half or thirds or more by cutscenes that usually you aren't listening because you know as soon as the guy stops talking you need to shoot him in the face fast.

MGS is sort-of a tradeoff with the guns.  In real life and in MGS, it is actually pretty hard to shoot someone with a pistol.  However, this is because of kick and other accuracy problems, not because you aren't allowed to aim.  The result (having trouble killing with a sidearm) is the same, but the frustration is so much greater.



Not to just continue the lsit forever, but Battlefield 2 is probably the most entertaining shooter i've played, ten times better than any competitor i've played aside perhaps from F.E.A.R.

[Turbo]

Shit, now that you mention Battlefield i remembered i forgot Medal of Honor Allied Assault. I was completely blown away by the whole cinematic/realistic experience (despite it's many shortcomings, like lots and lots. I replayed that game to no end). Special credits to the music: by Michael Giachino, who's gone to movies and tv, did the ost's for Alias, Lost, MI3 and Incredibles. Like the Lord of the Rings movies, i think the music in that game enhances it by like 30% Even the jilted multiplayer experience, i loved.

Battlefield looks great, but slugishes on my machine, so i've never played it. Will someday

Now you made me reluctant to play MGS2

[crab2selout.png]

Oh, wow, this got very interesting. I still have some posts to work my way through, but anyone here play Ninja Five-0 for GBA? It's my favourite ninja game. I loved the grapple hook, it is immensely satisfying to grapple hook a ceiling and swing around and slice a guy on the other side of it . It oozes ninja style with every kill and its a pretty decent challenge.

EDIT: Having played nikujin once more, I still dont understand why the praise. If I fall off a cliff once more while trying to knife somebody I'm going to scream.

[ndchristie]

Battlefield looks great, but slugishes on my machine, so i've never played it. Will someday

Downgrade everything as far as graphics and you will have a game that looks like Delta Force (which gets points for nostalgia) but plays so much better and doesn't stick at all.

[Rox]

Weird weird weird.. because when i watched my brother play it, i laughed at the random dungeons that seemed very similar to each other. The countless fights and obsession over the agility stat. I thought there was no point whatsoever in the whole game and that most characters look silly. Then i tried it for myself and played 20 hours in one weekend... SCARY cause i got so very addicted i couldn't stop playing. I guess it's the amount of free choices as well as the regular RPG stat hunting thing. I did put down the game after that and haven't touched it since. I'm not sure if i like it 

I watched a couple of guys play it, too, and thought it looked ridiculous. That some crazy first person roleplaying game tried to be actiony and obviously failed at it. And the horse looked awful. It almost died when riding down a steep slope. The extreme hype and praise also turned me off, as always, but when it was time for me to get my own 360 I knew I had to have it.

The first couple of hours are hard to like, I found. I don't know why, exactly. But once you set a goal for yourself and actually start adventuring, it's freaking impossible to stop. I do think you like it, but many games don't really make you want more if you're not already playing them. STALKER was like that for me. Once I got into it, I couldn't stop until I almost passed out from tiredness. Then I wasn't sure if I wanted to play it ever again. But I tried, and then I couldn't stop until early in the morning... It kept going like that a couple of times, and then I simply decided not to play it again.

Do give Oblivion a chance, though. Even if it has flaws, and the flaws are massive, and it's hard to NOT notice all the massive flaws, the experience itself greatly overpowers said flaws. I've been playing for about 200 hours now, and the second to last time I played, I found an entire outdoors area I'd never been to before, and for the half hour or so I was walking around there it felt like a whole new game. It's amazing that they've managed to design the environment so that you can tell exactly where you are on the whole vast world map just by looking at the vegetation, ingredients, and in some areas, wildlife.

I haven't played it for a couple of days, for fear of spending too long with it, but as soon as I'm done working on this school project I'm gonna get way past that 200 hour mark and get myself to the top of the Mage's Guild for once. It was the first guild I joined and after 200 hours of gameplay, I've still only come to the top of one measly guild. It also apparently makes me write entire essays when all I really want to say can be summed up in one sentence. Damn you Oblivion!

[Helm]

EDIT: Having played nikujin once more, I still dont understand why the praise. If I fall off a cliff once more while trying to knife somebody I'm going to scream.

Scream. Scream scream scream your guts out. Then return to it. The game has control problems. You learn to control it inspite of itself (or the limitations of game factory flag-type scripting) and then you start to love it. Soon it is inside you.

Huz, I will reply to a few things later, though my main point would pretty much amount to: tastes differ.

[ndchristie]

It's amazing that they've managed to design the environment so that you can tell exactly where you are on the whole vast world map just by looking at the vegetation, ingredients, and in some areas, wildlife.

which oddly enough is nothing like the real world

anybody that could tell vancouver http://budak.blogs.com/the_annotated_budak/images/woods.jpg
from muskoka http://www.ekon.ca/Images/Campers/around_the_camp_rope_path.jpg
or england http://homepage.ntlworld.com/tomals/DSCN2525,-Packhorse-Path,-East-Arncliffe-Woods.JPG
from new england http://www.lwrun.org/woods_path.jpg
easily would impress me greatly, and there's 1600 miles between them...

[robalan]

The problem with your argument, Adarias, is that despite there being a huge distance between those places, they're still rather similar in climate and vegetation.  While you can't tell much of a difference from one temperate forest to another (unless you have a trained eye, in which case you probably /could/ identify those places from the pictures), you can easily tell the difference between, say, Arizona, Florida, and Kentucky.  Besides which, there is a difference between the forests you show pictures of; the vegetation is going to be different, even if untrained eyes can't tell from the pictures you posted.

[AdamAtomic]

Also, games are not fun because they simulate reality perfectly?

[robalan]

Yeah, that too.  If somebody made a game where you play one person living their life in a realistic environment, I doubt it would be very popular.  The Sims was popular, though, so I dunno.

There aren't really any games that simulate reality perfectly, though I could see the appeal of a heroic fantasy game that was near-perfect in its realism.  In fact, the thing that bugs me most about RPGs is the total lack of realism in injury.  I look forward to the day when games can tell where you're hit and cause your character to react accordingly.  If you get slashed in the arm with a huge sword, that arm should become sluggish.  While perfect realism would probably not make for a terribly engaging game to play, I would enjoy games that draw close to reality.  On the other hand, complete departure from reality can make for awesome games as well.  Okami's art made everything look like calligraphy, and you fought enemies by painting the world like a canvas, but the game is amazing, immersive, and lots of fun to play.  So in conclusion, I have made a point, contradicted myself, and maybe done so again.  Therefore, quality of a game is not at all affected by it's adhesion to reality, or lack thereof.

[dragonrc]

I don't play games a lot anymore, I did when I was 10. I spend more time talking about games and making them then playing them.(not that I ever succeeded in making a decent game ).
I don't think video games have a really big impact on people, sure there are idiots who try to imitate GTA but normal people know not to act like them.

I don't really like making top tens because they will change every day. If I want to play a rpg game and have had enough of shooting games my number 1 on the list will be a rpg. That's why I'll just name some games that I enjoyed playing a lot:
Suikoden 2: IMO the best rpg ever made.
Tombi/Tomba 1&2: the best 2D platformer I ever played, the graphics are a bit childish but it suits the game.
Age of empires (age of kings and expansion pack): I think the newer age of empire series are more fun but this game got me into rts games and is worth naming.
FF7: It doesn't deserve all the praise it gets but I still think it is a great game
Monster hunter: A great game, it was my first online game.
Monster rancher (monster rancher 2 in europe): A pokemon kind of game. But I enjoyed this game much more then all the pokemon games
Little big adventure 1&2: Great game, I've replayed this game a lot.
Suikoden tactics: My first srpg, I loved it.
GTA san andreas: A great shooter. I don't really like this genre but the gta series are great fun.
Black and white: One of the best sandbox games of its time.
Harvest moon: Another fun game
And then there are games I enjoyed playing when I was young, but are boring now, like roller coaster, sims, crash bandicoot and tekken.

[Dusty]

Oh man, Tomba was great. Too bad my CD cracked and they're damn expensive to buy anymore :/

[Stickman]

I used to play video games a lot when I was working at a games company and the games were mainly RPG's and 2D fighters (Xenogears, Alpha 3....). Although I'm no longer in games (at the moment), I do buy them sometimes for research purposes such as the recent Odin's Sphere (because it's 2D and looks beautiful and also plays quite well), but I just find that I don't spend the time playing RPG's anymore.(which is probably why play 2D shooters more)

Games Playing Now:

Ibara (ps2)
The Adventures of Little Ralph (ps1 - great platform game! Short and sweet)
Valkyrie Profile 2 - but I'll probably exchange this. I like the characters but the story isn't really doing it for me...

[KittiKatt]

I don't really play video games anymore... I have a DS Lite which has been battery-dead for half a year and an N64 that works only half of the time. :B

I've found that nowadays I'd rather create and design the games than play them... I'm an artist at heart, but my brain says otherwise.