PDA

View Full Version : computer game evolution...good or bad?


NiKo
08-28-2001, 02:41 PM
i think its to bad that the adventure games genre had to follow the 3D fad that goes on today. infact, no games can have the same feeling you got while playing the old games like MI1&MI2, the old simon the sorcerer games, LSL games etc... they had something special in them that the new genre just doesnt have. i liked the evolution to animation like in CMI or LSL7 for example. but wouldnt mind going back to the old genre.
sure, 3D is a very good change for the action games and so on, but not for adventures if you ask me.
your thoughts?

------------------
http://publish.hometown.aol.co.uk/mtthwris/myhomepage/668sig.jpg?mtbrand=AOL_UK
~ if you rewind, you can hear Satan singing a duet with Ricky martin~

MagnusB
08-28-2001, 02:55 PM
I agree, but the problem is that the companies' first priority is to make a game that sells, not one that is the way the hardcore fans want it to be.
Its just the way it is, and you can't blame the companies, the only possible scapegoats would have to be those who like good graphics more than storyline and such.
Well, you can't blame them either, it's just the way it is, and we (big fans) are the losers.

Guybrush122
08-28-2001, 03:26 PM
Truth, MagnusB, truth

http://www.escapemi.com/forums/smile.gif

The Feral Chicken
08-28-2001, 07:01 PM
I think you're losing scope here. Some developers []do[/b] make games for the hardcore fan. Looking Glass (Thief, System Shock), Ion Storm (Deus Ex, Anachronox), Bullfrog (Theme Park, Populous) and Sports Interactive (Championship Manager) are prime examples Unfortunately, Looking Glass went belly up a few years ago, as did Bullfrog. However, these have basically re-generated in other forms (Looking Glass as Ion Storm, Bullfrog as Lionhead). LucasArts basically don't give a crap what the fans want, as long as it sells, thus the crappy Star Wars games.

------------------
http://www.chickens.btinternet.co.uk/chickenid.gif

Feral Signatures & Imaging (http://feralsi.cjb.net)

MagnusB
08-28-2001, 07:12 PM
I have not played all the games you metioned, but I know that at least some of them are both for old fans, and for new fans, and that's something different.
Besides, an established company like LucasArts don't give a damn about what people think of their games, as long as they buy them, and the main issue here is of course....graphics.

Drunken_Sailor
08-28-2001, 07:24 PM
....like most of the companies concentrates on.(Sorry for not posting on this board on a while,but I have tons of other things to do,including work.I shall try to come here as soon as possible,but it's not so easy http://www.escapemi.com/forums/frown.gif )

------------------
http://www.humor911.com/bilder/santa.jpg Poor Santa Claus!

MagnusB
08-28-2001, 07:31 PM
Sadly, you are right....

Nishova
08-28-2001, 07:32 PM
Thats true some companies do keep the old genre that some gamers find Appealing LucasArts on the other hand makes games that cost alot for the graphics and no plot(or no plot that is actually worth mentioning)

------------------
<^> <^>
Nishova
The used to be 3HM
<^> <^>

NiKo
08-28-2001, 09:26 PM
but dont you agree that the adventure genre is a special one? it should focus on the "hardcore fans". trying to get other people to be intrested in the game just because its following the current gaming fad is stupid. they might as well turn it into an arcade or a fighting game if thats their purpose...

------------------
http://publish.hometown.aol.co.uk/mtthwris/myhomepage/668sig.jpg?mtbrand=AOL_UK
~ if you rewind, you can hear Satan singing a duet with Ricky martin~

Guybrush122
08-28-2001, 10:05 PM
Good point NiKo. Everyone says "The Adventure Game is Dead" we obviously arent going to recruit THOSE people. So it should be made especially for hardcore fans. So every once and while a newbie to comp gaming is walking along a computer game store and sees and adventure game, and old one. If they like it for what it is then they have been recruited. And if they do not wish for 3d as much as they wish for another "old style" adventure they are hardecore. So therefore the adventure games should be made for hardecore gamers to please...and it eventually recruits a few more fans. If it is made for recruiting adventure fans with graphics and high tech crap with no real puzzles (just crap) it would **** off all the hardcore gamers and they would lose the majority of there fans. That was a mouthful. *massages tongue* http://www.escapemi.com/forums/wink.gif

------------------
http://sigsofmine.50megs.com/images/gb122.jpg
Did I Mention That I Am Marrying Myself?

NiKo
08-29-2001, 10:24 AM
couldnt have said it better.... http://www.escapemi.com/forums/smile.gif


------------------
http://publish.hometown.aol.co.uk/mtthwris/myhomepage/668sig.jpg?mtbrand=AOL_UK
~ if you rewind, you can hear Satan singing a duet with Ricky martin~

MagnusB
08-29-2001, 12:34 PM
Yes, that's nice and all, but the point is, there are more new fans than old fans.
Therefore they must focus on the group that is largest, and they end up with good graphics, little other stuff.

NiKo
08-29-2001, 12:47 PM
well.......well.....then...... F*CK the new fans....

------------------
http://publish.hometown.aol.co.uk/mtthwris/myhomepage/668sig.jpg?mtbrand=AOL_UK
~ if you rewind, you can hear Satan singing a duet with Ricky martin~

MagnusB
08-29-2001, 01:22 PM
Yet, if it wasn't for the new fans, games like MI wouldn't exist....

[This message has been edited by MagnusB (edited August 29, 2001).]

Guybrush122
08-29-2001, 02:13 PM
the new fans are larger than the old? Give me a break! The old fans are larger than the new. They dont target to please new fans, they target to get new fans. Big difference. As stated above in my last post, If they concentrated on old fans there would be about 20-50 more new fans recruited. And since they like the "old style" that makes them hardecore. Then they want "old style" the company delivers 20-50 fans recruited. they are not getting anywhere with graphics and fancy shmancy spit-in-pantsy engines and crap. They would have a lot more fans if they concentrated on they "old style"

------------------
http://sigsofmine.50megs.com/images/gb122.jpg
Did I Mention That I Am Marrying Myself?

Jorgito_Vaderman
08-29-2001, 09:13 PM
Yeap. I agree with you. There are much more old fans than new fans. They should continue making adventure games as they did before. They should focus more in the story than in the graphics. Its like Starwars! (That there are also much more all fans than new fans) They made the Ep.1 That its a **** compared to the old ones. Its always the same story, They try to make something new better than the old one, but they end screwing it up!

------------------
My name is Bobbin, are you my mother?
http://www.auna.com/img/webEsp/asociados/logo6b.gif (http://www.corporativa.madritel.es/)
Yeah! I work there!

Carolvs Ro Imp Semper Avg Hispan Rex Fundator Universitatis Granatensis

Faith
08-29-2001, 09:50 PM
Originally posted by Jorgito_Vaderman:
Yeap. I agree with you. There are much more old fans than new fans. They should continue making adventure games as they did before. They should focus more in the story than in the graphics. Its like Starwars! (That there are also much more all fans than new fans) They made the Ep.1 That its a **** compared to the old ones. Its always the same story, They try to make something new better than the old one, but they end screwing it up!


true true, just like MONKEY ISLAND!


------------------
Faith http://koti.mbnet.fi/peku1/smilies/evils/evil29.gif A ghostly Figure in your mind

MagnusB
08-30-2001, 06:08 PM
Originally posted by Guybrsuh122
the new fans are larger than the old? Give me a break! The old fans are larger than the new. They dont target to please new fans, they target to get new fans. Big difference.
Nope, there is no difference.
What I meant, was "to get new fans", I may have formulated it badly, sorry about that, but of course, that's what I meant.
Well. I partly agree with you, but the point is, it is different for each individual game.
Monkey Island for example, is a game which would sell better if focusing on new fans, rather then hoping that a lot of people still follow the genre.
Of course, a lot of people DO follow the genre, but not enough.


[This message has been edited by MagnusB (edited August 30, 2001).]

Madsole
08-30-2001, 08:29 PM
If all a game needed to be "popular" was gameplay we'd be way better off-
But it's not.
"Did any, single, one of you ever consider going out and buying a text adventure game? Huh?, I mean, who needs graifx anyway?, I can use my eyes to read and so can you so WHY do they make grafix at all?, it would be much better in the old style where you would use your IMAGINATION to create the grafix you needed!"-, this is not a serius valid opinion. This is sarcasm people!, you are hardcore fans. There are hardcore fans of text adventures too. But, since hardore fans are only about 20% of the buyers (in the case of monkey island, I'd guess it's only about 10% for the new MI4, and it was about 40% for lechucks revenge- This is only a guess, mind you), generally speaking, you don't cash in enough money.

Basicly, if you really wanted an old style monkey island game, you could make it yourself. 5 people would take less then a single months work to do it, I'd guess. (this means story design, art design, all that stuff)

Basicly, even shorter if the scource code for the original games were aviable, it would take even less.

The problm here is that we are so few taht want a product like this that nobody would ever considder making it for us. Making it ourselves is something most of us don't want any part of, so the idea just dies out right there.

Sorry for being such a bad spirrit-, somebodys gotta do it though.

I'd still like to see new text adventures, along the lines of books.

Only problem is, I like wacking thugs in Deus Ex better them reading, and solving pussles. I like beating the game on the hardest setting without ever "safety saving". I like it more, and find it more relaxing then beating a text adventure were you die all the time.

MagnusB
08-30-2001, 08:52 PM
That's what I mean, yes.

StarEye
08-30-2001, 09:59 PM
I could write a whole book about that topic, I think (perhaps because I love to write, hence the size of some (most?) of my posts).

First, please apologize me if I mention say things someone's said before me, but I just didn't feel like reading all the other "longer" posts, as I just saw the topic, before I write my own humble opinion. I'll read everything later on. I just want to reply to the topic.

Anyway, I think the computer game evolution is definately not a bad thing. It's good all the way. However, the choices of how to use computer-game technology is not always perfect. The games are getting better all the time. Older games most often just brings a certain nostalgia-feeling to it, like visiting a place where you've been to when you were a child.

I love to play older games. But I still love the newer games too. I don't love all the old games (a lot of them is crap), but I don't love all the new ones either. But there are certain errors the game developers do. Like creating a 3D Monkey Island adventure game, or even leaving out mouse support. I've actually played 2D adventure games with both mouse and joypad support on my trusty old Amiga (Curse of Enchantia). So they should be able to do it.

They try to make everyone happy, instead of making hardcore gamers happy. A casual gamer most often just pick up a Need 4 Speed title, or a FPS perhaps to play agains some friends. A hardcore gamer has a budget set up for each month, of how much money to spend of computer/console games. Most hardcore gamers also has more than one computer/console (like me), but that's irrelevant.

A hardcore gamer has gone through an evolution, and this evolution usually is over several years. First you get to see a computer game and thinks "this looks fun". You decide to try it and get hooked. 2-10 years later, you've become a desperate addict to games. They remember how the games used to be, and they see how games are now. They have most possibly experienced 2-3 generations of computer-games. Seen the evolution. Seen the good side of the older generation, and the good side of the newer.

Every day, a new hardcore gamer is made. When they try to sell games to both hardcore gamers, and casual gamers, they will fail horribly. Hardcore gamers often want something from every generation they've experienced, and sometimes only the latest generation, sometimes only the old (thus nostalgia).But when game-developers try to combine several generation in one game (like in Monkey 4), they usually fail, some are successfull, but usually they fail. They maybe made the game into something too different from the others that they won't stay in the same genre. Monkey 4 could, if you draw it very far, be called an Arcade Puzzle Adventure. Arcade because of the controls, puzzle because of the, well, puzzles, and adventure because of the storyline and the fact that your main character doesn't evolve, like in an RPG.

Sorry, won't bore you with any more of this... I think I wrote a bit too much this time. As I said, I could write a book about this. Perhaps I will http://www.escapemi.com/forums/wink.gif

------------------
http://publish.hometown.aol.co.uk/mtthwris/myhomepage/stareye.jpg
THX to Brighteyesmonkey for this magnificent sig. Final Fantasy and all :)

MagnusB
08-31-2001, 12:20 PM
Yes, that's very right.
The hardcore gamers and causual gamers or whatever you like to call them, are different target groups, and you just can't please both perfectly.
If a game is not a sequel, no one knows what they will get, and they buy it.
Some people like it, and they will definitely buy the sequel.
Some people don't like it as much as others, and they don't follow the series.
Then, the sequel arrives, people buy it, it's not quite what they expected, and so on....

Deadmeat
08-31-2001, 12:45 PM
Because of all the copiing (dont look at me) the producers of games now focus not on good games but on good-selling games. Sometimes, as with Max Payne, those are the same. But look at the army-men series: it's total crap, but i think it sells, cause they keep making em.

Nowadays you got two kind of gamers: the gamers that like games cause of the grahps and stuff, and the ones that like em for the gameplay. Obviously, the second kind is better. But for producers, the first kind is better : make a good-looking game, hype it, and noone gives a sh!t about the gameplay (B&W anyone?).

I myself am now playing "oldies": i got MI1 and Half-Life, and thinking of getting Lemmings 2. And ppl: Half-Life cant even come close to games as quake 3 qua grahics, but it totally annihalate those games on the subject of gameplay. No wonder it was tthe best game of the centurie.

Gamerevolution good or bad? I'd say bad. What we need is a producer that doesnt really care about the money, but really makes its games FOR THE PEOPLE!

I rest my case.............

------------------
http://monkeyislandclub.homestead.com/files/deadmeat.gif


I'm the root of all that's evil yeah
but you can call me cookie.

The Feral Chicken
08-31-2001, 12:57 PM
Black & WHite is one of the mst inventive and playable games of all time, and I don't even like strategies! How can you say it has no gameplay?

------------------
http://www.chickens.btinternet.co.uk/chickenid.gif

Feral Signatures & Imaging (http://feralsi.cjb.net)