| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Why are all console exclusive games so good? I want to play them, but i don't want to waste my money on consoles, when my PC is infinite times better and more powerful.
You answered your own question.
I have found a lot of Console Games typically come out for the PC or have a Version on another system, Resident Evil 4 anyone, or end up being available for Steam.
Don't forget about Heavy Rain; there were plans to release it on PC before some dingus stepped in and said "f*+# that".
I think it's due to conflicts seem to be the integral part of a story, and due to the limitation of programming, conflict types are limited compared to real life.
You can have lawsuits, debates, company competition, and other conflicts in video games, but they're nowhere near the depth as a random case in real life imho. For example, lots of people claim how much depth Witcher 2 had within its plot line, however when I read random financial news like possibility of hyperinflation caused by QE between eastern countries or political news about parties inner conflicts with bribes in estate investment and such, I simply cannot find any appeal to the called depth in conflicts within most video game. The most easily portrayed conflicts for a video game would be direct violence.
There are also games that with multiple paths that don't even have any conflicts, like in one of Koei's game (takiou rishhiden 5, not brought to US) you can be a smith and just do smithing all day till you've achieved the title of great smith and won the favor of Emperor to beat the game, or be a "tea man" and be the match maker who improves relationship between warlords, but those kind of niche games aren't appealing to the mainstream market.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The market is generally composed of retards. No surprise there. That is why we don't have Planescape: Torment 9 these days. Instead we get Call of Modern Warfield umptynineteen.
The market is generally composed of retards. No surprise there. That is why we don't have Planescape: Torment 9 these days. Instead we get Call of Modern Warfield umptynineteen.
Is that really necessary? It just sounds like a lot of bitterness. The market for CoD is huge because it's fun and widely accessible. That doesn't mean the market is made up of retards. It just means they want something different from their gaming experience than you do. It's easy to get bitter about having niche tastes, but the nice thing about our expanding world is that it's becoming more and more feasible to develop titles that satisfy those tastes.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
"I had fun once, it was awful."
Pretty much what I got from that.
Call of Duty is by no means a great series. I would even go so far as to call it a poorly balanced, unrealistic (however much it claims to try to be), constantly rehashed, and badly coded turd of a series.
But people enjoy it. And people are not "retarded" for enjoying something you don't like, nor are they "retarded" for enjoying something that doesn't have some grand overarching symbolism.
People play games, for the most part, to entertain themselves. That is their primary purpose.
You can have high concept ideals and a great story as well, but that doesn't mean jack if it's not entertaining, same as a book, movie, or TV show (Though the latter are completely sustained by their stories).
And Battlefield is a much better series. =p
Actually, personally I found niche titles to be rarer as technology improves in today's world as cost of development raises. Most companies would follow their successful business model unlike in the early games day when they were still trying to explore what would make them profit.
Now games are multi million if not billion business,the uncompetitive genres are filtered out by the consumers' choices. Unless by enthusiasts who don't require salary nor payment programming / composing music / etc., making "proper" indie games would still cost a fortune, I would estimate the cost at least would be ranged from 200k~300k by kickstarter standard.
Companies that still make niche games may also follow big corporations' models to squeeze out any potential earnings by introducing music dlc, skin dlc, and such, which may further separate their customers to different groups, so only the most die hard loyal fans would be left, buying games that have dlcs/expansions that may cost a few hundreds bucks.
Actually, personally I found niche titles to be rarer as technology improves in today's world as cost of development raises.
I'm not sure that reality agrees with this. Independent game development is a huge deal now. I think the issue you may be having is that you're looking at the kinds of games big-name publishers are creating, and concluding that no niche games are being created. That's because the big-name publishers/development houses aren't making the niche games. Smaller companies and independent teams are making the niche games. And they are proving that it can be done successfully.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Most Niche games require either a Kickstarter or Steam's Greenlight.
Actually, personally I found niche titles to be rarer as technology improves in today's world as cost of development raises.I'm not sure that reality agrees with this. Independent game development is a huge deal now. I think the issue you may be having is that you're looking at the kinds of games big-name publishers are creating, and concluding that no niche games are being created. That's because the big-name publishers/development houses aren't making the niche games. Smaller companies and independent teams are making the niche games. And they are proving that it can be done successfully.
I can simply point out the presence of random genre such as grand strategy games in fantasy settings is nearly none-existant.. don't think any exist, there are mods for grand strategy to make them fantasy setting but actual games, none that I know of.
There aren't many companies filling the gap between the big name comapnies and small indie developer imho, which often results in "fast food" mmorpg that are made to be sold for a few months or even weeks for quick profit, or DLC.
I would say digital distribution also play a role fastening the process. For the best pays of the bucks, if a none "hardcore" player can choose between buying a huge blockbuster hit title for $2.5 (steam sale, amazon sale, etc.) with digital purchase or an unheard game from a small dev that no one ever hears about that cost $20 or more in physical copies, I would believe most players would choose the prior.
It may not be as obvious in a country with enough population that has purchase power, but it can be observed clearly in place with much smaller community. That's what I've observed for nearly a decade now, about 95% of local game companies had been shut down in my country in the past 15 years. It's pretty much the same logic as how M-shaped society forms.
Elven Legacy?
When I refer to grand strategy, I mean game like Hearts of iron / Crusader kings / Europa Universalis and such.
So Risk Style Games?
They're quite alike I guess, just aren't focused on the RTS combats but more opinions on other choices such as crown law in CK.
What do you mean "grand strategy"?
The Heroes of Might and Magic series is a TBS with a fantasy setting. They were up to like 9 games last I checked.
I can think of quite a few more but they all flopped pretty much.
Heroes of might and magic felt rather RPGish and railroaded from my experience. I remember in 3, many if not most stages require rushing of some form.
> from wiki >
Grand strategy expanded on the traditional idea of strategy in three ways: first, expanding strategy beyond military means to also include diplomatic, financial, economic, informational, etc; second, examining internal in addition to external forces - taking to account both the various instruments of power and the internal policies necessary for their implementation (conscription, for example); third, including periods of peacetime in addition to wartime.
Ah. So you want a game kinda like the Civilizations series in a fantasy setting.
Unfortunately, I can't give it to you. I'm sure they're out there but I've never been a huge fan of strategy games in general so i don't follow many of them.
But The "grand strategy" genre is fairly rare to begin with, as far as I know.
Heroes of might and magic felt rather RPGish and railroaded from my experience. I remember in 3, many if not most stages require rushing of some form.
> from wiki >
Grand strategy expanded on the traditional idea of strategy in three ways: first, expanding strategy beyond military means to also include diplomatic, financial, economic, informational, etc; second, examining internal in addition to external forces - taking to account both the various instruments of power and the internal policies necessary for their implementation (conscription, for example); third, including periods of peacetime in addition to wartime.
Well, just from the wikipedia page, it looks like the genre has had 3 major releases a year since 2000. Fantasy games have a release almost every year. Chronology of Grand Strategy Video Games Wiki Romance of the Three Kingdoms seems to be the main line your looking for.
The thing is, these games both cost a lot and don't sell well relative to their costs. I would also argue that they compete with 4X games and games like Civilization for audience, so you have to look at them as well when deciding how saturated the market is. Additionally, because these games take a long time to play through and can be played through multiple times, the players aren't looking for many releases a year, so they buy fewer than even RPG fans, whose games can often take over 100 hours of gameplay. I know I sank a few hundred hours into Europe Universalis III, and I haven't even scratched the surface of playing it.
Even then, there are multiple small companies that consistently release content in this genre, and it has mulitple long running series.
Edit: I will also note that you cannot even find the Grand Strategy video game genre listed as a genre in the Video Game Genres wiki. You have to drill through wargaming, then into board game wargaming, then you can find a link to grand strategy war games, which leads you to grand strategy war video games. Just to show how niche a genre you are dealing with.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I did not complain about Call of duty. I complain about FPSes drowning everything else. I should not have expected to be understood.
I did not complain about Call of duty. I complain about FPSes drowning everything else. I should not have expected to be understood.
I don't think you have been into a game store recently.
Ah. So you want a game kinda like the Civilizations series in a fantasy setting.
Unfortunately, I can't give it to you. I'm sure they're out there but I've never been a huge fan of strategy games in general so i don't follow many of them.
You would be looking for
and
Elemental: Fallen Enchantress (NOT the prior elemental game)
Both are CIV like and basically successors in their own way to Master of Magic. I haven't played Fallen Enchantress, but Warlock is a good bit of fun, especially now that they've added heroes and the like.
Go play some Rune Factory, if you've got one of the right platforms for it. While it's technically got a violent element (monsters that have escaped into your world you have to "Send back to their home dimension" by vanquishing them with a weapon), it's basically about farming and building up a town, and you use your fantasy adventuring as a supplement to your "real" job living as a contributing member to the local economy. The violent elements are very downplayed--and you're also encouraged to "befriend" some monsters instead of vanquish them as they'll become workers for you. It is also way more fun than I am making it sound.
My favorite so far is Rune Factory 3 for the DS, where you play a were-sheep. :)
(If you want just the farming, play Harvest Moon, but that doesn't have the fantasy elements Rune Factory does.)
I agree with you that it would be nice to have some more games that were adventure games but not necessarily games where the main point is to kill things (as much as I also enjoy such games sometimes). And it is a shame most of the games like that are now considered oldskool.
I did not complain about Call of duty. I complain about FPSes drowning everything else. I should not have expected to be understood.
I'm pretty sure we understood you. Did you understand us?
I can simply point out the presence of random genre such as grand strategy games in fantasy settings is nearly none-existant.. don't think any exist, there are mods for grand strategy to make them fantasy setting but actual games, none that I know of.
Not that it's needed, but to add to the examples others have provided of recent titles in this "niche":
Dude, maybe you spent too much time playing video games. I have only a few FPS, mostly rpgs or games like Mass Effect. I think there's a good balance of combat in most. I also think adding combat to games is an entertaining and cost effective way of making the games i really like last longer. Good games like the Mass Effect series always leave you wanting more, but then again you also want to accomplish goals. How much shorter would those games have been if it was just dialog, or mini-games, and without combat to break up the other aspects would you have found non-stop non-combat as enjoyable or replayable?
And while i do think it would be cool to play someone learning magic, and that's something that gets glossed over, i definately want to go about shooting lightning and fireballs at crap afterwards.
And space operas without intergalactic wars are just musicals; so ***** that.=D
The market is generally composed of retards. No surprise there. That is why we don't have Planescape: Torment 9 these days. Instead we get Call of Modern Warfield umptynineteen.
Torment was good, but I'm seriously tired of game designers trying to shovel an "experience" on to me and instead just create tool boxes for me to create my own experiences.
The reason I like multi-player FPS games is because the cool stuff happens during actual play, not a cut-scene. I actually enjoy the CoD stuff, I just can't stand how expensive it is to stay current and keep playing with people. All of my memories from CoD come from doing fun/interesting/crazy things in matches, while grouped with people I enjoy playing with.
My favorite game of all time is Planetside, an MMOFPS from 2003. It was deeply limited by the technology at the time, but it created an environment that was conducive to awesome gameplay. I can still remember a massive battle at the Dagda base, VS held it while TR and NC came from the north and south. We had to smuggle in supplies to keep the base from going neutral and managed to hold it for several hours. All told, there were probably 500 people combined between the 3 sides fighting over the base.
If I want a story, I'll go read a book or watch a movie. I want my games to give me things to DO.
The market is generally composed of retards. No surprise there. That is why we don't have Planescape: Torment 9 these days. Instead we get Call of Modern Warfield umptynineteen.If I want a story, I'll go read a book or watch a movie. I want my games to give me things to DO.
Great, now that we've got the two extremes out of the way, all that is left is to add that most players vary somewhere in between these two
I did not complain about Call of duty.
You complained about all the "retards" liking "Generic Brown Military FPS".
Effectively the same thing.
I complain about FPSes drowning everything else.
Just like last gen it was action games and the one before that it was platformers.
It's currently the most popular genre. And yet, there are still plenty of other game types. Play those.
I should not have expected to be understood.
Say what you mean and mean what you say then. It helps matters.
I just saw a new game got published on steam yesterday called Papo & Yo, it looks like a puzzle solving game with some really nice visuals.
Also has the Myst series been Mentioned yet?
Or how about pretty much any Sports game. There are plenty of those (including racing games).
Papo and Yo is out? I had meant to pick that one up, it looked neat.
I just saw a new game got published on steam yesterday called Papo & Yo...
Great, now that we've got the two extremes out of the way, all that is left is to add that most players vary somewhere in between these twoThe market is generally composed of retards. No surprise there. That is why we don't have Planescape: Torment 9 these days. Instead we get Call of Modern Warfield umptynineteen.If I want a story, I'll go read a book or watch a movie. I want my games to give me things to DO.
The thing that makes video games better than movies/books/tv is that you get to control the action. The problem with a pre-canned story is that the action is being dictated to you. It's a direct conflict and too often video game designers write stories where you do the repetitive, simple stuff and all the really cool action happens when they take control away from you.
I'd guess that a common thread for most of us about why we like PnP games is that we get to DO everything through our characters, nothing is dictated to us. The GM doesn't say "you say something like this, or this" and then does both sides of the dialogue for you.
An example: I enjoy Skyrim. The stories are pretty simple, there isn't a whole lot of real choice going on, but I simply like exploring the world, going into dungeons, killing monsters and collecting treasure. Figuring out new ways to beat opponents, trying different skills, spells, weapon and armor combo's, etc.
I wish I had recorded it, I was shooting arrows at a dragon when it did the crashing to the ground animation. I happened to be exactly in it's path, but I just stood my ground firing arrows. I managed to kill it during it's slide and it came to rest about 15 feet in front of me. It was epic, unplanned and I don't think I could ever replicate it. If it had been a cut-scene animation I wouldn't have cared much, but as it was the visual and feeling of the experience will stay with me for a while.
Add in mods that I can experiment with to have an ever changing gameplay experience and you've got a pretty solid game. It isn't the story that gets me to come back though.
Go play some Rune Factory, if you've got one of the right platforms for it. While it's technically got a violent element (monsters that have escaped into your world you have to "Send back to their home dimension" by vanquishing them with a weapon), it's basically about farming and building up a town, and you use your fantasy adventuring as a supplement to your "real" job living as a contributing member to the local economy. The violent elements are very downplayed--and you're also encouraged to "befriend" some monsters instead of vanquish them as they'll become workers for you. It is also way more fun than I am making it sound.
My favorite so far is Rune Factory 3 for the DS, where you play a were-sheep. :)
(If you want just the farming, play Harvest Moon, but that doesn't have the fantasy elements Rune Factory does.)
I agree with you that it would be nice to have some more games that were adventure games but not necessarily games where the main point is to kill things (as much as I also enjoy such games sometimes). And it is a shame most of the games like that are now considered oldskool.
Wow, I hadn't realized it was both OOP and pricey used! I'd try the used games sections of GameStop, you might find one if you're lucky. I know I've seen some of the older Harvest Moons. Or they might put out digital forms for the 3DS. A new one is coming out in summer; MSRP is $39.99 but I myself will probably see if I can get it on sale.
I'm not ready to part with my own copy of RF3 yet, but if I change my mind I'll let you know.
Go play some Rune Factory, if you've got one of the right platforms for it. While it's technically got a violent element (monsters that have escaped into your world you have to "Send back to their home dimension" by vanquishing them with a weapon), it's basically about farming and building up a town, and you use your fantasy adventuring as a supplement to your "real" job living as a contributing member to the local economy. The violent elements are very downplayed--and you're also encouraged to "befriend" some monsters instead of vanquish them as they'll become workers for you. It is also way more fun than I am making it sound.
My favorite so far is Rune Factory 3 for the DS, where you play a were-sheep. :)
(If you want just the farming, play Harvest Moon, but that doesn't have the fantasy elements Rune Factory does.)
I agree with you that it would be nice to have some more games that were adventure games but not necessarily games where the main point is to kill things (as much as I also enjoy such games sometimes). And it is a shame most of the games like that are now considered oldskool.
Wow, I hadn't realized it was both OOP and pricey used! I'd try the used games sections of GameStop, you might find one if you're lucky. I know I've seen some of the older Harvest Moons. Or they might put out digital forms for the 3DS. A new one is coming out in summer; MSRP is $39.99 but I myself will probably see if I can get it on sale.
I'm not ready to part with my own copy of RF3 yet, but if I change my mind I'll let you know.
Ebay will eventually pop out something, so I'll just keep my eyes peeled. If I was you, I'd keep my copy; I always find myself replaying things I haven't touched after a few years.
I still regret selling my Masters of the Universe action figures...
Ah. So you want a game kinda like the Civilizations series in a fantasy setting.
The Fall from Heaven 2 mod for Civ 4 is a preeeetty good place to start for that particular fancy. In fact, it's downright fantastic.
Ah. So you want a game kinda like the Civilizations series in a fantasy setting.The Fall from Heaven 2 mod for Civ 4 is a preeeetty good place to start for that particular fancy. In fact, it's downright fantastic.
Civilization 4 got memory problems though, and it's a mod. Cannot remember but did it have victory conditions equivalent to space / culture / diplomatic victory?
I would argue that romance of three kingdom & king arthur are grand strategy games, the prior is focused on combat especially in later installment. The only thing you did in 11 was build up resources then going into war using a similar setup like Nobugana's ambition 12. Nobugana's ambition 10th installment was the only one in koei's "recent" games that don't require much wars, and that's like 10 years ago.
King arthur (well, 2 at least from my memory)was a railroaded rpg style of game that use RTS combat like total war, and it failed hard in the combat department despite that's what the title focused on.
Haven't had my hands on elemental / warlock so cannot tell, hope they're what I'm looking for.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Great, now that we've got the two extremes out of the way, all that is left is to add that most players vary somewhere in between these twoThe market is generally composed of retards. No surprise there. That is why we don't have Planescape: Torment 9 these days. Instead we get Call of Modern Warfield umptynineteen.If I want a story, I'll go read a book or watch a movie. I want my games to give me things to DO.
Count me as definitely much, much closer to Sissyl's end of the spectrum. I'll slog through a game with poor mechanics, lousy interface, or subpar graphics if the story is good enough. No amount of fancy cutting-edge prettyness or awesome controls will keep me interested in a game with thin or no story for long.
Ah. So you want a game kinda like the Civilizations series in a fantasy setting.The Fall from Heaven 2 mod for Civ 4 is a preeeetty good place to start for that particular fancy. In fact, it's downright fantastic.Civilization 4 got memory problems though, and it's a mod. Cannot remember but did it have victory conditions equivalent to space / culture / diplomatic victory?
I would argue that romance of three kingdom & king arthur are grand strategy games, the prior is focused on combat especially in later installment. The only thing you did in 11 was build up resources then going into war using a similar setup like Nobugana's ambition 12. Nobugana's ambition 10th installment was the only one in koei's "recent" games that don't require much wars, and that's like 10 years ago.
King arthur (well, 2 at least from my memory)was a railroaded rpg style of game that use RTS combat like total war, and it failed hard in the combat department despite that's what the title focused on.
Haven't had my hands on elemental / warlock so cannot tell, hope they're what I'm looking for.
The designer of Fall from Heaven is on the Elemental design team. (That's why he stopped working on FFH, he got hired by Stardock.)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Great, now that we've got the two extremes out of the way, all that is left is to add that most players vary somewhere in between these twoThe market is generally composed of retards. No surprise there. That is why we don't have Planescape: Torment 9 these days. Instead we get Call of Modern Warfield umptynineteen.If I want a story, I'll go read a book or watch a movie. I want my games to give me things to DO.The thing that makes video games better than movies/books/tv is that you get to control the action. The problem with a pre-canned story is that the action is being dictated to you. It's a direct conflict and too often video game designers write stories where you do the repetitive, simple stuff and all the really cool action happens when they take control away from you.
I'd guess that a common thread for most of us about why we like PnP games is that we get to DO everything through our characters, nothing is dictated to us. The GM doesn't say "you say something like this, or this" and then does both sides of the dialogue for you.
An example: I enjoy Skyrim. The stories are pretty simple, there isn't a whole lot of real choice going on, but I simply like exploring the world, going into dungeons, killing monsters and collecting treasure. Figuring out new ways to beat opponents, trying different skills, spells, weapon and armor combo's, etc.
I wish I had recorded it, I was shooting arrows at a dragon when it did the crashing to the ground animation. I happened to be exactly in it's path, but I just stood my ground firing arrows. I managed to kill it during it's slide and it came to rest about 15 feet in front of me. It was epic, unplanned and I don't think I could ever replicate it. If it had been a cut-scene animation I wouldn't have cared much, but as it was the visual and feeling of the experience will stay with me for a while.
Add in mods that I can experiment with to have an ever...
It really depends on what you are looking for in a game. Some games are more about setting up senarios for things to happen. Others are more puzzle based with scripted problems. Some have static stories to tell and are more like a book. Others are more free form for the player to design.
I like a mix of all of them. I love a good story, and sometimes want to play through one. Other times, I want to build something my own.
Personally, I find games that are open ended very boring. Either I want games that are a skill you can semi-master or ones that give me a good tale. The best games combine the two. I want strong story and plot lines in my games.
Count me as definitely much, much closer to Sissyl's end of the spectrum. I'll slog through a game with poor mechanics, lousy interface, or subpar graphics if the story is good enough. No amount of fancy cutting-edge prettyness or awesome controls will keep me interested in a game with thin or no story for long.Great, now that we've got the two extremes out of the way, all that is left is to add that most players vary somewhere in between these twoThe market is generally composed of retards. No surprise there. That is why we don't have Planescape: Torment 9 these days. Instead we get Call of Modern Warfield umptynineteen.If I want a story, I'll go read a book or watch a movie. I want my games to give me things to DO.
I just find that the number of games with actual good stories are very few and far between. To me, the average story in a game is more poorly written than a subpar book. The moral dilemma's aren't actually dilemma's, it's just a simple choice of which way I want to go on the game's "alignment system".
I agree that cutting edge graphics are overrated.
I still play Civ 2. If I could get it to run on my computer (been difficult lately) I would still play TIE Fighter, not for the story, but the game play. Minecraft is one of the best games to come out the past few years IMO. Masters of Orion 2 gets opened a couple times a year, a game from the late 90's, because it's extremely well designed and represents a really good challenge.
I'd be curious if you think there is a game where the story has been as influential as any of the truly great books, movies or tv shows. A game where the story and not the game play has garnered a following of a large audience. The best I can think of might be KOTOR 1 and 2, but I haven't really heard anyone ever talk about how much they replay those games the same way someone might re-watch their favorite movies or reread their favorite books.
I know plenty of people who reread the same book probably once every year or two and have done so for over a decade. I don't know as many people who do the same thing with a story-centric game. The games that get pulled out year after year are the ones that provide good game play.
Don't get me wrong, I enjoy a good story in my games as well, but I don't think being told a story is a video games strength. The strength of a video game is in the doing of stuff. You don't get to do things in a movie or book, you are passive. And while your own life experiences color how you experience a book/movie, you don't control what is going on.
PnP games have the luxury of the "story teller" sitting at the table with you, so you can interact with the story, make meaningful choices and both you and the story teller discover what happens simultaneously.
Video games can't react to your choices like that, they can only "react" to things they have already predicted would happen. Deep Blue, the chess supercomputer wasn't truly making predictive choices, it just had as many scenarios programmed into it as possible so it knew which were winning and losing scenarios. Basically all video games are the same thing, except the programmers pare down your list of options to what they feel like accommodating.
That's part of the reason I've grown unsatisfied with a lot of stories in video games. I'm not an active participant. Occasionally the illusion of being a participant is stronger than others, but in the end I'm still just a passive passenger to the actual story. If I'm just a passive passenger for the story, it isn't really necessary to make the story into a game to tell it to me. The game just becomes a skill check for a metaphorical turning of the page. If that skill check isn't fun, what is the point of it being a game? Why not just make it a movie?
Don't get me wrong, I enjoy a good story in my games as well, but I don't think being told a story is a video games strength. The strength of a video game is in the doing of stuff. You don't get to do things in a movie or book, you are passive. And while your own life experiences color how you experience a book/movie, you don't control what is going on.
PnP games have the luxury of the "story teller" sitting at the table with you, so you can interact with the story, make meaningful choices and both you and the story teller discover what happens simultaneously.
That's part of the reason I've grown unsatisfied with a lot of stories in video games. I'm not an active participant. Occasionally the illusion of being a participant is stronger than others, but in the end I'm still just a passive passenger to the actual story. If I'm just a passive passenger for the story, it isn't really necessary to make the story into a game to tell it to me. The game just becomes a skill check for a metaphorical turning of the page. If that skill check isn't fun, what is the point of it being a game? Why not just make it a movie?
Lots of video games with multiple paths feel rather like choose your own adventure books, you got the choices through the adventure but the outcomes are still determined by the writer (dev).
There was the D&D greyhawk adventure movie - scourge worlds that rather feel like the recent big rpg titles without the gameplay. Both of them got multiple choices the player get to choose from and offer different paths. It made me realize that choose your own adventure books, visual novels, and multiple paths games minus the combats are in the same vein.
That's why I enjoy games that are semi-sandbox like Taikou Rishhiden. While the historical events are scripted, they don't get triggered unless the conditions are met, and playing a different character can have a different view on the event. Some character may have the player as participant in said event, while other characters may just hear it as news talked by npcs, and it's possible to change multiple historical events by player's actions.
A sandbox with no player/npc triggered events makes me uninterested due to I find no reasons spending time in it. Unlike tabletop, there are little interactions if any with other players in a single player game, which made up the lack of stories/events in a sandbox game. While some people enjoy games for their gameplay, people like me may need to look for a reason in playing a said game. There may be simply no motivations for people who share the same thoughts as me when there are no likable stories / characters in a game once the player pass the new toy syndrome. Why would I want to spend time to dominate the game if there are no stories (events) or anyone I like.
I still read visual novels time to time due to the same reasons, found myself having little to no interest in most influential novels, movies, and other mediums. Les Miserable no longer felt that depressing when I grew up and see the real world around me, for example. If I want dark and gloomy, gritty natures for thoughts, I can just turn on TV or read news (local television programs prefer to broadcast ill events or brainwashing political viewpoints, especially when 90% of television sponsors are by corporations that are under China government's control in my country, despite I ain't even in China).
Escapism and depth don't click on each other in such situation, so I would choose materials that resonate with me. These may be treated as inferior creations by the majority but I'm happy with them as long as the companies can manage to survive and produce them within the M-shaped society I'm in.
On the subject of grand strategy, has anyone tried out Eador: Masters of the Broken World yet?
I accept that to an extent, many "story based" games are more like interactive novels or movies--ultimately you are on a linear path. But a good story-based game can be as excellent and exciting to play through as reading a well-written novel--moreso, sometimes, because of it being interactive and often multi-genre (with text as well as visuals and sound). And some story-based games, while the core of the story may change, very well done ones DO have outcomes influenced by your choices. There may only be a finite number of choices, but to see the results of all of them would take many playthroughs and hundreds of hours of gameplay. Like Fallout New Vegas--we all know somebody shot the Courier in the head and that the Courier hunted his or her attempted murderer down, we all know that the Courier will go certain places and do certain things in his or her search for justice, and we all know the Courier gets caught up in the war for New Vegas and whatever side the Courier chooses will win, but who wins, who loses, who dies, who survives, who lives successfully, who lives but in general misery... that all depends on you. Even seemingly minor choices can have a fairly big impact on how the final endgame plays out, and what you learn in the epilogue. I've played 2 playthroughs (one not finished yet) where the characters even are both neutral-good karma and help a lot of the same people, and yet both stories are still taking shape a lot differently in different places (not to mention on the second playthrough I've found different quests I missed the first time or done things in a different order with different results), and both will have some notable differences in their endings. Video games for all their limitations--and don't get me wrong, there ARE limitations, ABSOLUTELY, including some infuriating moments in my example game--but things can be very complex. And again, there's nothing wrong with a good story, even if that's all it is, a good story that somebody else is telling you, where you can't change what happens next.
TTRPGs have more freedom but often can be pretty damn linear too, depending on how they're played. And a good GM can often make the players feel like they're driving the car when he's really taking them for a ride. And I know some players that really would prefer the GM to lead them along the rails of a plot than forge their own way, as well as vice versa. The choices are freeer and technically unlimited, and I would say playing TTRPGs are the best way to both play a game, tell a story, and yet have the outcome be totally unplanned. But it's not that different in the broad scheme of things.
Some of the user reviews on it are saying it's very buggy. Some people have no issues.
I'm a big fan of Endless Space and Sins of a Solar Empire: Rebellion. They're both 4X space games, but they play very different.
Endless Space really feels like a successor to the Master of Orion series. It really feels like MoO2, but updated 15 years later. Lots of victory options. There can be a lot to manage, but it's turn based, so you're not rushed.
Sins is a real time 4X game. It's a bit older, though the recent expansion, Rebellion, is only a year old. The scale of the game is can be pretty epic, and if you play large maps it can start to move slowly (both in performance and just scale of the game). Sending a ship across the galaxy can take 20 minutes on big maps, but there's enough other stuff to do and manage that you don't really wait for it.
|
Count me as definitely much, much closer to Sissyl's end of the spectrum. I'll slog through a game with poor mechanics, lousy interface, or subpar graphics if the story is good enough. No amount of fancy cutting-edge prettyness or awesome controls will keep me interested in a game with thin or no story for long.
On the other hand, how unplayable of a mess are you willing to try to cope with for a story that is only "video game good"?
* thinks of Rule of Rose *