Rant about current games being stuck in the past

[HorseArcher]

What I meant is something like this:

let's say, First Person Shooters:

-Any game that is about WWII or a fight in a desert.

-Start out as a single guy with a gun and manage to kill entire armies singlehandedly

- Health and ammo packs. This was introduced in the Doom games and still here after like 13 years.

-Any game that uses the exact same idea as BF1942

-Any game that is like medal of honor, call of duty or anything like any of the cookie cutter fps shooters.

-a flashlight that has a battery life of about 30 seconds

-Max Payne-like slow motion shootout

-green key, blue key, yellow key. STOP IT. If i have a grenade launcher, or a super laser beam weapon, I don't think I'll be looking for keys to open a simple door.

-Humans and other living creatues, which needs several shots from a grenade launcher to die, or take over hundreds of bullets to bring down.

Carrying over 9-10 weapons , which usually start with a knife or bare hands, then a pistol, then an automatic rifle, then a shotgun (which is usually the best option) and a minigun and ends with a super laser/grenade/beam/plasma gun.



Storylines that follows (99% of shooters)

-An Alien invasion or a mutant outbrake with zombies and nazis on planet Earth or Mars, and you end up saving humanity/the planet/the only survivor/killed over thousands of things/saved a girl/_____(insert a dumb and meaningless ending, that pisses you off, because the game was rushed)


Simulations/actions games

-Tanks or another powerful military vehicle, but incapable of driving through a tree or bush (battlefield games mostly) and unable to shoot through a brickwall with its cannon.

-Airplanes that drop bombs on specific targets, but unable to damage anything else on the ground.

-
RTS games:

-Build a base, pump out tanks and soldiers and storm the other side with a giant army. Unfortunately all RTS still works this way and little advancement was done to improve the AI over 10 years or so. I can only speak of a few titles that tried to brake away and present an alternative way.

MMORPGs:

-Any more MMORPGs , regardless of title or type. MMORPGs should have never existed in the first place. It's a scam and it destroys lives and ruins families and very unhealthy.


RPGs:

-Anything with elves or orcs or any reference to LOTR.
-Starting out as a peasant or a poor boy with nothing and ending up as the strongest being in the world.
-Carrying so much stuff, that not even a convoy of 18 wheelers could bring it with you.


What I'm most sick about:

-No progress or significant advancement of making a better AI. That's the whole thing really. The current AIs in games are not much better than 10-15 years ago. All we got is updates in sound and graphics and the re-use of the old boring game elements established a long time ago. The horse is already a mummy, and it's still being beaten and still milking the same old cow.

[Roy Batty]

Shooters:
Horse Archer pretty much said it all.

-What happened to the deforming terrain of Red Faction? Why wasn't this expanded on?

-Squadmates that are nothing more than bullet magnets (or are missing completely)

Simulations:

-No story. Developers spend all of their time trying to squeeze a million different functions onto a standard QWERTY keyboard and 6 button joystick and completely overlook story, atmosphere and continuity.

-Developers spend all of their time trying to squeeze a million different functions onto a standard QWERTY keyboard and 6 button joystick. Should I have to map a button for turning my head to the left or right; or would something like the targeting system of Crimson Skies actually make more sense?

RPGs
There is so much wrong with how RPGs function today, I don't even know where to begin.
-Elves, Dwarves, Orcs
-9 million monster species
-More magic weapons than people
-+10 Longsword, +99d10 mental damage

In general, RPGs are about item and monster slaying progressment. It's like people only play the game to work their way up from killing bandit bunnies with a knife to killing (insert generic fantasy Satan-substitute here) with the +10 Longsword mentioned previously (or its two-handed sword cousin).

What I want to see is an RPG that features no leveling, and no magic weapons.

RTS Games
When RTS games make the move back to Strategy, let me know. I for one am tired of racing to make the biggest horde army and leading it into a battle that amounts to rock, paper, scissors, tank, nuclear warhead.

In conclusion, I second the request for improved AI.

[-Conan the Barbarian-]

Just about everything that you are ranting about is not in the game "Brothers in arms".

-You have a squad of men that attack enemies.

- No health packets but you can pick up enemy's weapons and use their ammo

-Not like medal of honor.

-No max pane slow motions except to depict being dazed by an exploding grenade

-no damn keys

-Humans dies easily with weapons that kill you easily in real life. One shot kills mostly, except if it is in the legs or arms perhaps. Must use cover and shoot and duck because you will be killed if you stand up and shoot.

-Can only carry two weapons and 5 grenades.

[mightyfenrir]

[quote=Horsearcher;1812551]

What I meant is something like this:

let's say, First Person Shooters:

-Any game that is about WWII or a fight in a desert.

-Start out as a single guy with a gun and manage to kill entire armies singlehandedly

- Health and ammo packs. This was introduced in the Doom games and still here after like 13 years.

Ammo can make sense in a fashion and health to a very finite point. As our good friend Conan has said below BiA addresses the erealism more and almost to a point where I threw my computer out the window once. I like that in that game you don't really have any opportunity to grab up health. I also love, bt was amazed when I first played through, that I almost always ended up with a German weapon set at the end of the level because A) I only once in the hedges remember finding a US ammo crate that the Germans had grabbed up and posted a machine gun nest on (and this only gave me more M1 ammo) and B) My squad mates hid as often as I did makingit impossible to pry ammo from their cold dead fingers. In Earned in Blood you could borrow ammo from a squad member, but I tried not to do that more than once per member to keep it real if I did it all... I still love grabbing an MP40 off the ground in battle more.

-Any game that uses the exact same idea as BF1942

-Any game that is like medal of honor, call of duty or anything like any of the cookie cutter fps shooters.

-a flashlight that has a battery life of about 30 seconds

-Max Payne-like slow motion shootout

-green key, blue key, yellow key. STOP IT. If i have a grenade launcher, or a super laser beam weapon, I don't think I'll be looking for keys to open a simple door.

-Humans and other living creatues, which needs several shots from a grenade launcher to die, or take over hundreds of bullets to bring down.

Carrying over 9-10 weapons , which usually start with a knife or bare hands, then a pistol, then an automatic rifle, then a shotgun (which is usually the best option) and a minigun and ends with a super laser/grenade/beam/plasma gun.

BiA addressed some of those issues too. There was no knife, no keys, people died in a shot or two depending on where they got hit and it wasn't cookie cutter at all, to me at least. I was happy when someone in my squad bit it in one level and I was alone and got completely destroyed because it was a lot more realistic than, say, CoD when you're in the German chateau, your squad mates die, and yuo wakt out the entire basement by yourself while you watch the captain get obliterated by a machine gun but still get the fuse in place on the bomb and then club some guy. Also, when they die there you have the option of reviving them or going on without them, much more realism there.

Storylines that follows (99% of shooters)

-An Alien invasion or a mutant outbrake with zombies and nazis on planet Earth or Mars, and you end up saving humanity/the planet/the only survivor/killed over thousands of things/saved a girl/_____(insert a dumb and meaningless ending, that pisses you off, because the game was rushed)

Like European Assault? ugh...

Simulations/actions games

-Tanks or another powerful military vehicle, but incapable of driving through a tree or bush (battlefield games mostly) and unable to shoot through a brickwall with its cannon.

-Airplanes that drop bombs on specific targets, but unable to damage anything else on the ground.

-
RTS games:

-Build a base, pump out tanks and soldiers and storm the other side with a giant army. Unfortunately all RTS still works this way and little advancement was done to improve the AI over 10 years or so. I can only speak of a few titles that tried to brake away and present an alternative way.

MMORPGs:

-Any more MMORPGs , regardless of title or type. MMORPGs should have never existed in the first place. It's a scam and it destroys lives and ruins families and very unhealthy.

Very very much agreed and I can't think of anything that breaks the mold


R

PGs:

-Anything with elves or orcs or any reference to LOTR.
-Starting out as a peasant or a poor boy with nothing and ending up as the strongest being in the world.
-Carrying so much stuff, that not even a convoy of 18 wheelers could bring it with you.

That's why I like Oblivion. The power of elves and LOTR stuff is nominal compared to other games and it makes it feel slightly more real, though it will always have some LOTR-esqueness to it because that's how it is. Personally, I recommend you play SE:RPG, look it up online... it's funny

RPGs
There is so much wrong with how RPGs function today, I don't even know where to begin.
-Elves, Dwarves, Orcs
-9 million monster species
-More magic weapons than people
-+10 Longsword, +99d10 mental damage

In general, RPGs are about item and monster slaying progressment. It's like people only play the game to work their way up from killing bandit bunnies with a knife to killing (insert generic fantasy Satan-substitute here) with the +10 Longsword mentioned previously (or its two-handed sword cousin).

What I want to see is an RPG that features no leveling, and no magic weapons.

I'm curious as to what kind of gameline you'd suggest. I don't have a huge problem with rpg's having somewhat similar format but, as you say, the magic part is a bit blah. I haven't ever used anything with magic in one. All I can think of is something where the character would never change or get better, because there would be no level change, and that whatever you put at the end would be just as easy to get rid of as anything else in the game because the character never improves from the beginning. In essence all I can imagine is the Sims with guns or swords or something... I'm genuinely curious, I don't mean to ridicule you at all, but I'm lost on your concept.

Just about everything that you are ranting about is not in the game "Brothers in arms".

-You have a squad of men that attack enemies.

- No health packets but you can pick up enemy's weapons and use their ammo

-Not like medal of honor.

-No max pane slow motions except to depict being dazed by an exploding grenade

-no damn keys

-Humans dies easily with weapons that kill you easily in real life. One shot kills mostly, except if it is in the legs or arms perhaps. Must use cover and shoot and duck because you will be killed if you stand up and shoot.

-Can only carry two weapons and 5 grenades.

I want another mission! Where's the next Brothers in Arms?!?

[Roy Batty]

I'm curious as to what kind of gameline you'd suggest. I don't have a huge problem with rpg's having somewhat similar format but, as you say, the magic part is a bit blah. I haven't ever used anything with magic in one. All I can think of is something where the character would never change or get better, because there would be no level change, and that whatever you put at the end would be just as easy to get rid of as anything else in the game because the character never improves from the beginning. In essence all I can imagine is the Sims with guns or swords or something... I'm genuinely curious, I don't mean to ridicule you at all, but I'm lost on your concept.

Well that's the question with a six million dollar answer isn't it? Let's see some cash before I give away the key to revolutionizing the game industry!

But in all seriousness: what's wrong with a character that never levels up? You phrased this as "never changes" but to me, this is a bit of a misnomer as the protagonist's ability to change is what makes a game an RPG. These changes are manifested by the PC (Player Character) making choices in the game which have a direct effect on the story's outcome, how NPCs interact with you etc... RPGs are defined by their story driven, reactive nature, not by the number of skill points you put into X:skill to unlock Y:feat.

How then would I design an RPG with no leveling? Simple: The game would feature character creation that allows the player to create, customize and personalize their character through physical appearance, name, statistics and general skills relevant to the game universe. The player would then progress through the game, making numerous choices which open and close certain "quests", open and close certain dialoge options, etc...

...and that whatever you put at the end would be just as easy to get rid of as anything else in the game because the character never improves from the beginning.

That's kind of silly. Player level, hitpoints and mana counts aren't the only things to base a challenge around. Without going into specifics, numbers, terrain, special attributes of boss characters/creatures, different tactics and attacks, all such things can be used and even combined with one another to make a challenge.

That's all I have for now. Time for a smoke break.

[Rapax]

But in all seriousness: what's wrong with a character that never levels up? You phrased this as "never changes" but to me, this is a bit of a misnomer as the protagonist's ability to change is what makes a game an RPG. These changes are manifested by the PC (Player Character) making choices in the game which have a direct effect on the story's outcome, how NPCs interact with you etc... RPGs are defined by their story driven, reactive nature, not by the number of skill points you put into X:skill to unlock Y:feat.

How then would I design an RPG with no leveling? Simple: The game would feature character creation that allows the player to create, customize and personalize their character through physical appearance, name, statistics and general skills relevant to the game universe. The player would then progress through the game, making numerous choices which open and close certain "quests", open and close certain dialoge options, etc...

That's all nice and such, but as far as I am aware, what makes an RPG is the fact that your character develops, advances, grows in a way. That you directly affect the outcome of the story is quite another point and after all, even if you'd be changing the world and story, you'd still be exactly the same person through the entire game. Customization of the character also isn't something special, that's what games like Oblivion have any way as a standard starting point. So you'd essentially have Oblivion without leveling up, without being able to advance your character, without a real driving force.

That's kind of silly. Player level, hitpoints and mana counts aren't the only things to base a challenge around. Without going into specifics, numbers, terrain, special attributes of boss characters/creatures, different tactics and attacks, all such things can be used and even combined with one another to make a challenge.

Well not exactly. The whole point of leveling up is that you start out as a relatively weak character, doing easy missions, fighting easy enemies and slowly make your way up till you can take on the bosses and complete complex missions. Following your principle, I'd be as strong at the beginning as I'm going to be at the end which basically means I could take on the boss right at the start of the game which, I'm afraid, is not very challenging, nor does it make for an interesting game experience. You will notice that in real life too people change. They may grow stronger, smarter or more experienced and leveling up and using skill points is just one way to show this development in a RPG. Without it, you're basically just an FPS character in an RPG world.

[Markas]

First person shooters-

Armour or even bare flesh that still lets you take enough firepower that would drop the A-Team. Operation Flashpoints' was good as two bullets in the wrong area means the end for you. Alas, it has not been expanded on and means you rarely need tactics. If devs put in breakable walls, realistic physics and a morale system for the enemy then using tactics could be rewarding but, alas, we're still in territory we were in ten years ago.

RPG'S

This gets my goat. Where are the deep, involving storylines? I think we've regressed on this one since Deus ex, Baldur's Gate etc so maybe a lesson from the past is in order. Diablo had a good story but simple gameplay, BG had a good story and more complex gameplay, Deus Ex was similarly good. Oblivion and Neverwinter Nights (1 and to a lesser extent 2) have poorly told or uninvolving storylines. So the King of Shadows is taking over? Do I care? no.

[zznɟ ǝɥʇ]

Forgotten Hope for BF42 eliminates many of the things you stated, though they have to be within the limits of the game.

FH2 looks to be better.

[Rapax]

While I understand the criticism and the need for a rant, I find it a bit silly to make all the claims so final and general. There's masses of different games out there, many of those quite advanced and far off any stereotypes of clichees. I especially find it ridiculous to claim that AI hasn't evolved in 10 years. Seriously, what have you been playing and comparing?

[VOP2288]

I agree with almost everything stated above me but one must remember that making AI totally life-like isn't a simple task - nor is it a quick one to really tackle.

As far as damage to the environment around you - there are plenty of games that throw that in there every now and then but you also need to think about the fact that totally destructible environments would require a horse of a PC (something which your every day PC gamer may not own).

With FPS' and being able to carry more than 3 weapons: I agree with this but STALKER kind of ruined that whole concept for me...

The only beef I have with RPGs is that most don't come outside of the fantasy/elves/dragons setting. Some do, but they end up really blowing. Yet, for an effective RPG (3rd person viewpoint/point and click kind) you would have to have a setting either medieval times and back or a fantasy land....I can't see a WWII RPG working out too well. I would like to see an RPG based in Imperial Roman times...

Another problem with FPS': lack of originality...truthfully I don't mind there being TONS of WWII FPS' (I LOVE WWII), what gets me is that everyone keeps doing the SAME thing over and over (Normandy breakout)

Oh and just to put my two cents in: MMORPGs suck and are a waste of money and time and the Battlefield 1942/Vietnam/2 concept is horrible.

[Kanaric]

A lot of these have to do with simply shoddy design of the games.

Companies dont want to spend all kinds of money to program in the fact that tanks can drive over trees.

Somehow I could do it in Mechwarrior 4 so i dont see how it should be a problem? Oh wait, forgot EA was Battlefield's publisher.

Any more MMORPGs , regardless of title or type. MMORPGs should have never existed in the first place. It's a scam and it destroys lives and ruins families and very unhealthy.

I disagree there. It depends on the game, the fact that everyone wants to clone Everquest and not go other paths... like UO, is really what the problem is.

Shadowbane and UO were both great mmorpgs that didn't go for the concept of EQ... which is what has evolved into WoW.

Eve Online is another good mmorpg concept.

Someone who says all mmorpgs suck hasn't played all mmorpgs.
[quote-Anything with elves or orcs or any reference to LOTR. [/quote]
Those were the best kind until atari bought the DND liscence.

Might and Magic, Wizardry, Baldurs Gate..... now you just get Diablo 2 clones like Neverwinter 2 and ****** first person action games like Oblivion.

-Starting out as a peasant or a poor boy with nothing and ending up as the strongest being in the world.

almost every japanese console rpg ever made.

I liked Suikoden 5 simply because the main character was the prince of an already established kingdom.

Dont forget the "Starting out as a peasant or a poor boy with nothing but turns out to be a genetically superior superhuman that has to save the world" plot. Final Fantasy 7 started that.

-Carrying so much stuff, that not even a convoy of 18 wheelers could bring it with you.

lol, thats what I used to like about some games like Ultima. Everything had a realistic weight and you needed something to store it in in order to carry it. Same with old DND games as well. That died when people arbitrarily decided complexity and micromanagement were bad.

-No progress or significant advancement of making a better AI.

Only when it concerns major companies like CA. Stardock with Galactic Civilizations has made a GREAT AI. Then again, they care for their customers.





Most of the gripe you have with modern gaming is just the fact that EVERYTHING now published by major groups is just flavor of the week trash ment to tide you over until their next game. They are not ment to hold your attention more than a couple of weeks and have to use gimmicks or hype to sell their products.

They dont rely on creating a story, only creating something that will keep you mindlessly playing it. That is why games that take effort to make, like flight/space sims, RPGs, turn based strategy, are rareer than ever.

With RPGs you really only see action games and mmorpgs because they only take a simply concept to create. You dont see complex plots, advanced tactical team games with strategic battles (baldurs gate), or games that are very long. The reason is that they are trying to turn RPGs into this type of game. Also with mmorpgs you dont see ANY pvp games, the ones that come out are by ****** devs that make buggy trash. You see MMORPGs but players dont run ANYTHING its all up to NPCs. They need to make mmorpgs like paper dnd, where you can do anything and players control and run the entire game content. That is how Shadowbane was and somewhat how Eve Online and Lineage 2 is and all those were great.

Your gripe against rpgs would have been considered ludacris back in the day when good games like Might and Magic and Wizardry or goldbox were out, and they have the elves, etc that you see. They were once upon a time done well. I'm thirsting for a great epic non-linear rpg.... will anyone deliver? no. Mass Effect maybe but I want more rpg gameplay less action gameplay. EVERYTHING has to be "action" now. Action RPGs are watered down trash most of the time.

You also dont see original concepts. Like Planescape Torment, or Fallout used to be. That goes for any game. Sure its near impossible to come up with an original game but people are just making newer versions of older games. They could at least be doing a newer version of an older game that hasn't been done in a while, like Master of Magic or X-Com.

So far i'm happy with the upcoming titles this year, first time in 5 years i can say that. Mass Effect, Age of Conan, Sins of a Solar Empire, and Spore I hope will turn things around. I still want a decent, party based, fantasy RPG that is a REAL rpg meaning you actually have conversations and role play..... Also I dont want Bethesda making fallout 3.

edit: IMO this all goes down to games being made for the mass media instead of the nerds who were gamers 10 years ago. Quality goes down when everything hits the mainstream as the general populace doesn't demand quality entertainment.

Also the fact that large mega companies that create monopolies on IP (nfl football with EA and dnd with atari) doesn't help as well. Also these companies are the top peddlers of trash games. Lucasarts used to be a GREAT company but they joined the axis of drivvle.

More companies need to go independent and use their own IP and just publish online or publish themselves if they have the ability. That is what bioware is doing because of Atari and its meddling.

[Favre]

I think Company of Heroes has made vast strides in RTS in the fact that they really have shifted the focus from just dominating each other with base rushes into small squad based combat that is fought all over the map. Its truly revolutionary in that aspect.

[Stalins Ghost]

I think Company of Heroes has made vast strides in RTS in the fact that they really have shifted the focus from just dominating each other with base rushes into small squad based combat that is fought all over the map. Its truly revolutionary in that aspect.

Agreed, although I'd say the major step took place in Dawn of War - CoH just used to capture points concept and expanded on it greatly. Thats what puts the focus on small scale squad tactics - in CoH they just made the single squad more useful in my eyes.

RTS's are the games living most in the past though. The problem is, as I see it, that the major RTS's are all competition based - CnC 3, Starcraft 2 etc, are all based for competition gaming. "Innovation" makes balancing hard and risks the game losing its status as a competition gaming title.

I'd love someone to expand on the Ground Control concept though. Do away with the completely unrealistic resource collection, base building etc and just focus on spending a limited amount of funds to create the best overall army.

More to come later....

[Pnutmaster]

edit: IMO this all goes down to games being made for the mass media instead of the nerds who were gamers 10 years ago. Quality goes down when everything hits the mainstream as the general populace doesn't demand quality entertainment.

Also the fact that large mega companies that create monopolies on IP (nfl football with EA and dnd with atari) doesn't help as well. Also these companies are the top peddlers of trash games. Lucasarts used to be a GREAT company but they joined the axis of drivvle.

More companies need to go independent and use their own IP and just publish online or publish themselves if they have the ability. That is what bioware is doing because of Atari and its meddling.

Quoted for truth.

I'm not sure who to blame when it comes to the absolute horror that is an EA game. The impersonal corporation entity, or the mindless jocks that buy NFL/NBA 200X every year for updated rosters and new lighting effects...

[Woad-Warrier]

Quoted for truth.

I'm not sure who to blame when it comes to the absolute horror that is an EA game. The impersonal corporation entity, or the mindless jocks that buy NFL/NBA 200X every year for updated rosters and new lighting effects...

[mightyfenrir]

Quoted for truth.

I'm not sure who to blame when it comes to the absolute horror that is an EA game. The impersonal corporation entity, or the mindless jocks that buy NFL/NBA 200X every year for updated rosters and new lighting effects...

When EA games were just sports they were great... need for speed was okay... BF1942 wasn't bad... then, well then it just got to be a bit much...

Call of Duty 2's health recharge (Halo as well) definitely works for me over the dumb health pack thing.

Killzone and Red Faction II also. I like Killzone, regardless of waht anyone says about teammates not dying after they take a rocket in the face haha.

[removeduser_487563287433]

Spore.

Spore.

Sporey Spore Spore Spore.


















Spore


























SPORE!
[move]Spore Spore Spore[/move]

[Anarius]

Spore is the "300" of games.

[Armfelt]

What's up with the RPG cliché where you start out as a peasant and as you return to your village from a trip to the woods you find your village burned down and its inhabitants murdered, then your father reveals on his dying breath that you aren't really his son but destined to save the kingdom.

[Rapax]

What's up with the RPG cliché where you start out as a peasant and as you return to your village from a trip to the woods you find your village burned down and its inhabitants murdered, then your father reveals on his dying breath that you aren't really his son but destined to save the kingdom.

It's a classic setup. The whole idea behind a RPG is to advance your character, to "level him up" and you can hardly do that if you start out as a big shot.