Advertisement
What does anybody feel is missing in the gamiing world currently? Any specific genres, styles, anything?
Advertisement
Advertisement
-
Re: Immediate future
Tue, October 28, 2003 - 11:04 AMI dunno about specific genres or styles, but there's some crossovers I'd love.
Just in the videogame field, I'd LOVE a RainbowSix or X-Com style game about monster hunting, sort of like the book Vampire$. Either tactical or fps-tactical, with different loadouts, that type of thing. For that matter, a "Last Man on Earth" simulator, a la I Am Legend or Dawn of the Dead would be great, too.
-
Re: Immediate future
Wed, October 29, 2003 - 9:07 AMI'd love to see more games with open-ended tech-trees.
While most games go for a 'this tech leads to this tech, etc.' I'd like to see more game where you could 'invent' completely new technologies.
-
-
Re: Immediate future
Wed, October 29, 2003 - 11:56 AMThat would be cool, but it could be incredibly hard to do without making it unbalancing. The testing costs would be prohibitive. But if it were attached to a sufficiently large project, it could be cool.
Of course, the flipside of this is that it would be way too easy to follow a lame technology without knowing it. And ultimately, someone would just figure out a supreme ultimate research queue that would allow them to get to some sort of game ending technology as quickly as possible, and you'd be stuck with the tech tree equivalent of the zerg rush building queue game that Starcraft has turned into.
Still, if you could get around those problems, it could be really neat. -
-
Re: Immediate future
Thu, October 30, 2003 - 9:19 AMTwo ideas I had to limit problems like this:
Randomly generated tech trees, so there's no one guaranteed path to game dominance.
Ro-Sham-bo model, where tech a trumps tech b trumps tech c trumps tech a.
-
-
Re: Immediate future
Sat, November 1, 2003 - 10:10 PMRandgen seems to annoy more players, as they feel that they never get to "learn" it. Additionaly, the "revelation of the designer's vision" effect is lost on me. I've never cared for the look of a randomly generated dungeon, for example, versus seing one sculpted (visually, location of enemies, etc) by a human eye.
From roleplay to cards to console-fighting games, glorified roshambo systems seem to entertain players, and present them with a balancing force they are agreeable with.
-
-
-
-
Re: Immediate future
Mon, November 3, 2003 - 7:18 AMI would love to see more nonviolent games. Entirely nonviolent games would be cool, but maybe just limiting the ways that the player can win/progress to being something other than bashing on bad guys. Or being bashed on by bad guys, for that matter.
Don't get me wrong, GTA is brilliant fun, and I've played the hell out of 3 and Vice City. I love Doom(II)/Quake(I,II,III), and it's ilk, and have played them through to the very end. I've even bought expansion packs (usually to the derision of any friends present at purchase, and sad disappointment later). However, the more I see these done, the more "standard" FPS or RTS games I see, the more I wish game marketers would try to convince the higher ups to try new stuff, rather than try to make a hit game by doing what everyone else is doing.</soapbox>Whoa, sorry about that.
Japan has got dating games, convenience store simulators, and train-conducting games. None of these would handily port to the western audience, but are offered here as food for thought about how many weird things about which we /could/ make games.
The Savage game sounded like a great new hybrid, but probably not well enough funded to realize its full potential.
www.gamespot.com/pc/action...index.html
In and of itself though, it looks like a realtime strategy game that requires players to take the role of individual units in a 3rd person combat game. A neat concept, even it is only taking two existing (and somewhat played out) ideas and putting them in a blender.
Apex sounded nice (I don't own an xbox); I wonder how many things would work by taking one kind of established gamplay, then strapping some kind of RPG/empirebuilding element into it.
The X-Com/vampire/zombie game is a swell idea, btw. -
-
Re: Immediate future
Mon, November 3, 2003 - 1:13 PMMan, I remeber my Warcraft III phase. It took some time to go through the entire game. It was rich enough with a pretty enough story that by the end I was sick of all the fighting. Granted, it's called WARcraft, so I expect some carnage and not much else, but it was kinda like a kid with cake. I got too much. When I finally finished, I just wanted to play solitaire and tetrisphere! No more carnage.
Railroad Tycoon II Platinum is an excellent example of a well funded, finely polished, enveloping game environment that doesn't have murder at the core. I recommend it to most people as the best example of how to make a "game environment" based on something besides death/agression.
I think that people are familiar enough with the staples of resource mgmt./rpg concepts now that you will see it infused into other genres more and more. It will add an extra level of complexity to well established genres (read: overpublished) like fps's and racers, so that fans of the style will have something "new" instead of better graphics on the same core mechanics. The football games are a good example of this, since they compete on the virtues of their "dynasty/history/inter-season/farm team/etc." modes.
-
Re: Immediate future
Sun, August 20, 2006 - 5:15 AMI agree. all i see in most games is... the goal is to kill or hurt somthing that is bad. i mean these game are built from the bottom up to be evil vs good. They reall should make somthing like... i dont know. A ultra hybrid game like GTA+tetris+diablo.. somthing like that.
Big citys with cars and such you could drive. but add an rpg eliment. and not monseter everywhere. Somthing more like real life. and a tone of real life puzles. like well trying to get past human limit. now that would be awesome. A game where you could fly by will alone, but to do that. would be really frigen hard. i dont know. I would like to see a game where monsters and animal dont all attack you......*cough* Ovlivion, well thats unless they are of the vicious type like a lion or simular. NO MORE GIANT RATS TRYING TO KILL ME!!!! AND spiders too.
-
-
Re: Immediate future
Sun, August 20, 2006 - 5:05 AMMy anwer is:
Alout is missing, as Well as we should stop calling everything NextGen. I mean how can it be next gen if it coming out this gen? im asumming its just a flash lable to sell things. sorry off track *cough*
Games that have great interactivity, reguarless of the type of game. Being able to do meaninless things in a game, that programers put there just for the hell of it.
Overall gameplay is mising from games!!!!!
So meny games come out that are just horable? im sure its alout.
I own about 40 or so pc games, and I like any type of game wether its a platformer or stadegy.
only a few do I find next to imposable to set down. Games like Diablo, Farcry, Shenmue, Deus ex 1.... the 2nd one sucked.
Games like this had so much gameplay.
Diablo just had a ton of items to be had, a rich user interface that made the game adicting.
Farcray was no only beauifull the game play was fast paced at times, and fun.
Deus ex well this game is one of my faves. From a diblo like interface, but a 1st person shooter rpg. where you could. open doors with out said item if you could ramdomly figure out the pass code was brialiant! Basicly it was and Rpg 1st person game.
Shenmue, had just a ton of meaninless stuff to collect, but meaninless doesnt mean it want fun. I would spend days just collection stuff at the shops, and stores in the rich enviorment this game offered.
So whats missing in curent game. Basicly what I described in the games above.