Post by elchevalier on Jul 30, 2011 11:27:24 GMT -5
The average lenght of a "good" game is somewhere around 40 hours
Who the hell came up with this idiotic idea? Because it doesn't even apply to rpg's. Final Fantasy IV (snes) could be finished in 20 hours, and they were still a blast. I think the issue of low difficulty in most games today plays a crucial role in this issue: games are not meant to be challenging anymore, they are mean to be "longer" and thus more repetitive, tedious, and just creating the illusion for many that doing the same thing for more time is far better than having a bigger challenge in a shorter ammount of time.
Of course, it comes to play how damn expensive this hobby has become, people feel they re not getting all their "money" if the game is not filled with all sorts of stuff. So, in the other hand of the coin, many games with abysmal solo campaigns (basically every popular FPS today) replace the challenge with online multiplayer, and other gimmicks, which brings us to:
Online multiplayer is the wave of the present/future dude!.
Now, being able to play online is not a bad thing per se, but if this is going to:
-Take away time from the developers to focus on the single campaign
-Shoved down the game for the sake of it
-Rise the cost of developing the game
-Not very fun or creative to begin with
Then DON'T do it, just don't, there's no need for it. Instead of that, how about offline co-op? You know, being able to play with somebody, right there with you? Neverless, forced online multiplayer is just part of the whole concept of games today trying to muli-task in all the wrong directions.
Western developers are so ahead of their japanese counterparts today!
Boy does this one is pimped to hell and back by the local vg media, that if you're not jerking off to Fallout 3 or something like that you are doing it wrong. Both sides are more or less on a similar situation, japanese developers just moved straight to the handheld, thanks to the now absurdly high prices to develop games. Both sides seem to be stuck in a certain mentality, both sides have are playing it "safe" too. Nobody is ahead of nobody, and for that matter, shouldn't the focus here be both sides making good games, and not just who beat who? Who turned this into a race?
Indie-developed games are the wave of the future dude!
That is if you love playing dozens of mediocre flash based puzzle-plataformers until the earth freezes.
HD graphics or GTFO
You would think that by this point somebody would had understand this, just as the whole "online gaming is the future" thing are not what will make a console sell well, and games be good. The wii is the best selling console of this generation, and any other generation, and it didn't had the need for those super pimped graphics every "core" gamer salivates. HD is nice, and the wii u is going to have it, but the jump was just too fast, and once more, the developing costs going trought the roof has done no good to the industry at all. Like zero, nada.
Fighting games revived
Financially yes, quality-wise? They really haven't moved much, if any. Give me Vampire Savior, Mark of the Wolves or Guilty Gear XX any day over Street Boredom IV, King of Glitches XXXXX or Blazblue: Crappy fanction the game.
Who the hell came up with this idiotic idea? Because it doesn't even apply to rpg's. Final Fantasy IV (snes) could be finished in 20 hours, and they were still a blast. I think the issue of low difficulty in most games today plays a crucial role in this issue: games are not meant to be challenging anymore, they are mean to be "longer" and thus more repetitive, tedious, and just creating the illusion for many that doing the same thing for more time is far better than having a bigger challenge in a shorter ammount of time.
Of course, it comes to play how damn expensive this hobby has become, people feel they re not getting all their "money" if the game is not filled with all sorts of stuff. So, in the other hand of the coin, many games with abysmal solo campaigns (basically every popular FPS today) replace the challenge with online multiplayer, and other gimmicks, which brings us to:
Online multiplayer is the wave of the present/future dude!.
Now, being able to play online is not a bad thing per se, but if this is going to:
-Take away time from the developers to focus on the single campaign
-Shoved down the game for the sake of it
-Rise the cost of developing the game
-Not very fun or creative to begin with
Then DON'T do it, just don't, there's no need for it. Instead of that, how about offline co-op? You know, being able to play with somebody, right there with you? Neverless, forced online multiplayer is just part of the whole concept of games today trying to muli-task in all the wrong directions.
Western developers are so ahead of their japanese counterparts today!
Boy does this one is pimped to hell and back by the local vg media, that if you're not jerking off to Fallout 3 or something like that you are doing it wrong. Both sides are more or less on a similar situation, japanese developers just moved straight to the handheld, thanks to the now absurdly high prices to develop games. Both sides seem to be stuck in a certain mentality, both sides have are playing it "safe" too. Nobody is ahead of nobody, and for that matter, shouldn't the focus here be both sides making good games, and not just who beat who? Who turned this into a race?
Indie-developed games are the wave of the future dude!
That is if you love playing dozens of mediocre flash based puzzle-plataformers until the earth freezes.
HD graphics or GTFO
You would think that by this point somebody would had understand this, just as the whole "online gaming is the future" thing are not what will make a console sell well, and games be good. The wii is the best selling console of this generation, and any other generation, and it didn't had the need for those super pimped graphics every "core" gamer salivates. HD is nice, and the wii u is going to have it, but the jump was just too fast, and once more, the developing costs going trought the roof has done no good to the industry at all. Like zero, nada.
Fighting games revived
Financially yes, quality-wise? They really haven't moved much, if any. Give me Vampire Savior, Mark of the Wolves or Guilty Gear XX any day over Street Boredom IV, King of Glitches XXXXX or Blazblue: Crappy fanction the game.
