Spreading linked game titles to other systems...

[WhirlwindMonk]

Well, as I have seen, it seems more that focus is going into the game system more than the games... with better systems come better graphics, but what about better gameplay?
Or into making more money rather than pleasing the consumer... if you ask me, the happier the consumer/gamer, the greater the profit...

And I missed on what point you were being sarcastic on Dracil, but I'm not going to worry about it

I agree for the majority of games. I see so many FPSs that come out that have really nice graphics, a few more guns, and maybe a new vehicle. Some allow you to crouch behind stuff, some don't. Some have lots of types of grenades, some don't. It doesn't really matter. They all feel the same to me. Same with sports games. NHL 2856! NOW WITH SHOOTOUT MODE THAT WAS IN NHL 1994 FOR SEGA GENESIS!!! (something like that. I remember having shootout games on the old Sega, but then they dropped that mode for years before bringing it back as a "new" feature in like NHL 2K4 or something) FF XII (what I've played so far) has felt like they're pushing gameplay and all that stuff quite well. Oblivion feels the same way in some areas, and in others it felt like they were trying to mainstream it for the stupid 360. Thank goodness for mods, otherwise I'd still be staring at huge fonts intended for the TV, not a computer screen. I've also felt like the Revolution and the DS are trying to bring in new innovation in gameplay and such. But seriously, if I see people go nuts over one more sports game or FPS that's exactly like the last 300 overhyped members of their genre, I might just snap.

 

[Lithium Hobo]

I agree for the majority of games. I see so many FPSs that come out that have really nice graphics, a few more guns, and maybe a new vehicle. Some allow you to crouch behind stuff, some don't. Some have lots of types of grenades, some don't. It doesn't really matter. They all feel the same to me. Same with sports games. NHL 2856! NOW WITH SHOOTOUT MODE THAT WAS IN NHL 1994 FOR SEGA GENESIS!!! (something like that. I remember having shootout games on the old Sega, but then they dropped that mode for years before bringing it back as a "new" feature in like NHL 2K4 or something) FF XII (what I've played so far) has felt like they're pushing gameplay and all that stuff quite well. Oblivion feels the same way in some areas, and in others it felt like they were trying to mainstream it for the stupid 360. Thank goodness for mods, otherwise I'd still be staring at huge fonts intended for the TV, not a computer screen. I've also felt like the Revolution and the DS are trying to bring in new innovation in gameplay and such. But seriously, if I see people go nuts over one more sports game or FPS that's exactly like the last 300 overhyped members of their genre, I might just snap.

That could be said for just about any game. RPGs from Japan are usually all the same. Clumsy hero who is the chosen one with a hidden power, a female love interest who is linked to a royal blood line or soon will be, a strong big guy companion, impossible odds that if not met will see the world covered in darkness or just destroyed or both. And, of course, horribly pop Japanese songs with lyrics like "love, evil, destiny, light" all in the same line. And let's not forget my favorite pet peeve, this conversation:

Main character: "Hm, he said he was going to [important landmark]..."
Mysterious new character: "[important landmark]?..."
Main character: "What is it?"
Mysterious new character: "Nothing, nevermind...."

UGH! I hate that! It doesn't progress any story, it's annoying and so over done the fork goes right through it!

As you can see, all games have their extremes, and many are too biased to see past many of those stereotypes just as many developers are too scared to move past them in their games. The key is shifting through the crud and find something new, original, and most importantly: fun.

 

[WhirlwindMonk]

That could be said for just about any game. RPGs from Japan are usually all the same. Clumsy hero who is the chosen one with a hidden power, a female love interest who is linked to a royal blood line or soon will be, a strong big guy companion, impossible odds that if not met will see the world covered in darkness or just destroyed or both. And, of course, horribly pop Japanese songs with lyrics like "love, evil, destiny, light" all in the same line. And let's not forget my favorite pet peeve, this conversation:

Main character: "Hm, he said he was going to [important landmark]..."
Mysterious new character: "[important landmark]?..."
Main character: "What is it?"
Mysterious new character: "Nothing, nevermind...."

UGH! I hate that! It doesn't progress any story, it's annoying and so over done the fork goes right through it!

As you can see, all games have their extremes, and many are too biased to see past many of those stereotypes just as many developers are too scared to move past them in their games. The key is shifting through the crud and find something new, original, and most importantly: fun.

I agree you can take stuff to the extreme, but I find FPSs and sports games to be much closer to the extreme than RPGs. Yes, there are steriotypes, but they aren't always true, and they aren't the whole point of the game. I've played many games in all genres and I've found much more variety as far as gameplay, plot, characters, etc in RPGs than in many other genres put together. I mean, there's a reason my OpenGL programming book that ends with you writing a basic FPS is 300 pages while my DirectX one that ends with you writing a basic RPG is 800. There's just so much more there. But that's my opinion. Not everyone shares it. I just feel ripped off when I pay $50 for an FPS that gives me 10 hours of gameplay before I'm bored when I can pay $50 for an RPG that gives me 40 hours of play the first time through and another 30 hours the next time, and then 15-20 hours when I do a speed run through, and then 50 hours when I do a completionist run through... see my point?

I will admit though, FEAR is pretty awesome. The physics is nice, the graphics are nice, but the AI and the atmosphere are what I really enjoy. Just underestimating the AI on the easier difficulties has gotten me killed many times. And stuff jumping out at you and dodging around corners only to disappear, that's pretty awesome, imo. FEAR is the only FPS I've ever played I'd be willing to pay full price for.

 

[Lithium Hobo]

I agree you can take stuff to the extreme, but I find FPSs and sports games to be much closer to the extreme than RPGs. Yes, there are steriotypes, but they aren't always true, and they aren't the whole point of the game. I've played many games in all genres and I've found much more variety as far as gameplay, plot, characters, etc in RPGs than in many other genres put together. I mean, there's a reason my OpenGL programming book that ends with you writing a basic FPS is 300 pages while my DirectX one that ends with you writing a basic RPG is 800. There's just so much more there. But that's my opinion. Not everyone shares it. I just feel ripped off when I pay $50 for an FPS that gives me 10 hours of gameplay before I'm bored when I can pay $50 for an RPG that gives me 40 hours of play the first time through and another 30 hours the next time, and then 15-20 hours when I do a speed run through, and then 50 hours when I do a completionist run through... see my point?

I will admit though, FEAR is pretty awesome. The physics is nice, the graphics are nice, but the AI and the atmosphere are what I really enjoy. Just underestimating the AI on the easier difficulties has gotten me killed many times. And stuff jumping out at you and dodging around corners only to disappear, that's pretty awesome, imo. FEAR is the only FPS I've ever played I'd be willing to pay full price for.

That's because you're playing RPGs and FPSs on the same mind set. Most FPSs are popular because of the multiplayer, while RPGs are popular for a long last single player experience with a heavy story.

So when I want a good shoot 'em up that'll let me work out aggressions, I play a shooter. When I want a long game experience that sees my character evolve with the game, I pick up an RPG.

Another problem is that you have to look beyond the surface of the game. Take Gears of War for example. On the surface, you may see it as another shoot 'em up, alien vs. human, game. Far from it. Granted you shoot a lot, but there is much more tatics involved as not only do you take cover, but your enemies take it, and do a better job of it. It's story is rich with political intrigue, war propaganda, and when you read into the story enough...you'll actually sympathize with the enemy, the Locust, and see where they're coming from.

Now I look at Oblivion. Very fun game, very rich gameplay, but the story...okay, sorry Bethesda, but it was weak. You're the chosen one who has to save the world from an evil cult that seeks to bring "hell" on "earth"? Seen it a million times. Loved playing through it, though.

And in that, you can find rich story in an FPS and infinite playability in an RPG.

 

[JacobHall86]

Of course that would put Final Fantasy only on Nintendo, instead of Sony, since the original FF is on the Original NES, unless I am mistaken, which I dont think I am.

 

[WhirlwindMonk]

That's because you're playing RPGs and FPSs on the same mind set. Most FPSs are popular because of the multiplayer, while RPGs are popular for a long last single player experience with a heavy story.

So when I want a good shoot 'em up that'll let me work out aggressions, I play a shooter. When I want a long game experience that sees my character evolve with the game, I pick up an RPG.

Another problem is that you have to look beyond the surface of the game. Take Gears of War for example. On the surface, you may see it as another shoot 'em up, alien vs. human, game. Far from it. Granted you shoot a lot, but there is much more tatics involved as not only do you take cover, but your enemies take it, and do a better job of it. It's story is rich with political intrigue, war propaganda, and when you read into the story enough...you'll actually sympathize with the enemy, the Locust, and see where they're coming from.

Now I look at Oblivion. Very fun game, very rich gameplay, but the story...okay, sorry Bethesda, but it was weak. You're the chosen one who has to save the world from an evil cult that seeks to bring "hell" on "earth"? Seen it a million times. Loved playing through it, though.

And in that, you can find rich story in an FPS and infinite playability in an RPG.

I never said an FPS couldn't have a good story. But for the most part, they don't. I agree that they have their place, but so many of them just feel exactly the same to me. And I agree, FPSs are mainly for multiplayer, but the multiplayer feels the same in many of them, just with different weapons. FEAR, like I said above, is one where the single player is interesting and innovative. Halo 2, on the other hand... "There's a super special awesome sword now!! And...uhhh...you can dual wield!! And...umm...yeah...a new vehicle, I think? Or is it just an old one with a different paint job?" Nothing new or exciting enough for me to even spend $10 on it. I have Half-Life, HL 2, and FEAR. That covers about everything I ever would want to do with an FPS.

Though, from what you say about Gears of War, I might have to try that once I'm back at school and can possibly have access to a 360. The AI sounds about like FEAR, but I'm always up for a good story.

 

[JacobHall86]

That could be said for just about any game. RPGs from Japan are usually all the same. Clumsy hero who is the chosen one with a hidden power, a female love interest who is linked to a royal blood line or soon will be, a strong big guy companion, impossible odds that if not met will see the world covered in darkness or just destroyed or both. And, of course, horribly pop Japanese songs with lyrics like "love, evil, destiny, light" all in the same line. And let's not forget my favorite pet peeve, this conversation:

Main character: "Hm, he said he was going to [important landmark]..."
Mysterious new character: "[important landmark]?..."
Main character: "What is it?"
Mysterious new character: "Nothing, nevermind...."

UGH! I hate that! It doesn't progress any story, it's annoying and so over done the fork goes right through it!

As you can see, all games have their extremes, and many are too biased to see past many of those stereotypes just as many developers are too scared to move past them in their games. The key is shifting through the crud and find something new, original, and most importantly: fun.

Winner.

 

[Lithium Hobo]

I never said an FPS couldn't have a good story. But for the most part, they don't. I agree that they have their place, but so many of them just feel exactly the same to me. And I agree, FPSs are mainly for multiplayer, but the multiplayer feels the same in many of them, just with different weapons. FEAR, like I said above, is one where the single player is interesting and innovative. Halo 2, on the other hand... "There's a super special awesome sword now!! And...uhhh...you can dual wield!! And...umm...yeah...a new vehicle, I think? Or is it just an old one with a different paint job?" Nothing new or exciting enough for me to even spend $10 on it. I have Half-Life, HL 2, and FEAR. That covers about everything I ever would want to do with an FPS.

Though, from what you say about Gears of War, I might have to try that once I'm back at school and can possibly have access to a 360. The AI sounds about like FEAR, but I'm always up for a good story.

Halo was well liked because of the multiplayer and the story. It pulled a full turn around on the players and gave them something more to delve into. Then with the books, we got religious intrigue and understanding of the Covenant. Halo 2 was...yes, a disappointment, so you're right there that it was just a rehash of Halo, but still a fun game.

Now Gears of War I loved because of the story and AI and gameplay. The multiplayer is very fun, but the fact that you're out of the round after each death does kind of make it...slower than other FPSs, but you get used to it. Where Halo had a religious reason for the war, the enemy Locust in GoW have a more cultural and political reason for bursting forth and generally pwning the humans.

 

[Dust and Ashes]

I have Half-Life, HL 2, and FEAR. That covers about everything I ever would want to do with an FPS.

I'd highly recommend you pick up System Shock 2 if you haven't played it. Of course the graphics are very dated but the gameplay is amazing.

 

[Dracil]

That could be said for just about any game. RPGs from Japan are usually all the same. Clumsy hero who is the chosen one with a hidden power, a female love interest who is linked to a royal blood line or soon will be, a strong big guy companion, impossible odds that if not met will see the world covered in darkness or just destroyed or both. And, of course, horribly pop Japanese songs with lyrics like "love, evil, destiny, light" all in the same line. And let's not forget my favorite pet peeve, this conversation:

Main character: "Hm, he said he was going to [important landmark]..."
Mysterious new character: "[important landmark]?..."
Main character: "What is it?"
Mysterious new character: "Nothing, nevermind...."

UGH! I hate that! It doesn't progress any story, it's annoying and so over done the fork goes right through it!

As you can see, all games have their extremes, and many are too biased to see past many of those stereotypes just as many developers are too scared to move past them in their games. The key is shifting through the crud and find something new, original, and most importantly: fun.

Stop playing Japanese Console RPGs from the same series and try some PC ones by other companies?

 

[WhirlwindMonk]

I'd highly recommend you pick up System Shock 2 if you haven't played it. Of course the graphics are very dated but the gameplay is amazing.

Ah! forgot about that one. I haven't had a chance to beat it, but I have played it and do enjoy it. Creepy like FEAR, and has sort of an RPG-ish feel to it with the stat and psionic power system.

 

[BrotherAtArms]

Of course that would put Final Fantasy only on Nintendo, instead of Sony, since the original FF is on the Original NES, unless I am mistaken, which I dont think I am.

Well considering that all the old school NES games were put onto the PS.
FF I, II, IV, V, & VI.
They skipped III for some retarded reason, and when they finally decide to remake it onto a newer system, they put it on a completely different system, forcing the more 'hardcore gamers' to buy that system just so they can play the game.