Sorry your browser is not supported!

You are using an outdated browser that does not support modern web technologies, in order to use this site please update to a new browser.

Browsers supported include Chrome, FireFox, Safari, Opera, Internet Explorer 10+ or Microsoft Edge.

Geek Culture / What would you like in a game

Author
Message
PiratSS
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 18th Oct 2002
Location:
Posted: 21st Nov 2004 21:10
Link
What is the best aspect of the game? Is it the graphics? The gameplay? The ragdolls?

Tell me your opinions, I really want to hear them.
Back to top
Profile PM
Lukas W
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th Sep 2003
Location: Sweden
Posted: 21st Nov 2004 21:32
Link
the story!


This is a Map Editor ver 2 DEMO Out now! http://www.tiame.tk
Back to top
Profile PM Email
BearCDPOLD
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 16th Oct 2003
Location: AZ,USA
Posted: 21st Nov 2004 22:01
Link
Everything. If you do everything well (which includes addicting gameplay) you have yourself a good game.

See HalfLife, Zelda, Halo/2, Super Mario, Pac Man

Crazy Donut Productions, Current Project: Project Starbuks
Sony stole our name!
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Chris K
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 7th Oct 2003
Location: Lake Hylia
Posted: 21st Nov 2004 22:09
Link
Pac Man is not a good game. What is this obsession with saying old games are good? They're not.

That's why GTA - SA, Halo, HL2 etc. are No. 1 and Tetris isn't. Games today are a whole new art form - much more like films than games.
Back to top
Profile PM
BearCDPOLD
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 16th Oct 2003
Location: AZ,USA
Posted: 21st Nov 2004 22:14
Link
But Pac Man is fun. It had the most colorful graphics of its time, cool little sounds, and interesting characters(ie: the first enemies not to be a block or alien).

Crazy Donut Productions, Current Project: Project Starbuks
Sony stole our name!
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Ilya
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 10th Aug 2003
Location:
Posted: 21st Nov 2004 22:16
Link
It's fun enough to play halfway through the first level for me.

Quote: "I've seen the word programming and I'm not sure what it means. Anybody please explain?"


Quote: "We shouldn't sacrifice the truth to preserve "balance"."
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
BearCDPOLD
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 16th Oct 2003
Location: AZ,USA
Posted: 21st Nov 2004 22:17
Link
You guys need to go get some emulators and play all these old games, they will keep you occupied for hours once you get into them.

Crazy Donut Productions, Current Project: Project Starbuks
Sony stole our name!
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Van B
Moderator
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Oct 2002
Location: Sunnyvale
Posted: 21st Nov 2004 22:24 Edited at: 21st Nov 2004 22:27
Link
I like to be able to loose myself in a game, like I suppose it has to have more besides a good plot, or better still, no plot. For FPS games, I like the Battlefield style, because every game is different, and your following a destinct goal, but there's many ways to achieve it. Games like Call of Duty are great fun, but it's that disposable fun that ultimately only lasts until you finish the game.

I guess I'm still waiting on that do-what-the-hell-you-like RPG, Fable is a step in the right direction, but falls very short of what we were hoping.

Bear,
Agreed, I tend to play old ST games through STeem, like Captive or Logical, but I'm eagerly awaiting a stack of MAME games (like 3 DVD's worth!) - old arcade games are great for that quick fix.


Van-B


It's c**p being the only coder in the village.
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Chris K
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 7th Oct 2003
Location: Lake Hylia
Posted: 21st Nov 2004 22:26
Link
Oh FFS.

How can you compare Pac-Man and Half-life? It's like comparing a clog and a Ferrari Enzo.

Quote: "It had the most colorful graphics of its time, cool little sounds, and interesting characters(ie: the first enemies not to be a block or alien)."


I don't care if it was the best game of its time! Now it's crap. It doesn't matter if it did it first - other games have done it better.

Characters in, for example, The Getaway 2, are complex. They have real personalities. Same with GTA and HL2.

"Cool little sounds"?! So what?! Deus Ex has one of the best scores that I have heard in any game or film.
Back to top
Profile PM
Newbie Brogo
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 10th Jul 2003
Location: In a Pool of Cats
Posted: 21st Nov 2004 22:56 Edited at: 21st Nov 2004 22:57
Link
I need graphics and good gameplay to get me in the game, if there are amazing graphics but all you do is sit and look at things, then look at more things until you explode... Isn't that great... Well... Maybe on some occasions.... But not now


WooT!
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Neofish
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 7th Apr 2004
Location: A swimming pool of coke
Posted: 21st Nov 2004 23:01
Link
Game play followed by graphics - good graphics can mask poor gameplay, and if the graphics aren't too bad then good gameplay will mask them (depends on game type of course)

[center]int N30F15H,a=1; do { N30F15H++; } while (a==1);
[center]
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Benjamin
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 24th Nov 2002
Location: France
Posted: 22nd Nov 2004 00:48 Edited at: 22nd Nov 2004 00:50
Link
Quote: "How can you compare Pac-Man and Half-life? It's like comparing a clog and a Ferrari Enzo."

You can't. Pac-man was a way more original idea. Half life is an fps, you go around shooting things. Woah I couldn't of thought of that idea myself .

For me pacman is way more addictive(or addicting as people like to say) than Half life.

AKA teh great Pet Rat.
Peace sells...but who's buying??
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Neofish
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 7th Apr 2004
Location: A swimming pool of coke
Posted: 22nd Nov 2004 01:04
Link
Half-Life was very addictive, but not because of the game type, but the gameplay (and the graphics at the time ), but I never found pacman addicitve, never liked it although arcade games like Pacman are addictive (I couldn't stop playing Captian Comic )

[center]int N30F15H,a=1; do { N30F15H++; } while (a==1);
[center]
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
BearCDPOLD
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 16th Oct 2003
Location: AZ,USA
Posted: 22nd Nov 2004 02:14
Link
Don't forget Galaga

Crazy Donut Productions, Current Project: Project Starbuks
Sony stole our name!
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Phaelax
DBPro Master
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 16th Apr 2003
Location: Metropia
Posted: 22nd Nov 2004 04:50
Link
hookers, fast cars, and sin.

"eureka" - Archimedes
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Manticore Night
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Oct 2003
Location: Ouinnipeg
Posted: 22nd Nov 2004 05:13
Link
fast paced and having big explosions, or somthing that is really interesting.

It's amazing how much TV has raised us. (Bart Simpson)
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
PiratSS
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 18th Oct 2002
Location:
Posted: 22nd Nov 2004 09:03
Link
Thank you for your feedback
Back to top
Profile PM
Aoneweb
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Sep 2002
Location: Tucson, Arizona
Posted: 22nd Nov 2004 09:16
Link
Phaelax, there is a game like that, it,s called Sin Fast Hookers

Toshiba Sattelite, 2GHz,Nvidia GeForce4 420go, Windows XP Home. www.aoneweb.com
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Jeku
Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Jul 2003
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Posted: 22nd Nov 2004 14:10
Link
Quote: "I don't care if it was the best game of its time! Now it's crap. "


Chris, your argument is bunk. It's like saying the original Star Wars movie is crap because modern movies have better special effects

Where do you think the inspiration for modern games come from? Retro, of course. Pick any of the billions of modern games--- they were all inspired by games like Spy Hunter, Galaga, 1942, Contra, Wolf3D, Tetris, etc. etc.


--[GameBasic - Coming Soon]-- ^^^ banner generously designed by TheBigBabou
Back to top
Profile PM Website
Mnemonix
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 2nd Dec 2002
Location: Skaro
Posted: 24th Nov 2004 04:23 Edited at: 24th Nov 2004 04:28
Link
Chris K.

Did you ever think that without old games, the new games would not be like they are now. Pac-Man provided inspiration to other game developers, whose game provided inspiration and etc. etc.

@PiratSS.

Its no good concentrating on a single aspect of a game. This creates bad games not good ones.

The 3d chat is coming...
Rights For Traffic Cones!
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
bitJericho
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Oct 2002
Location: United States
Posted: 24th Nov 2004 04:34
Link
I love pacman:o

Still takes quarters out of my pocket every time i see a cabinet.. which is getting rarer and rarer these days.. I'm surprised they're still around at all though..

I can play a good 15 to 20 minutes before I end up getting killed

[center]
Come write!
Yarr join LoGD, and defeat other coders!
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Ilya
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 10th Aug 2003
Location:
Posted: 24th Nov 2004 04:48
Link
Quote: "It's like saying the original Star Wars movie is crap because modern movies have better special effects"

Or that Pacman's(contraction, not ownership) is crap because modern games are so much better, and by today's standards, it's crap.

Quote: "Did you ever think that without old games, the new games would not be like they are now."

Yes, they would be like old games.

Quote: "Pac-Man provided inspiration to other game developers,"

And is now crap.

Quote: "Pac-man was a way more original idea."

And so was an FPS, when it was created. But developers liked the idea of an FPS, so they made hundreds of thousands of them(and that's a good thing).

Quote: "I've seen the word programming and I'm not sure what it means. Anybody please explain?"


Quote: "We shouldn't sacrifice the truth to preserve "balance"."
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Jeku
Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Jul 2003
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Posted: 24th Nov 2004 04:58 Edited at: 24th Nov 2004 04:58
Link
Quote: "(and that's a good thing)."


If you say so. I'd rather have half a dozen game-of-the-year FPS' than the hundreds of thousands of cookie-cutter FPS' we put up with now.


--[GameBasic - Coming Soon]-- ^^^ banner generously designed by TheBigBabou
Back to top
Profile PM Website
Ilya
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 10th Aug 2003
Location:
Posted: 24th Nov 2004 05:01 Edited at: 24th Nov 2004 05:01
Link
Many are better than few.
It's not hard to pick out the good FPSes.

Quote: "I've seen the word programming and I'm not sure what it means. Anybody please explain?"


Quote: "We shouldn't sacrifice the truth to preserve "balance"."
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Chris K
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 7th Oct 2003
Location: Lake Hylia
Posted: 24th Nov 2004 05:24 Edited at: 24th Nov 2004 05:26
Link
OK, look. I understand that Pacman, Tetris etc. were vital in forwarding games and revolutionary in their day but they simply do not compare to today's games.

DOS inspired Windows 1.0 inspired 3.1, 95, ...
Still, I don't think anyone would say that DOS is comparable to XP. Just like Telnet isn't comparable to Firefox.

Do you not see that it's not just the graphics that have improved between Pacman & HL2?
HL2 is a completely different animal. It's a work of art. The differences are innumerable.

Computer games are no longer just little games. I really think people shouldn't be looking back in games, now is the time of brilliance. Rockstar etc. are the Shakespeares of the games industry. We're in the middle of a fricking renaissance and people still hold this ridiculous obsession with old games. Just look at the games coming out/ in development at the moment (HL2, U3, Stalker)

Valve/ Rockstar etc. are way better game makers than the team behind Pacman. It's not just the technology, it's the people.

If anyone of you, when offer a choice between two rooms, one containing a Alienware PC running HL2 and one containing a B&W version of Tetris, would chose Tetris I might accept you're argument but I doubt that would happen.
Back to top
Profile PM
Nicholas Thompson
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 6th Sep 2004
Location: Bognor Regis, UK
Posted: 24th Nov 2004 05:43 Edited at: 24th Nov 2004 05:43
Link
Hahaha.. Thats a classic! Have yo ever used Steam? If so, how can yo claim Valve are better (j/k)

Seriously though.. Think of it this way. Pac man was what - 30 years ago and we're still talking about it. Do you think in 2034 anyone will know what Half Life (the game) is?

Also.. I think its funny how so many people are praising Half Life 2. I have been eagerly awaiting it for over a year as I'm sure everyone has. I played it for just over an hour last week and have yet to feel the urge to load it again. I found it THAT boring!!! Its a worse version of HL1 in my opinion. Yeah it has a graphics engine second to none right now.. The plot is fairly medicore up to the point I got to (endlessly driving around in a hoverboat dodging explosives). Sound... Is ok. Physics, again currently second to none.. Although Walabers Newton DLL does some pretty impressive stuff for a FRACTION of the price

The point Im tryign to make is.. Yes Pacman is old, but HL2 sucks in comparison. When Pacman was released, people were addicted to it for years (litterally). In 1 year time I bet I wont want to play HL2 ever again.

And dont get me wrong, its not just HL2. Doom 3 was a waste of time. It took me 45 minutes to regain the hard disk space that was taking up.. It took me even longer to get over the fact I'm never seeing THAT £30 again...

I cant seriously think of ANY games out right now that I will want to play in 10 years. But now someone has mentioned Pacman, I have got this rush to go looking through all my old games.

Some of them were the most origional and playable games I have ever seen! I just wish I had their imagination.

Some of the games coming out now, I see and think that looks nice.. but wait.. it looks like that last 100 versions of the FPS/Football game/whatever.

People now are so unfortunately addicted to realism that they 99.999999% of the time forget that ONE SINGLE thing that makes a game good.. Its adictiveness factor. That can come in any form.. For some its a good plot. For others, repetitive fun action (See Doom 1 OR PACMAN!).. It can even come in the form of humour, Duke Nukem 3D was brilliant for it even though it wasn't too dissimilar from Doom 1 and 2.

Quote: "We're in the middle of a fricking renaissance and people still hold this ridiculous obsession with old games"

What a nice note to end on.. This isn't a renasance. Most modern games REALLY are not ground breaking "new" games. They are old games with makeup on. HL2 you run around and shoot things. There is more eye candy, better physics and possibly better AI. IMPORTANT NOTE: Dont ever forgot though that to run HL2, you need a total of around 1000x the processing power, 1000x more RAM, 1Kg of copper to keep it all cool and plenty more compared to the beasts that ran the likes of PacMan and Doom, etc.

Can you HONESTLY say that HL2 is 1000x better than an old game? Take away its makeup, etc I think its nothing more than an old game.

Thats my opinion, its not meant to be offensive.. But take it how you will.

Nick

[EDIT] Wow I didn't realised I'd rambled for that long!! [/EDIT]

My Website:
http://www.thingy-ma-jig.co.uk
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Ian T
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 12th Sep 2002
Location: Around
Posted: 24th Nov 2004 05:48 Edited at: 24th Nov 2004 05:50
Link
Quote: "Pac man was what - 30 years ago and we're still talking about it. Do you think in 2034 anyone will know what Half Life (the game) is?"


.1 PacMan was one of the pioneers of gaming, period. That kind of opportunity simply isn't around anymore, so it's an unfair comparisin.

.2 Yes, I'm sure there will be a niche of fans who know about and possibly play Half-Life and its sequels. Yes, sequels-- face it, do any PacMan gamers today play the original copy ?


Oh yeah, and who said that a game's quality in relation to another was divided by its hardware requirments? I see no logic in that whatsoever.

[center]
"Thanks for the poncho..."
--Bill Clinton
Back to top
Profile PM
Ilya
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 10th Aug 2003
Location:
Posted: 24th Nov 2004 05:50
Link
Quote: "Yes Pacman is old, but HL2 sucks in comparison."

No, it's just that we're getting used to newer technology, and it's harder to make newer technology.
Think of technolog/time as half of a sine wave.
If you gave someone that plays PacMan a modern game, I wonder how long they would play it for.

Quote: "Can you HONESTLY say that HL2 is 1000x better than an old game?"

Yes, and just because it uses 1000x more of some things doesn't mean it should be 1000x better.

Quote: "you need a total of around 1000x the processing power, 1000x more RAM, 1Kg of copper"

And we have that due to the fact that computers are getting better.

Quote: "I've seen the word programming and I'm not sure what it means. Anybody please explain?"


Quote: "We shouldn't sacrifice the truth to preserve "balance"."
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Neofish
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 7th Apr 2004
Location: A swimming pool of coke
Posted: 24th Nov 2004 05:55
Link
Quote: "Just like Telnet isn't comparable to Firefox."

Since when was Telnet a browser!?!

[center]int N30F15H,a=1; do { N30F15H++; } while (a==1);
[center]
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Chris K
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 7th Oct 2003
Location: Lake Hylia
Posted: 24th Nov 2004 05:55
Link
OK, so if the original games are the best, what's the point in still making games?

I think that saying addictiveness is the only thing that should drive games is small minded. I think that there is more to offer than that and developers are realising it at the moment.

You cannot say that modern games are just old games with makeup on. Pacman has no storyline. It therefore falls well short of Deus Ex which has a brilliant story line. People will rather play Deus Ex than Pacman in the future. It excels in literally every way.

Name one way Pacman is better than Deus Ex. And please don't say it is more addictive. I am one of the next generation of gamers and, I'm sorry, I need more to entertain me than chasing dots round a maze. Modern games give me not only beautiful artwork but real intelectual stimulation.
Back to top
Profile PM
TKF15H
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Jul 2003
Location: Rio de Janeiro
Posted: 24th Nov 2004 06:00
Link
Quote: "If anyone of you, when offer a choice between two rooms, one containing a Alienware PC running HL2 and one containing a B&W version of Tetris, would chose Tetris I might accept you're argument but I doubt that would happen."

Well, I'd chose the Alienware PC for two reasons:
one: I haven't played HL2 yet, so I'd like to try something new.
two: I have a Sharp Wizard OZ-770, which has tetris on it anyway, so if I get bored of HL2...


Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Nicholas Thompson
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 6th Sep 2004
Location: Bognor Regis, UK
Posted: 24th Nov 2004 06:03
Link
I personally dont think they're getting better.. We're pushing them harder. I know technology has come on and we now have the ability to make nanometer stuff and micrometer stuff and god knows what else they haven't let on yet.. But I stick by my opinion that modern games dont live up to the power they have got.

Quote: "a game's quality in relation to another was divided by its hardware requirments? I see no logic in that whatsoever."


The logic wasn't that it gets divided by computer power (otherwise there would be some TRUELY tragic games now ). The point was, if any, power shouldn't make any difference! You shouldn't NEED a million GigaBiggaMegaSquegaQuads of storage and speed to make a game good and fun.

The origional post was about:
Quote: " What is the best aspect of the game? Is it the graphics? The gameplay? The ragdolls?"


I have merely stated my opinion that its gameplay. I dont think you NEED state of the art graphics to make a good GAME. In fact, you dont need a computer at all to make a good game!

Quote: "PacMan was one of the pioneers of gaming, period. That kind of opportunity simply isn't around anymore, so it's an unfair comparisin."


I think that oppertunity IS around. Its just harder to find. If we took that view as a general rule then the PC's that are out now are the best there will ever be because they've been made! There is no oppertunity to make new ones! (ok not the best example).. Take music. Classical evolved into whatever became popular after it.
Origional games ARE possible.

Take Uplink. Its a hacking game. That had NEVER been done before and that is the most recent game to keep me addicted to it for more than a day. It took me months to put that game down.

I'm sure if I could be bothered I could think of more origional games, but I cant

Hehe.. I kinda expected that post to recieve those kinda points.

Maybe I was being a little extreeme. I still stand by my opinions though:
(1) HL2 sucks in comparision with old games.
(2) Games now do not do the power they have justice
(3) Game makers have the wrong priority with Eye-candy over gameplay.

Again - these are my opinions!

I actually accpet (tho it might not sound like it) that other people disagree. And good for you to not just regurgetate what other people say but instead form your own opinions.

Just out of interest, @ChrisK and @Mouse.. How many "classics" would you say you've played?

My Website:
http://www.thingy-ma-jig.co.uk
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Nicholas Thompson
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 6th Sep 2004
Location: Bognor Regis, UK
Posted: 24th Nov 2004 06:06
Link
@ChrisK:
Quote: "real intelectual stimulation"

Try tetris Hehe..

As for artwork, thats only recently been an option due to hardware improvements.

But WHY do you NEED good graphics? Fair enough WANT them.. I want them. I'd rather have gameplay though, if I had to chose. Ideally I'd like both.

Yeah Deus X has good plot (I have never played it).. But so do some old games. And again - why do you need a plot?

Counterstrike is played on the internet and each round has about as much plot as a Pacman game (ie dont die and kill anything that moves) yet both those are/were the most popular games of their genre.

My Website:
http://www.thingy-ma-jig.co.uk
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
TravisP
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 30th Jun 2004
Location: Behind you, with a knife!
Posted: 24th Nov 2004 06:09
Link
Gameplay is all that matters...to me

Note: The above I didn't say, your just crazy.
Back to top
Profile PM Website
Chris K
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 7th Oct 2003
Location: Lake Hylia
Posted: 24th Nov 2004 06:16
Link
OK, I don't think you really understand my point. Let me put it to you this way-

If I were to take an Alienware PC & HL2 back to when Pacman came out, do you think anyone would look twice at Pacman?

No. They would have free choice between two games, they wouldn't have seen either before and they would undoubtedly choose HL2.

They would think "Pacman is a tiny bit fun, but HL2 stimulates me on a million different levels, it really transports me into another world, I can immerse myself in it! It tells a story! Why, that lets it stand against such other storytelling art forms as literature, theatre and film."

No comparison.

No old games have good plots. Not the games your talking about definately. In fact, no games had good plots until Unreal, HL, Deus Ex, Max Payne - wait a minute. They're part of the gaming revolution I'm talking about.
Back to top
Profile PM
Nicholas Thompson
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 6th Sep 2004
Location: Bognor Regis, UK
Posted: 24th Nov 2004 06:28
Link
I dont think you're making a fair comparision. That was my point.

Yes I agree, HL2's Plot, Graphics, Sound and physics are better than Pacman (tho I argue about gamplay )

MY point was in context. At the time, Pacman was great. It didn't NEED a plot or graphics to be good. Neither did tetris.

BUT I agree with you, all these new things ARE nice.

I DONT agree with your claim that they are part of a "gaming revolution".. I dont think they quite make the level of revolutionary. They are better but not revolutionary. The first revolutionary games were the first 3D games, the first FPS, the first GAME, etc.. These games you mention are not really much more than "version 2"'s of the oldies we mention. Yeah they have longer/better plots, etc.. But they're nothing particularly new!

Now, if HL2 had come with a Virtual Reality kit instead of a graphics engine that tried to set fire to the graphics card, then I would agree it was revolutionary. But at the end of the day, HL2 I dont think is HL2. I think its HL1.5. Different plot, different graphics.. but at the end of the day its an FPS. As I recall (I'm willing to be corrected) HL2 doesn't have a multiplayer option.. So its a revolutionary game with a step backward Hehe..

Also chris, I dunno how many people would agree that computer game stories are comparable to litterature (tho maybe some films, but thats another rant ).

Most computer games are very linear and you can often predict where its gonna go. A good bit of litterature (not that I ever do ANY reading) is so much more than a computer game plot.

Dont get me wrong - I agree with the point you made. Those are excelent games you listed, and as they go relatively origional. But again mostly just FPS's.

My Website:
http://www.thingy-ma-jig.co.uk
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
FoxBlitzz
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 19th Nov 2003
Location: United States
Posted: 24th Nov 2004 06:30
Link
Quote: "Pac Man is not a good game. What is this obsession with saying old games are good? They're not."


What are you on about? You've made a game for the TGC Retro Remakes Compo. Besides, I've loved playing Ms. Pacman ever since I was young. It's the kind of gameplay that never wears off. The original Pac Man wasn't that great in my opinion, but at least Ms. Pacman had multiple levels.

Sure, game like HL2 are stunning in visual quality and realism, but we've seen this kind of stuff a lot. I'm not against some of today's games, but you just cannot deny how much fun old games are. I'd rather roll a ball around a maze than pretend I'm some soldier fighting off terrorists. Usually the simplest concepts are what make a game fun, and that's what old games are all about.

Intel Pentium 4 CPU 2.40 GHz | 512 MB Ram
UNVIDIA GeFartFX 5600 Cruddy Edition
Featuring an amazing 1-2 FPS in 3DMark05!
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Nicholas Thompson
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 6th Sep 2004
Location: Bognor Regis, UK
Posted: 24th Nov 2004 06:39
Link
EXACTLY!! THANK YOU!!

My Website:
http://www.thingy-ma-jig.co.uk
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
TKF15H
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Jul 2003
Location: Rio de Janeiro
Posted: 24th Nov 2004 07:34
Link
The original question was "what would you like to see in a game" and not a discussion about whether old games are better or as good as new games. To get back on topic:
What I like to see in any game is something you can't define: Fun.
for some people, fun is shooting others under an adrenaline rush that makes them prefer not to go to the bathroom when needed.
For others, it's the slow-paced strategy of a game like Advance Wars.
This makes a HUGE difference, as it's what made Pacman so famous till today. It's what fit the definition of "fun" of the time. Some say graphics are an important part in deciding if something is worth playing or not, but I have two words for you: The Sims. I can't bare holding the GC controler with that game in the console. I fell asleep the last time I tried. The graphics weren't amazing, but they sure were alot better than tetris, which I'd rather play.
Others will say that gameplay is the most important, but if the game has no decent design then the best collision detection, frame rates, controls, etc. won't make up for it. Example: (once again) The Sims. Can you tell I truly hate the game yet? I'm not saying gameplay is not important though. There are many games that were well thought out but killed by gameplay. Counter-Strike, for example. I'm sick of the way bumping into another player makes you both slow down with bad collision detection, and I can't count the number of times I've been shot through a wall/door.
Since "fun" can't be defined in a game, there are what are called genres: Different kinds of fun. You just have to pick the kind you want. There's no game that will appeal to everyone's taste, so there's no point in trying to explain to someone mathematically that pacman was good. I really liked the game, but if I saw that interceptor ghost today I'd shoot it...
...Just like this mac ->

Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Joe Cooning
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 29th Mar 2003
Location: United States
Posted: 24th Nov 2004 07:42
Link
What you want in a game can very so much. The problem is is that what some people love most is what another likes least

Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Shadow Robert
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Sep 2002
Location: Hertfordshire, England
Posted: 24th Nov 2004 08:27
Link
Quote: "Do you not see that it's not just the graphics that have improved between Pacman & HL2"


I believe your missing the entire point.
No one is trying to say Pacman's Graphics are better than those Half-Life 2. No one is trying to say the story is better; here'in lies the point that was being made though.

If you took Pacman, gave it Shader Graphics, added Physics to expand on the already set gameplay, and then rereleased it. Underneath it is still Pacman, but on the surface it would be a state of the art game.

You don't think people would find the addictive nature of it fun?

Let's take another one, say.. RType, now explain to me what the difference between RType and Starfox Adventures AR-Wing Zones are?

It's simple the main difference the games now and games then have is thier front-end. Behind the scenes the premise is still the same as 20years ago. You make a game fun, and gamers won't care much past that.. it is only when you Hype the game to provide things which really make no difference in the grand scheme of the game that gamers seem to believe that this new game offers more.

In 10years time though, everyone will be like 'HL2?! You can't compare that to K-Zone!!' .. Will that make it any less fun? Will it make it any different to play? How will that game go from being THE-THING to something you hide in your attic?


Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Nicholas Thompson
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 6th Sep 2004
Location: Bognor Regis, UK
Posted: 24th Nov 2004 08:53
Link
And that is EXACTLY the point I was making.

Graphics are great.. but no matter how good a game looks, if the gameplay is crap it wont catch one..

BUT if a game has EXCELENT gameplay but doesn't have Farcry's or HL2's graphics engine.. 99% of people wont care because its fun to play!

My Website:
http://www.thingy-ma-jig.co.uk
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Lord Ozzum
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 29th Oct 2003
Location: Beyond the Realms of Death
Posted: 24th Nov 2004 09:29
Link
The Girls

"I don’t want to achieve immortality through my work. I want to achieve it by not dying."
---Woody Allen
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Nicholas Thompson
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 6th Sep 2004
Location: Bognor Regis, UK
Posted: 24th Nov 2004 09:40
Link
o.....k.....

My Website:
http://www.thingy-ma-jig.co.uk
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Shadow Robert
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Sep 2002
Location: Hertfordshire, England
Posted: 24th Nov 2004 10:34
Link
Vib Ribbon, Dance Dance Revolution, definately come to mind here heh
Oh and Ultima : Online, one of THE longest running and most popular mmorpgs of all time.

People still play it regularly, just not on EAs server now


Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Chris K
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 7th Oct 2003
Location: Lake Hylia
Posted: 24th Nov 2004 23:06 Edited at: 24th Nov 2004 23:06
Link
I understand what you're saying but I still don't really understand why you would still play old games. Even if games have improved a tiny bit in one department they're still better. Someone mentioned Ms Pacman - by your theory, why play that? It's just Pacman with a few extra features.

What I'm trying to say is that the technology has increased enough to open up whole new ways computer games can entertain you.

For example, the first level of Max Payne (when you're in his house) is genuinely disturbing and saddening.

It's physically impossilbe to make someone feel such emotions by playing them 8 different beeps and showing them 16 different colours on a 320x200 screen.

I really don't mind if you spend all your time playing old games, I'll play my new games.

I think I like them more.

If you released Pacman today with shader graphics and physics (don't know how you'd implement that) it would not be successful.

Go on, try it. I better it wouldn't take long to make.
Back to top
Profile PM
Van B
Moderator
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Oct 2002
Location: Sunnyvale
Posted: 25th Nov 2004 00:27
Link
Hehe, this topic has gone a little crazy no?

Lot's of young whippersnappers getting hot and bothered about HL2, and lots of old farts defending PacMan...

Basically, nobody can tell you what games are good and which games suck, not even reputable games reviewers, why? - because a game can't possibly be for everyone - if some guy at PC Format likes a game, there's a slight chance I will, but there's also a huge chance that I'll install it, play it once, then forget about it. For example, a game on the PSX, Armourinesroject Storm, it was a fairly low tech FPS game, run of the mill stuff, nothing startling - reviewers slated it. Yet when I persevered and gave it a real chance, it was totally awesome, the gameplay was great, it had that 'just died but trying again' feel to it. I'd put Armourines on the PSX way above Doom3, I'd put Quake2 on the PSX way above D3, and I'd put Manic Miner on the Spectrum way above D3. If you haven't played these games before, then I can understand how you'd turn your noses up - but frankly, someone who's played games for the last 20 years knows more about games, just like time served mechanics and plumbers get paid more, experienced gamers opinions are worth more - sorry, that's just how it works.

The graphics and sound are incomparible, but then I'm not watching a freakin movie, I'm PLAYing a GAME, so GAMEPLAY is what's important.


Van-B


It's c**p being the only coder in the village.
Back to top
Profile PM Email
Nicholas Thompson
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 6th Sep 2004
Location: Bognor Regis, UK
Posted: 25th Nov 2004 01:15 Edited at: 25th Nov 2004 01:16
Link
Thats exactly the point Van!

I think Doom 3 sums it up perfectly. Graphically it is a lovely game! I'm sure the plot is nice too... but its missing the magical ingredient that makes is a GOOD game.

I think if ANYONE found out how to mass produce that ingredient then they would be so rich it'd make mr willy gates look homeless!

But, fortunately, nobody knows how to make the ingredient as its impossible. If you're lucky, you'll stumble upon it.

A game that kept me occupied longer than Doom3 was Painkiller. Graphically, It was superb and I THINK it was the first to use ragdoll.. Not sure though. But, alas, it got boring.

Its not the repetitiveness... As chris has pointed out, Pacman is VERY repetitive. Most old games are due to space limits.. So what makes it fun?

I made a game recently, Gravikill (dunno who has played it). I was personally impressed with it and found it a LOT of fun but I DONT know why.. I dont doubt MANY people here probably hated it!

One point I would like to make is WHY do you need good graphics to get immerged in a game.. Do you still read books with colourfull pictures just to keep interested? I dont.. On the rare occasion I read a book - it never has pictures and I always get drawn in.

It all depends on the individual. It seems Chris prefers good grahics and a "soap opera" style plot, whereas us old fuddy duddies that have actually used a spectrum tend to prefer these clunky old "classics".

I remember Chris making a point a while back saying programmers now are better than before.. I disagree. Have you EVER tried to program on a spectrum? To get anything decent I think you have to have used Assembler level programming.. Half life 2 was written mostly in a lovely graphical suite using higher level commands and stuff like that! Old games basically NEVER crashed.. Half Life 2 had its first irritating bug within 10 minutes of release (the sound bug that a LOT of people get).

My opinion is now-a-days programmers are spoiled by these high level GUI's, etc. They have become lazy and most of them have no idea what they are asking a computer to actually do. I include myself in this category to a certain degree.. But I consider myself fortunate enough to have done some Assembler level programming on PIC Processors that taught me a LOT.. It taught me that to do anything simple on a computer you need hundreds of lines of REAL code, just to make that one simple command such as SQRT in DBP..

Be gratefull DB is so easy.. Dont praise these programmers at Doom3's place or Valve untill that actually do something impressive like write Half Life 2 completely in Assembler Hehe..

[EDIT] wow another long rant I didn't realise was so long! [/EDIT]

My Website:
http://www.thingy-ma-jig.co.uk
Back to top
Profile PM Email Website
Jeku
Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Jul 2003
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Posted: 25th Nov 2004 03:12 Edited at: 25th Nov 2004 03:13
Link
So far I accept Nicholas' argument over Chris K's.

Quote: " OK, so if the original games are the best, what's the point in still making games?"


Money makes the world go round. The more cookie-cutter lame FPS/Racing/Sports games that are released, the more $$$ the publisher will make based on population.

The same thing goes for movies. The most popular action movies (i.e. Jerry Bruckheimer's new treasure map one (forgot the name)), as craptastically awful as they are, always do better than movies that, most would agree, have better storylines and are cutting edge and original (i.e. Memento, etc.).

It dumbfounds me how people can line up for blocks to see Men In Black II purely based on marketing, while at the same time, some great movies with little or unknown actors will get a brief theatrical release or will often go straight to video.

Yet people still love the classic movies. I'd rather watch a classic Alfred Hitchcock B&W thriller than Scream 18 anyday!

See the comparison?


--[GameBasic - Coming Soon]-- ^^^ banner generously designed by TheBigBabou
Back to top
Profile PM Website
Major Payn
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 16th Dec 2003
Location: United States of America
Posted: 25th Nov 2004 03:22
Link
I think a game needs to be truely open ended, a game that does not force you down one path, but instead gives you the entire world to run around in, and tinker with, Like GTA!

Guns arnt the problem, people are the problem, shoot all the people and guns arnt a problem anymore.
Back to top
Profile PM
Back to top

Login to post a reply

Server time is: 2024-11-26 13:32:46
Your offset time is: 2024-11-26 13:32:46