Originally posted by Violent2Dope
So in this game you use chain blades like Kratos or what? Oh, and every time a game is sold it's done so to make money.🙂
See for yourself the femal version of God of War
Originally posted by Violent2Dope
So in this game you use chain blades like Kratos or what? Oh, and every time a game is sold it's done so to make money.🙂
See for yourself the femal version of God of War
Originally posted by ESB -1138It does seem to share some elements of gameplay with God of War.
See for yourself the femal version of God of War
Originally posted by SmasandianGood Points.
My fault, I assumed you meant splitscreen.Isnt the whole idea behind XBOX Live is to play with friends? Considering the excellent friend system it has. How is the industry focusing on competitive gameplay when Sony, XBOX, Nintendo all have system in place to allow you join in a game with friends online.
Ush, are you an robot? Or did something take over your mind with crap?
"A lot of people have totally lost the whole point gaming took off in the first place- the idea of not having to play against Humans."
I'm pretty sure the first game ever made, and more subsequent games were meant to be played by humans, and to compete. Gaming as whole, ie boards games, sports and other activites are pretty much meant to be competitive. I have no idea why you think computer gaming was meant to be played against an computer. That is complete horseshit. The whole idea behind gaming is to have fun. That is it. To have fun.
"I do feel that, luckily, this obsession with this shallow on-line play culture will dwindle. And it is those who throw their weight behind it who are shortsighted. And also very unimaginative."
I'm also pretty sure that online gaming is here to stay. I also think its the more popular genre of gaming. Unimaginative? Any game, SP or MP can be that. SP games are just as reponsible of being generic as MP games are.
In my mind, when I read "Robot" I translated it to "Idiot."
Anata wa wakarimasu ka.....
Originally posted by Ushgarak
VIDEO gaming, genius. This being the video games area, and us talking entirely about video games. Good Lord, show some sense.[b]"I have no idea why you think computer gaming was meant to be played against an computer. That is complete horseshit. "
WRONG. I cannot put this strongly enough. You are wrong and I am right. Computer gaming as first developed was entirely based around the novelty of an automated opponent. Pong was a minorty, and besides was the old equivalent of Wii Sports, and not in the scope of my criticism. Gaming was founded on Asteroids, Space Invaders and Pac Man. If you played it multiplayer, you took turn.
I was actually around at this point and experienced the start of the gaming industrey. I saw it happen, I was part of it as it happened, and I damn know what it was like, what it was focussed on, and how it has changed. This was the foundation of the industry. Whilst people concentrated that, the nature of gaming expanded. Since it started focussing on this competitve element it has stalled.
(People complain that the obsession with graphics is killing games. THAT is horseshit. Games were ALWAYS obsessed with graphics, from day one. I remember the same complaints about graphics taking over the industry in 1985, and even then the response was that it had always been that way. Two decades later and people still think a graphic obsession is a recent issue- and miss whacking great problems like this one)
And yes, the industry is focussed on competitive play with strangers. That's pretty much just how it is- the pull, the thrill of victory. From Quake deathmatch onwards, and especially with Starcraft, it was all about going online, strutting your stuff and beating people you don't know. The whole culture is a curse on gaming. For every Hellgate- a game which has the balls to do MP gaming in a more positive way- there are a dozen shite deathmatch clones. And now Starcraft II is trying to perfect the formula riding on a wave of ridiculous far-east competitive obsession.
And that's magnificently untrue about single player games. Very few multi-player games have ever put anything remotely like the amount of effort that has gone into classic sinngle player games over time.
Like I say, humans are a weak link. It's only big now because only reently has broadband technology made this sort of thing truly possible. But the obsession will not last because gaming technology will improve continuously, and will continue to show the highlight that, basically, Humans make terrible opponents and also limit gaming experence.
Humans cheat, Humans exploit gameplay mechanics, Humans ruin immersive games with names like "Nobwank", and Humans also reduce gaming to a horrible basic formula. Look at, say, games of Civilization when played competuitively. It goes from being an elegant game about constructing your own Civilization the way you want to a desperate resource rush game, like Starcraft but not in real time. Destroyed. The only way to enjoy it is with a group of like-minded friends.
I am all for the online experience, but despite the facade of friendship, it's still based on the competitive destruction of strangers. it can and will change.
It's a pox on gaming, but it will pass. And thank God for Nintendo, who have never indulged in it. [/B]
Are you can enjoy Starcraft singleplayer game.
Games have never been competitive? What's the whole idea between high scores? What's the point of keeping people's score in arcades? Isnt that whole idea of of points, is to see who has the best score?
Games have always been competitive. Pong, Space Wars, Pac Man, Asteroids, and Space Invaders. So, you dont play against each other, but you still compete. You see who has the highest score. Thats being competitive isnt it?
"I was actually around at this point and experienced the start of the gaming industrey. I saw it happen, I was part of it as it happened, and I damn know what it was like, what it was focussed on, and how it has changed. This was the foundation of the industry. Whilst people concentrated that, the nature of gaming expanded. Since it started focussing on this competitve element it has stalled"
This is what I dont get. What do you actually mean when you say that the nature of gaming has stalled since the inclusion of the competitive element? Do you mean economics of the industry, or the progression of orginality?
If economics, I dont understand, I was under the impression that the gaming industry is one of the biggest nowadays, probalby overtaking the music industry in terms of profitability. You can actually make the case that non competitive gaming, ie Asteroids, Space Invaders, failed at progressing the game industry due to the crash in the early 80's.
What's your evidence that the idea behind competive gaming will crash? Considering its such a small part of videogame, I dont really think competitive is that invasive to videogames.
" For every Hellgate- a game which has the balls to do MP gaming in a more positive way- there are a dozen shite deathmatch clones. And now Starcraft II is trying to perfect the formula riding on a wave of ridiculous far-east competitive obsession."
For every great singleplayer game, there's a ton of shit Final Fantasy clones, fighters, shooters and RTS's. How many times do I have to read an review for an shitty Final Fantasy remake that has been done 6 times over.
Ush, you bring some valid points. But most of what you said is coming from a bias point of veiw simply because you dont perfer the online "nature". One can also argue that online IS the evolution of gaming. It wouldnt be a "game" if there wasnt a winner and a loser, gaming has and always will be competitive. But like i said before the more people you bring into the equation the more competitivness you'll see...same mind frame larger scale.
But like i said before online gaming isnt going to go anywhere. The bottom line is that it brings in too much money just for it to stop now.
Nintendo will continue to do their own thing like they've always done regaurdless of what everyone else is doing.
But at the same time sooner or later their gonna have to jump on the online bandwagon in some sort of way...maybe wifi(ds style) is their way of doing it
I played Halo 2 and Gears of War online and never really got into it. I guess when you have some 7 year old kid trying to curse in every single sentence it really ruins the experience but yet everyone there seemed to either be complete idiots who seemed to never picked up a controller or these lifeless goons who do nothing but play games and find every glitch and cheat to get the unfair advantage to win.
I always had the most fun playing single player games.
true, but everyones not like that. my experience is limited because ive just gotten into this whole concept of online this year but believe me you can have some fantastic experiences on there you just have to meet like minded gamers which in itself is a true rareity...but when you find them its pretty fun
Originally posted by Kenshinswife
true, but everyones not like that. my experience is limited because ive just gotten into this whole concept of online this year but believe me you can have some fantastic experiences on there you just have to meet like minded gamers which in itself is a true rareity...but when you find them its pretty fun
That's just my view on the entire subject. I like to be able to play long 20+ hour games that doesn't involve having someone else to have fun with like Mario or Zelda or Metroid.
Originally posted by ESB -1138
I played Halo 2 and Gears of War online and never really got into it. I guess when you have some 7 year old kid trying to curse in every single sentence it really ruins the experience but yet everyone there seemed to either be complete idiots who seemed to never picked up a controller or these lifeless goons who do nothing but play games and find every glitch and cheat to get the unfair advantage to win.I always had the most fun playing single player games.
That's a problem I find when I play Live.
I've been playing online since Half Life and TFC and the beginning of CS. I never had a problem with PC online gaming. It's alot different than XBOX Live. I think the problem has to do with ability of voice in Live. I hate to say, I never use it unless I'm playing against people I know.
Originally posted by JToTheP
Because like I said, they're only doing it for sales, and if they try to change the gameplay in a sequel, they'll end up screwed. If you need to paste the same gameplay in another title, you clearly know you ****ed up.
Sorry, but what games company creates a game not for sales?
Originally posted by JToTheP
All Sony has going for it right now is God Of War, Ps3 wise, so that's why they're putting the SAME gameplay in another game. That's the ONLY reason they think they'll get sales, aside from MGS4.
MGS or GoW never managed to sell 10 million copies which is the number they would need.