Is a game with no ending EVIL???

[Spacemanchuck]

Specifically MMORPG's...

Ok I was reading in benzos thread down there, a poll for CA best games of the year, and it was asked why World of War Craft was not on the list. Response was "because a game with no ending is EVIL!!!"

I will say nothing and hear your comments and then comment upon reading your delicious little comments.
:perv:



This should be good!!!
P.S cursing and bashing of each others view points strongly encouraged!

[Dan.v.D.]

MMORPGs suck ass because the challenge is to beat ppl with no life whatsoever, and will screw up your´s.

[MuffinMan]

MMORPGs suck ass because the challenge is to beat ppl with no life whatsoever, and will screw up your´s.

yeah, i remember play SWG (star wars galaxies) and it sucked, it's a waste of money and a waste of time.

[nil]

yeah, i cant stand games that are too open ended. if there is no way to beat the game, theres no point in playing. at least, thats the way it stands now. if anyone ever creates a game/game world that is compelling enough in and of itself, my opinion may change, but i doubt it.

my flatmate is into WoW, all he does is eat, sleep, work and play WoW. i just don't understand it. he's obsessed with getting to level 60 (highest possible in the game?) it's frickin' bizarre.

[Sammy]

There's a lot more to Interactivity than challenge, story, progress, reward, etc., etc.
That's why none of us are game designers here, because we only think/compare interactivity to what games currently exist
...We've barely scratched that surface.

It's still in its infancy, but Electronic Interactivity is not only starting to present itself in ways inconceivable from just 10 years previous ... But it's starting to show its relevance to human evolution.
A form of media, as a business, that does in 25 years what took theatrics and film a century or more.

Up 'till recently it's been all about shooting monsters ... but accept it or not, some people don't give a damn about that.
Pop in Animal Crossing or World of Warcraft ... anything that challenges your notion of what a videogame *should* be...
Do that and then think back to the day that Tetris came out, and how it was a completely new expereince that no game had ever tapped into.... It attracted a completely new audience, no longer restriced to testosterone.

Some day soon, a game will come along ... It will be a normal playable character to relate with, with normal conflicts, normal peers, and yea maybe no ending ... And it may be one of the most successful games ever.

[Dan.v.D.]

There's a lot more to Interactivity than challenge, story, progress, reward, etc., etc.



err any example at hand?

[0kelvin]

What Sammy said.



0kelvin

[Sammy]

err any example at hand?

Games that we'll likely see within the next decade ... We're the ones with tunnel-vision, not the medium.

Film for example (of a medium that has sliped into tunnel-vission) has SO many options when it comes to documentaries, reality, series, propaganda, etc.... yet .... we go to the theatre and we're only ever presented with ONE option: "RisingAction-Conflict-Resolution" ... spoon fed to us over and over again from Hollywood..

Animal Crossing, is one of the best examples relative to this discussion ... Unlike any game you have ever played before, though it may not be your taste in game or visually appealing.
A 'community' game that playes out in real time ... Its innovation draws from the reality of time (in this case the internal clock of the gamecube)... it recognises when stores close and what holidays are approaching..... Even what fish and insects are active during season, weather condition, morning, noon, or night.
And yes, it has no ending or challenge just pure interactivity and the sense of interactive growth.

[Prometheus|ANJ]

Well, there's the main goals then there's the sub goals.

In a mmorpg, there's no main goal, but there's plenty of sub goals, like quests, leveling, treasures etc.

Does Tetris or Minsweeper have an ending or are they to short? I like them anyways.

I also like skirmish games, RTS or DM/CTF. I never play through the campaign/story mode.

A beatemup doesn't really need an ending either.

Sim City or Sim games in general got sub goals like getting new buildings and stuff, but there's no ending.

Some games let you continue playing after the ending too. I've always liked that.

[Dan.v.D.]

i must admit i haven´t played animal crossing yet but i´m pretty sure that has it´s charm for a while but then?

what made tetris that addictive bitch and appealing to many many ppl is the challenge factor; finding a solution to the conflict we´re randomly confronted with.
what is the fundament of "documentaries, reality, series, propaganda..."?
i´d say "RisingAction-Conflict-Resolution".
what do you deal with everyday?
i´d say "RisingAction-Conflict-Resolution"

everything in this universe is about "RisingAction-Conflict-Resolution"

We're the ones with tunnel-vision, not the medium
we with our "tunnel-vision" created that medium. to create further instances of "RisingAction-Conflict-Resolution".

prom: i´ve never seen a tetris/skirmish/minesweeper/beat'em up game that didn´t end. your only likely to replay

[0kelvin]

I've been playing Garry's Mod (http://www.garry.tv/garrysmod/) for Half-Life 2 a ton lately. There's no progress, story, challenge, reward, etc. There's hardly even a point. It's just a (figurative) sandbox with a bunch of tools and toys. It's the videogame equivalent of Lego. And it's a blast.



0kelvin

[Prometheus|ANJ]

Yes I didn't deny those games have endings. However, the thing that make you play those games is the gameplay itself, and not the lure of poontang at the end, which was the only reason to play the strip poker games on the Amiga, for example.

Regardless, Sim City doesn't have an end, and that doesn't hurt it IMO. It's more about solving temporary problems as they arise.

Skirmish games end when the match is over, but it's important to note that the map list often loops ad infinitum. Some people play them just to level up their ranking on some server. No ending there.

[Sammy]

I've been playing Garry's Mod (http://www.garry.tv/garrysmod/) for Half-Life 2 a ton lately. There's no progress, story, challenge, reward, etc. There's hardly even a point. It's just a (figurative) sandbox with a bunch of tools and toys. It's the videogame equivalent of Lego. And it's a blast.


Exactly --- Interactivity in its rawest form.

If you give a child a cardboard box, he will play a game with it ... There is no linearity, no discipline ... If he wants to create a story/ending within his interaction that is up to him.
There are some videogames that strive to mimic this.
Games without a defined or traditional ending.




we with our "tunnel-vision" created that medium.

We didn't create the medium of interactivity, we dwell in it.
videogaming exists as a simulation of that medium.

[NoUseFrAName]

no ending isn't necessarily evil....just less appealing to me, haha.

FF9, SWG and EQ....they're ultimately glorified versions of MSN messenger after a while....at first it's cool...you have a new contact, you chat learn about eachother etc.....but eventually the conversation becomes:
"hey"
"hey"
"'sup"
"not much, you?"
"nothing"
"yeah"

without an ending/goal/objective the games get more boring as they go, even if they start out exciting....not to mention the ages spent traversing across enormous areas of nothingness. It might as well be real life because it ends up being just like work.

then again, it would probably require more thought to figure out why MMORPGs suck(to me), and Harvest Moon doesn't....I'm willing to bet that the Comp vs. Console factor plays into it a lot for me.

-Rob

[emily g]

I like to watch foreign films because you can find more that are open-ended and don't have a neat resolution. It's much harder to find this in American films--audiences seem to get mad if the couple doesn't get together in the end, or the good guy doesn't kill the bad guy.
But opened-endedness is more like real life. Your life doesn't wrap up neatly after an episode occurs--it continues on. That's the appeal to me of films that are open-ended. You can imagine that the characters live on beyond the movie and you try to image what will happen to them.

I'm a big fan of Animal Crossing. I play almost every day. I would be really sad if the game had an "ending." But there are little goals that keep me motivated. I am trying to collect certain items, for example. But I set these goals myself, they aren't forced upon me by the gameplay. I suppose eventually I could run out of things to do.

The Sims are an interesting example of an open-ended game that was taken in a new direction by the players. Players can upload their albums to the website and look at others' uploaded albums. Some people had the idea to "stage" their photos and write in an accompanying story. Now you can read many, many stories on the website. There is almost any genre--mystery, soap opera, science fiction, etc. And they are often so long and involved that they have 5, 6, or 7 parts. People read these and look forward to when the author puts out the next part to their favorite story. This involves a lot of work. The authors create the characters and the sets, then try to get the characters to act a certain way so they can take the appropriate photos.
I guess the reward for the authors is having other people read and enjoy their work, plus readers can vote on the albums and you can check out which stories are the highest ranked.

I just heard this example on NPR the other day--there is a popluar Chinese website called "Ninth City." I guess it's kind of like the Sims in that you have a character and just live your life. You can interact with other players, and it seems that having their characters get married to each other is something the players like to do a lot.

So, these are just my thoughts . . . I think there are many ways to take games that just haven't been thought of because we tend to only think in terms of one model.

emily

[Presence]

Soooo.... who is up for a game of CS? :dur:

[darth massacre]

I started playing videogames pretty early on in life....from about 4 yrs old I had the privvy of playing on the older Apple PCs and the 8086s....my parent's weren't terribly rich, but one of my neighbours was and he showed me the path to the dark side.

Games in the past neither had a storyline or a purpose. It was just....fun.....and it was more of a showcase of what can be done with the computer rather than an actual industry like what we have today. It can be compared to burning an ant colony with lighter fluid (don't lie, you guys have done it before)...fun, but not very purposeful.

That was in 1982 (I believe before some of you guys were born). Move forward 10 years to 1992. Games have sprite based graphics, more of a semblance of story and plot...a direction where gamers are taken on a journey. More often than not it was story driven because the graphics weren't up to scratch...so the gist of the game itself had to make up for the terrible sprite based graphics. The only game I can think of with mindblowing graphics, sound and storyline at that time was Wing Commander.

Move forward 5 years to 1997. Right in the middle of the IT boom. Playstation took over the world, Lara Croft succeeded in pushing the boundaries of gaming icons where Mario and Sonic failed....Games take on a more structured feel, there seem to be a purpose for games, or at least the purpose for the characters in the games. Its actually a step backwards rather than forwards because game graphics took center stage and storytelling was lost. The beginning of the end for Adventure games, where story and plot was the center of the product gave way to goraud shading and bump maps. If the game doesn't have realtime shaders, its not good enough to play.

I think it was sometime in 99 when MMORPGs, or MMOGs in general started getting popular with the introduction of 56K modems. Ultima Online was the order of the day. Then of course there were the plans for MMOG FPS stuff like planetside, star wars galaxies and so on....even Novalogic's "big plan" for an MMOG styled integrated battlefield was in the works (it panned out to be the very disappointing Joint Operations so many years later).

These days we come full circle.... we have tonnes of MMORPGs. WoW, Lineage II, Everquest, Final Fantasy Online...blah blah blah.....It goes back to the "setting an ant colony on fire" thing. Tonnes of fun....not very purposeful.....

.....but whoever said entertainment has to be purposeful?

[Sammy]

.....It goes back to the "setting an ant colony on fire" thing. Tonnes of fun....not very purposeful.....
....but whoever said entertainment has to be purposeful?


An extremely awesome point.

Peter Molyneux (Black and White, Fable) always said that an ant hill represents an extremely fun and interactive reference for games ... That there are so many options presented, violent and passive: Poke with a stick, or give them a sweet??

Your choice, each as relevant to your life as the next (no purpose) but just as fun.

Modern games are trying to explore elements such as these ... and up 'till now there's been a lot of focus on a single-player experience ...
and MMORPG's (thought I have no desire to play them) I respect ... where there is an absence of story and shooting, there is a sense of community and bond with players that love the game just as much as you.

And to many - a sense of community, socialization, and liking of interests has an impact infinately larger than any forced story, challenge, ending, etc.

[0kelvin]

I'd have to disagree with you there on one thing, darth. The last two generations of consoles have made the biggest leap in storytelling in gaming history. That's what the advances in graphics were all about. Creating a more believable world and getting stronger emotional responses in the player (even if those responses were more often than not, "Whoa! Dude!"). Storytelling was and still is most definitely at center stage. I mean, very few NES-era games had a story whatsoever, and even in the SNES days, more times than not story wasn't anything more than a page in the instruction booklet with a vague explanation why there was a squirrel jumping on platforms. It's this focus on the storytelling side of games that has led to a lack in the gameplay side.

There was nothing on the SNES that could compare to the storytelling capabilities of a game like Metal Gear Solid.

Crap, I had more to say but I lost my train of thought. Well, I made half my point, at least. Maybe a rebuttal will remind me where I was going with this.



0kelvin

[darth massacre]

I'm not disagreeing Kevin.

But my point was graphics were used to move the merchandise forward, great storytelling came as a bonus. Storytelling in games are definitely picking up once again. Kind of funny coz the technology always comes first, then the software pushes the machine, then the artists and storytellers pushes the software....it doesn't happen concurrently.

Then there's the problem of games becoming interactive movies cough*finalfantasy*cough....push a button, watch a cut scene, go to point B, pick up a character, watch a cut scene, go to point C, fight a monster, watch a cut scene. Its just like "choose your own adventure" books being put into interactive format.

MMOGs present a new way of playing. Its open ended not because it wants to be. Its open ended because the focus is on having fun with your friends. Of course some people take things too seriously by going into "pro gaming" (something that I'll never understand) and by forming clans with their own politics. Its simple.....go into the game world, beat up a few monsters with your buddies, then laugh about it. Just think of it as the playground being moved into another world....and like our own childhood playgrounds or....for that case, the ant hill....there usually isn't an ending.

If its evil, its because it sucks in too much time :teeth: Top reason why I'm avoiding WoW when all my buddies are rushing into it.

[Dan.v.D.]

Its simple.....go into the game world, beat up a few monsters with your buddies, then laugh about it.

hmm unfortunately it´s not so simple. at least for me. i´m someone tending to take games seriously. and if i enter a mmog world everything tells me "you are a fuckin noob so why don´t you just go home?!"
because no matter what the game is and no matter what world it takes place in, if it´s a multiplayer it´s about competition. and that competition is always the same. there´s a handful of top_player_rockstars, always a bunch of noobs (and i´m soooo sick of that word alone) and hordes of ppl inbetween that mainly are there to jump around on noobs heads and sucking up to the chosen few. so the main challenge is to become one of those rockstars; not so easy, see my first post.

and i´m unfortunately not able to ignore what happens around me and to just have fun. so i tend to prefer singleplayer games. well not really but i made my decision to not spend years online for to rule at one game.

just ranting here. not saying anybody is wrong or something.

[Prometheus|ANJ]

I'm very careful not to play games where I'm not allowed to have fun until I've leveled up, or done something boring and monotous. It's just not economical to waste time achiveing a useless status. There's fun to be had much cheaper.

However, I played UO a few hours (on Yamato) and the people there were very nice and polite, despite me being a noob and gaijin. It was fun, but I'm glad I didn't play more.

[Dan.v.D.]

UO = unreal online?
i played cs for like 6 months and the first days even weeks were such a pain in the ass because i had like 3 kills a day or something.
but what kept me going was that i considered it lie some kind of sport it wasn´t really boring or monotonous because i learned all the time.
it was like levelling up with real skill and that´s something i always enjoyed. and that´s what bugs me often about rpgs on- or offline or whatever.
you get better items or higher levels and stuff only to find your enemys get stronger proportionally or worse - only more.
so it doesn´t mean anything because towards the end it´s exactly the same as at the beginning. the only difference is that the computer calculates bigger figures. so rpgs batter make sure they attract me with a complete involving experience. dunno i don´t even think it´s really about story because as said before books and movies do a better job at that. it´s about sucking me in somehow. and story, athmosphere, challenge, reward are the tools to keep me interested. hmm... so many thoughts but no real point haha

[Presence]

The MMPORG is simply a reflection of consumerism in the market, there are no new grounds being broken it is simply a company, selling you a personal image and content every month to keep you playing.

Still, WoW etc is just fun, there does not need to be an end as to that is not the genre appropriate content.

[softdrawer]

i dunno, i like tetris


..i never got to beat lvl 19.

[Prometheus|ANJ]

UO=Ultima Online.

I avoid FPS games almost as much as RPGs. If I'm going to spend time getting good at something, it should be something that I have use of IRL.

Having a lvl60 whatever character in a soon to be forgotten game or being 1337 at CS means you're probably gonna be a lvl1 Walmart imp IRL.

[Lono]

LOL!

-Lono

[oracrest]

I can understand that desire for closure within the context of a game. there are planety of games that have a definate beginning, middle and end that I will play many times over (super metroid, eternal darkness, SNES zelda, Rez, Ico, Blood Omen Legacy of Kain, just to name a few). the great thing about these games is I will play through them many more times each, and enjoy them all very much. the level of scripting and design thought is more packed into the game, and the story tends to be much, much richer.

most online games that I have played all seem to suffer from the same crippling flaws: watered down design (I assumre from having to construct a gigantic world and set of characters), other people that simply ruin the experience (either by quoting goofy anime lines, or using To2ally kewl text that simply killz the environment of da gamez)

Another bad thing is once you get tired of a neverending game, chances are you wont ever go back to it. shorter games that offer replay value are great in that sense. I think theres a lot to be said for replay value (Zelda, any mario game are good examples of these). mmorpgs seem to keep building on themselves, much like FPS games, the latest big thing makes all others obsolete, with rare exception. for example, when in game lighting is a mainstay, who will ever go back and play doom 3?

BUT.. I see a lot of potential for open ended games above what we have done so far. i havent played animal crossing, but that seems interesting in concept.

Tetris is great, but one thing it has that mmorpgs does not is the heightened ability within you as a person, not some digital character. that is what makes the gameplay so fun to go back to.

I just hope we get away from the tolkien ripped fantasy genre of multiplayer games. I can't handle anymore dwarves, elves and orcs... :dead:

[Dan.v.D.]

Blood Omen Legacy Of Kain really was one of those games...

i can´t exactly tell why but that game got me by the throat ;]

i think that it´s shadows made me finish soul reaver

[0kelvin]

I'm not a fan of MMORPGs, but I played City of Heroes for a couple months. That was actually quite a bit of fun. It breaks a lot of the MMORPG cliches, both setting and gameplay wise. It really makes things fun for people of all levels. Although it's a pretty shallow game when it comes down to it, it's really a step in the right direction (or at the very least, a step in a different direction).

I'll probably play again for a while once City of Villians is released. That should add some depth to the game, hopefully without ruining the things that made it good in the first place.



0kelvin

[oracrest]

Blood Omen Legacy Of Kain really was one of those games...

i can´t exactly tell why but that game got me by the throat ;]

i think that it´s shadows made me finish soul reaver

Yeah, I have managed to play through all the sequels since (including the horrid Blood Omen 2), but none have even come close to the originals mood and ambiance. For me it was probably the first game that had REALLY good writing and dialogue AND good voice talent to boot. The sequels still have good voice acting, but the dialogue has been getting more and more ridiculous each installment with it's pretentious vernacular, like each one has to outdo the last with it's use of big words and longwinded dramatic dialogue or something.

I also loved how evil you were. I mean, coming upon a chained up prisoner who is screaming "help me kind sir!" only to suck his blood! heh. great stuff.

If you liked the original, my personal fav of the sequels was the second soul reaver on ps2. It wasn't much different in mechanic to the first soul reaver, but it's story intertwined the story of the original (blood omen). and theres a part where you are fighting malik in this temple, and from somewhere else in the building you can hear the priests from the FMV of blood omen off in the distance calling "Malik!" and vorador "call your dogs, they can feast on your corpses". heh, really cool that they intertwined the original like that. worth a check out if you realy dug the original

[Presence]

I avoid FPS games almost as much as RPGs. If I'm going to spend time getting good at something, it should be something that I have use of IRL.

Having a lvl60 whatever character in a soon to be forgotten game or being 1337 at CS means you're probably gonna be a lvl1 Walmart imp IRL.

I'm not too sure about this PANJ, I know a pretty wide array of players, especially in CS and they are far from that stereotype. Actually, half of them are university students who use it to blow off steam instead of going out and getting wrecked at the pub. These are guys in both their MA's and Bach's.

I think it of course can get out of hand and with those who take it to that ridiculous level everyone gets branded. But the positive is that gamers who do take their online time seriously are much more aware of that said branding and keep a third person view as to how they spend valuable time. But if I am at home chilling what is the difference between 2 hours on CS Vs. throwing in a DVD? To have that IRL opinion is problematic.

[klinesmoker]

It's always amusing to me to see the reactions of people when someone mentions the word "game." Whether or not it has an ending, it sure beats the hell out of mindlessly watching the tube.
MMORPG's.... It's just as purposeless as anything we do to pass our time. That doesn't mean that it isn't enjoyable, by any means, but there are limitations. Allowing said activity to consume your life gets to be a bit much to handle. But who determines whether or not it's right or wrong to do so? It's like art, I guess. In the end, most people don't have a flipping clue what I am trying to do or say in my art. Simply put, they don't understand it. When they criticize, who are they to talk? I extend the same courtesy to hardcore gamers and game creators. Who am I to criticize?

[darth massacre]

hmm unfortunately it´s not so simple. at least for me. i´m someone tending to take games seriously. and if i enter a mmog world everything tells me "you are a fuckin noob so why don´t you just go home?!"

Maybe you shouldn't play with strangers then. That's why I hardly play MMOGs outside of my group of friends. Private servers or guilds of people we know in real life. If the 12 yr olds want to rule the virtual world, let them. Don't take it so hard man....its entertainment.

[Floris Didden]

I think it was sometime in 99 when MMORPGs, or MMOGs in general started getting popular with the introduction of 56K modems. Ultima Online was the order of the day. Then of course there were the plans for MMOG FPS stuff like planetside, star wars galaxies and so on....even Novalogic's "big plan" for an MMOG styled integrated battlefield was in the works (it panned out to be the very disappointing Joint Operations so many years later).

You forgot everquest! It's the mmog that took it 3D after UO and set the mark for swg, daoc, even wow. I played EQ quite vigorously for 5 yrs all the way straight through high school. The reason I quit was that I came to a point where I had no desire to explore the new territory's and, more importantly, felt that it was sucking up more of my time then I could justify (this was right around the time I "decided" on going for a CA/illu-job future).

Currently I'm studying game design. That's the actual design of the game, mind you, no lessons in CA whatsoever so I do that in my own time. The thing is though that we have whole classes discussing the things discussed in this thread. We are beeing trained/urged to look beyond the present installment of games and learn to enticipate what could be done in the future. Technology that is about to hit the market, like pocket projectors, are expensive now, but will probably be somewhere near the bargain bin in 10 yrs, what kind of cool games can we make with that by that time?

Great mention bout the legacy of kain series. I'm a big fan, for some reason. The world setting and grand epos story telling that is done fascinates me. It can become a bit over the top sometimes yes, but it's just very cool how the story covers all the games and how you as a player unravel it during play.

[Prometheus|ANJ]

Presence> Everyone needs a little fun every now and then. I wasn't bashing the casual gamer, just the extremists. I have some friends who flunked school cuz of excessive gaming.

There's probably people who just masturbate all day long. Good for them, I hope they're happy. As long as they don't become a burden of society it's only a Good Thing if people are happy. My point however was that many games are not that fun, but addictive, so they just suck away people's time. And that's the Bad Thing.


What is the difference between having seen a movie / read a book and having camped behind a crate for 2hrs hoping for a headshot? The difference is that you camped behind a crate the last time too. You're always camping behind that crate. CS is like watching a looping movie about some people that jump around with knives, machinegun a little and shout OMG lolololz h4h4 I'm teh best! Ima so 1337 did u see my haedsh0tz??1

[klinesmoker]

You forgot everquest! It's the mmog that took it 3D after UO and set the mark for swg, daoc, even wow. I played EQ quite vigorously for 5 yrs all the way straight through high school. The reason I quit was that I came to a point where I had no desire to explore the new territory's and, more importantly, felt that it was sucking up more of my time then I could justify (this was right around the time I "decided" on going for a CA/illu-job future).

Currently I'm studying game design. That's the actual design of the game, mind you, no lessons in CA whatsoever so I do that in my own time. The thing is though that we have whole classes discussing the things discussed in this thread. We are beeing trained/urged to look beyond the present installment of games and learn to enticipate what could be done in the future. Technology that is about to hit the market, like pocket projectors, are expensive now, but will probably be somewhere near the bargain bin in 10 yrs, what kind of cool games can we make with that by that time?

Great mention bout the legacy of kain series. I'm a big fan, for some reason. The world setting and grand epos story telling that is done fascinates me. It can become a bit over the top sometimes yes, but it's just very cool how the story covers all the games and how you as a player unravel it during play.
Everquest... Ahh the wasted hours. Not justifiable, mind you, but it was fun as hell. Too easy now if you ask me, but then again you didn't.
Legacy of Kain really nailed down what a game should be about in my eyes, so I have to hand props to the mention as well. Such vernacular! Grandiose!

[Rkhon]

Its funny how people always talk about how awesome a new console/single player game is because they can go anywhere on the map and do all kinds of stuff. But when you actually get a game where you can actually do whatever you want, and not have to follow a path...its deemed evil.

In WoW you can make your own story, your own ending...the real magic in games with no endings...replayability. (sp?)
WoW must be sooo evil, thats why its sold out everywhere, winning game awards from review publications, and doing the same in Europe... :P
The payoff in a game like WoW just seems more valuable of my time...especially seeing how much I could sell my account for...

Alot of the difference in opinion is that not all gamers appreciate the competitive value of a game. Multiplayer is very competitive and just like everything else, it take time and practice to get better. IF you ask me...thats better than watching TV after work.

[Sammy]

-- I'm addicted to Gran Turismo 4 right now --

Talk about a game with values and rewards beyond a traditional narrative or a closure-providing "ending" ... GT4 is about how Edutainment should be done.

I know next to nothing about automobiles, so everytime I pop in GT4 (not only am I 100% entertained) I'm learning something new.
I'm given so many choices to progress based on my personal strengths (In this case rally races) so there's no real frustratlion ... I just have to sit back, throw out my arcade thumb, and get lost on the tracks.

I can understand people not interested based on their lack of interest in automobies (I speak for myself, when I missed all the origional games) ... hopefully something will come allong that will appeal to your interests.

There's a lot of potential for games without end ... seeing as how often times you can spend hundreds and hundreds of hours provided they are "your thing" I hope that more educational ones roll out...

Personally, I think a good 160 hours spend in an educational RPG could have me walking out speaking Latin if it was done right.

[klinesmoker]

Man, every time i look at this thread I just laugh! Jesus, there's no end to a game, how can that be bad? it allows for infinitely more development than most activities we are confronted with in life. On that note, the arguement that "endless games are bad cuz you can't win" is laughable. Can't win in life, can you? So why try?

[oracrest]

-- I'm addicted to Gran Turismo 4 right now --

Talk about a game with values and rewards beyond a traditional narrative or a closure-providing "ending" ... GT4 is about how Edutainment should be done.

I know next to nothing about automobiles, so everytime I pop in GT4 (not only am I 100% entertained) I'm learning something new.
I'm given so many choices to progress based on my personal strengths (In this case rally races) so there's no real frustratlion ... I just have to sit back, throw out my arcade thumb, and get lost on the tracks.

I can understand people not interested based on their lack of interest in automobies (I speak for myself, when I missed all the origional games) ... hopefully something will come allong that will appeal to your interests.

There's a lot of potential for games without end ... seeing as how often times you can spend hundreds and hundreds of hours provided they are "your thing" I hope that more educational ones roll out...

Personally, I think a good 160 hours spend in an educational RPG could have me walking out speaking Latin if it was done right.

yeah, I think education should be pushed much more in games, but not in the sense that you know your being educated, but presented in a fun way that has something of a subconscious educational reward. Typing of the dead was a great example of a way to improve on your typing skills, and very innovative. I think it hit a culty status, but never really did too well. Its a shame, but they really took a great game and threw in an educational slant that actually improved the gameplay in my opinion. shooting a normal enemy once, and a boss ten times in much simpler than typing "bumble bee" for a normal enemy, but "the cat's skills were nimble" or something for a boss. much more intense of an experience i thought, cause you have to execute it perfectly, you cant do the typing equivilant of pounding the trigger and hope to win.

[darth massacre]

Educational games are a little harder to push. But its something that's lacking in today;s games. It wasn't that bad in the past.

One of the most educational game types are flight sims. I remember the good ol days when I have my F16 flight controller system in place and pouring through the massive flight manuals of Falcon 4.0. Hypothetical political situations and you get to fly the aircraft, learn about flight/aerodynamics, combat flying, how radar works, military hardware and so on.

One game that affected me more than any other was this EA release called SEAL TEAM, that was way back in 1993 or so. It had a thick manual with a lot of material on how the teams fought their guerilla battles against the VietCong in the viet conflict....that little bit of material sparked a whole load of research and reading on the conflict itself.

Another interesting way to involve educational information are via adventure games, sadly the genre has all but died off. I remember learning a lot more from the side storylines or about the actual locations some of the games featured.

Games these days aren't really concerned about history or education. Mostly just a lot of gloss and to keep you entertained. Its not a bad thing too though....the only problem is without the depth behind the game, there's not much to build on once you start the game and you end up choosing which game you like better because of how the system works.....again its not a bad thing....just like....there are brown eggs, white eggs, omega3 eggs....they're all eggs, but its just what you choose.

That being said, I think its also up to parents to keep an eye on what their children are playing. Not to forbid them or anything, but if there's a genuine depth in the game, parents may want to reinforce more sparking some interest in the kids to read up more on history and so on.



I think I'm dragging this off topic.

[tyboogie]

damn....sammy was breaking it down..droppin nuggets of knowledge all over the thread

-you should compile all these thoughts into a book form..for reals!!!!!

[benzo]

however someone wants to spend his or her time entertaining themselves is up to them. I know a lot of people who enjoy playing final fantasy online and world of warcraft so i guess that is all that matters. I always chuckle to myself when i hear them talk about leveling up in the halls. But personally, I think the virtual life they are living is detracting from the real. I think they are evil. Time could be better spent. Just like it would be better if people watched less television. But, hey, to each his or her own.....

[bracomadar]

I've played WoW and SWG. I didn't last over a month with either and got bored. Now friends are trying to get me to play Everquest 2 (a.k.a. Evercrank since the first was Evercrack) They are fun for a while, but there just seems to be no challenge in them though. It's just a race with yourself to see if you can make it to the highest level. Why even play online if you are just competing against yourself? As for FPS games, I like to play Counter Strike: Source and America's Army. Both have had recent updates. I think they screwed up CS:S to the point I don't wanna play it anymore with this latest update. The CS guys look like they belong in the X-Games. AA:0 is still good. I just wish they’d release a map maker. I also play Splinter Cell Chaos Theory Beta, but I suck at it, but is still fun. Garry's Mod is ironically the best game out there IMO :teeth: It's so different, but so rewarding. You get in there with a few friends and shoot each other into the air and build stupid things. It's just a hoot to play. It's just like playing with Legos as a kid. Out of all of those games that are built by teams of pros that you have pay for, some amateur comes up with a unique idea that holds my attention more than all of them FOR FREE :P This year I'm really looking forward to Battlefield 2, but THEY PUSHED THE RELEASE DATE BACK :uzi2: Just once can a game be on schedule???

[drup]

Of course not! Is the Sims evil?

[2ma2]

Beware; rant ahead!

I often found the MMORPG's to be lacking in freedom. Yeah, you could chat and maim, but the roleplaying is still close to zip. The computer medium will never reach the potential of the ultimal MURPG, wehre you can do what the hell you want and there is NO end in sight. Tabletop Rpgs! Yes, in a world ridden by Susie_125, DethLoKZ0r666 and Steve; in a world where "Dude, I must frag some more so I'll level up" cease to exist (with slight modification) and finally in a world where super-cool-next-generation-graphics has always been there and always will be.

..what, me no like online Rpg's? What gave you that idea? But what about the social aspect? Well, a gaming night, about 3-6 people are having fun together using nothing but pen, paper and if you like, some dice or a deck of cards. Garda!11! The only downfall would be if someone would like to play DnD ;)

Because an online game is not more fun that absolutely everybody else playing it. No matter how supercool the game is. No matter if there's an end or not. Rely on other people and you'll never know what will happen. Yes, this could be fun. It can also spoil it all. Now, I have not played WoW, and should not speak of this, perhaps it's great, perhaps it superb, but I doubt it. I enjoy open ended games; I adore Morrowind, I desperatly seek Daggerfall, Harvest Moon stole way too many hours of my life. Because when I get enthralled into a world, I do NOT want to be jerked out of it by some 13375p34k1n9 h4xx0r or Robert who's "going to kill off some monsters before I take a shower and buy some groceries. Call me later ok?"

[Gonzo]

Educational games are a little harder to push. But its something that's lacking in today;s games. It wasn't that bad in the past.

One of the most educational game types are flight sims. I remember the good ol days when I have my F16 flight controller system in place and pouring through the massive flight manuals of Falcon 4.0. Hypothetical political situations and you get to fly the aircraft, learn about flight/aerodynamics, combat flying, how radar works, military hardware and so on.

One game that affected me more than any other was this EA release called SEAL TEAM, that was way back in 1993 or so. It had a thick manual with a lot of material on how the teams fought their guerilla battles against the VietCong in the viet conflict....that little bit of material sparked a whole load of research and reading on the conflict itself.

Another interesting way to involve educational information are via adventure games, sadly the genre has all but died off. I remember learning a lot more from the side storylines or about the actual locations some of the games featured.

Games these days aren't really concerned about history or education. Mostly just a lot of gloss and to keep you entertained. Its not a bad thing too though....the only problem is without the depth behind the game, there's not much to build on once you start the game and you end up choosing which game you like better because of how the system works.....again its not a bad thing....just like....there are brown eggs, white eggs, omega3 eggs....they're all eggs, but its just what you choose.

That being said, I think its also up to parents to keep an eye on what their children are playing. Not to forbid them or anything, but if there's a genuine depth in the game, parents may want to reinforce more sparking some interest in the kids to read up more on history and so on.



I think I'm dragging this off topic.


I just have to poke my head into this coversation to state how much I loved Seal Team. I can still see the "swarm of bees" ammo when I would crack one off from the shotgun. The death animations, the copious amounts of foliage (which is pretty impressive for 12 years ago), and what seemed like hours spent inching forward prone in order to avoid detection. Ahh.

/nostalgia off

Seal Team had the best walkthrough for a bootup disk ever.

[Sammy]

Something that hasn't been touched uppon here is that often times games fueled by a traditional narrative try to offer a sense that the game never ended in the first place.

Take "Star Ocean: The Second Story" for example, it offered over 80 different endings. The Metroid franchise has always banked on the fack that players assume their skills will be rewarded with different ending sequences. Halo offered an extra 2 seconds provided you could make it in legendary.

This attempt to add replay value is sorta' a compromise between landing a good story (linear when constrained to the 'rules') and gaining some sense of interactivity or influence.
The best that can be done is up to "choose your own adventure - book" standards. And untill gaming starts to develop its own form on storytelling (not just a 'twist' on storytelling) things are likely to stay the same.

All over the industry we can see examples of developers trying to break the "I've reached the ending, and I'm done with it..." assumption that the consumer has...
mostly they're offering the ability to take the game's play mechanic outside of the confined storytelling experience and loggin to an online arena.

[darth massacre]

I just have to poke my head into this coversation to state how much I loved Seal Team. I can still see the "swarm of bees" ammo when I would crack one off from the shotgun. The death animations, the copious amounts of foliage (which is pretty impressive for 12 years ago), and what seemed like hours spent inching forward prone in order to avoid detection. Ahh.

/nostalgia off

Seal Team had the best walkthrough for a bootup disk ever.

We should start another thread on this. I'm not convinced the newer 3D engines could handle the vast undergrowth of Vietnam until I saw Ghost Recon. Its dated now, but it was the first I've seen that could render forests well enough. Other games like Men of Valour, Viet Cong, Nam 67 SHellshock, Battlefield Vietnam and so on are impressive to an extent but I don't believe they could handle the open play of the original SEAL Team.

Every passing year I dream of a remake of this incredible game. The most memorable missions....kill VC tax collector and his escorts....return 2 nights later to take out the rest of the VC high ranking personnel attending the funeral of the guy you took out. 2 LAWs and 2 Stoners did the job pretty well......

[maxetormer]

Beware here comes my RANT!

Hi there, nice interesting discussion, ill join in :D

There was nothing on the SNES that could compare to the storytelling capabilities of a game like Metal Gear Solid.


I disagree with ya, If you have ever played the The Secret of Mana
or the un released on the USA The Secret of Mana2, you would realize
that the storytelling on some of the SNES games was very very
good, if you ever played Super Mario RPG, dam that game had
sum of the most funny conversations and situations that I
ever played.

I have played some of the newest rpgs; NWN per example just did
not maked it for me, I liked the graphics but some how I was not
able to relate to the caracters, the conversations lacked the sparkle
that some of the old RPG had, Elder Scrolls Morriwind was a tecnical
deamon, but the figth system was painfull to use, and the fact that
the main caracter had not personaly in him, at least for me
made the game boring, I like open ended games; hell! Secret of Mana2
has the choise to play with six diferent caracters:

http://www.fantasyanime.com/mana/som2shots-main.htm

http://www.rpgfan.com/pics/seiken3/

and upon wich caracter you played with, the story developed diferent,
Its was like seeing the story unfold from every posible angle,
and Secret of a Mana had some of greatest freedom of movent
ever seen in a SNES game, once you get the dragon "Flamie" you could
praticly vist any region of the world at leasure, and it was a big
world.

http://www.planetnintendo.com/secretofmana/main.html

http://www.rpgfan.com/pics/seiken2/index2.html

The last new gen game I REALLY enjoyed was "Zelda; The Wind Waker"
This game had that same flavor and sence of porpouse that
old games had, and its got some really nice world to expore and
secrets to discover and IMO the most fun and perfect battle system.

For me to like a game its has to had a plot; some sorta of porpuse,
we all create some sence of porpouse in our own lifes, otherwise
why do we live? games with a good storyline mixed with
a reasonable freedom of choise are the games I enjoy the most;
lets face it freedom in real life is noexistent, its a philosofical
ideal, I like when some event takes me to unexpected places
just like in life; in games that are to open ended you have no external
events to spice up your "game" life, and some kinda of porpuse and
ending, I mean even the movies that have open endings do end; it does
not need to be a typical ending, the Secret of Mana had one of the
most amazing endings ever, it was not even a little cliché it felt like
one of those little endings that happen in life that leave a nice after
taste of the next best thing to come,
an new begining :D

[evildisco]

We need MMORPGs of real life for those who suck at life.

Seriously though they are utterly pointless and frustrating, I spent 6 months playing FFXI and after just two months I was still playing it even though I didn't like it.
I agree with Dan, most of these games involve the same ego bullshit about 'n00bs' and 'über', I am guilty of that too and I realize that the only reason that I played stuff like D2 or FFXI was only to achieve a status that means shit in the real world.
The bottom line is that the sole purpose of MMORPGs is neverending competition and ego trips for those who feel or are powerless in real life.

But regardless of that the concept of MMORPGs is genious, hook up people and get lots of $$$, I wish I had developed an MMORPG.

[0kelvin]

Oh boy, I posted that a long time ago. Basically what I think my point was not that the plot in Metal Gear Solid was better than any plot on the SNES, but the tools at their disposal to tell the story were far superior. You can only suspend your disbelief so far when the main character is a 32 pixel tall sprite, and only get so involved in the drama when all the dialogue is scrolling in text boxes. With better graphics, and things like voice acting, game developers are able to close the gap that much further, and draw players in that much deeper. Of course, without good writing it's pointless. But if you took two equal stories, and told one with fantastic graphics and professional voice acting, and the other with sprites and text, the first one would win every time.



0kelvin

[Prometheus|ANJ]

Speaking of stories in RPGs (http://project-apollo.net/text/rpg.html).

I'm not sure if I mentioned this, but Star Control II had a pretty nice story. There were smaller story elements that worked independently at any time, then there was a global story which was chronological and unraveled as you progressed.

You could also kill main characters (like Fwiffo on the moon) and the story adapted, or letting the badguys (Kohr-Ah) almost win, have them wipe out nearly all sentient life in the galaxy, then just steal items from the various ruined homeworlds (instead of having to do the quests).



But if you took two equal stories, and told one with fantastic graphics and professional voice acting, and the other with sprites and text, the first one would win every time.
Depends on how good your imagination is. Graphics are rarely 'fantastic'. More likely, they're hindering your imagination by presenting ready-to-consume badly designed 6000 polygon stuff, that no doubt took a great deal of effort to do, effort that could've put at say... story and gameplay.

Fuzzy visuals has the strength of letting each person imagine his or her own perfect version of a design element. This can't be done with very defined designs, that probably won't appeal to everyone.

As for professional voice acting, I downloaded the voicepack for SCII recently, and the voices sounded nothing like how I imagined them while reading the text. This was because the music playing in the background (of the text based conversations) gave a *feeling* of how the voice sounded. This feeling could not be directly translated to a voice. Similarly, when you have cool design in your head, you can rarely put it down on two dimensional paper. It becomes something else on the paper because it's two different mediums.

So, I don't think you can say that pretty&polished media would win every time over vaguely defined media, because it's like apples and oranges. A text based adventure can create an awesome abstract world in your head, something that can't be translated to 6000 polygons with a bump map. It's different media.

[John]

Since i don't like rpgs and they don't make adventure games anymore, story is pretty much nonexistent in the games i played. What i really look for is depth in the control scheme and within the interactive parts. Uh. Let me explain.
In console games you're stuck with the controller which offers pretty limited possibilities, while being more ergonomic and giving a nicer haptic feedback. A lot of the game, especially in the action and sports genres, takes place here. You enter a button or combination and get visual feedback from the screen.

Now some games, for instance SSX Tricky, can be beat pretty easily if you learn the maps. It's several visual situations occuring after each other at certain points in time, and that can be learned pretty easily. The whole trick system is a joke, after you get 4 basic situations down you can easily rack up all the points you need to make it to the last stage. After two or three days you have the games control down, after that it's like you're shown a pretty movie that could as well be prerendered and you're left to react.

It was more involved in Tony Hawk, you had to do combo's based on the level design and had to find out how to get the most of each jump. The environment really made sense, because more involved objects provided more interesting options of possible combinations of actions. Unfortunately, the later games made it easier to just keep a combination going and put the difficulty only on, guess what, fast visual responses, leaving the level design meaningless to the interactivity. See a rail, jump and grind, rail ends, jump and manual, see a quarter pipe, jump and grab trick. I'm reduced to a button pressing monkey.

Now, good games offer an involved level of control. For instance in Virtua Fighter each action offers an array of options for reaction which lead to different branches of possible button combinations. Plus, on some characters there's stances that give new meanings to many button combinations. Movement in Quake offers a lot of options to abuse the physics system, but the really weird stuff is not very interesting and has an absurd learning curve (to me). It still offers some fun tricks to pull off.

What it comes down to is that the prettiest level and character design is meaningless if it's not tied into deep possibilities for interaction. I think part of the success of Counter Strike is in the possibilities offered by the level design, several dimensional structures open up several possible situations and the design communicates that to a halfway experienced player. You don't see "a street in cs_italy" but "two possible hiding places to the left, entrances to the right and left hand, sniper up in the tower ..."

I hope i make some sense here.

[look]

I enjoy MMRPGs, it's fun to play with other players and keep explore new areas.
Of course it will get boring after you've ran over every last inch in the map... but it's fun up till then

I cannot stand game with story line but no ending, like those game with sequels coming out, they purposely not finish it up in the right manner so they can get teh player to play the sequel. That's EVIL!!!

[0kelvin]

Depends on how good your imagination is. Graphics are rarely 'fantastic'. More likely, they're hindering your imagination by presenting ready-to-consume badly designed 6000 polygon stuff, that no doubt took a great deal of effort to do, effort that could've put at say... story and gameplay.

That is true, but my statement was assuming the games were otherwise equal in every regard. So if one game has poor designs so would the other. But I guess one of the good things about sprites is that they hide poor designs better. On the other hand they can't always do good designs justice.


So, I don't think you can say that pretty&polished media would win every time over vaguely defined media, because it's like apples and oranges. A text based adventure can create an awesome abstract world in your head, something that can't be translated to 6000 polygons with a bump map. It's different media.

Yeah, I said the one would "win" for lack of a better phrase. I agree that they are apples and oranges to a certain extent.

I have nothing against sprite based games. I totally love them, and most of my favourite games are sprite based. But just as far as creating emotion and drama is concerned, the more believable the graphics (not neccesarily realistic, very stylized graphics can be believable), the easier it will be for the player to suspend their disbelief and really get immersed in it.


Ancient Kitten: Agreed



0kelvin