The Video Game Thread - anything and everything...
- Thread starter KrangPrime
- Start date
HeartBlade
Sr Member
In terms of graphics, the big problem is advertising and awards now imo.
I completely agree that graphics arnt everything and games “age” much better if they follow an art style. I still think classic SNES games like Chrono Trigger or Megaman X look amazing because they fit that art style while a PS3 era CoD looks “off” because of the emphasis on “realism” which then fails as graphics get better. If the core gameplay is good though, its not a problem.
However, games are a profit-driven business and pretty games garner attention. Furthermore, one of the ways to get attention is to win “awards.” These awards are a joke (being handed out by journalists and game “influencers” as opposed to other game devs or similar experts in the gaming industry) with the highest being “game of the year.” Game of the Year winners are pretty much always games that are very beautiful graphically, hence why games focus on graphics so much now imo which dramatically drives up dev costs. High costs then mean cant take risks with crazy or “different” games since businesses want to make money, hence remakes or new IPs with similar systems to ensure success.
Yeah, kind of silly to say old games are “unplayable” because of graphics but thats the modern gamer now. Games filled with microtransactions, pretty graphics, and a focus on action.
HeartBlade
Sr Member
Actually wondered about that too.
Im guessing MGS Alpha (3 remake) is going to run on Fox engine like MGSV so that means CQC can be done by simply pressing and holding buttons rather than rely on pressure sensitivity and flicking the analog stick to throw. If they want to recreate the “pressure sensitive” gun aim and firing, the PS5 adaptive triggers can recreate that but given its going to be on PC and Xbox as well, either two control schemes or just get rid of pressure sensitively all together.
Bit of a shame since I thought the pressure sensitivity was cool.
I do wonder that additions/changes will be made. Reddit wanted bigger maps and side quests and if bigger map meant same map but no loading screens in between, im all for it (would make the End fight more interesting). I am against adding sidequests though because it doesnt make sense to the story.
Cephus
Master Member
Maybe that's why I don't care about advertising or awards. I care about the end product, nothing else.
I don't do microtransactions either. If you've got a good game, I'll buy it and play it. It won't become my lifestyle. I play it and move on. If I want to come back later and play it again, I will. Otherwise, I got the enjoyment out of it that I wanted. I'm already doing something else. All I ever cared about was having fun. Is it fun? Yes or no. Yes and I might buy it. No and I won't. It's really simple. I am not a "modern" gamer. They don't make games for me because I'm not a clueless sucker that will keep putting money in their pockets.
Too bad.
Guess we'll see what they end up doing.
A bit bigger map, as if its just been blown up a bit, would be pretty cool. The Ends fight would surely be pretty cool.
Any type of sidequest should only be like the VR missions, as a whole separate thing and definitely not part of the story. Accessed from the main menu.
HeartBlade
Sr Member
Completely agree on both points. Awards are just popularity contests and marketing either shares too much to get people to preorder or to convey information of the million different bundles available. Do you want the standard, deluxe, or take out a loan editions of said game?
Cephus
Master Member
Hollywood has been failing at this for decades. All of the awards are just self-congratulatory back-pats while overpaid idiots get up on stage and tell all the other actors how much better they are than the people who pay their salaries.
Frankly, I just get the basic game, with very few exceptions, if I give a damn about the DLC, which most of the time I don't.
I should have clarified that I meant people said Fallout 4 had dated graphics when it released. I rarely will install graphic mods because generally I think the games look fine. I also hate when they do a graphics "upgrade" and they completely change the textures so they've gone from making it look nicer to changing the game artists' vision.
That's funny you mentioned Deus Ex because I recently bought it again on GOG, but have waited to play it because I don't know if it will be the same. I know there are graphic updates, but they can only do so much.
The only place I can kind of understand microtransactions are something like the Battlefield games. I think it would be okay if they allowed people to buy certain guns because some people just don't have the time to unlock everything. I know some people think that is "pay to win", but even if you give an average player the best equipment in the game, they are still toast if they come up against a better player.
This is looking to be really good. I understand how his tank like self could provide less of a challenge, but I'm sure the developers have some way to keep it going and fresh. FPS aren't my favorite type game, but still, just to be able to be Robocop doing his thing sound like this will be a blast to play.
I'm glad it was delayed, I'm way too busy with things now to be able to enjoy it currently.
I still have Final Fantasy 1-4 to play of the Pixel Remasters.
I've seen the Sega game being played, but never have played it myself, but yeah, that would make for a really awesome cross over.
CB2001
Master Member
You should read the comics. They're from Dark Horse Comics, and the story was written by Frank Miller (and he uses some of the ideas that he came up with that got cut for for the storylines of RoboCop 2 and RoboCop 3, namely RoboCop's human emotions interfering with his programming. And it also explains that Skynet became self aware because of RoboCop). It's definitely worth the read.
It's been a while since I last read it myself, but I remember it being a fun read. NECA even did toys based on the game and the comic IIRC.
Last edited:
Cephus
Master Member
If you don't have time to play a game, don't play a game. I don't really care in your example because I don't play multi-player games. If you want to cheat in a single-player game, knock yourself out. Nobody cares.
Solo4114
Master Member
I was unaware of any graphical updates, though I kinda doubt there's much they can do. The models are so low in polygons that there's only so far you can upgrade whatever the textures are.
"Pay to win" has always been a bunch of nonsense in those games, and the people who complain about that stuff completely misunderstand what's really at issue in the games.
The core problem has always, always, always been that any system of unlocks/upgrades/whatever is going to confer a mechanical advantage on whoever has more stuff unlocked. Yes, even with "sidegrades." Why? Because "sidegrades" allow you to customize how your avatar performs in-game to better suit your own preferred playstyle. You get to tune your experience, and the guy with nothing unlocked doesn't. That means you have an advantage.
Moreover, unlocking stuff isn't remotely a testament to one's skill. It's more a testament to how long your ass has been in the chair playing the same game. Anyone, given enough time, will unlock almost everything in the game. The exception being the Battlefield system's usual problems with aerial vehicle unlocks (where, because some other ******* spends all day long doing nothing but flying, you will never be able to stay airborne long enough to unlock stuff). But even there, that's not so much "skill" as much as it is "getting there first so you can spend your time clubbing baby seals otherwise.
What people object to with "pay to win" is that someone else might either negate the advantage they have, or get one over on them the exact same way they already get one over on other people by expending a resource they either don't have or refuse to part with.
Ultimately, that's all that those "pay to unlock stuff" systems do: they shift the resource for unlocking from time to money. And people who have more time than money don't like that and say it's "unfair." It isn't. What's unfair is the mechanical advantages conferred by the unlock/progression system.
HeartBlade
Sr Member
Or they could just do something like not lock off guns behind hours of grinding that necessitate a player have to decide between spending money on a loot box to MAYBE get a weapon/mod/whatever or hours upon hours of time that makes spending more appealing. Just a thought.
Maybe only have unlocks be different skins for your gun and character for doing stuff like beating the game or played on every stage or whatever. You know, things games used to do before the microtransaction craze went into full effect.
Im not an esports fan and definitely not an esports sports game fan (because **** EA and their anti-consumer practices of securing IPs to gain a monopoly on sports games) but I think it is patently stupid that players need to pay close to $6,000 for a game they already bought if they want to be “competitive” in a game, irregardless of skill.
EA’s Pay-To-Win Culture Unhealthy for FIFA Esports.
Im of the opinion that microtransactions shouldnt exist, period. F2P games were a mistake and microtransactions have ruined game design by strongly incentivizing developers to purposefully put in slog to incentivize players to pay up or waste time doing the most mundane tasks to get some random currency to progress.
Solo4114
Master Member
Yeah, see, I think the only things you unlock should be cosmetics. Show off your fancy hat. I don't care. Lock the kewlest cosmetics behind microtransactions if you want. But nothing that affects gameplay should be part of progression. You get what you get at the start. If you're doing anything with competition -- PvP of any sort -- then the only way to ensure that skill is the deciding factor is to keep all the gear/abilities the same.
Similar threads
