gdf

Recently completed video games

Recommended Posts

11 hours ago, Bjorn said:

I liked the opening couple of hours of Mad Max, before it became open world.  Literally as soon as I hit the spot where I had an Assassin's Creed style map with icons all over it, I quit out and uninstalled.  That just felt like anything other than Mad Max to me. 

 

There was real potential there, and then they went and made a video game :)

 

Yeah well I played Arkham Knight, Watch Dogs 2 and Mad Max back to back. They all suffer the same issue. I guess these kind of games aren't for me anymore. I played the Ghost Recon Beta over the weekend and I am totally skipping on that game too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, thenexus6 said:

 

Yeah well I played Arkham Knight, Watch Dogs 2 and Mad Max back to back. They all suffer the same issue. I guess these kind of games aren't for me anymore. I played the Ghost Recon Beta over the weekend and I am totally skipping on that game too.

 

I think for me they have to come in moderation, and the design has to feel like it fits the game/world.  Once I've played a game in that style, I don't really want to play another one. 

 

Like the Arkham games, Batman having some super UI overlay on the city feeding him information makes sense.  With Mad Max, I felt it really broke the character of the world, as it should be about exploring the wasteland, learning it, and stumbling across interesting things.  Navigating by landmarks in the distance.  Stuff like that.  But I'm sure that would have been viewed as too risky for a game like Mad Max. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Bjorn said:

 

I think for me they have to come in moderation  Once I've played a game in that style, I don't really want to play another one. 

 

This is absolutely true for me, too. I feel like one big open world game per ~2 years is about the rate I can consume them, probably even longer really.

 

Related to your other point: I've grown to really dislike minimaps in general. I hate that the most efficient way of navigating a video game world is steering around a little pip through a maze in the corner of the screen. I appreciate when they can be disabled, but usually the game is designed assuming you won't – in The Witcher 3, for instance, I don't know how to identify merchants or quest-givers without the minimap (or always trying to talk to everyone). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, dium said:

 

Related to your other point: I've grown to really dislike minimaps in general. I hate that the most efficient way of navigating a video game world is steering around a little pip through a maze in the corner of the screen. I appreciate when they can be disabled, but usually the game is designed assuming you won't – in The Witcher 3, for instance, I don't know how to identify merchants or quest-givers without the minimap (or always trying to talk to everyone). 

 

I've definitely started to get more irritated by minimaps lately too. As much as I loved GTA V, it sucks how much I had to stay glued to the minimap to make sure I didn't miss some critical turn while driving at high speeds. So much gorgeous detail and such a huge world and I'm just spending all my time looking at a tiny corner of the screen.

 

For some reason though, I don't feel like I had that problem at all with Final Fantasy 15. It has a minimap but for whatever reason, I felt that I only ever needed to glance at it occasionally. Something about that game made it a little easier and more intuitive to learn the lay of the land and it had the added benefit of displaying the quest or waypoint marker in the world with a distance indicator. Dungeons, on the other hand, definitely required a little more minimap staring to work your way through the branching paths.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, dium said:

 

This is absolutely true for me, too. I feel like one big open world game per ~2 years is about the rate I can consume them, probably even longer really.

 

Related to your other point: I've grown to really dislike minimaps in general. I hate that the most efficient way of navigating a video game world is steering around a little pip through a maze in the corner of the screen. I appreciate when they can be disabled, but usually the game is designed assuming you won't – in The Witcher 3, for instance, I don't know how to identify merchants or quest-givers without the minimap (or always trying to talk to everyone). 

 

I agree about the Witcher 3. They had all sorts of UI on-off options, which I had high hopes for, but ultimately fell flat since navigating the world without all that help is a pain. Trying to move around the Skellige section and finding that, whoops, I needed to go around a mountain to get to the next town. I think some of that had to do with the map being illegible when it came to clarifying unnavigable terrain.

 

There's something about the way that open world games double-dip on travelling that makes them exhausting. You load up the game and check out the minimap/map for something to do. You travel to the quest giver. Then more often than not, you travel to the part of the world that the quest giver asked. Just typing it out makes me tired. God forbid it's an eavesdrop mission or a mission that starts with you controlling a character in conversation that moves faster than the person you're conversing with. There's a lot of traversal that makes the openness of the world a pain. And fast-travelling to a mission from an icon on a map also feels terrible. I often am left wondering exactly what I'm signing up for.

 

Hopefully this open world fatigue will lead to some true evolutions of the form, cos I agree it's pretty tired.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Open world games have been fatiguing to me from the start.  I appreciate the ambition but 9 times out of 10 the experience lets me down.  The ones that I did like it usually wasn't the open world aspect that I cared for.  I find them to be too repetitive.  In order to justify having an open world you need to fill it with stuff to do and because making a bunch of different things is hard, you often end up with the same task repeated ad nauseum.  I'm not trying to make a lazy devs argument here, it's a tricky problem that I think few games have done right.  I tend to prefer more linear games because I find the craftsmanship and pacing better.

 

Of course I'm a big fat hypocrite because the game I've spent the most time with recently is an open world zombie survival crafting game.  So I probably don't know what I'm talking about.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know, there is this super awesome really good open world game called... Minecraft! Seriously, Minecraft is the best. I'll take every possible opportunity to remind everyone in case they forgot.

 

Which, speaking of completing games, I never did "complete" it. Damn Ender Dragon still eludes me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I should clarify that what I wrote above mostly applies to designed open worlds as opposed to procedurally generated ones.  I tend to not enjoy the procedural ones either but that's more personal taste than a design flaw.  I like crafted, guided experiences which is usually not the case in procedural games.  I appreciate games that allow for more creative and freeform goals but it's just not something I usually care for.

 

Again, I'm full of shit because the game I'm currently playing is a procedural open world game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's always a something that's the exception to the rule though, that doesn't mean the rule is wrong. 

 

 

I think where a lot of open world games go wrong is that they end up too big, and there's no good reason to take a good look around any one area.  Games like Arkham City and at least some of the Souls games are good examples where a word is "open" or at least contiguous and explorable, but it's ultimately a very small area that is densely packed with interesting things to see and do. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Bjorn said:

I think where a lot of open world games go wrong is that they end up too big, and there's no good reason to take a good look around any one area.  Games like Arkham City and at least some of the Souls games are good examples where a word is "open" or at least contiguous and explorable, but it's ultimately a very small area that is densely packed with interesting things to see and do. 

 

For me, I think there is also an appeal to games that go super far in the other direction, like Kerbal Space Program for example. If you really boil it down, each planetary body in that game is insanely huge and sparse, which you would think would make it a prime example of an open world game that is "too big". But because of the way that game is designed and what it tasks you with doing, that massive scale makes for a much more engaging experience. It might not be the strongest example since calling KSP an "open world game" is a bit of a stretch but there are times for me where "too big" actually feels like a positive rather than a negative.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Bjorn said:

There's always a something that's the exception to the rule though, that doesn't mean the rule is wrong. 

 

 

I think where a lot of open world games go wrong is that they end up too big, and there's no good reason to take a good look around any one area.  Games like Arkham City and at least some of the Souls games are good examples where a word is "open" or at least contiguous and explorable, but it's ultimately a very small area that is densely packed with interesting things to see and do. 

 

The Batman Arkham games fall into the category of open world games I liked for that very reason.  They contain some of the things that I dislike about open world games like some annoying repetitive stuff, although I give them credit for at least trying to make a few of them interesting (such as some of the Riddler trophies being puzzles rather than collectables).  I will take a smaller, more densely packed space with interesting stuff over a large expanse that allows for more "freedom" but ultimately has little in it. 

 

The other big thing that will compel me to play an open world game is good, engaging mechanics.  I felt that Shadow of Mordor succeeded in this area.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Zeusthecat said:

 

For me, I think there is also an appeal to games that go super far in the other direction, like Kerbal Space Program for example. If you really boil it down, each planetary body in that game is insanely huge and sparse, which you would think would make it a prime example of an open world game that is "too big". But because of the way that game is designed and what it tasks you with doing, that massive scale makes for a much more engaging experience. It might not be the strongest example since calling KSP an "open world game" is a bit of a stretch but there are times for me where "too big" actually feels like a positive rather than a negative.

 

I think that certain "open world" games with more simulational ambitions tend to benefit from larger gameplay spaces, even if they tend to be empty. Although it's not how I enjoy the game, I know that a lot of people love Crusader Kings 2 because its relatively simplistic system of stat checks and event triggers is repeated across a huge map that allows for the impression of denser content. Kerbal seems to be the same, although I never got as deep into that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think its a question of scale.  Crusader Kings and Kerbal benefit from a large open world because the scale of those games is not down to an individual.  Granted you can pick out individual entities in those games but that's not really what they're about.  I think when most of us hear open world game we imagine a single person running around an environment which is where the danger of being too big comes in.  If the game is scaled around a person that means having to fill that space, either by design or procedurally.  If you go too big the space gets empty (which feels boring) or artificially filled (which feels false).  On the other hand if your scale is interplanetary travel or a multi-generational dynasty then a big world feels totally appropriate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just add my two cents:

 

I think that something that affect a lot of open world struggle to make it feel alive, is how they handle npcs, in modern day open world games you would need so many npcs, that interact with them became impossible, assign them to a day-night cycle also is just not doable. Therefore, you end with huge cities which you can´t talk to a single person and in fact each just walks around. Meanwhile, sci-fi/fantasy games, can deal with this because, they can get away with urban spaces begin rather small, but this allowing each npc to have dialogues and cycles of activities, so while the capital of the realm (or the space empire) just have four shops, three houses and a castle, but still "feel alive". This also extend to the interaction, not just with people, but with the space itself, the huge modern metropolis, is just made of blocks you can´t enter or interact, but the space empire capital (most times) you can enter all places.

 

Another thing, one simple trick that Bethesa kind does, is that while in theory their games are also huge maps with lots of dots, they don´t link this dots to any system (specially progression systems), the whole thing is kind just there, but without pressure, you don´t really need to explore the whole thing (in fact, their main quests are rather short most times).

 

but to back to topic:

 

I finished Hyperdimensional Neptunia Re:Birth2 Sister Generations. Good game, improve a lot on the previous game, pace and length feel right, but sometimes is just way too easy to miss stuff needed for plans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Valorian Endymion said:

I think that something that affect a lot of open world struggle to make it feel alive, is how they handle npcs, in modern day open world games you would need so many npcs, that interact with them became impossible, assign them to a day-night cycle also is just not doable. Therefore, you end with huge cities which you can´t talk to a single person and in fact each just walks around. Meanwhile, sci-fi/fantasy games, can deal with this because, they can get away with urban spaces begin rather small, but this allowing each npc to have dialogues and cycles of activities, so while the capital of the realm (or the space empire) just have four shops, three houses and a castle, but still "feel alive". This also extend to the interaction, not just with people, but with the space itself, the huge modern metropolis, is just made of blocks you can´t enter or interact, but the space empire capital (most times) you can enter all places.

 

A terrific example of this is Deadly Premonition, and I remain surprised that we don't see more games use a small town as their setting.  A more or less open world from the start, populated with characters who have jobs, families, free time and follow a day/night cycle.  The town as character is one of the things that made that game so phenomenal for me.  And "place as character" is something I think a lot of open world games end up failing at. Though maybe that's more of a video game problem in general.  Lots of games fail to establish the place as a character.  But now I'm waffling on saying that, because plenty do.  There's a thought here I want to chase down, but I'm not quite sure what it is. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Switching topics... I have a bad habit of starting games that I never have time to go back to finishing... Latest one being The first Uncharted games so I could play though the series. I played the first 25% and have yet had the opportunity to get back to it.

 

As for the last official game I beat, I believe it was Evoland way back in March...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it worth creating a new thread to talk about open world games so we don't clog up this one?  I've mostly said my piece but I'll expound on it more if there's a conversation to be had.  If we're done then I'll leave it be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, SecretAsianMan said:

Is it worth creating a new thread to talk about open world games so we don't clog up this one?  I've mostly said my piece but I'll expound on it more if there's a conversation to be had.  If we're done then I'll leave it be.

 

Haha maybe, seems i've started something here!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/22/2017 at 4:01 PM, Tanukitsune said:

I beat Severed and boy was it a thrill ride!

Drinkbox studios latest game is AMAZING! It's also much darker than their previous games, it's about a girl who loses her family and arm to monsters and goes on a gory quest of revenge. You use the touch screen to slash and literally dismember them for parts... that you consume for upgrades. You also consume heart pieces to increase health, ew!

 

It's hard to describe how intense the combat gets and how they gradually they introduce new elements to it, some enemies' attack will be delayed when you hit them while others cannot, so you'll have to judge the group of enemies you're fighting to stay in one piece.

 

As enemies gain buffs, you gain the ability to steal one of them, so then you have to plan which buffs you need the most, or the buff you don't want the enemies to have.

 

Near the end the enemy introduces a wizard enemy which transforms into a behemoth monster if you attack it too much, complicating things, but I just found it so much fun.

 

If you have a touchscreen system where it's out on (WiiU, 3DS, Vita and mobile?), I must recommend it, it's the best game I've played in ages.

 

It's especially cool that if you have Wii U and 3DS, it's cross platform purchase so you get both versions on one buy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if the 3DS version is harder to play with it's smaller screen?

 

I just beat Tales of Hearts R and I'm so happy I could finally finish it, for some crazy reason, on my first playthrough I skipped an event which made the game crash soon after that.

 

I didn't realize that was the cause until I replayed it and suddenly met a boss I've never seen before.

 

I confess that the combat is too complex for and I set it to auto, the game has a LOT of complex things that can be set to auto: The story and characters are like most JRPGs familiar yet unique using the tropes in their own way. :tup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mirror's Edge Catalyst :tup:

Running around a jumping. And a few fighting bits. The fighting parts were often annoying because I failed frequently in keeping my "flow". But in most cases you do not really have to encounter enemies, just try to run around them. As is common in platform heavy games you often fail a jump because the game decides you cannot really hold on to the ledge right in front of you. It was fun playing the whole story and side missions, so quite a bit of variety in the things to do. All the optional "race tracks" can easily be skipped as you do not really need the XP that much because you get plenty for doing the actual missions. Most of those optional tasks are quite challenging as there is little room for mistakes.

I think it was a good remake of the original.

 

Lara Croft GO :tup: (on pc)

I like this one much more than the Hitman GO. There are more mechanics in this game unlike in the Hitman version where it is mostly just proper movement. I also thing it's much shorter, fewer levels, so you progress faster. So less tedious. However, most of the game is quite easy, the main story did not really have difficult puzzles to solve. The additional chapter was way more difficult, more of a challenge. So that was good. I think they are really nice ports of the mobile game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hidden Folks :tup:

A where is waldo game. Sometimes you have to interact with the world to find the objectives. Besides finding things it's also fun to look at all the little things going on. Not ever special thing in the "levels" is something you have to find.

And the sound effects... you should watch the trailer, it's hilarious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, elmuerte said:

Hidden Folks :tup:

And the sound effects... you should watch the trailer, it's hilarious.

 

Just watched the trailer yesterday, was creasing up at it. I'll have to get this game soon, my daughter in law would really dig it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just beat Final Fantasy II and the extra dungeon in the PSP version and I gotta say, FF II is very weird and probably not well balanced, but it's still fun to play and it has so many elements we now expect to see in an FF game.

 

The first Chocobo appears, but you only need it once, Cid makes his first appearance too and many of the staple FF enemies, like Malboro.

 

The weird part is that you don't gain levels, you gain "skills". When you get hit, you gain HP XP, when you use a weapon, you gain XP for that specific type of weapon.

 

It creates so many weird imbalances in the game, like gaining the ultimate spell and seeing it's only 1 and does barely nothing unless you grind a LOT or how you can have any character use any weapon, but they'll be useless until they gain some XP.

 

The Rebirth of Souls dungeon is a side story dungeon that's a nice tough challenge which takes places more or less at the same time as the final dungeon in the normal story and I loved it.

 

All I can say is...If you like older JRPGs, you should give FF II a go and give the weird level system a chance! :tup:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now