Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Neonivek]

Sequels that radically alter basic mechanics from previous games.

There.  That's all, it just bugs the hell out of me.  It's one thing to fix something that doesn't work or isn't fun, but altering the fundamental gameplay of a game without reason is asinine and infuriating.

If only there was a perfect example of a freshly released big budget game that cut a ton of mechanics from the previous games to make it more accessible. Hmmmm...

What I LOVE about this... is you could be talking about anything! You literally could make a list.

[Muz]

Sequels that radically alter basic mechanics from previous games.

There.  That's all, it just bugs the hell out of me.  It's one thing to fix something that doesn't work or isn't fun, but altering the fundamental gameplay of a game without reason is asinine and infuriating.

There's some that are ok, like Fallout Tactics and X-Com Interceptor, just because the theme and world is designed so well. There's XCOM, which did fix a lot but ended up with completely different games.

It's okay if your original game fits the same market.

But I hate it when games try to just make money by buying an IP then going for a different market. Like Activision Blizzard acquiring King (Candy Crush). What's up with that?

I think Fallout 2 and Fallout 3 are bad just because they go for two different kinds of players. Fallout 2 is meant for the type who love making different types of characters and see what happens. Fallout 3 is meant for the people who just like to jump into holes or explore different villages and caves and find new things. Entirely different expectations.

[Neonivek]

Well I think Spin-offs are a clear exception.

[Shadowlord]

But I hate it when games try to just make money by buying an IP then going for a different market. Like Activision Blizzard acquiring King (Candy Crush). What's up with that?

Activision Blizzard is a game now?

I'm sure they bought King because King is making tons of money from games that are ridiculously cheap to make (compared to AAA games).

[Neonivek]

Pit Stop Sequels

So there is a Dead Space and all things considered it is a good game, could be improved in my mind but almost all games could, that offered unique gameplay.

Then there is Dead Space 2 a game that pretty much has "No reason to exist" so to speak. That isn't accurate but the game is set up as a sort of inbetween of Dead Space 1 and 3. The game doesn't even hide the fact that nothing in the second game matters.

Don't get me wrong the story they go with saves it from being entirely irredeemable... But games should feel like they exist for themselves, not as a holdover because the REAL game is taking too long.

Ps. I know Dead Space 3 is technically the worst.

[Reelya]

But I hate it when games try to just make money by buying an IP then going for a different market. Like Activision Blizzard acquiring King (Candy Crush). What's up with that?

Activision Blizzard is a game now?

I'm sure they bought King because King is making tons of money from games that are ridiculously cheap to make (compared to AAA games).

Also, because the AAA devs want into the indie/mobile market but their work practices haven't really translated over very well. Putting a AAA studio onto making mobile content is a losing proposotion, things are just going to fuck up and cost a lot more money that way. So it's much better to acquire a successful mobile dev company. Then, the mobile company can keep doing what they do best, plus they've got an inside tap into all the Activision IPs now. Definitely expect to see more Activision-related mobile properties springing up.

[Culise]

On topic, tiles in space 4xes are one of my peeves, but that's due almost entirely to GalCiv II, so I'm willing to consider the possibility that they're not universally bad. After all, I don't consider research or tech descriptions peeves just because they were awful in GalCiv 2.

I suppose the problem with tiles in space 4X games is that they severely downplay the vast volume of space between star systems, at least in GalCiv. Everything floats, static, in a rather cramped "map" of sorts, with systems extremely close to each other, as far as cosmic scales are concerned. Distance is completely abstracted, perhaps too much.

You might want to try the Space Empires series which lpshades this by having interstallar travel occur solely by naturally occuring wormholes  with no actual faster than light or deep space travel per se

GalCiv technically actually does something similar - that is, creating some map feature that is justified by FTL fluff, but in the case of GalCiv it's the tiles themselves.  The tiles don't represent real distances; they represent distances as traveled by the FTL engines, which lose efficiency as they get close to large gravity wells.  Thus, the absolute distance you travel in one arbitrary unit of time (a game turn) varies based on proximity to planets, stars, or the like, and a single tile next to a star is smaller in absolute terms than a tile in deep space.  That makes the map look like one of those Earth maps where they scale country sizes by the measured criteria (like this).  I don't believe they ever actually mention this in-game, however; it's something I learned only in passing online, which makes you wonder why fluff rationalizations for gameplay crunch aren't put anywhere useful. 

[Lossmar]

On topic, tiles in space 4xes are one of my peeves, but that's due almost entirely to GalCiv II, so I'm willing to consider the possibility that they're not universally bad. After all, I don't consider research or tech descriptions peeves just because they were awful in GalCiv 2.

I suppose the problem with tiles in space 4X games is that they severely downplay the vast volume of space between star systems, at least in GalCiv. Everything floats, static, in a rather cramped "map" of sorts, with systems extremely close to each other, as far as cosmic scales are concerned. Distance is completely abstracted, perhaps too much.

You might want to try the Space Empires series which lpshades this by having interstallar travel occur solely by naturally occuring wormholes  with no actual faster than light or deep space travel per se

GalCiv technically actually does something similar - that is, creating some map feature that is justified by FTL fluff, but in the case of GalCiv it's the tiles themselves.  The tiles don't represent real distances; they represent distances as traveled by the FTL engines, which lose efficiency as they get close to large gravity wells.  Thus, the absolute distance you travel in one arbitrary unit of time (a game turn) varies based on proximity to planets, stars, or the like, and a single tile next to a star is smaller in absolute terms than a tile in deep space.  That makes the map look like one of those Earth maps where they scale country sizes by the measured criteria (like this).  I don't believe they ever actually mention this in-game, however; it's something I learned only in passing online, which makes you wonder why fluff rationalizations for gameplay crunch aren't put anywhere useful.

Distant Worlds and Star Ruler - those games can have settings that make any extrasolar voyage a really long one.
And ofcourse Aurora 4x - since every craft is sublight one, there is more than enough stories about systems so large that voyage to another planet takes centuries :>

[Shadowlord]

GalCiv technically actually does something similar - that is, creating some map feature that is justified by FTL fluff, but in the case of GalCiv it's the tiles themselves.  The tiles don't represent real distances; they represent distances as traveled by the FTL engines, which lose efficiency as they get close to large gravity wells.  Thus, the absolute distance you travel in one arbitrary unit of time (a game turn) varies based on proximity to planets, stars, or the like, and a single tile next to a star is smaller in absolute terms than a tile in deep space.  That makes the map look like one of those Earth maps where they scale country sizes by the measured criteria (like this).  I don't believe they ever actually mention this in-game, however; it's something I learned only in passing online, which makes you wonder why fluff rationalizations for gameplay crunch aren't put anywhere useful.

... That's the kind of thing that should actually be mentioned in the game somewhere.

[Neonivek]

The problem is what fantastic moron are you going to have ask that sort of thing?

This isn't like someone asking why ships use Knots instead of KM

[Niveras]

Edited: Wrong thread.

[Vgray]

GalCiv technically actually does something similar - that is, creating some map feature that is justified by FTL fluff, but in the case of GalCiv it's the tiles themselves.  The tiles don't represent real distances; they represent distances as traveled by the FTL engines, which lose efficiency as they get close to large gravity wells.  Thus, the absolute distance you travel in one arbitrary unit of time (a game turn) varies based on proximity to planets, stars, or the like, and a single tile next to a star is smaller in absolute terms than a tile in deep space.  That makes the map look like one of those Earth maps where they scale country sizes by the measured criteria (like this).  I don't believe they ever actually mention this in-game, however; it's something I learned only in passing online, which makes you wonder why fluff rationalizations for gameplay crunch aren't put anywhere useful.

... That's the kind of thing that should actually be mentioned in the game somewhere.

Manuals aren't useful? 

The manual I have also mentions that your population numbers represent taxpayers, not the total population of a planet. Citizenship is apparently a very fluid thing in the future.

[Niveras]

The population/taxpayer thing is mentioned in-game at several points (most chiefly the pop growth tallies, which point out that new population numbers represent taxpayers because people can't be born at the rate they're reporting). But there is nothing to describe the FTL mechanics, AFAIK, not even in the tech blurbs.

[LoSboccacc]

blasted, intended to pm

[LoSboccacc]

Don't get me wrong the story they go with saves it from being entirely irredeemable... But games should feel like they exist for themselves, not as a holdover because the REAL game is taking too long.

agreed. HATED crysis 1 ending.