Func_Msgboard: Modern Action Game Development: Is It DOOMed??

Modern Action Game Development: Is It DOOMed??

Posted by Shambler on 2015/12/11 14:34:29

Split from Doom4 topic as I believe this is a pretty pertninent and passionate issue in it's own right.

All of us folks on func are passionate about some form of old skool gaming, right?? Almost certainly Quake / Doom and some their contemporaries, as well as tangential franchises such as Thief, System Shock, etc.

As such we have a pretty strong appreciation of what made those titles great (and often still great). Including but not limited to: User-friendliness, direct controls, simplicity, freedom of movement and exploration, fast paced action, atmosphere, purity of purpose, etc etc.

But also most of us have some passions about modern contemporary titles. Fallout4, Witcher3, Skyrim, XCom EU, Soma, Wolf TNO. Slick graphics (well okay not FO4...), cinematic presentation, strong stories, dialogue, cutscenes, RPG elements, specific missions etc etc.

(I'm skipping low budget indie games here but feel free to compare those if it's relevant)

Nevertheless, as per the Doom4 thread, I think there is a general feeling that games these days are missing the characteristics that made older games great, and that attempts to recapture those characteristics are incompatible with the demands of modern gamers AND the ethos of modern studios, and that attempts to blend old and new and especially remake or reboot old games are doomed...

So:

Is this the case??

Discuss.

First | Previous | Next | Last

#101 posted by JneeraZ on 2015/12/15 02:35:25

Well, with Steams return policy demos would seem to be a moot point.

WarrenM

#102 posted by mankrip on 2015/12/15 02:54:58

Good point.

I don't have Internet access at home. I bring my laptop to my job when I want to install a Steam game, and I'd have to bring it again if I wanted to ask for a refund, which would be a nuisance� but I recognize I'm a minority in this case, and for the vast majority a refund can be good enough.

Still, shareware games had at least a semi-proper ending, and could be replayed over and over. The time limit for refunds forces the player to decide under pressure.

#103 posted by adib on 2015/12/15 03:17:46

I think you're positioning SS and PK at the wrong place. They're not meant to be "old school FPS", not Doom, Duke Nukem or Quake. These ones had (some) storyline, atmosphere, navigation, scares. SS and PK gameplay was more like one of those Konami top-down 2D scrollers: your ship against hordes filling the screen with bullets, along with powerups. A transcription of this gameplay to a 3D shooter, just for the fun of shooting and counting ammo / powerups. Their genre is "arcade FPS". Not a stipped-off Doom.

#104 posted by adib on 2015/12/15 03:24:06

I think a good "market-man" can sell you anything.

Along with mouth to mouth propaganda, the best of all. Forums and reviews would sell innovative gameplay.

Shamb

#105 posted by Blitz on 2015/12/15 04:48:22

Not GFX, most games look great or great enough.

The trend right now (if you want to follow where the investment money is going) is in better (read: more immersive) graphics.

Valve, Oculus (aka zombie-id), Magic Leap, and a whole bunch of others are making a pretty big bet that VR / AR will be so life-like and immersive that gamers will never look back to PC and console games. While I agree with you that the playing field is starting to level in the sense that no PC or console game looks leaps and bounds better than its closest competitors, it'll be interesting to see how the public responds to the perception of increased fidelity and immersion via VR.

And

#106 posted by Blitz on 2015/12/15 04:52:31

Don't get me wrong, publishers and external partners do have their place, and often times have really valuable and insightful feedback. My point was just that there are a lot of compromised visions out there because of the way funding works under that model.

#107 posted by JneeraZ on 2015/12/15 10:40:56

"The time limit for refunds forces the player to decide under pressure."

Sure, but the line has to be drawn somewhere. You can't let people finish a game and then decide if they want to pay for it.

#107

#108 posted by mankrip on 2015/12/15 11:08:10

You took it out of context.

My point is that demos and shareware are replayable. And shareware have proper endings, offering a full experience (although not *the* full experience).

#109 posted by JneeraZ on 2015/12/15 11:10:05

I agree, both have their uses. But as was explained above, developers making demos with the way games are done these days just isn't feasible. The refund policy will likely become the new normal.

Errr.

#110 posted by Shambler on 2015/12/15 12:25:47

Games can and do market themselves on gameplay. Doom4 itself is trying to highlight the fast-paced action. There's been a few others with Youtube videos shouting about "No Cover Mechanics!" "No Regenerating Health!" "Pure FastPaced Action!" - unfortunately most of those generally look like dogturd and/or are MP only.

Deus Ex markets itself on the different gameplay options too. Far Crys do to a certain extent, plus elephants.

#111 posted by FifthElephant on 2015/12/15 12:32:59

Did someone say elephants?

I Didn't Count Eleven Ants.

#112 posted by madfox on 2015/12/18 03:45:00

I never grew up after JackJazz,
and still changing bionic deus ex.

Jazz Jackrabbit

#113 posted by ijed on 2015/12/18 03:57:01

Was ok, but Mario Bros 3 is the best platformer ever made.

First | Previous | Next | Last

You must be logged in to post in this thread.