(11-23-2022, 04:28 AM)anthony Wrote: ...
... they actually make expressive use of the ideas and conventions.
I like your framing of "game stuff" - concepts and conventions that gamers recognise, expect or disdain. A meta-experience that comes with the fact that you've played other games before. A developer can chose to use them as means of expression, or use them to tick boxes.
There is also the possibility to use such expectations to lead and mislead the player. My prime example would be Noita, but you called roguelites "contrived", smh. Supposedly 'Baba is you' by the same developers has similar elements.
Quote:"They told me I could be anything I wanted and I became a stealth archer."
This made me lol.
"They told me, in AAA-games, I could only choose between playing a CoD bullet sponge or a Skyrim stealth archer"
I've liked stealth games since Thief (which I might overvalue for nostalgic reasons, but in my mind it was a very impressive game), and I'm not ashamed of seeking out an evolution of that experience - everything is not Skyrim, luckily. When you played Shadow of Chernobyl, did that feel stealth archer-y? My guess is not (certainly not for me), but you did essentially the same sneaking and sniping.
(11-23-2022, 07:15 AM)Hamamelis Wrote: I like your framing of "game stuff" - concepts and conventions that gamers recognise, expect or disdain. A meta-experience that comes with the fact that you've played other games before. A developer can chose to use them as means of expression, or use them to tick boxes.
There is also the possibility to use such expectations to lead and mislead the player.
I think playing on expectations is kind of inherently soy, especially after Metal Gear Solid 2 did basically everything you can do with the idea in one go.
As for game stuff, I've discussed that a lot with Pigsaw. Barrels, goblins, giant crystals in caves, experience points, enemy camps, this stuff is all gay and if we could skip over it we'd be left with the real game lying underneath. Jennifer Hepler was right that 90% of the shit in games should be skippable. Where she was wrong was her ideas on what the other 10% should be.
Quote:I've liked stealth games since Thief (which I might overvalue for nostalgic reasons, but in my mind it was a very impressive game), and I'm not ashamed of seeking out an evolution of that experience - everything is not Skyrim, luckily. When you played Shadow of Chernobyl, did that feel stealth archer-y? My guess is not (certainly not for me), but you did essentially the same sneaking and sniping.
I think that "stealth" as an abstract idea of something one can do is peak "game stuff". I like Metal Gear because it's not a "stealth" game. It's "tactical espionage action". I love that term because it's totally original and can mean anything. That's also why gamers hate it and call metal gear a "stealth game".
11-23-2022, 01:42 PM
(This post was last modified: 11-23-2022, 01:43 PM by Hamamelis.)
(11-23-2022, 07:37 AM)anthony Wrote: I think playing on expectations is kind of inherently soy...
It is soy: "You expected this work of art to conform to some pattern because of previous experience, and we expected your expectations and mixed it up, now don't you feel silly?" However, I have only ever seen one game do it in a way I found noticeable (Noita) and it was very well done, because it played into the greater theme of the game.
EDIT: I haven't played any Metal Gear Solid game.
Quote: "stealth" as an abstract idea of something one can do is peak "game stuff"
It's not an abstract idea, it's a game mechanism. In some games it's central and in others it's one of many. That's like saying guns are "game stuff".
(11-23-2022, 01:42 PM)Hamamelis Wrote: (11-23-2022, 07:37 AM)anthony Wrote: I think playing on expectations is kind of inherently soy...
It is soy: "You expected this work of art to conform to some pattern because of previous experience, and we expected your expectations and mixed it up, now don't you feel silly?" However, I have only ever seen one game do it in a way I found noticeable (Noita) and it was very well done, because it played into the greater theme of the game.
EDIT: I haven't played any Metal Gear Solid game.
Quote: "stealth" as an abstract idea of something one can do is peak "game stuff"
It's not an abstract idea, it's a game mechanism. In some games it's central and in others it's one of many. That's like saying guns are "game stuff".
"Stealth" is an abstract concept. It could mean any number of things. In AAA video games it means the "mechanic" of becoming 98% invisible and 100% silent while ducking low, which can be done indefinitely. I have a lot of respect for any game which actually thinks about stealth in the abstract as a possibility rather than a set of rules. A failure of a game like Spy Fiction is more interesting than The Last of Us.
Breath of the Wild is the only open-world video game I've played that didn't just feel like wandering through a bloated set-piece. There are as little rules as possible: it's really quite the accomplishment that they were able to achieve with that game. I sold my Switch after playing BotW, but now they're making a sequel, and I am tempted, to say the least...
I'm not as impressed by something like Red Dead Redemption, or the Last of Us. Rockstar Games in particular has always received undue praise, in my mind, because while their worlds are big, the story-driven gameplay is very linear - formulaic. Every one of their games has the big minimap in the corner, that gives you the line to follow to your destination... that's not really in the spirit of "open-world" if you ask me, but what, they get all of the accolades because you can simulate shooting and skinning a rabbit?
(01-13-2023, 09:41 AM)Guest Wrote: Breath of the Wild is the only open-world video game I've played that didn't just feel like wandering through a bloated set-piece. There are as little rules as possible: it's really quite the accomplishment that they were able to achieve with that game. I sold my Switch after playing BotW, but now they're making a sequel, and I am tempted, to say the least...
I'm not as impressed by something like Red Dead Redemption, or the Last of Us. Rockstar Games in particular has always received undue praise, in my mind, because while their worlds are big, the story-driven gameplay is very linear - formulaic. Every one of their games has the big minimap in the corner, that gives you the line to follow to your destination... that's not really in the spirit of "open-world" if you ask me, but what, they get all of the accolades because you can simulate shooting and skinning a rabbit?
Breath of the Wild is a rare kind of game where the physical space is something that you actually play with. Western "open" games still act like it's 2003 and simply having a lot of space is impressive. Normalfags say they're into this and buy these games, but they're retarded. They don't know what they actually want. Rockstar have more money and technical craft at their disposal than they can make good use of. I feel like everything they want to do could be expressed through a PS2 game if they were feeling inspired. Really that's most of these big games of our time. BotW was technically weaker than all of its competition but punched insanely above its weight. I put something like 40 hours into that game. Got like 5 hours into GTA5. Couldn't do it.
Why do your criticisms of BotW not apply to Elden Ring and vice versa?
(01-13-2023, 12:40 PM)BillyONare Wrote: Why do your criticisms of BotW not apply to Elden Ring and vice versa?
You posted this in the fps thread, assuming you meant to ask here. I might actually move the post if I can. I'm not sure who you meant to ask but I'll elaborate further on botw and FROM because I like both.
As I said above, it's about space. The way that space is experienced phenomenally. Most video games take place in superficially "open" space but aren't built with the idea that you are a potent mover. FROM games used to be quite rigid, which I never minded, and Souls works in this odd in between state now where you can simultaneously be barred by a waist-high fence, but there are also sequences where you have to make perilous roll-jumps across ledges and balconies to get somewhere. Even while you're practicing extreme and unconventional movement in Dark Souls you're still moving along a path. You look for your cue to find the path and you follow it. Most games which take place in 3D space could be reworked to have movement like Killer7 (bound to fixed rail-routes) and would lose nothing.
It seemed that most people on here had a negative view of Elden Ring and a positive view of BotW which seems hypocritical because Elden Ring seems to have a lot of the same strengths as BotW on top of an arguably richer and better looking world to explore. They seem to share the same faults as well. I have not played either yet, so perhaps I am wrong.
(01-13-2023, 08:18 PM)BillyONare Wrote: It seemed that most people on here had a negative view of Elden Ring and a positive view of BotW which seems hypocritical because Elden Ring seems to have a lot of the same strengths as BotW on top of an arguably richer and better looking world to explore. They seem to share the same faults as well. I have not played either yet, so perhaps I am wrong.
I actually have Elden Ring downloaded now. Haven't played it yet because I'm playing the Evergrace games right now. I really enjoy FROM so I'm perfectly open to the idea I'll love it even if it looks like the character is a bit flattened out from their creative peaks. I already see stuff I love, like the guy in the white mask. And most of the "criticism" I've read of Elden Ring has struck me as retarded. Critiquing it as an "open world game", like that implies an objective set of standards. As PIGSAW said above (which I actually said to him earlier), genre does not explain what a thing is. It explains how you were able to get away with making a thing what it is. In this context that means "I don't believe FROM were trying to make an open world game, I think they realised if they used that term in marketing they could brace people to accept certain things they wanted to try."
(01-13-2023, 08:18 PM)BillyONare Wrote: It seemed that most people on here had a negative view of Elden Ring and a positive view of BotW which seems hypocritical because Elden Ring seems to have a lot of the same strengths as BotW on top of an arguably richer and better looking world to explore. They seem to share the same faults as well. I have not played either yet, so perhaps I am wrong.
if you haven't played either, why raise this point? the answer would be self-evident if you had; breath of the wild was intentionally designed around the open world concept, while elden ring was an attempt to shoehorn souls games--a series which lives or dies by its ability to deliver a meticulously curated experience--into an open world for no reason other than to generate hype and pander to pleb tastes. even if elden ring had the best world imaginable, it would still fail as a souls game.
"Deus Ex has only 1 game"
"JRPG's are supreme"
"All English 'voice acting' is terrible"
(01-13-2023, 11:50 PM)parsifal Wrote: (01-13-2023, 08:18 PM)BillyONare Wrote: It seemed that most people on here had a negative view of Elden Ring and a positive view of BotW which seems hypocritical because Elden Ring seems to have a lot of the same strengths as BotW on top of an arguably richer and better looking world to explore. They seem to share the same faults as well. I have not played either yet, so perhaps I am wrong.
if you haven't played either, why raise this point? the answer would be self-evident if you had; breath of the wild was intentionally designed around the open world concept, while elden ring was an attempt to shoehorn souls games--a series which lives or dies by its ability to deliver a meticulously curated experience--into an open world for no reason other than to generate hype and pander to pleb tastes. even if elden ring had the best world imaginable, it would still fail as a souls game.
Please stop talking in memes and try again. Again, I haven't played Elden Ring yet, but I'm halfway through Evergrace 2 right now and it feels rather like an "open world" game in many ways. They have a clear fascination with the aesthetic possibilities of open fields and plains, but are limited by technology. I'm actually very interested in seeing them do some wide open space again in Elden Ring. King's Field also alternated between enclosed dungeon-spaces and things resembling "fields". I see no reason why wide open spaces run counter to "Souls". Again, genre is not rules. Genre is how you sell what you want to do. The same goes for terminology like "Souls".
Normalfag: Why is this sekiro game so hard?
FROM: It's a soulsbornvania with roguelite characteristics.
Normalfag: Okay I recognise that my negative feelings are invalid now and will continue paying for things I dislike.
Allow me to undo your stuck programming and make Elden Ring fun for you. It's not a Souls game. It's Evergrace 3.
(01-14-2023, 12:17 AM)Guest Wrote: "Deus Ex has only 1 game"
"JRPG's are supreme"
"All English 'voice acting' is terrible"
I truly believe I must speciate away from people who can play a JRPG and not immediately get a migraine and suicidal ideations. Most RPGs in general are like this actually - number crunching interactive spreadsheet simulators, basically fancy Excel.
When it comes to stats and such - the less, the better. I think GTA San Andreas did it right - you have basic muscle strength, reputation, general appearance, and there's "weapons skills" which even if they are a tad over-abstracted I think, are acceptable as I don't have any ideas on how to improve it.
I never finished Skyrim exactly because of the stupid skills/progression system. "Oooo you have gotten 5 gorillion magic points now you can pull unreasonably separated skills out of your ass!"
You do not even need to look at the stats in a JRPG. What JRPG are you referring to that is like this?
JRPGs are interesting because it basically means "multimedia work with abstracted violence game that involves numbers". Leaning into the numbers is a convention some people like, but the japanese are extremely lateral in how they look at this. This baseline is stable and is constantly evolving in new directions. Sometimes spawning new forms and genres, sometimes creating one off super original works, etc. These people are well aware that Dragon Quest is boring unless you really find the familiar conventions charming. The PS1 had Parasite Eve. These people are not hurting for ideas. I just don't play any "JRPG" that looks too normal, but variations on the base I love. Valkyria Chronicles was cool. Just got Resonance of Fate, looks super cool.
(01-14-2023, 02:32 AM)anthony Wrote: Please stop talking in memes and try again. Again, I haven't played Elden Ring yet, but I'm halfway through Evergrace 2 right now and it feels rather like an "open world" game in many ways. They have a clear fascination with the aesthetic possibilities of open fields and plains, but are limited by technology. I'm actually very interested in seeing them do some wide open space again in Elden Ring. King's Field also alternated between enclosed dungeon-spaces and things resembling "fields". I see no reason why wide open spaces run counter to "Souls". Again, genre is not rules. Genre is how you sell what you want to do. The same goes for terminology like "Souls".
Allow me to undo your stuck programming and make Elden Ring fun for you. It's not a Souls game. It's Evergrace 3.
i'm not speaking in memes, nor have i used any meaningless terminology. it makes perfect sense to use a term like "souls" because every game miyazaki has put out since demon's souls (except one) sought to realize the same sort of vision with varying degrees of success, and it is not one of overcoming space. if he wanted to make another evergrace he would have made another evergrace the first time around.
the reason an open world is unsuited to miyazaki's vision simply put is that there are exponentially more possibilities for how the player could approach any given situation; in theory given enough development time and resources elden ring could have succeeded as demonstrated by the first area of the game--with which i'm sure you won't be disappointed--but it quickly unravels because he is constantly working against the expansiveness. the amount of dungeons is telling because the moment he stops trying to square the circle of open spaces the game immediately becomes enjoyable.
you should play it for yourself before admonishing me. it's not a matter of integrating something new to the souls franchise because there is nothing that has been fundamentally added to complement the wide open areas beyond serving as set pieces to get you "hyped" for the next important area. the word "souls" may have been dropped from the title, but the game does not take one step out of its ugly shadow.
(01-14-2023, 02:36 PM)parsifal Wrote: the word "souls" may have been dropped from the title, but the game does not take one step out of its ugly shadow.
Massive outdoor spaces seems like a pretty big step.
JRPGs are an interesting genre in that most of the stuff that gets praised as best of the genre (Chrono Trigger, Final Fantasy, SMT) is shallow garbage that would have been greatly improved had it been a regular visual novel or anime.
(01-24-2023, 09:18 AM)Guest Wrote: JRPGs are an interesting genre in that most of the stuff that gets praised as best of the genre (Chrono Trigger, Final Fantasy, SMT) is shallow garbage that would have been greatly improved had it been a regular visual novel or anime.
I don't really consider "JRPG" a coherent genre or definition as used most of the time. It's a catch-all term for Japanese "video games" which are experimenting in broadly similar ways to to integrate video game conventions and mechanics into genre experiences similar to those common in less complex media forms, such as VNs and anime. Or, they are attempts at incorporating VN and anime elements into and on top of video game conventions and mechanics. However you prefer to see it.
I would argue that these works would be rather rote and boring if presented in more flat, less layered forms of media. Did you really find Chrono Trigger's looks, sounds, and writing so compelling you'd read the VN? Or FF7?
A thought I've found quite satisfactory since I had it is that JRPG's should be considered multimedia anime. I'm not saying this is a perfect description of intentions or nature, but I believe it encourages more productive lines of thought. Chrono Trigger is a multimedia work. Its "JRPG" parts, top down perspective, movement along a 2d plane, violence-simulation game ("combat", as logocentrists say), these all give us different angles and experiences of the visual, audio, and written parts of the work. Reading your way across a world is not the same thing as traversing it. Even via a rather simplified and contrived simulation. Reading about relationships with and between characters is not the same thing as having them physically (in virtual space) walk with you, having to plan out and execute actions with them as a team, etc.
These more sophisticated interactive elements make new novel experiences possible. Chrono Trigger the VN, anime, novel, or whatever else would be a completely different piece of work. You might argue that it could have more efficiently expressed the creator's intentions and been a superior display of craft, but that's something we have to discuss on a case by case basis.
Your use of the term "shallow" interests me. Which part do you mean? If you say you'd prefer a VN I'm inclined to think you mean the game parts ("gameplay" god help us) are shallow. From there we can ask what the problem is. Is shallow bad? Do we need more depth? Less frivolous use of mechanics? Fewer of them? Again, we can have this discussion if we only get more specific. And I would like to have this discussion. I'm trying all the time.
|
