Jump to content


 


Register a free account to unlock additional features at BleepingComputer.com
Welcome to BleepingComputer, a free community where people like yourself come together to discuss and learn how to use their computers. Using the site is easy and fun. As a guest, you can browse and view the various discussions in the forums, but can not create a new topic or reply to an existing one unless you are logged in. Other benefits of registering an account are subscribing to topics and forums, creating a blog, and having no ads shown anywhere on the site.


Click here to Register a free account now! or read our Welcome Guide to learn how to use this site.

Photo

Is anyone else here a quality gamer?


  • Please log in to reply
11 replies to this topic

#1 ILoveTabitha

ILoveTabitha

  • Members
  • 47 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:01:20 PM

Posted 24 November 2009 - 07:51 AM

Please tell me I'm not the only one here who prefers quality over quantity when it comes to gaming. I prefer games that last forever (such as everything by Blizzard Entertainment [since Diablo] and everything by Reenactor Entertainment), over franchises and companies where people stop playing and talking about the game immediately after it's release and a new game in the franchise is immediately announced upon the release of a game (such as Medal of Honor, Call of Duty, Final Fantasy, Left 4 Dead 2, Electronic Arts, Command & Conquer [since Westwood went defunct], Star Wars games, etc.). I can see the logic behind why companies release games in such large quantities (but have little or no real quality or innovation in them), it's because they earn more money off of 50 little games that die a month after it's release than they do spending the time, money, and effort to make a really good game that blows everyone's mind over the course of a few years. There is an old joke about LucasArts and how they have a status quo of 20 Star Wars games a week (while this may not necessarily be literal, it isn't far from the truth). While it is true that some of these "all flash no substance" games may be quite enjoyable, they won't last forever like those by Blizzard Entertainment and Reenactor Entertainment. Electronic Arts is one of the worst when it comes to releasing a bunch of games. Now then, before anyone points out that EA is a publisher and doesn't generally make games (they just use other companies to make them for them, which is how they have so many), please keep in mind that they are (both de facto and de jure) dictators over those littler companies that they own. In fact, I own the 2001 Electronic Arts game, Sub Command. In fact, Electronic Arts is so bad about putting quantity ahead of quality that they put on the box (before and during the game's release) that they would shutdown the multiplayer in December 2001. Now that is just pathetic, and not just because you should never shutdown multiplayer, but also because they planned for the game to go under prior to it's release. Then, they went off and made a sequel, I mean really, what the hell! So, does anyone else here feel as I do?

BC AdBot (Login to Remove)

 


#2 Smurfmdk

Smurfmdk

  • Members
  • 8 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Location:Yorkshire, England
  • Local time:08:20 PM

Posted 25 November 2009 - 12:14 PM

Hey,

I agree about Diablo, Diablo II and the expansion (lord of destruction) - these games were amazing, and i would like to add that Final Fantasy has also been one of those games, i mean who doesn't still pick up their PS one or two and complete FFVII or FFVIII for 4 or 5th time :thumbsup: - i play FFXI online and have done for about 3 years now, this game is neverending and probably still the best MMO out there. WOW is the other major competitor but i suppose it is on personal preference and age of people...i made my opinion that it is just little kids playing WOW all the time and not really paying much attention to story lines and the aim of the game - just fooling around asking to "dual" all the time because you are a lower level.

All the C&C's are brilliant - not amazing i agree but to play as a quick 2 on 2 with a friend over the internet is great and a good source of something different from RPG's. The music is fun to listen to and the main story actors give the game a different feel to playing the story complared to the likes of MoH and CoD.

But i have to say being part of an online clan i do play all the war games (MoH, CSS, CoD, BF2142...) these are great for getting on TS or Vent and having a laugh with mates, killing some people, dieing loads and all in all not really caring too much...

so to conclude you have made a valid opinion that i would imagine many will agree with and many will not. I thought i might as well give you mine on here to see what i have to say :flowers: (plus i am pretty bored at work)


Cheers
Matt

#3 scff249

scff249

    Indecisive Lurker


  • Members
  • 1,319 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:A galaxy far, far away...
  • Local time:02:20 PM

Posted 27 November 2009 - 05:46 PM

What you're saying is a bit subjective as to what's quality.

Certain games sell well because they're able to get to that market so easily. An example: The reason why Madden games sell so much is because of its target market. Why does the target market matter? Because the casual gamer market is much greater than the hardcore gamer market (IIRC, it was something like 90% of the market is casual...but that information was also from 3 years ago, so it may have changed).

Also, if you think about it, some people may just do this so that they can also keep a job as well if the games keep consistently selling well (not completely true, though, since there's still the indie game market, which that's really growing fast, IIRC).

Just to note on the Star Wars games, I actually talk about Star Wars Rogue Squadron: Rogue Leader still (despite that it's something like 10 years old...whenever the Gamecube came out, that game came out soon after). Despite how old it is, the game aged pretty well, IMO.

Also, about that joke and LucasArts, you can realistically make 20 games in a week if you're talking about the whole team. Albeit, they're all very small and only needs beginner class skills. On the individual level, it's impossible.

I don't think I got to what you're saying, though.....

Edited by scff249, 28 November 2009 - 12:35 AM.

"Ototo'i wa usagi o mita no...Kino wa shika...Kyo wa anata." -Kotomi Ichinose (Clannad) [see below for translation]
"Day before yesterday I saw a rabbit, and yesterday a deer, and today, you." -The Dandelion Girl
"You are not alone, and you are not strange. You are you, and everyone has damage. Be the better person." -Katawa Shoujo


#4 rkoelsch

rkoelsch

  • Members
  • 27 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:02:20 PM

Posted 25 December 2009 - 07:19 AM

I think quality is a subjective qualifier. Everyone has different ideas of what they like.

I like the original neverwinter nights, Knights of the old republic and world of warcraft(originally). WOW doesn't have the spark it used too. Age of Conan is a beautiful game. It suffered from a horrible release and bad promises. It also has the only music soundtrack from a game that I have added to my collection.

I played Diablo2 for a bit and while it was a fun game wasn't anything special in my eyes. So you see how viewpoints can differ.

#5 kdevine126

kdevine126

  • Members
  • 7 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:02:20 PM

Posted 03 January 2010 - 12:29 PM

I would say it's incredibly subjective as to say what is a "quality" game. Is it a game that you can play for hours upon hours? A game that you can play again and again for months? Or a game that redifnes a genre.

If you look for a game that you can play over a period of years I would say the best that I have ever played a few large strategy games such as the Total War series or Europa Universalis. I've had EUIII for about three months and have yet to reach the end end date for a single nation. Same thing with the Total War series. I loved Rome:Total War when it first came out, and forged the Roman Empire once or twice, but I went back to it multiple times. Dont get me started on the community mods for it, cause one could spend a lifetime playing all of them.

Personally I think one of the highest quality games I've ever played is "Vampire:The Masquerade; Bloodlines." I'll admit that I'm a bit biased since I'm a fan of White-Wolf's original V:tM. As for Bloodlines, the original game was buggy to death, but thanks to a large albiet controversial community mod project the game really shines. Mainly because after Deus Ex it is probaly the greates FPs RPG.

So can a studio that pounds out game after game make something of quality? Let's take EA for example, a studio that would like to brag that they put out more "hit" games then anyone else. Well you could blame it on the old thousand monkeys on typewriters line, but let's just look at EA's flagship games.

The Sims: originally made by Maxis BEFORE EA took them over, since then they have just been adding on to the series without any major changes. Just expansion after expansion. I never really got into the series, because there is just something very odd about playing a game where I live as someone doing all the routine things of daily life...things I could be doing instead of playing said game.

Rockband: When it first came out it raised stakes big time on Guitar Hero, and still being in college at the time it was a game that you can find in nearly every apartment. Rock Band 2 didnt really change much except make it look nicer. If Rock Band 3 doesnt do anything revolutionary I'd say the series will be the new Madden line.

Madden NFL: Has a dedicated following unlike any other I've seen. However I honestly cant tell the difference from one year's version to the next's other then updated rosters. But in a way isnt that the point?

Medal of Honor: Holds the honor of being the first WW2 game. However the series has greatly fallen since it's glory days of Allied Assault. Hopefully 2010's isnt just COD MW clone.

So I'll end with this if a game series doesnt change it will become stale and boring, but isnt that often the point of a game series, to keep the formula that has worked so as not lose the fanbase? Case in point; the Halo and Modern Warfare series

#6 nightspydk

nightspydk

  • Members
  • 184 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Local time:09:20 PM

Posted 07 January 2010 - 10:06 AM

I've found myself during months of intense gaming enjoying russian releases more than anything etablished. Subjective indeed. :D

#7 locally pwned

locally pwned

  • Members
  • 489 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Portland, Oregon
  • Local time:11:20 AM

Posted 08 January 2010 - 01:47 AM

Perhaps instead of "quality" we should look at innovation.

What does a new game add to the whole? What new mechanics does it explore?

Large publishers want to play it safe. If they can sell millions of copies of "Big Franchise (n+1)," they will, rather than risking the creation of a completely new game.

But this comes down the the market. If people didn't buy each new version of the same old game, publishers would look into more innovative ways to make games. If you want to stimulate the industry to create more types of games, look for smaller independent publishers who aren't afraid to release new types of games and buy a few from them.

----

I've been gaming for a long time; I first started attending LAN's in 1997 or so. From my perspective gaming has changed quite a bit. Back then, just finding other players was harder than you think; these days gaming is much more prevalent, yet finding consensus on what games are worth playing seems further away than ever.

It seems to me shooters particularly are getting more and more watered down. I am not a fan of many new mechanics, such as persistence (gaining new weapons and a tactical edge based on shear hours spent, rather than everyone starting from equal ground and skill being the dominating factor) and auto-heals (no set amount of health you have to work with to finish levels; in multi-player, anything less than a kill may now loose value if your target is able to hide for a few seconds) seem to only weaken the genre. I imagine the explosion of console players has some influence on these changes. It seems that instant gratification is far more important than skill an patience.

But then, perhaps I am just a dinosaur, not changing with the times. :thumbsup:
"The whole of science is nothing more than a refinement of everyday thinking." - Albert Einstein

"The world is my country, all mankind are my brethren, and to do good is my religion." - Thomas Paine

"If it looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, we have at least to consider the possibility that we have a small aquatic bird of the family anatidae on our hands." - Douglas Adams

#8 Nitpickery

Nitpickery

  • Members
  • 4 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:03:20 PM

Posted 24 January 2010 - 04:32 PM

It seems there are several different personal opinions about quality wafting about.

If you mean quality in terms of replayability and hours of entertainment, the Fire Emblem games, particularly The Sacred Stones, entertained me for quite a while.

If you want innovation, I'd say I enjoyed the innovation in gameplay mechanics seen in Drill Dozer and Super Mario Galaxy and the innovation in plot structure seen in all of the Metal Gear Solid games and No More Heroes.

If you want visual presentation, Okami and LittleBigPlanet were creative, unique, and
Spoiler
.

These are just a few examples. As much as I'd like to, I can't play every game.

#9 scff249

scff249

    Indecisive Lurker


  • Members
  • 1,319 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:A galaxy far, far away...
  • Local time:02:20 PM

Posted 24 January 2010 - 11:24 PM

If you mean quality in terms of replayability and hours of entertainment, the Fire Emblem games, particularly The Sacred Stones, entertained me for quite a while.


Just about any of the Fire Emblem games could theoretically have a lot of replayability, depending on what you take for it (be it for the character development, gameplay mechanics, or etc). Goddess of Dawn and Shadow Dragon are a bit shaky in that aspect (the latter being more shaky as I've only played that twice and quit playing it due to the slight lack of character development and a few quirks I had about it....and the former I still play after having some 12 replays in that game....not counting the number of times I've played just Endgame......).

If you want innovation, I'd say I enjoyed the innovation in gameplay mechanics seen in Drill Dozer and Super Mario Galaxy and the innovation in plot structure seen in all of the Metal Gear Solid games and No More Heroes.


No More Heroes really should be labeled for their gameplay as their use of the Wii controls was fairly flawless (a couple of odd hiccups here and there, but it's impossible to be perfect). The story was decent, though, but that game really shined for its gameplay.

"Ototo'i wa usagi o mita no...Kino wa shika...Kyo wa anata." -Kotomi Ichinose (Clannad) [see below for translation]
"Day before yesterday I saw a rabbit, and yesterday a deer, and today, you." -The Dandelion Girl
"You are not alone, and you are not strange. You are you, and everyone has damage. Be the better person." -Katawa Shoujo


#10 martinluken133

martinluken133

  • Members
  • 3 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:02:20 PM

Posted 25 January 2010 - 02:01 PM

I can see the logic: Money. People actually buy it anyways.

#11 matt3

matt3

  • Members
  • 113 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:United States
  • Local time:01:20 PM

Posted 27 January 2010 - 05:17 PM

I still play the old Command and Conquer series but that is the ones made by Westwood like C & C Red Alert 2 and Yuri's Revenge even some of the one older than that. I bought Red Alert 3 but yet still a game that was made the nine years before still seams better to me. I mean there are people that will go out and buy the newest modern warfare play it for a bit and then never even talk about it again.

#12 the_patriot11

the_patriot11

    High Tech Redneck


  • BC Advisor
  • 6,755 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Wyoming USA
  • Local time:12:20 PM

Posted 30 January 2010 - 12:59 AM

see to me quality is subjective. I find games like diablo a complete waste of time, however games like COD4 to be a classic. though, to be honest, Im not one of those who has to play all the new games, give me 2 or 3 that I like and im very happy with them. right now its COD4 for the PC and rainbow 6 vegas 1 and 2 for the xbox 360.

picard5.jpg

 

Primary system: Motherboard: ASUS M4A89GTD PRO/USB3, Processor: AMD Phenom II x4 945, Memory: 16 gigs of Patriot G2 DDR3 1600, Video: AMD Sapphire Nitro R9 380, Storage: 1 WD 500 gig HD, 1 Hitachi 500 gig HD, and Power supply: Coolermaster 750 watt, OS: Windows 10 64 bit. 

Media Center: Motherboard: Gigabyte mp61p-S3, Processor: AMD Athlon 64 x2 6000+, Memory: 6 gigs Patriot DDR2 800, Video: Gigabyte GeForce GT730, Storage: 500 gig Hitachi, PSU: Seasonic M1211 620W full modular, OS: Windows 10.

If I don't reply within 24 hours of your reply, feel free to send me a pm.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users