View Single Post

Default 

September 26th, 2007, 13:49
Can you provide examples of this? I think of Civilization IV, which is a game that I could have my kids play a few years ago when they were very little , still play now with greater challenge, and that I can get all levels of challenge out of.
Yes, I think Civilization is a good example of reasonable evolution.

I also think that the developments in UI design are often for the best, especially if you compare something like System Shock with its sequel. Popular genres like RTS games have many good developments involving streamlining the experience, like multiple waypoints, gatherer automation etc. But it's always a fine line to walk, and sometimes you take away too much for the sake of simplicity. But the main issue is really what motivates the change. Is it a change for the better game, or is it a change for the larger audience. When I look at Oblivion, Bioshock, Deus Ex 2, and many other "big titles" I see changes for the sake of sales, not for the sake of the game (as in the art). I don't blame developers/publishers for those changes, because it means they're simply interested in money/popularity and that's understandable, but I loathe the fact that they can't be straight about it.
DArtagnan is offline

DArtagnan

DArtagnan's Avatar
Waste of potential

#67

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Denmark
Posts: 13,067