|
Your continuous donations keep RPGWatch running!
RPGWatch Forums » Comments » News Comments » Gothic 3 - First Impressions @ IGN

Default Gothic 3 - First Impressions @ IGN

November 19th, 2006, 06:38
Sad, but true Sammy!! Hey, totally off topic, but your Chargers are looking very good this year!! I've followed them ever since they hired an Aussie several years ago!!

If God said it, then that settles it!!

Editor@RPGWatch
Corwin is offline

Corwin

Corwin's Avatar
On The Razorblade of Life
RPGWatch Team

#21

Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 10,321
Send a message via Skype™ to Corwin

Default 

November 19th, 2006, 06:44
Corwin is pretty much closest to the mark. The reason it appears games are being "dumbed down" is that the industry is much larger now which has brought with it higher costs and higher stakes. The kind of folks that want to play time consuming, somewhat complicated games is small, and will never get much larger. This wasn't so much of a factor in the old days, because the costs of producing and distributing a game were small enough that sales in the thousands, perhaps 10's of thousands was sufficient to cover costs and perhaps generate a bit of profit. Now, of course, it's big business. Playing computer games as a form of entertainment became "normal" enough, socially acceptable enough and technologically accessible with more folks having access to computers and gaming consoles than ever before as to present a pretty good buisness opportunity for companies. The early days of the industry were arguable mostly driven by the passion of the creators/developers. Now that big money can be made, the industry is driven by profit margins. Plain and simple.

So, it's actually not dumbing down as much as it is expansion of the industry bringing with it certain cold, hard marketing facts. Namely: if you want to make mucho dinero, you've got to pour millions of dollars into a game with a lot of flash that a broad market will enjoy and be entertained by. Sorry, but most of the market is nothing like us folks at the Watch when it comes to how they're entertained with video games. No need to pass judgement about them being "dumb" or "stupid". They're just different and want different things. Who here can say that no matter what the form of entertainment they consume, the always want it to be complex and challenging? Didn't think so. Lot's of folks want games to be fun and easy. And that's OK.

Of course, the justifiably troubling question is what is the future of complex and challenging games for those of us that like that style of entertainment?
chamr is offline

chamr

chamr's Avatar
Mounted Highborn

#22

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: CA, USA
Posts: 850

Default 

November 19th, 2006, 07:09
the future has be somewhere along the lines of creating an 'end all engine' that is so great and has so many options that small developers can use this engine, for years, allowing them to use most of their resources on creative aspects rather than technology. graphics are already getting about as good as they can get without getting realistic. but most games would actually not benifit from too realistic of a setting because then the luxury of doing 'creative' things with design. starships, elves, and monsters don't exist. what is the benifit in creating a 'realistic' one when an unrealistic one can actually be more powerful of an image. realism isn't always the issue it can sometimes be the quality of design. some would agrue that the best looking sci/fi game looks more realistic than a 60's sci/fi television show with bad makeup and hokey sets, but real people.

more to say, but my bumber sticker says "would rather be playing gothic 3"
curious is offline

curious

curious's Avatar
liberty or license

#23

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: California
Posts: 1,386

Default 

November 19th, 2006, 14:01
I think the future of gaming for people like ourselves, is in the hands of the small Indie developers. Their games may lack a little polish and gloss, and the graphics may not be cutting edge, but the GAMEPLAY is vastly superior!!

If God said it, then that settles it!!

Editor@RPGWatch
Corwin is offline

Corwin

Corwin's Avatar
On The Razorblade of Life
RPGWatch Team

#24

Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 10,321
Send a message via Skype™ to Corwin

Default 

November 19th, 2006, 19:04
Originally Posted by Dhruin View Post
The faction system is less linear.
And much more subtle - you can partially side with a number of factions, or be true to one while also gaining influence with others without compromising your 'RP-value'. It is quite nice, actually.
Originally Posted by Dhruin View Post
So…? Or are some people confusing poor design choices with dumbing down?
Maybe 'dumbed down' is the new 'this is teh ghey' …

— Mike
txa1265 is offline

txa1265

txa1265's Avatar
SasqWatch

#25

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Corning, NY USA
Posts: 11,326

Default 

November 19th, 2006, 20:15
I'm just saying that oblivion would be much more enjoyable experience if it didn't hold my hand all the time. If Benthesa HAD to put those help messages in the game why couldn't they even give us a CHOISE to disable them!?!
Dez is offline

Dez

Dez's Avatar
Keeper of the Watch

#26

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,108

Default 

November 19th, 2006, 21:10
I agree with that about Oblivion. But there are a couple of people in this thread who think Gothic 3 is dumbed down…there are plenty of bugs and design failures but I just don't see the dumbing down.
Dhruin is offline

Dhruin

Dhruin's Avatar
Watcher
Super Moderator
RPGWatch Team

#27

Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 11,964

Default 

November 20th, 2006, 01:21
Originally Posted by chamr View Post
Corwin is pretty much closest to the mark. The reason it appears games are being "dumbed down" is that the industry is much larger now which has brought with it higher costs and higher stakes. The kind of folks that want to play time consuming, somewhat complicated games is small, and will never get much larger. This wasn't so much of a factor in the old days, because the costs of producing and distributing a game were small enough that sales in the thousands, perhaps 10's of thousands was sufficient to cover costs and perhaps generate a bit of profit. Now, of course, it's big business. Playing computer games as a form of entertainment became "normal" enough, socially acceptable enough and technologically accessible with more folks having access to computers and gaming consoles than ever before as to present a pretty good buisness opportunity for companies. The early days of the industry were arguable mostly driven by the passion of the creators/developers. Now that big money can be made, the industry is driven by profit margins. Plain and simple.

So, it's actually not dumbing down as much as it is expansion of the industry bringing with it certain cold, hard marketing facts. Namely: if you want to make mucho dinero, you've got to pour millions of dollars into a game with a lot of flash that a broad market will enjoy and be entertained by. Sorry, but most of the market is nothing like us folks at the Watch when it comes to how they're entertained with video games. No need to pass judgement about them being "dumb" or "stupid". They're just different and want different things. Who here can say that no matter what the form of entertainment they consume, the always want it to be complex and challenging? Didn't think so. Lot's of folks want games to be fun and easy. And that's OK.

Of course, the justifiably troubling question is what is the future of complex and challenging games for those of us that like that style of entertainment?

I agree, but to play devil's advocate, why are mmorpgs popular. Corwin, and your, core point is that people want a quick fix, and dumbed down mechanics. Even WoW is far from quick, or dumb. There is a lot to that game. EQ was slower (but I think less complex, but I barely played when I found out there is no character development, where as wow, ac, sb, uo, and some others had choice in character development so i gravatated towards them) and very popular. Vanguard is supposed to be even slower and more complex.

So how does this fit into the quick fix, dumbed down catagory? Why does it only apply to SP games? What if a wow was as simple to plat through as Diablo? Will Diablo 3 be as hard as WoW? We all know the answer is no.

Is it because people expect SP games to give them a quick, thoughtless fix, and the ones who are looking for some depth would rather play in a game such as wow, that has no ending, and always has that carrot on the stick?
roqua is offline

roqua

roqua's Avatar
Sentinel

#28

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 474

Default 

November 20th, 2006, 06:17
Originally Posted by roqua View Post
Corwin, and your, core point is that people want a quick fix, and dumbed down mechanics. Even WoW is far from quick, or dumb.
I never said people wanted a "quick fix". I said they wanted "fun and easy" rather than "challenging and complex". I think "fun and easy" is a major selling point of WoW. In fact, I've read several articles praising how much it's "streamlined" the game to the point where "your grandmother can play it and have fun", which implies to me that it is, indeed, fun and easy. Not complex and challenging. Don't confuse lots of content and "stuff" with complex or challenging. Simply because a game has tons of areas, skills, classes, items and monsters does not mean it's a challenge at all. It has no bearing. Arx Fatalis is generally considered a very challenging game (and not just because they didn't provide enough guidance in-game), and I think it has the shortest monster and item list of any game in the last 6 years. Conversely, Civ IV is often considered a complex and challenging game. I found it rather simple, just crammed with lots and lots of "stuff" which, when boiled down, doesn't amount to much more than window dressing on a pretty run-of-the-mill TBS.

Also, I've played WoW. I was in beta. I can't say I had extensive experience with it, but what experience I had showed the game to be very, very shallow, which is why I lost interest in it and never bothered to pick up retail.

Originally Posted by roqua View Post
Vanguard is supposed to be even slower and more complex.
That's a good example of one that will be interesting to see how large an audience they can capture. I read a good description of the crafting system by someone in beta and I was simultaneously excited about having a look at the game while thinking "no way a large slice of the game player market is going to have the patience for this".

Originally Posted by roqua View Post
Is it because people expect SP games to give them a quick, thoughtless fix, and the ones who are looking for some depth would rather play in a game such as wow, that has no ending, and always has that carrot on the stick?
Again, I think you're confusing "depth" with lots of "stuff". Blizzard has perfected the formula for computer game as addicition. Crack does not give you deep insight into yourself, but it sure as hell is hard to kick.


P.S. I've never beta-tested crack. I've only read accounts.
chamr is offline

chamr

chamr's Avatar
Mounted Highborn

#29

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: CA, USA
Posts: 850

Default 

November 20th, 2006, 06:22
Remember, I don't play MMORPG's, so my perspective is normally from an SP position!!

If God said it, then that settles it!!

Editor@RPGWatch
Corwin is offline

Corwin

Corwin's Avatar
On The Razorblade of Life
RPGWatch Team

#30

Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 10,321
Send a message via Skype™ to Corwin

Thumbs down 

November 20th, 2006, 16:16
Originally Posted by any View Post
Seems to me, although without map marks and compass (thank God!), game was dumbed down for americans :/
Not G3 only - almost everything now is influenced by US way-of-life and dumbed to the max, which frustrates me, an european, a lot :/
Fantastic argument! You WIN the Internet! /golfclap

If I'm right but there is no wife around to acknowledge it, am I still right?
TheMadGamer is offline

TheMadGamer

TheMadGamer's Avatar
SasqWatch

#31

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Oregon
Posts: 1,935

Default 

November 20th, 2006, 18:27
I have done some research on the subject in the past (as part of my previous studies), and the reasons why modern games seem easier to complete can't be explained by either this or that, it's a result of a lot of different things.

I'm not going to write an entire article here, but I can sum up some points:
- The more experienced we, as gamers, become -> the easier games will seem as well.
- Games today require a lot more money to make than they used to, so they need to sell more to make up for it. Games today can't be made to hardcore players alone, they need to be able to sell them in several segments of the market, not just the segment of 11% hardcore players represent.
- Console games now sell very well, due to various reasons such as being easier to use right out of the box, easier controls, no patching, less bugs, etc etc. Console games focus more on short playtime with high fun factor than fun over longer periods of time, as console gamers are often slightly more casual than their computer counterpart. This infulence leads to games having "explosions" of fun, being very fun in short periods of time, such as SingStar, but extremely boring in the long run (not exactly loads of fun to do a LAN party for 48 hours with SingStar).

Take Oblivion as an example. Oblivion, even compared to its predecessors, is simplified. To average players, who only play a few hours a day and not 10 like some of us do, Oblivion is an amazing game, as you can jump in, use autotravel to some dungeon, clear it out, have fun and stop playing. I know players who spent several weeks completing Oblivion, and had fun every time they played. I completed it in three days and found it extremely repetitive when I tried to do it over again on the 4th day, but the game is obviously designed for my friends, not me, as they represent a bigger market share than I do.

There are far more reasons than this, and each reason has more depth than posted, but the point is - games today are not meant only for a hardcore audience like they used to be, and that has nothing to do with the USA. Nintendo Wii, coming from Japan soon, will be the next step for casual players, focusing almost exclusivly on "fun factor" games which are not all that great over longer periods of time, unlike most solid RPGs.
Last edited by Maylander; November 20th, 2006 at 18:35.
Maylander is offline

Maylander

SasqWatch

#32

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Bergen
Posts: 5,289
Send a message via MSN to Maylander

Default 

November 21st, 2006, 00:49
Chamr,

I have to disagree. I've at least tried every major (and almost all the minor, including muds) mmorpgs and wow has as much complexity or more than the other titles. I guess we could be getting complexity and challenge mixed up, but wow has more complexity to it than any mmorpg I've played, and I am no blizzard fan and I don't like diablo, starcraft, or warcraft.

I should also state that I don't raid, and I don't like grouping, and that in wow I can kill twinked out people by having a better build and strategy. I love wow's talent build system. Wow is easy to get into, but the smart people will always have the edge due to the complexity of the game. Is the game challenging? Not for the most part. But the game is the least gear dependant for pvp of any mmorpg I've played, and again, the talents set the game apart when it comes to character building, which is one of my favorite parts of any rpg, along with character creating (which sucks for almost all mmorpgs, besides SB).
roqua is offline

roqua

roqua's Avatar
Sentinel

#33

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 474

Default 

November 21st, 2006, 02:55
WoW balances many things in a better way than most. It doesn't have the best PvP system, or raiding or economy, but all aspects are fairly good, unlike most MMORPGs where several elements are simply not present at all(for instance no PvP, or only small group instances, or nothing at all for casual players, or hardcore, players).
Maylander is offline

Maylander

SasqWatch

#34

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Bergen
Posts: 5,289
Send a message via MSN to Maylander

Default 

November 23rd, 2006, 02:30
After thinking about it I disagree with myself. AO was far more complex, and in all fairness, probably alos SWG. I am putting a lot of wieght into the talent build system, which I have a lot of fun with building non-cookie cutter builds.

But SB hands down has the best character creation (and development) of any mmorpg.
roqua is offline

roqua

roqua's Avatar
Sentinel

#35

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 474

Default 

November 23rd, 2006, 03:43
SWG was the best MMORPG out there before the combat upgrade. It was astounding in how it was completely independent of AI control, the entirely galaxy was left blank and the players got to scribble it in. Yes, it was messy, and yes they were parts that could've been improved but all in all it was a brilliant idea and was executed quite well.

God I miss it.

Edit: nice to see you here, roqua ol' buddy.
Naked_Lunch is offline

Naked_Lunch

Naked_Lunch's Avatar
Watcher

#36

Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 28

Default 

November 23rd, 2006, 03:56
Originally Posted by Naked_Lunch View Post
SWG was the best MMORPG out there before the combat upgrade.
So the changes it went through really changed all that (never played it, either before or after the changes) ? I've heard a lot of criticisms leveled on the upgrades, did it really made the game that bad ?
Cormac is offline

Cormac

Sentinel

#37

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 405

Default 

November 23rd, 2006, 04:09
Yes. It destroyed the amazing skill system and open-ended class progression and shoehorned it into nine professions, including jedi which destroyed the entire purpose of being a jedi in the first place. Not only that, but it nerfed most of the classes (no battle fatigue et al made dancers and entertainers useless). Because of this, a lot of the genuinely intelligent and interesting players left, replaced by moronic tweeners and whatnot that only played as jedi and just wanted to t0t4lly k1llz0r th1ngz rofl1!!

The space combat is still pretty neato, though. Only reason to keep playing the game, really.
Naked_Lunch is offline

Naked_Lunch

Naked_Lunch's Avatar
Watcher

#38

Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 28

Default 

November 23rd, 2006, 04:47
Uh. I always wanted to try it but I guess I'll keep away then. I so wanted to be a jedi
Thanks for the reply.
Cormac is offline

Cormac

Sentinel

#39

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 405
RPGWatch Forums » Comments » News Comments » Gothic 3 - First Impressions @ IGN
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT +2. The time now is 14:06.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright by RPGWatch