Dungeon Siege 3 - Preview @ G4TV

[JemyM]

I don't see what using an existing toolset has to do with anything.

When a game is produced there's a limited set of resources of which some is put into engine, some in gameplay. A sequel or expansion made with the same engine doesn't only come with a bugfixed and polished one, the developer can also spend more resources into actual gameplay and content. Fallout 2 was thus much larger and complex than Fallout 1, Baldur's Gate II larger and more polished than Baldur's Gate I, Gothic II larger than Gothic I etc. Raven Software usually had stronger story and content than ID's original game made with the quake/doom engines.

Mask of the Betrayer was longer than Fallout 1 indeed, but was it longer than Fallout II or Baldur's Gate II?

Expansions also tend to be much shorter than sequels, which was the case with Tales of the Sword Coast, Throne of Bhaal, Hordes of the Underdark, Mask of the Betrayer and Awakenings.

The overall point here, is that I do not rule an expansion as a good example of a full blown game made from scratch, so I do not really see one as an achievement.

 

[Dhruin]

Ah, well, for me I'm interested in the creative content and couldn't care less about the tools - or the length for that matter. I don't really understand why you'd value that over the quest design, story, structure, world design and so on - that's the achievement I'm interested in. Fallout was a better game than Fallout 2 for mine, by the way, because it was a more focused experience.

Anyway, just some observations. Carry on.

 

[JemyM]

Ah, well, for me I'm interested in the creative content and couldn't care less about the tools - or the length for that matter. I don't really understand why you'd value that over the quest design, story, structure, world design and so on - that's the achievement I'm interested in. Fallout was a better game than Fallout 2 for mine, by the way, because it was a more focused experience.

I think you miss the point. I also prefer the creative content, which is why I think it's best when an artist can begin with a canvas and all the colors he or she needs, instead of having to first assemble the canvas from scratch and gather all the chemicals required for the colors before he or she can begin to paint their piece.

In the recent years it have been common to purchase the engines from companies who work on them exclusively, such as the Unreal 3 engine, which means that companies can spend more time on building the actual game, than the engine.

Related article: Spiderweb Games - How Jeff Vogel Saved the Gaming Industry Overnight

 

[DArtagnan]

I think you miss the point. I also prefer the creative content, which is why I think it's best when an artist can begin with a canvas and all the colors he or she needs, instead of having to first assemble the canvas from scratch and gather all the chemicals required for the colors before he or she can begin to paint their piece.

In the recent years it have been common to purchase the engines from companies who work on them exclusively, such as the Unreal 3 engine, which means that companies can spend more time on building the actual game, than the engine.

Related article: Spiderweb Games - How Jeff Vogel Saved the Gaming Industry Overnight

That's just as much a disadvantage, as an advantage - in terms of the creative process.

In theory, it means less time spent with the engine - and more time with the creative stuff. Sadly, as it turns out, it simply means less time with the game, overall.

They license engines (or use established ones, based on what was used before an expansion) to cut costs, ultimately - and they also constrain themselves, because even a very flexible engine, like Unreal, will have limitations in terms of what you can do with it - without completely re-writing code or changing stuff at a fundamental level.

Back in the day, truly creative developers opted to create their engines from scratch, even when having the option of licensing. Looking Glass, for instance, chose to write the Dark Engine (Thief), because they had certain specific things in mind, and they didn't want to license anything else. I remember reading that about them, in an interview. Then again, they also wrote the Ultima Underworld/System Shock engine - which was FAR ahead of anything else at the time, so they had the competence needed.

Today, even though developers are changing engines pretty significantly, they're still bound by certain basic limitations - or the impractical nature of redoing the core of an established engines.

I think it's extremely evident in modern games, and even though there ARE significant differences, I think it's supremely evident that games like Batman, Mass Effect, Bioshock, Alpha Protocol, and games like that - are bound by much the same limitations. Even as different games, I think they "feel" too much alike.

In the past, most games felt THOROUGHLY unique - and that's just another thing that's been lost.

 

[JemyM]

I think the reason all games feel the same is rather the similar presentation. All games are 3rd person, have a minimap in top left/right, usually allow to take cover and will at one point allow you to man a turret with unlimited bullets. The tasks involve finding X or doing Y # number of times, or go to shiny lit-up waypoint to receive next instruction in journal. Party/troop control, going off track, games as toolsets in which you can craft your own character/strategy are growing rare. You just need to sit back and absorb the recognizeable which also means the predictable.

 

[DArtagnan]

I think the reason all games feel the same is rather the similar presentation. All games are 3rd person, have a minimap in top left/right, usually allow to take cover and will at one point allow you to man a turret with unlimited bullets. The tasks involve finding X or doing Y # number of times, or go to shiny lit-up waypoint to receive next instruction in journal. Party/troop control, going off track, games as toolsets in which you can craft your own character/strategy are growing rare. You just need to sit back and absorb the recognizeable which also means the predictable.

Yup, agreed. I think the engine plays a part in that as well, because so many of the assets are prepared for those similar features already.

But, it's also a general lack of daring and creative drive.