Interplay vs Bethesda Fallout: Indigo Gaming

Originally Posted by Aerth

However having a younger public have removed lot of possible thematic in this kind of game though.

There is no evidence of a change in age bracket.

FO 1 and 2 targeted people from late teens to early thirties.
So did FO 3 and 4 as commanded by the vid industry.

Players in their early teens are a blip on the radar for those products. They are added as a peripherical market segment. They are appealed by the idea of playing a product not meant for them.

It remains another core segment for 3 and 4: players who played 1 and 2 ten or twenty years before. It is a franchise and devs want to bank on that.

For the modifications as they were quoted, the change in tone etc, it came from this audience.

People in their twenties might enjoy a corrosive take on anything social. People in their fourties, fifties would prefer things to keep together so that they retire and live off their pension. SO it is better to keep topics like slavery, sex industry under the carpet for that age bracket.

Originally Posted by Drithius
A discussion on the "streamlining" of video games seems flawed from the get-go if you fail to realize that the 18-40 year olds of today are not the same 18-40 year olds of 20 years ago.

With the advent of the internet and smartphones, developers have to design around an increasingly distracted audience.

No. They are mostly the same. Now designers must design distraction.
Games can be as engaging, demanding and involving as they used to (probably more)
Those products no longer meet requirements to be sold in large scale.
Any player absorbed 1000 hours by a product is no longer available for the consumption of another product during that time.

Products must be designed so that they no longer require attention or exclusivity (exception: products designed to sustain a professional competiting players scene)
Products are designed in such way they leave room for something else to be consumed fast enough after or as it happens, during the consumption of the game.

Days are twenty four hours long. Increasing consumption goes through providing products that enable consumption in parallel.

Originally Posted by luj1
Games don't age

I have to agree to an extent, but it's only my personal opinion based on my own experience. I know some people who still play Atari games, and can for hours at a time, enjoying themselves.

For me personally, I'm not likely to play a Spectrum game, but a C64/NES/SNES/MS-DOS/etc. game? Sure. It's not cut and dry for me, though. It depends on the game/thing in question, whether it's vintage music, games, books or other art.

I don't think I'll ever get tired of CRPGs from 1996 and on, though. Even some pre-1996 are cool (D&D NES games, Bard's Tale, Wizardry, etc..)

Originally Posted by Ivanwah
It's not about the destination, it's about the journey. If you play a game and the only thing that matters to you is a final cutscene, why play it at all? Why not just watch the cutscene on Youtube or something?

Games can be about the journey, not the destination. Bethesda's products like SKyrim can be about the journey for players who use it to craft their own story.

Rimworld is a game about the journey, not the destination. Same start(colonists dropped on a planet), same end (colonists leaving the planet) It is all about writing what occurs between. Even more, not reaching the destination does not mean an unsatisfactory experience. Failing to leave the planet is enjoyable as the story of the failure might be enjoyable.
The end exists to bring a sense of closure.


Now the power trip is not about the journey, it is all about the destination.
When players play Skyrim to feel that sense of power, they want to reach that point when they can crush anything put in their path. All about the destination.
When they reach that point, they lose interest.
They want to go from those humbling start when the PC is weak to the top of power when they can laugh at anything thrown to them.

Originally Posted by ChienAboyeur
Games can be about the journey, not the destination.

That's MMOs.
Fallout is not MMO.

MMOs are about the destination. Grinders are about the destination.

Originally Posted by ChienAboyeur
MMOs are about the destination.

Sure - if so called "endgame content", raids and eventual annual DLC are that destination.

The power point to participate and succeed in those events is the destination.

Silence joxer! Let the hivemind speak