Well at least you’re consistent.
-Accents that sound nothing like the thing they’re supposed to be imitating. Characters with European accents are particularly notable. Upon hearing Demoman’s voice the first time, I instantly thought “That’s fake”, same goes for Morrigan.
-Elements from one game genre thrown into a game of a different genre. HELLO THERE, RAVENHOLM.
-“Would you like me to repeat that?” It makes absolutely no sense at all: if we wanted to read it, we would have read it the first time. If we didn’t want to read it, that’s why we skipped it. The only way that this could come in handy is if the player somehow forgot what they read 30 seconds ago.
You know guys, if you type “game definition” into Google the first definition that comes up is “A form of play or sport, esp. a competitive one played according to rules and decided by skill, strength, or luck.” The important part here is played according to rules. Games must have rules and they must have a goal, set by the game and not by the player. Otherwise, it can’t be classified as a game at all. More appropriate terms are software toys or simulations. Sandbox games can’t be considered a video game cliche because they’re not even games to begin with.
The heck? Apart from Minecraft, or something like that, all open world games still have a plot and goal.
Yeah, I know that. We’re talking strictly about the sandbox side of things here, though, because that’s the biggest selling point of games like GTA, Elder Scrolls, etc.
What I’m trying to say here is that Beat and Vampire Saviour have a point, they’re just not arguing it very well. The basic, underlying principal of what we call a game is that there is a challenge or goal and afterwards there is a reward. The reward in this case doesn’t necessarily have to be points or an S Rank, it can be powerups, it can be an easter egg, or *any *kind of feedback to let you know that you’ve actually done something. Even the ending of the game can count as a reward.
Portal is a game that is often brought up in game design classes because it demonstrates this concept very clearly and simply. Your goal is to get to the end of each test chamber, and your promised reward is cake. The cake isn’t “patting the player on the back”, it’s just the reward for completing a goal. If you get nothing from attaining a goal, then the goal was never really there unless you set the goal for yourself, like you would do in a sandbox game. Earlier, trying to land on people with a motorbike was brought up. That is what we call a self-imposed challenge.
That’s not to say that unstructured play is a *bad *thing. Games don’t need to be structured to be fun. But they do need to be structured to be games.
SILENCE PEON
/caps
In JRPGs: the final battle will always take place in some swirling interdimesnional vortex dissonant with the rest of the game. Bonus points if your character has to scale an ethereal staircase or traverse a cosmic walkway to fight said villain in fucking outer space.
You know what the reward for dicking around in sandbox games is?
Fun
Sent from my SPH-D700 using Tapatalk 2
I hate it when the guy who taught you everything you know ends up being the final bad guy. It was suprising the first time or so, now its just annoying.
Games are not allowed to be fun.
What?
Wat?
For instance, you don’t have to open the locked doors in a specific order. You’re able to explore different parts of the dungeon in an order not predetermined for you.
Whenever I played a sandbox game, I never wandered around wasting time. For example: I used instant travel in Oblivion so I could accomplish real quests, not dick around.
I never really take time with “sandbox” features. They are pretty gimmicky and a waste of time when getting from one challenge to the next. For example, Burnout Paradise was sandbox like, but the actual challenges were fun and required skill to complete. If it was sold solely on the sandbox part, that would lead people away from the fun racing challenges.
EDIT: This is not to say that speeding as fast as you can in the oncoming lane isn’t fun and rewarding in Burnout Paradise. The game actually rewards you for trying things like this without initiating a challenge. Jumping from one parking garage to the next, etc.
Also, Martian, see me on GGPO or PSN.
Point is you don’t have to limit yourself to objectives designers give you. You can create your own objectives. It’s not dicking around if you’re having fun.
Ah yes, good point, but structured play improves motor function and, get this, overall intelligence.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/22/magazine/can-you-make-yourself-smarter.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
Remember how VS mentioned Dodonpachi?
Notice how right in the beginning, a researcher says “We’re really trying to figure out how people become experts at something?”
Also Tetris is good for your brain: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/09/090901082851.htm
For more, at the University of Minnesota, some of the researchers here use shoot em up style video games to understand visual processing and how they improve your visual motor skills. I find this awesome because I work in the neuro-opthalmology department here – not with video games though.
If you don’t like sandbox games because they give both a linear path to the end, and the freedom to do what you want because you don’t feel like being on a track then go play castlevania I or FFXIII
But quit saying that because sandbox games give you that freedom option that somehow that’s a bad thing.
It would only be bad if there was only the sandbox and absolutlely nothing else to do. Even then, Id still have fun playing it.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using Tapatalk 2
That’s like saying Streets of Rage isn’t linear because you don’t always have to attack the guy that’s closest to you at that moment.
Reminds me of Gears of War .
Or the lab place on Super Metroid to the right of your spaceship.