Should Games Start Taking Risks?

[DaniPoo]

I dunno but I really feel like ALBW was a great tribute to ALTTP.
I remember way back when Nintendo had plans to make ALTTP a 3D classic, well that did not happen.
I have heard that Nintendo started making the engine for a real ALTTP remake instead since they discontinued their 3D classics program. And that instead of creating a remake they ended up making ALBW (Still I dunno if thats true or just some rumor).

The safe card would have been to continue the ALTTP Remake, but they created a new game set in the very same world instead.
I was pretty sceptic about the game taking place in the very same Hyrule as ALTTP, But nintendo pulled it off in a beautiful way!
I dont think Nintendo played their safest cards with this game.
And when it comes to Mario.. Hmm.. Im getting a little bit tired of the "New Super mario Bros" games by now.
But I have no problem with the main Mario games. And the handheld experience is getting better by each title.
Sure the story is almost the same in every game and the core gameplay stays the same.
But remember that Mario is a famous trademark and one of Nintendos flagship franchises.
I think Nintendo know what people expect from a Mario game these days.
And they sure delivers when it comes to intressting level dessign and fun gameplay.

We have all these different kind of mario games that delivers different gameplay(From the main series) like Mario & Luigi, Mario Party, Mario Kart, Mario Tennis and so on for those that think the "Jumpman" formula is getting old.

I have to say that the pokemon franchise evolves very slowly compared to other series, however.
I think believe they did that on purpose with X and Y.
I believe they where focused on going 3D without loosing the feeling of a pokemon game instead of making lots and lots of new features. And since the FPS isn't really stable and that they didn't use 3D everywhere I believe the game is poorly optimized for the 3DS, and that makes me believe that they were pressed for time working on these games.
I also believe that these issues will be resolved in the next pokemon games since they they wont have to make a whole new engine this time. They just need to refine the engine a little and then they can focus on the new games.
They wont have to remake all pokemon models either. They could just fokus on the game itself and all the new stuff.

All in all, I like change and improvement but I also like nostagia and that why I got both Nintendo and Playstation consoles.
Nintendo is changing however their games have a well established core gamplay that wont change.
Sony have powerfull systems that many developers can create new fresh experiences for.
But if you really want a complete new experience you should probably just try some franchise you havnt tried before instead of waiting for huge change in Super Mario.

 

[FAST6191]

Honestly, I wish developers could release triple A games every two/three months, but that won't happen.

Isn't that what episodic gaming is supposed to be?

Personally I would like to take that a step further and have a rolling release type affair. It has already been demonstrated to work in other types of software, games already have it on a lot of mobile phone games and for video type things... that is what TV is.

 

[Foxi4]

I would answer "yes" to the poll question... If only the problem was actually real. To say that games are not taking risks is to be unfamiliar with th broad spectrum of contemporary games.

Take "The Walking Dead" for instance. The game practically single-handedly revived a dead genre - I haven't seen a single mainstream point-and-click adventure game since the dawn of the 3D era because developers figured that it's impossible to create one in 3D perspective - it was so easy to make this a shooter, the material was begging for it, but TellTale chose not to. In fact, another developer did make a shooter in the same franchise - "Survival Instinct" if I recall. Guess what? It sucks.

The same could be said about many other games - developers began mixing genes these days and it pays off. Battlefield for instance, on a grander scale, is more than a shooter - it requires teamwork and strategy, at times it play like a simulation and that gamplay style became the staple of the series.

There is no huge epidemy of regression - there were always some innovative games and some that were cliche. Fish out the good ones and you're golden.

 

[Black-Ice]

As long as it adds a cool new dynamic to the game, risk away!

 

[Clydefrosch]

considering how every successful franchise makes enough money per new game to fund like 5 new instances, why not take a step from the save road every other game?

 

[WhiteMaze]

Still, it's kind of silly to go "People don't make games like this anymore!" when they literally just did.

Sure.

They make a single good game. And 500 rehashed ones. My point still stands.

 

[Guild McCommunist]

I think after so many goddamn stale DS games..Pokemon X and Y changed things enough to get me interested back in the series....and believe me..I swore to never pick up a copy of pokemon again after the staleness of Platinum pissed me off

X and Y is still basically a Pokemon game except both incredibly easy and it adds animu saiyans.

 

[kakashi919]

From what I've seen, X and Y focused on being more competitive for battling against each other. So yeah the main game is easy. Though I haven't played a lot of it, it's the first pokemon game I'm actually excited about in a long time.

 

[WhiteMaze]

From what I've seen, X and Y focused on being more competitive for battling against each other. So yeah the main game is easy. Though I haven't played a lot of it, it's the first pokemon game I'm actually excited about in a long time.

Of course it is.

After 20 years of the same Helicopter 2D view crap, and after we've had 3D handheld technology for another 10 years, they finally decided to release a proper 3D Pokemon game. In 2013. The first (proper) 3D Pokemon game was released in 2013.

This will be something for the history books.

 

[kakashi919]

Better late than never right?

 

[Hells Malice]

It was more or less. If you ran into an enemy scroll thing an arena sort of erupted outward and a battle started, without loading or cutscenes or anything (unless it was an enemy you hadn't encountered before).


Did you finish the game? Every single dungeon in the dark world (except the desert one, I think; that one is mandatory) does have an optional upgrade.

Yeah but that was just a tiny little thing. +stamina, +def, +damage. I meant something more interesting, like a fun item or something, an item variation, something.

 

[Arras]

Yeah but that was just a tiny little thing. +stamina, +def, +damage. I meant something more interesting, like a fun item or something, an item variation, something.

True, that would have been better. There are two item upgrades if you finish the battle tower thing, but those are just +damage on items you'll never use for dealing damage anyway.

 

[Redhorse]

Someone said, "if it ain't broke don't fix it". I can not agree (though you're welcome to) with that: Just because it's not presently broken does not mean it's not wearing down. IE Gee, my auto oil filter has worked just fine, why change it now?" Pft.

A Doctor I once worked for said...

'Good Better best, never let it rest, until your good gets better and your better gets Best' words I've carried, in my mind, throughout my years...

Dr. D. knew a thing or two about achievement. That being said, I would hate to see too many changes in my favorite franchises Example: Advance Wars, .Fire Emblem etc.

In fact I personally feel the changes in the newest Fire Emblem [Awakening] were a bit too much. It is the very first one I was not crazy about, since the first non english one I got my hands on here in the States. It feels to me as though they took away what made the series fun to me. It's as though they just took the old adage about throwing enough around and something will stick.." literally. (Yeah I've heard how and why N gave I.S. free reign to throw all they wanted to in this as a last ditch effort to revive the series (here in the states) but can't help feel that proper promotion could have done far better. For me the series never waned.

As I said I wasn't pleased...

The Newest Fire Emblem [Awakening] reminds me of this old saying..

'An Old Maid in Silk Panties is like Chocolate Milk in a Champagne bottle.'


It just isn't what I wanted or remembered ...
(back to my GB Micro..)

 

[EgoTrip]

Regarding Zelda A Link Between Worlds, without going into details because of spoilers, there ARE unique items in some dungeons, and upgrades to items in others. I do agree that having most items available at the beginning, and the non-linear game play is slightly against the nature of Zelda games, but its not as bad as you make out.

As for the risks, corporations are in the business to make money so they are going to take the route with the least risk in doing so. Adding more will not please their shareholders.

The sad fact is that most people will happily take whatever they are spoon fed by the mainstream, the same happens with music and movies, yet be ignorant of the underground and independents, where people do take risks and produce stuff with real substance. Sure it may not always be polished to the same standard as an in-house Nintendo production, but beneath the glossy exterior, they can be just as good if not better. Just dig deeper.

 

[tbgtbg]

I haven't played the new Zelda yet, but I'm quite interested to hear it's non-linear. You know what other game was non-linear? The Legend of Zelda. And that's still my favorite of the series (not that the others are chopped liver)

 

[WhiteMaze]

Better late than never right?

True. But by that logic, we will be seeing the same 3D Pokemon games for the next 20 years, until they finally decide to innovate something. Again.

Brace yourselves boys, the next generation Pokemon shall reach the shelves in 2033. Yaaaaaaaay!

 

[Ryukouki]

Regarding Zelda A Link Between Worlds, without going into details because of spoilers, there ARE unique items in some dungeons, and upgrades to items in others. I do agree that having most items available at the beginning, and the non-linear game play is slightly against the nature of Zelda games, but its not as bad as you make out.

As for the risks, corporations are in the business to make money so they are going to take the route with the least risk in doing so. Adding more will not please their shareholders.

The sad fact is that most people will happily take whatever they are spoon fed by the mainstream, the same happens with music and movies, yet be ignorant of the underground and independents, where people do take risks and produce stuff with real substance. Sure it may not always be polished to the same standard as an in-house Nintendo production, but beneath the glossy exterior, they can be just as good if not better. Just dig deeper.

Yeah, I just couldn't attach myself with a full inventory of loot. Considering I made 8000 rupees in like an hour LOL it kinda butchered the exploratory sense. I'm but one opinion though in a vast sea of users. Kinda also why I like some indie games better.

 

[calmwaters]

Isn't that what episodic gaming is supposed to be?

Personally I would like to take that a step further and have a rolling release type affair. It has already been demonstrated to work in other types of software, games already have it on a lot of mobile phone games and for video type things... that is what TV is.

I wish. Wouldn't it be great to have a Final Fantasy type game released every two/three months? But no, there aren't many people who could shell out 60/80 euros every two months for a game... But if they were to release episodic games, I'd prefer Half-Life and/or a Mario RPG/puzzle/whatever. Maybe even Uncharted for those of you who like it.

Did you ever hear about this thing called "indie games"? The only reason some games are called AAA-games is because of the budget/resources allocated to it.

I'm also having trouble understanding what your analogy is about. the 8 oz. jar is smaller and thus cheaper, but has the same amount of quality put into it. And in games, providing that quality is actually the hardest thing. In other words: the costs are relatively the same to make a game with 8 levels as it is to make one with 40 levels. That, and that the 8 level game wouldn't sell because being too small, is why everything is big (at least in games).

Oh, and...as said, I'm not sure what you're saying here so I might be completely wrong, but...isn't a game like Super Luigi bros U an example of a small game? It's the smaller instance of that larger NSMBU game.

Well then we could switch to strictly indie games since those developers experiment with different game play mechanics. I don't think I was fair with my peanut butter analogy since I love the 40 oz jars; it'll last me for 2 weeks. But I'm not into games that take me 3 months to play from start to end. I prefer something that's short so I can finish it. The whole fun of playing games is getting to play them over and over again; games never have just one save slot, y'know? You shouldn't force people to play a game for 3/4 months; it gets stale after a while. Take Skyward Sword: I played that game for six months and got tired halfway into the third month. And then when I finished it and got to the hero mode, I said, "fuck no; I've had it." Now Chrono Trigger, which I got right after I "finished" Skyward Sword, I played that game for six months and it was just as awesome at the six month that it was in the beginning. Now I can beat that game in around 30 hours, not including the grinding... (jeez, derailed myself)

I think the NSLBU is a rewrite of NSMBU; it's just a code switch, but the playtime lasts as long as the Mario version. I believe.

 

[Gahars]

But if they were to release episodic games, I'd prefer Half-Life

Well, you know, they tried that...

 

[calmwaters]

Well, you know, they tried that...

thanks for letting them fail... maybe next time they'll succeed without your help...

/sarcasm