As with most Eurogamer content, these are very well written and take me back to when I played these:
Portal
Red Dead Redemption
Journey
Fallout 3
The Last of Us
Street Fighter IV
World of Warcraft
Spelunky
Dark Souls
Super Mario Galaxy
Fin.
Printable View
As with most Eurogamer content, these are very well written and take me back to when I played these:
Portal
Red Dead Redemption
Journey
Fallout 3
The Last of Us
Street Fighter IV
World of Warcraft
Spelunky
Dark Souls
Super Mario Galaxy
Fin.
It's Portal 1.
And saying that Portal had little influence or imitators is laughable.
Maybe they live in an alternate reality where games like Qube and Quantum Conundrum don't exist.
I mean in the AAA world it didn't have much influence, I guess, but obviously there are tons of indie games that take cues from it.
I also think Portal 2 was the better game, even if Portal 1 was better in terms of story and humor.
I'm still kind of surprised by how little influence Minecraft has had in the world of AAA. There's no shortage of smaller games it's had a major impact on (just beat Eldritch last night) but AAA? Nothing I can think of.
James
Everquest Next
This gen's use of the term 'AAA' to refer to high budget instead of high quality bugs me but I guess it's here to stay.
These are well written articles aside from the Portal influence comment. Now I kind of feel like playing Singularity again. That one's underrated and has some Portal influence.
I am feeling more and more of a disconnect between what I want in games and what most critics want. That Red Dead Redemption article describes a lot of positive aspects of the game but for me it doesn't have a chance of being one the generation's best because the lack of challenge brings it down. Like Assassin's Creed 2, I stopped playing before the end because I was sick of not dying. I want to be pushed by difficulty, to strategize in open-ended games out of survival need. I guess a lot of gamers don't seem to care about that stuff.
No, they don't. Deal with it.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeoZeedeater
I feel it's still worth complaining about. If STALKER games can be successful, there's still a market for people like me.
Yes there is a market for people like you, and it's filled with STALKER games.
Success is relative. Just like Iron Man 3 would be a miserable failure if it made $100 million, an Assassins Creed game that does STALKER sales would be a monster bomb.
Games have trended towards being easier for like 20 years.
Some games have the sense to include options to adjust difficulty. Ass Creed 2 and RDR don't unfortunately (I don't count setting auto-aim on or off). I think it's worth telling developers we want more options. It's the reason we got 1999 mode in Bioshock Infinite. It's not perfect by any means but I'm glad that more hardcore setting is there.
Also, I think there's a limit to how dumbed down the masses want their games. I haven't played Dead Space 3 yet (despite owning it from that humble bundle) but isn't the main reason people avoided it because they turned it into a pure action game?
If there is a limit, I think we are still far from it.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeoZeedeater
Ass Creed 2, RDR, the Zelda series for example are all trying to be mass market games. Aiming to sell to as large of a demographic as is humanly possible. Expecting those games to be brutally difficult is like expecting 1000 dollar a bottle fine wine to be sold at TGIFridays. It's just not going to happen. Yeah there's a market for tough games, but it's way smaller than the mass market those titles are trying to hit. Besides most people don't want that. Most folks are looking for a distraction, and something that helps pass the time. They're not looking for something that's going to take them 40 hours to master just to get past level 3. I will give NeoZeed though that there should be difficult settings in more games for sure. It would be nice too if they were more than just giving the main character less health, or having there be more enemies.
Both of these things are tough lines to walk. Would NES Ninja Gaiden 2 or Dark Souls have been improved by a selectable difficulty? I don't think so, and there's definitely something to be said about games being balanced around an intended design. 1999 mode was so lazy that it's pointless; it's an option but does it actually offer anything to the game besides showing how exploitable the mechanics are?Quote:
Originally Posted by NeoZeedeater
The dumbing down of games also works both ways. The best and most oft-repeated example this generation is the transition from Mass Effect 1 to 2, where many things were removed but ultimately resulted in a game that was much more enjoyable to play. If this was the late 80s/early 90s we probably would've had all three games running on the same engine with no improvements, and would've been shuffling through idiotic inventory management to turn everything into gel for three games instead of one.
Obviously the opposite also applies (the difficulty levels in Platinum games where they're designed from the outset to be played at the highest level, Dead Space dumbing down as you mentioned, etc.) but really the big issue that I see is simply a well designed game vs. a poorly designed one. While RDR might be improved in some ways by a harder difficulty I would bet money that the only real change would be upping enemy damage/health and lowering player damage/health, which I don't think would add too much. A "real" improved difficulty (let's say something like where it's often one-hit kills for both enemies and the player to make it more realistic and the ability to treat wounds to survive, like the Fallout 3 survival mode) would be fantastic but that rarely happens.
There are a lot of video games.
Well, the problem is that even if those people who did avoid it bought it, it still wouldn't have made enough money to justify developing the franchise. They needed to sell to all Dead Space 2 people and a lot on top of that. So the truth is that Dead Space is just a game that is not popular enough to justify dropping the amount of money it costs to make a Dead Space game.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeoZeedeater
I've been playing XCOM and StarCraft 2 so I like hard games too. But sometimes a game is good just to chill out and see the sights. I'm glad both exist.
The success of games like Dark Souls and The Last of Us makes me worry very little about whether games in the future will be easier. There is a market for hard games, and major publishers seem to have finally realized that. Are there going to be lots of easy "cinematic" games? Definitely. But at the same time I don't think those of us looking for hard games are going to be left out.
What does concern me is the continuing trend towards focusing on short-term decisions rather than long-term consequences. Regenerating health, freedom to re-spec at any time, or the simple lack of any major decision-making at all are all symptoms of an emphasis on immediacy that almost totally excludes player choice on how the game evolves. Of course, the two games I cited above manage to avert this quite nicely for the most part, but at the same time I think it's a far greater and more prevalent problem than difficulty.
I'm trying to think of a game that was improved by limiting this and coming up blank. Granted, some companies feel that it improves a game because they can charge the player real money to allow for a respec, but in terms of gameplay and experimentation not so much.Quote:
Originally Posted by bVork
I can't say I see that sort of thing is any less present now than it was before.Quote:
or the simple lack of any major decision-making at all
This is a societal issue that goes well beyond games.Quote:
Originally Posted by bVork
Because playing a game for 20 hours and realizing your character is garbage because of decisions you made in hour 1 when you didn't know shit sucks ass. I know it's how it's been historically, doesn't mean it is good or fun.Quote:
Originally Posted by bVork
Designers gotta learn how to balance.Quote:
Originally Posted by Diff-chan
How about playing a game for 20 hours and realizing the character you choose is garbage?
I'm not defending things one way or another, I like respecing at points but not constant switches personally. Gives the decisions some weight without completely locking you into something.
Games need to do a better job informing the player about consequences of lasting decisions, generally. I shouldn't have to consult a FAQ to find out what fruit my skill tree will yield.
I think it was Digital Devil Saga that gave only the name of the skill you were buying in advance. You had to buy it to find out exactly what it did. I got burned dumping a ton of points into bad skills.
Nailed it.
Also don't put any points in Swimming in Deus Ex.
Free re-specs are a cheap solution to bad design. Ideally, the player should have the information they need to make an informed choice in the first place. Re-speccing should be a serious decision that is not made on a whim. Etrian Odyssey games, particularly later in the series, strike the right balance between the freedom to change things and the cost for doing it. Meanwhile DmC lets you reshuffle your skill points at any time, meaning that I don't even think about where to throw new skill points since I know I can change them whenever I like.
But in D3 the free respecs work beautifully because the system was designed for it and it wasn't a cover for shitty design. DmC has plenty of bad design choices, it's not like that was some standout issue.
It's not the respeccing that's the problem, it's the game design.
Good points. Games like Dark Souls and The Last of Us give me hope.Quote:
Originally Posted by bVork
I do think that making player choice matter can be tied in with higher difficulty. It's not necessary for interactive fiction like The Stanley Parable but look at something like Epic Mickey. It was supposed to be a Mario type game mixed with Deus Ex style choice. I enjoyed it for the atmosphere and classic Disney stuff but the player choice aspect failed big time. I think the reason it failed was primarily because it was so easy. Why search around for new ways to solve problems when solutions are planted right in front of you?
Yeah, that's just a bad design decision. I don't think a game needs to tell you the consequences of everything ahead of time but it should at least tell you what you're buying/upgrading.Quote:
Originally Posted by A Robot Bit Me
True, although I don't consider it much of a flaw with the game like many do. On my first playthrough it seemed fairly obvious swimming wasn't worth investing in.Quote:
Originally Posted by Joust Williams
Which is what I said: free re-specs are a symptom of a nearly exclusive emphasis on immediacy rather than longevity and consequence. There are ways that free re-specs can work just fine, particularly when they are justified within the game itself. But at the same time, plenty of games use them as a panacea for useless skill trees (instead of rebalancing or removing the worthless ones) or simply because it's (sadly) expected at this point. It's not that the concept exists in the first place, it's how it is often misused and what that represents as part of the culture of game design as a whole.Quote:
Originally Posted by MechDeus
But there weren't any bad skills in DDS... You pretty much use everything you get in those games and they really don't let you power your way throughQuote:
Originally Posted by A Robot Bit Me
Maybe it wasn't that, then. DQVIII would have been a better example.
But Dragon Quest VII has Yangus. It can't be that either.
I wonder if DQX, being an MMO, finally, finally, finally brought multi-hit weapon skills used with multi-hit weapons in line. I was really excited for DQ IX having both classes AND VIII's weapon skills, but it wasn't well balanced.
VIII has Yangus. VII has Maribel.
i forgot an I
DQVII: Maribel is a Bitch and the Game is Better For It
IBTN.
This is nearly every aspect of gaming in every generation. Enforcing long-term decisions and consequences can be done in better ways than locking the player into specific abilities that end up sucking balls.Quote:
Originally Posted by bVork
I don't either because it's a game where there isn't an end game or a place where you really back yourself into a corner. That's the best kind of game maybe--games where respecs aren't an option but it's fairly balanced (although I would say that things like hacking aren't since the only thing better hack gets you is a longer time to be in hack mode, which is pretty useless unless you want to read everything) and you don't need to mouse around for 9 hours to see all the paths you can take. But I cannot think of one spot in the game where you need swimming to even do anything in the water.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeoZeedeater
Journey has been added. While I enjoyed it, there is no way that one would make my list, unless it's going to be hundreds of games long.
This especially bothers me with regard to endings. Having a game full of choices (like Mass Effect), some of which DO have long-term consequences, and then boiling the end down to some single binary choice at the very end really sums up narrative pathing in games today.Quote:
Originally Posted by bVork
I'm excited to see how they handle it in Tesla Effect. They're promising totally unique story threads and even different locations on the different paths and that you'll have to replay the whole game to get the different endings. I already think Pandora Directive handled that better than any other game in the genre and TE looks to advance the ball in a meaningful way.
Sounds like a boring list of the usual suspects.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
The whole point of DmC's combat is experimentation and changing how you fight whenever you want. It's not about character builds and "meaningful choice." It's a skill-based game built on combos and fighting enemies in the style you want to fight them.Quote:
Originally Posted by bVork
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diff-chan
At this point in the game, I'd rather hear what TNL has to say rather than a mainstream garbage site.
If we put a good chunk of TNL's opinions together and averaged it out we'd probably end up with a boring list of the usual suspects.
Not that there aren't some legitimately great games that end up on Every List, but I don't think we really need to talk about Portal yet again.
Portal is awesome though, who cares about Journey
Journey is every bit as good as Portal. Come at me.
I have never heard as many people call a game a "life altering experience" or similar stuff as much as I have with Journey. I just don't get it. Did I miss out on the free peyote with game purchase? Yes, it's visually stunning and relaxing to travel through but that's about it. There's nothing wrong with that. I'm sure it's what the developer set out to make, and I don't fault the game for it, but there's just so much pretentious writing over a game that doesn't have much depth to it.
Not to someone who has never read a chapter book to completion.
I can certainly see how a "story" with a "conflict" that is "resolved" without the employment of a machine gun, curb stomp, or two machine guns would be transcendental for someone for whom modern video gaming is the sole source of artistic and intellectual stimulation. I know a grown man with a mortgage and a bed frame and a 401k who will tell you to your fucking face that Xenogears is the best story he's ever read. And you know what? It probably is.
It definitely pulls at those games-as-art strings that always result in the worst hyperbole.
I would never argue that the game mechanics are interesting but I think the anonymous, seamless co-op experience is something really special. Other than that it's just a perfectly executed beautiful experience (to me, because I'm an artsy faggot)
Dude, adult videogamesmen were moved to tears at the Twilight Princess trailer. Journey is certainly a few artistic notches above that.
Philistines gonna Phil.
I hope they write up Dark Souls/Demon's Souls - games like 'em are getting fewer and farther between each generation.
gonna Phillip Seymour Hoffman. I bet he cried at the Twilight Princess Trailer too. It was pretty good in 2006Quote:
Originally Posted by A Robot Bit Me
He told me at his birthday at Little Caesar's that he did, but that he felt pretty bad about it after.
Fallout 3 is number four.
I highly doubt it. This gen has been realllly long.Quote:
Originally Posted by MechDeus
http://www.the-nextlevel.com/tnl/thr...S3-Wii-PSP-DS)Quote:
Originally Posted by Changeling
It's not like we have to go too far back to verify that, as well.
I do not. Yoshi made a big Best Game of the Generation thread a few years back. The poll results were Gamefaqsian.Quote:
Originally Posted by Changeling
Shocking, the most popular games are the most popular games.
If we all made a list of our 10 favorite games, then they will have some unique entries but also a few that overlap with everyone else's. So an aggregate list will emphasize the overlap ones.
This isn't that complicated.
Yeah, that's why collectively made lists always suck.
Last gen's TNL list was extra bad because of the lack of PC gamers. Now that the PC has hardly any big exclusives, a new list wouldn't be affected in the same way.
I don't think the last gen list was bad, just vanilla. This gen would be different since PC gaming is on the rise here as well as indies getting better distribution through Steam.
Also, you seemed happy with the last gen list at the time...
Quote:
My two cents on the games -
Jet Grind Radio - A fantastic, original, and addictive game. This is worth buying a DC for. I'm glad it made the top 10.
Street Fighter III: Third Strike - I haven't been hardcore into fighting games since the early '90s but I still bought this and loved it. I agree with Yoshi about the cast but you can't deny the smoothness of the gameplay and animation.
Halo - It overshadows a few better first-person shooters but it's still a fine game with an epic feel. It's also somewhat responsible for legitimizing the genre on console which is a good thing.
Metal Gear Solid 3: Subsistence - In the past, I would groan at the MGS series making top lists but this time it deserves the extreme praise. Subsistence fixed most of the camera issues which held back my enjoyment. The story is still retarded but with such slick atmosphere, gameplay, and cinematography, I can overlook that. And, the MSX2 games alone make the package worth buying, too.
Shadow of the Colossus - A breath-taking game despite some technical issues. I enjoyed Ico but I was blown away by SotC's living puzzles.
Ninja Gaiden - I haven't played Black but I must say it pains me I didn't enjoy the Xbox Ninja Gaiden more. I live for ninja action games but I found this a fairly good but overly frustrating Onimusha wannabe. I liked God of War a lot more, and it certainly wasn't because of the theme.
Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic - Despite some glitches, this was a really great RPG. They kept the length small enough but gave it enough player freedom to keep it interesting. I am surprised however that this is so much more loved than Jade Empire which was of similar quality.
Half-Life 2 - Simply the best pure-action FPS there is, especially for single player, from the feel of the weapons to the dream-like environments. It's everything I wanted in an HL sequel.
Metroid Prime - I hate to say it, but this is an overrated game. Don't get me wrong, I think it's quite good, and it's impressive that an unproven developer made a Metroid game of this quality, but its level design, platform gameplay and charm aren't at Super Metroid's level. Also, this isn't in the same league as other "FPA" games like System Shock 2 and Deus Ex in terms of depth or design.
Resident Evil 4 - Capcom managed to breathe new life into a franchise that seemed destined for stagnation. This is one of the best action games around.
Super Smash Bros. Melee - I will never understand the hate this gets from some people. It's the ultimate party game/Nintendo museum. It's the spiritual sequel to the 1983 Mario Bros. in many ways which is one of my childhood favourites.
Gradius V - Back in the day I was a bigger fan of R-Type and Thunder Force than Gradius but given the last games in each series, Gradius wins out with one of the best shooters in recent years.
Dragon Quest VIII - This was finally a bit of step up for the most archaic RPG series but even with a fresh coat of paint, it's too long and repetitive to hold my interest.
Marvel vs. Capcom 2 - I wouldn't put this near last gen's top 25 but it's pretty stylish and good for a quick fighting fix.
Rez - I love rail shooters and TRON-ish visuals. This nicely mixes both. It's no Sin and Punishment for gameplay but it serves its purpose.
Shenmue II - I can understand why some don't like this series. Sure, it could use more puzzles but I think it's an amazing experience that manages to be more than the sum of its parts. You can tell the attention to detail, epic story, classic Sega nods and emotional soundtrack were a labour of love from Yu and his team.
Ico - Simply a well made Out of this World-inspired adventure with awesome atmosphere. Yorda is too young and skinny to be considered hot, though, you pedophilic bastards.
Warcraft III - I'm not much of an RTS fan but it seems quite polished.
Silent Hill 2 - I tried to get into this but couldn't. As scary and twisted as it is, I don't find the design that compelling compared to the Resident Evil or Fatal Frame games. It's not bad but I guess I can't like them all.
Deus Ex - I think I have given my opinions on this game enough times. Best game ever (at least until Bioshock, hopefully).
Virtua Fighter 4: Evolution - I haven't played it enough to master all its complicated nuances but even casually popping it into my PS2 now and again is enjoyable. I have always loved the feel and characters in this series.
Final Fantasy XII - Easily the best JRPG and Square game since Xenogears. Real-time combat and non-random battles are very welcome as well as a story and characters that don't head into self-loathing douchebag teenager Squall territory.
Halo 2 - See Halo 1 comments.
God of War - The old-fashioned arcade Double Dragon/Golden Axe type of beat 'em up may have nearly become extinct but at least we have some awesome modern successors like this.
Guitar Hero - I'm not a big fan of rhythm games but from what I played, this seemed like just the testosterone fix the genre needed. Cool stuff.
You're right. Looking at the picks again, bad isn't the word I would use. I forgot some of the stuff that made the honourable mentions. I probably complained about the lack of System Shock 2 votes, though. And if we did a last gen list again, I would be fighting to have Planescape: Torment included. ;)
Absolutely. It deserves every accolade it's been given.Quote:
Originally Posted by FirstBlood
That being said, anyone that calls a game a "life altering experience" needs to get out more.
Since it seems folks feel a collective list would be hi-hum, maybe TNL can it's own 'Games of the Generation' articles...?
I always forget that VVVVVV is the true GOTG. Let's make it official: VVVVVV, GOTG
If each one of us took a game we feel really strongly about and wrote an article about it, it would be pretty neato. I want to read about Korly's adoration for Tekken Tag Tournament 2.
Trying to aggregate the lists in the thread we had recently is a waste of time. I mean, I'm pretty sure my top two games aren't on anyone else's list. But what do I have scattered throughout it? Skyrim, Red Dead Redemption, Mass Effect 2, Team Fortress 2. All mass-market games with super-wide appeal and a number of flaws stemming directly from the deliberate decision to cater to as many people as possible.
I will put crusader kings ii at the top of my list, just for you bvork.
The Last of Us is number five.
lawl
Sad that none of Eurogamer's picks emphasize gameplay as their main hook. I'll be interested what else makes the rest since I have some respect for the site. But for now; puzzle FPS, open world game, art game (never played), open world game and cinematic game has my balls in a knot.
I think Portal emphasizes gameplay.
Considering 90% of the game is a tutorial and the only thing people talk about is the companion cube and the end song, no.Quote:
Originally Posted by Joust Williams
TLOU does, though.
I would have pcked the series as a whole, that is true. But TLOU? nah, half of the game is just walking around from encounter to encounter
Both games use their mechanics specifically to serve the narrative. It's a huge part if why they're so goddamn good.
Journey is the only even remotely questionable choice thus far. Heck, they even have the 3:2:0:0 platform ratio right, although Gears and Mario Galaxy probably belong by the end.
Don't get me wrong, I love Fallout 3 and RDR and think they should be in the discussion, but there are so many more diverse games that NEED to be on the list. Galaxy is a perfect example. Geometry Wars is another example. Not saying that those won't end up on the list, but its leaning the wrong way thus far.
Also, lists... I know. It's just something to discuss.
It's about quality not diversity.
Geometry Wars should be on the list. Every entry in the "series" was excellent, even the Wii game.Quote:
Originally Posted by Changeling
It's weird how completely forgotten it is now.
Also, I know it's a forgotten fad today but GH/RB were as popular as videogames could be and are the best party games ever. They deserve a mention.
When was the last entry? Gamers have a short memory, mostly.
Street Fighter IV is number six.
World of Warcraft is number seven.
You mean that game that came out before any of the current generation systems?
Yup. WoW shouldn't count. They can't even play by their own rules.Quote:
Originally Posted by Diff-chan
SF4 is an obvious one though. Good write-up on that one.
Be careful what you ask for re: mainstream. Number eight is Spelunky. That's the first one on the list I haven't played.
I really need to buy that.
Everyone should at least check out the freeware Spelunky to see if they like it.
The PSN Spelunker game is cool, too.
Reeeeally? This seems odd coming from you, it's been on Steam and everything.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
It's a randomly generated game that relies on technology from 1991. I can't stand either one of those current trends, let alone when they meet up.
I get the randomly generated, but not the 1991.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
It looks like an SNES game but was released in 2013. Granted, it is priced somewhat appropriately for that, but when there are games like Giana Sisters that are priced the same and didn't take the lazy way out, I am unlikely to support those that did.
Random generation works in Spelunky, because it's not so much a platform game. I mean, the platforming is dead simple. It's a risk management game.
Yeah, but Spelunky is fun and Giana Sisters is not.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
IMO of course, I own both.
Spelunky is better than Giana Sisters because it does its genre better than Giana Sisters does.
I didn't get very far in GS
Exactly. I played GS for like an hour or so? I kept getting murdered in Spelunky and coming right back for more.Quote:
Originally Posted by Joust Williams
That you think this is in any way a valid criticism is so gross.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
Part of the problem with the industry.
Part of the problem with the industry is intolerance for retro/pastiche? I wish.
You know what absolutely every retro game has in common? They aren't as good as hundreds of actual vintage games that you could get for the same price.
I'm really not aware of a game like Spelunky on any 16-bit system.
Nope.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi