Viewing Thread:
"Binge & Purge"

I want a new game.
Something I haven't played before.
I don't mean a new game to buy, I mean I want someone out there, a developer somewhere, to use that knotted cord of cells in his skull to be original and create something new.

It can't be that hard, we have a limitless imagination and can dream of other worlds and conjure gods.
So why then, can I get a racing game, a fighting game, or a jumpy about collecting things game?

There's a game called Rez, doesn't interest me but at least it's something new.
Same with Parappa the Rappa, it was odd but totally different.
I don't want to guide some large-breasted Indiana Jones wannabe around some dusty levels for no point.
I don't want to have a fighting game where different characters beat the tar out of each other.
Is it just me?
Am I the only one that stares at the shelves and sees loads and loads of game boxes, but only about 4 different types of game within?
Sure, the graphics are different, but it's the same bloody thing over and over.

Wolfenstein & Medal of Honour are good games.
But they're the same as Half-Life, which is the same as Doom.
GTA3 is a good game, but it's the same as Driver and the same as Target Renegade.
Sure, it looks better and stuff but it's the same clunky, wheezing ideas being trotted out time and time again.

Ecco The Dolphin.
Not my sort of game (I think) but at least it's different.
Same with Microsoft Train Simulator - I can't think why anyone would want to buy that (I got it gratis, as a joke from some punk here), but it's a break from the norm.

So why is it so hard for developers to think outside the box?
"People buy these sorts of games, they sell"
Well hey Activision/whoever, if all you serve is one food then of course people are going to eat it, because they don't have any choice.

Give us the chance to experience something new, it may work or it may not, but for chrissakes, put some effort into it would you?
Stop vomiting up the same old ideas but putting shinier game engines on it and counting the cash.
And we can do our part as consumners - just don't buy the games you know are the same old stuff.
Film License games.
They always bring 'em out and they always, always suck.
So who buys them?
Stop buying and the developers will start having to think.

Say what you like about Black and White (and sometimes I hate it, other times I love it), but it was a new game, a new style and totally original stuff for you to play around with.
Doesn't matter if you liked it or not, it was a breath of fresh air in an otherwise fetid dungeon of samey titles all vying for your hard-earned.

But what am I saying, you're all creaming for Metal Gear Solid 2.
Yeah, it looks nice.
Yeah, you can hide in lockers but it's exactly the same as before, there is nothing different here. It's just newer.

If you have an original idea, something different enough, why not develop it a bit, and then approach some software houses?

It's always "X...with a twist" isn't it?

Think what you'd like to play, then find a way to make it. No doubt other people will want to play it too.

I'll tell you what the problem is with developers and designers today.

Think of as many genres as you can... Choose one. Try now to think how you could possibly change it, make it utterly unique to any other game in that genre.

This is what current designers do. That, I believe, is not what games are about.

Why, instead, don't we just design games on what we want to do?

Imposing the "first person shooter... with a twist!" element onto a game, it just gets repetitive... and it's really not a game. By all means, use the first person perspective if you feel you need to... but make the game, don't change the game.

Agree with Meka here. I know of your troubles with Lylat Wars, and to be honest, I thought it was crap too.

Try something different. Just because words on paper don't appeal to you, doesn't say the actual gameplay doesn't. Nintendo games do really make a break from the norm, the same old shoot/run/end sine wave styled action game. It's just fun, and that's all.

Get a Gamecube. Probably not at launch, but after a year or so, and you'll find a world of originality, and innovation.

Luigi's Mansion has you using a vacuum cleaner to catch ghosts, but you have to dazzle them with a flashlight first. Hasn't exactly been tried before, has it? It's not a long game, apparently, but at least it's different.

If games like Animal leader and Doshin the Giant see the light of day over here, again they're something completely different.

Animal Leader has you eating other animals in order to evolve - not only that but the whole thing has a cubist look to it.

Doshin the Giant I don't really understand, you're a big yellow giant, but you have good and evil side, which must be manipulated to keep perfect balance on the island. Sounds a bit liek Black or White, only the 64DD version came first ;-)

I suppose most people will dismiss these as silly kiddy games, but it can't do you any harm to give them a try, can it?

With the majority of Nintendo or Rare's games in the N64 era I have found myself doing something different, playing games I haven't played before. Sequels are more than just make-overs, and this appeals to me.

fair point there goaty..

but before you start complaining do YOU have any ideas....

i personally think its better to have good racing/shooting/fighting games than original games that are actually VERY bad...

i mean come on.. what next?

a game where you walk into a supermarket and buy loadsa stuff that is already on a shopping list?

a game where you walk into an arcade and play games?

a game where you just sit there admiring the room you are in?

I know originality is important but there are limits...

I agree with the Wookster on this one.

How easy is it, really, to think up a whole new genre?

When gaming first started, there was only a limited number of genres available becuase of the technology. Flat, 2D, basic games. Like Asteroids, Pacman etc. Easy games graphics wise, same basic movement routines, no complex AI.

All easy stuff that a mobile phone can handle now.

Then technology increased. And more genres opened up to the developers. Driving games, Side scrolling beat em ups/shoot em ups, better platformers etc.

Then came FPS's etc, and all the genres we have today.

Until technology moves on again, there will be few new ideas. Any new games that come along just mix existing genres, Deus Ex, for example.

Other "classic" games, I'm thinking of Half Life here, just take an existing genre, and do it really, really well.

Rez is just a scrolling shoot em up, with enhancements to the music, ie it links in with the play. It's nothing amazingly original. Just an old idea with a few bells and whistles added.

That's not to say it's bad, as I love the game. It's refreshing simply because it's different from anything else out at the moment.

I've heard a bit about Ico, and it does look good. But with any game, I'd want to get my hands on a demo before I decide whether to buy it or not.

Yup, I'm waiting on Ico, too. It seems oddly compelling, considering there's so little (apparently) to do.

I'll back you up on that Mr Snuggly, Ico is one of those defining moment games, a bit like Prince of Persia when it came out on Atari or Amiga, it has lots of great new ideas that will be seen in games for years to come!

The game you want, Mr Goaty sir, is called Ico. It's essentially a platformer, but it looks absolutely beautiful and there's a refreshing lack of on-screen furniture and stuff. Official PS2 Mag gave it 9/10.

You have to rescue this princess from a castle (okay, so it doesn't sound that original) but you're not a hero and she's not a feisty chick - you're a seven year old boy and she's a little girl. It's up to you to guide her out of the castle and hold her hand along the way. Ahhh. It looks absolutely fantastic, I want it now.