The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Glass smashes, water splashes, wood snaps, rocks crack, mud.......... eeerrr...... is brown? oh and it leaves marks, metal dents, plastic bends............. wind blows things, rain dampens, fire burns ..........
Don't understand?
Well,
With the availiable technology today developers are always looking for just that little something to make thier games as realistic and as close to the living, breathing world as possible. They go out to bizzare locations to take photo's of environments and everyday items to get the best ideas of how certain places or substances or whatever should look whilst playing. They research behaviours, atmosphere's and effects certain things have upon a desired character or object. They are always searching for that little detail that will place thier game high above any other and hope to make a gamers dream come true.Thinking of the most creative and innovative things that don't always pay off and waste alot of time is something we can do without.
Developers and the fans are both hungry to get the most true to life experience with the games.
The gamers want to get this close and developers want to make this come true for them.
Unfortunately though, we are yet to see such a game that has come as close to real life with the obvious exception of Metal Gear Solid 2. Hideo and his team thrived to get everything spot on and did it brilliantly. Sure, we can have great graphics, sound and gameplay for a game to 'complete' but even with all those tipped to the edge we still wouldn't see the game that is a close competitor to real life. With all those spot on there is still just that little something that would take the game to new levels.
I understand that some games developers don't look to achieve a game that is going to rival a living experience but just target to make a game that is comical or just a fantasy world of fiction to give a gamer a bit of fun. I guess all games involve something outrageously strange whether it be a huge man-eating monster (hold on a minute.......isn't........ nah I wont say who) or just an adventurous storyline filled with magic spells, leprechauns and potions.
But still, they always try to make the environments and characters as real as possible as to what effects they have when being the subjects of interaction but don't succeed as well by not adding a little detail.
But what am I talking about? I'll tell you what right now.
What I feel to be the missing and hidden aspect of all the games is the level of interactivity being given to every little thing put into them.
What do I meen by that?
Well I meen that in real life you can do absolutely anything to the environment around you and whatever it is that you do, it leaves some sort of a mark or has some effect upon it. Keep on jumping up and down on a rainy day in a field and you'll soon see yourself wearing a hole into the floor and gradually sinking yourself. Take your dad's car and go for a joyride crashing into a building........... what happens? ........... apart from getting an angry dad, a smashed up car and a bunch of expenses from the home owner? Well you'd see a nice big hole in a wall thats all crumbled and stuff. (that's something about games that doesn't happen, the buildings or walls are just flat and cause you to bounce off if you hit into them leaving no signs of you bashing into it). Have a little walk around and what is the thing that you do all the time? You interact with your environment!
Its the thing that ,time and time again, developers , looking to create a realistic and close to life game, miss completely or just take the fact that something will break if it is hit and only go that far. It is always, and has always been staring them in the eyes but somehow they just don't see it. Maybe they are too wound up in many other thoughts that they can't think and lose control, (hence some of the strange endings we see in our games), but still, it is forever shouting out at them and beaming right into thier faces.
And what do I meen by interactivity?
Well the freedom of walking around your environment and being able to do whatever you like. Just exploring and finding out new things. Yes, I know there has to be limitations somewhere along the line but it must be able to be done to a certain degree. Just the things that you would want to do whilst playing. Some examples are listed below. Although some are rather silly, they could be fun and would add to the overall replay value of a game.
In most games there's always a button that just isn't used and is left on its own , lonely and desperate to be pushed just a few times. Maybe developers could introduce an "interact button" which would allow you to do exactly what it says. Push it next to a place you want to interact with, lets just take a cash machine for example, and hey presto! you're beating the machine with a baseball bat until it gives you some 'well earned' cash! (hehe)
Some examples,
Football games:
*The crowd throw some toilet role onto the pitch*, you push the button and *player throws role back at fan*
(yes very unrealistic but how fun would that be?)
Having little mounds of grass that you see sometimes on the pitch. Remember when the ball roled over one and over Tim Flowers into the net?
Well, exactly what I meen.
Stamping a little ditch where you are going to kick the ball to get it longer or higher.
Kick the ball at the referee and watch him fall over and maybe see the ball bounce into the net. (hehehe)
Maybe even have the football bursting or going flat after a while of belting it or when it gets caught in the middle of a bad tackle. And then we could see the ref call for a new ball to play with.
Fighting games: ah look, theres a nice steel barrier here, push the button and *snap* you pull some metal off and start to beat the life out of your opponent.
You do a move onto the floor and something happens, concrete cracks, grass sinks a little and wood brakes etc etc etc.
Even if the fighters bones would break would be very realistic and would be either a bonus to you or a struggle to make the game a bit competetive. It would make it more fun for some and would make it more of a challenge and provide more replay value as a result.
Wrestling games: I cant imagine the amounts of things you could do with some interactivity in a wrestling game. Maybe climb up the titantron and jump off. Set up a ladder in the corner and slingshot someone into it. Set a table up in the corner and throw someone through it. Get a fire extinguisher and spray the foam into someones face. Gosh, there's lots of things you can do with a game like that.
Game like GTA: Pull the lid off a grid and watch someone fall down (hehehe), open the door of a shop and go having a look around, punch a wall and get bricks off to eerrrrr....... throw at people, get some spray paint and trademark your area with some nice graffitti, throw someone over a bridge or into a dustbin, steal someone's handbag or just whatever you want to do. Again, another game that already has lots of interactivity but can have lots more.
Driving games: If you're on a dirt track then you could skid and cause mud to fly behind you and onto other drivers screens causing them to lose a bit of control. Or smashing into the cars and damaging them resulting in having to leave the race. Tyres wearing down and coming off if used on improper surfaces or the result of doing a bad turn.
First Person Shooters: Maybe something like in Red Faction could be done where when you shoot an area it crumbles and you could (instead of shooting enemies directly) shoot some rocks or something above the enemy to make them come falling down on top of it. Shooting different parts of the enemy result in different things and even shooting the gun makes the enemy weaponless and an easy targtet. Just anything to make these types of games actually fun for me to play would be great. I personally dont like many of them but it could change.
Every other game that you can think of can have just something else that would or could maybe perfect the game and make it a pleasure to play. All of us are fans of a certain game and you can see at least one thing that you would dearly like in a game. Just a little added feature that would make it as realistic as where the game came from. Sports games from the TV, lifestyle games from eerrrr, hhhhmmmmm, ah yes, living! and so on. Even when the fans of games are searching around the internet for the latest screenshots or info on the game in development they e-mail and forward thier views on how games realism can be reached easily with one thing but the developers just dont listen. They are making the games for us, the fans, but they dont listen. Even when its being told to them and staring them in the face, they don't see it and haven't seen it yet.
The level of interactivity put into a game can vary the replay value of it by a huge margin. If the level was high it could result in months of gaming madness. The things you could do would last for a long time and could never get old. Different things every day. A gamers dream come true. Not many people have the money to go and buy new games each week or even monthly and so look for a game that will last them until they have enough money for another. I personally have difficulty trying to pick a game when I have the money to buy one and always want a game that will last me until I have more money or have a birthday coming up or something like that.
I know the developers take a long time making the games and deserve good pay for making them but for prices like £45 it's just a rip off for some of them that last a few days to actually 'complete' and ,once done so, never played again. Good job SR have them for a respectable price then eh!?
So what are they waiting for? Its staring them right in the face and they just don't see it. They want thier games to be played by millions who thoroughly enjoy them and play them time and time again, (which would earn them respect from fans all over the world) but it hasn't been discovered and put to a great extent.
Now, who else would love the freedom of a fully interactive game that would last you a gaming lifetime without getting as repetetive, boring and old as the ones you have shoved away in your cupboard?
I surely would.
Post your thoughts on this matter and how an 'interactive' game would be perfect for you if you would like.
I think I summed it up pretty nice in the first 'sentence' showing how the interactivity of elements and objects are and how they should affect everything from your character to the environment or be affected themselves when you do something to them.
If you can do it in real life then why can't we do it in a videogame? Sticking to the context of the game though that is..
Developers out there and the rest of you guys,
What are you still reading this for? ......... go on............. go make a game that wont bore us to death after about 2 months............... you still reading? ............. aahh gone for the dohnuts I see............. good choice! :D
Thanks for taking the time to read this.
Much appriciated
MH.
Don't understand?
Well,
With the availiable technology today developers are always looking for just that little something to make thier games as realistic and as close to the living, breathing world as possible. They go out to bizzare locations to take photo's of environments and everyday items to get the best ideas of how certain places or substances or whatever should look whilst playing. They research behaviours, atmosphere's and effects certain things have upon a desired character or object. They are always searching for that little detail that will place thier game high above any other and hope to make a gamers dream come true.Thinking of the most creative and innovative things that don't always pay off and waste alot of time is something we can do without.
Developers and the fans are both hungry to get the most true to life experience with the games.
The gamers want to get this close and developers want to make this come true for them.
Unfortunately though, we are yet to see such a game that has come as close to real life with the obvious exception of Metal Gear Solid 2. Hideo and his team thrived to get everything spot on and did it brilliantly. Sure, we can have great graphics, sound and gameplay for a game to 'complete' but even with all those tipped to the edge we still wouldn't see the game that is a close competitor to real life. With all those spot on there is still just that little something that would take the game to new levels.
I understand that some games developers don't look to achieve a game that is going to rival a living experience but just target to make a game that is comical or just a fantasy world of fiction to give a gamer a bit of fun. I guess all games involve something outrageously strange whether it be a huge man-eating monster (hold on a minute.......isn't........ nah I wont say who) or just an adventurous storyline filled with magic spells, leprechauns and potions.
But still, they always try to make the environments and characters as real as possible as to what effects they have when being the subjects of interaction but don't succeed as well by not adding a little detail.
But what am I talking about? I'll tell you what right now.
What I feel to be the missing and hidden aspect of all the games is the level of interactivity being given to every little thing put into them.
What do I meen by that?
Well I meen that in real life you can do absolutely anything to the environment around you and whatever it is that you do, it leaves some sort of a mark or has some effect upon it. Keep on jumping up and down on a rainy day in a field and you'll soon see yourself wearing a hole into the floor and gradually sinking yourself. Take your dad's car and go for a joyride crashing into a building........... what happens? ........... apart from getting an angry dad, a smashed up car and a bunch of expenses from the home owner? Well you'd see a nice big hole in a wall thats all crumbled and stuff. (that's something about games that doesn't happen, the buildings or walls are just flat and cause you to bounce off if you hit into them leaving no signs of you bashing into it). Have a little walk around and what is the thing that you do all the time? You interact with your environment!
Its the thing that ,time and time again, developers , looking to create a realistic and close to life game, miss completely or just take the fact that something will break if it is hit and only go that far. It is always, and has always been staring them in the eyes but somehow they just don't see it. Maybe they are too wound up in many other thoughts that they can't think and lose control, (hence some of the strange endings we see in our games), but still, it is forever shouting out at them and beaming right into thier faces.
And what do I meen by interactivity?
Well the freedom of walking around your environment and being able to do whatever you like. Just exploring and finding out new things. Yes, I know there has to be limitations somewhere along the line but it must be able to be done to a certain degree. Just the things that you would want to do whilst playing. Some examples are listed below. Although some are rather silly, they could be fun and would add to the overall replay value of a game.
In most games there's always a button that just isn't used and is left on its own , lonely and desperate to be pushed just a few times. Maybe developers could introduce an "interact button" which would allow you to do exactly what it says. Push it next to a place you want to interact with, lets just take a cash machine for example, and hey presto! you're beating the machine with a baseball bat until it gives you some 'well earned' cash! (hehe)
Some examples,
Football games:
*The crowd throw some toilet role onto the pitch*, you push the button and *player throws role back at fan*
(yes very unrealistic but how fun would that be?)
Having little mounds of grass that you see sometimes on the pitch. Remember when the ball roled over one and over Tim Flowers into the net?
Well, exactly what I meen.
Stamping a little ditch where you are going to kick the ball to get it longer or higher.
Kick the ball at the referee and watch him fall over and maybe see the ball bounce into the net. (hehehe)
Maybe even have the football bursting or going flat after a while of belting it or when it gets caught in the middle of a bad tackle. And then we could see the ref call for a new ball to play with.
Fighting games: ah look, theres a nice steel barrier here, push the button and *snap* you pull some metal off and start to beat the life out of your opponent.
You do a move onto the floor and something happens, concrete cracks, grass sinks a little and wood brakes etc etc etc.
Even if the fighters bones would break would be very realistic and would be either a bonus to you or a struggle to make the game a bit competetive. It would make it more fun for some and would make it more of a challenge and provide more replay value as a result.
Wrestling games: I cant imagine the amounts of things you could do with some interactivity in a wrestling game. Maybe climb up the titantron and jump off. Set up a ladder in the corner and slingshot someone into it. Set a table up in the corner and throw someone through it. Get a fire extinguisher and spray the foam into someones face. Gosh, there's lots of things you can do with a game like that.
Game like GTA: Pull the lid off a grid and watch someone fall down (hehehe), open the door of a shop and go having a look around, punch a wall and get bricks off to eerrrrr....... throw at people, get some spray paint and trademark your area with some nice graffitti, throw someone over a bridge or into a dustbin, steal someone's handbag or just whatever you want to do. Again, another game that already has lots of interactivity but can have lots more.
Driving games: If you're on a dirt track then you could skid and cause mud to fly behind you and onto other drivers screens causing them to lose a bit of control. Or smashing into the cars and damaging them resulting in having to leave the race. Tyres wearing down and coming off if used on improper surfaces or the result of doing a bad turn.
First Person Shooters: Maybe something like in Red Faction could be done where when you shoot an area it crumbles and you could (instead of shooting enemies directly) shoot some rocks or something above the enemy to make them come falling down on top of it. Shooting different parts of the enemy result in different things and even shooting the gun makes the enemy weaponless and an easy targtet. Just anything to make these types of games actually fun for me to play would be great. I personally dont like many of them but it could change.
Every other game that you can think of can have just something else that would or could maybe perfect the game and make it a pleasure to play. All of us are fans of a certain game and you can see at least one thing that you would dearly like in a game. Just a little added feature that would make it as realistic as where the game came from. Sports games from the TV, lifestyle games from eerrrr, hhhhmmmmm, ah yes, living! and so on. Even when the fans of games are searching around the internet for the latest screenshots or info on the game in development they e-mail and forward thier views on how games realism can be reached easily with one thing but the developers just dont listen. They are making the games for us, the fans, but they dont listen. Even when its being told to them and staring them in the face, they don't see it and haven't seen it yet.
The level of interactivity put into a game can vary the replay value of it by a huge margin. If the level was high it could result in months of gaming madness. The things you could do would last for a long time and could never get old. Different things every day. A gamers dream come true. Not many people have the money to go and buy new games each week or even monthly and so look for a game that will last them until they have enough money for another. I personally have difficulty trying to pick a game when I have the money to buy one and always want a game that will last me until I have more money or have a birthday coming up or something like that.
I know the developers take a long time making the games and deserve good pay for making them but for prices like £45 it's just a rip off for some of them that last a few days to actually 'complete' and ,once done so, never played again. Good job SR have them for a respectable price then eh!?
So what are they waiting for? Its staring them right in the face and they just don't see it. They want thier games to be played by millions who thoroughly enjoy them and play them time and time again, (which would earn them respect from fans all over the world) but it hasn't been discovered and put to a great extent.
Now, who else would love the freedom of a fully interactive game that would last you a gaming lifetime without getting as repetetive, boring and old as the ones you have shoved away in your cupboard?
I surely would.
Post your thoughts on this matter and how an 'interactive' game would be perfect for you if you would like.
I think I summed it up pretty nice in the first 'sentence' showing how the interactivity of elements and objects are and how they should affect everything from your character to the environment or be affected themselves when you do something to them.
If you can do it in real life then why can't we do it in a videogame? Sticking to the context of the game though that is..
Developers out there and the rest of you guys,
What are you still reading this for? ......... go on............. go make a game that wont bore us to death after about 2 months............... you still reading? ............. aahh gone for the dohnuts I see............. good choice! :D
Thanks for taking the time to read this.
Much appriciated
MH.
Page:
Thanks Sgt.Pepper.
Much appriciated.
:)
Much appriciated.
:)
i like this post.
its fun and quwerky
well done herc
i hope ya win GAD for this!
its fun and quwerky
well done herc
i hope ya win GAD for this!
Thanks,
You made a good point there which i forgot to include.
Interactivity gives US the choices of what WE want to do.
The field is much more open and the possibilities are just brilliant.
I was kinda saying that it will just take a bit of time to get everything understood as to how to use the disk space and console power to its fullest but i was aloso implying that the developers are missing the idea of interactivity completely because they are trying to think of other things to put in thier game and just forget or dont think about the interactiveness.
Thanks for the feedback. A good one too.
:)
You made a good point there which i forgot to include.
Interactivity gives US the choices of what WE want to do.
The field is much more open and the possibilities are just brilliant.
I was kinda saying that it will just take a bit of time to get everything understood as to how to use the disk space and console power to its fullest but i was aloso implying that the developers are missing the idea of interactivity completely because they are trying to think of other things to put in thier game and just forget or dont think about the interactiveness.
Thanks for the feedback. A good one too.
:)
Good post there mate, gad quality easily!, and a well thought out effort.
My thoughts are that i feel games at the moment do offer a fair bit of interactivity, but like you said nothing really like mgs2, i think soon along with technology we will see interactivity move on a fair bit and it won't be a case of the same objectives all of the time, i'm not for one second saying we don't get different objectives in games, it would just be nice to see a little bit more in games today, we all know there is a point as to how much a developer can do but with time i'm sure we will see some bit improvements in time, it will take time but when you look back to now in about 10 years time you will know how far its come, there is no doubt in my mind interactivity can only get better, and thats a good thing i think, it gives you a good sense that you are in control more of what you want to do and gives you more things to explore with, it might be lacking in some games, but it won't be before long when we see others following suit. again good post :)
Spike
My thoughts are that i feel games at the moment do offer a fair bit of interactivity, but like you said nothing really like mgs2, i think soon along with technology we will see interactivity move on a fair bit and it won't be a case of the same objectives all of the time, i'm not for one second saying we don't get different objectives in games, it would just be nice to see a little bit more in games today, we all know there is a point as to how much a developer can do but with time i'm sure we will see some bit improvements in time, it will take time but when you look back to now in about 10 years time you will know how far its come, there is no doubt in my mind interactivity can only get better, and thats a good thing i think, it gives you a good sense that you are in control more of what you want to do and gives you more things to explore with, it might be lacking in some games, but it won't be before long when we see others following suit. again good post :)
Spike
Yeah,
It depends on your taste for game genres.
My post was about ALL of the genres though and was on about developers needing to take into account the interactivity needed to make it a game which will have a huge replay value and be very realistic too.
If you like action type games then im sure that there is something that you have always wanted to have in an action game. An action game is a great example of a type of game where interactivity can play a huge role in it. Action in my view kinda IS all interactivity needy and is something developers need to improve upon.
Thanks anyway,
:)
It depends on your taste for game genres.
My post was about ALL of the genres though and was on about developers needing to take into account the interactivity needed to make it a game which will have a huge replay value and be very realistic too.
If you like action type games then im sure that there is something that you have always wanted to have in an action game. An action game is a great example of a type of game where interactivity can play a huge role in it. Action in my view kinda IS all interactivity needy and is something developers need to improve upon.
Thanks anyway,
:)
Good post, but i still prefer if develpers go for more action and fun ratter then to much realism, but realism adds to the fun.
Jive wrote:
> Great post and some really good ideas there, got to agree with you on
> the interactivity with the surroundings,
----------------
Thanks alot Jive! :)
I think the developers have it all laid out infront of them and just need to find the things that will make the game achieve its purpose. The consoles have the power and the DVD's have the space on them to create a game worthy of being played over and over again.
Most developers dont even use most of the availiable space and power of the disk and console.
I know that they will need a bit of time to figure out how to get these both used to thier fullest abilities but surely they could do a game soon that could include a vast amount of interactivity. We need to be patient a little but if they themselves are claiming to be produing a masterpiece of a game to us then i should hope that they do.
Jive wrote:
> Chucking a toilet roll back at a fan surely has to be a sending off
> offence by the way, hasn't it? ;D
-----------------
Of course it would, thats why you would have to do it whilst the referee isnt looking, thus bringing a bit more fun to the game.
heheh
:D
Thanks for the reply.
:)
> Great post and some really good ideas there, got to agree with you on
> the interactivity with the surroundings,
----------------
Thanks alot Jive! :)
I think the developers have it all laid out infront of them and just need to find the things that will make the game achieve its purpose. The consoles have the power and the DVD's have the space on them to create a game worthy of being played over and over again.
Most developers dont even use most of the availiable space and power of the disk and console.
I know that they will need a bit of time to figure out how to get these both used to thier fullest abilities but surely they could do a game soon that could include a vast amount of interactivity. We need to be patient a little but if they themselves are claiming to be produing a masterpiece of a game to us then i should hope that they do.
Jive wrote:
> Chucking a toilet roll back at a fan surely has to be a sending off
> offence by the way, hasn't it? ;D
-----------------
Of course it would, thats why you would have to do it whilst the referee isnt looking, thus bringing a bit more fun to the game.
heheh
:D
Thanks for the reply.
:)
Great post and some really good ideas there, got to agree with you on the interactivity with the surroundings, unfortunately I've never played Red Faction but have heard alot about the deformation of surroundings etc.
The only trouble I can see is processing power being required by developers to enable all of the surrounding areas and items to be interacted with, although with the PS2, X-Box and soon to be release GameCube still not having their full potential and power realised then this will surely come in the future.
I think we (gamers) will just have to be patient with developers as they get to grips with whatever software or hardware they are writing in and for, as they develop new software that enables them to take new games to the next level of interactivity.
Chucking a toilet roll back at a fan surely has to be a sending off offence by the way, hasn't it? ;D
The only trouble I can see is processing power being required by developers to enable all of the surrounding areas and items to be interacted with, although with the PS2, X-Box and soon to be release GameCube still not having their full potential and power realised then this will surely come in the future.
I think we (gamers) will just have to be patient with developers as they get to grips with whatever software or hardware they are writing in and for, as they develop new software that enables them to take new games to the next level of interactivity.
Chucking a toilet roll back at a fan surely has to be a sending off offence by the way, hasn't it? ;D
Thanks Dav1d :)
I didnt meen to add a new button but with all games there is one button on the pad that isnt used for anything.
I said that it may be a good idea for the developers to introduce the interact button as one of those which arent being used, it would do the same thing but it depends on where you push it.
e.g.
Wrestling game: Push it next to a ladder and it allows you to pick it up, then press it again and place it wherever you want it to be put next to or up against (turnbuckle or barrier).
Whereas, if you push it somewhere else in the ring, it will interact with that certain thing.
:)
And with the availiable technology developers have today i should think they could put a bit more interactivity in the games.
Hope so.
:)
I didnt meen to add a new button but with all games there is one button on the pad that isnt used for anything.
I said that it may be a good idea for the developers to introduce the interact button as one of those which arent being used, it would do the same thing but it depends on where you push it.
e.g.
Wrestling game: Push it next to a ladder and it allows you to pick it up, then press it again and place it wherever you want it to be put next to or up against (turnbuckle or barrier).
Whereas, if you push it somewhere else in the ring, it will interact with that certain thing.
:)
And with the availiable technology developers have today i should think they could put a bit more interactivity in the games.
Hope so.
:)
I like your football example! Kicking a ball at a referee would be great fun, maybe a sending off offence though! :-D
I agree that games can do with more interactivity allowing the gamesplayer with more to do.
Only problem would be the controller. If you had all these different buttons, doing all these different procedures youd end up with a controller looking like a keyboard!
Realism is the key, the more realistic the better the experience.
Nice post though :-)
I agree that games can do with more interactivity allowing the gamesplayer with more to do.
Only problem would be the controller. If you had all these different buttons, doing all these different procedures youd end up with a controller looking like a keyboard!
Realism is the key, the more realistic the better the experience.
Nice post though :-)
Page: