The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
If there's one thing I hate (apart from Hitler and clowns) it's repeats. No, I'm not talking about repeats on TV - that's a different rant entirely. Instead I'm referring to a rather nasty trend that's cropping up in more and more games these days - that of drawing out the length of a game by forcing players to revisit areas or levels they've already encountered.
Take Halo, for example - which is an excellent game right up to the point where you hit the halfway mark, at which point you find yourself going backwards through levels you've already explored. Levels which themselves are made up of identical looking room after identical looking room. Quite why Bungie - Halo's designers - felt the need to do this is a mystery, as Halo would easily have been long enough without these repeating sections, which serve only to induce frustration in the gamer. X-Box slasher 'Otogi' is another offender - at the halfway mark, you find yourself going through the same levels you've just cleared, only with a slightly different colour scheme. Even Silent Hill, quite possibly the greatest survival horror series to date, suffers from this phenomenon, the latest entry in the series having you backtrack through every level you've played, with slightly different monster and item placement. It beggars belief.
How did this horrible trainwreck of a trend start? It's difficult to say for certain. Certainly, a couple of the 'Mario' games let you play through the levels again, with some improvements, after completing the game. And several racing games would, upon completion, allow you to play the levels again, but racing through them the other way around. But these were bonuses awarded after you were finished with a game, and weren't forced upon you.
So why are we now seeing games in which such Deja-Vu style cheapness is an integral part of the game. In the majority of cases - laziness. Games companies are always looking to get games out as fast as they can and with as little associated cost as possible. And cutting and pasting existing levels in this fashion is a very cheap way of artificially extending the length of a game. And since not all reviewers have the time to play a game all the way through before reviewing it, there's a good chance this won't be picked up on by those reviewing a title.
Unfortunately, I can't see this trend stopping any time soon. All gamers can do is let each other know if a title follows this trend and vote with their wallets. I'm certainly glad I only rented Silent Hill 4 instead of buying it, spending my money on a more deserving game. Hopefully games companies will eventually get the message that inducing deja vu in their customers is neither big nor clever. But for now, be careful with your hard earned cash.
Take Halo, for example - which is an excellent game right up to the point where you hit the halfway mark, at which point you find yourself going backwards through levels you've already explored. Levels which themselves are made up of identical looking room after identical looking room. Quite why Bungie - Halo's designers - felt the need to do this is a mystery, as Halo would easily have been long enough without these repeating sections, which serve only to induce frustration in the gamer. X-Box slasher 'Otogi' is another offender - at the halfway mark, you find yourself going through the same levels you've just cleared, only with a slightly different colour scheme. Even Silent Hill, quite possibly the greatest survival horror series to date, suffers from this phenomenon, the latest entry in the series having you backtrack through every level you've played, with slightly different monster and item placement. It beggars belief.
How did this horrible trainwreck of a trend start? It's difficult to say for certain. Certainly, a couple of the 'Mario' games let you play through the levels again, with some improvements, after completing the game. And several racing games would, upon completion, allow you to play the levels again, but racing through them the other way around. But these were bonuses awarded after you were finished with a game, and weren't forced upon you.
So why are we now seeing games in which such Deja-Vu style cheapness is an integral part of the game. In the majority of cases - laziness. Games companies are always looking to get games out as fast as they can and with as little associated cost as possible. And cutting and pasting existing levels in this fashion is a very cheap way of artificially extending the length of a game. And since not all reviewers have the time to play a game all the way through before reviewing it, there's a good chance this won't be picked up on by those reviewing a title.
Unfortunately, I can't see this trend stopping any time soon. All gamers can do is let each other know if a title follows this trend and vote with their wallets. I'm certainly glad I only rented Silent Hill 4 instead of buying it, spending my money on a more deserving game. Hopefully games companies will eventually get the message that inducing deja vu in their customers is neither big nor clever. But for now, be careful with your hard earned cash.
Spot on.
Sometimes backtracking is done for a good reason.
Sometimes there's been some changes, or you can do new things which mean you can do things you couldn't do before.
But when you just find yourself just playing through the same level again... it just starts to annoy you.
In Halo there was a little bit of deja vu in the first few levels, odd bits of repetitive level design, enough to notice but little enough to ignore, because the levels mostly had a proper design to them.
It was the level with all the bridges and caverns of sleeping monsters that really took the biscuit. Cavern, bridge, cavern, bridge, cavern, bridge... I can't remember how many but it got really annoying and I got completely bored with the game.
Then when you first meet the flood, and the thing takes you into the library... was that one small level repeated 5 times?
But you've got to see it from the develloper's point of view.
We expect bigger and better games and we want them NOW.
How were the poor souls EVER going to manage that in time for hte Xbox launch. Now I know it would've just been better for them to cut out the deja vu bits but considering the rest of the game was pretty spot on then we can let them off.
I think we pick on Halo because it's probably the best example of this whole deja vu thing, but it is so we do. :-)
I have to say, I think I see one of the reasons why Nintendo opted for this whole "shorter game" strategy, although the continuous sailing on Windwaker gave to the worst "deja vu" effect ever.
Sometimes backtracking is done for a good reason.
Sometimes there's been some changes, or you can do new things which mean you can do things you couldn't do before.
But when you just find yourself just playing through the same level again... it just starts to annoy you.
In Halo there was a little bit of deja vu in the first few levels, odd bits of repetitive level design, enough to notice but little enough to ignore, because the levels mostly had a proper design to them.
It was the level with all the bridges and caverns of sleeping monsters that really took the biscuit. Cavern, bridge, cavern, bridge, cavern, bridge... I can't remember how many but it got really annoying and I got completely bored with the game.
Then when you first meet the flood, and the thing takes you into the library... was that one small level repeated 5 times?
But you've got to see it from the develloper's point of view.
We expect bigger and better games and we want them NOW.
How were the poor souls EVER going to manage that in time for hte Xbox launch. Now I know it would've just been better for them to cut out the deja vu bits but considering the rest of the game was pretty spot on then we can let them off.
I think we pick on Halo because it's probably the best example of this whole deja vu thing, but it is so we do. :-)
I have to say, I think I see one of the reasons why Nintendo opted for this whole "shorter game" strategy, although the continuous sailing on Windwaker gave to the worst "deja vu" effect ever.
also games just repeated for money - mario advance 2 (mario off the SNES). although that is a game good enough and old enough to be repeated. But i tell you what really gets my goat:
Pokemon Fire Red/Leaf Green, was a game looked forward to by many little kids across the world. But they get it, rip it out of the package, slam it in their GBA and suddenly realise its EXACTLY the same as PKMN Red/Blue. and i thought shigsy had morals
Pokemon Fire Red/Leaf Green, was a game looked forward to by many little kids across the world. But they get it, rip it out of the package, slam it in their GBA and suddenly realise its EXACTLY the same as PKMN Red/Blue. and i thought shigsy had morals
I see what you mean too. Go to hub, get supplies, go to new area. It's just a matter of perspective I guess. At least we agree that most of the time back tracking sucks.
Cid Vilante wrote:
> Don't think much more needs to be said after that. I do sometimes find
> it annoying but then sometimes it can make a game more
> "believeable", for lack of a better word.
>
> Take Metal gear solid. Most doors are locked at the start. That makes
> sense. You get the key cards as you progress through the game.
> Previously locked doors can now be opened. I know this is another
> case of forced deja-vu as you need some items from the locked doors
> to proceed.
I actually wouldn't count that as backtracking myself. I know what you mean - but in this case it's more like one area is acting like a hub, and you spend a minimum amount of time in the repeating level. Like this:
New Area 1
!
!
Main Hub Area ----- New Area 2
!
!
New Area 3
I have no problem with that. But in games like Silent Hill 4 - which is organised in terms of levels with the occasional return to your room - and others it's like this.
Level 1 --------- Area 1
Level 2 --------- Area 2
Level 3 --------- Area 3
Level 4 --------- Area 4
Level 5 --------- Area 5
Level 6 --------- Area 1 again
Level 7 --------- Area 2 again
Level 8 --------- Area 3 again
Level 9 --------- Area 4 again
Level 10 -------- Area 5 again
So in MGS you're revisiting only one area. Yet in Silent Hill 4 you're revisiting a total of 5 areas.
> Don't think much more needs to be said after that. I do sometimes find
> it annoying but then sometimes it can make a game more
> "believeable", for lack of a better word.
>
> Take Metal gear solid. Most doors are locked at the start. That makes
> sense. You get the key cards as you progress through the game.
> Previously locked doors can now be opened. I know this is another
> case of forced deja-vu as you need some items from the locked doors
> to proceed.
I actually wouldn't count that as backtracking myself. I know what you mean - but in this case it's more like one area is acting like a hub, and you spend a minimum amount of time in the repeating level. Like this:
New Area 1
!
!
Main Hub Area ----- New Area 2
!
!
New Area 3
I have no problem with that. But in games like Silent Hill 4 - which is organised in terms of levels with the occasional return to your room - and others it's like this.
Level 1 --------- Area 1
Level 2 --------- Area 2
Level 3 --------- Area 3
Level 4 --------- Area 4
Level 5 --------- Area 5
Level 6 --------- Area 1 again
Level 7 --------- Area 2 again
Level 8 --------- Area 3 again
Level 9 --------- Area 4 again
Level 10 -------- Area 5 again
So in MGS you're revisiting only one area. Yet in Silent Hill 4 you're revisiting a total of 5 areas.
Don't think much more needs to be said after that. I do sometimes find it annoying but then sometimes it can make a game more "believeable", for lack of a better word.
Take Metal gear solid. Most doors are locked at the start. That makes sense. You get the key cards as you progress through the game. Previously locked doors can now be opened. I know this is another case of forced deja-vu as you need some items from the locked doors to proceed.
It can be argued that there was no need for this back tracking as they could have just created new areas for the key items to be. This may have worked but we don't know as they didn't do it that way.
I think that this is one case where it does make sense to do it. there are probably a few other games where it has been sensible to do somethinkg like this.
Take Metal gear solid. Most doors are locked at the start. That makes sense. You get the key cards as you progress through the game. Previously locked doors can now be opened. I know this is another case of forced deja-vu as you need some items from the locked doors to proceed.
It can be argued that there was no need for this back tracking as they could have just created new areas for the key items to be. This may have worked but we don't know as they didn't do it that way.
I think that this is one case where it does make sense to do it. there are probably a few other games where it has been sensible to do somethinkg like this.
If there's one thing I hate (apart from Hitler and clowns) it's repeats. No, I'm not talking about repeats on TV - that's a different rant entirely. Instead I'm referring to a rather nasty trend that's cropping up in more and more games these days - that of drawing out the length of a game by forcing players to revisit areas or levels they've already encountered.
Take Halo, for example - which is an excellent game right up to the point where you hit the halfway mark, at which point you find yourself going backwards through levels you've already explored. Levels which themselves are made up of identical looking room after identical looking room. Quite why Bungie - Halo's designers - felt the need to do this is a mystery, as Halo would easily have been long enough without these repeating sections, which serve only to induce frustration in the gamer. X-Box slasher 'Otogi' is another offender - at the halfway mark, you find yourself going through the same levels you've just cleared, only with a slightly different colour scheme. Even Silent Hill, quite possibly the greatest survival horror series to date, suffers from this phenomenon, the latest entry in the series having you backtrack through every level you've played, with slightly different monster and item placement. It beggars belief.
How did this horrible trainwreck of a trend start? It's difficult to say for certain. Certainly, a couple of the 'Mario' games let you play through the levels again, with some improvements, after completing the game. And several racing games would, upon completion, allow you to play the levels again, but racing through them the other way around. But these were bonuses awarded after you were finished with a game, and weren't forced upon you.
So why are we now seeing games in which such Deja-Vu style cheapness is an integral part of the game. In the majority of cases - laziness. Games companies are always looking to get games out as fast as they can and with as little associated cost as possible. And cutting and pasting existing levels in this fashion is a very cheap way of artificially extending the length of a game. And since not all reviewers have the time to play a game all the way through before reviewing it, there's a good chance this won't be picked up on by those reviewing a title.
Unfortunately, I can't see this trend stopping any time soon. All gamers can do is let each other know if a title follows this trend and vote with their wallets. I'm certainly glad I only rented Silent Hill 4 instead of buying it, spending my money on a more deserving game. Hopefully games companies will eventually get the message that inducing deja vu in their customers is neither big nor clever. But for now, be careful with your hard earned cash.
Take Halo, for example - which is an excellent game right up to the point where you hit the halfway mark, at which point you find yourself going backwards through levels you've already explored. Levels which themselves are made up of identical looking room after identical looking room. Quite why Bungie - Halo's designers - felt the need to do this is a mystery, as Halo would easily have been long enough without these repeating sections, which serve only to induce frustration in the gamer. X-Box slasher 'Otogi' is another offender - at the halfway mark, you find yourself going through the same levels you've just cleared, only with a slightly different colour scheme. Even Silent Hill, quite possibly the greatest survival horror series to date, suffers from this phenomenon, the latest entry in the series having you backtrack through every level you've played, with slightly different monster and item placement. It beggars belief.
How did this horrible trainwreck of a trend start? It's difficult to say for certain. Certainly, a couple of the 'Mario' games let you play through the levels again, with some improvements, after completing the game. And several racing games would, upon completion, allow you to play the levels again, but racing through them the other way around. But these were bonuses awarded after you were finished with a game, and weren't forced upon you.
So why are we now seeing games in which such Deja-Vu style cheapness is an integral part of the game. In the majority of cases - laziness. Games companies are always looking to get games out as fast as they can and with as little associated cost as possible. And cutting and pasting existing levels in this fashion is a very cheap way of artificially extending the length of a game. And since not all reviewers have the time to play a game all the way through before reviewing it, there's a good chance this won't be picked up on by those reviewing a title.
Unfortunately, I can't see this trend stopping any time soon. All gamers can do is let each other know if a title follows this trend and vote with their wallets. I'm certainly glad I only rented Silent Hill 4 instead of buying it, spending my money on a more deserving game. Hopefully games companies will eventually get the message that inducing deja vu in their customers is neither big nor clever. But for now, be careful with your hard earned cash.