The "Sony Games" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
It's a common theme in nearly every Playstation 2 game of note except the sport/racing genres.
"You INSERT NAME must save the country/nation/planet/person by killing/capturing/finding/going to INSERT PERSON/RAVE/OBJECT NAME"
Metal Gear Solid 2, 007, Max Payne, Ace Combat, even GT3 and State Of Emergency, and loads more. You can't have a shoot 'em up, action adventure or RPG game without having to save the world or someone. Even in ICO you must save a ghostly princess ! Wouldn't it be nice if occasionaly you didn't have the fate of a place or person in your hands, or at lest if it was less obvious.
Imagine a game where you choose a team of people, equip them and just go out into a jungle to explore. You'd encounter various obstacles, enemies, locations e.t.c but there would be a freedom to do whatever whenever, if done well enough just finding places like waterfalls would be a just rewards for playing the game. Think back to the FFX demos we've seen, the beauty of the locations is a major draw factor for gamers.
What about just finding missing people who aren't of massive in-game importance ? In the ever increasing struggle to get gamers to beleive "emotion engine" was anything other than hype might it be easier to get gamers to realte to finding a normal person rather than an almost spectre seen in Silent Hill 2. How about seeing more games with less obvious objectives, or unconventional ones ? It'd make a pleasant change - remember how well Ecco did on the Megadrive ? Theres more people worth saving than just the President you know :P
"You INSERT NAME must save the country/nation/planet/person by killing/capturing/finding/going to INSERT PERSON/RAVE/OBJECT NAME"
Metal Gear Solid 2, 007, Max Payne, Ace Combat, even GT3 and State Of Emergency, and loads more. You can't have a shoot 'em up, action adventure or RPG game without having to save the world or someone. Even in ICO you must save a ghostly princess ! Wouldn't it be nice if occasionaly you didn't have the fate of a place or person in your hands, or at lest if it was less obvious.
Imagine a game where you choose a team of people, equip them and just go out into a jungle to explore. You'd encounter various obstacles, enemies, locations e.t.c but there would be a freedom to do whatever whenever, if done well enough just finding places like waterfalls would be a just rewards for playing the game. Think back to the FFX demos we've seen, the beauty of the locations is a major draw factor for gamers.
What about just finding missing people who aren't of massive in-game importance ? In the ever increasing struggle to get gamers to beleive "emotion engine" was anything other than hype might it be easier to get gamers to realte to finding a normal person rather than an almost spectre seen in Silent Hill 2. How about seeing more games with less obvious objectives, or unconventional ones ? It'd make a pleasant change - remember how well Ecco did on the Megadrive ? Theres more people worth saving than just the President you know :P
I agree with you - even simplistic platformers like Crash Bandicoot have a continual plot where you are trying to save the world from the clutches of the evil Neo Cortex.
Over the years games have consistently used this as a base theme and it is almost like it has become part of gaming culture. With the obvious exceptions of games like GTA3 the majority of adventure games to tend to use this kind of theme.
But at the end of the day, there has to be a goal otherwise there will be no sense of achievement when completing the game. There has to be something to aim at - Sports games is easy - Who wins at the end of 90 mins, who is the fastest over 10 laps etc but adventure games need something to aim for.
It's all well and good playing Tomb Raider and hunting for gems, artifacts etc but if there was no purpose to looking for them then the game would finish on a very flat note and would certainly not warrant playing the sequel !
It must be tough trying to write plots for games and I dont envy the guys that do this for a living with the inevitable slatings they will get for using simliar storylines etc but I suppose saving the world has seemed to work for a long time and it will continue to do so.
Over the years games have consistently used this as a base theme and it is almost like it has become part of gaming culture. With the obvious exceptions of games like GTA3 the majority of adventure games to tend to use this kind of theme.
But at the end of the day, there has to be a goal otherwise there will be no sense of achievement when completing the game. There has to be something to aim at - Sports games is easy - Who wins at the end of 90 mins, who is the fastest over 10 laps etc but adventure games need something to aim for.
It's all well and good playing Tomb Raider and hunting for gems, artifacts etc but if there was no purpose to looking for them then the game would finish on a very flat note and would certainly not warrant playing the sequel !
It must be tough trying to write plots for games and I dont envy the guys that do this for a living with the inevitable slatings they will get for using simliar storylines etc but I suppose saving the world has seemed to work for a long time and it will continue to do so.
It's a common theme in nearly every Playstation 2 game of note except the sport/racing genres.
"You INSERT NAME must save the country/nation/planet/person by killing/capturing/finding/going to INSERT PERSON/RAVE/OBJECT NAME"
Metal Gear Solid 2, 007, Max Payne, Ace Combat, even GT3 and State Of Emergency, and loads more. You can't have a shoot 'em up, action adventure or RPG game without having to save the world or someone. Even in ICO you must save a ghostly princess ! Wouldn't it be nice if occasionaly you didn't have the fate of a place or person in your hands, or at lest if it was less obvious.
Imagine a game where you choose a team of people, equip them and just go out into a jungle to explore. You'd encounter various obstacles, enemies, locations e.t.c but there would be a freedom to do whatever whenever, if done well enough just finding places like waterfalls would be a just rewards for playing the game. Think back to the FFX demos we've seen, the beauty of the locations is a major draw factor for gamers.
What about just finding missing people who aren't of massive in-game importance ? In the ever increasing struggle to get gamers to beleive "emotion engine" was anything other than hype might it be easier to get gamers to realte to finding a normal person rather than an almost spectre seen in Silent Hill 2. How about seeing more games with less obvious objectives, or unconventional ones ? It'd make a pleasant change - remember how well Ecco did on the Megadrive ? Theres more people worth saving than just the President you know :P
"You INSERT NAME must save the country/nation/planet/person by killing/capturing/finding/going to INSERT PERSON/RAVE/OBJECT NAME"
Metal Gear Solid 2, 007, Max Payne, Ace Combat, even GT3 and State Of Emergency, and loads more. You can't have a shoot 'em up, action adventure or RPG game without having to save the world or someone. Even in ICO you must save a ghostly princess ! Wouldn't it be nice if occasionaly you didn't have the fate of a place or person in your hands, or at lest if it was less obvious.
Imagine a game where you choose a team of people, equip them and just go out into a jungle to explore. You'd encounter various obstacles, enemies, locations e.t.c but there would be a freedom to do whatever whenever, if done well enough just finding places like waterfalls would be a just rewards for playing the game. Think back to the FFX demos we've seen, the beauty of the locations is a major draw factor for gamers.
What about just finding missing people who aren't of massive in-game importance ? In the ever increasing struggle to get gamers to beleive "emotion engine" was anything other than hype might it be easier to get gamers to realte to finding a normal person rather than an almost spectre seen in Silent Hill 2. How about seeing more games with less obvious objectives, or unconventional ones ? It'd make a pleasant change - remember how well Ecco did on the Megadrive ? Theres more people worth saving than just the President you know :P