The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only.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.
It’s a funny thing, but no matter how many adventures I play, it’s still an elusive quality which makes a game good or bad. Your opinion of a title is usually governed not by first impressions but by many impressions gleaned over a number of hours play, and all the many strands of the game give you an overall impression of what sort of game you are looking at.
The first factor is balance. If a game isn’t balanced, then some bits are hard and some bits are too easy, giving you an odd discontinuous feeling. This is one of the hardest things to get right, as there are no strict formulas to follow as to what is good or bad balance in a game. So game producers just have to follow their noses as to how they shape their work. This means that once the game design has been finalised it has to be play tested in its entirety to get a feel for the quality of the overall structure.
Obviously the more games a developer produces in a certain genre (like adventures, for example) the better it becomes at getting the balance right. A player usually requires a couple of levels to get used to the way a game plays, to settle into the scenario and start to make useful guesses about puzzles.
A well-judged game leads the player gently into the new world, showing them how everything works and revealing and hiding clues as they progress, a good example being MGS2. As you progress you learn new tricks and more elements about the storyline as you progress. This brings me to factor two: the illusion of freedom of movement. Nothing is quite so galling as having the feeling that the whole thing is on rails, and you have no freedom to act on your own initiative.
In adventures NOTHING is as important as the impression of complete freedom of movement. Over the years various techniques include locked doors, fences and woodlands which crowd in close around you, or even deserts which you cannot cross and in which you die of thirst. The more ingenious the illusion, the better the game. Many games give the impression of complete freedom, when in fact you are completely limited to a couple of rooms at any one time. The Broken Sword series are good examples of such games. Examples of titles that truly give freedom of movement include Halo and GTA3, although these are not really classed as adventures.
Quality of ideas is the next factor in making a good overall package. Some game makers come up with a cool game engine, and slap a scenario on it like a sticker, something about the Thargoids from Planet Qwerty planning to steal your Frop. A tacked-on scenario always feels tacked-on, and something which hasn’t been well written just won’t cut the mustard. A good well-written scenario carries a game much further than you would think, and makes up for a lot of problems in other areas. Characters must be well-rounded and stories must grab you.
All these factors must work together as a whole to produce something better than the sum of the parts. However, it is still possible for a game to succeed if it lacks slightly in one of the aforementioned areas, but only if it excels in the others. Some games have even been known to prosper on the strength of one factor, although it has to be so mind-blowingly good in that particular area that it can carry the other two factors along for the ride. Of course, the situation is not ideal, but it can still result in an enjoyable gaming experience.
The first factor is balance. If a game isn’t balanced, then some bits are hard and some bits are too easy, giving you an odd discontinuous feeling. This is one of the hardest things to get right, as there are no strict formulas to follow as to what is good or bad balance in a game. So game producers just have to follow their noses as to how they shape their work. This means that once the game design has been finalised it has to be play tested in its entirety to get a feel for the quality of the overall structure.
Obviously the more games a developer produces in a certain genre (like adventures, for example) the better it becomes at getting the balance right. A player usually requires a couple of levels to get used to the way a game plays, to settle into the scenario and start to make useful guesses about puzzles.
A well-judged game leads the player gently into the new world, showing them how everything works and revealing and hiding clues as they progress, a good example being MGS2. As you progress you learn new tricks and more elements about the storyline as you progress. This brings me to factor two: the illusion of freedom of movement. Nothing is quite so galling as having the feeling that the whole thing is on rails, and you have no freedom to act on your own initiative.
In adventures NOTHING is as important as the impression of complete freedom of movement. Over the years various techniques include locked doors, fences and woodlands which crowd in close around you, or even deserts which you cannot cross and in which you die of thirst. The more ingenious the illusion, the better the game. Many games give the impression of complete freedom, when in fact you are completely limited to a couple of rooms at any one time. The Broken Sword series are good examples of such games. Examples of titles that truly give freedom of movement include Halo and GTA3, although these are not really classed as adventures.
Quality of ideas is the next factor in making a good overall package. Some game makers come up with a cool game engine, and slap a scenario on it like a sticker, something about the Thargoids from Planet Qwerty planning to steal your Frop. A tacked-on scenario always feels tacked-on, and something which hasn’t been well written just won’t cut the mustard. A good well-written scenario carries a game much further than you would think, and makes up for a lot of problems in other areas. Characters must be well-rounded and stories must grab you.
All these factors must work together as a whole to produce something better than the sum of the parts. However, it is still possible for a game to succeed if it lacks slightly in one of the aforementioned areas, but only if it excels in the others. Some games have even been known to prosper on the strength of one factor, although it has to be so mind-blowingly good in that particular area that it can carry the other two factors along for the ride. Of course, the situation is not ideal, but it can still result in an enjoyable gaming experience.
It’s a funny thing, but no matter how many adventures I play, it’s still an elusive quality which makes a game good or bad. Your opinion of a title is usually governed not by first impressions but by many impressions gleaned over a number of hours play, and all the many strands of the game give you an overall impression of what sort of game you are looking at.
The first factor is balance. If a game isn’t balanced, then some bits are hard and some bits are too easy, giving you an odd discontinuous feeling. This is one of the hardest things to get right, as there are no strict formulas to follow as to what is good or bad balance in a game. So game producers just have to follow their noses as to how they shape their work. This means that once the game design has been finalised it has to be play tested in its entirety to get a feel for the quality of the overall structure.
Obviously the more games a developer produces in a certain genre (like adventures, for example) the better it becomes at getting the balance right. A player usually requires a couple of levels to get used to the way a game plays, to settle into the scenario and start to make useful guesses about puzzles.
A well-judged game leads the player gently into the new world, showing them how everything works and revealing and hiding clues as they progress, a good example being MGS2. As you progress you learn new tricks and more elements about the storyline as you progress. This brings me to factor two: the illusion of freedom of movement. Nothing is quite so galling as having the feeling that the whole thing is on rails, and you have no freedom to act on your own initiative.
In adventures NOTHING is as important as the impression of complete freedom of movement. Over the years various techniques include locked doors, fences and woodlands which crowd in close around you, or even deserts which you cannot cross and in which you die of thirst. The more ingenious the illusion, the better the game. Many games give the impression of complete freedom, when in fact you are completely limited to a couple of rooms at any one time. The Broken Sword series are good examples of such games. Examples of titles that truly give freedom of movement include Halo and GTA3, although these are not really classed as adventures.
Quality of ideas is the next factor in making a good overall package. Some game makers come up with a cool game engine, and slap a scenario on it like a sticker, something about the Thargoids from Planet Qwerty planning to steal your Frop. A tacked-on scenario always feels tacked-on, and something which hasn’t been well written just won’t cut the mustard. A good well-written scenario carries a game much further than you would think, and makes up for a lot of problems in other areas. Characters must be well-rounded and stories must grab you.
All these factors must work together as a whole to produce something better than the sum of the parts. However, it is still possible for a game to succeed if it lacks slightly in one of the aforementioned areas, but only if it excels in the others. Some games have even been known to prosper on the strength of one factor, although it has to be so mind-blowingly good in that particular area that it can carry the other two factors along for the ride. Of course, the situation is not ideal, but it can still result in an enjoyable gaming experience.
The first factor is balance. If a game isn’t balanced, then some bits are hard and some bits are too easy, giving you an odd discontinuous feeling. This is one of the hardest things to get right, as there are no strict formulas to follow as to what is good or bad balance in a game. So game producers just have to follow their noses as to how they shape their work. This means that once the game design has been finalised it has to be play tested in its entirety to get a feel for the quality of the overall structure.
Obviously the more games a developer produces in a certain genre (like adventures, for example) the better it becomes at getting the balance right. A player usually requires a couple of levels to get used to the way a game plays, to settle into the scenario and start to make useful guesses about puzzles.
A well-judged game leads the player gently into the new world, showing them how everything works and revealing and hiding clues as they progress, a good example being MGS2. As you progress you learn new tricks and more elements about the storyline as you progress. This brings me to factor two: the illusion of freedom of movement. Nothing is quite so galling as having the feeling that the whole thing is on rails, and you have no freedom to act on your own initiative.
In adventures NOTHING is as important as the impression of complete freedom of movement. Over the years various techniques include locked doors, fences and woodlands which crowd in close around you, or even deserts which you cannot cross and in which you die of thirst. The more ingenious the illusion, the better the game. Many games give the impression of complete freedom, when in fact you are completely limited to a couple of rooms at any one time. The Broken Sword series are good examples of such games. Examples of titles that truly give freedom of movement include Halo and GTA3, although these are not really classed as adventures.
Quality of ideas is the next factor in making a good overall package. Some game makers come up with a cool game engine, and slap a scenario on it like a sticker, something about the Thargoids from Planet Qwerty planning to steal your Frop. A tacked-on scenario always feels tacked-on, and something which hasn’t been well written just won’t cut the mustard. A good well-written scenario carries a game much further than you would think, and makes up for a lot of problems in other areas. Characters must be well-rounded and stories must grab you.
All these factors must work together as a whole to produce something better than the sum of the parts. However, it is still possible for a game to succeed if it lacks slightly in one of the aforementioned areas, but only if it excels in the others. Some games have even been known to prosper on the strength of one factor, although it has to be so mind-blowingly good in that particular area that it can carry the other two factors along for the ride. Of course, the situation is not ideal, but it can still result in an enjoyable gaming experience.
Any comments on the post?
That's a good recipe for gameplay - I think you've summed up the necessary ingredients.
When the hand of gameplay fits snuggly and perfectly into the glove of graphics something special is created.
Immersion in an intriguing gameworld is a cool feeling - when every element of a game works well, and you know you're playing class product - it's this that makes gaming so addictive and enjoyable.
When the hand of gameplay fits snuggly and perfectly into the glove of graphics something special is created.
Immersion in an intriguing gameworld is a cool feeling - when every element of a game works well, and you know you're playing class product - it's this that makes gaming so addictive and enjoyable.
pop