this post was submitted on 16 Nov 2024
393 points (99.0% liked)
Games
32906 readers
1669 users here now
Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.
Weekly Threads:
Rules:
-
Submissions have to be related to games
-
No bigotry or harassment, be civil
-
No excessive self-promotion
-
Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts
-
Mark Spoilers and NSFW
-
No linking to piracy
More information about the community rules can be found here.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Copping out of an obligation?
Dude, not finishing the story and leaving us all on a cliffhanger for seventeen fucking years and then giving this as an excuse is the real cop out.
Looking back, I actually don't like what Half-Life did to the genre. It didn't push it forward; it made everything after a linear, set-piece experience with minimal replay value. It might have been different back in the day, but it wasn't something I had hoped other developers clung to like they did.
Honestly, I have no problems with linear games.
Even Rockstar is fumbling with open-world games. God forbid if you try to do missions slightly differently than how Rockstar intended.
:It doesn't necessarily have to be open world as is currently used these days. The OG Doom isn't exactly linear, but also isn't open world in any sense. Remove the loading times between levels and it would be open world in the way that term was originally used. The desirable aspect of an open world, for me, has more to do with the continuity of the play space than how games calling themselves open world games are designed. Free to explore the map without it just being a series of hallways with only one actual path and maybe 1 dead end per fork where they stick a "secret" or treasure.
The OG Doom is fairly linear, unless you play on the lowest difficulty level where all doors are permanently open. Else you need to kill specific enemies that can only be found in certain rooms to get keys.
At this point, I'm aching desperately for that linear shooter. They have other strengths. Halo Infinite offered a ton more freedom than the old games, but it was worse off for it.
It was very different back in the day.
I think it was inevitable. Before HL2 we had Deus Ex. It was glorious. Fans loved it. Game devs looked at it and went “F*%@ that! We’re not making 3 games worth of content when you’re only going to see 1 on a given play through!”
So that defines the basic tension. Gamers love replay value and multiple paths and different character builds and tons of secrets to explore. Game devs on the other hand want players to see every little blade of grass and tree they worked so hard at placing in the game. I think they also have a lot of data from achievements that show most gamers barely finish the game once, let alone discover all the secrets and alternate endings etc.
I'll just say as an aging gamer, I simply do not have time to grind or replay things. I could do that stuff in highschool, but not anymore.
Grinding especially is a no-go for me. 100% achievements? No chance in hell that's happening.
Life moves too fast and there's too much entertainment. Devs that think people have time to sit there and enjoy some obscure shit they hid, will be disappointed.
That’s an interesting take! I’m getting to be an aging gamer myself and I no longer really play story-focused games. I play Roguelikes which I can pick up and drop any time, 5-10 minutes at a time, here and there. These games are designed to have maximum replay value. So even though I don’t have a lot of time I spend it on replaying rather than playing new games!
It’s an interesting difference and I think it depends on what we both look to get out of games.
Yea that's also good. I do that with chess 😂