5-hour singleplayer games are the future, right guys? Right! - Games

[QUOTE=Achilles123;28850257]Complaining over the internet is easy. Just because complaining won't accomplish anything, and many people in fact like the more recent games, doesn't mean people won't complain. And honestly, you're doing the same thing they are. You're complaining over them complaining even though you probably know it's not going to do anything.[/QUOTE] [URL="javascript:FR_InsertTextHelper(%20'vB_Editor_QR_textarea',%20':mad:'%20);"][IMG]http://cdn.fpcontent.net/fp/emoot/mad.gif[/IMG][/URL] it provides mental stability

[QUOTE=thisispain;28850429][URL="javascript:FR_InsertTextHelper(%20'vB_Editor_QR_textarea',%20':mad:'%20);"][img_thumb]http://cdn.fpcontent.net/fp/emoot/mad.gif[/img_thumb][/URL] it provides mental stability[/QUOTE] Pretty much this since I'm going into the game dev business so I know I'll have to fight this kind of idiocy.

[QUOTE=Swilly;28850449]Pretty much this since I'm going into the game dev business so I know I'll have to fight this kind of idiocy.[/QUOTE] From who? Game devs aren't required to make niche gamers happy, and most other game devs will agree with you. -- Also, mental stability has nothing to do with game devs. I don't know why you said pretty much this is respone to thisispain and then listed something completely different.

Sandbox games are always better.

[QUOTE=Meller Yeller;28849289]The singleplayer? No Black Ops has better gunplay but Half Life 2 is longer, more atmospheric, and doesn't have that linear feeling to it like Black Ops[/QUOTE] Wow, fuck length. I don't care to play a game for 60 hours and Half-Life 2 just drags on and on for way longer than necessary, it has just as much "atmosphere" as any war game, just a different one, and it is as linear as they come, maybe it's more subtle about it but the only "exploration" you're going to get is the Vortigaunt cave thing. Blops took me eight hours to beat and I would have been fine with some more hours, it had enough stuff happening to hold my interest, whereas in Half-Life 2 it's just level after level after level after another level because of some stupid excuse about how OH NO YOU HAVE TO TAKE A DETOUR and then you finally reach the point where you're supposed to go and whoops something goes wrong time to go through another ten levels. I got bored midway through Ravenholm, now I don't even remember where I came from and what direction I was supposed to go. Maybe it gets better later, but up to this point the storytelling's been pretty terrible. It's funny that people here like Just Cause 2 but dismiss the recent Call of Duty games as being too simple and mindless. Also, people keep using the examples of Homefront and the two last Call of Duty games, if you have no other example to provide your argument is pretty weak.

[QUOTE=latin_geek;28848946]Halo: Combat Evolved is the kind of game modern day developers should base off. Grand storyline and great levels (Even if they were linear) and a simple but amazingly fun (You heard that right! Not "Competitive", "Challenging" or "Filled with cursewords and 12 year olds"... "Fun"!) multiplayer. Oh, and the demo. Multiplayer restricted to the most basic yet amazing map ever, and one singleplayer level that didn't really even spoil the full game. And this. [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t3iBQOBLnfA[/media][/QUOTE] FUCKING NOSTALGIA EVERYWHERE c

[QUOTE=norzone;28849557]FPS games are going down the drain IMO.[/QUOTE] Yeah, and PC gaming is dying.

[QUOTE=Meller Yeller;28850172]Well it's supposed to be a realistic [B]setting[/B] which seems to be completely true lately[/QUOTE] "Realistic setting" games are stupid. If you're going to make a true-to-life setting then you may as well represent everything else in a similar fashion. Part of the reason Call of Duty pisses me off so much is because they patronize everything with dialogue and arcadey mechanics; it's insulting to people who have died in these wars that they portray it in such a bleeding-heart, and yet arcadey fashion. If you're going to make an unrealistic game, do it in an unrealistic and genuinely interesting setting; For example team fortress and team fortress 2.. both very arcadey games, and they create fictional settings to go along with it. If you're going to make a WW2 or Modern Warfare game, make it realistic and portray the setting in an unbiased manner.

I purchased MW2 and black ops, play the multiplayer almost exclusively, and enjoy it. So what? Some games are geared towards one play style, some towards others. Nobody is forcing you to buy anything. [QUOTE=hypno-toad;28851109]"Realistic setting" games are stupid. If you're going to make a true-to-life setting then you may as well represent everything else in a similar fashion. Part of the reason Call of Duty pisses me off so much is because they patronize everything with dialogue and arcadey mechanics; it's insulting to people who have died in these wars that they portray it in such a bleeding-heart, and yet arcadey fashion. [/QUOTE] Fucking seriously. My uncle helped quell the Russian ultranationalist threat and to have games representing real, historical conflicts in such a fun and uncomplicated way is absolutely disgusting. Every game should include hours and hours of patrols and filling sandbags and should begin with a tearful goodbye to your family. Anything less would be completely disrespectful. In fact, fuck the entire entertainment industry. We should just have soldiers carry around cameras in combat and outlaw all other war movies from now on.

[QUOTE=hypno-toad;28851109]"Realistic setting" games are stupid. If you're going to make a true-to-life setting then you may as well represent everything else in a similar fashion. Part of the reason Call of Duty pisses me off so much is because they patronize everything with dialogue and arcadey mechanics; it's insulting to people who have died in these wars that they portray it in such a bleeding-heart, and yet arcadey fashion. If you're going to make an unrealistic game, do it in an unrealistic and genuinely interesting setting; For example team fortress and team fortress 2.. both very arcadey games, and they create fictional settings to go along with it. If you're going to make a WW2 or Modern Warfare game, make it realistic and portray the setting in an unbiased manner.[/QUOTE] Insulting to people who have died in wars? What are you, :foxnews:?

I hate that I have two choices in my life. Play music Work with computers. Completely different. I swear you guys, if I ever EVER got big enough in music to sit on my ass all day, I would make a game based off a fast threads thread. Although that's like 1:1,000,000,000 that I even make it in music or computers. I still have luck... :unsmith:

you could make music with computers

[QUOTE=Unreliable;28851828]I hate that I have two choices in my life. Play music Work with computers. Completely different. I swear you guys, if I ever EVER got big enough in music to sit on my ass all day, I would make a game based off a fast threads thread. Although that's like 1:1,000,000,000 that I even make it in music or computers. I still have luck... :unsmith:[/QUOTE] why the fuck did you post this?

I don't get why you need to waste fucktons of development time on a shittily written storyline that nobody cares about and even less play. CoD developers are fucking stupid, the players just want to get killstreaks and jerk of to their golden assault rifles. If you're going to make a fucking storyline put some fucking effort into it. If you're not going to put effort in, don't make a fucking storyline. It's pretty fuckin' simple.

thread full of nerds.

I loved games like Duke Nukem and Doom. Some were short, but the amount of secrets and secret rooms completely made the games worth playing. I went through Duke Nukem 3D searching for every secret.

Games need to be cinematic and open ended, not just a straight line of shooting enemies.

[QUOTE=ThePutty;28850381]Assassin's Creed 2 took me 27 hours to finish. 5 hour games my ass[/QUOTE] and Brotherhood has took 36 hours of my time and I still have about ~40% to go.

Assassins Creed pretty much just begs you to fuck around with it Plus, the fact that you can do whatever you want after you beat the game is pretty cool too

I guess I'm pretty much the only person who hates the player, not the game. CoD is the perfect example; the game is fine, to an extent, but the people playing it piss me off to no end.

[QUOTE=larrylumpy;28852496]Assassins Creed pretty much just begs you to fuck around with it Plus, the fact that you can do whatever you want after you beat the game is pretty cool too[/QUOTE] Assassin's Creed was horribly linear. Step 1: Travel to city Step 2: Fight group of guards Step 3: Go to Assassin Hideout and find out something Step 4: Find guy to talk to Step 5: Perform other objective Step 6: Go to target Step 7: Kill target Step 8: Escape guards Step 9: Return to Assassin Stronghold to get next target

[QUOTE=hgncommand;28852327]Games need to be cinematic and open ended, not just a straight line of shooting enemies.[/QUOTE] Uncharted case closed.

You guys realize this shit happens every generation? "EVERY GAME IS A DOOM CLONE OH GOD WHAT DO?!" "EVERY GAME IS A QUAKE CLONE OH GOD WHAT DO?!" "EVERY GAME IS A WWII GAME OH GOD WHAT DO?!" "EVERY GAME IS A MODERN SHOOTER OH GOD WHAT DO?!" Happens every generation. This will die off, and something else will take its place.

[QUOTE=A B.A. Survivor;28852566]Assassin's Creed was horribly linear. Step 1: Travel to city Step 2: Fight group of guards Step 3: Go to Assassin Hideout and find out something Step 4: Find guy to talk to Step 5: Perform other objective Step 6: Go to target Step 7: Kill target Step 8: Escape guards Step 9: Return to Assassin Stronghold to get next target[/QUOTE] Obviously haven't played any other than the first. Not the point though. There were still sp games being released with more than just 5 hours of gameplay. Many don't but those are the shit games. Like was said before you can't compare the shit games of today to the good ones in the history.

The only recent good games have been of other Genres besides FPS, and now even DA2 is getting mainstream influences. FPS has maintained total dominance in everything and is pumping out the horrors of monopoly/dominance. If the game developers want to make 75% of all games FPS games, then they might as well make them shit, because you'll still buy it, because it's the only option. [editline]27th March 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Zally;28852910]You guys realize this shit happens every generation? "EVERY GAME IS A DOOM CLONE OH GOD WHAT DO?!" "EVERY GAME IS A QUAKE CLONE OH GOD WHAT DO?!" "EVERY GAME IS A WWII GAME OH GOD WHAT DO?!" "EVERY GAME IS A MODERN SHOOTER OH GOD WHAT DO?!" Happens every generation. This will die off, and something else will take its place.[/QUOTE] These all keep getting more linear as generations goes on.

Borderlands took me 30+ hours.

[QUOTE=lifehole;28853366] These all keep getting more linear as generations goes on.[/QUOTE] are you serious doom is as linear as it gets besides fucking wolfenstein

[QUOTE=The mouse;28853385]Borderlands took me 30+ hours.[/QUOTE] Took me 60 hours. I have no problem paying £40 for games that offer that much gameplay.

Let's put simple: Every kind of game for every kind of people. It's a balance, there are people who likes some kind of games and there are people who likes others kind of games. Nobody is right or wrong (...maybe). The one thing I'm concerned is about the kids these days (about games of course, the rest is practically dead for me).

[QUOTE=Tabarnaco;28850930]PC gaming is dying.[/QUOTE] Hahaha. No.