Acting on rumors (which appear to have basis in reality) of deleted discussion threads, Michael Larabel of Phoronix posted an inquiry into possibly getting a small update on the state of the Linux version. The forum admin linked to their FAQ which indicates that the Linux version was coming and then closed the thread.---My thoughts: Epic has been very amibiguous on the state of the Linux port of Unreal Tournament 3. Whether or not there is a port still is up in the air, but the manner in which Epic decides to deal with this has been truly stupifying. Everyone deserves an answer, and this type of information snafu is not helping Epic in the eyes of Linux gamers. Don't beat around the bush, Epic. If there's a port, say there is one and at least treat these Linux gamers as mature adults who can understand and can be rational. Epic choosing to stop every Linux thread shows very disturbing signs and this just angers the Linux folks even more.Step up, Epic Games. Tell us the truth.
read more | digg story
Thursday, April 24, 2008
Friday, March 28, 2008
Random Thoughts
Lately, I've been playing 'Star Wars Knights of the Old Republic'. It's a nice little roleplaying game from Bioware with a good story and lot of good rpg play into it. Nice games don't come often, and I don't usually give games high ratings, but KotOR is indeed a classic that needs to have a place in the list of games people must play. It's certainly dated on a technical aspect, but it doesn't loose it's allure. I certainly don't miss newer games when these old gems can really still bring you some good enjoyment.
These past months have been somewhat a time warp for me, checking out older games. I thought to check out Elder Scrolls: Oblivion, which is one of the newer RPGs and by Bethesda. Judging from videos and screens, I'll probably never pick up a new RPG by them. Oblivion is a highly touted product, and with good reason too. So much work has been put into it, but it's all so strange that everytime I see it, my interest level drops to zero. I've put in countless of hours on Morrowind, it's predecessor and while Morrowind was a good product, it wasn't a great one. You have to acknowledge the flaws alongside its strengths, but overall, after playing Morrowind to the ground, the lasting memory of it isn't the roleplay that you do (or lack of), but the tedious nature of the game.
I'm sure Oblivion attempts to solve many of those issues but for a game that's built from the ground up, it sure looks a lot like Morrowind in motion. Morrowind's graphics are eye-gougingly bad by today's standards and for all the accolaides that oblivion receives from the visual department, it looks like crap. Everytime I see it makes me cringe, from the facial acting to the character models and the lighting effects. That's me talking from a visual aspect which isn't much to speak of when I play games. I play even older games with far less fancier visuals.
Oblivion's gameplay from videos look a whole lot like Morrowind did, and the Elder Scrolls series is the kind of game after I play once, I don't really look forward to going back. It's the same with Oblivion. It moves so much like Morrowind, the battles seem so much like it, and it really looks like another tedious game. I know Oblivion has a little bit of some thing like those teleport to location things, which by the way is a bad idea. I think that when a Dungeon Master warps his players to the 'exciting' parts just because his players are getting bored, something is definitely wrong with the game. Come on, Bethesda, you're more creative than that.
Or are you? Perhaps the Elder Scrolls series will benefit from a fresh different approach. Perhaps Bethesda ought to give another studio a shot at building this epic and gigantic RPG. I want to like The Elder Scrolls series. Don't let Morrowind be the last TES game I play.
Moving on, I suppose...
As depressing as TES is, the Linux gaming is just as depressing. The opensource games out there don't really peak my interest, and the games available are and few in between. Some people hinge their hopes on emulation which is a valid solution and has been for the past few years. This, though, only alleviates the problem to a certain degree. Emulation, for one thing, is always going to play catch up, and it isn't likely to run every game conceivable. The allure, I think loses its sheen when you have to work to get the games running and sometimes, there's just too much work to be done and too much waiting. The only solution I think is that Linux gaming leans on porting. For the same amount of effort you push into emulation, it's far more productive in the long term that portability tools be developed, hence giving development studios and big game companies a good reason to port for far less the cost.
I do think that unlike the previous topic, the Linux gaming scene is slowly changing. More games are coming and LGP surely has some aces under its sleeves. I hope this is the start of big and better things to come for the Linux community.
All in good time, I suppose. All in good time.
These past months have been somewhat a time warp for me, checking out older games. I thought to check out Elder Scrolls: Oblivion, which is one of the newer RPGs and by Bethesda. Judging from videos and screens, I'll probably never pick up a new RPG by them. Oblivion is a highly touted product, and with good reason too. So much work has been put into it, but it's all so strange that everytime I see it, my interest level drops to zero. I've put in countless of hours on Morrowind, it's predecessor and while Morrowind was a good product, it wasn't a great one. You have to acknowledge the flaws alongside its strengths, but overall, after playing Morrowind to the ground, the lasting memory of it isn't the roleplay that you do (or lack of), but the tedious nature of the game.
I'm sure Oblivion attempts to solve many of those issues but for a game that's built from the ground up, it sure looks a lot like Morrowind in motion. Morrowind's graphics are eye-gougingly bad by today's standards and for all the accolaides that oblivion receives from the visual department, it looks like crap. Everytime I see it makes me cringe, from the facial acting to the character models and the lighting effects. That's me talking from a visual aspect which isn't much to speak of when I play games. I play even older games with far less fancier visuals.
Oblivion's gameplay from videos look a whole lot like Morrowind did, and the Elder Scrolls series is the kind of game after I play once, I don't really look forward to going back. It's the same with Oblivion. It moves so much like Morrowind, the battles seem so much like it, and it really looks like another tedious game. I know Oblivion has a little bit of some thing like those teleport to location things, which by the way is a bad idea. I think that when a Dungeon Master warps his players to the 'exciting' parts just because his players are getting bored, something is definitely wrong with the game. Come on, Bethesda, you're more creative than that.
Or are you? Perhaps the Elder Scrolls series will benefit from a fresh different approach. Perhaps Bethesda ought to give another studio a shot at building this epic and gigantic RPG. I want to like The Elder Scrolls series. Don't let Morrowind be the last TES game I play.
Moving on, I suppose...
As depressing as TES is, the Linux gaming is just as depressing. The opensource games out there don't really peak my interest, and the games available are and few in between. Some people hinge their hopes on emulation which is a valid solution and has been for the past few years. This, though, only alleviates the problem to a certain degree. Emulation, for one thing, is always going to play catch up, and it isn't likely to run every game conceivable. The allure, I think loses its sheen when you have to work to get the games running and sometimes, there's just too much work to be done and too much waiting. The only solution I think is that Linux gaming leans on porting. For the same amount of effort you push into emulation, it's far more productive in the long term that portability tools be developed, hence giving development studios and big game companies a good reason to port for far less the cost.
I do think that unlike the previous topic, the Linux gaming scene is slowly changing. More games are coming and LGP surely has some aces under its sleeves. I hope this is the start of big and better things to come for the Linux community.
All in good time, I suppose. All in good time.
Saturday, March 8, 2008
Rest in Peace Gary Gygax
Gary Gygax passed away at the age of 69 in March 4, 2008. While this post is 4 days after the fact, it's never too late to pause and remember all the great contributions this man has made for the game industry and RPG in its essence.
While Gary is gone, his works will live on and his achievements forever remembered.
Rest in peace Gary Gygax.
While Gary is gone, his works will live on and his achievements forever remembered.
Rest in peace Gary Gygax.
Monday, February 18, 2008
Professor Layton and the Curious Village
"Every puzzle has an answer."
That puzzle for me had been this quirky Japanese game series, Professor Layton. Years ago, I've seen this title and it never seemed to arouse my curiosity, at least, not enough to actually go out and find it. Here was yet another DS title, albeit with a charming simplistic animation direction, that attempts to cram mini games down DS owners throats. With this conclusion, however, the game was somehow lodged at the back of my mind, whispering softly every now and then.
When the game finally came out in America, that seemingly small voice had grown more vocal. The charming characters had somehow found their way to my good side. But deep down, I knew Layton was nothing more than a dressed up puzzle game. It was the only thing I knew it was really about.
Even with that mindset however, somehow, it was a title I had never totally forgotten, and it seemed like something I would be willing to try now. This, I think, is the first real credit to Level 5's game. No matter what you see in the Layton games meat, the art design is always welcome no matter who you are. And at times, it may be so good that it beckons you to play it.
Professor Layton and the Curious Village unfolds as a sort of crime mystery filled with puzzles from the puzzle-addicted folks of St. Mystere. You accompany Professor Layton and his young apprentice, Luke in their quest to solve the mystery of the Golden Apple. Sounds like Sherlock Holmes? Indeed it is. Layton was indeed designed after the fabled inspector from London according to Level 5.
The puzzles you encounter range from the obvious, to the deft, to the devious. No matter who you are, there will be something that will make you scratch your head. This smoothly combines mind bending puzzles with a story that, by its own right, is a cleverly presented one. Layton also side-steps from the common pit fall of most adventure games. The puzzles aren't ones that you'd end up trying to turn lipstick to bullets (This is a reference to one game I absolutely abhor). Instead, the puzzles stand on their own and have little to no connection to the running plot. They are simply devilishly mind twisters meant to stir your thoughts.
This is the real meat of Professor Layton and the Curious Village. It's as I thought it would be. But there is a certain charm to it that keeps you going. Professor Layton's real power comes from the puzzles and a total charm of story.
But here, in its strength, lies the game's weakness. The puzzles you solve, don't have a life span that goes beyond it. For the hundreds of puzzles packed in the little cartridge, once it's done, there's no more going back to it. And frankly, the puzzles are often so absorbing, you might end up talking to people hoping they'd toss you another one. Often they do, but this gradually leads you away from the plot and into a puzzle hunt. At times, the dialogs will be totally unimportant and simply serve as a tack on to provide you with puzzles. I don't mind, but it doesn't make it all the more natural.
With this problem though, the game does gracefully guide you back to the plot. The expertly created animated cut scenes deliver the kind of feel that gets you right back into the game. It's also so well done, you'd want to go back and see it again. The voice acting is also equally superb. This is one area, that I believe the English version surpasses the Japanese version. The voice actor for Layton delivers the kind of intelligence you'd expect from a man of his stature. Luke shows the typical curious apprentice. In fact, a lot of Layton's characters are really typical but again, these are things that you tend to not mind a lot.
To say Professor Layton is a triumph of innovative game design would be a lie. But to think that Professor Layton series does not deserve merit would be a disservice as well. The truth is, Professor Layton and the Curious Village is as good as they say and is far more accessible than most of the conventional fair games out there. It's the one game I don't mind tagging along, even if the game concepts seem quite too simple for a single package. I wonder the longevity of the series, but till I hold the sequel in my hands, cheers to Layton and Luke!
When the game finally came out in America, that seemingly small voice had grown more vocal. The charming characters had somehow found their way to my good side. But deep down, I knew Layton was nothing more than a dressed up puzzle game. It was the only thing I knew it was really about.
Even with that mindset however, somehow, it was a title I had never totally forgotten, and it seemed like something I would be willing to try now. This, I think, is the first real credit to Level 5's game. No matter what you see in the Layton games meat, the art design is always welcome no matter who you are. And at times, it may be so good that it beckons you to play it.
Professor Layton and the Curious Village unfolds as a sort of crime mystery filled with puzzles from the puzzle-addicted folks of St. Mystere. You accompany Professor Layton and his young apprentice, Luke in their quest to solve the mystery of the Golden Apple. Sounds like Sherlock Holmes? Indeed it is. Layton was indeed designed after the fabled inspector from London according to Level 5.
The puzzles you encounter range from the obvious, to the deft, to the devious. No matter who you are, there will be something that will make you scratch your head. This smoothly combines mind bending puzzles with a story that, by its own right, is a cleverly presented one. Layton also side-steps from the common pit fall of most adventure games. The puzzles aren't ones that you'd end up trying to turn lipstick to bullets (This is a reference to one game I absolutely abhor). Instead, the puzzles stand on their own and have little to no connection to the running plot. They are simply devilishly mind twisters meant to stir your thoughts.
This is the real meat of Professor Layton and the Curious Village. It's as I thought it would be. But there is a certain charm to it that keeps you going. Professor Layton's real power comes from the puzzles and a total charm of story.
But here, in its strength, lies the game's weakness. The puzzles you solve, don't have a life span that goes beyond it. For the hundreds of puzzles packed in the little cartridge, once it's done, there's no more going back to it. And frankly, the puzzles are often so absorbing, you might end up talking to people hoping they'd toss you another one. Often they do, but this gradually leads you away from the plot and into a puzzle hunt. At times, the dialogs will be totally unimportant and simply serve as a tack on to provide you with puzzles. I don't mind, but it doesn't make it all the more natural.
With this problem though, the game does gracefully guide you back to the plot. The expertly created animated cut scenes deliver the kind of feel that gets you right back into the game. It's also so well done, you'd want to go back and see it again. The voice acting is also equally superb. This is one area, that I believe the English version surpasses the Japanese version. The voice actor for Layton delivers the kind of intelligence you'd expect from a man of his stature. Luke shows the typical curious apprentice. In fact, a lot of Layton's characters are really typical but again, these are things that you tend to not mind a lot.
To say Professor Layton is a triumph of innovative game design would be a lie. But to think that Professor Layton series does not deserve merit would be a disservice as well. The truth is, Professor Layton and the Curious Village is as good as they say and is far more accessible than most of the conventional fair games out there. It's the one game I don't mind tagging along, even if the game concepts seem quite too simple for a single package. I wonder the longevity of the series, but till I hold the sequel in my hands, cheers to Layton and Luke!
Thursday, February 7, 2008
PC Gaming... WHAT THE HELL?!
I started first and foremost as a PC gamer. This goes way back in the 80s. I've always been one even though I owned console games after. There are games that are just tailor made for PCs. I remember the classic King Quests and Quest for Glory, the games that brought back good memories. In recent years, some of the console games trickled on PC and I really have no qualms that they are around. It just means the games that aren't released on my console could still be played on PC and I spent quite a bit of cash to get myself a very good PC back in 2005. All was well back then, butterflies fluttering, birds chirping under the shade of trees, and me blasting virtual enemies away on my PC.
Looking at Assassin's Creed on PC coming out soon though, reality started to settle in. You can check the info here and here (courtesy of Kotaku). What the hell do they think? Do I grow a money tree in my backyard? Am I supposed to keep spending money on my PC parts just to play their new fangled games? I suppose if I really earned a lot of money and throw a couple of thousand dollars away for games and hardware this would be perfectly fine. But the expenditures are starting to outweigh the benefits. The specs are ridiculous and I suppose a few years and those prices will drop. But what will be the standard specs by then?
I'm sorry you moronic PC developers. I don't have infinite money. There's enough games out now that will keep me busy without having to pick up your games with stupid requirements. I'm out.
Looking at Assassin's Creed on PC coming out soon though, reality started to settle in. You can check the info here and here (courtesy of Kotaku). What the hell do they think? Do I grow a money tree in my backyard? Am I supposed to keep spending money on my PC parts just to play their new fangled games? I suppose if I really earned a lot of money and throw a couple of thousand dollars away for games and hardware this would be perfectly fine. But the expenditures are starting to outweigh the benefits. The specs are ridiculous and I suppose a few years and those prices will drop. But what will be the standard specs by then?
I'm sorry you moronic PC developers. I don't have infinite money. There's enough games out now that will keep me busy without having to pick up your games with stupid requirements. I'm out.
Friday, February 1, 2008
Thoughts on Rally Games
I have a tremendous love for rally games and I've played quite a few of them, but it wasn't always like that. I remember 3D-Hot Rally back in the old days, where Mario and Luigi drove a 4x4 monster truck on this never ending road that went to different surfaces. Back then, I barely knew what rally was, and I didn't have fond memories of that title. It was reminiscent of Sega's Outrun except that the car had damage and Mario and Luigi would need to make repairs at the expense of time, which you chased against. I could never finish that game, nor do I even want to try. It was practically impossible for me to play these games. Everything seemed so random. I passed on this and never looked back to playing it... and that gimmicky 3D goggles suck!
My next foray into rallying came in Lombard Rally on PC, in the good old CGA days. I still had no idea what rally was and played this game wishing it was much easier. The co-driver held a map, and you as the player had the responsibility to drive and look at that tiny map to figure out where to go. It was not easy, and chasing clocks were never my thing. I pretty much gave up on any racing game at that point. It just never seemed fun at all and I always lost.
Incidentally, after many years of playing different game genres, I found a motorsport I could connect with, Formula One. This is going to be brief, but I have to stress this. I played Video System's F1 World Grand Prix on N64 and it was nothing close to easy at that time. But instead of folding, I put in some good time and played some good laps. It was my reinduction to racing games.
From my beloved N64, I played Top Gear Rally, which was intriguing in terms of decal options, was not the kind of rally game I wanted. It felt like a standard racer and nothing more. I also played the atrocious V-Rally '99. And to think Eden Studios was supposed to be one of the best ones at it. The cars felt strange, and floaty. While this game was difficult, I was less interested to put in the time to it. In fact, I didn't want to.
Some time later, I found WRC on tv and managed to get more informed over what rallying was all about. It was a shame I missed the tighter years of WRC, but I could accept Loeb's battle against Petter and co. At this time, my brother played and eventually completed Sega Rally 2 on Dreamcast. While I was opened to playing it and put in some laps, it just never really felt like rallying to me. It was understandably an arcade game, but it just never clicked, and playing a racing game on a split screen is never the way to go. I love to hear my engine. I love to see what my car did. And with Sega Rally being a game that seemed so much like other arcade racers, I just hung up my gloves on it.
Incidentally, it was at this time where I'd eventually find rally games that I loved. First up was V-Rally 3 on PC. It was unforgiving, but it felt 'right', at least at the time. The car choices were limited, and I was a little less interested in going the full mile, but I was content in running the stages and setting good times and doing it over and over again. That is more than I can say for any of the previous rally efforts.
When my new PC could no longer play V-Rally 3 due to potential issues with hyper-threading, my brother was indeed looking for another title. Colin McRae Rally 2005 or Richard Burns Rally. Unfortunately, he picked Colin's.
This isn't to say Colin's game is terrible, because it's far from it. I put in good stage times. I used the class B cars, class A cars and drove at my favourite stages. But the game just never gave me the satisfaction V-Rally did. It felt OK, but not mind-blowing. It was at that point that I needed to know what Richard Burns had to offer.
Unlike Colin's title, where most reviewers praised to high heavens, Richard's title had more mixed ones. Preposterous physics and a constant comparison drawn over Colin's effort were what I felt was the overall tone. But I played Colin's title, and I wasn't interested in what some bloke said made Colin's title better than Richard's. I had to find out for myself.
My first run at Rally School in Richard Burns Rally lasted approximately less than ten seconds. I didn't know, I wasn't looking at the clock. The first ford section threw my Impreza to the trees and the car never recovered. But somehow, for a title that seemed inhumanly difficult, it put a smile from ear to ear. It felt like gold. It felt really good. It felt like rallying. Those ten seconds I had with it was worth more than the days I put on Colin McRae Rally 2005.
I loved it. And I put a video to show my sample run, albeit not too good, was good enough for me.
Strangely though, it wasn't the last rally game I have fond memories of. I put in some time on portable space in the form of Colin McRae Rally 2 on GBA. It's an old title, needless to say, but it felt remarkably similar to its brethren, albeit in a smaller screen and on the go. It's good and it ultimately defined what my choices were on the portable space and the PC platforms.
As I think about all this, and wonder what Petter Solberg Rally will be, I tend to hope it would be as good or even better than Richard Burn's effort. And I also hope it runs on my computer. Here's to hoping for a great simulation and a very satisfying game. After all, it's all in the feeling.
My next foray into rallying came in Lombard Rally on PC, in the good old CGA days. I still had no idea what rally was and played this game wishing it was much easier. The co-driver held a map, and you as the player had the responsibility to drive and look at that tiny map to figure out where to go. It was not easy, and chasing clocks were never my thing. I pretty much gave up on any racing game at that point. It just never seemed fun at all and I always lost.
Incidentally, after many years of playing different game genres, I found a motorsport I could connect with, Formula One. This is going to be brief, but I have to stress this. I played Video System's F1 World Grand Prix on N64 and it was nothing close to easy at that time. But instead of folding, I put in some good time and played some good laps. It was my reinduction to racing games.
From my beloved N64, I played Top Gear Rally, which was intriguing in terms of decal options, was not the kind of rally game I wanted. It felt like a standard racer and nothing more. I also played the atrocious V-Rally '99. And to think Eden Studios was supposed to be one of the best ones at it. The cars felt strange, and floaty. While this game was difficult, I was less interested to put in the time to it. In fact, I didn't want to.
Some time later, I found WRC on tv and managed to get more informed over what rallying was all about. It was a shame I missed the tighter years of WRC, but I could accept Loeb's battle against Petter and co. At this time, my brother played and eventually completed Sega Rally 2 on Dreamcast. While I was opened to playing it and put in some laps, it just never really felt like rallying to me. It was understandably an arcade game, but it just never clicked, and playing a racing game on a split screen is never the way to go. I love to hear my engine. I love to see what my car did. And with Sega Rally being a game that seemed so much like other arcade racers, I just hung up my gloves on it.
Incidentally, it was at this time where I'd eventually find rally games that I loved. First up was V-Rally 3 on PC. It was unforgiving, but it felt 'right', at least at the time. The car choices were limited, and I was a little less interested in going the full mile, but I was content in running the stages and setting good times and doing it over and over again. That is more than I can say for any of the previous rally efforts.
When my new PC could no longer play V-Rally 3 due to potential issues with hyper-threading, my brother was indeed looking for another title. Colin McRae Rally 2005 or Richard Burns Rally. Unfortunately, he picked Colin's.
This isn't to say Colin's game is terrible, because it's far from it. I put in good stage times. I used the class B cars, class A cars and drove at my favourite stages. But the game just never gave me the satisfaction V-Rally did. It felt OK, but not mind-blowing. It was at that point that I needed to know what Richard Burns had to offer.
Unlike Colin's title, where most reviewers praised to high heavens, Richard's title had more mixed ones. Preposterous physics and a constant comparison drawn over Colin's effort were what I felt was the overall tone. But I played Colin's title, and I wasn't interested in what some bloke said made Colin's title better than Richard's. I had to find out for myself.
My first run at Rally School in Richard Burns Rally lasted approximately less than ten seconds. I didn't know, I wasn't looking at the clock. The first ford section threw my Impreza to the trees and the car never recovered. But somehow, for a title that seemed inhumanly difficult, it put a smile from ear to ear. It felt like gold. It felt really good. It felt like rallying. Those ten seconds I had with it was worth more than the days I put on Colin McRae Rally 2005.
I loved it. And I put a video to show my sample run, albeit not too good, was good enough for me.
Strangely though, it wasn't the last rally game I have fond memories of. I put in some time on portable space in the form of Colin McRae Rally 2 on GBA. It's an old title, needless to say, but it felt remarkably similar to its brethren, albeit in a smaller screen and on the go. It's good and it ultimately defined what my choices were on the portable space and the PC platforms.
As I think about all this, and wonder what Petter Solberg Rally will be, I tend to hope it would be as good or even better than Richard Burn's effort. And I also hope it runs on my computer. Here's to hoping for a great simulation and a very satisfying game. After all, it's all in the feeling.
Wednesday, January 16, 2008
Opinion on Adventure Games
Adventure games have been with us from decades ago. It is hard to believe how far the genre has survived since the old Sierra days. Adventure games had primarily been a story-focused affair with players being inundated with more developed graphics, videos, puzzles and a complex story. At first, I was at ease with this kind of trend. How much more game play can you really add to games of this ilk? Most of these games were laid-back gaming affairs, choosing to let the player play at his own pace and at the same time throwing strange and often frustrating puzzles as an indication of levels of difficulties. While at the time, I thought it was fine, my interest in them started to diminish.
My problem was primarily in that there's no real form of immersion. The pretty screens can only go so far, and the kind of game play involved harkened back to the early 90s. My thoughts about these games started to shift in that this can no longer be the same kleptomaniac style play of picking up all you can pick up and sticking the square plug on a circular hole till it fits. It's a shame that the gameplay has gone stale since then, opting to give you video cutscenes which in my opinion, isn't really a bad idea. But it cannot be the be-all-end-all of the game contents. Videos are good ways of pushing the story forward, but it surely does not make the game any more interactive.
I think adventure games need to have a higher level of interactivity, and a lesser level on throwing puzzles for the sake of it, and hinging your game success on videos. Games are interactive form of entertainment, and adventure games tend to have the least amount of them.
In recent memory, I remember two adventure games that have given me that kind of satisfaction and reinforces the thoughts for me. The first is Indigo Prophecy.
Atari and Quantic Dreams created a stellar of a game that dwelled on a great plot, as well as keeping a good flavour of adventure in it. It had a more engaging element to the way you played it and it certainly was all I had hoped for. It certainly was not a laid-back type of adventure game, which I believe lead to it being a hit or miss title for adventure gamers, but it gave a new level of interactivity to it, even though the ideas used aren't very original. Though the PC port had a bit more questionable controls layout, over all, it did not become a detriment in my enjoyment. That Quantic Dreams had focused on creating a game that gave players more to do than just picking up items and solving puzzles had earned them some respect in my books.
The second is Hotel Dusk: Room 215 on the DS. From the first screenshot and the catchy title, I had already marked the title as a must buy. Hotel Dusk though dwells a little bit more in the traditional adventure sense, but creates a satisfying dialog system that you don't mind talking to these well-written characters. It had created a good sense of immersion in the game. Unlike other adventure games were the dialogs only drop clues on what to do next, Hotel Dusk makes the dialog system part of its focal point in the game. The dialog choices have consequences, and it gives the player that bit more thought and interaction with the game. Even though Hotel Dusk follows adventure games a bit more in the traditional sense, it knows its strengths and focuses on that to give players a more engaging experience.
After playing these two titles, I am convinced that the genre can thrive, but developers have to try and put more thought and effort to the products they do. In my opinion, the traditional sense of adventure games is purely pre-historic. The genre has to evolve into something much more than the conventional sense. And I think it mainly involves a clever way of interactivity.
My problem was primarily in that there's no real form of immersion. The pretty screens can only go so far, and the kind of game play involved harkened back to the early 90s. My thoughts about these games started to shift in that this can no longer be the same kleptomaniac style play of picking up all you can pick up and sticking the square plug on a circular hole till it fits. It's a shame that the gameplay has gone stale since then, opting to give you video cutscenes which in my opinion, isn't really a bad idea. But it cannot be the be-all-end-all of the game contents. Videos are good ways of pushing the story forward, but it surely does not make the game any more interactive.
I think adventure games need to have a higher level of interactivity, and a lesser level on throwing puzzles for the sake of it, and hinging your game success on videos. Games are interactive form of entertainment, and adventure games tend to have the least amount of them.
In recent memory, I remember two adventure games that have given me that kind of satisfaction and reinforces the thoughts for me. The first is Indigo Prophecy.
Atari and Quantic Dreams created a stellar of a game that dwelled on a great plot, as well as keeping a good flavour of adventure in it. It had a more engaging element to the way you played it and it certainly was all I had hoped for. It certainly was not a laid-back type of adventure game, which I believe lead to it being a hit or miss title for adventure gamers, but it gave a new level of interactivity to it, even though the ideas used aren't very original. Though the PC port had a bit more questionable controls layout, over all, it did not become a detriment in my enjoyment. That Quantic Dreams had focused on creating a game that gave players more to do than just picking up items and solving puzzles had earned them some respect in my books.
The second is Hotel Dusk: Room 215 on the DS. From the first screenshot and the catchy title, I had already marked the title as a must buy. Hotel Dusk though dwells a little bit more in the traditional adventure sense, but creates a satisfying dialog system that you don't mind talking to these well-written characters. It had created a good sense of immersion in the game. Unlike other adventure games were the dialogs only drop clues on what to do next, Hotel Dusk makes the dialog system part of its focal point in the game. The dialog choices have consequences, and it gives the player that bit more thought and interaction with the game. Even though Hotel Dusk follows adventure games a bit more in the traditional sense, it knows its strengths and focuses on that to give players a more engaging experience.
After playing these two titles, I am convinced that the genre can thrive, but developers have to try and put more thought and effort to the products they do. In my opinion, the traditional sense of adventure games is purely pre-historic. The genre has to evolve into something much more than the conventional sense. And I think it mainly involves a clever way of interactivity.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
