When did gaming become so complex?

Well, in the interest of honesty, I'm crap with the torque bow and sniper rifle, so there may be something to what Hemi's saying. Possibly. Like, a little, small bit.

Quintin_Stone wrote:

It's cuz yer yella!

Totally. It's one of the reasons I almost never attack the Titan. It's scary going into the enemy's turf, man.

Like Harry Callahan said, a man's got to know his own limitations.

One answer to this is to play with a group of people that don't care about your skills, like GWJ peeps.

Funkenpants wrote:
Quintin_Stone wrote:

It's cuz yer yella!

Totally. It's one of the reasons I almost never attack the Titan. It's scary going into the enemy's turf, man.

Like Harry Callahan said, a man's got to know his own limitations.

I like "make my day" a little better, though. It's such an iconic phrase that it sounds normal, but when I think about it I chuckle - a tough guy like him would only say "make my day" in a sarcastic way, which makes me dig it all the more.

I'm a sucker for his "Do you feel lucky? Well, do you, punk?" I plan to say it all night on Ventrilo.

Funkenpants wrote:

Totally. It's one of the reasons I almost never attack the Titan. It's scary going into the enemy's turf, man.

I can tell you this: it'd be a whole lot easier attacking a Titan if the enemy didn't have APMs, detpaks, grenades, sentry guns, and assault rockets.

I haven't read through all the replies because ironically i don't have the time but:

@armedbushido:

This is why games like planetside are better for semi-casual MMOG's. Although there is an experience element to the game, mostly it is careening around with your buddies and attacking bases. Having more experience enables you access to more content but doesn't always give you an advantage over the other players. The only problem is that you are still required to play for an hour or two at a time to be able to do anything in the game.

I've come up with a design for an MMOG which negates levelling, introduces more complex social interactions and also increases the diversity of player experience, meaning that each player will not experience the game in the same way even though they may be working towards the same goals - either in a group or alone...

All's i need is someone to produce it for me

Quintin_Stone wrote:

I'm a sucker for his "Do you feel lucky? Well, do you, punk?" I plan to say it all night on Ventrilo.

That's it - tonight is officially Dirty Harry Quote Night on BF2!

"Seeing as how this is a G36 Assault Rifle, the most powerful rifle in the world, and would probably take your head clean off...you've gotta ask yourself a question."

Fedaykin98 wrote:
Quintin_Stone wrote:

I'm a sucker for his "Do you feel lucky? Well, do you, punk?" I plan to say it all night on Ventrilo.

That's it - tonight is officially Dirty Harry Quote Night on BF2!

"Seeing as how this is a G36 Assault Rifle, the most powerful rifle in the world, and would probably take your head clean off...you've gotta ask yourself a question."

Ah, Dirty Harry. Truly the original badass good guy.

I know what you're thinking. "Did he fire thirty shots or only twenty-nine?" Well, to tell you the truth, in all this excitement I kind of lost track myself.

Quintin_Stone wrote:

I can tell you this: it'd be a whole lot easier attacking a Titan if the enemy didn't have APMs, detpaks, grenades, sentry guns, and assault rockets.

That's true. So if you're worried about your kill/death ratio or feel outclassed on multiplayer that is not the place to be unless you're a pretty highly skilled player or are going in with a big squad with a bunch of medics. I'd say if you're a casual gamer, it's better to seek out situations where the odds are in your favor whenever possible in these multiplayer shooters.

I think the real question here is "When did life become so complex?" Well, there's your problem. You grew up, became independant and accepted your responsibilities. Your interests have also changed a lot since back then.

Why do you even want to play an MMO anyway? It's not like the games you've enjoyed in the past and you don't have much time to devote to such a complicated game anyway. It has less to do with game developers and more to do with your tastes. You could easily create a library of games that mimic the ones you enjoyed as a child but that's not what you want. You might like to hop around in a 2d sidescroller but you also have the desire to decipate others and laugh at their faces as they roll away from their bodies.

The best thing I can come up with is to set up a schedule and try to fit a gaming session in when appropriate. With your situation, you'll probably never have time to master a game like Gears but you could still play with friends who don't care how l33t you are.

Yeah you kind of had me until you said you played WoW. I guess I had a laugh at that and from some of the others who complain about lack of time and have level 60 characters raiding in WoW. Maybe that just shows I really have a lack of time.

I think you're just facing a reality that games are made for youngins mostly. Same with TV and movies. I certainly don't watch nearly as much as I did 10 years ago. And yeah alot of today's games have gotten feature bloat as they cater to more and more hardcore fans and try to get consumers to keep shelling out $50 or $60 for the same game.

That being said, Nintendo wants you. GEt a DS or a Wii. One reason I have both of those is because I can't play every hardcore game that comes out. I've been doing a lot of Soduku puzzles in Brain Age game the last few days and overall enjoying the brain games which actually can be quite competitive amongst family members or a few friends. And they make me feel like playing games isn't quite as much a waste of time. I also like the NSMB on the DS. Engaging, enjoyable and yet easy to get into and you can pick up where you left off pretty easily. ON the Wii I do a little WiiSports. GEt a tad bit of exercise. Get a little competitive with friends or family. And yet it's not a 10 hour timesink.

I did finish Zelda and SPM too which are more 'hardcore' games. ONe reason I was able to do that is they are a little easier to get into and pick up where you left off. The other reason is that I can play them with my son. And we both enjoy the games. So I can get my gaming time in and spend some time with my son and read him stories at the same time. So I think you have to adapt to games that fit your schedule/life if you want to keep your hobby.

I still play some pcgames. LIke someone else said I found that by playing (mostly) one game online aka BAttlefield for the past 4 or 5 years I can 'keep' up and indulge my competitive gaming side a bit. Also a game like BAttlefield fits my schedule because you can get in and have fun for as little as 30 minutes. I can also easily go attend to my kids if I need to without 'ruining' the game for the most part. YOu can just not spawn in or you can sit in a building somewhere for 2 minutes hoping you don't get knifed (or is knived?) while you attend to other matters. And there's no further commitment required to playing on pubs. IT doesn't matter if I play again tomorrow or next week. So again I've kind of rolled with the times. Maybe not consciously tho.

Also like others said it's about finding people of your own skill to play with. ONce in awhile I break out an old rts game and may buy a new one here and there and play with a bud or two. I used to play 'em online and was more competitive about it, but again there's just no time. Also some games do try and institute a ranked system where supposedly you play against only people of your skill level. I'm not sure how well that works in practice. It seems like Xbox Live would have the best chance of that succeeding because you have 1 gamertag and you can't make 50 of them to grief newbs like I remember the kids doing in the rts games.

I do think games have changed. I think the controls have become more complex and they are a bit harder to get into although I think the difficulty level is easier. IN other words there's a slightly higher barrier to entry, but after that today's gamer has more hair than before. GAmes long ago had fewer controls, were easier to get into, but were rather difficult. It was the Arcade influence. Arcade machines have to grab your attention quickly and get you into the game quickly. So they are easy to pick up and play. But they also need to suck your money dry so they can't be too easy so you can play for 15 minutes on one quarter.

Also many franchises have just grown increasingly more complicated/feature bloated. Madden? Civilization? Many rts games? Even BAttlefield is much more complex than the first fps games. Many of these games too have so many dam features nowadays. Career modes. Paint your cars. Tune them. Franchise mode. Superstar mode. .....What every happened to just give me the dam game? Civilization II 12 years ago had a 150 page manual or so and yet Civilization IV has so many more features than 2 ever did. Where does it stop?

I don't think games can continue to get more features and more complicated to infinity. The analogy I can think off the top of my head is the cpu market. For years cpus increased in speed. The more Mhz and Ghz the better. That went unchecked for 20 or 30 years until lately when it just wasn't feasible/practical any longer. Now the direction of the cpu market has changed. IT's swerved into multiple core cpus and instead of Mhz being the number one bullet point; performance per watt is. Imo the same thing is going to happen to the gaming industry. IT's just a matter of when and not if. I think NIntendo has chosen (maybe been forced) to make this sort of change.

What I think I'm sorta meandering to (or rather it's an observation I want to share before I end this book) is that perhaps there is a market developing here that is underserved. IT's the hardcore gamer that doesn't have time anymore to play the games that are increasingly complex and yet wants those types of games. The guy that liked Madden, but does he have the time to play it anymore in it's current form? No. But can you make an old-timer version or a more casual version of it? Something he can incorporate into his lifestyle. Something where he doesn't have to wade through a thousand options to rig the game to suit his more casual level of play now. Maybe it does have more random elements to help with balance a range of skill levels when he wants to play multiplayer against buds. Think MarioKart as an example of this.

I mean the first generation of folks that grew up with games are in their 30's or higher (gasp.) Many of those folks probably would get back into gaming or continue gaming if games were made for them. It seems like it would make it easier at least. The choices for those folks now are Poker, Solitaire, Bejeweled, etc. But I think there's a niche for a cross between, for example, the content of Madden and with the pick up and play and low time committment of Bejeweled if that makes any sense. Maybe think Madden in the Genesis days with better graphics (even if it meant 2d) and some of the refinement (not feature bloat) of today's games.

Nintendo is the company that comes to mind as one that seems to be doing this or at least recognizing that perhaps the industry does need to branch out. WiiSports? Brain Age? WiiSports reminds me of the Atari 2600 and Combat and yet it's a fresh take on the simpler arcadey games of yesteryear. It's a new direction. ONe that I have time for.

If you focus is on playing Xbox live/multiplayer/MMORPG, then it's difficult to keep up when you've trying to balance a busy life. That said, I've had some limited play-time with the GWJ crew on Xbox Live and I found that I was a bit more competitive than I was with the live masses. It's hard to compete against kids and younger guys who put all of their (proportionately greater) spare time into gaming. Have you tried playing with groups such as GWJ'ers rather than in ranked games? How about setting up scheduled games with some friends?

How about single player games? There's plenty of options for the PC and 360.

If your goal is to be really competitive in multiplayer, well, you've got to do the time. If your goal is to have fun, there's plenty of options.

Yeah, definitely get a DS or else just do lots of XBLA.

Agreed. Get a DS, Wii or a bunch of XBLA games. There are plenty of multiplayer XBLA games that don't require months of practice to master.

Fedaykin98 wrote:

Well, in the interest of honesty, I'm crap with the torque bow and sniper rifle, so there may be something to what Hemi's saying. Possibly. Like, a little, small bit. :wink:

It's probably because you're a man like Dirty Harry. Those are sally weapons!

wordsmythe wrote:
Fedaykin98 wrote:

Well, in the interest of honesty, I'm crap with the torque bow and sniper rifle, so there may be something to what Hemi's saying. Possibly. Like, a little, small bit. :wink:

It's probably because you're a man like Dirty Harry. Those are sally weapons! :lol:

Aw, thanks for the vote of confidence!

The economic and time costs of gaming are increasing, and the number of competent titles grows exponentially (this fall's 360 lineup is going to kill my wallet). Games are increasingly complex and deep; there is no doubt. Most of the MP portions of games I just do not touch, because I do not have the time to get good. There is a pretty legit intimidation factor with venturing online, so I am in the same bucket here.

Out of all the MP titles I own, I have only played a significant amount in the original Counter-Strike and Halo2. I have dabbled with BF2, Gears of War to a decent degree, but nothing significant. The rest of my time is playing through some SP stuff, or just locally with friends. I still prefer playing games locally with buddies actually IN THE SAME ROOM, even though most split screen stuff suffers from some problem here or there (I have a love-hate relationship with split screen gaming). Most people I know do not own high-end systems, so I tend to find ways to get everyone around the same console.

I still love the single-player or co-op experience over most multiplayer titles. I actually wish I could just purchase the SP campaign for a lot of games at a reduced price! Geesh, they are being made by seperate dev houses anyways (for the same game), just package them seperate and allow us to choose!

WyattERP wrote:

I still love the single-player or co-op experience over most multiplayer titles. I actually wish I could just purchase the SP campaign for a lot of games at a reduced price! Geesh, they are being made by seperate dev houses anyways (for the same game), just package them seperate and allow us to choose!

While I would like a la carte pricing for SP and MP, and maybe a bundle price with a $5 discount, it seems unlikely to happen for most games soon. In particular for console games, which are sold via boxes at retail chains - that would be a nightmare.

Computer games, and online games in particular may go further down this road. Guild Wars offered a PvP only version (multiplayer only, no compaign) at a slightly reduced price.

Then there are games that are single player or multiplayer only. Shadowrun apparently has the thinnest of single player content, just a tutorial to familiarize yourself with the controls before you go to multiplayer, and Warhawk (PS3) will be multiplayer only as well. But for those big name, AAA titles that have both a campaign and a versus mode, I can't see them going into separate retail packages or being sold piecemeal at a discount.

Yeah, battlefield 2142 does this too - though i'm unclear as to how to go about it since it was my dad (creepy!) who found this out and bought the MP only portion. I've never seen two different types of boxes...

Yeah I wish you could only buy the online mp of some games like rts games.

And other times I would love if I could buy the sp campaign at a reduced price knowing I'll never play the mp part.

Hell I wish all games were ala carte. It would need digital distribution to work. But take Madden. I would love to buy the core game at a reduced price. Say they throw in a few teams to play of my choosing. The core moves (hell if I use them all that are there now.) Give me the ability to play a few buds, but after that I don't care much about anything else. No franchise mode. No Superstar mode. No 3000 rules options. Yada yada yada. I just play the occassional game and may play with friends. That's all the time I have for it. $60 doesn't make it an attractive game to me. But $20 for some basics that reflect the time I'll spend with the game? YOu bet.

Online play could easily be offered ala carte via digital distribution because those games require the consumer to online in the first place. Obvious I guess and that's what Sony seems to be doing this fall.

Definitely on the sports games. I have no desire to play around with the hot dog stands and play 12 years of dynasty, create franchises, etc. I have NBA2k7 and all I play is multi-player. Same with Halo 3. When I buy it I will buy it just for MP. I think this is why I love Crackdown so much. It's distilled down to pure joy. Lots of simple tools you choose to put to use to have fun in the sandbox.

I think eventually (maybe next 10-15 years) most games will only be available for download and at that point, we'll see developers having individual game segments that are priced seperately.

Sorry for the thread necromancy, but I was really bummed after playing Halo 3 last night again. In fact I'm definitely returning Halo 2 and canceling my Halo 3 pre-order this afternoon. I would even start to look at my 360 as suspect, save for the fact that I love XBLA, the 2k sports games and Viva Pinata.

I think trip1eX speaks the truth. There is definitely an underserved niche here. I was thinking about this after getting my a** handed to me in Halo 3 again last night. I was thinking, what do I play? Seriously. I don't really want to go back to playing Pokemon (although perhaps I should consider it since it looks fun and at least I won't die instantly/get laughed at or cussed at). Nor do I want to load up a massive SP game like KOTOR or Mass Effect. These are also massive time sinks. MP games seemed like the perfect solution. A little social interaction, a quick game, it's all good.

However, my inability to connect with Goodjers in the sports games coupled with my inability to divorce my wife and spend hours becoming a L33T Halo player, makes me wonder where to go from here. I clearly won't enjoy playing Halo MP in any other context than with Goodjers. I still enjoy XBLA (thus Catan, Uno, etc.) so that's all good. And I still enjoy the 2k sports games. But that's about it. Those and Viva Pinata. Even Crackdown, my favorite, is gathering dust due to none of my friends playing it. I'm definitely sticking with the 360, but may consider a DS again.

It seems like Nintendo has tapped into something and I didn't even realize it until I saw the grass on the other side of the fence. MP gaming is fun, but it's hard work finding a group of people that match your skills and thus can make the game enjoyable. Ironically Nintendo might be right after all.

I'll stop rambling. Bottom line is gaming is supposed to be fun. Getting slaughtered in Halo 3 is not fun. So it's time to look around, I suppose.

DSGamer wrote:

I'll stop rambling. Bottom line is gaming is supposed to be fun. Getting slaughtered in Halo 3 is not fun. So it's time to look around, I suppose.

You are playing a beta with hardcore Halo 2 players that were chomping at the bit to get a taste of what 3 had to offer. At launch when more casual players get it I'm sure the matchmaking will be able to put you with people that play at a similar level.

EvilDead wrote:
DSGamer wrote:

I'll stop rambling. Bottom line is gaming is supposed to be fun. Getting slaughtered in Halo 3 is not fun. So it's time to look around, I suppose.

You are playing a beta with hardcore Halo 2 players that were chomping at the bit to get a taste of what 3 had to offer. At launch when more casual players get it I'm sure the matchmaking will be able to put you with people that play at a similar level.

Seriously? Does that mean that there is any reason not to return Halo 2? i.e. Would I find that competitive and the match-making decent if I tried it out?

DSGamer wrote:
EvilDead wrote:
DSGamer wrote:

I'll stop rambling. Bottom line is gaming is supposed to be fun. Getting slaughtered in Halo 3 is not fun. So it's time to look around, I suppose.

You are playing a beta with hardcore Halo 2 players that were chomping at the bit to get a taste of what 3 had to offer. At launch when more casual players get it I'm sure the matchmaking will be able to put you with people that play at a similar level.

Seriously? Does that mean that there is any reason not to return Halo 2? i.e. Would I find that competitive and the match-making decent if I tried it out?

I don't know about Halo 2 because there probably aren't too many casual players still sticking with it but when Halo 3 launches there will be a surge of them for a while. This is the path that all the popular shooting games seem to follow. Also if the VS. mode isn't really your thing the 4-player co-op in campaign really has me excited. You should, at the least, give it a rent to see if things have changed after the masses have their hands on the game.

I think it's less complicated and more time consuming.

I think WoW and other MMOs need to stop making really long dungeons. Hellfire Ramparts was close to the perfect length, although the linear design at the beginning is crappy. Dire Maul North was good, but a bit too long.

Its not that I don't have enough time to play, I just don't want to be stuck in a dungeon for 2 hours.

Soul Caliber is not "random" and it's pretty easy to spend enough time playing it that no spanking new player is going to ever even damage you. Especially if you play Lizard Man. :p

I enjoy mountain biking. And I certainly do not spend enough time doing it. I'm never going to enter a race or go do some of the very long and very fun trails that experts do. On the other hand, I also ride flat trails with my friends who don't really want to go "off road" on their bike. My WoW time is very similar. I'm not dumping hours into raiding or grinding anything. I don't get to do Gruul's Lair, or Karazahn right now and I am ok with it even though people in my guild are doing it. They have epic flying mounts, I don't. I'm not in a race and I am not playing for phat lewt. I play to have fun. Like how I ride a bike to have fun.

If being the best at the game is what you need, but you don't have the time to devote to it, you are going to be unhappy. It would be like me entering mountain bike cross country races and being upset I didn't win when I am not out there training every day. If you log into WoW and you are constantly reminded of your lack of dedication instead of just having fun playing the game (win or lose), then another game might be the answer. I was never good at shooters, but I played with my friends and it was fun. I only have so much time and I enjoy what I can when I can. I recently have been playing some Star Wars II on the PSP and Super Mario Paper on the Wii. Both are single player and fill in an hour here or there during the week. Those games are fun and they never ever make me feel like I am behind someone else or losing at playing.

That's the problem with MP, though. I don't mind being bad and losing most of the time. But it's not fun to get slaughtered constantly. You want some reward from playing the game. And getting killed when you respawn doesn't count. I could just play a SP game and always be victorious.