Cross Atu
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
2437
   |
Posted - 2014.06.19 16:47:00 -
[1] - Quote
1. Depends on type, I play many styles. If I were to boil it down quite a bit I'd say I choose game A over B due to either a interesting story (for single player) or customizable player driven choices (for online RPGs, MMOs, FPS, or RTS). The first is like reading a good book, or watching a quality stage/cinema performance. The second is like playing a board game or a sport with friends, in that who you are playing with and/or against defines the experience deeply and the same basic framework can yield diverse and complex experiences.
2. From a good one? That it delver on it's promises.
If a game offers a contiguous set of player defined story choices through out a trilogy then it needs to make sure those choices are meaningful and those triggers are working.
If it offers a 'twitch' experience it needs to be smooth and optimized.
If it offers puzzles they need to be complex but not obfuscated.
The list goes on but fundamentally it comes to this, if a game says "players will engage with me here" then whatever method/methods it offers need to be meaningful within the game world. If the offered game play is cosmetic only then one will likely be more entertained watching a TV show than playing because the game offers very little value added fun factor even if it's conceptually amusing.
3. Cohesion of internal logic. If something is a bird one day it shouldn't be a dolphin the next.
Especially in a persistent sandbox game players need to be afforded context and information such that they are able to make informed choices. If players are given open in game access to all relevant information; item stats, skill effects, UI fidelity, FX fidelity, removal of bugs.
Then they can focus solely on playing the game, be that making fits, buying items, playing matches, planing battles et al
If however something about the game engine/UI is broken or constraining then it distracts players from a focus on the game and their enjoyment of it. It forces them to troubleshoot etc rather than play and thus it violates immersion. One should spend effort working at playing the game, not working just to be able to play the game (this includes things like attributes and mechanics functioning in a counter intuitive manner and/or not being clearly presented within the game interface).
0.02 ISK
Cross
ps ~ sorry my answers are a little rough, those are broad scope questions and I'm trying to keep my responses concise.
Cross Atu for CPM1- An emergent candidate
|
Cross Atu
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
2439
|
Posted - 2014.06.19 18:22:00 -
[2] - Quote
Soraya Xel wrote:I should tackle my answer to this thread soon. Cross Atu wrote:That it delver on it's promises.
If a game offers a contiguous set of player defined story choices through out a trilogy then it needs to make sure those choices are meaningful and those triggers are working. I detect a wounded former Mass Effect fanboy. ;)
lol, yeah I admit used to love Bio back in the day before the epic fail (banning peoples accounts for criticizing your game is pretty low) of course I could say the same thing about Steam, who's customer service to me was so bad that by the time I got their (totally forum letter, and partly misspelled) "support" reply I'd not only already fixed the problem myself (this was after days of trouble shooting mind you) but completely finished playing the game as well (Dues Ex: Human Revolution).
The last straw there was that the message essentially said "that's not our problem take it up with the Devs" which might have been fair if not for the fact that my first message to them included a message from the Devs saying the same thing and directing me to Steam "support". 
There are other examples of this too, the lovely DRM iteration on an Assassin's Creed title which shall remain nameless lol
(used to be a total Bliz fanboi for years, don't even talk to me about them in general these days  ) etc.
In short I'm a AAA gaming bitter vet, hence the "deliver on their promises" aspect. Because a game can be whatever, and players can choose to participate or not. If however I game claims to be something and then development/publishing provides no meaningful follow through that's pretty much running a con on people, albeit a legal one. 
I understand that nothing is perfect, and that unforeseen, sometimes unfixable, problems arise in game development.
But there's a substantial difference between "we don't actually know how to do this" and "we've decided it's not worth our time to try and deliver on our promises". The former is just part of life, the latter is, in my opinion, deeply shortsighted and selfish.
 Aaaaaannnnddd, it's time for me to stop ranting 
Cross Atu for CPM1- An emergent candidate
|