Sorry your browser is not supported!

You are using an outdated browser that does not support modern web technologies, in order to use this site please update to a new browser.

Browsers supported include Chrome, FireFox, Safari, Opera, Internet Explorer 10+ or Microsoft Edge.

Geek Culture / what do you look for in A video game?

Author
Message
lava man
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 19th Jan 2007
Location: west allis wisconsin
Posted: 24th Jan 2007 01:11
what do you look for in A video game?
for example storyline gameplay graphics
or somthinng else.
Michael S
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 2nd Apr 2006
Location: Why do you ask?
Posted: 24th Jan 2007 01:34 Edited at: 24th Jan 2007 01:35
This has been asked before believe it or not.
Please search

EDIT: Here is a thread http://forum.thegamecreators.com/?m=forum_view&t=75811&b=21
It should answer your question

If the speed of light is 299,792,458 meters per second, how fast is dark?
Check out my current forum:http://ninjasoftforum.proboards107.com/index.cgi
Steve J
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 22nd Apr 2006
Location: Vancouver, Washington
Posted: 24th Jan 2007 01:37
uhm, yes but that is specific to FPS games...

Hobgoblin Lord
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 29th Oct 2005
Location: Fall River, MA USA
Posted: 24th Jan 2007 01:57
Gameplay first and foremost, if the game calls for it then storyline next, graphics are one of the last things on my list.

lava man
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 19th Jan 2007
Location: west allis wisconsin
Posted: 24th Jan 2007 02:31
okey so whats your favorite style fps rpg rts.
Michael S
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 2nd Apr 2006
Location: Why do you ask?
Posted: 24th Jan 2007 04:17
They are all unique and all have fun and interesting atributes. You need to think of a target audience then think of a story then plan out what you want in your game.

If the speed of light is 299,792,458 meters per second, how fast is dark?
Check out my current forum:http://ninjasoftforum.proboards107.com/index.cgi
Agent Dink
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 30th Mar 2004
Location:
Posted: 24th Jan 2007 04:33
Gameplay. I don't care if people think Doom3's graphics were enough to buy it, the game itself has a serious lack in fun factor... and the graphics weren't all that awesome IMHO either. They could have been, but their shadows are too harsh, and the textures and bump maps too oily and blurry. Oh well.

I'd say storyline is a big factor too. If a game has a killer and in-depth storyline, it makes it all that much more irresistable.

Being a graphics guy, I like to see awesome graphics, but that doesn't make the game itself better necessarily. Half Life 1 is a very entertaining shooter, it's graphics are very poor by todays standards.

Sometimes the only way over a wall is to pile up enough bodies to climb over - Dave W.
Black Mesa
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 25th Mar 2006
Location:
Posted: 24th Jan 2007 04:43
Probably because I have to run EVERY game at lowest settings, I mostly look for unique gameplay. I really like free-form open ended gameplay such as in RPGs or games like Jagged Alliance. I'm also really into any game that allows me to customize or level such as BF 2142 or any rpg basically.

Your mod has been erased by a signature
Bizar Guy
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Apr 2005
Location: Bostonland
Posted: 24th Jan 2007 04:59 Edited at: 24th Jan 2007 05:09
Well, no matter the game, Suspension of Disbelief. If a game can't pull this off it's not good, plain and simple. Even if the gameplay is good, it needs to be good in a way that sucks you in, so that you don't remain conscious that it's a game. Even tetris has suspension of disbelief, in the form of incredibly addictive gameplay.

After suspension of disbelief, I look for Gameplay/Story equality. For instance, I could care less that Mario 64 has a lame story, because it's so strong in every other category, especially gameplay. And then with Dreamfall, the gameplay though good for the most part is easy and definitely backseat to the story. However, the story is so amazing that the simple gameplay makes it feel like your in the story, but that's it's still all about the story.

Then of course, you get a rare game like Homeworld or Halflife 2 where both the gameplay and story are so good that you can forgive if they're not the best of wither category, because they do so well in both.

After those two, Graphic Art. Notice I don't say graphics, and for a very simple reason. It's not the polygons or number of npcs you can fit on screen that matter, it's how good the art is. Most people have forgotten that it's the quality of the art and not how realistic you can make something that matters (even if you're into realism, you should know that you still want something that's not only realistic but visually pleasing).

Quote: "Half Life 1 is a very entertaining shooter, it's graphics are very poor by today's standards."

Very similar with Homeworld, only an rts. If you look for the artistic quality of the graphics as well though, in both games you can see they have a lot of work put into the art itself (though more so in Homeworld). Good visuals always improve suspension of disbelief, but that has very little to do with the number of poly's.

Then, music. Music is the the final layer. It's what keeps you immersed in the game by engaging one of your major senses. If you have bad music, it will sour the rest of the game like nothing else, but with good music, a game can become a masterpiece.

So, in this order,
-Suspension of Disbelief as a whole
-Gameplay/Story
-Graphic Art
-Music

Really, a game can't be complete without all its parts.

Edit: I forgot to say. I don't care much for free for gameplay most of the time. It's great if done right, but some games really just shouldn't be, and you can tell they're just following the pack by trying. So, it depends how it's used for me. I don't buy a game based on how freeform it is. Believe it or not, even with games like Black and White and Fable, I was attracted by the art, and only partciularly by the gameplay. Neither are polygon hogs, but I still think they look amazing, even compared to most modern games. Particularly in Fable, it feels like something out of a fairy tale. Some of the best fantasy art in any game in my opinion.

lava man
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 19th Jan 2007
Location: west allis wisconsin
Posted: 24th Jan 2007 06:02
here's a short of the storyline from my project.

you are part of the sma or special millatarey arsenal.
you and A small group of soldiers are all that's
left after A unknown object hits your ship
and you land on A daed planet or so you thought.
Fallout
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 1st Sep 2002
Location: Basingstoke, England
Posted: 24th Jan 2007 13:25
Gameplay is the most important thing for everybody, it's just graphics are the initial hook and pull people in. Gameplay is the product and graphics are the marketting, in my opinion.


Josh
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 7th Dec 2002
Location: Pompey, Great Britain =D
Posted: 24th Jan 2007 15:13 Edited at: 24th Jan 2007 15:14
Something that can pull you in and make you sympathise with the characters; Japanese RPGs are great at this. Also a distinct and unique style about it, be that graphical, musical, or game play, that's very important for me. Thats why I'm drawn to Japanese and DS/Wii games.

Tales of Symphonia always stands out to me as a great Japanese RPG.

Jeku
Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Jul 2003
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Posted: 24th Jan 2007 22:10
I am seriously considering giving up all action games and simply sticking with puzzles and life-sims. There's something to be said about playing puzzle games again and again, never having the same situation happen twice, and always beating your top scores.

The Japanese are crazy about their logic puzzles, and I wish we had more of them here-- i.e. Picross, Slitherlink, etc. Can't wait for Mercury Revolution on the Wii, and Lumines on the DS (hey I can dream can't I?).

Plus I can't get enough of games like Animal Crossing, Harvest Moon and Viva Pinata, where you buy raw goods, manufacture stuff and resell them to buy better goods. Just so addicting IMHO, which is why I love Second Life--- kind of an Animal Crossing MMOG on steroids. How come Nintendo won't do an Animal Crossing MMOG where people can make and sell their own objects?? Sounds like a killer app to me.

There are some exceptions, like GOW, but I've only played it half a dozen times.

lava man
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 19th Jan 2007
Location: west allis wisconsin
Posted: 25th Jan 2007 02:08
I in to action games like halo and rainbow six and ghost recon ect.
I guess I just love to shoot things.
5Louiz
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 15th Nov 2006
Location: Brasil
Posted: 25th Jan 2007 02:46 Edited at: 25th Jan 2007 02:47
Emotion, gameplay and storyline are the most important elements, in my opinion. Graphics and other technology showcases are not very essential.

Some technologies like impressive graphics, physics and alternative input systems (the groovy Wii remote, for example) may contribute for a comfortable gameplay and for the feeling of the game.
lava man
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 19th Jan 2007
Location: west allis wisconsin
Posted: 25th Jan 2007 02:53
Quote: "(the groovy Wii remote, for example)"

yeah until the strap breaks and your walking
around with A remote in your head!.

I use dbp and xna
jasonhtml
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Mar 2004
Location: OC, California, USA
Posted: 25th Jan 2007 06:27
my favorite gametype would be a MMORPFPS, but there has yet to be one made


forum.thegamecreators.com/?m=forum_view&t=78971&b=8&p=0
forum.thegamecreators.com/?m=forum_view&t=91115&b=32
Chris K
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 7th Oct 2003
Location: Lake Hylia
Posted: 25th Jan 2007 13:03 Edited at: 25th Jan 2007 13:03
In order, I would look for - intensity, writing, storyline, graphics, music.

I absolutely hate using the term 'gameplay'. What the hell is that suppose to mean? It's like saying 'bookread'. I doesn't mean anything. 'Gameplay' would be the whole game. It can be applied sensibly to the tiniest minority of games - basically arcade games. It is completely defunct nowadays - the medium has moved on too far.

How do you quantify the 'gameplay' of Day of The Tentacle or Oblivion. Meaningless.

-= Out here in the fields, I fight for my meals =-
Fallout
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 1st Sep 2002
Location: Basingstoke, England
Posted: 25th Jan 2007 13:44 Edited at: 25th Jan 2007 13:45
I think "gameplay" is a great term and easily defined, imo. It basically means "how you interact with the game elements". So good gameplay means "good, interesting interaction with game elements" and bad gameplay means "tedious interaction with game elements". I think that still applies through the entire spectrum of games, personally.


Benjamin
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 24th Nov 2002
Location: France
Posted: 25th Jan 2007 14:31 Edited at: 25th Jan 2007 14:37
Quote: "writing"

You like games with lots of writing on the screen?

Oh and I agree with Fallout. So does Wikipedia - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gameplay.

Tempest - P2P UDP Multiplayer Plugin (DBP/DBCe)
Download the free version
x1b
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 19th Sep 2004
Location:
Posted: 25th Jan 2007 14:59 Edited at: 25th Jan 2007 16:30
Disregard him, kris. He has some alien strain of burgers and tourrets or it's one of those parasites mentioned in another thread.

I like a good story line but also open ended games. Never cared for being forced to follow a static story line. Oblivion is good about that.

Chris K
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 7th Oct 2003
Location: Lake Hylia
Posted: 25th Jan 2007 15:17 Edited at: 25th Jan 2007 15:18
Good writing as in interesting, well written dialog. Like - "Six Feet Under has got good writing".

Hilarious as that was, here is the actual Gameplay definition from Wikipedia:

Quote: "Generally, the term "gameplay" in video game terminology is used to describe the overall experience of playing the game excluding the factors of graphics, sound, and the storyline."


So it just means "game".
Is AI part of Gameplay? It's clearly completely vague.

People just use it to mean "Is this game fun" - but since games have started giving us experiences more varied than 'fun', it doesn't really apply. Like MGS's button bashing torture scene. It is tedious and uninteresting (from and interaction point of view), and definitely not fun - but it is very tense and gripping.

I thought that scene was good - but it wasn't due (primarily) to the Graphics, Sound or Storyline... so is that 'good gameplay'? Whacking X? If not, why is that scene a good scene in a video game?

I know what people mean when they say it, but I don't see the point in separating off as a factor to compare against other, smaller contributing factors.

We don't do it with any other mediums... "The soundtrack was a bit crap and the cinematography was rubbish but it had good Filmwatch". Good gameplay means, "Good game", bad gameplay means "Bad game".


I'm sorry I'm finding it really hard to explain it properly...

-----------

Holy poo I just read the rest of the Wikipedia article and I says exactly the same as me!! I swear I didn't write it, or read it before I posted! Really weird... even says "Bookread" and "Moviewatch"! Pretty freaked out now....

Any way, yeah, go read that because it explains what I mean a lot better.

-= Out here in the fields, I fight for my meals =-
Benjamin
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 24th Nov 2002
Location: France
Posted: 25th Jan 2007 17:34
Quote: "He has some alien strain of burgers and tourrets or it's one of those parasites mentioned in another thread."

I don't think it's good to make fun of other peoples' problems.

Tempest - P2P UDP Multiplayer Plugin (DBP/DBCe)
Download the free version
Fallout
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 1st Sep 2002
Location: Basingstoke, England
Posted: 25th Jan 2007 17:41
I see where you're coming from, but it depends on your definition of the word. If you have a poor definition, it'll be a poor word. If you have a good definition, it'll be a good word. Obviously a lot of places define it in a vague way and therefore it's very vague to talk about gameplay in that sense.

All I know is, when I was doing my dissertation and researching into game design methodologies and the dreaded "design document" that game companies put together, "Gameplay" was a word used quite a lot. It also have a fair few alternatives ... I can't remember what they were now, but some companies/approaches used terms like "game mechanics".

Despite what the title was, they all have details on everything the player does to interact with the world, and everything that game does to interact with the player. That includes AI on a high level - i.e. when the player clicks on unit A and then clicks a ground location (in an RTS), the AI will automatically move the unit to that location. That's a gameplay element. The actual pathfinding algorithm is an AI subject, but its nothing to do with gameplay.

So, to me, gameplay means any interaction the player makes with the game and its elements and any interaction the game makes with the player as a result of that. Same for the professionals that use that term, but for the professionals that don't, they'd probably side with you.


Kohaku
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd May 2004
Location: The not very United Kingdom
Posted: 25th Jan 2007 17:42
I mostly look for Bans head so that I can pop it.

Often though, I like choice and freedom. Just like in ghost.. And the Elder Scrolls.


You are not alone.
lava man
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 19th Jan 2007
Location: west allis wisconsin
Posted: 26th Jan 2007 00:47
I like halo 1&2 because the storline and gamplay
tie in together.
and the character's are interesting and
it keeps you interestid. I mean even my dad
plays it for hours on end.

I use dbp and xna
LD52
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 31st Aug 2006
Location: Internet
Posted: 26th Jan 2007 05:00
Its been said before and the first is Gameplay... then i would say speed so the game loads fast ... decent graphics ... then an interesting storyline ... include sound ... and a nice menu.
One bonus that i like is that copy write symbol.. where is that copy right symbol its not on my keyboard i know it was there ... where is it ?? hmm whatever i guess like others said pack it with features, fun gameplay and atleast decent graphics to attract others then if you have time insert the copy right symbol somewhere maybe in a title or is a footer if you can find one on your keyboard because im out of luck its not on mine
Agent Dink
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 30th Mar 2004
Location:
Posted: 26th Jan 2007 05:32
The copyright symbol isn't on anyone's keyboard to my knowledge. You have to copy and paste it from Character Map in Windows.

Sometimes the only way over a wall is to pile up enough bodies to climb over - Dave W.
Jeku
Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Jul 2003
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Posted: 26th Jan 2007 09:25
A beautiful front end is the key to a great game. Period. That is of course my most biased opinion to date

Chris K
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 7th Oct 2003
Location: Lake Hylia
Posted: 26th Jan 2007 10:21
But sometimes, like in Madden on PSP, I find the front end totally ruins the game experience.

I really home someone got fired for that cock up.

-= Out here in the fields, I fight for my meals =-
Jeku
Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Jul 2003
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Posted: 26th Jan 2007 21:38
*cough*

Well, let's hope next year's Madden PSP front end improves by leaps and bounds--- as I'm sure it will. In fact they should all get raises to further their cause.

Seppuku Arts
Moderator
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 18th Aug 2004
Location: Cambridgeshire, England
Posted: 26th Jan 2007 22:15
Quote: "Well, let's hope next year's Madden PSP front end improves by leaps and bounds--- as I'm sure it will."

Don't delude yourself Jeku, EA and all of its employees can't do anything right and are terrible at what they do.

Just pulling on your tail dude *Ducks for the flying chair*


I find that a lot of games have lost their direction in what makes a good computer game. My favourite genre is adventure or good RPGs and sometimes fun/puzzle games.

The most important aspects are:

-Good Gameplay
-Flow/Presentation
-Plot (If it's genre requires it)
-A sense of realism, without going over the top with technology and compromising everything else.
-A sense of style.

Graphics and technology isn't important, I tend to play these sort of games to appreciate the power as a 3D modeller and indie game developer, like Doom 3 for instance, its good for the horror aspect, the technology there does it great justice for that, but an elongated horror like that, needs the other aspects of a game to work IMO.

However, games that have achieved my criteria, is the first two monkey island games, Push Over (This game was quite simple), Final Fantasy 6,7,8 and 9, Zelda, the Prince of Persia lot, Call of Duty 2 and the first two Broken Sword games and others. And these of course are loved games and I certainly love them, they're awesome games

Click Me! Dolphins aren't Mammals, they're lizards.
lava man
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 19th Jan 2007
Location: west allis wisconsin
Posted: 26th Jan 2007 23:48 Edited at: 26th Jan 2007 23:54
Quote: "Prince of Persia lot, Call of Duty 2"

yeah I like thos games and also fable is
pretty cool to

and you guys have been alot of help thanks.

I use dbp and xna
SunnyKatt
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 16th Sep 2006
Location: USA
Posted: 27th Jan 2007 01:54
What i look for in a great game

an open-ended world
i hate games where you have your set storyline, and you cant do whatever or go back or explore. because of an open ended world, i love love love oblivion

everything else was already said.

IM NEVER ONLINE TILL SOMETIME AT NIGHT!!! god dont expect me to be sitting at my computer all the time
LD52
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 31st Aug 2006
Location: Internet
Posted: 27th Jan 2007 02:44
Quote: "The copyright symbol isn't on anyone's keyboard to my knowledge. You have to copy and paste it from Character Map in Windows."


Oh ya Silly me i thought i got mixed up.
lava man
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 19th Jan 2007
Location: west allis wisconsin
Posted: 27th Jan 2007 03:14
Quote: "What i look for in a great game

an open-ended world"


yeah I no what you mean I like to play
mercenaries playground of destruction on the xbox
you can explore anyware you want you can put c-4
on cars you you can drive tanks cars trucks helicopters
you you should really check it out.

I use dbp and xna
Deadly Shadow
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Dec 2004
Location: Oklahoma , USA
Posted: 27th Jan 2007 22:25
Graphics r #1 issue for me, they have to kick ass

Don't tell me what to do. Thats My job.
Matt Rock
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th Mar 2005
Location: Binghamton NY USA
Posted: 27th Jan 2007 23:58
Quote: "But sometimes, like in Madden on PSP, I find the front end totally ruins the game experience.
"

Yeah, I wonder who pulled off that catastrophe? I found myself buring my head in the cat box in the hopes of wiping out that aweful design from the cockles of my memory. Utterly disasterous design!
(kidding!)

Anyway, isn't this more of a design question? Almost like it has something to do with the theory of a game's design? I'm wondering why there isn't a forum for topics just like this

In my own opinion, a lack of realism is the number 1 cause of death amongst games. Usually this only applies to FPS games but I've seen it make its way into other genres as well. A great example of a realistic game, to me anyway, is the Rainbow Six series, especially Rogue Spear and RS3. If you get shot in the leg, you should limp. If you get shot in the arm, your reticule should be harder to train on a target. But nothing is ever perfect... for instance, in Rainbow Six, why don't you need to lead your target? Even Battlefield 1942 makes you lead your target! A great example of a game that should be realistic but couldn't be farther from being so would be Fight Night Round 3. The team behind that game seems to have this idea that boxing is all about beating the living daylights out of your opponent, and that shows me that the people responsible for designing that game clearly have absolutely no respect for the sport, nor do they know anything about it. Most boxing matches don't end in a knockout, they end on the scorecards. And rarely will you see two fighters covered in blood from head-to-toe, and FNR3 borders on dousing the fighters in brain matter five rounds into a fight. The game doesn't realistically capture boxing in the slightest. If they spent less time on trying to pretty the game up and make it bloody and horrific, and instead spent most of their time actually watching boxing matches and listening to fans of the sport (you know... doing their homework), then the end result would have been a fantastic game. Instead, each Fight Night is remarkably worse than the game that came before it. Anyway, that game infuriates me from a lack of realism (or sincerity on the part of the dev team). In some cases, realism is vital to a game's success, and if you don't even make the slightest effort toward capturing even the most minute amount of realism or detail, in a game where realism should matter, then you definitely won't see me lining up for the sequel. But I guess most people don't care about realism, if they did, I wouldn't have a reason to complain, lol.


"In an interstellar burst, I'm back to save the universe"
El Goorf
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 17th Sep 2006
Location: Uni: Manchester, Home: Dunstable
Posted: 28th Jan 2007 00:27 Edited at: 28th Jan 2007 00:28
i like the game to not be similar to a game i've played before. the game also needs to have a multiplayer option with an online community, so im not limmitted to only being able to play against friends.

the game itself needs to not be repetative. for example, if its an mmorpg, it needs to not just have the same style quest over and over again, for example world of warcraft:

"collect 20 tusks"
"collect 30 zevrah hooves"
etc etc

the game also needs to also be constantly keeping the player on the edge of a knife, progressing as the player gets mroe options available, but the game progresses at the same time by the player having to be more selective about what he does yuse from whats available. an example of this would be tower defense on warcraft 3

thats all i can be btohered to type for now, or else i'd be here all night...
Jeku
Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Jul 2003
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Posted: 28th Jan 2007 01:12 Edited at: 28th Jan 2007 01:13
Good luck making a boxing game that is 100% realistic and having the same amount of people feel like buying it. If the game had no blood and every match ended decided with just a score, then it would not sell as many copies. If the game looked as good as FNR3 (which you have to admit looked great) then you wouldn't be able to make back the money spent creating the game. Sorry

Just look at the Rocky franchise. The boxing in those movies are horrible --- nobody blocks, yet it's a blockbuster and academy award winner.

Matt Rock
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th Mar 2005
Location: Binghamton NY USA
Posted: 28th Jan 2007 02:03
All I'm asking for is that the same research, care, and admiration for the sport be put into making the Fight Night games as EA has put into the other games in their Sports lineup. FIFA is a fantastic football/ soccer series of games. The players are realistically attributed, the gameplay mechanics are realistic, and there are multiple levels of play to the game. You aren't just controlling the players on the pitch... before and after each game, you're plotting out viable transfer deals, negotiating loans and sales with other teams, dealing with injured players, plotting out your starting lineup while organizing your substitutes and reserves... and it all happens in realistic seasons based on a calendar that could very well be a real one. FIFA is a great example of a realistic sports game, and the people behind that should be applauded for the research and planning that has gone into that game. Fight Night is a farce, and I've never once met a serious boxing fan who thought differently.

They don't need to take all of the blood out to make it a far superior game... just a lot of it. There's literally millions of boxing fans around the world, and I'm positive there's a market for a proper, realistic boxing game... no one has tried to make one yet, and that's really the only problem. A rundown of things they could have (and should have) done better:

* The scoring system is autrocious in the FN series. In real boxing, each fighter starts out with 10 points per round (in a 10-point must match, which the FN series attempts to use). If one fighter dominates the other but doesn't knock them down, the dominant fighter keeps 10 points, and the lesser fighter gets 9. If a fighter is knocked down, they're score is reduced to 8. If they get knocked down twice, it goes down to 7. If a fighter is knocked down three times in a round (and that match is not using the 3-knock down rule wherein if a fighter is knocked down three times it becomes a technical knockout), then there score becomes 6, and it continues down to 1 (although I've never seen a fighter get a score of less than 4 and live to tell about it). This is a basic, universally-known scoring system that the Fight Night crew either refused to implement, or didn't know enough about the sport to implement.

* They should have (and could have) made it harder to knock down an opponent. Even on the highest level of difficulty, I have to work pretty hard to finish a fight without knocking out my opponent.

* A realistic scheduling system would make the game 5,000 times better. The game shouldn't choose who I fight... I should. I should have a manager and an agent advise me on who I should fight and why, but in this game, you end up with a small handful of potential opponents which is extremely un-realistic. On that note --

* A realistic ladder system. If I start out at the bottom of the ladder I should have to work like hell to get to the top and become the champion, and then I should have to work to stay on top. Round 2 did this exceptionally well, but they obliterated that feature in Round 3. Why? Also, in Round 2 (the better of the two games), you couldn't select who you wanted to fight (which brings me back to the previous problem I have with the series). It limits you to a set range of fighters, and then it limits you further to fighters the game selects. You can choose a fighter to challenge from that very limited range of fighters, and in real life, that doesn't happen.

* The option to hire and fire an actual corner crew. You should get to hire a trainer, a cutman, an agent, and a manager... in the very least. And there needs to be a far better selection than two or three people for each. One trainer is good for speed, another is good for strength, the third is bad at both... that is one of the laziest systems I've ever seen in a sports game.

I could go on and on for hours, days, maybe even months, about all of the things they could have done to make the game more realistic and thus appealing to both serious boxing fans and people who just want to beat on other people. I don't think it's too much to ask for that the people behind Fight Night work toward making it a proper simulation, and put as much work into it as the FIFA or Madden teams do.


"In an interstellar burst, I'm back to save the universe"
Jeku
Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Jul 2003
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Posted: 28th Jan 2007 03:45
Perhaps they're not intending Fight Night to be a "proper simulation"? Did you think of that?

As a common layman, I enjoyed FNR3 on the 360--- it looks and feels amazing. The slow motion punches, etc. It didn't jump out at me as *that* unrealistic (and yes my dad's side of the family are boxing nuts so I've seen my fair share of fights).

Hobgoblin Lord
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 29th Oct 2005
Location: Fall River, MA USA
Posted: 28th Jan 2007 04:02
Matt

Yeah you could choose a manager like Don King who gets you nobodies to fight then since he manages the current champ he gets you a quick shot at the title, but you get less money

Would be kind of cool if some mob guys came your way and wanted to pay you to take a dive. I was thinking of some really new ideas for a boxing game before, but scrapped it since the modelling and animation is out of my league.

Matt Rock
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th Mar 2005
Location: Binghamton NY USA
Posted: 28th Jan 2007 17:50 Edited at: 28th Jan 2007 17:54
I've been working on the design of a proper boxing simulator, almost entirely because Fight Night had let me down so much. I'm not rushing it, I want to take my time and make sure I get it as perfect as I possibly can before I make an attempt towards developing it, but so far (on paper anyway) it's shaping up rather nicely. You'll have to hire managers, agents, cutmen, trainers, and publicists, and each has a unique set of no less than five statistics (some have as many as ten), which effect their performance in various ways. Your fighter has twenty three statistics ranging from the basic stuff like stamina and toughness to the more complex stuff, like footwork speed (I'm looking to expand the statistics for even more realism, but for now, 23 is seemingly enough). You'll spend roughly 50% of your time fighting, 15% of your time training and teaching your fighter new combinations by working the speed bag and heavy bag, and the other 35% of your time will be spent dealing with your staff, setting up fight contracts, etc. You'll have the option to fight every single day (at the dramatic, exaustive expense of your stats), or fight once a year, or work it out however you want. And your personal life (home life) will have a serious effect on your fighting as well, although I'm still working out the kinks there. And I did include mafioso-types in the game too . You could slip into obscurity and become known as a guy who throws fights on purpose, and when you're still an unknown fighter, you might end up angering some very hostile people with the decisions you make. I know it won't sell even half as many copies as any of the FN games has, but I'm willing to bet that if this game turns out even remotely like I'm planning and designing it, it's definitely going to turn some heads . The only problem I can even see with making this game is licensing... it wouldn't feature any real fighters, and if it does, they won't be notable ones like Manny Pacquiao, Floyd Mayweather, Roy Jones, or James Toney... EA has deals with the biggest fighters in the world, deals I could never, ever get. But this game isn't designed for people who play their "career" with Ali or Frazier, it's designed for the players who create their own characters and take serious interest in their development, so I guess it won't be too much of a problem (or at least I hope it won't).

Even if they didn't intend it to be a proper simulation like the game I'm designing, they still should have taken the time to learn some of the basics of the sport. The scoring and scheduling were my biggest problems with the FN series... if they had taken some time and put some care into those primary issues, they wouldn't have forced my hand . And of course, when I make this game, I'm going to do everything I can to call out EA and say "this is the game you should have made," because in boxing, the underdog is always supposed to be loud, rowdy, and vocally claim dominance (even when their opponent is seemingly undefeatable). Float like a butterfly, sting like a bee! Rumble, young man rumble!

Edit: We should combine our ideas and maximize this game's coolness . We've worked together in the past and I have a bunch of 3D modelers sitting around with nothing to do, so this might be a decent project to get people working on.


"In an interstellar burst, I'm back to save the universe"
Code Dragon
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 21st Aug 2006
Location: Everywhere
Posted: 28th Jan 2007 18:26 Edited at: 28th Jan 2007 18:29
Quote: "Gameplay is the product and graphics are the marketting, in my opinion."


So true. I tend to not buy games with high end graphics because they usually didn't spend much time on the gameplay. I don't care about graphics at all, if the game isn't fun it's not worth playing. Some high end grahpics are so real it can make you feel motion sickness. If you want good graphics, go outside and tell your friends "Hey! This is really good graphics". What you don't want is game is a simlutation of real life, because we already have that, don't we? I can't see why telling people to go to school in the Sims is fun for some people.

Keyboard not found. Press F1 to continue.
Seppuku Arts
Moderator
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 18th Aug 2004
Location: Cambridgeshire, England
Posted: 28th Jan 2007 18:28
Quote: "Just look at the Rocky franchise. The boxing in those movies are horrible --- nobody blocks, yet it's a blockbuster and academy award winner."


Much agreed, but I myself don't like the Rocky movies, I think Cinderalla man and Million Dollar Baby are much more realistic, Rocky seems to be so much 'I'm the best boxer there ever was and look at my mean moves'. The other two have more realistic moves and ways of boxing and are able to use the drama so much better to capture the realism more. Cinderella Man was the best, you didn't know whether or not he was going to die, or come out clean, probably because it was based on a true story that I didn't know about, as heroes can be made in death or in victory (as his last opponent had that reputation), which made it work that much better.

Anyway, back on topic.

Click Me! Dolphins aren't Mammals, they're lizards.
Matt Rock
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th Mar 2005
Location: Binghamton NY USA
Posted: 28th Jan 2007 19:49
Raging Bull, that was a good one too Boxing movies seem to always win awards easier than other sports movies, I've always wondered why that is. Probably because the viewer only has one athlete to focus their attention on.


"In an interstellar burst, I'm back to save the universe"
Jeku
Moderator
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Jul 2003
Location: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Posted: 28th Jan 2007 21:12
Quote: "they still should have taken the time to learn some of the basics of the sport"


Maybe I'm in a really negative mood now, but I wish you'd stop pretending you know how the producers and designers created these games. You are making over-generalizations about what *you* think they did (i.e. didn't do their homework, etc.), when you honestly have no idea. Proper game cycles have periods of planning that can last for months, so for you to waltz in and say the designers don't know the basics of the sport is insulting to them.

Basically, anyone can be a backseat game designer with their dime-a-dozen ideas on why a game could be better

</rant>

Seppuku Arts
Moderator
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 18th Aug 2004
Location: Cambridgeshire, England
Posted: 28th Jan 2007 21:34
Quote: "Boxing movies seem to always win awards easier than other sports movies, I've always wondered why that is. Probably because the viewer only has one athlete to focus their attention on."

Haven't seen Raging Bull

Boxing movies do, but other sports aren't that far behind, I know Karate Kid didn't quite work, but Coach Carter is an amazing movie and Dodgeball is just legendary and Bend it like Beckham was actually quite surprisingly, good, and not because it's got Keira Knightly in it either. But Baseball movies don't quite hit it for me, the only movie I think I've seen and liked with baseball in it, was Hook and the small bits of baseball, weren't the reasons I liked it .

I do suppose there is a ditto to Jeku, although I would have worded it differently, I mean it's actually a rare occasion when someone agrees with Matt instead of contradicting him , but I think I'll give you a back rub, might calm those nerves a bit

Quote: "Basically, anyone can be a backseat game designer with their dime-a-dozen ideas on why a game could be better"


Then there are the few that actually get something in the end...That would not include me, I'd be a terrible game maker, probably not interested in it enough to keep up with it all. I have a lot of good ideas, but it would actually take a lot to get them done and I can see how it would be difficult for a game company to create games that are clean as a whistle. I'm sure with any game you can pick up the bad points and good points.

Although, I doubt I should no, but it seems to me from working with indie game and 3d modelling projects, I think it is safe to say, a good plan is what makes the game work. (As every unplanned/badly planned project I've worked on/with has failed )

Click Me! Dolphins aren't Mammals, they're lizards.
Matt Rock
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 5th Mar 2005
Location: Binghamton NY USA
Posted: 28th Jan 2007 22:42
I'm sorry Jeku, but I definitely need to disagree here. I can see them having a logical reason for dismissing a proper ladder/ rank system, but scoring? The scoring is fundamental to boxing, regardless of what level of realism the designer is trying to achieve. It's a fatal error. I'm not intending to come across as a "backseat designer" and these definitely aren't "dime a dozen" ideas... these are elementary basics of the sport. It can easily be equated to a soccer game not having offsides and not using corners or goal kicks. If this is insulting to the designers who worked on the FN series, then please do me a favor and when you go into work on monday, direct them to this thread, then feel free to give them my e-mail address, because I'd love to know what credentials they had for making a boxing game. I mean seriously, I don't know anything about American Football... I wouldn't try to make a game about it. I know it sounds crass and rude, and I know I'm only a *lowly* indie developer, but I mean seriously, the scoring system is just as insulting to anyone who respects the sport, and I can't think of a single reason as to why they'd cheapen the scoring system when it's pretty darn simple to implement from every level of development. I know you're defending your company here, and that's totally understandable, but try to understand that I'm definitely not being hostile toward any other EA Sports games... they're all great, but Fight Night was a major let-down, and you must at least be able to admit an error on their part in terms of the scoring system being so distant from any degree of accuracy.


"In an interstellar burst, I'm back to save the universe"

Login to post a reply

Server time is: 2024-11-18 05:38:23
Your offset time is: 2024-11-18 05:38:23