Officially overwhelmed

SEANMCAD

6 years ago I was very frustrated and bored with video games lack of depth and lack of variety. Now I am officially overwhelmed with depth, variety and quantity (and yes quality).

I predict a change is coming in the video game market and I am not sure what that change will be. I think we are coming close to a 'ok cool now what?' moment and its frankly going to be even more exciting then before but it still leaves unanswered questions.

What are the concrete examples to make what I am saying more clear? ok please understand my citation of games is NOT an advertisement, its purely the honest representation that I have to give to make the above comments more clear.

Last weekend 7 days to die had a massive update, they installed electricity which had pressure plates, switches, generators, traps. They also added a HUGE number of POIs and many of them considerably large, adding yet again hours of compelling and deep content to an already rich game play experience. Ok, fine...well you point?

Last night I saw that Imperium Galactic Survival did the same thing about 2 months ago. Stranded Deep just added severe weather.
and finally I just saw this asset pack on the Unity Store that is basically 100% of what you need for a survial building game.
https://www.assetstore.unity3d.com/en/#!/content/80368

Content like that (my asset example) in a game 6 years ago would have been a major game changer to the industry and would have opened up many gamers eyes (such as myself) as to what can truely happen in a video game. Now, 6 years later, its an asset pack for pretty much anyone to use.

We are now at a point in video games (in my believe) where we have too MUCH good, deep  and compelling content and for a developer to be innovative we now have to step outside of the standard 'survial building, fly to other planets' model but where do you go when your game is basically a simulator of everything? where you do go when there are 20 games that are a simulation of everything? I dont know, maybe its not a simulation of everything, if not what is missing?

Octagon7711

So far the only change I've seen that I really like is a free play period with a game.  Being allowed to D/L and play a complete version of the game with the only restriction being time.  Game access ends after two or three hours which usually allows you to play one fifth or one fourth of the game to see if you like it.  I wish more games did this.

There are so many games out there now that I don't just buy them to see if I like them anymore.  So the next step for me is no more pay to try games.  Let me have hands on first.

SEANMCAD

Octagon7711 said:

So far the only change I've seen that I really like is a free play period with a game.  Being allowed to D/L and play a complete version of the game with the only restriction being time.  Game access ends after two or three hours which usually allows you to play one fifth or one fourth of the game to see if you like it.  I wish more games did this.

There are so many games out there now that I don't just buy them to see if I like them anymore.  So the next step for me is no more pay to try games.  Let me have hands on first.

interesting.

I find the change from a game play feature set of lets say something like EQ2 to the feature set of something like lets say Imperium Galactic Survival to be huge and extremely appealing. 
You have no interest in building or crafting in your games?

cameltosis

So, the major trends that I have noticed over the last, say, 10 years:

1) Mid-level devs have died out

You used to have indie, then mid-level, then large / AAA. The most successful AAA companies made so much money that they've bought out most of the mid-levels and are buying out the successful indies. This has left a big gap in the market. 

2) Digital Distribution

This has made a monumental shift in the landscape of the games industry. Without the need to print cds, manufacture boxes, ship to retailers, store in warehouses etc, the cost of distributing a standard game has dropped dramatically, as has the ease of purchase. 

3) More free tools and assets

Game developers have always been a rare breed, but with the explosion of the games industry the situation has become worse. Weirdly, The Big Bang Theory has contributed towards this in a big way (look at uni applications since release - comp sci has massively declined whilst physics has shot up). To try to combat this, companies have been making their tools and assets free / cheap to use in an effort to get more devs into the industry. 

4) Stagnation at the top

This happens with any successful art form. Once the investment required to produce something reaches a certain point, risk must be avoided at all costs. We've seen significant stagnation at the top of the market across all genres. 

5) Rise of the indie

A natural result of points 1-4, the indie scene has exploded. The overwhelming majority is utter garbage, but some gems have surfaced. 

6) Monetisation

A combination of stagnation at the top, combined with a global market, has seen a need to change the way the games industry is monetised in the west. We now have a much more eastern approach to monetisation (f2p / microtransactions / lockboxes etc) combined with alternate ways to fund indie titles. 



In terms of actual gameplay, there are no trends that I can spot, just natural evolutions of what was already there. I don't see the indie scene really doing anything particularly innovative - sure, they are getting deeper and more complex which is great, but nothing truly outstanding. 

My predictions on where the industry goes next:


1) Continued stagnation at the top

Without the mid-level devs, stagnation will continue. Indies will continue to push the envelope of features, but without the quality of finish or the money for marketing it is hard to make the big devs take note. It used to be that indies experimented, mid-levels then took the ideas further and proved genuine market need, then big devs pushed them mainstream. That flow of ideas is broken. 

2) A few indies will inspire

I think a few ideas that indie devs come up with will manage to take off big, resulting in AAA's taking up the reins. I don't know where it will come from, I think crafting is probably too niche for AAAs to take on but I suspect that physics / creation / destruction will start becoming a bigger thing soon. I also expect the indie scene to invent a new sub-genre that will be the next big thing (like mobas are now). My suspicion is it'll be PvP flavoured

3) MMOs will have a resurgence

It feels like the industry has been slowly pushing the console crowd towards the potential of MMOs. We have a few actual MMOs (ESO, FF etc), but more importantly, we have games like Destiny, The Division that are multiplayer online. I think we'll see a new form of MMO appear on consoles in the next 10 years (by MMO, I mean supporting 500+ in the same virtual environment, and no, I don't care what your definition might be, this is my prediction!). 

My expectation is that the new form of MMO will be along the lines of CoD or Battlefield, just supporting massive amounts of players. So, MMOBAs :P I then think we'll be followed by MMORPG versions of popular console IPs like Assassins Creed and Gears of War. 

4) A game to end all games

At some point, one of the AAA developers is going to attempt "the game to end all games". They'll invest 1-2 billion into making it. It'll be an MMO. It'll be huge. It'll cover a ridiculous array of features. It will be impossible to complete due to the size of the game. It will mix all the best bits of sandbox and themepark features in an attempt to please as many people as possible. 

My suspicion is that it'll be GTA-esque in style (fun, modern day), but with so many more features to keep us all happy. The crafters will have a crazy complex system that will supply everything we need - from designing clothes and setting up shops, to build cars, mining and processing raw materials, building whole new roads, villages, towns and cities. Hell, even building airports and planes. Racers can race, fighters can fight, socialisers can do their thing. 

If they pull it off, then the sort of stories we hear coming out of EvE will be common place. We'll have daily news updates on mainstream media about political shifts, reports on ongoing conflicts etc. 

If they don't pull it off, the attempt will be applauded but other AAAs will be discouraged, resulting in further stagnation at the top. 

5) New input devices

As you know Sean, I view VR as a gimmick and I fully expect this to be born out in the market over the next few years. That is simply because of the disconnect between vision and movement. 

So, I predict the invention of new input devices - something that can accurately translate my real world movements into the game, as well as feeding back game data to my body. If / when this happens, that is when VR will take off. Now, this may come in the form of some sort of wearable exo-skeleton, or maybe some sort of neural interface, or something I can't even imagine. 

SEANMCAD

cameltosis said:

the vast majority of all your bullet points is not related to actual game play but instead everything around the actual game play.

 My post is about actual game play, as in features inside the game, what can your character do , not do, can he/she build, craft, explore, build a ship and fly it off the planet. not what is the charging methods.

 And on that point I would LOVE it if you addressed points like that, which for those who are familar with the games I gave as an example would be able to tell that is what I was on to.

 That is a very long way of me basically metahphorically asking you this: 'dont you like to build anything in your games or do you think its better to not have such features'?

I should point out however the two basic difference between your observation and mine.

Yours: business practices and a lot of disappointment.
Mine: game play and a lot of optimism 

Hawkaya399

SEANMCAD said:

6 years ago I was very frustrated and bored with video games lack of depth and lack of variety. Now I am officially overwhelmed with depth, variety and quantity (and yes quality).

*snip*

Content like that (my asset example) in a game 6 years ago would have been a major game changer to the industry and would have opened up many gamers eyes (such as myself) as to what can truely happen in a video game. Now, 6 years later, its an asset pack for pretty much anyone to use.

We are now at a point in video games (in my believe) where we have too MUCH good, deep  and compelling content and for a developer to be innovative we now have to step outside of the standard 'survial building, fly to other planets' model but where do you go when your game is basically a simulator of everything? where you do go when there are 20 games that are a simulation of everything? I dont know, maybe its not a simulation of everything, if not what is missing?

To be curt, it seems like you're saying games are near perfect and you don't know how htey can improve? And you're tired of this situation.

I think you're burnt out. That's my impression.

Speaking as a programmer, I think we're far, FAR from simulating everything. And that's assuming you want to, since probably none do. Simulating everything is unnecessary and would break any Earthly budget. When they do simulate, most AAA games use kid gloves and apply so many restrictions it's not emergent anymore. The major reasons are to guarantee quality testing and entertainment for players. But for those of us who want adversity and more emergence, indie is the only way to go. It's a compromise, since with Indie there's generally less talent and money.

SEANMCAD

Hawkaya399 said:

SEANMCAD said:

6 years ago I was very frustrated and bored with video games lack of depth and lack of variety. Now I am officially overwhelmed with depth, variety and quantity (and yes quality).

*snip*

Content like that (my asset example) in a game 6 years ago would have been a major game changer to the industry and would have opened up many gamers eyes (such as myself) as to what can truely happen in a video game. Now, 6 years later, its an asset pack for pretty much anyone to use.

We are now at a point in video games (in my believe) where we have too MUCH good, deep  and compelling content and for a developer to be innovative we now have to step outside of the standard 'survial building, fly to other planets' model but where do you go when your game is basically a simulator of everything? where you do go when there are 20 games that are a simulation of everything? I dont know, maybe its not a simulation of everything, if not what is missing?

I think your problem isn't with games or MMO's being perfect, but simulations in general. I think you're discovering you don't like them and you thought you did. It's always a surprise when our internal model of ourselves conflicts with actual reality.

I think you must have massively misread what i said.

I think games right now are the best they have ever been in human history. maybe I am not following you

Kyleran

SEANMCAD said:

Hawkaya399 said:

SEANMCAD said:

6 years ago I was very frustrated and bored with video games lack of depth and lack of variety. Now I am officially overwhelmed with depth, variety and quantity (and yes quality).

*snip*

Content like that (my asset example) in a game 6 years ago would have been a major game changer to the industry and would have opened up many gamers eyes (such as myself) as to what can truely happen in a video game. Now, 6 years later, its an asset pack for pretty much anyone to use.

We are now at a point in video games (in my believe) where we have too MUCH good, deep  and compelling content and for a developer to be innovative we now have to step outside of the standard 'survial building, fly to other planets' model but where do you go when your game is basically a simulator of everything? where you do go when there are 20 games that are a simulation of everything? I dont know, maybe its not a simulation of everything, if not what is missing?

I think your problem isn't with games or MMO's being perfect, but simulations in general. I think you're discovering you don't like them and you thought you did. It's always a surprise when our internal model of ourselves conflicts with actual reality.

I think you must have massively misread what i said.

I think games right now are the best they have ever been in human history. maybe I am not following you

See, I'm not the only person who has trouble understanding what points you are trying to make.  

Kyleran

SEANMCAD said:

cameltosis said:

the vast majority of all your bullet points is not related to actual game play but instead everything around the actual game play.

 My post is about actual game play, as in features inside the game, what can your character do , not do, can he/she build, craft, explore, build a ship and fly it off the planet. not what is the charging methods.

 That is a very long way of me basically metahphorically asking you this: 'dont you like to build anything in your games or do you think its better to not have such features'?
 

Better not to have such features.  I, like most others like to kill stuff, over and over again.

As long as games provide this they will always be popular.

Scorchien

SEANMCAD said:

Octagon7711 said:

So far the only change I've seen that I really like is a free play period with a game.  Being allowed to D/L and play a complete version of the game with the only restriction being time.  Game access ends after two or three hours which usually allows you to play one fifth or one fourth of the game to see if you like it.  I wish more games did this.

There are so many games out there now that I don't just buy them to see if I like them anymore.  So the next step for me is no more pay to try games.  Let me have hands on first.

interesting.

I find the change from a game play feature set of lets say something like EQ2 to the feature set of something like lets say Imperium Galactic Survival to be huge and extremely appealing. 
You have no interest in building or crafting in your games?

  well these games have always been here like Dwarf Fortress for ex. the only advances are graphics , animations, physics , But building games have always been here , DF is still far deeper than 7Days , and dont get me wrong love 7Days been playing it for 2 years ,along with Stranded ,The Forest ,Novus Inceptio etc..(which may be the deepest of the bunch altho still rough)  But it doesnt make sense to compare the feature lists to EQ2 , they are completly different games ...

Octagon7711

SEANMCAD said:

Octagon7711 said:

So far the only change I've seen that I really like is a free play period with a game.  Being allowed to D/L and play a complete version of the game with the only restriction being time.  Game access ends after two or three hours which usually allows you to play one fifth or one fourth of the game to see if you like it.  I wish more games did this.

There are so many games out there now that I don't just buy them to see if I like them anymore.  So the next step for me is no more pay to try games.  Let me have hands on first.

interesting.

I find the change from a game play feature set of lets say something like EQ2 to the feature set of something like lets say Imperium Galactic Survival to be huge and extremely appealing. 
You have no interest in building or crafting in your games?

My interests are exploration and questing.

cameltosis

SEANMCAD said:

6 years ago I was very frustrated and bored with video games lack of depth and lack of variety. Now I am officially overwhelmed with depth, variety and quantity (and yes quality).

I predict a change is coming in the video game market and I am not sure what that change will be. I think we are coming close to a 'ok cool now what?' moment and its frankly going to be even more exciting then before but it still leaves unanswered questions.

From your OP, you talked about a change coming to the market. You then talked about big releases and updates and loads of new content. Definitely seemed like you were talking about the market in general, and not about specific changes in gameplay. 

SEANMCAD said:

cameltosis said:

the vast majority of all your bullet points is not related to actual game play but instead everything around the actual game play.

 My post is about actual game play, as in features inside the game, what can your character do , not do, can he/she build, craft, explore, build a ship and fly it off the planet. not what is the charging methods.

 And on that point I would LOVE it if you addressed points like that, which for those who are familar with the games I gave as an example would be able to tell that is what I was on to.

 That is a very long way of me basically metahphorically asking you this: 'dont you like to build anything in your games or do you think its better to not have such features'?

I should point out however the two basic difference between your observation and mine.

Yours: business practices and a lot of disappointment.
Mine: game play and a lot of optimism 

I didn't see any optimism in your OP! You talked about how great the current crop of games are, but that you were worried for the future because you couldn't see how they could get better. 

Anyway, to reply specifically about trends I have spotted in gameplay (even though I did include that in my post):

• I haven't seen anything particularly new or special come along in years
• Crafting in some specialist games is indeed getting deeper / more complex. 
• In general, all I'm seeing is your standard evolution of features that have existed for years. I see no reason why that evolution would suddenly stop, so I expect crafting to continue to get deeper/more complex, just as I expect graphics to continue to improve, physics to get more realistic, stories to get longer/more involved, animations to get more realistic. 

There are a few gameplay changes that I think we'll start to see in the MMO world over the next 5 years:

• Massively-multiplayer - I think Camelot Unchained has the potential to change the way we view MMOs. It will pretty much be the first game designed around being actually massively-multiplayer. My hope is that they get the tech right and the 500+ player battles will be astonishing to witness and participate in. This in turn will hopefully start inspiring other developers to finally leverage the power of the genre. We'll see everything from 1000 player FPS games like CoD, 500+ player maps in survival games, as well as traditional MMORPGs that can finally support loads of people playing together at once. 
• Collision Detection - This is something that has never been leveraged to it's full potential. With ever improving tech, I'm sure we're reaching the point where this is possible to implement well. Doing so then starts to open up new ways of designing content. 
• Persistent, player altered worlds - whether it be player cities in SWG, minecraft servers, EQN or the CUBE system, we slowly seem to be moving towards a point where MMOs can support meaningful alterations of the worlds we inhabit. I think we'll see more and more games where the players can genuinely change the world they are in. 

As to whether I want to build things in my games or not: entirely depends on how the building is done. 

I absolutely love Cities: Skylines and Prison Architect. That sort of building is immensely satisfying. You get the creative part - trying to make things look pretty - combined with the functional part - does my city / prison operate properly. 

I absolutely hate crafting as usually implemented in MMOs. Gathering materials is boring, the actual crafting process is boring. The only vaguely enjoyable part is selling your items for a profit, but I've never been motivated by money. Even SWG I found too tedious to be able to enjoy crafting. 

Kerbal Space Program was somewhere in the middle. I appreciated the depth and complexity but the precision required removed a lot of the potential creative expression. So after 15-20 hours of gameplay, I got bored and quit. I would have preferred that it was less simulation and more arcadey, so that not only did I have to make functioning space ships, I could have made them look cool too. (I'm the same with driving games - I prefer arcade style, like burnout, or middle-of-the-road like GRiD, to sim racers). 


In general though, I'd rather focus my gameplay time on combat, exploration and socialising. However, if you look through my post history, I am a massive fan of having proper player economies where everything we use is crafted and nothing is looted. Whilst I am not a fan of crafting myself as I find the actual activities boring, I do believe that full player economies are a great feature to have and are much more preferable to loot-based games.

SEANMCAD

so to be clear (because this will be extreemly helpful in my understanding) some here are saying that they do not like to build structures or craft or explore but rather they like to limited their gaming expereince to killing and questing and leveling up.

Which is perfectly fine but it leaves me with a second question, why so many OPs expressing frustration with the gaming market? I think the gaming market today is better than its ever been in the history of mankind. I doubt most posters on MMORPG who enjoy the style of gaming as they have described can say they are even pleased with the gaming market let alone say its the best or one of the best eras ever

SEANMCAD

Scorchien said:

SEANMCAD said:

Octagon7711 said:

So far the only change I've seen that I really like is a free play period with a game.  Being allowed to D/L and play a complete version of the game with the only restriction being time.  Game access ends after two or three hours which usually allows you to play one fifth or one fourth of the game to see if you like it.  I wish more games did this.

There are so many games out there now that I don't just buy them to see if I like them anymore.  So the next step for me is no more pay to try games.  Let me have hands on first.

interesting.

I find the change from a game play feature set of lets say something like EQ2 to the feature set of something like lets say Imperium Galactic Survival to be huge and extremely appealing. 
You have no interest in building or crafting in your games?

  well these games have always been here like Dwarf Fortress for ex. the only advances are graphics , animations, physics , But building games have always been here , DF is still far deeper than 7Days , and dont get me wrong love 7Days been playing it for 2 years ,along with Stranded ,The Forest ,Novus Inceptio etc..(which may be the deepest of the bunch altho still rough)  But it doesnt make sense to compare the feature lists to EQ2 , they are completly different games ...

ok I am sorry but I can not even begin to understand why one would consider a gaming experience like that in Imperium Galactic Survival would be similar to that of Dwarf Fortress.

yes...to your point...there have also always been rather deep and compelling text based adventure games to but to compare a text based deep experience with lets say Skyim is kinda missing the illustration

SEANMCAD

cameltosis said:

I didn't see any optimism in your OP! 

just so you know I usually stop reading when i see something like this so often your writting things to me in great length I am not even reading because I am kinda getting tired of the bullshit

its the best gaming era in the history of mankind, no time ever has it been better than now and by a very large margin. 

just to be clear given you misunderstanding of the OP.

laserit

SEANMCAD said:

so to be clear (because this will be extreemly helpful in my understanding) some here are saying that they do not like to build structures or craft or explore but rather they like to limited their gaming expereince to killing and questing and leveling up.

Which is perfectly fine but it leaves me with a second question, why so many OPs expressing frustration with the gaming market? I think the gaming market today is better than its ever been in the history of mankind. I doubt most posters on MMORPG who enjoy the style of gaming as they have described can say they are even pleased with the gaming market let alone say its the best or one of the best eras ever

The take that I get from reading many of the posters from this site, is....

They are not happy with the *MMORPG* market. Personally my biggest gripe with the *MMORPG* market is the new age business model and how the *MMORPG* games are designed around it.

SEANMCAD

laserit said:

SEANMCAD said:

so to be clear (because this will be extreemly helpful in my understanding) some here are saying that they do not like to build structures or craft or explore but rather they like to limited their gaming expereince to killing and questing and leveling up.

Which is perfectly fine but it leaves me with a second question, why so many OPs expressing frustration with the gaming market? I think the gaming market today is better than its ever been in the history of mankind. I doubt most posters on MMORPG who enjoy the style of gaming as they have described can say they are even pleased with the gaming market let alone say its the best or one of the best eras ever

The take that I get from reading many of the posters from this site, is....

They are not happy with the *MMORPG* market. Personally my biggest gripe with the *MMORPG* market is the new age business model and how the *MMORPG* games are designed around it.

fair enough however the game play they seem to enjoy is what the MMORPG market is, so its a bit confusing.

I mean are they upset that the games dont have enough mob killing, quest building and leveling? that doesnt seem to a be a problem in the MMORPG market

Galadourn

SEANMCAD said:

I dont know, maybe its not a simulation of everything, if not what is missing?

The GAME part is missing; developers and players alike got infatuated with the advances in technology and the realism it could provide, and forgot the most important parameter of video games, which is .... the 'being fun' part. Realism does not necessarily equal fun, in fact it can have quite the opposite effect.

SEANMCAD

Galadourn said:

SEANMCAD said:

I dont know, maybe its not a simulation of everything, if not what is missing?

The GAME part is missing; developers and players alike got infatuated with the advances in technology and the realism it could provide, and forgot the most important parameter of video games, which is .... the 'being fun' part. Realism does not necessarily equal fun, in fact it can have quite the opposite effect.

we are at a level of this conversation where we should be talking more concretely.

Look at it from my side, people are saying they LIKE the specific elements of game play that are prevalant in MMORPGs but that the are frustrated with MMORPGs. help me understand beyond 'fun'. the actions and activities and how you interact with the game are exactly as they described they like. Please explain how they are not.

because to be clear, I too became disapointed with MMORPGs but it appears its for COMPLETLY different reasons, like zero intersection

cameltosis

SEANMCAD said:

cameltosis said:

I didn't see any optimism in your OP! 

just so you know I usually stop reading when i see something like this so often your writting things to me in great length I am not even reading because I am kinda getting tired of the bullshit

its the best gaming era in the history of mankind, no time ever has it been better than now and by a very large margin. 

just to be clear given you misunderstanding of the OP.

Do you ever take a step back and think "you know what, just about everybody on these forums manages to misunderstand what I'm posting, I wonder if perhaps I suck at explaining myself?". 

Because seriously, it's like every freaking time. You're very knowledgeable about the indie market and crafting games, but your poor explanations and overly defensive attitude makes it seriously difficult for anyone here to have a civil conversation with you. 

Back on point:

Optimism: hopefulness and confidence about the future or the success of something.

Your post:

SEANMCAD said:

We are now at a point in video games (in my believe) where we have too MUCH good, deep  and compelling content and for a developer to be innovative we now have to step outside of the standard 'survial building, fly to other planets' model but where do you go when your game is basically a simulator of everything? where you do go when there are 20 games that are a simulation of everything? I dont know, maybe its not a simulation of everything, if not what is missing?

I acknowledge that you're happy about the CURRENT state of gaming. Good for you. Optimism is about looking to the future, yet in the paragraph quoted you raise serious doubts about the future. That is not optimism. 

If you were optimistic, you would have written something alone the lines of "I can't wait to see what new innovations are coming", not "its going to be really hard to innovate". 

Can you see the difference?


Perhaps I'm being too harsh on you. Maybe English isn't your first language, in which case your inability to convey your opinions is more understandable. 

SEANMCAD said:

so to be clear (because this will be extreemly helpful in my understanding) some here are saying that they do not like to build structures or craft or explore but rather they like to limited their gaming expereince to killing and questing and leveling up.

Which is perfectly fine but it leaves me with a second question, why so many OPs expressing frustration with the gaming market? I think the gaming market today is better than its ever been in the history of mankind. I doubt most posters on MMORPG who enjoy the style of gaming as they have described can say they are even pleased with the gaming market let alone say its the best or one of the best eras ever

See, here is another example of your snide attitude. You are automatically assuming that because somebody doesn't like crafting, it means they have a limited gaming experience. Have you considered that maybe it's not that they don't like crafting, just that they don't like the current implementations of crafting? We all have likes and dislikes, that is human nature, so it makes sense that we would focus our leisure time on things we do like, whilst avoiding things we don't. 


As to the second part, it's down to a lack of innovation in general, combined with a narrowing of scope. Some scenes or genres are definitely experiencing a bit of a golden era. The indie scene is the best it's ever been, so if you are into indie games, great. Same thing with MOBAs, FPSes and survival games. Loads of new games coming out all the time. 

If you are into different genres, such as MMOs or RPGs, you're shit out of luck. Not only are we not getting many games in total, the innovation is lacking and the scope is narrowing. Proper MMOs are a dying breed with the western market pretty much giving up on them. RPGs also suck in the modern age, we're generally restricted to shitty ARPGs or RPGs that focus far too much on story and virtually nothing else. 





 

SEANMCAD

cameltosis said:

for the second time, you are wasting your time with me.

YOU I dont really want to engage with. You can change that but are doing a horrible job at it

 

Thoth_Moshe

Overwhelmed with tree punching simulators.  Quality my ass

SEANMCAD

Thoth_Moshe said:

Overwhelmed with tree punching simulators.  Quality my ass

thats pretty funny but from what I see the alternative is even worse then that. How many decades can the 'mainstream' keep creating the exact same limited game play game with a different title and keep you excited? well from your post it appears longer then I had assumed

How is that quest trail going for you?

Scorchien

SEANMCAD said:

Scorchien said:

SEANMCAD said:

Octagon7711 said:

So far the only change I've seen that I really like is a free play period with a game.  Being allowed to D/L and play a complete version of the game with the only restriction being time.  Game access ends after two or three hours which usually allows you to play one fifth or one fourth of the game to see if you like it.  I wish more games did this.

There are so many games out there now that I don't just buy them to see if I like them anymore.  So the next step for me is no more pay to try games.  Let me have hands on first.

interesting.

I find the change from a game play feature set of lets say something like EQ2 to the feature set of something like lets say Imperium Galactic Survival to be huge and extremely appealing. 
You have no interest in building or crafting in your games?

  well these games have always been here like Dwarf Fortress for ex. the only advances are graphics , animations, physics , But building games have always been here , DF is still far deeper than 7Days , and dont get me wrong love 7Days been playing it for 2 years ,along with Stranded ,The Forest ,Novus Inceptio etc..(which may be the deepest of the bunch altho still rough)  But it doesnt make sense to compare the feature lists to EQ2 , they are completly different games ...

ok I am sorry but I can not even begin to understand why one would consider a gaming experience like that in Imperium Galactic Survival would be similar to that of Dwarf Fortress.

yes...to your point...there have also always been rather deep and compelling text based adventure games to but to compare a text based deep experience with lets say Skyim is kinda missing the illustration

said the guy who compared EQ2 feature list to 7days to Die ... go figure

SEANMCAD

Scorchien said:

SEANMCAD said:

Scorchien said:

SEANMCAD said:

Octagon7711 said:

So far the only change I've seen that I really like is a free play period with a game.  Being allowed to D/L and play a complete version of the game with the only restriction being time.  Game access ends after two or three hours which usually allows you to play one fifth or one fourth of the game to see if you like it.  I wish more games did this.

There are so many games out there now that I don't just buy them to see if I like them anymore.  So the next step for me is no more pay to try games.  Let me have hands on first.

interesting.

I find the change from a game play feature set of lets say something like EQ2 to the feature set of something like lets say Imperium Galactic Survival to be huge and extremely appealing. 
You have no interest in building or crafting in your games?

  well these games have always been here like Dwarf Fortress for ex. the only advances are graphics , animations, physics , But building games have always been here , DF is still far deeper than 7Days , and dont get me wrong love 7Days been playing it for 2 years ,along with Stranded ,The Forest ,Novus Inceptio etc..(which may be the deepest of the bunch altho still rough)  But it doesnt make sense to compare the feature lists to EQ2 , they are completly different games ...

ok I am sorry but I can not even begin to understand why one would consider a gaming experience like that in Imperium Galactic Survival would be similar to that of Dwarf Fortress.

yes...to your point...there have also always been rather deep and compelling text based adventure games to but to compare a text based deep experience with lets say Skyim is kinda missing the illustration

said the guy who compared EQ2 feature list to 7days to Die ... go figure

sorry I dont follow what you mean

Scorchien

SEANMCAD said:

Scorchien said:

SEANMCAD said:

Scorchien said:

SEANMCAD said:

Octagon7711 said:

So far the only change I've seen that I really like is a free play period with a game.  Being allowed to D/L and play a complete version of the game with the only restriction being time.  Game access ends after two or three hours which usually allows you to play one fifth or one fourth of the game to see if you like it.  I wish more games did this.

There are so many games out there now that I don't just buy them to see if I like them anymore.  So the next step for me is no more pay to try games.  Let me have hands on first.

interesting.

I find the change from a game play feature set of lets say something like EQ2 to the feature set of something like lets say Imperium Galactic Survival to be huge and extremely appealing. 
You have no interest in building or crafting in your games?

  well these games have always been here like Dwarf Fortress for ex. the only advances are graphics , animations, physics , But building games have always been here , DF is still far deeper than 7Days , and dont get me wrong love 7Days been playing it for 2 years ,along with Stranded ,The Forest ,Novus Inceptio etc..(which may be the deepest of the bunch altho still rough)  But it doesnt make sense to compare the feature lists to EQ2 , they are completly different games ...

ok I am sorry but I can not even begin to understand why one would consider a gaming experience like that in Imperium Galactic Survival would be similar to that of Dwarf Fortress.

yes...to your point...there have also always been rather deep and compelling text based adventure games to but to compare a text based deep experience with lets say Skyim is kinda missing the illustration

said the guy who compared EQ2 feature list to 7days to Die ... go figure

sorry I dont follow what you mean

lmao .. go figure ...........i suspect you wouldnt