Sick to Death of "Streamlined" Games!

Why do publishers insist on making their games more "streamlined" in order to make the more "accessible"? Personally I'm pointing the finger at Bioware and Lionshead for their efforts in Mass Effect 2 and the Fable sequels. I liked the amount of skill choice in Mass Effect, so why did they scale it back to 4 skills for lesser characters in ME2? Ditto for Fable.

Whats so good about making games for the idiot masses? If they didn't like the original, tough cookies. I did, and I'm the one who will buy them, so how about making a sequel for me? I liked the sequels actually (in fact ME2 is my favourite game of all time, for everything it was barring the RPG elements) but I would have liked them more if they RPG elements were more complex. So come on game developers, how about you reward my loyalty to your brand buy not forgetting me when you're slapping your cames together.

What are some other sequels that developers have dumbed down fore every other idiot out there?

Let's say we both played a game called Robodonkeyblaster. You enjoyed it. I didn't.

Now let's say we hear Robodonkeyblaster II is coming out. Since you enjoyed the first Robodonkeyblaster so much, your mind is already made up - you're buying Robodonkeyblaster II no matter what. You might even attend a midnight Robodonkeyblaster II launch party. But as for me? There's no way I'm buying Robodonkeyblaster II unless the developers have made significant improvements over the first Robodonkeyblaster.

If changes to the Robodonkeyblaster formula aren't made, only you are buying a copy of Robodonkeyblaster II. If changes ARE made, then both of us are buying copies. Unless you, the unabashed Robodonkeyblaster fan, are willing to purchase two copies of Robodonkeyblaster II, the developers would receive less revenue if they left the Robodonkeyblaster formula the same as it was in the first game.

Complex games that are too hard to get into are just as bad or even worse as "making them easier". And streamlining is a good thing. Being overwhelmed and not knowing what the hell anything means defeats the purpose of playing games. We want to HAVE FUN, not have to figure out for hours how things in the game work.

Perfect example is MS Flight Simulator Series. Now its MS Flight arcade shooter. They want to make games that are easy to learn so you get hooked easy

Perfect example is MS Flight Simulator Series. Now its MS Flight arcade shooter. They want to make games that are easy to learn so you get hooked easy

PANIC99

Flight Simulator, Combat Flight Simulator, IL-2 series, and even DCS: Black Shark have newbie-friendly settings. We don't know for sure yet just how arcadish MS Flight will be.

I have yet to play Fable 3 so I can't comment on that. However having playing ME1 to completion twice, and ME2 once (I'll get around to playing it again eventually), I can say I feel ME2 was a massive improvment overall from the first game. Streamlined doesn't mean dumbed down, they are in fact two different things. Streamlined means everything flows together natually, very few things pull you out of the experience or reminds you that you're playing a video game in a well streamlined game. Bioshock, Batman: Arkham Asylum, and Dead Space were VERY streamlined. They also happen to be 3 of my favorite games of this console generation.

That being said I do agree with the RPG elements on ME2. They wern't streamlined, they were stripped down. Which I found rather silly as that particular aspect of ME1 wasn't exactly hard to grasp. Marvel Ultimate Alliance 2, Enslaved, and Final Fantasy XIII are also examples of games that were stripped down in their own right as opposed to streamlined.

TLDR version: It's not streamlined games that are the problem. It's the games that treat you like you're a moron and you may hurt yourself if you don't wear a special padded helmet while playing the game that are the problem.

Let's say we both played a game called Robodonkeyblaster. You enjoyed it. I didn't.

Now let's say we hear Robodonkeyblaster II is coming out. Since you enjoyed the first Robodonkeyblaster so much, your mind is already made up - you're buying Robodonkeyblaster II no matter what. You might even attend a midnight Robodonkeyblaster II launch party. But as for me? There's no way I'm buying Robodonkeyblaster II unless the developers have made significant improvements over the first Robodonkeyblaster.

If changes to the Robodonkeyblaster formula aren't made, only you are buying a copy of Robodonkeyblaster II. If changes ARE made, then both of us are buying copies. Unless you, the unabashed Robodonkeyblaster fan, are willing to purchase two copies of Robodonkeyblaster II, the developers would receive less revenue if they left the Robodonkeyblaster formula the same as it was in the first game.

Oleg_Huzwog

It suck but most mainstream gamers including some that calls themselve hardcore gamers like simple to understand games.

dumb games sell better, since most people seem brain damaged when it comes to games, ask wow develoeprs

Perfect example is MS Flight Simulator Series. Now its MS Flight arcade shooter. They want to make games that are easy to learn so you get hooked easy

PANIC99

Let's say we both played a game called Robodonkeyblaster. You enjoyed it. I didn't.

Now let's say we hear Robodonkeyblaster II is coming out. Since you enjoyed the first Robodonkeyblaster so much, your mind is already made up - you're buying Robodonkeyblaster II no matter what. You might even attend a midnight Robodonkeyblaster II launch party. But as for me? There's no way I'm buying Robodonkeyblaster II unless the developers have made significant improvements over the first Robodonkeyblaster.

If changes to the Robodonkeyblaster formula aren't made, only you are buying a copy of Robodonkeyblaster II. If changes ARE made, then both of us are buying copies. Unless you, the unabashed Robodonkeyblaster fan, are willing to purchase two copies of Robodonkeyblaster II, the developers would receive less revenue if they left the Robodonkeyblaster formula the same as it was in the first game.

Oleg_Huzwog

Thats all well and good, but they should really be asking why you didn't buy Robodonkeyblaster, and then asking what I liked about it. I'm betting one of you're complaints wasn't that you had too much choice of weapons and skills, whereas one of my complaints about the sequel is that it didn't have enough of those two things. So have they actually fixed your problems, or just pretended to while changing what I liked?

Yeah, Lionshead really dumbed down the difficulty for Fable 3.. but I still enjoyed it regardless. Maybe in the next one they'll do better.

Or maybe they'll dumb it down some more. Thats my biggest fear.

Who cares aslong as the end result is still a good game?

There is no reward for loyality.One of the Bioware guys said:"Some will go,others will come".

The streamlining is cheaper.Less dialogue lines,less writing,less GUI tweaking.Cinematics are cheaper,than actuall gameplay.Less items in inventory,in general less customization is cheaper.

Add the general complaints of lots of gamers about reading the journal,or being penalised for not exploring.The inability to keep the game at the same level from start to the end,mostly because there is someone above to dictate deadlines,marketing strategies,and the aspect of the so called:"User oriented content creation".

The thing with the user oriented content creation gets picked by a guy that mostly knows about the gamers wishes,as much I know about American footbal,as European.Usually someone reads 10 complaints and does the math."Wait a minute they dont want to drive in our game and explore planets,so we save millions of polygons,"

OMG ME2 performs so much better-is what they get in return+Bioware is so awesome.After that one calculates the money they paid the poor sood to paint all those displacement maps for the planets in ME,and that`s just enough to do such thing on other elements too.

When streamlining happens in games that where problematic,inacsessive it makes sense in form of improving what was wrong.Usually the easy path,gains more money with less effort .The funny thing is that mostly the more streamlined games,are getting better scores with previewers,reviwers and good knows whom else.It might be the clash of generations,and the fact that every time I mention that I actually read the journal,someone calls me nuts.

On the other hand I completed the suicide mission,had my fishes and crew allive in my first playtruogh,and never touched the game again.

Admittedly the item system on ME1 was abysmal, but that could have been solved by sorting the items into groups better. Did they really need to throw the baby out with the bathwater by cutting weapons down to 2 or three for each class with no upgrades? Of course they didn't.

I think the streamlining of Fable 3 is overblown. Yes the game is easy, but that's a different issue. That has to do with having too much health and magic being overpowered, because the combat is virtually identical to the last game. But Fable 3 actually has more weapon options with unique abilites that open up with use, spellweaving to create various spell effects, and guns that have differents ranges, rates of fire and spray effects. The quests often involve some kind of decision making, which are not overly difficult moral choices but involve deeper decision making than any previous Fable has presented you with. You can no longer get someone to love you just by handing them a beer. Now you actually have to do things for them to secure their friendship and take them out on a date before you can start a relationship. I'm not trying to say any one of these elements sets any kind of a standard, but it is absolutely deeper than anything seen from previous Fable games. They also put a lot more thought into the questing and story. Yes it's a simple game, but no simpler than previous Fables, and I find it more enjoyable.

Admittedly the item system on ME1 was abysmal, but that could have been solved by sorting the items into groups better. Did they really need to throw the baby out with the bathwater by cutting weapons down to 2 or three for each class with no upgrades? Of course they didn't.

Misfire704

Fair point, but I think you're asking the wrong question. A better question would be were all the weapons and ammo and other things in ME1 even needed? I know well over half the items I found in ME1 I just sold as soon as I possibly could because they were useless. Not saying 3 choices per weapon type with no custromization was the right answer. I would of been far more forgiving of such limited weapon choices if I were able to customize all of them to some degree. But I would still take a small handful of useful weapons over a cluttered inventory full of junk I never use.

Complex games that are too hard to get into are just as bad or even worse as "making them easier". And streamlining is a good thing. Being overwhelmed and not knowing what the hell anything means defeats the purpose of playing games. We want to HAVE FUN, not have to figure out for hours how things in the game work.

speedfreak48t5p

Only if you're as dumb as a rock. Games that had sequels which suffered from "streamlining" have never been complicated in the first place. Take what BioWare is doing with DA2. They think adding a description that tells the player what attribute requirements for an ability are, and a description on what that ability does is too difficult for players and they have to "streamline" that. If someone can't figure out what a skill does in DA:O, then they're dumb like a bag of rocks.