No Depth! No Difficulty! Graphics Only!

Modern Gaming! (Not final destination yet).

Look at almost any modern game. The game focuses on graphics, tech, etc. but lacks any gameplay depth at all. The only reason to replay the game is to attain extra achievements, or to grind extra levels, which is what passes for "depth" in today's games. There is no attempt to find a better way to get through a section of the game, because there is only one "correct" way to play the entire game, and it is made very obvious. And for difficulty, developers have substituted long winded cutscenes that cannot be skipped and add nothing to the game. Alternatively, they put an obstacle in front of you that you have no method of getting past without memorizing the solution through trial and error or reading the guide. Often, they put a long, unskippable cutscene right before it to pad out the games length, as the number of hours a game takes is far more important than the quality of a game.

I can think of only three modern games that have both depth and a default difficulty level that is harder than "walkover". All three of them were bashed for being too hard and too short, because the developers didn't just let you win and focused on adding depth rather than making a shallow game with tons of padding. But it seems that most people can't realize depth when its given to them and only care about quick and easy rewards. They instead want more bredth, and would much rather have a game with 20 different weapons that can actually be considered 2 due to the number that are actually useful, with 50 stages that all consist solely of just killing everything from start to finish, than one that has 5 weapons, each with many different availible attacks that can be combined in many ways, with no specific combination being right or wrong,and 10 stages with greatly vary objectives. As for diffculty, cakewalk is a must, as anything in which the player is at risk of dying if they're doing anything other atrocious play is too hard. When are we going to see an actual game come out rather than an interactive movie?

Bioshock 2, L4D, ME2, and a BUNCH of wii games. In short, gaming still has some heart.

Yay memes!

There are plenty of difficult games:

-Demon's Souls
-Cursed Mountain
-Killzone 2
-Ninja Gaiden Sigma 1 and 2
-Stalker

etc

You state a bold generalization, but that's what it is, a generalization.

What three games did you even want to mention?

Also, if you want more challenge, play the games on a harder difficulty setting.

depends on the games you buy. for example shooters are probably the least developed genre this generation. It takes almost no effort to make a shooter game and the vast majority of people who buy these games have no experience outside of shooters (i'm talking to you call of duty, gears of war, resistance 2, counter strike, and just about any other shooter developed by EA, Activision and any other company that takes pride in a game that sells well rather than a game you can be proud of because you worked so hard to make it).

i agree, i have been saying this for a very long time, modern gamers have horrible standards. They buy any BS that companies throw at us. The fact that no one cares about game quality gives devs the incentive that they can continue throwing junk at us. Gaming isnt what it used to be. im going to throw all the credibility i have here, and blame the whole thing on Halo. Yeah you heard me. Halo killed gaming. Halo was easy, no depth, and graphics only (at the time it was released.). Now were infested with all these little children playing "hardcore: games or uneducated people with a sick blood lust playing games like GTA because it has gangs, drugs, sex and so on. Average Americans man wth?!?!?! sry wnet on a rant forget anything u just read :P

There are plenty of difficult games:

-Demon's Souls
-Cursed Mountain
-Killzone 2
-Ninja Gaiden Sigma 1 and 2
-Stalker

juden41

Thats the problem, a game is labeled as difficult if it doesn't completely help you out these days.

i agree, i have been saying this for a very long time, modern gamers have horrible standards. They buy any BS that companies throw at us. The fact that no one cares about game quality gives devs the incentive that they can continue throwing junk at us. Gaming isnt what it used to be. im going to throw all the credibility i have here, and blame the whole thing on Halo. Yeah you heard me. Halo killed gaming. Halo was easy, no depth, and graphics only (at the time it was released.). Now were infested with all these little children playing "hardcore: games or uneducated people with a sick blood lust playing games like GTA because it has gangs, drugs, sex and so on. Average Americans man wth?!?!?! sry wnet on a rant forget anything u just read :P

painguy1

Many games lack depth... but most games have difficulty to them... thats why "difficulty levels" exist. So if you are a better gamer, then you can still give yourself a challenge.

Games back in the day, were difficult because of poor game design... and they were usually really short, so to make up for a lack of content, they were made difficult to make you need to play it longer to complete it.

Gaming is in a better place now imo. I wouldn't go back even if I could.

Games back in the day, were difficult because of poor game design

moistsandwich

That's a stereotype, only a few games have been difficult because of glitches/poor game design.

Oblivion, Fallout 3, GTA 4, Bioshock, Mass Effect, Lost Odyssey, Dead Rising, Dragon Age, MGS4, Fable 2.....

[QUOTE="painguy1"]

i agree, i have been saying this for a very long time, modern gamers have horrible standards. They buy any BS that companies throw at us. The fact that no one cares about game quality gives devs the incentive that they can continue throwing junk at us. Gaming isnt what it used to be. im going to throw all the credibility i have here, and blame the whole thing on Halo. Yeah you heard me. Halo killed gaming. Halo was easy, no depth, and graphics only (at the time it was released.). Now were infested with all these little children playing "hardcore: games or uneducated people with a sick blood lust playing games like GTA because it has gangs, drugs, sex and so on. Average Americans man wth?!?!?! sry wnet on a rant forget anything u just read :P

millerlight89

lol yeah im basically a halo hater. dont mind me :P im just trollin along

[QUOTE="moistsandwich"]

Games back in the day, were difficult because of poor game design

Yandere

That's a stereotype, only a few games have been difficult because of glitches/poor game design.

poor game design was far more common than good game design. I lived it... i know the truth.

[QUOTE="Yandere"]

[QUOTE="moistsandwich"]

Games back in the day, were difficult because of poor game design

moistsandwich

That's a stereotype, only a few games have been difficult because of glitches/poor game design.

poor game design was far more common than good game design. I lived it... i know the truth.

[QUOTE="moistsandwich"]

[QUOTE="Yandere"]

That's a stereotype, only a few games have been difficult because of glitches/poor game design.

millerlight89

poor game design was far more common than good game design. I lived it... i know the truth.

If you lived it, then you would know it IS true.

[QUOTE="millerlight89"][QUOTE="moistsandwich"]

poor game design was far more common than good game design. I lived it... i know the truth.

moistsandwich

If you lived it, then you would know it IS true.

Then you must have played shovelware or you never played games.

Not that many people like hard games, thus there aren't as many hard games. Free market at work.

[QUOTE="moistsandwich"]

[QUOTE="millerlight89"] If you lived it then you would know that is not true.Yandere

If you lived it, then you would know it IS true.

Then you must have played shovelware or you never played games.

Theres plenty of depth to todays games. Nostalgia doesnt really help anyone...alextherussian

When someone likes old games they have nostalgia? News to me.

Ninja Gaiden Black disagrees with you.

[QUOTE="alextherussian"]Theres plenty of depth to todays games. Nostalgia doesnt really help anyone...Yandere

When someone likes old games they have nostalgia? News to me.

I'm sure it is.

People are oft blinded by nostalgia... many people that frequent these forums in fact.

[QUOTE="alextherussian"]Theres plenty of depth to todays games. Nostalgia doesnt really help anyone...Yandere

When someone likes old games they have nostalgia? News to me.

[QUOTE="Yandere"]

[QUOTE="alextherussian"]Theres plenty of depth to todays games. Nostalgia doesnt really help anyone...alextherussian

When someone likes old games they have nostalgia? News to me.

While I can't say if Dune 2 is deep or not many old games are a lot deeper than current generation games.. Nethack and Starfleet: The War Begins, Unnatural Selection, etc.

I agree with TC mostly. That is the abundance of games being released this gen. (FF 13 ring any bells). However I am excited about the future as many developers are becoming comfortable with this new tech and can start making more "gameplay substance" and less time on pretty CG movies.

That's not always true. Final Fantasy XIII, as much hate as it gets, is actually more difficult than most of it's predecessors.

[QUOTE="Yandere"]

[QUOTE="moistsandwich"]

Games back in the day, were difficult because of poor game design

moistsandwich

That's a stereotype, only a few games have been difficult because of glitches/poor game design.

poor game design was far more common than good game design. I lived it... i know the truth.

[QUOTE="moistsandwich"]

[QUOTE="Yandere"]

That's a stereotype, only a few games have been difficult because of glitches/poor game design.

SteveTabernacle

poor game design was far more common than good game design. I lived it... i know the truth.

True, but I feel your only touching on a few outcomes from "back then". I found most games on the PS2 to have an adequate difficulty level with many offering that "hard" mode if you so wanted it. Many games are genuinely difficult without being too cheap on the player. That being said, it's all opinion at this point.

I've actually been thinking about this lately while plaing Dragon Age first play through on Nightmare. The game forces you to use cheap tatics ie.. hit and run on regular mobs. Also Ninja Gaiden 2 had the worst difficulty scaling I've ever seen in a game and yes I beat it. Bioshock and Deadspace had good scaling not once did I have to resort to some cheap trick just to get threw a stage. In all I think it comes down to the developer some got it some don't. Ona side note older games where hard because you could not save not because they had more depth. Play old school Ninja Gaiden on a emulator with save states and it doesnt seem so intimadating.

There is validity to what the TC is saying. Unfortunately people just want to be stimulated rather than challenged. bobaban

well we can start with the beginning, when challenge was simply stuff like pong - re: competing with another human to win, that challenge is always fun

then came game designers who wanted to challenge the player against a scripted sequence so that arcades could fill up with more games that eat up more quarters, that's where high scores came and suddenly difficulty = longevity

then came consoles, and slowly over time scores eroded into levels, suddenly it wasn't about skill alone but progression, at the same time came continues and then limited continues to keep a player on their toes and require skill despite it not being about a high score

then came memory cards, which nullified the point of limited continues, instead now games were soley about progression, now games had to be literally longer and more content for perceived value to exist

in order for gamers to value the content provided, they had to have fun with the gameplay, but in order for that content to come at a steady pace to ensure length, there had to be a challenge

then came online multiplayer, and things have come full-circle, people play against other humans for a challenge, and now single player is relegated to mostly-fun progression story-based scripted sequences, where designers have to ensure gamers have fun for them to view all the content so they get the perceived value

that's where we are today basically, technology is the real instigator in why games are easier nowadays

I can't say I particularly care. If I have fun with a game, it doesn't really matter how difficult or how much depth it has. If I derive entertainment from a game, so be it. I honestly do not see the fascination in keeping gaming a closed, tight knit circle that only a few gamers can try because they want hard games or games with an incredible amount of depth. Just play the game and enjoy it. If others play it for different reasons, they do. Why does it bother one so much?

[QUOTE="moistsandwich"]

Games back in the day, were difficult because of poor game design

Yandere

That's a stereotype, only a few games have been difficult because of glitches/poor game design.

This may often be true of mainstream games but there are many instances in which it is certainly not true, including MANY in the mainstream. See Super Mario Galaxy, generally called the best game of the generation by critics. IT has very nice graphics for Wii, very colorful and pretty with a nice art direction. But why is it a good game? It's certainly not because of the graphics! If that was why Banjo & Kazooie: Nuts and Bolts would be the best platformer this generation, but it's not even considered CLOSE to such a title, not with Super Mario Galaxy, LittleBigPlanet, New Super Mario Bros. Wii, and some others exist. It's great because of excellent game design and because it manages a decent difficulty curve that will have some very challenged, and the ones who find it easy can take on the challenge modes. Beyond beating the game there are STILL 40-60 (can't remember which) stars to be collected, many with new twists, and then you unlock Luigi to play the levels as. This is called depth, a game you an beat and still have things to do. A different type of this would be Demon's Souls, Gamespot's Game of the Year. The graphics were beautiful and created an amazing atmosphere, but was this why it was praised? Definitely not, if graphics were what won last year Uncharted 2 would've won as it was expected to. It was the innovative DEEP, DIFFICULT, game design that made it a success. The game allows infinite New Game +s (to my knowledge), has many things to collect, and has an absurdly high level cap. Plus you can interact with others. Then there are side quests, many well concealed, as well as the simple fact that there are so many different ways to take on the challenge this game provides, and you'll get a very different experience (switch between Thief, Magician, and Knight, the game will feel VERY different). That's a game that is great because of its depth and difficulty. Even games in the mainstream like Call of Duty MW 2, which while, IMO, having ugly graphics, sell like "hot cakes lodged in copies of an unreleased Harry Potter book set during Hermione's bicurious phase." Why? The mainstream gamer finds the instant gratification, quick learning curve, and all around fun of the game appealing. Now I personally don't like Call of Duty, but do you think people like it because of graphics? No, they like the shooting. If it was graphics they all wanted they'd be trying to play Crysis, but they are totally happy buying a new CoD game every year because they find them fun. Mainstreamers like Halo because of the fun multiplayer, which while many would pass off as boring and stupid, to anyone really playing it, they'd have fun with how customizable games really are in MP. I'm not a big FPS fan at all, I only play Valve games and Killzone 2 (not so much KZ2, mostly TF2) consistently, but I find the multiplayer to be very fun, off or online. It has huge open maps and a lot of fun ways to customize matches, right down to the gravity level. This is why people like it, not because of its graphics, God no the graphics in Halo 3 are by no means good. Simply, this is not true. There are some games I would argue are all flash no substance, but these games often aren't received very well. Crysis is largely graphics, but the Nanosuit provides a decent sense of innovation and depth, so while the game may feel a bit generic, it has other things going for it. Shattered Horizon is generally said to have amazing graphics, but critically it was not well received, getting only a 72 on Metacritic. So obviously Crysis has something to make it stand out and get an average AAAE score. I don't think it's that great a game, I've tried playing it without the good graphics to say if that was all that was good, but it isn't 100% graphics. And thus begins me posting on here. Hi!KRaDOSIV

I think you said it perfectly. Welcome to Gamespot and System Wars. You'll do fine here.

One thing i've noticeed about games of recent that they dont have puzzle elements as often as they use too.Dibdibdobdobo

if anyone can name a pre 2000 game with more depth than the stalker game's you can have a cookie. depth started with deus ex.TheMistique

Elder Scrolls II daggerfall,Fallout 1,Fallout 2,FFVII,FFVIII,Gran Turismo(was really deep for its time).Those are a few FO games were far more deep than the more recent FO3 by a country mile imo.

[QUOTE="Yandere"]

[QUOTE="moistsandwich"]

Games back in the day, were difficult because of poor game design

moistsandwich

That's a stereotype, only a few games have been difficult because of glitches/poor game design.

poor game design was far more common than good game design. I lived it... i know the truth.

[QUOTE="Yandere"]

[QUOTE="moistsandwich"]

Games back in the day, were difficult because of poor game design

dog_dirt

That's a stereotype, only a few games have been difficult because of glitches/poor game design.

My words exactly.

[QUOTE="dog_dirt"][QUOTE="Yandere"]

That's a stereotype, only a few games have been difficult because of glitches/poor game design.

wackapacka

My words exactly.

[QUOTE="wackapacka"]

[QUOTE="dog_dirt"] but surely its also a stereotype to say all modern games are too easy with no challenge. delta3074

My words exactly.

Agreed with dog_dirt on the stereotyping. And for delta3074 and all the old skool gamers, do you like elements like checkpoints?

[QUOTE="Dibdibdobdobo"]One thing i've noticeed about games of recent that they dont have puzzle elements as often as they use too.dog_dirt