I played the demo a couple of years ago and bought it when it came out. Definitely recommend it to anyone. I'd make a thread about it…...but I still haven't got around to actually completing it yet.
General Video Game Discussion
-
-
-
Now here is an interesting looking little indie game:
http://boingboing.net/2015/09/24/undertale-game.htmlNoted to be of interest to all Earthbound-lovers.
We've been on top of it in the "What Are You Playing?" thread to the point that the discussion got turned into a separate Undertale thread, haha.
Related: I enjoyed Giant Bomb's review of the game and kind of wanted to discuss on of its points.
If DIY darlings the Arcane Kids argue that “the purpose of gameplay is to hide secrets,” Undertale developer Toby Fox seems to shout a clarifying addendum: “But that doesn’t mean that players need to find them all!”
I really like this phrasing of the game's comment on completionism. In the era of achievements, completionism is motivated by a fundamental component of the game. I think this quote, and by extension Undertale, strikes at the heart of the problem with that. The desire to collect every experience from a game is destructive. Now I can't come down on anyone for playing a game the way they want to play it, but when a game turns into a checklist, marking off the last box ends the game. It is done. It has been consumed. And while that doesn't mean you'll never return to it, what is the nature of your intentions towards a game world that you treated in such a way?
At the same time, there is definitely a place for completion in gaming. I sit here on top of my Binding Of Isaac 110% completion and still play it. Because completion in that game extends it, I still play it a lot even though I've gotten every intangible reward out of it. Completion can sometimes deepen a game. Hell, to get the full scope of Undertale's criticism of completionism, you need to complete it 100%. The desire to complete can also come from an immense love of the game which promotes a desire to see it from all angles. There's a lot of positivity behind the instinct for completionism and, in many cases, its execution.
I guess the lesson to be taken from it is to be mindful of how to use that element in a game. I think the enforcement of achievements is something that needs to be reevaluated. I liked that the Steam version of Undertale didn't have any at all and I would like to see more games making that choice, especially in things like Telltale Games' work, where the achievements are all story progression and, thus, redundant. I think the same can go for the placement of unlockables behind hidden content, which are just as enforcing of completion as achievements are. Completion can be an important part of a gamer's experience, but it shouldn't be forced on everyone. One of the great joys of playing games is the potential for self-expression and achievements are a limitation on that.
Those are just some basic thoughts on completionism in games, but what I really want to hear are yours. By which I mean everyone's. What do you think of achievements, unlockables and the desire to find them all?
-
The "minimum requirements" on Metal Gear Solid V for the PC lists a processor that was released in May 2014. There are several similar power processors from 2013 that'd probably work fine, but that's… 2 years.
I know this is a pretty late response but I wanted an excuse to post this. It was only released 3 days ago anyway. Although the ground zeroes version was released ages as per the game. The channel is pretty fun.
The laptop used the footage for this video has the following specifications:
CPU: Dual-core 1.7 GHz Intel Core i5-3317U
RAM: 4 GB DDR3
VIDEO: Intel HD Graphics 4000All gameplay footage is taken using an external video capture device.
-
Sure, an older computer is fine is you're willing to spend several hours reprogramming the game just to make it run.
-
Those are just some basic thoughts on completionism in games, but what I really want to hear are yours. By which I mean everyone's. What do you think of achievements, unlockables and the desire to find them all?
I like achievements/trophies… when they're reasonable. When they encourage you to put an extra hour into the game doing something you might not otherwise, and see a bit more of the game. But when its a completionism thing that simply adds a solid extra 20 hours of collecting basically identical items or monsters in a beastiary... or its "do a near impossible super hard challenge after 50 hours in extremely hard mode", those suck... and kind of ruin the drive to do any of the others because you know you'll never do that or spend the time on it... so if you aren't, or can't, do all of them, that discourages even wanting to do most of them.
I loved Nino-Kuni, and though I platinumed it. I misjudged how long it would take to collect X monsters and recipes, and to level up and evolve certain monsters to get them to that count... and basically I got to the end of the game and then stopped for two weekends to waste time on it. (I thought it would be two hours maybe... it turned out to be more like 20... but by that point I was already invested into the completionism) and it ultimately tainted the game and made it so I don't really want to revisit it.
Meanwhile, take a game like Flower or Journey, and you can literally get 100% completion in one go if you try and you know where things are... and certainly within two or three plays if you don't, and just take your time. Its a deviation of a couple hours tops, and I wish it had more stuff... but it just encourages replay and exploration... rather than punishing you for not wasting days of time.
And screw any game that has a missable achievement or item that you only have one shot at in the course of a 50-100 hour game.
Pokemon passed the event horizon a few generations back. "Collecting them all" with the 150 is no longer a hobby that can be done in a reasonable amount with some trading, but an obsession that takes hundreds of hours and many many games to get the 750...complete with obscure item evolutions or endless internet trading which defeats the point almost entirely.
-
I've got a higher tolerance for collectibles than most these days, but I far and away prefer collectibles that actually do something or at least give some story/lore. Like the tapes or blueprints in Metal Gear Solid V.
-
Those are just some basic thoughts on completionism in games, but what I really want to hear are yours. By which I mean everyone's. What do you think of achievements, unlockables and the desire to find them all?
I actually was thinking about this a little bit a few days ago.
The thing is, when you stop and think about it, all video games are puzzles. Not just puzzle video games, but ALL games (unless you play against other people, in which case, yes, it really is more of a game). Basically, what you're doing with a video game is utilizing the controls to complete a challenge or obstacle that the game presents to you. By using the appropriate combinations of buttons and levers, you are, in a sense, "solving" and completing the game. And I think that factors a lot into the completionist mindset because what's a puzzle if it's not complete?
And I guess whether or not you're a "completionist" depends on how much that appeals to you personally? Me, I love puzzles. One of my fondest memories (maybe the only memory) of going to summer school one year is that I used to build 3D structures of famous landmarks made from foam puzzle pieces.
But, of course, video games aren't as simple as a jigsaw puzzle where it's pretty clearly defined when it's "complete." Is it complete when you've finished the main game, or is it complete when you've got all the extras? I suppose most "casual" gamers would be content with the former, but people with the completionist mindset want to get the whole experience and solve every "puzzle" the game has to offer them. And, yeah, that's generally how I am.
Now, of course, even I have my limits. I try to complete games in totality when I can, but if it includes doing something that will take hours and hours or will be really tedious, I generally won't do it. Or, of course, if the extra material proves too difficult or I've just had enough of the game and it's not really fun anymore, I'll probably end up calling it quits. But even still, I look back on a bunch of my old games sitting on my shelf and think "Man, I still need to finish this game."
-
Those are just some basic thoughts on completionism in games, but what I really want to hear are yours. By which I mean everyone's. What do you think of achievements, unlockables and the desire to find them all?
Interesting question.
Ever since I was a kid, the little lad that I was touching the controller of my mother's SNES and my own N64….I've always tried to do the "most" in a game. There's something appealing to me about seeing that 100% on a file label....I would wager it was because a) I wasn't a sport nut and b) I wasn't the social butterfly, so my real accomplishments came from grades and....well, video games. I know the two aren't super connected, but pushing for one always helped the other "c'mon, this test is easy! You beat Super Mario 64!"
As for collecting things.....some people dislike the games where you're gathering tons of stuff, because it feels like a slog and the more you put in, the less individual value it has, in a sense? Getting the red crystals doesn't seem so special when you have to collect blue, yellow, cyan, green, opal, etc.
Not for me. I LOVE collecting stuff. Physically having my character or whatever pick something up.....maybe it'll have use later. Maybe it's just cool to look at. Maybe something that's totally worthless, but oh man, was the experience getting to it…
I remember those long days playing Pokemon Yellow. Every item was in a ball sprite. Nowadays there's distinction between certain classes of items, but everything was a ball sprite. The card key. The TM you really wanted. Escape Rope to get the f**k out of Rock Tunnel. You never knew what until you picked it up. When I got stuck in Victory Road and wanted to turn the game off in frustration, seeing those things somewhere, pushed me on.
–-Anyways, let me jump back to the point----
Doing the most in a game gives me a strong sense of accomplishment because I feel validated in searching around and doing everything, collecting literally everything I was see. It may or may not have value, but there's always something to be had when you search and explore that hidden place.
....sadly, nowadays I tend to take on more than I can handle these days, and many games are uncompleted...:<
-
Those are just some basic thoughts on completionism in games, but what I really want to hear are yours. By which I mean everyone's. What do you think of achievements, unlockables and the desire to find them all?
It depends I think trophies and achievements can be fun at times but I normally won't do them because usually I have nothing to gain by doing so. Unlockables however is different I always like unlockables especially when it means getting ultimate weapons and the like.
-
Most of my Crusader Kings 2 games are started only to get a specific achievement but it's okay because Crusader Kings 2 is awesome.
-
Heck, even the achievements can be fun to me. I have a 360, and I'd always smile and say "oh, neat" whenever I did something to get it.
….of course, I always jealous the people I knew had insanely higher gamescores compared to me....then again, I only played like....10 odd games, none of which were FPS.
-
Achievements should be either be:
A: intuitive and actually encourage the player to do things in game that they wouldn't do otherwise. E.g. collect all the unlockables, play through the game on a higher difficulty, or even specific boss/enemy related achievements like "defeat the enemy in ____ minutes" or "defeat the enemy using only ____".
or
B: general stuff for beating certain bosses or certain areas of the story.
Those are all accomplishing feats and make the player feel like they've actually progressed and earned something.
Then there's achievements like this that exist, and while funny, really shouldn't be called achievements. There's also some achievements that are super grindy like "Defeat 1000 of ____ enemy", which are also pretty unoriginal and are probably there because the developer ran out of ideas.
And on that note, developers definitely shouldn't feel obligated or be forced to stick achievements into their game (like all games on the 360/Xbox One). That just leads to lazier achievements that the developer put in due to being forced to. Avatar the Burning Earth is probably the biggest offender when it comes to possible lazily forced achievements, since you can get the full 1000 Gamerscore within the first five minutes of gameplay.
-
My favorite achievement is still the Dead Rising one of defeat at least 53,594 zombies. Which works great as far as the premise of the game goes.
-
Those are just some basic thoughts on completionism in games, but what I really want to hear are yours. By which I mean everyone's. What do you think of achievements, unlockables and the desire to find them all?
I miss the days you play through a game one time and complete it with 95%. Second time 100%. But back then there were no achievements or trophies or Steam. Maybe the last game I got 100% (only game) were Batman Arkham Asylum with all the Riddler trophies on the 360. I liked it because I always was a somewhat completionist.
Buuut, then for example there was Far Cry 3, where I gathered 100 of 300 trophies and said to myself fuckit, this isn't worth my time at all. Or Injustice on which it was possible to get all the artworks but I had no iOS shit that time so, no. Or Batman Arkham Origins on PC where I just wanted to gather all Riddler trophies again but one was bugged and I couldn't get it and and and… Now I'm used to buy single player games and do not fully complete them because I can't and it still hurts somehow, because it's not ok. -
My favorite achievement is still the Dead Rising one of defeat at least 53,594 zombies. Which works great as far as the premise of the game goes.
Yeah, as long as an achievement like that has an actual reason behind it, it's fine.
Otherwise it's just a generic achievement.
-
And screw any game that has a missable achievement or item that you only have one shot at in the course of a 50-100 hour game.
Persona 4 Golden is testing my patience with just that 2 trophies away from platinum and now the worry sets in that I might not get one of them i.e. "The Legend Of Inaba" trophy due to starting some social links a bit late. The Compulsive Reader (which I can get) wasn't any better because of some arbitrary bullshit and this is about my 4th playthrough of the game.
@Galaxy:
Those are all accomplishing feats and make the player feel like they've actually progressed and earned something.
Yeah a massive head ache, high blood pressure, and the realization that you wasted an untold amount of time of doing something that wasn't as great as you thought it'd be:ninja:
-
I think achievements can be a great way to complement a game, provided they're done right.
many enemies works well in beat-em-ups, collect everything in platformers and other games with lots of collectibles, etc.As for how you shouldn't utilize achievements… well, first of all, I hate real-time specific ones. There's a reason my Psychonauts run is 93%, and that's because the 36th of the achievements require me to "buy an item from the campstore on christmas
amount of enemies might work in beat-em-ups and games with lots of enemies, but there are lots of games where that achievement adds nothing. Last would be when a game has an unnecessary amount. 30-70 is alright for me, unless it's a large and/or open-world game. When you get over the 100 mark you start to lose interest in even trying.Overall, I think the whole completionist thing is part of human nature. Just like how you want a knitted scarf to be perfect, or how artists can spend years mastering a technique. For games that are bad, you generally don't care about achievements, and for those that are good, achievements can both enhance the gameplay and give you a reason to replay it and discover more.
-
I can understand achievements and they can definitely add something to the experience of certain players, as incentives particularly.
However, I myself am terrible at completionism. For me, the point where I consider I have squeezed every inch of experience it has to offer, involves mastering the mechanics and having experienced as many levels and areas as possible, whether or not I got everything.
So for example, Tropical Freeze stands completed as I have done all levels in the game in Hard mode, but there's no incentive for me to do the puzzle pieces, for example.Normally for me the instinct when playing a game is the opposite to collecting: to go through it as best as possible and with as much natural flow as I can, in platformers meaning I go with the joy of speed and in RPGs meaning that I talk to people and explore to find things I might need and proceed when properly equipped for what's approaching. And the joy of the replay is using that experience to do things I might have missed or, knowing the game, going even faster and more efficiently.
-
I don't think I've ever once cared about an achievement or a trophy. Like I literally don't even flinch.
Either a game is fun and I play it, or it isn't and I don't. I'm a total sucker for unlockables though. I'll sail out to the edge of the world and dive down to the bottom of the sea to get a blueprint that I know I'll never use and I have no idea why. It could be 20 levels below me and the wrong class. I really can't explain it.
-
The best use of achievements ever was the one for the Portal 2 chapter This is the Part Where He Kills You.
I don't really care about them either but it's nice when I get one still. I generally don't go out of my way to complete them.
-
Achievements can be used for some funny punctuation on occasion and to lead you down certain paths, but I think it kind of hurts the agency of the gamer a little. As far as I can tell, there are three main types of achievements: completion, grinding and secrets. Completion achievements are redundant and grinding ones are boring, but the secrets just really up front tell the player what's special in their game, instead of letting them determine what's special and what isn't. In Majora's Mask, I remember rolling around the map as a Goron just for fun. Imagine what it would do to that experience to have an achievement to travel a certain distance as a Goron.
There's an example of what I mean with the Grim Fandango remaster, which made achievements around finding certain lines of dialogue. That made me dread going through conversations that used to be fun, since I had to make sure I went through every leaf on the tree. I know that the achievement is meaningless, but its presence incentivizes a different kind of play. It catalogues what there is in the game and implies that there is not much more to it. That's why I think what I quoted is so important. Secrets help to define the give depth to the game experience, but when every player is being told to find them all, what good is the depth? It's just a goal of which a lot of people will fall short, instead of a mystery to be explored.
-
a](http://www.siliconera.com/2015/09/28/horror-manga-artist-junji-ito-was-collaborating-with-silent-hills/)t this point…it's more like salt on the wounds now.
-
In Majora's Mask, I remember rolling around the map as a Goron just for fun. Imagine what it would do to that experience to have an achievement to travel a certain distance as a Goron.
Answer: you still roll around everywhere as a Goron because it's really fun and normal Link is so damn slow.
-
Lab Zero started an IndieGoGo for their new Metroidvania/Valkyrie Profile inspired RPG, Indivisible. -
Lab Zero started an IndieGoGo for their new Metroidvania/Valkyrie Profile inspired RPG, Indivisible.I feel like this deserve it's own thread. With Inafune stirring up some kickstarter negativity due his failings it's just worth remembering that there are a good number of successful projects.
Also if there ever is a safe bet with these things it's studios like Lab Zero who have gone through the process and have proven themselves able to deliver.Also best of all Inafune take note these guys actually have a prototype that seems to be worth something unlike that garbage that was pumped out for red ash.
-
Why are they on IndieGoGo and not Kickstarter? Very low chance of me backing a project on that platform.
-
Why are they on IndieGoGo and not Kickstarter? Very low chance of me backing a project on that platform.
If I remember correctly they have a deal with IGG helping them out on the promotion side.
Maybe this gives some tangential insight on why http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=180717028&postcount=1078 Ravidrath is a dev from Lab Zero.
Testing the prototype now.
–----------------------------------
Played the prototype and I'm impressed the moment to moment feels very good, it took me a bit to get the hang and flow of the combat but it's pretty solid to be honest.
All my concerns are pretty much related to content itself like combat not having enough depth, pretty much stuff the prototype gets a free pass on for being just a demo show.
At first I was a bit overwhelmed with the combat and I felt like I needed better indication of who is getting attacked by who but I kind of got used to in quickly so I'm not sure if that's a real concern.Had more fun in my 30 minutes with this than with the MN9 demo. Movement feels really nice and it all looks great too. Maybe the jumping could be a bit better regarding the momentum.
Oh before I forget the prototype is free to everyone you don't need to be a backer.
-
I see… the reasoning seems pretty weak right now but at least they have a reason. I'll probably give the prototype a shot when I get home tonight. Still, I like the tighter controls imposed by Kickstarter and the fact that my contributions are going through Amazon Payments which I trust and have some recourse with if anything should happen. I'm not likely to back on IGG. Though either way, their rewards are not compelling to me at all... so I can always get it upon release.
-
I see… the reasoning seems pretty weak right now but at least they have a reason. I'll probably give the prototype a shot when I get home tonight. Still, I like the tighter controls imposed by Kickstarter and the fact that my contributions are going through Amazon Payments which I trust and have some recourse with if anything should happen. I'm not likely to back on IGG. Though either way, their rewards are not compelling to me at all... so I can always get it upon release.
Yeah one of the factors I'm considering too. To be honest I'd prefer to just buy when it comes out. Especially because I've never been someone too interested in backer rewards I usually just go for the digital tier.
That said given that I've only heard positive things from people backing skull girls and about how they handle their communication(they were the first game studio doing crowdfunding I think that actually broke down the exact cost for its backers), I might chime in anyway if the project is struggling to close it out during the last 2 weeks.
-
I got screwed out of a Steam key. Then again my crippling aversion to exchanging mouth sounds and my saltiness over not!Minette and not!Feng winning their character vote thing makes that more my fault then theirs…
-
very helpful -
On the opposite side of things; Battle Chasers: Nightwar reached it's goal and is working through it's stretch goals.
I guess we know where the next "Devs didn't make the game" controversy is going to be.
-
Joe Mad, huh? He was the lead artist or Darksiders, correct?
-
-
Next Far Cry will be set at 35 000 BC… at least setting is a new and rather fascinating... not hyped but might be good, though Ubisoft is always Ubisoft :getlost:
-
Wow they're taking it back wayyyyyyy back.
-
Hi Manny. Hi Diego.
-
Lol, finally. They have reached their goal in making a full blown hunting simulator.
-
Why are they on IndieGoGo and not Kickstarter? Very low chance of me backing a project on that platform.
Kickstarter takes away a much larger cut.
-
So out of curiosity I spoiled myself on DragonQuest 8 3DS's new ending
And all I got to say is:
![](http://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i212/Faltzer_Black/Mobile Uploads/ptetwfrds0v4lrmanlnk.gif)
-
At about 10 minutes he talks about why indiegogo over kickstarter
-
No one could say that any better than… well. anyone.
It's irritating to hear people talking against the transparency/honesty of this campaign. If ya don't want to back it, then say that and nothing else.
-
Never heard of it.
-
@Cyan:
Paradox/Obsidian project, gogogogogogo
Crusader Kings 2: Vampire Republic
Obligatory "If this happens one thing is going to be sure and that is that Obsidian will totally nail the nostalgia bugs" comment.
JK one of my fav studios and they actually do fine when given the time it's just somehow the times they didn't receive that is pretty high. -
Vampire the Masquerade is a part of the tabletop game series World of Darkness. In 2004 a video game came out based on the tabletop game called Vampire the Masquerade Bloodlines. Unfortunately the game came out unfinished due to Activision and Valve and the company that made the game, Troika, went under. Sometime later CCP, the people who make Eve Online bought White Wolf, who own either VTM or the entire WOD and were making an MMO in the world. At some point Obsidian expressed interest in making another VTM game but this never happened. But now Paradox owns White Wolf and WOD and from the tweet I posted, that was retweeted by Paradox, there may be plans for another VTM game, this time made by Obsidian.
It's also worth noting that I think some former members of Troika work at Obsidian.
-
Obsidian is essentially an asylum built by the remains of most of the developers of all the old CRPGs that people gush over and misguidedly try to emulate.
I think they even have some of the Bioware people who worked on Baldur's Gate.
-
Koei tecmo has made a big collaboration deal with a "very big western IP"