Month: December 2011

GamerSushi Asks: Lost in Sidequests?

Skyrim

I’ve got a problem. It’s been well documented on this site and in our podcasts, but I should reiterate: I’m an RPG completionist. I’m OCD in a way that is truly tough to convey to people who can’t open up my head and take a peek inside. From the largest weapon to the smallest task, I’m trying to do everything, see every nook and cranny of even the hugest open RPG world until its boundaries feel like shackles and I’ve got nowhere left to go.

Such is the case with Skyrim. You see, I’ve put about 50 hours into the game so far, and I’m sitting pretty at about Level 43. And I’ve only recently just gone to High Hrothgar for the first time. If you’ve been playing the game, you know that most people go do this just south of Level 10, but not me. I’m an overpowered badass that’s been running all over the place doing the bidding of every peasant and lowlife that needed ferrying or dungeoneering.

It’s really hard to pinpoint the root cause of this obsession, and even harder to curtail it once it sets in. Something about the way my personality works just causes me to get lost in side quests.

I thought I’d take this opportunity to ask how you guys handle side quests versus main quests. While side quests are really meant to help you level between the main or perhaps give you something to do once you’ve beaten the game, I tend to use them to make the main ludicrously easy for myself. How do you guys approach them? Go!

Gameplay Mechanics That Time Forgot

demons souls

For every gameplay mechanic that sets a standard in the industry, there are always a few that manage to slip out of vogue no matter how interesting they are. Back in the days when gaming was just getting started, developers felt like they could take a few more risks with their designs and some really cool stuff came out of that era. There are some neat ideas being presented today, but the fresh stuff is few and far between.

IGN’s newest appendage 1up put out an article on four gameplay mechanics that should have caught on and it’s an interesting look at some big ideas that have faded away into obscurity. While Demon’s Souls (and Dark Souls) are new, things like Rainbow Six’s mission planner or Blade Runner’s randomized story elements are kind of relics now, lost to the ages.

I remember trying to figure out Rainbow Six’s planner back in the day and I recall it being beyond the scope of my young mind. My missions frequently boiled down to giving everyone a shotgun and hoping for the best, but I bet if I went back and tried that game today I would find a layer of strategy that is so painfully absent from modern shooters.

The social single-player elements of Demon’s Souls is one of the most intriguing aspects of that game to me and I would be really pleased if that caught on in other games, especially sandbox titles. How awesome would it be if you were playing Grand Theft Auto V and saw some graffiti on the ground left by another player, pointing you towards a secret area with a special vehicle? This is a masterful way of bringing players together inside their own separate worlds and I’d like other developers to take a stab at it.

Do you guys have any gameplay mechanics that you used to love that have fallen by the wayside? I seem to recall squad commands being quite the big ticket item last generation but I don’t see that too much these days. Personally, I’d love to be able to give my AI teammates commands because they can’t seem to think for themselves that well. Sound off!

Source – 1up

Valve Versus Piracy

Gabe NewellAt the risk of being called a Valve fanboy (I’m really not), I have to say that I think Gabe Newell is probably one of the more brilliant minds in the videogame industry. That’s probably a cliche opinion to have about the guy, but I’ll stick by it until he shows me other wise. I’m pretty much fascinated by everything he says in interviews, mostly because he comes across as a guy that not only understands the business he’s in, but understands gamers. That’s a tricky shot for a CEO to hit consistently, and he managed to do it without making a fool of himself too often (PS3 cracks aside).

In a recent interview with The Cambridge Student Online, Newell waxes philosophical about a number of subjects relating to Valve, including Half-Life as a response to the dumbing down of the FPS genre, the decision to make TF2 free to play and what he expects of CS: GO. One of the more interesting parts of the interview, however, is what he has to say about piracy. You see, Newell doesn’t view piracy as that big of an issue for Valve:

“In general, we think there is a fundamental misconception about piracy. Piracy is almost always a service problem and not a pricing problem. For example, if a pirate offers a product anywhere in the world, 24 x 7, purchasable from the convenience of your personal computer, and the legal provider says the product is region-locked, will come to your country 3 months after the US release, and can only be purchased at a brick and mortar store, then the pirate’s service is more valuable. Most DRM solutions diminish the value of the product by either directly restricting a customers use or by creating uncertainty. Our goal is to create greater service value than pirates, and this has been successful enough for us that piracy is basically a non-issue for our company.

This actually ties into something that we all talked about on a podcast, many moons ago. When it becomes just as convenient and valuable enough to get a product at a price you’re willing to pay for it as it is to steal it, piracy loses all meaning. Now, I know this is a touchy subject (and we always talk about how touchy of a subject it is), but as much as I do what I can to distance myself from piracy, I at least acknowledge that video game companies don’t always handle this well.

However, given the recent admission from CD Projekt that DRM-less Witcher 2 was pirated 4.5 million times, does anybody have any idea at all how to make their products more valuable than free? What say you guys? Weigh in and keep it tidy. Go!

Source – TCS

GamerSushi Asks: Changing Remakes?

Final Fantasy 7 Remake

If there’s anything we can say about 2011 – in addition to the fact that it’s been one of the best years for gaming that we can remember – it’s that it has been the year of the HD remake. In the fall season alone, we’ve seen Halo CE: Anniversary, Ico/Shadow of the Colossus and Metal Gear Solid: HD Collection all release to rave reviews from fanboys that have longed to see their old favorites restored with loving detail. Naturally, this opens up the conversation to other classics, and there are none more sought after than the dreaded Final Fantasy VII remake.

In a recent interview with Official XBox Magazine, Final Fantasy XIII-2 producer Yoshinori Kitase gave some of his thoughts about how he’d tackle a remake of one of the most famed entries in the beloved series:

“If I may speak as a game creator, if we were to produce a remake of VII, for example, I would be really tempted to delete things and add new elements, new systems or whatever because if we were to make exactly the same thing now, it’d be like a repeat… But if we did that, the fans might be disappointed or ‘this is not what I was expecting’ so in that sense maybe some might say that it’s better to let memory be memory.”

I have to say that I understand the impulse to want to approach the remake creatively. I mean, where would the appeal be to just slap a new coat of paint on something if you’re part of the team involved? But on the other hand, a part of me would also want the game that I loved exactly as it was. It would be interesting if developers could find a way to include both things in the final product, although I understand it’s not entirely feasible.

So what do you guys think? What kind of remakes do you prefer? Fresh new takes on old favorites, or a new coat of paint on the classics? What would you change in HD remakes of your favorite games? Go!

Source – OXM

The Case Against Annualization

modern warfare 3As the end of this generation draws near we’re seeing an increase in the amount of franchises that are taking a stab at faster release cycles. Call of Duty has been pulling this trick for a while but even titles with a bigger scope like Assassin’s Creed and Dead Rising are trying to give us a new game every year.

The term “new game” may be a bit of a stretch because in the rush to meet the deadlines a lot of these titles are getting flak for not adding enough to previous iterations. While waiting years for a game may be painful, is it preferable to basically buying what equates to an expansion pack? Continue reading The Case Against Annualization