Well compared to modern shooters, it does. It's a genre that evolved so quickly that the further back you go the less well they age.

I hope that makes sense.

I stand by what I said circa 2013 that was something along the lines of: Half Life is over hyped.

STM is overhyped

I'm avidly awaited I'll have you know.

You shut your damn whore mouth.

Yeah we're all having that moment right.

Okay let's not make this a Half-Life thread, we all have out opinions on Half-Life but unless we're talking about the episodic release of the latter ones lets save it for a Half-Life thread.

The Half-Life episodes were waaay too short imo.

Sorry Nate, jeez.

I'd rather wait longer and play AE in one big chunks, rather than playing little bits at a time and having to wait to each other part to come out.

Congratulations, you're a normal human being.

I think this is probably the biggest reason for them not to make it episodic. If the majority of people are going to just wait until the full version is available for purchase, then that ruins the point.

On the flip side though, which I think Havoc pointed out, is that it might open up room for extra story stuff or maybe even other things.

Which is not true, and would turn completely opposite. You don't make games episodic to put more work in the game. Turning games episodic is enough work of its own.

Well. I guess there aren't any pros then.

I don't know shit about game production, really.

I don't think Lorne will really do episodic Soulstorm Brew. It's like those silly ideas you gather in your head before realising it's totally not worth it.

One of the pros for the developers is that the game would probably end up being more expensive as a whole.

Going episodic would mean they could start getting returns on their work earlier. That means they can theoretically spend more money sooner.

I don't think the difference would be big enough for it to matter.

NnT sold pretty well. It's a big risk to rely on it though.

From an advertising perspective episodic can be good too, for a big name like Oddworld at least. You can get stories out on major news sites for each episode.

Seriously, who plays Half-Life because of the shooter mechanics? Half-Life 3 isn't being hyped because it's a great shooter. It's being hyped because it has a great story, set in an awesome universe and people want to see the continuation/conclusion to that story.

And nothing is even known about Half-Life 3, how on earth would you know what the shooter mechanics are going to be like? :fuzconf: For all you know it's going to be the best thing since sliced bread.

I'm honestly curious (and no, none of this is facetious) but do people actually play a video game solely for the game mechanic? That would be the equivalent of reading a book only to experience the author's style, or watching a movie only to get a kick out of the production quality.

I can understand the appeal of a particular game mechanic being inclusive of a great experience, but I couldn't fathom anyone picking up a controller for that reason alone.

oh shit you've summoned shade

Tetris.

I was just about to say yeah. Pretty much any puzzle game for me is JUST for the mechanics.

I didn't even think about puzzle games. That should have been bloody obvious. Anything designed before 1987 would also probably fall into the same category.

What about the broader video game market? Is there a sizeable percentage of people who purchase $120, next-generation games for a specific mechanic alone? I've heard that the majority of "Call of Duty" players tend to ignore the storyline in favour of the online experience, but I would argue this attitude would be more about a competitive attitude than anything related to the mechanic (although I could be totally off the mark).

Using "Oddworld" as an example, I suppose, is there anyone on this forum who thinks the story is ancillary and only plays the games merely to enjoy the engine? I'd be very interested to hear from you.

Yup, that's definitely what he's trying to do right now.

kjjcarpenter, you should talk to Shade667 ;)

Oh crap, I don't like the look of that winking face. Should I be afraid?

Action movies. I didn't watch pacific rim for the deep character development, I watched it for giant fucking robots and monsters.

EDIT: Wrong thread.

I was talking only about 2 and 1.

There are a few exceptions, like the wolf among us and the new kings quest (which Im thinking of picking up) that have me drawn to the story, but 99% of the time Ill get the game purely for the gameplay. Its what got me through Destiny and kept me for a hundred hours. Its not exactly the game mechanic per se, but the gameplay in general. If it feels good, and fun, then the story can be shit, and the music and everything else can be crap and Ill still have an enjoyable experience.

Im not sure if summoning me was correct cuz he was asking if someone played a game for a mechanic, rather than the gameplay as a whole, I dont know the differences.


I like stories, and character development, and music, and cinematics and all that junk, but theyre bonuses as long as the gameplay is solid. Which is what I think games should be about, the gameplay. I didnt play games like crash bandicoot and spyro for the story as a kid, so I guess thats why they took a backseat.

Guys we need to give Shade an award that was amazing.

I can't personally understand that point of view. There are some really bad gameplay games I've played and loved because I really dug everything else. For instance (and I know I will be crucified for this) I did not at all like the majority of the gameplay for persona 3, but it had jamming music, fantastic voice acting, writing, and nice visuals for PSP.

I've always been about gameplay and mechanics from the get go. If the art style and story are also good that's a huge bonus, but I can not for the life of me care about a game if the gameplay is bland, boring, or broken regardless of how good a story is.

I actually have a hard time understanding the appeal to a great story but a shitty game like if the game's shitty I don't think a good story helps it any it just hurts the story

At least when the story is shitty but the gameplays good you can laugh and groan about it while you're sucked into playing it

Depends on the game. If the story sucks but the gameplay is phenomenal that would be enough to get it over the bar. If the gameplay sucks but the story's great, in a Silent Hill game, for example that would be equally as important.

That's very interesting. Thanks for sharing! It's a great to glimpse outside of this bubble I usually live in. It suppose it's like the different types of Dungeons & Dragons players, such as the ones who play for the story, the ones who play for the character interaction, the ones who play for the fighting, the ones who play for the loot.

I honestly can't sympathise with that attitude, but it's still interesting regardless. It's actually the complete antithesis to why I play video games, where the mechanics/gameplay are ancillary to the experience of the story. The examples you use are quite interesting, because I still remember my 8-year-old self connecting the story threads of the Crash and Spyro games as if they were cousins of "The Godfather".

Just saying "bad" gameplay is pretty vague too. There's bad as in broken, bad as it boring, bad as in unfair, bad as in tedious, etc. Some combinations of bad gameplay and good storytelling can still be captivating to some people, just like a really bad story can make certain people bored of really good gameplay.

Subjectivity is big.

I dont get the joke.

He's being snarky.

And I agree it really depends on the game and the genre. In a platformer, you want gameplay and level design to be the best where as in an RPG, gameplay is good and all but what's the point if the story and character development isn't there.

EDIT: Sorry about that post Job. I wasn't thinking.

I'm not sure that was a joke, I found the way you explained your point of view was clear and to the point.

Oh right. Sorry got my wires crossed. I just assumed he was being sarcastic after she "can't understand that point of view"

Im so used to saying something and getting joke responses.



Also, speaking of RPG's, I guess thats why the only RPG's i like are pokemon and Monster hunter.

Gameplay is obviously the most important factor in games. That said, The Walking Dead etc. are not games. They're interactive movies, even the "game" calls itself that.

Also, I heard Destiny sucks and you have to shoot bosses for 15 minutes and its boring as hell and people call this game mediocre.

Pretty much sums to the OWF in a sentence.