Comments on: Making the case for epic video games
Some developers think epic video games will be long gone in a few years, but Don Reisinger wants to save them. Will it work?
Some developers think epic video games will be long gone in a few years, but Don Reisinger wants to save them. Will it work?
Web sites launch all the time, but they also shut their doors. We highlight 15 that bit the dust this year.
Let the debate begin: Was the iPhone more important than iTunes? Was anything bigger than Google finding a great business model? CNET offers its list of the 10 most important stories of the '00s.
Don Reisinger is a technology columnist who has covered everything from HDTVs to computers to Flowbee Haircut Systems. Besides his work with CNET, Don's work has been featured in a variety of other publications including PC World and a host of Ziff-Davis publications.
Don writes product reviews for InformationWeek and is a regular contributor to Processor Magazine. You can visit his personal site at DonReisinger.com or if you would like to email Don with questions or comments, drop him a line at CNETDigitalHome@gmail.com. He is a member of the CNET Blog Network and is not an employee of CNET. Disclosure.
Add this feed to your online news reader
Have you ever wanted a no-nonsense discussion on what is really going with all the tech topics related to your Digital Home? If so, join Don Reisinger as he brings you the same biting commentary you've come to expect from his Digital Home blog in all its audio glory.
Subscribe to this podcast using an RSS reader other than iTunes
Subscribe to this podcast using iTunes
I think it's ridiculous for every title to try to spin 8 plates SUCESSFULLY in order to be noticed.
I mean, think of how many absolutely deal breakers there are in game development. A bad script can ruin a game. Bad voice acting can ruin a game. Bad camera can ruin a game. Bad controls can ruin a game. Bad pacing can ruin a game.
Why do developers even attempt to do all that in games that real gamers don't even care about it in? I can't tell you how many action games I've played where I'm treated to an hourlong cutscene before being allowed to play the game. I want to play an action game for the action. i don't want an hour long cutscene. So, there, you just made me hate your game before I even got to PLAY your game.
Interactive Entertainment (Metal Gear Solid, Final Fantasy) and Video GAMES (Super Mario, Guitar Hero) need to divide into two seperate industries. They will better serve their respective customers as two seperate entities and produce experiences that are more enjoyable.
P.S. It's funny to see games devs pop out an underdeveloped game every year and flood it with advertising, then watch them scratch their heads wondering why nothing is selling. 2 year olds could set up a better business plan than that!
I love the "concept" of an epic game - but how many people really have the time to finish these 100 hour games before the next game they want to play comes out (ignoring professional game reviewers and teenagers with no lives)? We have jobs, we have wives and kides, we are lucky if we get to "game" 5 hours a week.
I've been playing GTA a few hours a week since it came out - doubt I'll ever finish it. I played Oblivion for 150 hours. Never finished it. I haven't even finished BioShock!!! If I spend 3 months putting in 100 hours on GTA - the backlog of great games I'll never get to play starts growing.
So I guess I'm saying spend that $100mm to give me a REALLY good 20 hours and make the rest downloadable content.
Epic games are different. The combination of story, gameplay, longevity, and atmosphere is what makes them great.
Here are a list of my epic games that I have played and time spent on them:
Elder Scrolls: Oblivion (80 hours and counting)
Half Life 1 and 2 including the recent Episodes (over 200 hours on all)
Mass Effect (55 hours played through twice)
Bioshock (20 hours)
Stalker: Shawdow of Chernobyl (30 hours and counting)
Call of Duty 4 (8 hours single but 13 days online)
Crysis (15 hours)
Metal Gear Games (100+ hours)
Gears of war (8 hours. Even though short it left a lasting impression though online faded away)
Thoughts?
For the next rendition of GTA, I believe that the online portion of the game should come from the main character being able to fly to new cities that are downloadable via gaming networks (xbox live). If I live in Portland, OR, I could fly there from the city's airport and start a new set of missions in that town via the expansion.
The best selling games this gen are...
MGS4
GTA4
COD4
etc.
When devs put a ton of time into a game and make it perfect, the game gets raving reviews and sells crazy amounts. They always recoup the costs and then some.
People won't pay $60 for a game that is not epic.
Look at valve or blizzard, every game they put, they put a crapload of time and cash into, and they always made a killing.
Its the devs that make mediocre titles on small budgets that fail to sell and recoup the costs. Atari is nearing bankrupcy for example.
Yes continue making epic games but we always needed sometimes those small games to have fun when we're bored from the epics . Actually I think the game industry is now perfect , I mean including the bad + good games. There has to be always a bad games so we can distinct the good one.
- by chrkeller June 20, 2008 3:38 AM PDT
- I think there is a major difference between epic and having to be 100 hours long. Everybody keeps mentioning MGS, yeah that game is not even remotely close to being 100 hours long. The first one is 10 hours, the second about 20 and there third is about 20. I have not completed the fourth yet. I would also consider God of War and Resident Evil 4 epic in terms of storyline and just overall greatness, both are 10 hours. A game can be epic without having to be 100 hours. Gears of War is only 4-5 hours. I love huge epic games, I don't like games that are 100 hours. There is a difference.
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
Showing 1 of 2 pages (26 Comments)