Re: The Games we play...cks a She w
peep said:
^OMG, that has been winding me up since day one of these Lego games.
I grew up in a world where Lego was varying degrees of square/rectangle blocks and two types of triangle. There weren't even those thin flat bits. Mini-figs? You had to construct a body out of Lego - though they did produce octopus type of arms and heads that would fit onto Lego blocks (it was the first wave of a modern version of Lego back then).
These days, they even do boulders and rock pieces shaped to landscapes. Never mind the Star Wars cockpits, curved sections for specific models etc, etc, etc. In my day, they didn't even have wheels!!!
So, am I going to sit here and complain that the games aren't entirely Lego blocks? Bollocks am I. The core toy is already corrupt, I'd rather have a playable game that "cheats" in the same way Lego do with their models anyway. So ner
I had a girlfriend, many years ago, who worked for the company that had the Lego franchise between Gremlin (or whatever Gremlin turned into in Sheffield) and Traveller's Tales.
She worked on Lego Island 2 and they set out to produce the entire game using Lego models. Only currently available Lego blocks could be used. So they modelled the entire game world doing that. It looked ****. The water was flat and opaque blue. Roads couldn't work because you couldn't have height as the road pieces could only be laid flat. You couldn't walk anywhere because the different levels were chunky so you had to jump, you couldn't have steep sides.
Worst of all, because the world was made up of millions of individually rendered blocks, it ran on the fastest computers at about 100th of a frame per second.
When they recreated it using smoothed textures and stuff, the game instantly became playable, flexible and it looked great. They kept in the "build system", so instead of pop-ups as you entered and area, the houses, cars, etc would build themselves in front of you. Animated properly as a real build. It was a very cool little game for the late 90s to be honest.
However, that's why. It's simply impossible to have a "believable" and workable world made out of just Lego. They're blocks, the have sharp edges and if they don't, that's because Lego have engineered them away in real life, so they should also be engineered away in the games to make them playable and to look like what they represent. When I used to play with them in the back garden as a youngster, I integrated them into the natural world around me. The Lego was a central part of the play, I never demanded my father replace the entire garden with blocks to make the Lego fit in better. The organic play area mixed with the Lego was part of the joy of playing.
peep said:
I'm tempted by the Marvel one but not sure if I can be bothered to pay out for it.
That's why I picked it up for £25 with the console. Well worth it at that price. I can't wait to really sink my teeth into it
peep said:
I love the idea of drive club but I get the impression after seeing people play it the other week that it's just going to be the same experience you get from all the driving games which I'm very bored of now.
The thing is, that's the same with all games. Racing games haven't changed much in terms of mechanics since, I dunno? Pole Position? I complain about Mario not having changed (or Zelda, or COD or whatever), but it's the same pretty much all over in terms of standard genres. Yes, Pole Position, Ridge Race, Grid, Gran Turismo and Mario Kart are all very different games to play, but essentially they do the same thing.
It's all about nailing the core mechanic, definitely. So you need to produce a game which is great to play and meets "modern expectations". However, it's then how you present that game mechanic to the player which I think is the key.
Having brilliant environments to surround you is one way, but you also need "game elements". In a racing game do you have a career/event system? Open world where you pick individual races to compete in and unlock more cars/areas (like the latest NFS and Forza Horzion)? It's all about making you want to deal with the core mechanic.
I think this is where things have gone adrift in racing games. They usually nail the racing side of it, but it's becomes a soulless grind to the finish line with no real reward or... It's a mess of attention destroying rewards and prizes, glitz and glamour that detract from the actual core fun of the game.
Racing is about using one car in enough races to earn enough to get another car you can race enough times to be able to afford another car... etc
Or, you race in what are essentially lightweight arcade combat events that unlock exponentially at such a rate you never have time to notice that every car and race is essentially the same.
There's no reward for playing, unless you love the actual core driving itself. That's where both Forza and GT fail, because while the core driving is sublime, you're never actually "racing". So there's no fun or excitement in being great other than a better lap time than somebody else - which the arcade games (like NFS and Grid) are giving you anyway only you can beat your friends due to pure luck on the race track because they require far smaller amounts of skill to do well and more seat of the pants reactions and luck.
Nobody seems able to create a racing game that isn't trying to be something extreme at the moment. It's either extreme in realism, or extreme in blasting you constantly. Nobody is producing a racing game that appeals to people who want to actually race - I think that's the biggest issue. Maybe :lol:
peep said:
What I've noticed recently, and it's starting to annoy me now, is that all the exciting games for the next gen seem to be getting pushed back every time I go to check them out. Oh well, the games I have currently will keep me occupied for a year or two anyway
Welcome to early adoption limbo
Always wait 6 months at least, unless you really can find value in early adopting
