Is adding VR to a simple game enough for you to be interested? |
- Is adding VR to a simple game enough for you to be interested?
- Sacrifice (2000) - A One Of A Kind Game
- What video game developer holds the metaphorical championship belt right now? Who's the no.1 contender?
- What's your favorite "playground" a game has given you?
- What a Hardcore game should feel like (x-post from /r/MMORPG)
- Survey: Creating Better Relationships Between Game Developers and Let's Players/Streamers
- What has happened to playable Demos?
- Would you like to see graphics/performance get "perfected" rather than "better" each generation?
- You got enough money to hire a team to develop a Triple-A game. It's your idea, your game concept. What is your game about and why should we buy it?
| Is adding VR to a simple game enough for you to be interested? Posted: 02 Oct 2016 04:28 AM PDT Speaking from ignorance here, I don't own a VR headset although I have tried a few at friend's houses etc. I just had a look at Serious Sam VR on youtube, and in the past I've seen some gameplay of various other upcoming VR games too. All the shooting-gallery style games seem very rudimentary even compared to something old like Time Crisis or House of the Dead. Apart from space sims, most VR games remind me a bit of motion games - everything is simplified, stripped down, slowed down, limited, etc compared to a game with traditional controls, because motion/VR can't be as fast, accurate or varied as the various traditional control devices we have so far. I feel like game designers haven't yet discovered how to take advantage of motion controls & VR, in such a way that it enhances your ability to control the game. Instead, simple actions that would be automatic or a single button press in a traditional game (eg. opening a door) become a slower, awkward, motion action, for the sake of "immersion". It's almost like Heavy Rain or Octodad. Probably the one exception is Space Sims, because they let you keep using traditional controls for the things that matter, and the VR just allows you to free look around. Which is more effective than previous methods of having to press a key to look in a direction or use your Flight Stick's hat controller. So far, I can't imagine VR or motion controls becoming the new standard for all games. It feels like they will be passing fads that eventually settle into a specialised niche, like Telepresence applications. I guess VR will also birth a few new genres specific to itself, such as Immersive Exploration Horror. Can you think of any examples where a VR/Motion game has more depth and better mechanics than a traditional game in the same genre? [link] [comments]  |
| Sacrifice (2000) - A One Of A Kind Game Posted: 01 Oct 2016 05:17 PM PDT Hi guys! I'm here to talk about Sacrifice, one of my all time favorite video games which sadly doesn't get a lot of attention here on Reddit, and try to convince you to give it a shot! Okay, so what is this game? Sacrifice is a third-person real-time strategy video game developed by Shiny Entertainment (the guys behind MDK and Earthworm Jim) and published by Interplay in the year 2000. While it is a strategy game, it puts little emphasis on building and resource gathering. You control a powerful Wizard in the service of the gods, capable of casting destructive spells and summoning dreadful creatures. You can't die - after depleting your health, the Wizard turns into a ghost and can return to his corporeal form by replenishing his Mana at a mana fountain or his Altar, the main structure and the place that links you with your god. Your goal is to defeat the opposing Wizard. But how do you accomplish that, if a Wizard can't die? It's quite simple - together with your summoned army you must storm the enemy's Altar and Desecrate it by Sacrificing one of your own creatures. If the enemy Wizard is killed during the ritual, he is banished from the realm and you win. While it sounds incredibly pagan and brutal from the description alone, it's really not - you've got to see it for yourself to believe it. What are the game modes, what is the diversity? There is an incredible solo story campaign with a captivating, deep story and HIGH amounts of replayability. As the wizard Eldred with a mysterious past you can pledge your services to one of the five Gods:
Each God offers their own missions and storyline while rewarding you with new spells and creatures, letting you replay at least five fully different times. You can also mix it up and change your alliegiances, which can result in up to 172890 different playthroughs! There is also a skirmish vs. A.I. option and even online multiplayer for up to 4 players! You can also choose between 15 different Wizards, each of them fully voiced and with a unique look. What makes this game stand out? It's a wonderful, one of a kind mix of RPG and strategy. No other game offers such a strategical depth and unit commanding tactics together with World of Warcraft-esque character controls. There are multiple ways to fortify your Altar, impactful and well-timed spells can turn the tide of the battlefield and every creature has its own strengths and weaknesses. The playstyle also massively differs from any other strategy game - the only currency is Souls. More powerful and larger creatures require more Souls to summon. Blue Souls are pure and free to collect, while heathen Red Souls (left behind by enemies and neutral creatures) require Converting them at your altar with the help of quirky creatures which you must protect during the process. The game has very unique visual and sound design, offering out of this world character concepts with great, smooth animations. It looks very good even today, though it is a 2000 release! The developers also managed to get an impressive amount of great voice actors, with a lot of big names like Tim Curry, Brad Garrett and Jennifer Hale. That sounds very interesting! Can I see more of it/can I play it? Here is a half an hour video by TotalBiscuit playing and praising the game. 13 minutes in he starts a skirmish match showcasing how a Sacrifice session looks like, but I personally suggest watching the whole thing to see the unique character designs and listen to their awesomely voiced conversations. If you want to play it for yourself, it's available for a very low price on GOG.com. For such a great game with high replayability and loads of interesting solutions, it's a steal. I highly recommend you give it a try - you won't be disappointed. [link] [comments]  |
| Posted: 02 Oct 2016 11:31 AM PDT |
| What's your favorite "playground" a game has given you? Posted: 02 Oct 2016 01:26 PM PDT As of recently, I've been playing a lot of Half Life 2. The game's been a reliable source of fun even as the technology ages, and I've just now thought of another reason as to why. Half Life 2 gives the player access to a lot of "playgrounds". I'm not altogether certain if there's an actual term for it, but what I refer to when I say it is an area in a game where the developers have just shown you a mechanic (usually in a tutorial/training stage) that will be expected to be used in the following level, if not the rest of the game. Several of these playgrounds are some of the best parts of the game for me. Ravenholm is the most memorable chapter in the game for me, largely due to the badassery of Father Grigori, but the level is reinforced to be a playground for utilizing the gravity gun they gave you (and trained you with) the level beforehand. The enemies are slow and methodical, there is little ammo in the level in general, and the objects you use with the gravity gun are heavy, sharp, or cause burning (all excellent for taking out the zombies). There's also an achievement for encouraging you to use only the gravity gun for the level, which presets that goal in the individual's mind to see just how versatile the weapon is in a relatively dangerous environment. In short, there's some danger involved, but once you get used to it, the level becomes a fun little playground for using the gravity gun. Another example occurs at the end, right after you clear out Overwatch's Nexus. Barney tells you to go to the roof. You go up there, clear out the baddies, and for almost no reason, there's a crate of infinite rockets right by the roof. And right by it, a battlefield rages on. Unfortunately, the gate soaks up most of the bullets if you try to snipe the Combine on the battlefield... But you can use the laser on the rocket to guide it around that fence and bombard the soldiers. Likewise, you can take out those striders that are bothering the guys down there. The striders will fire back, but the shots are easy to avoid, meaning the player can readily bombard them with their infinite rockets and get skilled with utilizing the rocket launcher, which normally has too little ammo to play around with. Of course, in the next scene, you're on the ground of that battlefield, which means you're really going to want that rocket launcher to take out the Striders attacking you. Both of these scenes are nice playgrounds to just have fun with the mechanic the game gave you, before you're really expected to practice around with it. It doesn't feel like the game's holding your hand through a tutorial, because there's some danger involved with it, but the danger's relatively easy to mitigate. As a result, it's a fun, simple way to practice your skills while still being relatively challenging. My question is, what other sort of playgrounds do games give you that genuinely feel fun to play with? I think of the Tank from Halo being given to you to wreak havoc with, being given a monster Ultralisk in Starcraft, etc... When has a game given you free reign with a mechanic in a manner that felt fun to truly practice? [link] [comments]  |
| What a Hardcore game should feel like (x-post from /r/MMORPG) Posted: 02 Oct 2016 12:44 PM PDT Hello everyone, Historically, the "hardcore" genre has whittled down severely with the years, with the recent announced sunset of one of the few last Hardcore games left (Wizardry Online) there are no games that satisfy the need for a true risk vs reward. There is a game called Camelot:Unleashed which shows it could possibly breathe some life back into this genre, but only time will tell. Runescape Oldschool has a Deadman mode which revives the genre in its own way, but is inevitably dulling due to its limited combat mechanics. Allow me to introduce my history in gaming, I started off in Vanilla World of Warcraft, as the few of you that have played it, it was a truly hardcore experience, not only for its vastly open world, engaging lore which ties back to its previous 3 Warcraft titles, and pvp experience, but for the sheer amount of time dedication it required for a player to get anywhere, this draws away many, but there is an audience and market for this (as seen with the Rise and shutdown of Nostalrius). I played that game all the way to the end of the Wrath of the Lich King expansion where it was declared that Hybrid builds would cease to exist, and since open world pvp was effectively dead at that point unless you had a gathering profession and occasionally fought over a node. After doing so I've tried a variety of games, but most notably I'd like to start off with a game called Archlord 2, This game, hosted by Webzen for NA, while short lived, was a game truly dedicated to PvP engagement, the 200v200 battlegrounds were not bait, they were real and so was the open world PvP, the rise to power of the clans that managed to reached the top of the ranks and no cross-server interaction created a very at home atmosphere, you knew who pk'd you, what clan they were, you knew what teamspeak/vent they were on, rivalries were common, and it was another game that required you to dedicate several hours just to be able to keep your feet on the ground. It had a very unique talent system where you had 3 skill trees, and 4 weapon types, and to effectively use all your skills you had to swap weapons in the middle of combat to be able to use your skills from the other trees. It was a pinnacle of pvp, with a much faster pace than WoW, but not exactly at a Blade and Soul level. As i mention initially, the game Wizardry Online was among the most captivating hardcore experiences felt in a game, its combat system, although feeling a bit clunky, flows very well, its dungeons FORCED you to party with others, and the greatest thing of it all, is that it captured the essence of realism, if your party member missed that zombie and swung at you, -you took damage-, PvP was open and unguarded for any who dared to step outside of the towns, and if you died you could be looted for your most precious gear, would you really take a leap of faith with a gang of strangers into a dark cavern to kill ferocious animals, only to find at a critical moment that thief in your party could very easily plunge his blade into your back and run off with your valuables while you had to face the penalties of death? The red glow is a scary thing in this game for the inexperienced, it showed that you were truly against the amusement park that MMO's had devolved into, and wanted to play for true risk. So, before i keep rambling on, what are the recurring themes in these type of games: 1.Time Commitment A true hardcore game should allow a casual player to get by like no other, but a player that dedicates their free time to a game should be mountains ahead of other players, the atmosphere thats created by these special types of players is like no other. If you know who Anti Parazi was on Asheron's call; If you know who Zezima was on Runescape; If you know who Vurtne was on World of Warcraft; If you know who Black was on Archlord 2; or even coming from another genre, if you know who Faker is on League of Legends, or Grubby on Warcraft 3. The games themselves are only a medium, a game does not need to be hyped up, its players create the hype, give the players a way to aspire beyond the reach of others and to leave piles of dead in their wake, and your game shall be famed, its the entire basis of a hardcore game. 2.Engaging PvP and PvE Experiences These are not strategy games, you don't get time to think, only to react, one false move, and you may easily fall in combat, I wouldn't go as far as to make it as absurd as Dark Souls PvE, because frankly, as "cool" as it may look to avoid being 1hit many times, its generally a boring experience, but if you're pressing the wrong button at the wrong time you SHOULD be punished severely for it depending on what scale you're fighting on. Ones mistake should be anothers opportunity, but one whos too patient should also be punished for holding back, the middleground must be found, I'd like one day to see the intensity comparable to a high level of Street Fighter game of footsies felt in a MMO. Asheron's call, being as old as it is, did this right. You made a fresh new char and some guy is deciding to terrorize noobs, but you have the skills to back it up? sure you may not kill him, but you are going to give him one hell of a time trying to kill you as he wont be able to land anything on you. 3.Limited Mobility If you want to get from point A to point B, nowadays every MMO just has a instance or teleport button to do that for you, these methods shoulden't be common, they should be a PREMIUM, In Vanilla WoW, unless you were a Mage, you were spending a good amount of time taking boats and chatting with your guild as you took the hippogryph from stormwind to eastern plaguelands only to be jumped by a roaming rare elite mob that has 4 elite guards that patroll the pathing or to be attacked by a member of the opposing faction grinding some mining resources or just looking for a fight. If theres going to be a "safe" method of travel from point A to point B, it should be so costly that its only used in dire situations, otherwise, why should I bother to explore the open lands, when i can simply teleport to somewhere? I value safe zones as not every player should be forced to PvP, but it should always be a looming threat, If you want safety, run to your dungeon as a party and not alone, find a common ground to meet up at and head out TOGETHER, if someone is standing over the resource you want and you cant beat him alone, go to another one, otherwise you should call upon friends to take him down, and he might do so back, look back to what happened at Tarren Mill before battlegrounds in WoW, a simple scrap caused by two players fighting while questing would result in a massive over escalation of entire raids wiping each other out in the middle of a field. You dont want your players to be sitting around in Town all day waiting for their dungeon to pop, you want them to keep doing something. 4.A sense of Mystery Lets go back to Tibia, more specifically, the Sword of Fury, to those of you who dont know what it is, in this game theres a Sword on the middle of an unreachable island, there is supposedly a way to reach it however it has not been found yet, rumors have long floated about, and the only thing that's been found is that by performing a set of actions underground, one can make the sword temporarily dissapear. Although this implies extreme work from a developers point of view, the quests and items should -not- be datamineable, there should be things that should never show up on a wikipedia page, and should only be known from experimenting, sheer luck, and word of mouth. A truly good game, has secrets, hidden everywhere, not limited to items, secrets that also only unveil to a true explorer, like details of a story or of an NPC, regards to what became of who. These type of things should slide undocumented from the official patch notes, only to be discovered by a player later on exclaiming in excitement and wonder. In short, I'd like to see a game with these elements still around, unfortunately the AC community is so small its not the same. Everywhere i look, it just seems that the only place these type of game still exist are limited to CN/JP/KR servers as the rest of the world just wants to be spoonfed and press 123 for their next achievement and piece of gear. Unless someone can point me to a game of this type of caliber, it seems that this genre has died in the West. [link] [comments]  |
| Survey: Creating Better Relationships Between Game Developers and Let's Players/Streamers Posted: 02 Oct 2016 12:06 PM PDT Hey all, I've been a mod maker and streamer for a few months now and going back between the two made me realize that there's often an information gap between the developers of a game and the players who record them -- I'm conducting a survey in order to better understand the relationships between the two in order to see what people's needs are on both ends of the spectrum. Hopefully this will lead to improvements and platform ideas that will foster growth and collaboration in both communities at the same time. I would like this data to foster an open discussion of sorts, so go into this survey with the expectation that your answers will be seen by the public at large. (The data will eventually be made public so it may also be a place to plug your game/channel if you like -- you can also choose to remain anonymous as well, however.) Especially thoughtful answers will be included in the summary report as well, which will be generated once I get enough responses. Thanks for your participation! Please send this form out to anyone you think would be relevant to the discussion as well. More answers = better results! https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1hZqcnhPPilFqZPmzmbf8YF1L1-uWzaxN4twXplkGQ90 [link] [comments]  |
| What has happened to playable Demos? Posted: 02 Oct 2016 05:10 AM PDT I really liked to test games and then to see if I like it, then I'd buy it. Nowadays demos are pretty rare. I don't have a PS4 or Xbox One but at least on Steam it's pretty rare. And even if a game has a playable demo it's often not so good produced. I liked the demo of The Stanley Parable where nothing was spoiled and It was just fun to play. After playing this demo I bought it. Has anyone a clue about it? [link] [comments]  |
| Would you like to see graphics/performance get "perfected" rather than "better" each generation? Posted: 02 Oct 2016 12:47 AM PDT It seems with each new gen of consoles/new PC hardware, we're fighting an ever-ongoing arms race - new graphical techniques makes games look better more realistic, but at the cost of requiring the extra horsepower to drive these new techniques. Take console open world racers, like Forza Horizon - there's no doubt FH2 on Xbox One was much better than the 360 version, and FH3 improves again in terms of graphics, etc. But, for example, they still run at 30fps. Would you rather see them say "right, ok, instead of adding new techniques and more traffic and more new effects, let's keep things the same but use the extra power of the new hardware to max out anti aliasing and get a rock steady 60fps" or whatever. Thoughts? [link] [comments]  |
| Posted: 01 Oct 2016 06:34 PM PDT |
| You are subscribed to email updates from For those who like talking about games as much as playing them.. To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now. | Email delivery powered by Google |
| Google Inc., 1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, United States | |
Emoticon