What do you think should be improved in our games?

Bootup05 · 04-05-2006, 03:40 AM

What would you like in your games?

I have been thinking about this whilst playing some sort of new games rescently, Games are MUCH better than the used to be but to me they still don't look very lifelike, don't get me wrong I think the graphics are wicked but there sort of making games ( especially driving gams) look nice in a different way than reality (if you get what I mean)

What I mean about the games which I would personally like improved is, more reflections, If your on the road in the nigh you usually see stacks, all over the place, I think game designers could put a bit more effort into this.

Grass, most games (driving/car/racing games) the grass is just flat textured greenery, I think they could try to put some better textures in, like so you can actually see the blades of grass, like in delta force - extreme! Would make the game quite nice.

Things like mountains and track borders/edges, houses, buildings, at the moment most square(ish) things in games are made totally square, like as you'r going down a road or track, have you noticed that buildings or track walls are EXACTLY square and straight, to liven it up a little and make it more realistic I think that there should be a few odd shapes (buildings) rooftop textures, and trackside panels out of place not ALL exactly straight!

Another thing is background trees that you see around the track, they could also be moving ( not the whole tree and not all the trees moving she same distance and all that) I mean like just the top of the tree's and each tree having different movement.

Also the sky detail in GT Legends, If anyone has seen it is pretty spectacular, looks pretty realistic, I think wherever sky ( except for fight sim {they use even better}) is concerned it should look as good as or maybe better than this, Il try get a screeny done of it soon

but this is just another tip!

Last thing

Im not sure if you have noticed this but I have, As you go down a track or road and look at the ground you will notice that the textures are mostly repeated, If we could have less of the repeation it would be nice.

I highly doubt it but if a game designer see's this It could help for our future games

Also Might be a good idea to make this a sticky if it gets popular, for the future when games improve we can comment and others can say what they like/don't like.

Now I know that games take a long time to make and all that and you need REALLY good hardware to view all the new stuff, but Im thinking that there should be a few games out that have been dedicated only for high end rigs and that have had a lot (say 6-18 months of work put into them), and the designers ( if they do make games only for high end systems they shouldnt worry about hard drive space, go beyond the 5gb game barrier, 10 maybe 15gb worth of game, if its worth it, as most high end systems have the space avaliable for the games so the designers need'nt worry about the size!

These are all just things that I have picked out whilst gaming that I think would be a nice thing to be improved and will effect the experience alot to make it that bit better.

If you have managed to get to the end of this post well done

and thanks for reading, please comment or put down your own opinions

Dr Studly · 04-05-2006, 04:16 AM

yea... well IMO i think some of the older games are just as fun(even though they have worse graphics etc...) i think they are more fun then some of the new games... don't get me wrong i think new games are great but i think gameplay is getting replaced by graphics...

also, we need to work on more virtual reality... lets say instead of different servers in online gameplay, there is a planet it is all on, and it is one big war and u can choose to be part of it... no map boundries... instead of a map, a world, and there are different battles going on all over the world... anyone get one i am sayin? (this would mean there would be... o... 2000 players on a single world map?

**DCIScouts** · 04-05-2006, 04:47 AM

I think that the things that worked well for extremely good games in the past are the same things that work extremely well for good games in the present (and probably future)... :

1. Good Storyline (abosolute must-have)
2. Differentiated, yet balanced gameplay
3. Very few bugs/stable programming
4. Fun to play
5. Has some flexibility (and re-playability) for own style of play to emerge

Now, is it bad for a new game to look like it came out 5 years ago? Of course. But to me, that does NOT factor into if the game is good or not. Additionally, games should be trying to bring in new ideas or concepts, but these 5 criteria have been the same way, I would say, since Pong.

But seriously, look at what are considered "great/tiemless" games... Starcraft, Half-Life (and 2), Warcraft, WoW, FEAR, Civilization series, SimCity series, Diablo series, C&C the list goes on. But when you break it down, these 5 things every one of them has in common.

34erd · 04-05-2006, 05:03 AM

In my opinion games need to concentrate more on effects then cramming tons of polys onto the screen. In future I want to see alot more, normal, parallax, and bumb mapping, dynamic light sources, HDR, soft shadows, realistic explosions, etc... FEAR had a low polygon count but the effects more then made up for it

4W4K3 · 04-05-2006, 05:20 AM

Replayability is really waht makes a game worth keeping. Games that get boring half way through, or are just aggrivating don't have alot of incentive to play through again, or to bring over to a friend's or w/e.

Online gameplay is also something that makes a game very popular. Games that are solely single player don't get much looking from me. I'm more of an online/LAN type person who likes to play with others.

Let's take Red Faction. It was fun to play, I'd give it an average rating. Not really stellar, and the storyline and ending kind of sucked. But I'll be darned if I didn't play that game for hours and hours and at various LAN parties because the online play was just so great.

skidude · 04-05-2006, 11:34 PM

Games nowadays seem to concentrate fully on "the best graphics ever seen" and seem to leave a storyline behing, *cough* Half-Life 2 *cough*, so i need a good story to go along with the game, graphics just make you go "WOW, this game looks good..... now what?".

I'd like to see one thing in upcoming games:

Destructable environments.

I mean not just oh you can shoot this barrel and it will explode, i mean if you are in a tank and drive into a building wall, the wall will crumble and u can drive right through, u dont just magically "bounce" off.

Dr Studly · 04-05-2006, 11:36 PM

some technology that will make maps boundrieless... a type of map will keepgenerating as you go on...and i don't mean endless forest... i mean wut it would be like if you kept running... like in WW2 game u run north for a while u will hit w/e city was really north from that battlefield... more realistic enviroment, not graphicwise but lifewise

mrgeorgedude · 04-06-2006, 01:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by skidude

Destructable environments.

I mean not just oh you can shoot this barrel and it will explode, i mean if you are in a tank and drive into a building wall, the wall will crumble and u can drive right through, u dont just magically "bounce" off.

lol ya ive always dreamed of that...like not only will a rocket launcher be able to blow up that helicoptor, but u can shoot a hole right through the wall and enter your objective from a different angle...

in my opinion, FREEDOM is what makes a game fun...not just having to stick to a strict storyline or plot, but be able to do whatever the heck you want and make your own storyline (fable kinda did this but not to a good enough extent

)

Cab00se · 04-06-2006, 01:56 AM

I think the biggest thing like what was mentioned is replayability/online play. I'm in the same boat where I really generally only like games with some type of Multiplayer capability. If it doesn't than it would have to have some insane replay value for me to consider it.

I think games that have been the most successful are games that allow you to experience and utilize a lot of the game in singleplayer but leave you wanting more... a la multiplayer. This would be games like Starcraft where after the campaign you have an idea of what is good. (or at least way back when now bnet is a different place with the money maps).

Also games like Half-life where you learn the need of cover and twitch reaction speed.

The second biggest thing to me is graphics and physics. I can live with medium graphics if the explosions and ragdolls are good. Or in space or something say bits of the ship fly off like in Empire at War. If the physics aren't going to be anything great than the graphics better be amazing.

Basically I look for something that will make me think, but not frustrate me into boredom. I am looking forward to what will come in the future.

4W4K3 · 04-06-2006, 03:09 AM

Actually a destructable environment was created in older games. Again, Red Faction had a pretty much 100% destructible environment. You could skip around certain places by blasting holes in the walls or floors and making tunnels, it was actually necessary in some missions.

They even had an extra map called "Glass house" where you had a rocket launcher and a BIG room. You could blow up the house however you wanted, and create miles and miles of tunnels. I blew holes so far down into the ground, I'd jump in and die when I hit the bottom it was so far. 100% destructable.

It really never caught on though.

04-05-2006, 03:40 AM	#1 (permalink)
Bootup05 Diamond Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Essex, UK Age: 17 Posts: 1,266	What do you think should be improved in our games? What would you like in your games? I have been thinking about this whilst playing some sort of new games rescently, Games are MUCH better than the used to be but to me they still don't look very lifelike, don't get me wrong I think the graphics are wicked but there sort of making games ( especially driving gams) look nice in a different way than reality (if you get what I mean) What I mean about the games which I would personally like improved is, more reflections, If your on the road in the nigh you usually see stacks, all over the place, I think game designers could put a bit more effort into this. Grass, most games (driving/car/racing games) the grass is just flat textured greenery, I think they could try to put some better textures in, like so you can actually see the blades of grass, like in delta force - extreme! Would make the game quite nice. Things like mountains and track borders/edges, houses, buildings, at the moment most square(ish) things in games are made totally square, like as you'r going down a road or track, have you noticed that buildings or track walls are EXACTLY square and straight, to liven it up a little and make it more realistic I think that there should be a few odd shapes (buildings) rooftop textures, and trackside panels out of place not ALL exactly straight! Another thing is background trees that you see around the track, they could also be moving ( not the whole tree and not all the trees moving she same distance and all that) I mean like just the top of the tree's and each tree having different movement. Also the sky detail in GT Legends, If anyone has seen it is pretty spectacular, looks pretty realistic, I think wherever sky ( except for fight sim {they use even better}) is concerned it should look as good as or maybe better than this, Il try get a screeny done of it soon but this is just another tip! Last thing Im not sure if you have noticed this but I have, As you go down a track or road and look at the ground you will notice that the textures are mostly repeated, If we could have less of the repeation it would be nice. I highly doubt it but if a game designer see's this It could help for our future games Also Might be a good idea to make this a sticky if it gets popular, for the future when games improve we can comment and others can say what they like/don't like. Now I know that games take a long time to make and all that and you need REALLY good hardware to view all the new stuff, but Im thinking that there should be a few games out that have been dedicated only for high end rigs and that have had a lot (say 6-18 months of work put into them), and the designers ( if they do make games only for high end systems they shouldnt worry about hard drive space, go beyond the 5gb game barrier, 10 maybe 15gb worth of game, if its worth it, as most high end systems have the space avaliable for the games so the designers need'nt worry about the size! These are all just things that I have picked out whilst gaming that I think would be a nice thing to be improved and will effect the experience alot to make it that bit better. If you have managed to get to the end of this post well done and thanks for reading, please comment or put down your own opinions __________________ Main System Proccy - Intel E6400 @ 3440 \| Mobo - P5B DLX \| RAM - 2GB TwinX 6400 C5 \| GPU - 96GT HDD - WD 400GB Caviar SE - WD 320GB Caviar SE - 160GB Seagate Ext Monitor - Asus 19" Wide LCD \| PSU - Tagan 600W Dual Engine \| Soundcard - SB Live Ext 24 Heatsink - S Infinity \| Optical - Pioneer DVDRW \| OS - Vista Ult64 SP1

04-05-2006, 04:47 AM	#3 (permalink)
DCIScouts Super Moderator Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Kalamazoo, Michigan, USA Age: 25 Posts: 5,049	I think that the things that worked well for extremely good games in the past are the same things that work extremely well for good games in the present (and probably future)... : 1. Good Storyline (abosolute must-have) 2. Differentiated, yet balanced gameplay 3. Very few bugs/stable programming 4. Fun to play 5. Has some flexibility (and re-playability) for own style of play to emerge Now, is it bad for a new game to look like it came out 5 years ago? Of course. But to me, that does NOT factor into if the game is good or not. Additionally, games should be trying to bring in new ideas or concepts, but these 5 criteria have been the same way, I would say, since Pong. But seriously, look at what are considered "great/tiemless" games... Starcraft, Half-Life (and 2), Warcraft, WoW, FEAR, Civilization series, SimCity series, Diablo series, C&C the list goes on. But when you break it down, these 5 things every one of them has in common. __________________ In the end, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends. -Martin Luther King Jr. The most overlooked advantage to owning a computer is that if they foul up there's no law against wacking them around a little. -Joe Martin FOLDING FOR THE GOOD OF MANKIND :F@H Team 44358 Posting and you - CF Edition Cheers CF

04-05-2006, 05:03 AM	#4 (permalink)
34erd Diamond Member Join Date: Jul 2005 Age: 15 Posts: 2,842	In my opinion games need to concentrate more on effects then cramming tons of polys onto the screen. In future I want to see alot more, normal, parallax, and bumb mapping, dynamic light sources, HDR, soft shadows, realistic explosions, etc... FEAR had a low polygon count but the effects more then made up for it __________________ DFI Lanparty UT nF4 SLI DR Athlon 64 3500+ Venice 1 Gig OCZ VX DDR500 DDR BFG GeForce 7800GT 160 Gig SATA HDD CD-RW DVD-ROM Antec NeoPower 480 Thermaltake Tsunami

04-05-2006, 05:20 AM	#5 (permalink)
4W4K3 VIP Member Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Lewisville, TX Age: 20 Posts: 6,864	Replayability is really waht makes a game worth keeping. Games that get boring half way through, or are just aggrivating don't have alot of incentive to play through again, or to bring over to a friend's or w/e. Online gameplay is also something that makes a game very popular. Games that are solely single player don't get much looking from me. I'm more of an online/LAN type person who likes to play with others. Let's take Red Faction. It was fun to play, I'd give it an average rating. Not really stellar, and the storyline and ending kind of sucked. But I'll be darned if I didn't play that game for hours and hours and at various LAN parties because the online play was just so great. __________________ My Computer I choose to believe what I was programmed to believe. Can I eat your brain? FOLDING FOR THE GOOD OF MANKIND :F@H Team 44358

04-05-2006, 11:34 PM	#6 (permalink)
skidude Diamond Member Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Orono, Maine Age: 18 Posts: 4,870	Games nowadays seem to concentrate fully on "the best graphics ever seen" and seem to leave a storyline behing, cough Half-Life 2 cough, so i need a good story to go along with the game, graphics just make you go "WOW, this game looks good..... now what?". I'd like to see one thing in upcoming games: Destructable environments. I mean not just oh you can shoot this barrel and it will explode, i mean if you are in a tank and drive into a building wall, the wall will crumble and u can drive right through, u dont just magically "bounce" off. __________________ Desktop / Laptop CPU- AMD Athlon X2 6000+ 3.0 GHz / Intel Core 2 Quad Q9550 2.8 GHz Video- ATI X1900XTX / 2x 8800M GTX SLI Memory- 2 GB A-Data DDR2800 / 4GB DDR2800 Hard Drives- 3x 160GB 7200RPM / 2x 320GB 5400RPM (RAID 0) Mobo- Gigabyte GA-M61P-S3 Socket AM2 Motherboard / Sager NP9262 "In These Lowly Halls / No Moon Will Beam, No Sun Will Shine / In These Narrow Rooms / No Tears Are Seen, No Laughter Heard" --- Insomnium ---

04-05-2006, 04:16 AM	#2 (permalink)
Dr Studly banned Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Hales Corners Wisconson Age: 17 Posts: 2,435	yea... well IMO i think some of the older games are just as fun(even though they have worse graphics etc...) i think they are more fun then some of the new games... don't get me wrong i think new games are great but i think gameplay is getting replaced by graphics... also, we need to work on more virtual reality... lets say instead of different servers in online gameplay, there is a planet it is all on, and it is one big war and u can choose to be part of it... no map boundries... instead of a map, a world, and there are different battles going on all over the world... anyone get one i am sayin? (this would mean there would be... o... 2000 players on a single world map?

04-05-2006, 11:36 PM	#7 (permalink)
Dr Studly banned Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Hales Corners Wisconson Age: 17 Posts: 2,435	some technology that will make maps boundrieless... a type of map will keepgenerating as you go on...and i don't mean endless forest... i mean wut it would be like if you kept running... like in WW2 game u run north for a while u will hit w/e city was really north from that battlefield... more realistic enviroment, not graphicwise but lifewise Last edited by Dr Studly; 04-05-2006 at 11:44 PM.

04-06-2006, 01:56 AM	#9 (permalink)
Cab00se Silver Member Join Date: Dec 2005 Age: 22 Posts: 134	I think the biggest thing like what was mentioned is replayability/online play. I'm in the same boat where I really generally only like games with some type of Multiplayer capability. If it doesn't than it would have to have some insane replay value for me to consider it. I think games that have been the most successful are games that allow you to experience and utilize a lot of the game in singleplayer but leave you wanting more... a la multiplayer. This would be games like Starcraft where after the campaign you have an idea of what is good. (or at least way back when now bnet is a different place with the money maps). Also games like Half-life where you learn the need of cover and twitch reaction speed. The second biggest thing to me is graphics and physics. I can live with medium graphics if the explosions and ragdolls are good. Or in space or something say bits of the ship fly off like in Empire at War. If the physics aren't going to be anything great than the graphics better be amazing. Basically I look for something that will make me think, but not frustrate me into boredom. I am looking forward to what will come in the future.

04-06-2006, 03:09 AM	#10 (permalink)
4W4K3 VIP Member Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Lewisville, TX Age: 20 Posts: 6,864	Actually a destructable environment was created in older games. Again, Red Faction had a pretty much 100% destructible environment. You could skip around certain places by blasting holes in the walls or floors and making tunnels, it was actually necessary in some missions. They even had an extra map called "Glass house" where you had a rocket launcher and a BIG room. You could blow up the house however you wanted, and create miles and miles of tunnels. I blew holes so far down into the ground, I'd jump in and die when I hit the bottom it was so far. 100% destructable. It really never caught on though. __________________ My Computer I choose to believe what I was programmed to believe. Can I eat your brain? FOLDING FOR THE GOOD OF MANKIND :F@H Team 44358

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode