fvng
Member
So what you're saying is you're 12 years old?
David Cage's games get attacked for "no gameplay" yet LucasArts games are worshipped
- Thread starter fvng
- Start date
So what you're saying is you're 12 years old?
plagiarize
Banned
you asked WHY Cage's games get criticized for having no gameplay, when LucasArts games are worshiped.
That the LucasArts games are well written is the answer to that question. The answer to the conundrum posed cannot be irrelevant to the topic.
Kai Dracon
Writing a dinosaur space opera symphony
There was a genre of game that existed around the time Lucas Arts was making point and click adventures, with gameplay somewhat comparable to a "QTE" cinematic title: Sillywood FMV games.
And the Sillywood genre didn't get as much respect as point and click adventures then, because it reduced gameplay to, yes, "simon says" or Dragon's Lair style interactivity. Even something with a bit more in the way of player choices, like Night Trap, couldn't compare to the established design paradigm of PC graphic adventures.
And the Sillywood genre didn't get as much respect as point and click adventures then, because it reduced gameplay to, yes, "simon says" or Dragon's Lair style interactivity. Even something with a bit more in the way of player choices, like Night Trap, couldn't compare to the established design paradigm of PC graphic adventures.
Fallout-NL
Member
CecilRousso
Member
Indeed it is, and it's a bit sad that it's so overlooked. This is a problem that quite many have with the old LucasArts adventure games, they remember the humour, the story and the characters, forgets the gameplay, and because of that thinks it's irrelevant. Many new adventure games have failed because they failed to understand the games they tried to imitate.
goldenpp72
Member
One has you solving puzzles while being immersed in an interesting world with often times compelling or funny stories, the other has you mashing random nonsensical buttons to do mundane things while listening to poorly done voice work in a shit story and a ho hum setting.
The Shenmue comparison is a bit invalid, Shenmue is a quirky game to an extent and the QTEs were in turn wacky and more arcadey in nature. In Shenmue you have scripted moments where you hit X to throw dudes down stairs or dodge a chainsaw, and the novelty of seeing drastic failures for missing them does play into it a bit. It also doesn't hurt that the concept was not saturated in a bunch of games at the time. It also doesn't hurt that it's only a small fraction of game time for a bigger game. Much like when Assassins Creed first came out and compelled people, auto platforming is now mostly understood as a piss poor mechanic that was only once neat for the novelty of immersion.
In Heavy Rain you have almost an endless stream of QTEs versus once in a great while, and instead of jumping off giant monsters or helicopters (or something else that would be challenging to do as a game mechanic smoothly), you do it to find a damn inhaler in your pocket. Real compelling stuff.
The Shenmue comparison is a bit invalid, Shenmue is a quirky game to an extent and the QTEs were in turn wacky and more arcadey in nature. In Shenmue you have scripted moments where you hit X to throw dudes down stairs or dodge a chainsaw, and the novelty of seeing drastic failures for missing them does play into it a bit. It also doesn't hurt that the concept was not saturated in a bunch of games at the time. It also doesn't hurt that it's only a small fraction of game time for a bigger game. Much like when Assassins Creed first came out and compelled people, auto platforming is now mostly understood as a piss poor mechanic that was only once neat for the novelty of immersion.
In Heavy Rain you have almost an endless stream of QTEs versus once in a great while, and instead of jumping off giant monsters or helicopters (or something else that would be challenging to do as a game mechanic smoothly), you do it to find a damn inhaler in your pocket. Real compelling stuff.
vagabondarts
Member
The idea that they are comparable is a travesty.
Someone needs to actually play some of the old Lucasarts games.
Do it in true style, without a walkthrough.
this.
Someone needs to actually play some of the old Lucasarts games.
Do it in true style, without a walkthrough.
this.
Yup.
It would be like making a thread like:
"Why do people prefer DMC over DmC when DmC has the better storyline (storyline discussion only)"
fvng
Member
I think he's always experimenting which is nice. Heavy Rain was an experimentation of a narrative with branching paths that keeps going even if a character dies.. Beyond was an improvement in a lot of ways but I think once he decides to add an actual challenge to his games with the risk of an actual game over screen... I enjoyed Beyond but I felt the criticism of being unable to lose was a fair one and should be fixed in his next game. Failure is never really punished.
No this doesn't answer the question, other people understood the question and answered, even if I don't necessarily agree with the responses, at least they understood the question.
Okay, and I havne't played any tempest but the original, but they don't just ell you at any given point what you need to do to win, right? The reason, for me, that QTEs can never be about "being in the zone" is because I'm constantly forced to look at what controls I have to hit at any given point. Being "in the zone" for me would be about letting my reflexes take over, interpreting what is one the screen, coming up with a strategy and implementing it, all without really thinking about it.
I'm not talking about high level puzzle solving here, but even in something like Doom, when you get to a point where you understand the weapons and enemies enough that you can run into a room and just instinctively react to whatever you find, I call that being in the zone. QTEs eliminate a crucial step here. There's no interpretation of the action on screen, because you're beign told what to do at every turn. For me, that completely drags me out of the experience.
I think the closest things to QTEs in this sense are probably rhythm games (which is not a genre I'm particularly knowledgeable about, so correct me if I'm wrong). Even in rhythm games, though, you're taking sensory input (for instance, the music and the "note highway" or whatever is the equivalent) and translating these into what you need to do next. Ideally, the whole thing comes together and becomes a reflex, where you're hitting the right button at the right time just because it "feels" right, it's instinctual. QTEs usually never achieve this because they don't have set rules, and they never allow you to break away from the feeling that you're just putting inputs into a controller, because those inputs are constantly being thrown on the screen.
KoopaTheCasual
Junior Member
As everyone has rightfully chimed in on, puzzles are still more of a 'game element' than simulation QTEs. This makes the comparison in the OP pretty bad.
If you wanted to make this case, it would be much much more apt to reference Telltale. But of course, people think the stories and writing in those games is generally a lot better/more solid. So those games are pretty free from criticism.
If you wanted to make this case, it would be much much more apt to reference Telltale. But of course, people think the stories and writing in those games is generally a lot better/more solid. So those games are pretty free from criticism.
Necromanti
Member
Most people seem to be saying that the gameplay offered is of a low quality--not that it has zero gameplay--and that the elements that would make up for it in a story/narrative-centric title (e.g. clever or developed storytelling) are simply not there.
It might also help if you provided compelling evidence to back up your argument in the OP, because I'm not seeing any strong resemblance between, say, Grim Fandango and Heavy Rain. Your original premise seems contrived, reductive and superficial, not pointing out that could be substantiated.
plagiarize
Banned
Imagine two cakes.
One cake is just dry cake. The other cake has whipped cream on it.
People complain that the first cake doesn't have any frosting on it. You rightly recognize that neither does the other cake. So you ask 'Why do people not attack that cake for not having frosting'.
People tell you 'Because it has whipped cream on it'.
Your response... 'Whipped cream is off topic. I was only talking about frosting. Why is it okay that that cake doesn't have frosting on it. Don't mention whipped cream.'
What are you trying to prove? That a well written adventure game is allowed to get away with other things that a badly written one gets criticized for? Well, yeah. Of course... there's actually a reason for me to keep playing the well written one even if it's a bit light on gameplay.
One cake is just dry cake. The other cake has whipped cream on it.
People complain that the first cake doesn't have any frosting on it. You rightly recognize that neither does the other cake. So you ask 'Why do people not attack that cake for not having frosting'.
People tell you 'Because it has whipped cream on it'.
Your response... 'Whipped cream is off topic. I was only talking about frosting. Why is it okay that that cake doesn't have frosting on it. Don't mention whipped cream.'
What are you trying to prove? That a well written adventure game is allowed to get away with other things that a badly written one gets criticized for? Well, yeah. Of course... there's actually a reason for me to keep playing the well written one even if it's a bit light on gameplay.
Even then, I'd actually take DMC3's story over DmC's any day.
#DEMONS?
OH COME ON.
I actually love DmC, but that story is fucking awful
BeatResetsTheWorld
Banned
What's the point of having a discussion when you ask an intentionally leading question and ignore all other factors? It's like you're trying hard to expose some sort of hypocrisy is Cage haters, but can only do so by ecxluding anything you deem irrelevant
That most likely wasn't his point. He was harping on why these people aren't also shitting on Lucas Arts games.
Shenmue did this except death wasn't involved. The outcome and ending to both Shenmue games are the same, but there are plenty of different branches that get you there. Failing a QTE could mean you go down a completely different path than intended, there was more than one method of getting the next clue to progress in the game.
Character death in Heavy Rain meant one character doesn't show up at the end and the chances of other characters showing up gets lower, depending on if one character depended getting clues because of something a different character was doing.
-Adventures that are still loved were well written, the others are just forgotten.
-Terrible writing: the 3 Quantic Dreams games i tried (Farenheit, Heavy Rain and Beyond) suffer from glaring "in your face" plot holes, bad characters, and pacing issues. Good writing is also the reason why Telltale's The Walking Dead is a beloved series, despite being basically the samething.
-Plots in non-adventure games were barely above "save the galaxy from mutant space poop" during the very early '90. Cage games are surrounded by games with good (and often better) writing quality.
-Adventures didn't rely on QTE, the filthiest form of gameplay. Puzzles are barely gameplay if one is a purist of the term (because solving a puzzle won't make you master the game's system of rules, because every puzzle is unique and based of out-of-the-game knowledge), but they still involve the player's problem-solving skill and effort. QTE are reflex testing for monkeys.
That said: I generally like the concept behind QD games, sometimes i just like the idea of an interactive movie being displayed semi-following my input, it's just that QD needs to hire a proper writer.
-Terrible writing: the 3 Quantic Dreams games i tried (Farenheit, Heavy Rain and Beyond) suffer from glaring "in your face" plot holes, bad characters, and pacing issues. Good writing is also the reason why Telltale's The Walking Dead is a beloved series, despite being basically the samething.
-Plots in non-adventure games were barely above "save the galaxy from mutant space poop" during the very early '90. Cage games are surrounded by games with good (and often better) writing quality.
-Adventures didn't rely on QTE, the filthiest form of gameplay. Puzzles are barely gameplay if one is a purist of the term (because solving a puzzle won't make you master the game's system of rules, because every puzzle is unique and based of out-of-the-game knowledge), but they still involve the player's problem-solving skill and effort. QTE are reflex testing for monkeys.
That said: I generally like the concept behind QD games, sometimes i just like the idea of an interactive movie being displayed semi-following my input, it's just that QD needs to hire a proper writer.
lol maybe the mental equivalent of one - Adventure gameplay keeps you young.
Before their graphical descendants text adventures were huge. The gameplay here was exploration and puzzles, there was usually some overarching story. RPGs seem to have mugged Adventure games and taken their stuff.
I do miss some of these old styles of games.
From what I've played of Black Rain - not much admittedly - it does not hold a candle to the depth of most of these old games. I see no disconnect in criticising it for it's lack of gameplay while loving the gameplay of older point and click, or text, adventures.
Holy hell. How is that even a game. And who could be out of his damn mind to compare them to Lucasarts games. My god.
Northeastmonk
Gold Member
I think you're not looking at the year and technology each developer had at the time. I think they're two separate types of games. That's like taking Brutal Doom and Doom and comparing the two. Brutal Doom looks like a shitshow, while the original still holds its nostalgia . Just cause you add detail, doesn't mean it will be better. You're just looking at it differently. And maybe some things are meant to stay the way they were. There's also more to LA's games (comedy, drama, adventure - doing things to make people laugh). David Cage has a few games that each are their own crime drama in and of themselves. I can't stand when games are looked at so objectively, it's as if you aren't following a timeline, but you're just throwing random opinions out there in the open.
Cage's games suffer from not being anything more than what they already are. There aren't multiple games to choose from. It's either drama or more drama (go check out the playable cutscene). Not every LA game has a shower scene either. It's like trying to make someone who was born in the mid 90s understand why games like King's Quest were popular. I think with a younger generation of gamers, they will have to decide what was what. For the majority of people, it was what was available. Maybe there will be a book written in twenty years that will explain it all.
DJSharpeCheddar
Banned
NO, you have to have a discussion by MY RULES.
If the actual answer to my question happens to be outside of that, TOO BAD.
Disregarding the Puzzles vs QTE arguement (which has it's value), I think it's more that when people dislike something, they stick with what stands out the most to criticize it. In this case "no gameplay", when people enjoy the experience they're much less likely to notice such flaws.
It all comes down with more people having issuse with Cage games than with LucasArts game.
It all comes down with more people having issuse with Cage games than with LucasArts game.
Red Mage
Member
CecilRousso
Member
I honestly don't think that the QTE's is the worst part of the gameplay in Cage's games. It's more when he makes trivial movements unneccessary complex in failed attempts to add immersion.
- I'm not having fun moving the joystick in half circles just to drink from a glass, especially when drinking from the glass has no effect whatsoever.
- 4 or 5 different buttons to move up a small slope? Immersion? Not for me. How about letting me just go up there by a simple movement or a button, and you add something more complex then a hidden object scene when I get up there?
. You're not evolving game UI's when you remove it a first glance, and then add giant "Move your joystick in half circle like this" signs over doors and chairs that I maybe should use.
- I'm not having fun moving the joystick in half circles just to drink from a glass, especially when drinking from the glass has no effect whatsoever.
- 4 or 5 different buttons to move up a small slope? Immersion? Not for me. How about letting me just go up there by a simple movement or a button, and you add something more complex then a hidden object scene when I get up there?
. You're not evolving game UI's when you remove it a first glance, and then add giant "Move your joystick in half circle like this" signs over doors and chairs that I maybe should use.
fvng
Member
Well that explains a lot.
Anywho, as long as we're talking about genres that are the foundation of 'our hobby'.. QTE based games like Dragon's Lair also date back to the 80s, so they are very much the foundation of gaming as well even if you don't particularly like them.
Topic has nothing to do with humor, but thanks for your input. Fate of Atlantis and The Dig weren't comedic games.
It's not a cop out, It was an attempt at keeping this conversation thread on topic because I already anticipated responses that derailed the thread about writing when the thread is about comparing gameplay. Do you understand the importance of keeping a thread on topic?
protomouse
Member
and so on and so forth. The LucasArts games were first and foremost about solving puzzles by combining and using items and talking to people. Cage's games take a mechanic that most other games (arguably) use as a filler and stretches it into the length of a full production. You watch a cutscene, you press some buttons, another cutscene, you walk a little, another cutscene etc. I know people that like his stuff but, to me, it's extremely shallow and unengaging. There's little to no challenge, no sense of actually being in the game, little freedom of movement and the choices you have to make feel mostly meaningless when the end-game comes around. Heavy Rain was way better than Beyond - but I definitely consider them both to be as close to "no gameplay" as you can get.
Sir_Crocodile
Member
I find this thread pretty insulting to top tier lucasarts adventure games like Fate of Atlantis and Day of the Tentacle, which had fantastic puzzles.
How you can call games that require logic and lateral thinking as "interactive movies" is beyond me
How you can call games that require logic and lateral thinking as "interactive movies" is beyond me
plagiarize
Banned
Right. LucasArts games have something which more than more than makes up for being light on gameplay (good writing and comedy) whereas Cage games don't have anything that makes up for being light on gameplay.
The end result of a LucasArts game is a completely rewarding experience that isn't lacking. A Cage game falls short, so we look at why it fell short. The LucasArts game didn't fall short, so we're not looking to see if it has less of a particular component than normal.
I don't really understand your point. Why do you consider twitch gameplay as the only form of gameplay that can appeal to people, or the only form that should be labeled as gameplay? Does a text adventure have gameplay according to you? How about something like Animal Crossing? I seriously doubt that you can find any review of Heavy Rain that criticizes the lack of twitch gameplay in Heavy Rain while at the same time praising the way that was handled in the Lucasarts classics. It's the weirdest element to compare these games on, while at the same time saying that the discussion can't be about the writing and the characters, which is what does make the difference for these people. The focus of both types of games (and the most recent Telltale games which, as others have mentioned, are much closer to Heavy Rain's design than the older Lucasarts games) aren't on rewarding your reflex skills as other games are, but on engaging the player into the story and the world it presents.
Believe it or not, some people like to play games that don't feature reflex-based gameplay at all, and want a laid-back experience that reward paying attention and solving puzzles (sometimes not even that, sometimes just for the experience of being in that world). Comparing two games that fall into that last category while focusing on main elements of the first catagory is just baffling to me. It's comparing apples and oranges.
Something I didn't notice before. When the bad dude spills fish all over the floor, people continue to walk through the fish mess and continue shopping like normal, even though they're walking through fish shit and a chase is happening in front of them.
So for your new strawman you're going to have to find people who hate these games and also love Dragon's Lair.
Good luck with that!
I never claimed to like/dislike them.
So you agree then that Heavy Rain is an interactive movie and not and adventure game?
SapientWolf
Trucker Sexologist
Gameplay is kind of an empty term, but for what it's worth, games like Grim Fandango had clever puzzles with solutions that emerged from observable properties of the game world. That sounds like common sense for a developer but a lot of adventure games at the time had puzzles with complete nonsense solutions. The act of solving those puzzles comprised the gameplay, and the controls and interface facilitated that. They were satisfying to solve and required you to explore the incredibly crafted environment and experience the well written dialogue. Since those things made solving the puzzles more enjoyable, we can say they were there in support of the gameplay.
In short, Lucas Arts games had great gameplay, and every aspect of the design worked in tandem to support it.
CecilRousso
Member
Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but I remember it being something that was loathed and mocked backed in the days, and weren't brought back until many years later, as an emergency solution for gameplay to add interactivity to scenes that otherwise wouldn't have it, that saves a lot of resources in terms of game assets in AAA production level games.
During the Amiga years or the golden age of PC gaming I don't remember any game that used it. Maybe the lousy FMV games had something similiar?
The Praiseworthy
Member
Cage's works are extremely unappreciated... which is really sad because they offers so much soul.
CecilRousso
Member
Cage should credited for trying, but we shouldn't overlook the flaws his games has.
Have you played a music game? At high levels, they're all about being in the zone. I'm not sure what you mean about needing to look at the buttons - do you actually look at your controller when you press buttons? I know where every button on my controller is without looking at it.
Wrt tempest, being in "the zone" in tempest 2000 was more about being able to filter out the extraneous visual information overload going on to concentrate mainly on the small bits of gameplay that mattered moment to moment. People watching would be amazed that you could keep track of what was going on.
Edit: and well made qtes usually have a method to their madness. That would be something that I would use as a metric for good vs bad qte. The worst ones are the completely random, out of nowhere qtes.
What are the themes in Indigo Prophecy, Heavy Rain, and Beyond Two Souls? Don't need a huge list, just some assertions and examples.
snoopeasystreet
Member
This is a nonsense retort.
In a game with simplified mechanics, the story is generally used to propel the propel the player through the experience in place of adding mechanical complexity. To discount it would reduce this argument down to "are QTE's more enjoyable than clicking on hotspots?" which would be nonsense. This doesn't even include that solving the puzzles in the LucasArts games usually comes from learning about the rules of the world through interaction with characters and locales and then applying that logic to solve a puzzle.
To say writing/story is irrelevant to this topic would be like saying "graphical fidelity is irrelevant to a topic on immersion". Sure, there's an argument to be made for raw gameplay analysis but you can't really get away with discounting something so core to an experience.
A huge part of the Lucasarts adventure games were the exploration, puzzle solving and character interactions. You felt like you were exploring a new world. That was it's gameplay and it had lots of it.
Heavy Rains objective was not to be a taditional game but a interactive movie, it's basically just one long quicktime event in comparison.
Heavy Rains objective was not to be a taditional game but a interactive movie, it's basically just one long quicktime event in comparison.