Support NeoGAF

[aku:jiki]

Whenever I hear talk of Genji, it seems like the word "shallow" is its twin brother. I'm thinking of a couple of reviews I've read, and some comments in Bebpo's old thread from the japanese release.

My question is... why? Honestly. I'm not sure what qualifies as depth in games these days. I'm a big (2D) shooter nut, and I know that depth for us basically means how many ways you can up your score -- be it multipliers, chains or something else.

I don't know what signifies depth in a third person action title, though, but my guess based on the talk online would be combos. If it doesn't have combos, it seems the game is destined to be deemed "shallow". Personally, I don't see why. Genji doesn't have freeform 18-string combos, sure, but it does have chaining and I find what's addictive with the game is just that. Trying to go for as high a chain as possible, both in and out of Kamui (the game's slowdown feature). My personal record so far is a 100 kill chain with 120+ hits, and I'm always aiming for higher even though I hardly ever reach above 20 since the game isn't really built for comboing between areas like, say, Bujingai was. (Which, I guess, would be another argument for it being shallow?)

Anyway. How do you define depth in genres you like anyway? I'd like to know what you guys think and expand my knowledge!




Side note: It seems Bebpo's thread has half the internet believing Genji is a recycle-fest. Not so. It's true that you revisit the same geographical locations towards the end of the game, but they have been almost completely remodeled and redrawn so it hardly counts as recycling. </whine>

 

[Tamanon]

I think Genji is Japanese for wrong forum.

 

[Prospero]

I clicked on this thinking that it would be about Lady Murasaki's The Tale of Genji, and was all ready to rip the parent poster for saying it doesn't have any depth.

 

[demon]

 

[aku:jiki]

God damn it, how did I end up in OT? I was in the gaming forum, honest!

It's been moved though, I see.

 

[Prospero]

:lol at demon's post

 

[Warm Machine]

Drinky once posted an excellent definition of depth.

 

[drohne]

damnit i'd made up my mind to skip one of these "guy hits things with sword" games, and this thread has gone and screwed it up. genji get.

 

[Sathsquatch]

I think the basic idea behind "depth of gameplay" for any genre is that "deep" games involve a lot of purposeful thought. The game encourages the player to understand the consequences of their actions and decide upon a specific course of actions based upon their understanding of the game. The number of variables that influence decision-making within a game generally determine a game's depth. Games that offer the player options without giving them adequate incentive to understand why they might want to take one course of action over another are "shallow" games. Actions that are not viable or obviously worse than other in game actions do not contribute to a game's depth.

 

[Kiriku]

I finished Genji just a few minutes ago actually, fun game...but on the easy side (since it's easy to abuse the amahagane crystals levelling and get full life everytime, for example). I never bothered spending time on chaining combos and stuff like that, I just played through it and enjoyed it. Kamui was a nice function to speed through some of the easier battles, but I wish they would've developed the system further, or let it evolve throughout the game. It got kind of repetitive towards the end. The game did have recycled environments though...not that it bothers me much in itself...but it made a short game feel somewhat shorter.

 

[Mihail]

If a game has depth, it allows you to play at many skill levels and consistently improve.

An example I always use is F-Zero GX. Everytime you get better at one aspect of the game, there is always another to master (I'd be glad to give specifics if anyone requests them). I don't have requirements for depth in every genre, however, since, in my opinion, not every genre can have depth. RPGs, for example, don't offer much room for improvement in skills.

 

[aku:jiki]

I think the basic idea behind "depth of gameplay" for any genre is that "deep" games involve a lot of purposeful thought. The game encourages the player to understand the consequences of their actions and decide upon a specific course of actions based upon their understanding of the game. The number of variables that influence decision-making within a game generally determine a game's depth. Games that offer the player options without giving them adequate incentive to understand why they might want to take one course of action over another are "shallow" games. Actions that are not viable or obviously worse than other in game actions do not contribute to a game's depth.

So...would you say that Genji offers at least some depth, since it leaves it up to you decide when to fight in realtime, slowed down time or up to 3x slowed time (all with a limit bar that forces you to make the choice to slow down at the right time)? Some battles are easier in realtime, some are not. Some require you to sacrifice your entire "time bar" to slow down everything to a halt to perfect a strike.

The game did have recycled environments though...

How do you figure? Like I posted, yeah, you go back to the same places...but

Spoiler

the leaves and grass are burned, the ground is scorched and cracked. Everything has been redone.

Many games do this, I can't see why Genji is getting an extra amount of hate for it.

damnit i'd made up my mind to skip one of these "guy hits things with sword" games, and this thread has gone and screwed it up. genji get.

But this is one of the good ones! It's surprisingly addictive with the leveling (both through fighting and collecting crystals), "new game+" with kept experience and items and the weapon list. It's like Pokemon with samurai! And the combat is a lot of fun for what it is.

 

[Kiriku]

How do you figure? Like I posted, yeah, you go back to the same places...but

Spoiler

the leaves and grass are burned, the ground is scorched and cracked. Everything has been redone.

Many games do this, I can't see why Genji is getting an extra amount of hate for it.

But I think it's more noticable in Genji since the game is fairly short. Also, I'd say the number of recycled locations in Genji is fairly high, more than average...with it being kind of a short game, I expect more in terms of variation. But it's no big deal really...it just felt a bit cheap.

As for depth...I think difficulty, various kinds of scripted situations and clever enemies can bring out the "depth" in a game like this. But in the case of Genji...the game is too easy, so the player is rarely pushed to explore the possible battle depth (meaning the complexity and variations in the battle system) to its fullest. The depth may be there, but I think many people will not bother to explore it if they can do fine without it.

 

[Sathsquatch]

So...would you say that Genji offers at least some depth, since it leaves it up to you decide when to fight in realtime, slowed down time or up to 3x slowed time (all with a limit bar that forces you to make the choice to slow down at the right time)? Some battles are easier in realtime, some are not. Some require you to sacrifice your entire "time bar" to slow down everything to a halt to perfect a strike.

Well, I haven't played Genji so I don't really know if it's a deep game or not, but those particular mechanics sound pretty cool. I guess that I would be interested to know whether or not it is really obvious when you should alter time to a particular rate. If it was too obvious, then the player wouldn't really be weighing any factors to make the decision. I haven't read a lot of reviews for Genji, so I don't know what specific reasons the reviewers had for calling it "shallow".

I wonder how any of the developers here would define "depth of gameplay".

 

[aku:jiki]

I guess that I would be interested to know whether or not it is really obvious when you should alter time to a particular rate.".

Well, it's obvious in the way that bigger/tougher enemies are harder to beat, and would be easier if time was slowed down, but that wasn't always true for me (some had timing that was just too hard for me to get down while in slowdown mode, so I just beat them manually). Besides that, it's entirely up to the player when and where to use it. Correct usage gets rewarded, like killing bosses in slowdown mode for special items and such.

 

[Sathsquatch]

Well, it's obvious in the way that bigger/tougher enemies are harder to beat, and would be easier if time was slowed down, but that wasn't always true for me (some had timing that was just too hard for me to get down while in slowdown mode, so I just beat them manually). Besides that, it's entirely up to the player when and where to use it. Correct usage gets rewarded, like killing bosses in slowdown mode for special items and such.

Well, that sounds cool and I can see why you like the game. I suspect that the problem with this game may be that this game mechanic and others in this game might always be used in exactly the same way and that the basic situations that the game throws at the player may be too similar. If I can use this slow-motion against every enemy in the same way, then the mechanic itself not very deep because its too easy to use and to understand. If the player doesn't have to weigh using this slow motion against other powers or figure out how this slow motion helps in different ways during different situations, the game will probably feel shallow.

I guess the slow motion mechanics in Viewtiful Joe would be a good comparison to the slow-motion in this game. In VJ, the slow motion power can be used to do many different things. It can do all of the following:

Dodge attacks that would have normally hit Joe
Make explosions larger and more powerful
Let Joe knock enemies or projectiles into other enemies
Increase the damage Joe does to enemies
Give Joe more time to react to enemy attacks
Slow propellers to make flying objects or enemies drop to the ground

Based on the different attacks or properties that each enemy has, the player needs to figure out how the various properties of the slow motion move help them in given situations. Its up to the player to understand what slow motion does and apply that knowledge to unique situations. For example, the player would use the slow motion differently against the bosses "Another Joe" and "Fire Leo" because Slow motion is used to respond to their unique attacks and vulnerabilities. The player also has to understand how to use Joe's other powers by themselves or with slow motion while managing one vfx meter that limits his use of all three of these powers.

What may make VJ generally considered a "deep" game while Genji is a "shallow" game is that VJ requires application of knowledge of a game's mechanics to unique situations because slow motion has so many different properties in that game. Genji (I assume) generally requires the player to apply the concept of slow motion always do the same thing by allowing them to use their counter-attack or just attack an enemy.

 

[genjiZERO]

I clicked on this thinking that it would be about Lady Murasaki's The Tale of Genji, and was all ready to rip the parent poster for saying it doesn't have any depth.

wouldn't it be hot if they actually made a game based on Hikaru Genji? It could be half date-sim half stealth-action.

 

[aku:jiki]

What may make VJ generally considered a "deep" game while Genji is a "shallow" game is that VJ requires application of knowledge of a game's mechanics to unique situations because slow motion has so many different properties in that game. Genji (I assume) generally requires the player to apply the concept of slow motion always do the same thing by allowing them to use their counter-attack or just attack an enemy.

I see what you mean, but I find it kind of amusing because VJ left me with a totally shallow feeling. Perhaps I played it wrong, but I always just slowed and zoomed on just about every enemy I came across. Speeding up and whatever else powers they had just seemed (and actually were, since slow+zoom yields money and stuff) useless in comparison.

Genji feels more fun, somehow, even though it by definition may in fact be "shallow". It's true that all it does is let you slow down, and that it works the same in every situation. If an enemy's timing in slowdown mode is too hard, you can always slow down twice or even three times (if you've got the full upgrades for the feature) to get an easier time timing, but that would also leave you with less in your "time bar" for future battles. I guess maybe a conclusion would be that Genji is reasonably deep, but not something that'll ever go down in the depth hall of fame.

 

[C- Warrior]

As probably GAF's biggest action gaming fan, I can come up with a lot of ways to analyze depth.

No, depth does not refer to the "amount of combos" one can do.

Take for instance, you can do more combos in Dead or Alive than you can in Virtua Fighter.

However, it's the 'method' of how these combos are performed that is equally/moreso important.

Is it "dial a combo?" ala Dead or Alive/Ninja Gaiden, or is it "freeform" ala Devil May Cry/Virtua Fighter/God of War?

Do you have to look at a menu to memorize and then regurgitate move lists like XYXYYYXXY etc.? Or can you string together a few special moves together anywhere, anytime and most importantly, in any order you want?

That above description shows the difference between combo systems, and animations. A worthless combo that is unbalanced is just an extra animation the developers used that wasted dev. time.

Beyond that, depth is also related to enemies, bosses etc.

God of War's Kratos has a wonderful combo system, magnficient, *kiss**kiss* beautiful.

But the problem, the elements surrounding Kratos is ---shallow as fuck--- bosses that have one or two moves, simplistic A.I, and the defense for most of these bosses (aka ...just 3) is block block block.

Ninja Gaiden's combo system is pretty lame (see: Dead or Alive) but it has aboslutely magnificent controls, defense, A.I, bosses and enemies. Aboslutely perfect. Flawless, without competition, head and shoulders above competition.

So, all that explains who depth isn't just how many combos a character can do. As stated, God of War has better combat mechanics than Ninja Gaiden, but the elements surrounding that combat system is weak in God of War, whereas it's god-like in Ninja Gaiden.

DMC3 has the best combo system out of the bunch, and it's enemies and bosses are varied, threatful, and diverse, however it has a few rough edges like an updated targeted system that isn't needed (DMC1's simpler setup was fine, don't know why they changed it) and a few camera issues that arise.

So, it's not combo's that make depth. It's the totality of it.

Now, let's talk about a game that doesn't have an ass load of move-applied enemies, bosses (with mulitple patterns/advanced A.I and attacks) yet still has depth.

Castlevania Symphony of the Night. Why does that game have depth? (yes, it does have depth). Looking at this game, the ultimate understanding of a why an action title has depth can be found. And that answer is diverse strategic implemenations that vary moment to moment, obstacle to obstacle. The vast combo systems in GoW, DMC, and NG bring a sense of "available strategy." However, my whole spiel on DMC3's and NG's wonderfully created enemies and bosses gives that "avaialable strategy" a purpose for actual use.

Kratos has a lot of potential for strategy with his manual/free-form combo system and diverse array of moves. However, as said above, the cursory enemies and bosses prohibit any pragmatic use of that 'available strategy.'

Symphony of the Night, although not offering as many combos and animations as your typical DMC-era born action game, satisifies Alucard's potential strategy with varied enemies who have varied attacks. Each new enemy you face requires a new strategy, regardless if Alucard can only do a few slashes and a few magic moves.

So, this brings us to why Genji is considered shallow. Although the main character can do a few special chains etc., the same tactics/strategy can be applied to nearly all obstacles presented in the game. One boss fight can be beaten by continually doing air-kicks on it, and doing the other moves etc., has zero practical benefit.

So, it's not exactly having a lot of combos makes a deep action game. It's how the combo system goes in relation to the obstacles and situation that demand the use of the said combo system that matters most, and imporantly gives a game depth. Having said all that, I'm sure one could also understand that more difficult games are generally deeper than ones that are easier.

 

[radios shipping overview]

It sounds to me like Genji's depth should be evaluated on the basis of its kill chaining system and related level layout, not its attacks or combos. Are the levels laid out in such a manner that high-level chaining is rewarding and requires ingenuity to carry out? If so, then that gives it a sort of depth that should be evaluated on separate terms from the usual action game that tries (or doesn't try) to emulate fighting game mechanics. It would more resemble the layered gameplay you'd find in a modern 2D shooter, which is definitely something that should be considered deep.

 

[Finaika]

How about Shinobi/Kunoichi for PS2? Do they considered deep or shallow?

 

[Bebpo]

I think Genji lacks depth because this is what you do in the game.

1. Enemies appear
2. Hit slow-motion button
3. Wait for them to almost attack you
4. Hit attack
5. Repeat on all enemies currently on-screen
6. slow-motion ends and you have the highest possible score you can get

See if this was say difficult to accomplish and there were other less difficult ways of ridding enemies that gave you lower scores maybe the game would have depth. But the fact is that after 30 mins with this game almost anyone should be able to do this perfectly and not get hit once the entire game getting almost a perfect score.

The problem is that after 30 mins you perfect the single only way to get the highest score and there is nothing to work torwards for the entire game. Depth is always being able to get better and keep improving towards the ultimate goal. Depth is where you can have say 10 levels of depth and the newbie kid starts on 1 while the pro player starts around 4 or 5. Even for the pro player there's still 5 ranks that they can work towards, even more so for the newbie. Depth makes a game that anyone can play, yet no one can master right off the bat and everyone can continually get better.

Genji is incredibly easy, the amount of frames they give you to do the slow motion attack is longer than counters in DoA. There is no real skill involved after you get this down and it's not particularly skillfull to execute.

 

[Letter to Elise]

Just got this demo in the mail today.

I'll probably pick it up under $20 as the design intrigues me.

 

[Bebpo]

How about Shinobi/Kunoichi for PS2? Do they considered deep or shallow?

They have plenty of depth since it takes a lot of skill to learn how to chain as many enemies as you can into one kill stream. Even the bosses have great depth like the final boss of Shinobi where anyone can wear him down to death if they try, but only a true master can work a combo off all the talismen, sneak up behind the boss and slice him in the back for a 1 hit kill while in the combo stream. Kunoichi is easier mainly because of the shooting 1 hit kill attack, but there's still a huge difference between someone who'se good at it and someone who has mastered it.

 

[Shouta]

For me, a game with depth is a game that gives you the ability to explore the game systems in a detailed manner and rewards you with better control of the game if you understand it more. You may or may not need to delve into the game systems to beat it but if it's there, it's a game with depth. This goes for all genres, at least to me. However, since RPGs are my main genre, it's a bit tailored to those games.

 

[aku:jiki]

Are the levels laid out in such a manner that high-level chaining is rewarding and requires ingenuity to carry out?

Unfortunately, no. Making it from one enemy encounter to the next with the combo counter intact is impossible. It's the biggest flaw in the game, if you ask me.

As probably GAF's biggest action gaming fan, I can come up with a lot of ways to analyze depth.

Cool post, thanks! It gave me a lot to think about. I especially agree with what you said about SOTN.

nothing to work torwards

There's always perfecting the timing for more difficult enemies, where I would even include normal spear-carrying soldiers. I can never get those down... Either way, there is something to work towards. It may not be considered much, but it's something. I'm about to start my third playthrough and I still can't kamui many enemies without resorting to double kamui.

 

[duckroll]

It seems to me that you actually agree that Genji is/has:

1) short
2) recycled
3) easy
4) bad level design
5) imperfect systems

Therefore, I must wonder why you bothered to start an entire thread defending a game which had about as much impact on the action game genre as someone dropping a piece of sand in the desert. :lol

 

[Bebpo]

There's always perfecting the timing for more difficult enemies, where I would even include normal spear-carrying soldiers. I can never get those down... Either way, there is something to work towards. It may not be considered much, but it's something. I'm about to start my third playthrough and I still can't kamui many enemies without resorting to double kamui.

I think that's the main difference. While you're starting a third playthrough and still perfecting the timings, a lot of people were able to get all the timings down before they even finished the game for the first time. And really if all there is to work torwards is mastering the timings, then once you do that the game gets really really boring.

I liked the game for about the first 2-3 hours of it. But then you kinda master the timings and the environments start repeating and it all goes downhill real fast IMO :\

I don't hate the game, but it's more of a $5-10 purchase that you beat in a day and have a bit of fun with than a fully-fleshed out action game. That being said I'll be skeptical of his next action game until I actually play it.

 

[Kiriku]

I have a certain weakness for these kind of games, high on presentation and fun to play. So I hope they make a sequel, because I think it has potential to become something great. They could develop the Kamui system further, for example...keep it simple but add more variation.

 

[aku:jiki]

It seems to me that you actually agree that Genji is/has:

1) short
2) recycled
3) easy
4) bad level design
5) imperfect systems

Therefore, I must wonder why you bothered to start an entire thread defending a game which had about as much impact on the action game genre as someone dropping a piece of sand in the desert. :lol

I do not agree that on points 1,2 and 4 and I don't really see how you got that out of my posts in this thread. My first run through the game was upwards of 8 hours since I took my time to revisit areas with the other character (since there's pretty much always an item only one of them can get), and since I've gone through it almost three times now I've clocked 14 hours. I don't believe it's recycled either, since when you do return it's when war has broken out and everything is busted. Onimusha does this too but nobody whined then. (Although I guess I can see Kiriku's point on this subject.)

But, yeah, I've redefined some opinions. I just like to think aloud a lot. Type down what I'm thinking and share the thoughts for someone to perhaps build upon. What I really wanted with this thread was not to discuss Genji, though, but to see how people define depth in many genres. I just used Genji as my starting point since it's what I'm playing now. It didn't really work out, but I'm enjoying all the thoughts on depth in the 3rd person action genre.

 

[Callo Merlose]

They have plenty of depth since it takes a lot of skill to learn how to chain as many enemies as you can into one kill stream. Even the bosses have great depth like the final boss of Shinobi where anyone can wear him down to death if they try, but only a true master can work a combo off all the talismen, sneak up behind the boss and slice him in the back for a 1 hit kill while in the combo stream. Kunoichi is easier mainly because of the shooting 1 hit kill attack, but there's still a huge difference between someone who'se good at it and someone who has mastered it.

I did just that in Shinobi, but I'm getting my ass served to me as finger food by Kunoichi. Just now, actually. I'm looking to unlock Hotsuma.

 

[Servizio]

I have a certain weakness for these kind of games, high on presentation and fun to play. So I hope they make a sequel, because I think it has potential to become something great. They could develop the Kamui system further, for example...keep it simple but add more variation.

Already announced for PS3, I think? Not sure if it's PS2 or 3. But I'm pretty sure it was announced just prior to TGS.

 

[Kiriku]

Already announced for PS3, I think? Not sure if it's PS2 or 3. But I'm pretty sure it was announced just prior to TGS.

Thanks, didn't know that.
I thought they just had announced a new game not related to Genji.