Support NeoGAF

[HowZatOZ]

I think its just what the hardcore do, we nitpick until our heart is content. Just go look at the Watch Dogs threads (don't if you want to stay sane) and you'll see the crazy train ride that is the hardcore market.

 

[sploatee]

I think homogenisation in a shrinking AAA marketplace is the problem.

There's too much budget to take risks. I like grand follies!

But in all honesty, if you want innovation, stay away from console AAA s. It's all about iteration, not innovation.

 

[SEGAvangelist]

People lost their shit over yet another CoD not long ago. It all really comes down to marketing, and boy have Sony been beyond fucking terrible when it comes to showing their games. First, they show a minute of Galahad running throw a corridor. Now they show 30 seconds of him taking cover and shooting stuff. Can't really blame anyone for thinking The Order looks boring.

The Order needs Kevin Spacey pretty much.

 

[Unknown One]

The one big disappointment is the Battlefield series not amping up the destruction.

 

[Amir0x]

"Last-gen gameplay" is just an easy term to refer to something uninspired right now. The Order is uninspired enough to take setpieces wholesale from almost every game of last gen while seeming to add almost nothing on those sequences in twists or improvements.

Man, but we've seen like almost nothing of The Order yet, a total of, what, Four combined minutes of gameplay? I'd say it's a bit early to make THAT judgment

But I do agree they keep showing relatively tepid areas of gameplay, and that they need to re-evaluate how they're sharing this game. But that's a separate topic.

Well that's the rub, because its never clearly defined, but that doesn't matter when you're creating and sustaining hype, whether from marketing teams or from fans devouring every morsel of a new series that seems to hold promise and filling in the silence with their own active imaginations.

I think the only way to put it reasonably is to say that there is a real thirst out there for games that allow for interactivity that would either be impossible in previous generations, or could only now do the concept justice because of that new hardware or new capability set. And its the flagship exclusives carry that torch and those expectations.

The only way around this would have been to sell next-gen as a marginal improvement to graphics horsepower. But who in the world is going to do that?

It does seem to be the case (as with the visual expectations), that developers, publishers and console manufacturers have to share some of the responsibility for why the expectations game is the way it is.

I suppose my point would simply be if we as a gaming community should find a way to look through that marketing fluff for the more realistic expectations we should be having

 

[TheXfactor]

It's not just the gameplay, I think a majority of people were expecting a lot more in terms of graphics. They look better, but sometimes it seems possible on a last gen console. Nothing has wowed the casual or even hardcore audience yet

 

[NullPointer]

People want Life Simulators.

Fuck people then, I want games

But yeah, I do want to have my mind blown too. Whether that's an old school formula perfected and polished to a gleam, or something I never would've imagined, the potential is definitely there.

I suppose my point would simply be if we as a gaming community should find a way to look through that marketing fluff for the more realistic expectations we should be having

I think are plenty of voices here on GAF that do exactly that - and their perspectives probably come across as whining or negativity to those enraptured by the promise of the next thing.

Disclaimer: I am frequently enraptured by the promise of the next thing. Please forgive me.

 

[ghibli99]

I don't understand how there can be such different expectations just because the system is newer. Even within a single generation, advances and refinements are made in all respects. Yes, I do expect visuals to be better, but in terms of gameplay, we've hit a point where most games are so refined that further iteration doesn't feel as significantly different than they did going from, say, Super Mario Bros. to Super Mario Bros. 3. I do agree that there is a subset of people who just hate everything. Trolling or not, what a miserable existence.

 

[Mysterious Stranger]

There are no new genres There is no 4th person FPS game or whatever these games think is new for the new gen.

RPGS, FPS, 3RD PERSON GAMES ARE ALL THE SAME even into PS5.


Don't know what people want, they don't even know!

 

[Toparaman]

Mario World was just Mario 3 with next gen graphics OH NO!

Actually, that was a common criticism of Mario World at the time, and one of the reasons why many people gravitated towards Sonic instead.

 

[Linearskillz]

Yup... it's going to be a very long generation for the people seeking some undefined "next-gen" experience that love to boldly proclaim how unimpressed they are by everything. It's already extremely tiring.

 

[KorrZ]

People lost their shit over yet another CoD not long ago. It all really comes down to marketing, and boy have Sony been beyond fucking terrible when it comes to showing their games. First, they show a minute of Galahad running throw a corridor. Now they show 30 seconds of him taking cover and shooting stuff. Can't really blame anyone for thinking The Order looks boring.

This so much this.

The Last of Us is one of my favourite games of all time, and it is the definition of pure refinement of established mechanics, nothing particularly innovative there.

Sony is just doing an absolute shite job marketing The Order so far.

 

[Josh7289]

There are far too many games and they're far too similar to each other. I find myself bored by almost all of them, because there's hardly anything new in this medium anymore.

The few truly novel games, like Tomodachi Life, still capture my interest, though.

 

[Cosmozone]

Totally forgot about that 'next-gen gameplay' buzzword, lol. That came from the hope, better hardware would be able to offer more than better graphics/eyecandy, like AI, physics, etc. Of course it's a false hope. Always remember, it's ultimatively the software that is most responsible to deliver the goods. That's why I hate when developers say that they could do this and that with better hardware. Just deliver a good game.

 

[CoolOff]

I blame Sessler for the "next-gen gameplay"-train. He just wouldn't stop talking about it pre console-launch.

Gameplay innovation of a larger magnitude won't take place in AAA games, simply because of risk/reward, at least not when talking about stuff that doesn't clearly improve the experience.

 

[Symbiotx]

Addiction to novelty.

Everything must do something that has never been done before.

 

[TechnicPuppet]

I'd rather the opposite. Next gen gameplay ideas and last gen graphics. Graphics is an obsession now, feels like nothing else matters. This gen the first question is always what resolution is that game running at.

 

[Y2Kev]

I think there is a lot of value in mechanical innovation. I think there's also a lot of room for refinement and perfection of existing forms. There are, of course, those rare games that hit both at the same time, but those are generational exceptions. Something like RE4 might qualify.

I think this is like the obscenity test. "I don't know what next-gen gameplay is but I know it when I see it." Games adhering so closely to well established, successful, enjoyable forms often triggers that immediate familiarity reaction from within people.

Effectively we had no technological advancement last generation by a number of the same tokens. Oblivion was a refinement of Morrowind. GTA5 was a refinement of gta4 which built undoubtedly on the framework of GTA: San Andreas. We had innovation around the fringe, like mixed multiplayer-single player interactions, but even those forms were in some regards refining and repurposing existing ideas.

There's a little something old in everything new. We need to do a far better job of describing what "new" means beyond hiding behind lazy and shapeless terms like "AI" and "level design." Come right out and say what you expect.

I'm not addressing trolls. That's not really worth my time.

 

[Alchemist]

There's no such thing as "next-gen gameplay". People are just using that term for games they choose to hate.

 

[Bunta]

I agree entirely. Every game doesn't have to be innovative to be good. There's nothing with with a polished "standard gameplay" game.

 

[Y2Kev]

I'd rather the opposite. Next gen gameplay ideas and last gen graphics. Graphics is an obsession now, feels like nothing else matters. This gen the first question is always what resolution is that game running at.

No, it's not. This is emotional myopia.

 

[Elija2]

I remember seeing a review for Tony Hawk's Project 8 where the reviewer criticized the game for not having "next-gen gameplay", whatever that means. I think at the beginning of a new generation some people just have higher expectations of what a next-gen game should be like, but after enough time has passed they'll correct their expectations.

EDIT: Found the review. At 3:25 the reviewer says "In order to garner truly high scores from IGN, next-gen games have to be next-gen from top to bottom." I'm not sure what that's supposed to mean, but maybe that was just his way of saying that Tony Hawk games have gotten stale (which was kinda true).

 

[BumRush]

So I've seen this more times than I can count (Forza 5, Ryse, inFamous, Knack etc have all been smeared with this), and the latest victim is The Order. First, let me preface by saying I agree they need to reevaluate how they're showing this game, because they keep picking areas that do not showcase what The Order is supposedly really doing according to their own words.

BUT

Why again is it a negative if something IS a 'standard' such and such? A 'standard' TPS that is super refined is still a phenomenal game, potential 10/10 for all we know. A 'standard' racing game that is super refined and polished is likely to play infinitely better than some shallow gimmick showpiece with some turd gameplay feature added to try to 'differentiate' itself from the rest of the market.

Where did this idea come from, that so many people seem to equate innovation for innovation sake with quality? We have literally hundreds, if not THOUSANDS of examples of developers doing just this and releasing garbage bin products with no regard for how the games actually feel to play, all because they're so worried that they're "innovating."

If the innovation comes from a natural place and supplements refined gameplay elements, awesome! But if a game is simply a refined version of what has come before, why is that bad if what came before was widely considered great?

For example, Uncharted is a 'standard TPS' with some platforming elements. The second game is widely regarded on neoGAF and among other gaming communities. I'm not on the same GOTY trip as the people who love that series (I have deep problems with the series, but I digress), but if The Order came out and played like Uncharted, mechanically as enjoyable, would these same people genuinely be criticizing the series still?

I'm not even sure at what point the standards changed for the gameplay entering into next-generation. So far, literally zero games have demonstrated any sort of gameplay that has vastly differentiated itself from some title from last-gen. If there is a single game, my apologies, because I certainly missed it.

Now maybe these people really do dislike everything that has come so far, and that's a respectable position to have. But what I want to know is: what is next-gen gameplay for you? What precisely are you looking for? And what elements of 'last-gen gameplay' are making you reflexively dismiss titles that play like them on next-gen?

Amen.

 

[CountAntonius]

This is all I've ever wanted from Quake 3/ Half life engine era games. For MP purposes. =(

 

[gundamkyoukai]

I think there is a lot of value in mechanical innovation. I think there's also a lot of room for refinement and perfection of existing forms. There are, of course, those rare games that hit both at the same time, but those are generational exceptions. Something like RE4 might qualify.

I think this is like the obscenity test. "I don't know what next-gen gameplay is but I know it when I see it." Games adhering so closely to well established, successful, enjoyable forms often triggers that immediate familiarity reaction from within people.

Effectively we had no technological advancement last generation by a number of the same tokens. Oblivion was a refinement of Morrowind. GTA5 was a refinement of gta4 which built undoubtedly on the framework of GTA: San Andreas. We had innovation around the fringe, like mixed multiplayer-single player interactions, but even those forms were in some regards refining and repurposing existing ideas.

There's a little something old in everything new. We need to do a far better job of describing what "new" means beyond hiding behind lazy and shapeless terms like "AI" and "level design." Come right out and say what you expect.

I'm not addressing trolls. That's not really worth my time.

Yep no one comes out and say what they want that is new and most of the time it would fall into the refining and re purposing existing ideas group .

 

[ricardokenshin]

Regarding A.I.

"next-gen" A.I. can't be as smart or it would frustrate players and think of it as cheating. A.I. has to be "dumb" in games for us to find them enjoyable. When I say "us" is the "most of us who play single player games" if you want a fantastic opponent, then play multiplayer.

Not all people want to fight super intelligent enemies that's why single experiences still exist.

 

[ReignofSparrows]

I honestly think that most of the comments this post is directed toward are from people who had no interest in the game already. If you think about it, most games, by definition, are not pushing the boundaries of innovation. So, for every person shitting on a game for not being innovative enough, that person assuredly plays and enjoys other 'non-innovative' games. There is nothing wrong with a rock-solid game, book, or album that fits neatly within an already defined genre.

My own thoughts are that refinement is really important in all forms of media, and people seem to toss that out the window when there is a new console generation. For instance, with Titanfall, everyone kept lining up on sides of the 'CoD with mechs lol' posts, but when I played the game, I thought the shooting reminding me of CoD was the best part of the game. The gunplay felt fast and responsive, and I didn't go 'oh that's a bad thing that this reminds me of the FPS with my favorite shooting.'

As for the Order - I hate the setting and characters of Gears of War. But the gameplay is solid. So, if a game wants to use that gameplay as a foundation and present to me a setting and story that I have an actual interest in, then I am all for it.

 

[NeoGarrison]

There's no such thing as "next-gen gameplay". People are just use that term for games they choose to hate.

Right on the money.

 

[1.21Gigawatts]

NextGen means we get more powerful machines. More powerful machines don't make gamedesigner more creative all of a sudden, they only give them more horse power to play with.

Infamous used this power to make the gameplay more spectacular looking. The traversal more elegant and beautiful and therefor the gameplay was more fun than it was on last gen.
The game had its weaknesses, but "gameplay not beeing next-gen" is stupid bullshit.


Same for TheOrder or any other game. If devs use the hardwarepower of next gen console to add to the concepts, for example better AI, more destructible envirnments, better storytelling through better facial captures and details etc. than thats fine.

Use proven concepts and improve upon them.
You don't need to innovate always.

In fact, my favorite games of all time are rarely innovative.

 

[Jinko]

I think its just what the hardcore do, we nitpick until our heart is content. Just go look at the Watch Dogs threads (don't if you want to stay sane) and you'll see the crazy train ride that is the hardcore market.

This is the exact thing that sprang to mind reading this thead, I think it partly that expectations are so high right now, especially for people buying into these new consoles, with so few games many have an unrealistic expectation of what next gen gaming will be/should be.

Watch dogs is a good example of how hyping up a game can shoot yourself in the foot, both as a publishers and as a gamer.

 

[Jotaka]

People want a new genre to be born... That why all the crazy about VR set like Oculus or Morpheus... That to me will be a big flop

 

[nbnt]

nvm.

 

[Salex_]

I expect more from new IP. If you're starting from a clean slate and all you come up with is derivative gameplay that looks indistinguishable from other games in the genre then you deserve some flak.

heh. How do you make a game look completely different from every other game in a genre that's been around for decades?

Can you share this knowledge of next gen gameplay? If you can answer this question, is your idea better than established gameplay mechanics?

 

[terrisus]

Last generation it was:
"Just looked like a last gen game with motion controls, who cares?"

 

[Colonel Nasty]

Bad games are bad games even if they are pretty. Ryse, Killzone, and to a lesser extent Infamous. Games should still be fun and creative over fidelity. Indie games should be the only place where games get to by on gameplay. Good looking and innovative are not mutually exclusive.

 

[revimack]

What is 'next-gen gameplay' supposed to mean? The new consoles don't provide much in the way of CPU power, so increases in simulation complexity are likely to be minor.

I'm sure you can iterate on existing concepts and gameplay ideas and such, but we're not likely to see big increases in game complexity like we saw last generation. Graphics quality has improved and will continue to improve a lot, though.

 

[IncandescentPrecept]

I've always said this - GAF is a place where a vocal minority of jaded gamers come to hate. You shouldn't put too much in what is said here.

 

[Tsundere]

I'd rather the opposite. Next gen gameplay ideas and last gen graphics. Graphics is an obsession now, feels like nothing else matters. This gen the first question is always what resolution is that game running at.

B-b-but you bought Ryse!

 

[AniHawk]

so the argument is iteration over innovation, and i agree that innovation is treated as some sort of high water mark versus iteration. iteration really doesn't get its due unless there are other presentation elements. the last of us iterates on the uncharted formula to great success, but it doesn't push the genre in any new directions- it's just a very well-made game.

i know that some people really want new experiences out of new boxes, and i think we have been partially conditioned to that, at least older people, when controllers were constantly evolving and standards for gaming were increasing so much from generation to generation. this gen may have finally seen some sort of standstill where there's very little to immediately differentiate it from the previous generation.

i'm a big fan of iteration though. generally, innovation is a positive, but lack of innovation isn't a negative. i'd rank new super mario bros. wii over super mario galaxy all day every day despite the former having a safer approach.

 

[Darknight]

How many threads are we going to have based on the new Order gameplay? This is two so far.

This is not about the gameplay. Its a legitimate question regarding some gamers in this forum and what they consider innovative gameplay vs same old crap with shiny graphics and their double standards - hipocracy. (they dont say anything alike to their own fav franchises)

Its not a solid argument against current gen games because every generation, the games *at the core* remain the same. Core elements remains the same but engines, graphics, art, textures, animations everything else changes for the better (or worse depending on budget, time, team size etc etc). A TPS at its CORE will have the player moving around, ducking/taking cover, shooting a weapon and killing countless baddies with other actions like QTE thrown in the mix.

So for someone to put The Order down just because it plays like a TPS is bullshit. "Oh wow look he is running around, taking cover and shooting people! So lame, we have seen it before because GEARZ!!!! UNCHARTEDZ!"

A sound argument would be "arent they aiming for a 'filmic' experience? So far I havent seen such thing and all we've seen is corridor shoot-outs. Animations look great but you can still see clipping here and there. Oh and the framerate looks rough. Lets hope its fixed or improve by E3/launch." not "wow a TPS in 2014....LAME. Its copying Gears of War. I mean can RAD even do something new? Why are these dudes shooting people? I want to see something new." and then dont say what they consider innovative or new in this current medium. Or cop out and bring up GoW and say its been done before while ignoring the countless other games before Gears that had similar gameplay mechanics. (Kill.Switch always gets ignored. im sure there are other games as well)

There's no such thing as "next-gen gameplay". People are just use that term for games they choose to hate.

Ok that said it better than me. Basically this.

 

[Mr Git]

If a developer does create something new or inserts an innovative mechanic without it feeling contrived then that's excellent and often a rarity. I'm quite happy playing well established mechanics if they're done correctly or well (TLOU is a good example). Many times I've just overplayed a certain game, but never tired of its core gameplay and would happily eat up another title that filled that hole with something slightly different - even if only aesthetically. I think generally the community can get fatigue from certain genres and that leads people to criticise them more than they would otherwise.

 

[Vire]

I don't think people have a problem if it seems like a good and competent version of a last generation game.

The problem people have with The Order is not that it's yet another third person shooter, it's that it looks like a poor version of things that have come before.

 

[IncandescentPrecept]

What is 'next-gen gameplay' supposed to mean? The new consoles don't provide much in the way of CPU power, so increases in simulation complexity are likely to be minor.

I'm sure you can iterate on existing concepts and gameplay ideas and such, but we're not likely to see big increases in game complexity like we saw last generation. Graphics quality has improved and will continue to improve a lot, though.

Game complexity does not mean a better game. There's a reason why the best games are iterative titles.

 

[commedieu]

Because. Fanboys.

yep. The same reason HD doesn't matter. Paywalls online. Or graphics at all this gen.

Its just a way to shit on thing A.

 

[quickwhips]

Some people on gaf hype stuff so high it can only disappoint...I feel this game might suffer because of it.

 

[Uncle Rupee]

I think it's only natural there comes a time in someone's life when they grow tired of the same experiences with a new coat of paint.

I felt this way back during the transition to the PS3/360 generation. It's one of the reasons I was excited about the Wii, because I thought the motion controls might lead to some innovative game play in old genres. In many cases it did not, but that's besides the point. For some people slapping new graphics on old game design ideas isn't enough.

For my part, I was quite happy to play the better Wii exclusives while ignoring the PS3/360 completely. Only when the generation was coming to a close did I pick up a PS3 and the games I was interested in. I'm glad I waited, and now the feeling has worn off and I'm enjoying those kinds of games again. Sometimes all it takes is a break from things.

 

[SEGAvangelist]

B-b-but you bought Ryse!

Ryse is badass.

 

[Jinko]

Perhaps shooter have got to the point where they can't evolve much further .... maybe shooters are going to die out soon (I can only hope)

 

[NeoGarrison]

It's always just completely funny to me when trolls go on ahead and write things like: OMG what a a crappy A.I!
From a video.

I mean really? How the hell do you really know what the A.I of an unreleased game is like from a video? Hell how do you know what difficulty the player is playing in? I seriously doubt anyone with a brain would showcase a game playing on the hardest difficulty, all you would see is a dude getting killed over and over. Every freaking gameplay video I have ever seen in my life features the player who is playing.... WINNING. Regardless of how enemies move, is that= Bad AI?

A.I complaints for unreleased games are just Troll Toolkit BS.

 

[revimack]

Game complexity does not mean a better game. There's a reason why the best games are iterative titles.

Sure. I just don't think the 'next-gen gameplay' moniker is helpful when you could achieve a similar game on a last-gen console.