Quantcast
Destructoid - that1dood's Community Blog




About Me
I'm a chill guy. I like anime, games, technology in general. I'm pretty average for the most part.

Top 10 Favorite Video Games:
Star Ocean: The Second Story
Tales of Destiny
Wild Arms
Final Fantasy VII
Mass Effect
Limbo
Super Mario 3
Tetris
Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess
Portal


Top 10 Favorite Movies:
Transformers
Citizen Kane
Cloverfield
12 Angry Men
Hudsucker Proxy
The Matrix
Rosencrantz and Guildenstern...Are Dead
Fried Green Tomatoes
Better Off Dead
The Lord of the Rings: Return of the King


Top 10 Anime:
Tengen Toppa Gurren Lagann
Denno Coil
Trigun
Cowboy Bebop
Naussica of the valley of the wind
Gundam Wing
Avatar: The Last Airbender
Ronin Warriors
Rouroni Kenshin
Last Exile
Gamer Profile
3DS friend code:
Steam:
Battle:
PSN: austenw
Mii:
Gamertag: Austentaceus
Following (19)
B-Radicate
BlindsideDork
BS3 Owner
Chad Concelmo
Clockwork - Avatar setup pending
Dale North
EternalDeathSlayer
Gameboi
Hamza CTZ Aziz
Jim Sterling
JoshDunford
king3vbo
Knivy
MechaMonkey
N07
njsykora
Sadie G
Snaileb
Topher Cantler
2010 Sucked: Keep it Simple Stupid
that1dood | 9:15 PM on 01.03.2011 10 comments



2010 sucked for me in a lot of ways. I was laid off twice. I lost two of my close friends suddenly and unexpectedly. THIS happened. Needless to say there was a lot of crap going on this past year. So, as a form of stress relief, I turned to video games this year like never before. I played more games this year than I think I have in my whole life combined. Well, maybe not that much... The point is, I played a lot of games. And I came to a realization: Games are best when the idea behind them is simple and uncomplicated.


What were some of the best rated games for last year? A quick glance at MetaCritic shows game such Super Mario Galaxy 2. Mass Effect 2. Pac-Man Championship Edition DX. Starcraft 2. God of War 3. Super Meat Boy. Wow:Cataclysm. Civ 5. Just to name a few. I don't think these games are mistakes. They all have one thing in common: They're not firsts. They're sequels. But not just any sequels, they're sequels made by teams who knew what they had, cut the crap out, knew what they did right the first time and expanded on it or left it as is and released solid products that are fun to play and easy to lose yourself in.

Super Mario Galaxy 2 is a prime example of this. When Nintendo set out to make SMG 2 they knew that they had a winner with SMG1. Everyone loved it. It got rave reviews. But why? Why was this game so amazing? Because it was simple. It's Mario. The goal is simple: get to the star at the end of the level. That's it. Nothing more complicated than that. Granted, there were the amazing platforming aspects to the game. But the point is never lost. The basic idea, to get to the star and have fun doing it, is never lost in a sea of random windows and lists or nonsensical story or bizarre gameplay elements that don't make sense with the rest of the game. It's kept simple. And everyone wins because of it.


Another example, though not exactly obvious, is Mass Effect 2. Mass Effect 2, while not exactly simple in the same way as Super Mario Galaxy, figured out what it did right in the original Mass Effect and just made it better. No more tedious expeditions in the moon rover from hell, no more elevators. Instead we get more engaging third person action, an enthralling story with interesting characters and the return of the semi-unique conversation gameplay. Get the mission, go to the mission, talk to him/her, shoot a bunch of guys, talk to him/her again in their inevitable betrayal, shoot them, rinse, repeat. Simple. Fun. Perfect.


Going to the exact opposite spectrum of the gaming universe from Mass Effect 2, we have the wonderful XBLA game Limbo. This game was not only simple in it's simple platforming gameplay, but it's gorgeous monochrome palette, surprising lack of dialogue just made for an enjoyable, fun, surprisingly complex while simple form or storytelling just goes to show how keeping the basic ideas behind your game makes for a better product.



On the other hand, things can out of hand to a bit of a ridiculous degree. The obvious and unfortunate example of this is Final Fantasy 13. Final Fantasy, while gorgeous, was ultimately one of the worst entries in the Final Fantasy series because it just couldn't seem to get it's crap together. The plot was completely nonsensical, the outrageously linear "beginning" all just make for a less fun game. And the battle system. Oh the battle system. It seems to me that when the creators of a game get to the point that they build a battle system that literally plays itself, they've missed the point. It is widely accepted that Final Fantasy was in it's prime with FF 6-9. I would argue that this is because they were simpler. There was no "paradigm shifting" or sphere grid or any of that to over complicate matters. The story was easy to follow and the characters were well thought out. And despite actually being linear, the world felt open and huge. They were simpler. Easy to comprehend. Kill this guy, move to the next town. With very little nonsense in between save for some dialogue and some battles.


In conclusion, game devs should remember to keep it simple when making their games. When a game is simple and easy to understand, often times it makes for a much better, more enjoyable and more fun gaming experience. SquareEnix, I'm looking at you! If FFXIII Verses or FFXV is as bad as XIII, someone's losing an eye!



Attached photos:

Photo Photo Photo Photo

Is this post awesome? Vote it up!

4

Those who have fapped:  wisearse  


Post a comment! You can also post a photo below:

Comment with Facebook





Click connect and comment instantly!

Comment with Dtoid





New? SIGN UP - it takes 5 seconds

9 comments | showing # 1 to 9
prev next

Kaggen's Avatar - Comment posted on 01/04/2011 00:36
Kaggen
I think as long as you keep it fun an intuitive you can make as complicated games as you want, but you have to explain and educate the player how it´s supposed to work. BUT I get you point and I agree ;D
Kaggen's Avatar - Comment posted on 01/04/2011 00:36
Kaggen
all to a certain degree, as with everything :P
CelicaCrazed's Avatar - Comment posted on 01/04/2011 03:09
CelicaCrazed
Good stuff!!

One of the games I'm most excited for this year is Resistance 3 and everything I'm hearing from Insomniac Games is how they're basically simplifying it. They're taking what worked from the previous games and cutting out the unnecessary bits. Even stuff that was awesome (8-player co-op) or a major selling point (60-player versus) they're cutting out so that they can focus and aim their new game the exact way they want.
LoopyChew's Avatar - Comment posted on 01/04/2011 07:55
LoopyChew
Wow, when I first read the headline, I thought you meant 2010 sucked in terms of gaming. I'm sorry to hear about your friends!

As for the games, that's basically what any developer worth its salt ought to be doing: recognizing their strengths and weaknesses (in terms of the studio as well as the franchise), and building the former while minimizing (or improving on) the latter. One other highly-praised game--Red Dead Redemption--manages to pull this off. Despite it not really being part of a franchise, it's a spiritual sequel to both Red Dead Revolver and GTA IV, much in the same vein of the others on this list. I found GTA IV unplayable, but RDR a huge timesuck.

In 2009, Assassin's Creed II pulled this off beautifully, and while I haven't gotten far enough in Brotherhood to say one way or the other, I've already seen improvements in the formula and critics seem to enjoy the further refinements too.
yourbelovedpariah's Avatar - Comment posted on 01/04/2011 08:53
yourbelovedpariah
I've been thinking this for a long time now. I'm beginning to prefer the XBLA titles after the AAA retail releases, all because they seem much more focused. Super Meat Boy shouldn't have been half as engrossing as it is for a game simply about jumping over things, but weeks later I find myself drawn back to it again and again.
Then I look at Vanquish. While fun, it's a mess in terms of focus. The score attack system has no real weight to it when the weapons for each mission are randomised. Who's to say the score won't improve until you reload and receive the weapons you want? And why, with so much emphasis on replaying levels, does our performance have to be based on a 6-digit number? Why not a medallion, like in Platinum's near-flawless Bayonetta?
Sometimes, less is more. More features don't necessarily equate to better games if they're not well-realisd in the first place.
Elsa's Avatar - Comment posted on 01/04/2011 11:37
Elsa
Nicely said. I too felt that last year gave us far too many sequels. There weren't a lot of new IP's and the ones we saw tended to be similar to existing games.
that1dood's Avatar - Comment posted on 01/04/2011 14:58
that1dood
I honestly don't think there's anything wrong with sequels. If they're done well. All of the above examples are proof of that. The problem is when the first game wasn't that good to begin with and the sequel is just a rehash of the first with all the problems of the first one made worse.
manasteel88's Avatar - Comment posted on 01/04/2011 16:17
manasteel88
Not sure I see what you are talking about with the XIII battle system. I liked it and it was pretty different in what it offered. It was more real time management than active participation, but it wasn't a bad system.

They just made a boring game. Not what I would call bad. Just boring.
PlayHangman's Avatar - Comment posted on 01/05/2011 00:09
PlayHangman
Hmm.

I don't know so much about cutting out features. Cutting out features means cutting DOWN complexity, and complexity is very often an inherent good, even sometimes when complexity IS the bad kind (i.e. the "fat" in games).

Remember when Valve cut out grenades, conc. jumps, extra weapons, etc. out of TF2? People were pisssssseeedddd. And, in fact, a lot of high level players are still pissed because while TFC may have been inelegant in its complexity, it was still, well, COMPLEX, a lot more so than TF2 and, thus, more interesting (at high levels of play, anyway).

Or remember when Smash Bros. Brawl came out and high-level Melee players were peeved at the lack of advanced techniques? Melee, at high-levels of play, was comparable to any fighting game in its complexity whereas Brawl was reduced to a shallow minimum and was a lot less interesting because of it.

If developers are going to cut down complexity, they better know exactly what they're doing. It's better to keep features and REFINE them than outright cut them out.
prev next

Comment with Facebook





Click connect and comment instantly!

Comment with Dtoid





New? SIGN UP - it takes 5 seconds

Comments policy

Destructoid is an open discussion community. You don't need to "audition" to post a comment - just speak your mind. We respect differing opinions on the site, so have at it. Be smart, funny, insightful, clueless, or cute -- but back it up with substance. Keep your cool, keep it fun. We only ask that you act respectfully and above all: don't be a troll and ruin it for everyone else. Don't bring down gamers or we'll, you know, gently shoot you in the face and stuff you into a flaming mailbox. Each comment is your opportuntity to make this community awesomer. Is that even a word?

Avoiding the banhammer only requires common sense: spamming, trolling, racism, NSFW stuff, and other forms of sucking will not be tolerated. If anyone is griefing please report abuse. Be good. Don't suck!