@csl316: The first civilization also kind of dealt with a similar struggle. In AC3 you kind of deal with two from the first civilization that ultimately force you to make a typical end of game decision on what you want to do. They basically act as reflections of the Templar/Assassin ideological clash, with one wanting to be released to "help" humanity and the other wanting humanity to deal with the pending crisis on it's own. That is the other thing at the center of this universe, or it was...the "end of the world" crisis. Apparently in some way the artifacts of Eden play a part in preventing some of this. I haven't played AC4 yet but thus far very little has been resolved in the overarching backstory other than basically wrapping up Desmonds part in it.
Devise22's forum posts
To be completely honest the game was kind of a rip off.
As for people saying that would of been cliched, did you play the game? Do you realize how common it is for teenagers specifically of that age and going through that much change in their lives to run away? I was very unhappy with this game after I finished it. Tons of immersion, tons of great method of storytelling and huge emotional set up for the big ending. I found myself stressed and had to work myself into walking into the attic at the end. But that much set up and melodrama is one of the most unrealistic things considering what ended up actually happening.
I'm all for tons of other elements this game used to convey the story, but for everyone praising this game for it's realistic storytelling should give their head a shake. When kids run away they don't leave hap hazard journals around for their siblings as if everything that is happening is the most important and dramatic moment in history. The set up was their, the pay off was not. I'm not saying it had to be suicide either...but come on...something. Something that warranted all that build. Sadly it wasn't. I'll praise the game for what it did do right though, and more games should look into Gone Home for immersion. Having the guts to cover an issue such as this and have a happy ending as well is fine, but didn't really realistically connect said happy ending.
@fredchuckdave Dark souls gives the player an option to not get invaded or summon in help though. The fact that Need for Speed Rivals doesn't do that really hurts the game. Having an ability to just "turn off" the way the game treats multi player and thus unlock fast travel spots or hop into events from a menu screen among several other convenient options would be great.
But to answer the original poster, this won't always be the case. We are going to experience an excess of always online or mostly online multiplayer type games merged with single player games heading forward. Or to coin your phrase, "mingleplayer" games. Right now the sacrifices in game design seem soley set on convenience for balance purposes, but that is mostly because a lot of developers are just doing this for the first time. They look at the way an MMO is structured and try to blend that with their own game design ideas. This will of course evolve and change as this generation continues. Whether that means more options for people who want a more single player like experience, or even more overhauls into a games system and how they interact with each other. We will get there. Dark Souls being a great example of a game that has options similar to that.
This isn't very hard to answer, you should ask for 3rd installments that are better than the second and it's already more challenging and if you want to get crazy ask for 4th over 3rd.
Yeah third installments better than the second or even the first are tough. AC Brotherhood is technically a "third" installment even though it's more of an expansion. Halo 3 is the best in the entire series or at least tied with ODST imo. I thought Fable 3 was the better than the second as well. Resident Evil 4, one of the best in the series. Super Mario...maybe. The Third in that was great. Grand Theft Auto. *Thinks* That is certainly tough. A few f them but not a lot of modern stuff to be honest. Skyrim I suppose.
If a game has some hidden difficulty to it I generally find it to be more enjoyable. In the case of Stanley Parable getting stuck and trying to figure out what to do just makes me more interested in figuring it out. Simply because it is not often you get stumped.
Dark Souls is simply memory patterns combined with nailing controls/gameplay elements. It is a fantastic game to be sure, but it is one of those games that the more you play it the better you are going to get at it. Most modern games give you a small tutorial on a usually familiarized pallete of controls and gameplay styles and you play through the few new things that the specific game brings to the table and are able to master very easily. Dark Souls has a high barrier of entry, as when you start it takes some getting used to. But once you get used to it instead of just levelling off you begin to uncover some depth to the many layers of the games systems.
@ryanwhom While that would be nice, hiring a team of people to moderate every playroom at all hours of the day just to confirm that all the content is above board seems a bit overkill. At the end of the day as soon as one of these incidents happen it makes Twitch, Sony and the integration of this service look bad.
It isn't that there is anything wrong with people get naked on camera, although the husband doing it to a passed out wife...is rather...forceful. Specifically for a willing online audience. The issue more so is that the Twitch service on PS4 is a gaming exclusive stream. If this couple wants to get naked on camera, there are TONS of places on the internet to do that. Why does it have to be on PS4? That isn't what Sony or Twitch are about. So just banning accounts that make non gaming related streams makes sense. It isn't like they are banning people for badmouthing Sony games or something crazy. People can still talk foul and curse and all that other nonsense. So long as the context is one of gaming.
Yeah games don't suffer the same issues as movies usually do when it comes to sequels. Specifically with the first one. Most of the good or great video game franchises end up starting with a solid first game that has a bunch of issues/stuff that they would of liked to iron out/include but it was a new IP. Then in the first sequel they are able to polish out the look of the game, the engine, and include much more that they wanted to while improving upon the base of the game. Which usually ends up being much better.
More often than not when you hit the 3rd or 4th game in a VG franchise, if they are plagued to go on that long...you see hyped expectations, disappointing endings, not enough new things, and ultimately the fanbase and VG world being much more harsh on the game for doing a lot of the same things. The second game is generally always the sweet spot when it comes to quality games in a franchise. Of course there are exceptions to this, but more often than not.
I really wish branding wasn't so common place to make people think things that aren't actually true. "Bethesda" is working on this game but not the Bethesda that worked on Oblivion, Fallout 3, Skyrim. That Bethesda is Todd Howards team, that has no interest in doing an MMO. But being that Bethesda is rather large and ZeniMax wanted them to go out and try to soak up some of the perceived "MMO Money" another team began working on Elder Scrolls Online.
I couldn't speak about the quality, but at the end of the day it isn't the main team working on it. So I take that personally at face value. If it sucks, it isn't like the main teams track record is tarnished. Morrowind, Oblivion, Fallout 3, and Skryim I all found fantastic. When Fallout 4 gets announced in a few years as it likely will, with the main team doing it...I'll actually get excited again.
Mass Effect 2.
Let us be honest here, the Game of the Generation should be one that best defines what gaming was in this generation. Dark Souls is a great game, refined mechanics and multi player from this predecessor and was an absolute joy to run around, die, and run around some more. Killing bosses in the orders you'd like, tons of freedom. But Dark Souls is in a bubble. It's gameplay concepts and how it functions are very much it's own. It belongs as one of the top games of the generation from a quality standpoint, but did it define this generation?
While Mass Effect is hardly the series that created the buzz of hybrid RPG mechanics and action combat, there isn't a single game in this generation that managed to meld the two together as well as Mass Effect 2. Pseudo open world, tons of interesting side quests and characters, branching storyline and dialogue options giving you the freedom to do what you want. Enough world exploring and rpg mechanics to satisfy most audiences. Oh and solid third person combat to boot. The past video game generation has been all about hybrid game genres, open world games, branching stories and various dialogue options as well as refined combat. Mass Effect 2 easily brings the best of some of all of those games together into one package. While I doubt it was the overall best game of the generation, although it was up there, it clearly to me defines this generation of video gaming best. You can play Mass Effect 2 and pretty much experience some of almost every defining/important game from the generation somewhere.