Traditional structure

[KempStar]

Almost all games these days seem to follow similar structures. Example-

Shoot-em-up:
Level-boss-level-boss

FPS:
Pistol-machine gun-shotgun-rockets (etc)

RPG:
Town-journey-dungeon-boss-town-repeat
Walk-boat-airship

Platform game:
Level-mini boss-boss-level


Almost all games are shackled by these conventions. I would imagine that almost all game designers give little or no thought to deviation and structure, which has been to the detriment of game design. There are a few games that do make some effort to be different- For example, Halo. There are no bosses. There is no sequential progression of usefulness in terms of the weapons. All of the weapons are useful in one way or another all the way through the game. One game that might spring to mind in terms of creative structure is Ico. However, whilst it is certainly refreshing that there are no clear "levels", and the pacing of the game is consistent, it falls into the same traps as all the other games. Why should there be a boss at the end of the game? There are no bosses throughout the game, and this battle simply doesnt feel "right" after the game that has preceeded it. The combat throughout feels completely tacked on and sharply incongruous to the atmosphere of the rest of the game. I feel the overall atmosphere would have been more consistent and haunting if the castle had been empty. Perhaps the only reason this didnt happen was that it would have gone against traditional ideals of how a game should be structured. Heres a few issues to ponder-

1) What games (recently or otherwise) do you feel have completely gone against traditional ideas of STRUCTURE, and how have these games succeeded/ failed??

2) How could games/ genres be improved by using different methods of structuring the experience?? it is my opinion that whilst huge innovations have been made in terms of character design, plot, style etc, very few games seem prepared to deviate from the norm in terms of structure. This is to the detriment of gaming.

[lordcookie]

1) Freakout just had boss battles and nothing else. It didnt really work very well either. It became very repetitive, very quickly.

2) I would like to see a beat em up that doesn't end with one massive boss, but instead you just fight one of the normal characters. As nearly every beat em up is set in some type of tournament the winners of groups A and B should compete in the final fight rather than a super boss. This obviously doesn't change the game much, but the boss fights in beat em ups are normally big let downs.

[The Sheriff of Nottingham]

Majora's Mask provided an interesting twist on the traditional Zelda structure, so although the dungeons, bosses etc. were still present they were set against the recurring three day pattern, which gave the familiar structure a new feel. Many didn't like this but equally many see it as the best Zelda for this very reason.

Animal Crossing doesn't seem to fit into any existing genre or structure. At least, I've not had to fight any bosses yet.

I have to disagree with your comments on Ico - I thought the battles worked very well, especially given the denoument in the chamber when... well, you know what happened, I'm not going to get into spoilers. And the final boss battle had been trailed via the two previous encounters with the Queen so it was fitting and inevitable from a story point of view that you would fight her eventually. And without the boss battle, you couldn't have that ending...

[KempStar]

Majora's Mask provided an interesting twist on the traditional Zelda structure, so although the dungeons, bosses etc. were still present they were set against the recurring three day pattern, which gave the familiar structure a new feel. Many didn't like this but equally many see it as the best Zelda for this very reason.

Thats a great example. Why cant other developers be as inventive in this regard? Majoras Mask is one of my favourite games of all time, and certainly my favourite Zelda game by a long shot. It has quite bewildering depth. After many months, I was still discovering new masks, new quests, and stuff I hadnt noticed before. Sometimes I would deliberately let time run out. The way the screen starts shaking violently and the fact the meteor almost engulfs the screen in clock town is fantastic. Now nintendo could have just made another zelda game, with different levels. They could have just taken the time aspect out of the game. It would still have been great IMO, nintendo really should be commended to taking a risk with something different.

Animal Crossing doesn't seem to fit into any existing genre or structure. At least, I've not had to fight any bosses yet.

Another good example. Animal crossing doesnt impose ANY structure or demand on the player, you really can play it how you like.

I have to disagree with your comments on Ico - I thought the battles worked very well, especially given the denoument in the chamber when... well, you know what happened, I'm not going to get into spoilers. And the final boss battle had been trailed via the two previous encounters with the Queen so it was fitting and inevitable from a story point of view that you would fight her eventually. And without the boss battle, you couldn't have that ending...

The battles were ok to begin with, and looked lovely imo. however, after a few battles, they just felt distracting. They posed practically no threat at all, and pressing x repeatedly is all they seemed to involve. It also felt like they were only there to artificially prolong the length of the game.....
tbh I cant remember the ending of Ico! I have a terrible memory when it comes to games. Its good in a way, as I can play RPGs 6 months later, and its like playing a totally new game :P However, as I felt Ico would have been better without the normal battles, I also felt it would have been better without ANY fighting. It jarrs with the style of the game IMO.