Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Goldeneye 64 & Earth Defence Force 2017 - striking similarities?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Goldeneye 64 & Earth Defence Force 2017 - striking similarities?

    I've played Goldenye 64 recently, just out of curiousity and after that I switched to Earth Defence Force and came to the conclusion that both of 'em are among my favourite shooters on any systems. I've thought about why they work so well and then it stroke me, they're quite similar in many fundamental ways!
    But let me explain..


    I've always thought that Goldeneye 64 was and still is a splendid example of a shooter, not because its audiovisual splendor (which is long gone), nor its excellent controls for a console FPS, but because of how the game has been structured.

    Up until Goldeneye, all the other shooters before it followed the formula established by Wolfenstein 3D and Doom, namely traversing through a series of levels in a rather linear fashion. After you've completed a level, you were just send to the next one and while there were secret rooms and different difficulty settings, that tried to raise the replay value, the latter still required you to start the game all over again and the secrets areas weren't that motivating, cause uncovering them wasn't substantially rewarding (in terms of truly unique stuff that altered the gaming experience in a meaningful way).

    When we take a look at Goldenye instead, it fundamentally altered the principle of the more linear structure through subtitle additions. The first one was to break with the predetermined succession of levels and give the user the possibility to replay any completed level at any given point.
    The next addition was to introduce not only difficulty settings that are differentiated by the strength of your enemies, but also by different sub-goals that required you to develope entirely different tactics for how to tackle the levels.
    This would be meaningless, if the levels themselves wouldn't encourage you to try different approaches, but thankfully both the macro (the whole level) and micro (specific rooms/ enemy encounters) situations in the game were explicitly designed with this goal in mind. There's generally more than one solution to a given problem and of course, also the order in which to tackle the sub-goals is mostly up to the player.
    Rare didn't even stop here, although those things alone would increase the replay value siginificantly, they also added rewards, that could be gathered through the completion of certain levels (on certain difficulties) in a given amount of time (those "time trial" times were shown at the end of such a level). Most important of all, those rewards offered significant and therefore meaningful alterations to the core gameplay experience, in form of "cheats", that could be activated and combined to play through already completed levels, just for the fun of it.
    Some of those cheats made the game more difficult (like lightning fast movements) or easier (like enormous heads for easy headshots), but most of them could really change the game and made those already completed levels seem fresh and like joyfull playgrounds all over again. It was similar to a "sandbox style" experience.


    It's really sad but understandable, that I've not seen other games following this example, cause the influence of Goldenye on the shooter genre has been nearly nonexistent in this regard, mainly cause of the dominance of PC titles.
    Except Perfect Dark & Perfect Dark Zero I've encountered only one other series of shooters (albeit not first, but third person ones) that resemble Goldeneye in terms of their game structure, namely Chikyuu Boueigun 1-3, of which the third installment has been released here as Earth Defence Force 2017 for the XBox 360.
    Exactly as with Goldeneye, you're offered the possibility to revisit completed levels anytime and encouraged to replay them on higher difficulties and you're rewarded with meaningful things, such as new weapons, that can completely alter the way you're able to tackle a mission and while the differences between the difficulties aren't as pronounced as in Goldeneye (enemies get tougher and some of 'em get new attacks), there's a certain RPG-like addictivness to it, thx to the armor pickups, that increase your health over time.
    There's another similarity between both games and this is something that imo Perfect Dark didn't quite manage to get right. I'm speaking about the length of the levels, cause most of them are relatively short (like the my favourite levels in Goldeneye) but jam-packed full of non-stop action, which increases the urge of getting "only one more go" at them to try another tactic or weapon combination.


    So, while those two games may not have much in common on the first sight (and you might've thought "WTF?" as you read the threads title), I think they share similarities that are deeply rooted in their overall design and I'd love to see other shooters following these principles, cause that's something that really works quite well in my book and other games could learn from it.

    What do you think, do you agree/ disagree with my assumptions, or able to name other shooters that emlpoy the same structure?

    #2
    I personally can't see the similarities between those 2 games. The most recent game I have played other than Pdz that employs a similar structure to that of goldeneye is actually splinter cell chaos theory. The overall objective based levels felt really similar to 007 when it was played on 00 agent mode.

    Comment


      #3
      At first I was thinking 'nonsense' when I read the title of this thread, but I do agree with you on the difficulty levels - I played through EF 2017 on medium, then hard but now I'm doing the levels as I can. The spiders do my head in so I tend to avoid those levels, levels with a small number of larger enemies tend to be a bit easier as well.

      It was the same as Goldeneye, some levels I found much tougher on 00 Agent so I'd go onto the next and work my way up.

      It works well...rather than being stuck on a level cursing the TV because those spiders have killed me again I can skip to the next or simply choose a level I think I can do.

      John

      Comment


        #4
        Except that the guns don't really change your strategy for the levels in Earth Defence Force 2017 since there isn't really any strategy. I've completed it on normal and nearly on hard now. There is a very lightweight amount of strategy for example if going against flyers don't take just rocket launchers but nothing like the adaptive levels of Goldeneye. Especially since the majority of guns are just upgraded versions of each other which affect damage and reload rates. It is only RPGish in the most basic of senses - i.e. you health increases. It lacks customization and self determination of character strengths which makes RPGs what they are.

        Then there's the fact that Goldeneye shone because of stunning AI, whereas EDF 2017.... well..... doesn't have ANY.

        Goldeneye required skillful aiming, EDF just requires you to level grind your stamina up.

        Don't get me wrong I like EDF a lot but the only similarity is that it lets you replay particular levels from the main menu. So by saving at the start of every level in Quake 4 does that make it like Goldeneye too?

        Oh and in Goldeneye the tank was controllable, unlike EDF.

        Comment


          #5
          If you've only played up to hard I can see why you might not appreciate the comparison - I would say hardest and inferno are a lot more difficult, you can't just breeze through them in order or similar. On hardest and inferno you need to pick out the levels you can do and build them up, which does feel exactly the same as the way I played Goldeneye.

          John

          Comment


            #6
            Well I have done 12 Inferno levels and 19 on Hardest. The comparison is weak at best and coule just as easily be made about a large percentage of other games. You could equally say Goldeneye is like Ninety Nine Nights if that is your basis for comparison. It's looking for a deep link and instead choosing one which is so simple it doesn't stand up.

            Comment


              #7
              So I take it you're not playing the levels in order then?

              John

              Comment


                #8
                Wow, that's a little off-topic, cause it's only partly related to the structure of the campaigns of both games, but well..

                Originally posted by averybluemonkey View Post
                Except that the guns don't really change your strategy for the levels in Earth Defence Force 2017 since there isn't really any strategy. I've completed it on normal and nearly on hard now.
                Those difficulties are a cakewalk and it doesn't really matter which weapons you choose early on. In EDF2's later stages on Inferno, you'll have to come up with different strategies on how to tackle a mission, otherwise you wouldn't stand a chance.
                Originally posted by averybluemonkey
                There is a very lightweight amount of strategy for example if going against flyers don't take just rocket launchers but nothing like the adaptive levels of Goldeneye. Especially since the majority of guns are just upgraded versions of each other which affect damage and reload rates.
                That's not really true, all the different weapon types differ greatly in their useage and while it's true that most of them from the same type are just upgraded versions, there are important differences (velocity of projectiles, reload times, ..) to keep track of and evaluate.
                I think the possibility to play it in Co-Op (and the resutling interplay of your two characters) and the enourmas variety of weapons and huge and open playfields, opens up at least as much possibilities to tackle a level as Goldeneye did, if not more.
                This is escpecially true for EDF2 which offered two completely different characters with two different sets of weapons.

                Originally posted by averybluemonkey
                It is only RPGish in the most basic of senses - i.e. you health increases. It lacks customization and self determination of character strengths which makes RPGs what they are.
                I've spoken about the addictivness, not about typical RGP traits.

                Originally posted by averybluemonkey
                Then there's the fact that Goldeneye shone because of stunning AI, whereas EDF 2017.... well..... doesn't have ANY.
                And you know what? That's entirely valid within the concept of the game and is even beneficial in comparison to a more sophisticated enemy AI. I mean, you're fighting giant ants and the game is knwon for it's nonstop arcade frills. You'd like to play hide & seek with your enemies and stealth parts?
                To say that Goldeneye had stunning AI is also little over the top imo.
                Those enemies aren't that more intelligent than (real) ants. I love that game, but I also see that it wasn't perfect. I mean, I played it recently, and on the hardest setting it's possible to open a door 3m away from two guards, than placing yourself so that you can see the head of the first one, but they still won't recognise you, then shoot the first guard. The second one, albeit standing right besides the first one, doesn't even take notice.

                Originally posted by averybluemonkey
                Goldeneye required skillful aiming, EDF just requires you to level grind your stamina up.
                The level-grinding aspect is also one thing that I despise in games, but if you're not playing well in EDF, you won't ever be able to beat it on the highest difficulties, regardless of how much health you harvested. You can also counterbalance level-grinding with good play, instead of just take houres to mindlessly grind HP pickups, you could tackle a level over and over, until you find a succesfull way through the level.
                Your point also isn't entirely justified, seeing as in EDF2's highest diffictulty, your HP are capped at a relatively low value, so level-grinding isn't possible anymore at that point.
                It may not require the same pinpoint accuracy as Goldeneye did (cause you know, the enemies are as tall as buildings^^), but in contrary movement and usage of the environment also plays a very big part in mastering the game.

                Originally posted by averybluemonkey
                Don't get me wrong I like EDF a lot but the only similarity is that it lets you replay particular levels from the main menu. So by saving at the start of every level in Quake 4 does that make it like Goldeneye too?
                No, cause it doesn't encourage replaying those levels nearly as much as Goldeneye or EDF did, which is partly due to the length of the levels and the absence of rewards.
                Originally posted by averybluemonkey
                Oh and in Goldeneye the tank was controllable, unlike EDF.
                I don't know what you're reffering to exactly, cause I think the tank controlled find in EDF. I also felt that the Tank mission was one of the weakest missions in Goldeneye.

                But yeah whatever, you see I'm referring to EDF2 and not EDF2017, cause I haven't played that yet, but yeah, that doesn't has anything to do with the way EDF's campaign is structured and how it handles player motivation and replay value.


                About the two games that have been mentioned..
                -Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory
                -Ninety Nine Nights

                So they both offer you the possibility and incentive to replay completed levels at any given time, through alteration of levels and meaningful rewards and therefore offer a tremendous amount of replay value regarding their "campaign modes"?


                Interesting, I think I'll have to check them out then.
                @EvilBoris: I hope you don't just refer to the espionage setting and the structure of single levels.

                Originally posted by averybluemonkey
                The comparison is weak at best and coule just as easily be made about a large percentage of other games.
                I'd love to play more shooters (or other action-orientated games) , that structured their (mostly single player) campaigns the same way that Goldeneye did, so if you really know more of 'em, pls tell me.
                Last edited by Ryo Saeba; 22-06-2007, 08:39.

                Comment


                  #9
                  I'm picking more stealth games again, but hitman was brilliant from a replay point of view. you could repeat a previous level at a later time, but you could go back with another weapon that you didn't have access too first time around. It was very satisfying going back to a previous level then just sniping a guy offof a balcony, especially if you had struggled stealthing your way around his mercenary filled mansion.

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X