Are Games Becoming Less About Gameplay?

[Guts]

Well the short answer is: IGN is **** and full of **** reviewers. Like when they gave Football Manager 3/10 or something and Godhand got the same.

Naturally any reviewer with half a brain understands that the actual gameplay is the meat and bones of any game, you have to be able to recognize the games' faults and good qualities. Some people care more about the atmosphere and story than the gameplay, I personally tend to bend that way. I mean take something like No More Heroes, not the greatest game mechanically, kinda clunky in places and even tedious, but I love the game for the crazy style, unpredictable story and loony characters, so I would rate the game overall "great", but I know not everyone would like it.

Or Deadly Premonition which is hugely loved here. Gameplay is quite frankly horrible in every way from the combat to the driving. But there are many other qualities that make up for those short-comings so many people love it. But many people will also hate it. In the end, it comes down to the reviewers personal taste.

[Kit]

Well the short answer is: IGN is **** and full of **** reviewers. Like when they gave Football Manager 3/10 or something and Godhand got the same.

Think I mentioned this before, but I listened to one of their podcasts many moons ago (pc one) while on a long commute.

One of the reviewers hadn't played Half Life or Doom...

Just let that sit there for a minute.

You're reviewing pc games professionally and you haven't even played two of the most important games ever...

Mental.

[charlesr]

I've only played Half Life on the Dreamcast.... And Half Life 2 on the Xbox (although I got stuck and didn't have an old enough save so didn't finish it).

[Kit]

So you are already more qualified to review pc shooters than the staff at IGN. ;p

I know each person will have a specialism etc... but I find it just mental you can get a job reviewing specifically pc games having not played two of the most important games ever.

[speedlolita]

Well that's why people don't tend to give a crap what IGN say.

I haven't since I was very young.

[dataDave]

IGN were good in 1998.

[importaku]

IGN were never good period.

IGN = Idiot Gamers Network

[chipsgravy]

Games stopped being about game-play around the same time scores were removed in favour of achievements. Without scores games became about 'experiences'. Game directors fancied themselves as the next George Lucas and thus interactive movies became the norm. Coincidentally around the time games lost their replay-ability and appeal to me.

[dataDave]

Just stick to Japanese stuff and you'll be fine, then.

[Paddy]

I originally wrote a thorough response to this on my Smartphone at the time but it clearly hated me so it didn't update properly.

I'd been thinking about this recently what with the last handful of titles I'd completed being The Last of Us, Bioshock Infinite, Uncharted 3 (again), Tomb Raider, Dark Souls and The Walking Dead (Telltale Games one). Hopefully these examples are representative of games that can marry story, characters and gameplay effectively so that they all feel necessary in the final product that ends up being the game you play through.

Yes reviewers championing titles because they have great stories and characters first over gameplay seems like a case of backwards priorities but reviews are just a guide after all. I assume the posters on this forum are intelligent enough to make their own decisions about what they choose to play, glazing over certain details in reviews read due to disagreeing/lack of care/wanting to make their own minds up.

As long as we continue to get more examples such as the above and fewer examples of games like Xenosaga (the gameplay was fine but God dammit those cutscenes were ridiculously lengthy) then I think gameplay will continue to matter a great deal for developers and gamers alike.

Let's see how Quantic Dream's upcoming PS3 offering Beyond does with that this October btw...

[BigDeadFreak]

I think the problem is that, while most people on here can distinguish between games that prioritise gameplay and try to communicate to the player through gameplay mechanics rather than cutscenes, the majority of developers seem to focus on the latter.

I recently played Metroid: Zero Mission on the GBA having never properly played a 2D Metroid before (shameful, I know!). The thing that struck me was the sense of weakness and vulnerability giving way to empowerment came through the gradual increase in abilities and the way this meshed seamlessly with the level design. I was constantly thinking 'if only I could reach that/break that/ kill that' and the feeling of almost invincibility that I felt when I got the respective upgrade was tangible. I think this is far more rewarding and resonates on a much deeper level than watching a cutscene that says 'you are now powerful' followed by some cover based shooting that is indistinguishable from the cover based shooting that preceded it.

Moreover, I think this is what separates games from every other medium and it would surely make sense for developers to play to their strengths rather than just try to ape films. With all the will in the world, games are always going to be third rate movies. The best actors, directors, editors and cinematographers will generally be attracted to films as that is where their abilities are best able to shine.