Quoting: LinasEspecially Jedi: Fallen Order in my opinion is the most formulaic overpriced asset flip, basically Tomb Raider with lightsabers, just done worse.

That was the exact same thing I said. Tomb Raider in a Star Wars setting, only with far worse, frustrating mechanics and traversal. I spent more time than I should have getting through it, thinking OK, the next planet has to get better. Hmm, Kashyyk, that's a nice planet. Get there and it's just more of the same stupid grappling, wall jumping irritating crap.

That was an utterly horrible game, I never played it again.

Jedi: Survivor isn't much better, in my not so humble opinion. At first I thought they learned from their mistakes of the last one. I was enjoying the living shit out of it on the first few planets. I wasn't having much difficulty traversing or accomplishing anything. Then suddenly the difficulty ramped up to "right click and uninstall" level of annoyance on Jeddha. I tried to get through it but it was just relentless at every turn... "now what".

Those games are colon blow.

Huh, I liked Fallen Order a lot. The souls-lite mechanics, while making no sense at all, suited me perfectly and generally I had a very good time. It wasn't anything exceptional, but I rate it a high 7.

The latest two Tomb Raiders, however... I liked the reboot, it was properly epic and a nice change from what was before (which I liked as well, admittedly). Rise was so bland and uninspired. I never managed to get through Shadow, I'm hoping to muster the resolve some day, but it's just such a terrible slog.

Last edited by damarrin on 30 May 2023 at 9:18 am UTC

Oh, and if someone is looking for something that's not just a reskin of everything else with slightly modified mechanics, the answer is the two latest Zeldas. I know, Nintendo bastards, anti-consumer, backwards, hostile, evil (one or more maybe definitely true), but their games rock.

Last edited by damarrin on 30 May 2023 at 9:34 am UTC

Somewhat related topic: people "trained" to expect certain grindy game-play mechanics and being confused/angry when they don't exist or are actively avoided in indie games.

I noticed this a lot with Veloren, an open-source multiplayer RPG, where people would come to the chat and ask about ways to optimize their grinding strategies and so on all the f*cking time. I mean, come-on... those mechanics are just a ploy in F2P games to make you spend money on microtransactions and loot-boxes and you are seriously asking for them to exist in a game that tries to actively avoid such dark-patters?

Back on topic though: I think the reason why AAA games are so formularic is related... some people just want to tune out and repeat the same thing over and over. Just look at how popular LoL / Dota2 is, which is literally the exact same map over and over again and people have been playing it for 10 years now. Makes me honestly a bit sad to see so many people with what I assume must be coping strategies for mental health issues.

Last edited by Julius on 30 May 2023 at 11:41 am UTC

Quoting: JuliusBack on topic though: I think the reason why AAA games are so formularic is related... some people just want to tune out and repeat the same thing over and over. Just look at how popular LoL / Dota2 is, which is literally the exact same map over and over again and people have been playing it for 10 years now. Makes me honestly a bit sad to see so many people with what I assume must be coping strategies for mental health issues.

People enjoy board games over and over again with possibly limited variations. Baseball, basketball, etc are all the same maps over and over.

I'm fine with games following a formula with minor changes. I liked Tomb Raider in the PS1 days. Sure the yearly games were not innovative but they gave me new levels to play which was fine for me.

We have a lot of games coming out. Many may match current trends but we also get innovative games. Frankly most people won't play the first innovative game because it will have flaws. They will iterate and eventually find the right balance. Vampire Survivors for example wasn't the first auto attacking game but it was the one that got enough things right to takeoff.

Quoting: Dennis_PaynePeople enjoy board games over and over again with possibly limited variations. Baseball, basketball, etc are all the same maps over and over.

Sure, but with the exception of lonely old ladies playing the same game of solitaire over and over again (clear coping strategy) these board games are social events where the game itself hardly matters and at least for board-games people do like to have a larger library to choose from and not play the same (or overly similar) game multiple times in one evening in my experience.

Sports are a slightly different topic because they are competitive (even as a visitor sport), so usually people are mostly just excited about that aspect. Same for gambling, where the game itself isn't really the point.

You could argue that at least LoL fits somewhat into the social and competitive category, but people playing with randos on the internet are not particularly social nor do they really compete unless they are really good.

Last edited by Julius on 30 May 2023 at 9:27 pm UTC

Quoting: JuliusSomewhat related topic: people "trained" to expect certain grindy game-play mechanics and being confused/angry when they don't exist or are actively avoided in indie games.

I noticed this a lot with Veloren, an open-source multiplayer RPG, where people would come to the chat and ask about ways to optimize their grinding strategies and so on all the f*cking time. I mean, come-on... those mechanics are just a ploy in F2P games to make you spend money on microtransactions and loot-boxes and you are seriously asking for them to exist in a game that tries to actively avoid such dark-patters?

Back on topic though: I think the reason why AAA games are so formularic is related... some people just want to tune out and repeat the same thing over and over. Just look at how popular LoL / Dota2 is, which is literally the exact same map over and over again and people have been playing it for 10 years now. Makes me honestly a bit sad to see so many people with what I assume must be coping strategies for mental health issues.

Yeah, in many games I feel like mechanics are there just to check a box. Must have crafting system, must have combat, must have collectibles, etc. Those are seen as easy, drag-and-drop ways to add content, replayability, lore, even challenge... but disconnected from the overall design, it doesn't quite work as a game mechanic. For example, some games have collectibles to give a small nudge for players to explore and find the interesting gameplay outside the main path; some are there just to fill a map that didn't have to be that big and patch over the lack of clear goals.

And then, player expectations are a big deal, and trying to sell to people a game that they don't understand, that they have no idea how it is, can be hard. Staying within a genre, a niche, a formula, can give people a clue about whether they would like the game or not, making the game both more easy to sell (people like X, sell a game that is like X)... but also more approachable to people, benefiting from game literacy and design language and familiarity with tropes or mechanics. Which means it isn't always a bad thing - but the growing consolidation means people have fewer and fewer examples, and those things are decided just by a few large shitty companies and only by virtue of them having more money.

Quoting: JuliusSure, but with the exception of lonely old ladies playing the same game of solitaire over and over again (clear coping strategy) these board games are social events where the game itself hardly matters and at least for board-games people do like to have a larger library to choose from and not play the same (or overly similar) game multiple times in one evening in my experience.

For the game itself hardly mattering... not at all. Modern boardgames have pretty amazing game design, and people are very enthusiastic about the specific games. There are "famous" boardgame designers with signature styles, extensive criteria for categorizing boardgames, old favorites, boardgame snobs that only play certain things...

Now, I agree in that I don't think people repeat boardgames all that much - usually people buy a lot of boardgames and most are played somewhat few times, with variety trumping replayability. And even considering many playthroughs, the length of a game (generally has to fit in a single social gathering) means people don't play the same game for that many hours save for a few favorites.

But even so, some games just have a lot of replayability, and others don't. One thing that tends to greatly reduce replayability, in my opinion, is being somewhat focused on a story - the core game loop tends to be way more replayable than the number of times you want to watch the very same story unfold. Other things, like variable or random setup, also make it easier to replay a game. And it depends on the person, of course. Mobas are definitely more replayable than the average RPG, precisely for having a progression of skill across multiple games that isn't tied to a narrative arc that ends and people move on. But that only goes so far, and there is all the live service elements that companies use precisely to keep the game interesting for people playing on long timescales, so it is not exactly repeating the same thing - it shakes things just enough for people to not get bored. Not exactly my favorite design for games, but I don't think it is quite the same as the stagnation across various games.

Last edited by eldaking on 31 May 2023 at 12:09 am UTC

None of the open world games have ever appealed to me. For me, I'm into fighting games and while a lot of newer games feel different the DLC/Season/MxT method of how they are supported have tapped me out on ever buying those games.

I just play them at locals or when they are free online - or for the rare ones like Tekken 7 - play the arcade version.

I know why devs went that route but they feel so nickel & dimey that I'm unable to enjoy the games.

So I'm just sticking to retro-fighters to play with my friends & family also at retroLocals.

In the mean time, I check out a indie SP game from time to but I avoid anything with crafting and have a jolly time.

The Gardens Between is different. There are two characters walking through spiralling levels that you cannot control directly. What you can do is forward and reverse time and making one of them interact with the environment to get them to the exit at the top of each level.

Quoting: KlaasThe Gardens Between is different. There are two characters walking through spiralling levels that you cannot control directly. What you can do is forward and reverse time and making one of them interact with the environment to get them to the exit at the top of each level.

I liked that game. When it was on Stadia, I rocked it and enjoyed it.