Topic: What makes a great game... great?

@Octane @Grudgebearer

The Order 1886? I loved that game, actually. Got the platinum trophy for it too! I think I played through it 3 times.

As per my first post in this thread, gameplay is my focus, and for an adventure game, it needs to be fun and engaging to control the character. The Order's gameplay is kind of like a cross between Gears of War and the Tomb Raider reboots, both of which I've always thought were very fun to maneuver and control your character. There is a lot of cover-based shooting, and it controls really well along with some unique guns. I also enjoyed that the game presents lots of different settings and scenarios for said shooting; the game didn't wear on me like some other series. The environments and situations managed to feel fresh (this could also be helped by the fact that the game is a tad shorter than most of these action-adventure games).

So yea, the gameplay, in my opinion, is very engaging. But like Octane said, the big problem is that it's broken up a bit too much by all the cutscenes. Still a game I would recommend if you like adventure games, especially since you can probably get it on sale these days for like 20 bucks. Combined with the awesome graphics, it was a cool game.

My wife and I even named one of our cats after one of the characters. lol

...

I wish I was joking.

@rallydefault I've seen enough of it to know I'd not touch it with a 10-foot barge-pole. That and I don't have a PS4.

@Octane Yas (Zora) Queen.

Lol, but seriously, I've played so-called 'rusty spigots' that held my interest and widely lauded or polished to a shine games that bored me to tears. Bethesda games are good examples of that. They're unwieldy by design — and the melee combat is unintentionally pretty forgettable — but they're big, complicated, and enjoyably deep in a way I haven't found other open worlds that try to distill some kind of repeated gameplay formula to be.

That's why I don't put much stock in reviews by subtraction: the notion that any flaw found anywhere in a game makes it lesser despite its strengths. 'Cause the thing is all games have those — trying to ride a horse in Breath of the Wild is a start-stop mess of geometry and those mini games are painful but, like TES games, the game clearly doesn't want you to do that all the time because it doesn't let you summon your mount anywhere.

It's much more productive to review games by their overall content and the impression it leaves. In contrast to smaller flaw, if something like fall damage and poor health regeneration options in The Witcher makes it a slog to explore the open world, then that's something to count against the game more strictly. To that end, I don't see how reviewers can get away with 45 hours spent in an open world game before the date of publication because that's just not how any of them are designed to be played and one doesn't start to feel the boredom inherent to the genre yet. But I'm getting off topic.

@Grudgebearer

lol ok fair enough, but I'm of the opinion that you really can't know something until you've experienced it. You can judge from looks, sure, but you can't really know a game until you've played it.

It doesn't seem like we have the same taste, anyway. You say you love Terraria, but I can't stand that game, to be honest.

@MegaTen @rallydefault This led me to try a horrible Wii game called "Enclave: Shadows of Twilight". An action-adventure game with an incredibly slow camera, graphics that make the Wii fold it's shoulders in disgust, and overall clunky design. There's a reason why there are reviews, and videos that detail a game.

With so many games, so many "bad" and "good" (quotations because opinions differ) games, it's hard to know what to buy and what not. I bought Splatoon for example, and even after putting 50 hours or more into it, I did not enjoy myself, and brought it back. I've paid, what? 54,99 or so for ARMS? And ended up bringing that back, since I couldn't keep up with too many things happening on the screen, and thus could not enjoy my experience.

I'll try a demo if it's there, but I'm far more wary and cautious about just "trying" something new. You're throwing around money, that can be spent on other things that do provide you what you want, and isn't something to just throw around willy-nilly.

I try "new" games all the time, granted that they're within the genre I enjoy (Fate/Extella). Cash is too precious to a regular person like myself to act as if it's disposable without solid reasoning as why I'm spending it, and to justify what I'm spending it on. There's a reason why sequels sell as well as they do, because people know what to expect from them "Like the previous game, but better!" (usually)

As for Terraria, I've had great co-op fun in that game, and even single-player, as a bit of creativity brought together with fighting things is what I enjoy the most in games, that and I have IMMENSE respect for the developers of that game, since they've given enough content to for free that could easily have been 20+ in DLC value. Tastes differ, of course, but I believe the general consensus as to The Order 1886, was "not that great" to say the least. With the above explanation, you'll have to pardon me that I don't just buy a PS4 and the Order 1886 to try it myself.

@MegaTen I agree about art direction insofar as old gen games can look great, but not in the sense that games with realistic art styles and without bright primary colors look bad (what I think you were alluding to).

Something need to be detailed to be beautiful to me. That detail can be as simplistic as the high contrast in Inside or the physics effects in Journey, but it has to be there (for instance, both of those games had beautiful animations). I love some realistic 6th gen games, how dirty their worlds can get in the corners of a dimly lit room. In contrast, I loathe some of the more generic designs in Splatoon and ARMS. The robots and base Inklings before they got hairstyle options are good examples.

In 2D games I greatly prefer detailed pixel art or a 2D art aesthetic to 2.5D models. Maybe it's just the games themselves, but A Link to the Past, Phantom Hourglass, and A Link Between Worlds look very bad compared to The Minish Cap. I always though DS / late GBA pixel art was beautiful, and I wish some series like Mario & Luigi and Pokemon Mystery Dungeon had kept that.

Of course visuals aren't my focus when looking at games and I don't mind playing older gen games at all as long as they're not completely gaudy.

For all but text-only games (which I guess aren't even 'video games') one of the most important factors for me is animation - whatever is moving about on the screen in front of me, if the movement isn't pleasing to my eye then I will likely never consider a game great.

I think I watched a video of some Dragon Quest XI (could have been another game though, I can't quite remember) gameplay yesterday and there was some horse riding in it. The animation of the horse's legs was a bit 'off' to my eye and puts a downer on my impression of the game.

@MegaTen I've found plenty of great games that way as well, and my example would be Spectrobes: Origins on the Wii. Got a "meh" score as far as I recall, but I loved every moment of it playing through the story co-op with a dear friend of mine.

I'm just more akin to trying games in the genre that I enjoy, on the platform of choice (as in I'd never buy an RTS on consoles, only on PC).

A great game for me is one that keeps me invested. This can be managed in a few ways. Here are a few recent examples of games that kept me invested for different reasons. Yonder is a simple exploration/farming game. More basic than Stardew and there is no combat. The stylised graphics made me want to explore every corner of the world. That was great to me.

I recently started playing Warframe. The gameplay loop is fun as hell, but the main thing for me is the character customisation and all the measures of success that there are. Watching things level up and that feeling of progression is something that made this game great.

Finally, The Last of Us didn't really break conventions gameplay wise, but the characters and story really pushed me through the game and made it great in my opinion.

Whilst graphics are not the be all and end all of a game, I found that all three were helped by looking good as well as feeling great to play. I would rather look at something nice, than not. However, its not a deal breaker.

@Grudgebearer
Yea, don't get me wrong: I agree with knowing what you like and mostly sticking to it. For example, I'm terrible at strategy/tactical games, and even if I like the game's overall vibe, I know I'm not going to have fun with it. So even if I read/watch a "review" (that's a whole other discussion lol) saying the game is awesome, I know enough about myself that I still won't enjoy the game.

Good example was Starcraft 2. Obviously an AMAZING game. But I suck at it, and RTS just isn't my genre. I bought it anyway, and lo and behold, had to force myself through the campaign, played a handful of online matches, and just never really had fun with it. And it shouldn't have shocked me because, regardless of how good the game was, it's just not in my wheelhouse.

And that is exactly the reason I won't buy Total War: Warhammer even though I've come REALLY close multiple times lol I KNOW it's an excellent, well-made game, but it's still an RTS, and I just don't like RTS.

@rallydefault Hah, you happen to name a game I've got nearly 1200 hours in there, and sure to go over that next Thursday. Got into the Warhammer universe with Age of Reckoning and love RTS/TBS, so this was right up my alley.

But yes, we usually don't have the luxury to try a genre we don't like. I, for example, hate puzzles and have exhausted myself with 2D platformers (most of the indie games these days, lol) even if I did buy BotW and enjoyed it, I've simply used google whenever a shrine came up that wasn't immediately obvious. Puzzles to me, are a distraction to keep me from what I love doing: Fighting/exploring/adventuring.

There's plenty of even Nintendo IP that doesn't interest me (Kirby, Yoshi, ARMS, Splatoon, steered clear of Zelda before BotW, did play Twilight Princess though, due to puzzles, etc), hence my inherent advocating for more third-party presence on Nintendo consoles. It's to get the best of both worlds.

@Grudgebearer
lol yea I used to play the actual figurine Warhammer with my friends when I was younger, so I recognized your username as one of the units, but it also helped bring a good example to mind.

It is all 100% subjective, what you look for in a game is what makes the game great(for you).
For me, currently, I am looking for games with great stories, i have realised, that lately i need a good story as an incentive to play through games nowadays and that a good gameplay just isn't enough for me(unless it is a 3-5 hour retro game) or i have friends to play with.

What makes a great game great? Personal opinion

For me it's joy. Pure and simple. Games are just that...playing (I think way too many people suck the fun out of almost every hobby by taking it way too seriously) and if I can laugh out loud or grin ear to ear, or get my butt whooped, but enjoy it and come back ready for more, the game is great. A good game will already have the mechanics and story (or world) pretty well in hand, but that part when it "clicks", when you can waste hours of your day on it and not realize that happened...then you have a great game on your hands.

@Ryu_Niiyama On Point, Totally agree.

A great game is a game I can recommend to people easily. A masterpiece is a game I can recommend to someone that dislikes said game's genre or previous entries.

For example, I have a friend who doesn't really like extremely long/big games since they can feel overwhelming to beat and generally thinks shorter games have better replayability, something he values greatly. But I recommended to him Xenoblade Chronicles and he couldn't stop playing it, despite the fact that it takes like 50+ hours to beat it on a first playthrough. He considers that game an exception to his tastes.

We all have a friend who doesn't like a specific genre, but if there's a game where you think even haters of the genre can get down with, then it's way beyond a "great game". A great game to me is like, if you even slightly like that genre you'll love that game. A masterpiece is like "this appeals to even non-fans of the genre".

That's how I see it though. Just play the games you love.

A great game is one that has an interesting and appealing gameplay concept and is well rounded and polished in every or nearly every aspect of the game (gameplay, level design, extra content, graphics, storyline).