Game Has To Be Innovative to Be Good

Then Dark Souls games aren't good because they're just 3d metroidvanias with a different coat of paint.

And Witcher 3 isn't good because it's just a big, generic fantasy open world rpg.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=JIpLi0RVmfY
youtube.com/watch?v=sB0xy74Zrj8
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

>Game Has To Be Innovative to Be Good
Says who?

Me, I would agree with all three sentiments in the OP. DSouls is bad, so is the witcher, generic WRPG with terrible gameplay. Almost no one makes new, interesting video games anymore.

People that call Uncharted a movie instead of a game.

They say compared to other TPS's like Quantum Break, Max Payne, and Gears of War, Uncharted isn't a game because it's not innovative or doesn't have a gameplay gimmick like time manipulation.

So you're saying it's not possible to review a game on its own merits

That's the same mentality as those dumb ass journalists that write articles like "Dragon's Dogma is the Dark Souls of Fantasy RPGs"

If it's fun it's worth a 6 or a 7. But how are you going to jerk off a game that's the 3rd, 4th, 5th sequel in a series? When it's only undergone minor refinements to satisfy complaints from the last title and has "MORE X and MORE Y" to pad back-of-the-box checklists? Dumb ass journalists give these games 10s - when they don't they get flamed by fanboys. And yeah, it sucks, because sequelitis promotes stagnation, which is bad.

Witcher 3 isn't good because it has shallow, repetitive gameplay and focuses almost entirely on its story.

What games do YOU like, user?

if you say dragons dogma you are subhuman

Then UC4 is a pile of garbage for being rehashing everything that has been made before?

>Witcher 3 isn't good because it has shallow, repetitive gameplay and focuses almost entirely on its story.
So all rpg's?

>dark souls sucks
>witcher 3 sucks

i dont remember ever thinking those series were good

I'm saying if we're going by that oversimplified and arbitrary criteria Sup Forums has made to dismiss Uncharted 4, then Souls games and Witcher are shit as well. Same with a majority of games.

GOTY last year was splatoon. I will get mocked but the gameplay was innovative and new for TPS, and was matched with a unique, cohesive artstyle, character design, music, etc. The gamepad gyroscope means that you can get control finite enough that playing a shooter on console didn't feel like shit for once. They even bothered to throw in single player, although it was lacking and without challenge. Obviously it wasn't perfect, but for Nintendo's first multiplayer shooter outing i enjoyed it, a lot.

This year I'm looking forward to Planet Coaster. Frontier's attention to detail on this title has been exceptional so far. The crowd movement is refreshingly realistic; the terrain editor is the most powerful I've seen in a modern sim; and the promised blueprint system means spergs can share their creations and ensure morons can make gorgeous parks of their own. I've been lusting after this game for a decade now and they're doing everything right.

Otherwise there's not a lot else. P5 will be good hopefully. I still play a lot of COH1 and Anno 2070.

I agree. It's why nuDOOM, Dark Souls 3, and Overwatch are pieces of shit.

Doesn't matter anyway. The only people discussing those heaps of garbage anyway are crossposting redditors.

>P5 will be good hopefully
It won't be good because nothing we have seen is innovative. It's just style over substance.

Let's not forget it's also another sequel which is also guaranteed indication of shit.

P5 is a JRPG so the only thing that has to be good is the story and character design, everything else is going to be rote because that's the nature of japan. The dungeon crawling is mostly filler anyway, but they make it interesting in their own way with the breeding mechanics. There is room for innovation there, but people play Persona to make some virtual friends, embed in their lives for a bit, and have an experience that carries a little more weight then a movie of the same thing because of your level of participation. Worth the price of admission IMO.

That's dumb, a game doesn't have to be groundbreakingly innovative to be good, a game can be derivative but perfect the genre it is derivative of and be good. If a game had to be innovative to be good, then the best games would be the earliest ones that started entire genres, but that clearly isn't the case. Take for example, Catacomb 3D which is one of the first FPS games, and it's great that it was able to start an entire genre but later games by the same company (namely Doom) were able to improve on the formula and come out as a better game that still holds up today.

Innovation is important, but it's not the only thing that makes a game good.

>P5 is a JRPG so the only thing that has to be good is the story and character design
Then that's not a good game.

This guy just dismissed Witcher 3 for its gameplay using the same criteria

And Uncharted is a setpiece driven third person shooter. That hasn't been innovative since the first Max Payne.

>people play Persona to make some virtual friends, embed in their lives for a bit, and have an experience that carries a little more weight then a movie of the same thing because of your level of participation. Worth the price of admission IMO.
You just said the gameplay is mediocre, but it's okay because you're at least interacting in a story which makes it more fulfilling than a movie. How does that not apply to Uncharted? Essetially, by your words, they're both interactive movies, therefore both are bad. They're also sequels and derivative gameplay-wise

That's me, and you misunderstand. The Witcher doesn't have an interesting setting, story, or gameplay - THAT is why it fails. P5 at least will potentially have an interesting story and setting. Even though it'll be somewhat similiar to 2 previous titles, it gets some leeway since we only have those 2 titles to compare it to. Witcher 3 doesn't just stand against 2 other Witcher titles, there's Skyrim and pretty much every other WRPG there too. Give the fucking medieval guys with swords and magic a fucking rest, and if you absolutely CAN'T do that, then you better make it real unique and interesting.

No Witcher game has ever succeeded at that. IMO.

What is this supposed to say?

The OP is illustrating that neither games are good due to that criteria. Neither Witcher, Dark Souls, or Uncharted.

And high school kids saving the world is unique because?

> the gameplay was innovative and new for TPS

No it's not, just because the target you're shooting is different doesn't mean that it's innovative in the slightest

>Planet Coaster
>P5
>both of these being innovative in any gameplay meaning of the word

Persona is a lot more participatory than Uncharted. You don't influence the story at all in UC - there aren't any branching paths, much less different endings. It's harder to get invested and feel a bad of a game's world if you're just steering Nathan Drake in the only direction he's capable of going in, vs. naming your protagonist and making choices for him in the Persona series.

All that said I would stress that I don't think Persona is a LOT better than Uncharted, but more interesting and a little more innovative. I'm just defending it because people always look for the widest hole in your argument.

Agree
Max Payne was way better than Uncharted. Wouldn't you rather have a new game that's good and fresh like Max Payne was than another corridor shooter series like UC?

Because you actually go to school? What other games are like P3-4?

People who criticize Splatoon on 4ch never seem like they've played it. It's the ink and swimming that makes it innovative. That kind of dynamic territorial control is definitely new.

>its another barely-veiled uncharted 4 shilling thread

Any "realistic" game is gonna look like shit in the next few years.
Every game ever.
Style > Realism

So turning games into movies is innovating?

>This year I'm looking forward to Planet Coaster. Frontier's attention to detail on this title has been exceptional so far. The crowd movement is refreshingly realistic; the terrain editor is the most powerful I've seen in a modern sim
None of that is innovation gameplay-ise. That's refinement.

There hasn't been a decent coaster game in 10 years. This isn't just about whether a game can bring a 100% never-before-seen experience, it's about a 'fresh' experience. Uncharted was a clone when it came out and we've had 4 now in a time period where no coaster sims have been released.

I DID play Splatoon and I loved it a lot

but it's not an innovative video game, you're a complete fucking dipshit if you think it is

and therefore, your entire argument falls apart and you're just left as a moron who believes one thing and says another.

>its doing metrovania in 3d

>it's non generic in themes, characters, or gameplay

>ive been shut down every time i make this thread because im a stupid u4 fanboy for something that has more cutscenes then actual gameplay. gameplay thats weaker versions of games that came out 10+ years ago. gameplay that improves on nothing. gameplay thats directly cutscene A to cutscene B. gameplay thats literally look for the only way i can go, look for button highlight, "hmm maybe i can find a box to stand on" [you are this much of a stupid idiot intensifies] -nathan drake

Games need to have good gameplay to be good
prove me wrong

You're a dipshit if you think Splatoon isn't innovative, and now your whole post has fallen apart because it was just shitposting, and you're left as a moron who thinks insulting people proves them wrong

this is obvious

You can't influence the story in Max Payne or Gears of War.

Why does Uncharted take the heat then?

Also
>uncharted is a boring corridor shooter

How is it in any way more so than Gears or Max Payne? You actually have to use the environment to your advantage in Uncharted and move because enemies will charge you, flank you, and all cover is destructible.

Compare this playthrough with the E3 demo.

youtube.com/watch?v=JIpLi0RVmfY

youtube.com/watch?v=sB0xy74Zrj8

In what way is Dark Souls innovative in terms of gameplay at all?

You're just slashing and rolling with various swords. Just like in tps's your rolling and shooting with various guns and explosives

You're moving all over the place. You don't have to influence a game's story for it to be good. That was just a reason why Persona succeeds more as a story-based game than Uncharted. Max Payne isn't a story based game, the whole point of max payne is the slow-mo and shotdodge which absolutely was innovative at the time. Sure, it had a story, a fun one, but that wasn't the focus of the game like UC or P3-4. Gears is a garbage title and doesn't aid your comparison. Lastly, enemy AI is not influencing the story, that's just dynamic elements in gameplay. It doesn't change how Drake feels about a given character or vice-versa. These are two completely different things.

Congratulations, you just figured out why the souls series isn't good.

Then why does Max Payne 3 get off the hook?

Uncharted 3, 2, Gears 3, Binary Domain, Vanquish, GTA 5, etc all came out around the same time. And they all virtually played the same.

At least somebody can agree with me.

Souls is the most overrated shit I can think of on Sup Forums.

I'd much rather play Symphony of the Night or Guacamelee.

>it's a "no I'm right on all accounts, all games are shit thread"

Discarded

Yep. All bad (to varying degrees, also i've never played Vanquish).

I think MP3's problem was reboots after years of development. UC2 and 3, the whole Gears series, BD, didn't need to exist. GTA has plenty of room to innovate but the costs to make the game at that map size at that production level are just exorbitant. It may actually be impossible to manage a software project of that size and have it turn out to be good.

You have terrible and extreme biased opinions, dude.

I have absolutely no idea how you can call any of those games terrible but then say you like Persona. You just don't like third person shooters, and maybe you should say that instead of calling the best ones shit. Gears 3 and Uncharted 4 are masterpieces.

Except I said I liked Splatoon. Gears had been done a thousand times before they even made the first one. Have you ever heard of Duke Nukem? Come on. I really fail to see how you do the exact same thing that's been done 1000 times before in gaming and then call it a masterpiece. Serious question, how old are you? Because I don't see how you can't look at modern titles and see a bunch of tired, redunant shit. At least Persona was new. I wasn't crazy about P3 but I thought P4 was really good before they milked it to death. Sometimes when you come up with an actually new idea, the first real sequel can be a lot better than the original (like SMB and SMB3). So yeah, I'm excited for P5 following P4 because SMW was good after SMB3. But Gears and Uncharted have been done SO. MANY. FUCKING. TIMES. Uncharted is just Tomb Raider, for crissakes! They called it Dude Raider when the first one came out! Were you 10 in 2007?

>3d metroidvanias
they aren't you nigger

Yet Sup Forums hates tlou when tlou mp mode alone is insanely more fun than all of w3

Why is a game considered bad if it's not 100% original?

I'm not getting this new Sup Forums meme.

I thought DaS 3 was great. Can't say if it's GOTY yet but it's better than every other 2016 release I've played so far.

>MP mode of a generic tps better than a 300+ hour story.

Here is your (you).

OP is right
But he's not correct

Those games aren't good BECAUSE of what they are on a simplified, surface level, they're good because of what they do with those limitations.

Uncharted 4 is mediocre though

>Rei fag with shit tasted
All's right with the world