Why devs can't make another masterpiece like this?

Why devs can't make another masterpiece like this?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=hzDl2THyF4w
store.steampowered.com/app/494430/
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

It's called THE LAST GUARDIAN, exclusive to the SONY PLAYSTATION 4

Because quality, especially minimalist quality like SotC are really difficult to create and execute properly.

He said masterpiece, not dog walking simulator: XTREME

Because of laziness of both the devs and the consumers, consumers will throw their money at continuous things they're used to (cod) and are afraid to step out of the comfort zone farther than some indie pixel garbage. And as for devs they need to sell, no one seems to want an actual game anymore they just want walking sims and some "it's art it doesn't need to be good" shit. So they make that shit.

Kys

Because trying to make a masterpiece like that would be the fucking problem
It's the big fucking problem with video game companies these days and (for example) why they ruined God of War

For what? The dog walking simulator joke or the actual answer?

>cod boogeyman

Holy shit is this 2009

If this came out today, Sup Forums would hate it.
Ran at ~20 fps and has very little content.

Wasn't calling it shit and so uncool now blah blah blah I was using as in example of a game that every year no matter the quality people will still buy

>if this came out today, Sup Forums would hate it

universal rule that applies to all games

>Implying the "CoD boogeyman" argument isn't still as valid now as it was then
Or at least just replace it with fifa

There are better games that came out this year and it's one of the worst in history of vidya. SoC is a decent little game but nothing special and very predictable.

If it came out today there would be a day one patch to fix half of its problems

This guy gets it. Shadow of the colossus was the exception back then, now these type of games doesn't even exist.

Because its difficult to market. Also its target demographic is difficult to define.

one pleb every thread

Sad but true. For a PS2 game the world alone was amazing, the fact you could climb all over it only add to that. Now we get stuff like Skyrim that you can debate is even more impressive with it world but because the world was so empty cause it people to hate it right away.

If you play on a console pass the PS2 then the odds are that you are spoiled at this point in terms of gaming. It just a matter if you are self aware of it or not. I generally stick around /vr/ to keep myself grounded but at the end of the day I can't help but to see only potential, not what is.

Plebs were normal hardworking people and patricians were incestous neets. So ok I'm fine with it.

>if you don't adhere to our hivemind you're a pleb
Fuck off, the game is okay but it's by no means a masterpiece - it had some excellent visuals and music but the gameplay is dull and repetitive, as well as noticeably lacking in content.

>is a work of art
>gameplay is good and has replay value
A game like this happens once in a lifetime. Even team ICO can't do it again.

I played it during PS2 era but I remember being way more impressed with DQ VIII world (still kinda empty but it was big and looked nice and you could meet rare monsters). Horse riding was top-notch though.

I mean, what games beyond ps2 make it impossible to enjoy shadow of the colossus? I never understood arguments like these because I often go back to play great games, I don't have nostalgia or anything like these arguments claim, Many games are still good.

Yea the horse was great. Love how it was smart enough to kinda auto drive itself.

>gameplay is good and has replay value
Yeah, those flimsy climbing mechanics and boring trips around an empty overworld were sure great. And whoa! You can replay the game with marginally less stamina for climbing! What a challenge!

>guiz i need 50 side quests of hunting 50 wolves

Not the guy but compared to some other games gameplay feels really bad nowadays. World is empty and combat is really bland. Colossi feel like big bullet sponges with one or two weak spots.

>Many games are still good.
That is exactly it though. Many games are still as great as always, just people standards keep increasing. Back to the Skyrim example, people didn't hate the game itself, they hate that it was lacking in stuff that Morrowind/Oblivion had. People can't see the game for the gameplay anymore in some cases and that is just depressing.

I don't find climbing the monsters dull or repetetive. You're fighting giant monsters. It's exciting. Complaining about repetition in a game like this doesn't really make sense. What do you want, minigaames where you're not killing monsters?

As for the lack of content. Does it matter? I don't want games to outstay their welcome, that's when they become truly shit. Not every game needs to be this 100 hour open world grindfest shit

Oh I see now, it's artfags that are ranking it as some god-given masterpiece

Not him, but the game IS good, it's just not a masterpiece. The gameplay isn't particularly great and it's not got much substance to it in general - it's basically the grand spectacle of vidya.

I've finished this game last year, halfway I started going

>great, I get how to kill it
>can I skip it? Please

Even the few times where it threw a swerve at you with the whole "gotta first break its armor" or "use the torch to scare him off and fall like a fag" it was a couple mins more of figuring out. Rest was a fucking chore.

Not the guy and I don't mind killing monsters but lot of them are not interesting enough to fight. It's like playing Monster Hunter game with only big fat herbivores around. It picks up in SotC as the game progresses but it would be great if you had more movesets and strategy for multiple playthroughs.

Yes, but when that's all you do in the game 10+ times over it becomes repetitive. There's one thing of having to climb on a boss, that's some cool shit, but when every boss is the same but the only difference is how to get on the boss it gets quite boring. SoC is alright, but not even close to a masterpiece IMO.

I don't see how it's dificult to market.
Hell, I would pay full price for a game proper polished, finished, with a decent story and a decent soundtrack with joy, and I guess everyone here would do it also.

Sorry user, I disagree with your opinion.
SotC was a masterpiece not only for the game itself, but what the game turns overtime.
Do you remember the 1st time you saw a colossi? The music, while running around trying to figure out how to take down that motherfucker? Or the feeling when you had to take down an non-hostile colossi? The lighting works (for a PS2 game)?
SotC was way more complex than any game we have today on this aspect.
I think we played diferent games I see...

I don't think so.

Yes, similar with said. We got a fucking problem with devs who wanna make fast money, trowing shit at us and what we do? We go and buy that shit.

>world is empty
that's the point desu, its abandoned. Just enjoy the journey. You need a breather between the boss fights.
>Colossi feel like big bullet sponges
That's because you're not supposed to hit them anywhere other than their weak points

Not what I meant at all, this guy summed it up well The climbing mechanic also could've been better implemented, it was pretty finnicky and not in the good way.

>The music, while running around trying to figure out how to take down that motherfucker? Or the feeling when you had to take down an non-hostile colossi?

Yes and many other games offer those same feelings. Good music and lightning doesn't make the game masterpiece IMO, sry to disagree with you.

the game would be an even better masterpiece if I can fight that unused Spider colossi, from the images i've seen, the battle looks fun

but someone did

That guy and you have shit opinions, kys

name some games that offer the same feelings

Not even close to being the same kind of game

>Yes and many other games offer those same feelings
Name 5

It's because Japanese developers design their game around the gameplay rather design the gampeplay around the story.

>that's the point desu, its abandoned. Just enjoy the journey. You need a breather between the boss fights.
The whole game is like 7 hours long. That's not much of a journey.

If this were true JRPGs wouldn't exist

They are in the process of making it. It's called Zelda Breath of the Wild.

kys senpai.

What you want a 50 hour journey of collecting fruits for NPCs

Monster Hunter, Dragon's Dogma,Warcraft 3 , Witcher1, Fallout,

I took 6 hours on a rushed second playthrough
and there's nothing wrong with a game being short

But don't you see how it gets repetitive to climb up, hit a weakpoint, get knocked off, then rinse and repeat?
Basically the whole game played like this, only the presentation changed.

Oh fuck off that's a terrible comparison. Skyrim and SotC aren't even close to the same type of game

Despite it being amazing and one of my most beloved games, it is by no means perfect and it definitely was a case of the right game at the right time.

I fear that something like it would not work the same now, as something like Panzer Dragoon wouldn't either.

This formula has been remade recently again and there are a few games similar to ICO coming out soon, but it is too late because already one did it so magnificently, which was SotC.

There is when there's no real content or replay value. This isn't like the early Resident Evils or something where you had a bunch of game modes, multiple playable characters, and different challenges to beat. SotC is a one-and-done tech spectacle with boring gameplay.

It's still true though. Even if Japanese RPG's suck, they tend to design around the core gameplay elements, or "tweaks" to already established systems like from a turn based system, rather than create their gameplay systems around the story they want to tell. Just look at the most recent western games? Uncharted 4 designs its' gameplay around the story it wants to tell, which lead to some really boring gameplay seen across multiple titles. It didn't do anything new.

Whilst thats true, each colossus had a gimmick that changed the fight, so it didn't feel repetetive to me

No they don't, only one close is Dragons Dogma but it poorly copies it

>What are different strategies for different enemies
>What is emergent complexity
>What is comfy exploration in an alien landscape with amazing sound design

Tip top pleb

No, they changed the overall colossi experience, but nothing would change mid-fight. You literally repeated the same set of actions until it died, and I'm sorry but in what's essentially a boss-rush game I think that's poor design: certainly not something I'd consider a "masterpiece".

Personally I thought Arthas killing potentially infected people was way memorable and interesting than killing Colossi.

There's nothing wrong with something only being made to be appreciated once. Also your use of "content" is dubious. The game is the content. It doesn't have that other shit because it's not a "videogamey" game

>You don't get it the game is empty and boring on PURPOSE! It's an ARTISTIC DECISION!

lmfao idiots

>definitely was a case of the right game at the right time
I agree user.
For me, during my 1st gameplay, SotC offered everything that no other game ever did. I agree the game isn't perfect, no one ever will be, but like you said, it was "magnificently" made.

those are shit comparisons in terms of offering the same feelings

Why?

You're right.
It's an "artistic experience", revered by the pretentious for its grandiose style over substance

its here

youtube.com/watch?v=hzDl2THyF4w

store.steampowered.com/app/494430/

looks noice

You can literally say that about any game though. All games are designed around a few game systems, which are then repeated ad naseum until you've finally completed the game the arbitrary moral choices they present you. In SoTC, everything is left for the player to assess and react to. The game doesn't tell you to feel bad. The game doesn't tell you how to fight this particular enemy. From what I remember there's barely a tutorial for fucks sake. And there is the difference between SoTC and other games. it respects you as an outside force, respects you to form your own conclusions and thoughts about the perceived events and actions you take in this game. Modern game don't do that. They specifically tell you how you should feel, what you should, how you should do it based on very alluding dialogue options, cutscenes, or gameplay segments meant to railroad the player into a specific action to garner a specific result.

>nothing changed mid fight
weakpoints become deactivated at one part of the colossi after x amount of damage, so you have to climb to the next. at the next weakspot, the colossi acts differently.
It handles phases differently, there isn't like a "i'm at 25% health, now I go into rage mode!" indication

>What are different strategies for different enemies
See >What is emergent complexity
A term that I don't think applies to this game at all
>What is comfy exploration in an alien landscape with amazing sound design
Something so basic that even No Man's Sky could achieve it?

BotW looks like a strong contender

This.

Not really, that was a trend long ago, now most games are trying really hard to be grey and ambiguous.

Don't get me wrong, I appreciate that it let's the player simply experience the game without interruption or flashy effects. Nonetheless, the act of climbing itself in this game I felt was a bit tedious and extremely repetitive due to the setup of most fights - it is for these reasons that, whilst I consider it a good game with a strong influence, I would not consider it a masterpiece.

If anything, the fact it didn't have to explain anything to the player only speaks volumes of its lack of substance as a videogame. It really is a game made for, and revered by, artfags.

Plenty of games did these things better than SotC both before and after it came out.

>There's nothing wrong with something only being made to be appreciated once.
It is when you have to dish out $60 for the damn thing. There are NES games that offer more mileage than SotC.

more like why cant devs make something new instead of copypasting everything done during PS2 era? get fucking original i dont pay for you to steal someone elses concepts

as ex. overwatch is stealing designs = i dont buy overwatch.

You see, this is the diference. Arthas killing potentially infect people it's morally wrong, so you feel bad during it.
In SotC the game let you decide if killing a non-hostile colossi is morally wrong or not. The game don't force you to feel something pre-determined in some cutsence or action.
You decide how you will feel about it.

All while painting it in hues easily discerned by even the most challenged consumer.

Even if they're following a market trend to allow player choice, they're presenting it in such a clear cut and self fellating manner that it still disrespects the average intelligence of someone who plays video games.

The climbing mechanic is bare bones, perhaps archaic in its design compared to those of similar structure or mechanics modern video games. However, to simple say that the games entire fault rests on that shoulders of that mechanic is to also lay protest against all the other games on the market. Could it be better? Yes. Was it perfectly fine and above standard at the time? Yes.

You can argue your point so many ways, but let me leave you with this question. Does the fact that a game with seemingly so little substance or value to modern gamer have so much impact on the industry at large, that even people who didn't experience the game during its time are still conversing and arguing about it, then what else constitutes as substance?

This game asked more from the people participating in this game than asking more from the game to serve the players. It's a product designed to arouse the interests of whoever consumes it, rather than play on the those who do.

>It is when you have to dish out $60 for the damn thing.
Oh, please. You found it in the garbage heap for 10 dollars shortly after. All games cost nothing after release, including console games. A game like Shadow of the colossus gets tons of praise for valid reasons. It's not for everybody but that's true for every game

I used SotC as an example user.
Of course we want original ideias, not rip offs.

>You found it in the garbage heap for 10 dollars shortly after.
You buying it used months or years later doesn't justify its original price or value as a product.

Sorry for the typos it's early and I just woke up.

The speed run mode is really fun

So are ZeniMax shills in this thread? They have a hate boner specifically for Team ICO recently

Nobody is putting a gun to your head.
>You buying it used months or years later
Games go on sales all the time.

>Arthas killing potentially infect people it's morally wrong, so you feel bad during it.

Disagree, those people would probably get infected and infect even more people. It's not obvious choice and people often argue what's right and wrong just like in SoTC. And you actually go and kill all of them in the game, it doesn't happen in the cutscene. Sorry, but it's obvious you never played Warcraft 3.

I'm surprised no one has tried to copy this game, the only one I can think of is Prey for the Gods

>more like why cant devs make something new instead of copypasting everything done during PS2 era? get fucking original i dont pay for you to steal someone elses concepts
Despite being a far more ubiquitous console, I think GC and Xbox games were way more influential to the next gen than PS2 games - not counting multi-plats.

CoD and FIFA both existed when SotC was created.

Let's explore your own word.

>potentially
>adverb
>1.
>"possibly but not yet actually":
>ex. potentially useful information.

Everyone played Warcraft 3 because it's an influential game. Of course, during the map you knew the humans would be transformed, so you need to proceed and purge them.
I said that Arthas choise was morally wrong, as Uther said. I didn't said his choise was wrong.
I'm sorry, but I don't only play plames only for gameplay, but also for what else they have to offer.

Yeah and I disagree with you, I think his choice was morally correct.

I think you're overstating the impact this game had, it can't have influenced developers that much if SotC stands out so much that it's considered a masterpiece despite some flaws pointed out in this thread. Furthermore, developers seem to blatantly ignore the many aspects that SotC did well, such as its focus and lack of handholding.

God of War wasn't a good series anyway, there was nothing there to ruin.

by this stupid logic nobody would be playing new releases, and since SotC released so late in the PS2's life I guess you're also suggesting people wait until next gen before buying games for last gen?

And then we know what he had tunred in.

>"Prince Arthas Menethil, on this day, a powerful darkness has taken hold of your soul. The death you are destined to visit upon others will this day be your own."

In any case, is nice to talk to you user.

>such as its focus and lack of handholding.

>sword shows you exactly where the next colossus is
>swords also shows you where a colossus' weakpoint is
>Dormin gives you a hint if you're taking too long
>regenerating health and stamina
>copious number of save points
>no hand holding

I mean, the game isn't that hard to begin with, but still.

>This game asked more from the people participating in this game than asking more from the game to serve the players. It's a product designed to arouse the interests of whoever consumes it, rather than play on the those who do.
You really do come across as a pretentious douchebag with drivel such as this. Exactly the sort of person I'd expect to regard SotC as a "masterpiece", rather than simply the unique but slightly flawed experience it was.

I wasn't trying to give this game more importance than it deserves, but instead try to give answers through commonsense questions, which I admit was a poor way to facilitate my point. I'm simply asking, through one of many different arguments you could take, that if this game had so little substance than why is this game still discussed and argued upon. That's one argument you can have on this issue, perhaps weak and easily overturned, but a simple question that will easily sway the average poster or nonposter's opinion. To go more indepth or bring about further points or arguments would mean to spend my time, drunk as fuck all the while, in an inefficient manner. I'm tired, drunk, and don't feel like getting too much into an argument about a game with someone with an opinion that does not matter to me beyond my initial rebuttal.