New Games Suck... Or Is It Just Me?

I've said this before, but it's a choice to be so cynical and pessimistic. I disagree strongly that capitalism can be reduced so simply to doing the least for the most gain. That strategy works sometimes, but without innovation and the desire for excellence a lot of products would never exist.

Not my choice though. I purchased several dozens of games from the past 3 years, and the only game that I really disliked to the point that I want to throw my disc out of window is just Trails through Daybreak, that's it.

Everything else I enjoyed them to a certain degree so I have positive opinions on gaming industry as a whole. Although some really shallow games like Valkyrie Elysium made me felt like I should wait for an even deeper discount because it was too mediocre for the price that I paid for. Wouldn't mind some dumb shallow action fast food hack and slash at $15-$20 though. Brainless shallow games have their place in my entertainment world just like deep masterpieces.

That being said, I do read all the player negative reviews before I purchase a game, to ensure the flaws can be tolerated.

And I am always open to play a genre or style that I've never play before. I change game genre all the time. So if I just finished an action platformer, the next game will be simulation or VN or point and click. This way I won't get burned out from playing the same formula over and over.

Imo changing genre constantly is one key to keep feeling new and inspired when I play new games. I suggest every gamer try that sometimes.

It's possible for both to be true.

There are certainly businesses and people who are innovating, doing great work, and operating with some measure of integrity. For every one of those, there are a few dozen who aren't and are functioning at the lowest possible level, though. Most businesses profit and are more successful when they can scale, but doing that and maintaining innovation/flexibility/etc isn't easy especially when operating with lower priced staff and doing more mediocre work is a lot cheaper and scales much higher.

Also, I got diabetes looking at that image.

Look how many Dark Souls clones there are, or how any action rpg today gets called a soulslike or is compared to it.

Copycats are inevitable, but they have to have something worth copying in the first place.

I liked Stellar Blade and Wukong. I tried Elden Ring and didn't like the combat. Gave it like 5hrs and just couldn't get into it.

To be fair, a lot of "soulslike" games aren't anywhere close to dark souls in terms of game mechanics and level design philosophy. I wouldn't call them clones.

But it seems that people have the tendency to call a hard game "soulslike" these days. That doesn't mean those are really dark souls clones if core combat mechanics and level design philosophy is different.

DS's combat has a strong focus on stamina management and positioning/distance. Like, much stronger than average arpg. With very little focus on technical input skill like combo or complicated moveset choice. It also has a focus on using environmental hazards/traps. Those design philosophy kinda made DS unique.

people call games like Nioh or Sekiro soulslike all the time which is absolutely incorrect term used.

If we search for games that really followed DS's design philosophy, not just a hard game being branded as soulslike, then there aren't that many true dark souls clones in the market imo.

Edit: also, in the field of marketing, when you want to introduce a new product to strangers, the most effective way is to compare it with something kinda similar so people can understand quickly. That's another reason why soulslike term is being used often.

But "kinda similar" isn't the same as copying imo.

Nioh is actually very Soulslike in terms of basic combat. Perhaps more Soulslike than Dark Souls itself lol (as in, "more royalist than the king" - stam management is tighter & the game is extremely more punishing for mistakes)

I haven't play nioh, but I am under the impression that it has a mission based structure, faster/more aggressive and more complex combat plus stance system. That's why it feels somewhat different from DS to me.

That's true but its skeleton is very Soulslike, that's why I said "basic" combat. Fundamentally it's the same, but Nioh has more depth & options. Also bonfire system.

Personally I always view the bonfire system a more immersive version of checkpoint system that existed since 90s. In the 90s people select "continue" after they game over, and the game will start from the last check point. In megaman X series players even keep all the upgrade that they found when they continue and restart a stage. So continue in this case isn't the same as reload a save, but keeping the progress from previous lives.

In other words, checkpoints that doesn't end a game after game over existed long before DS.

Bonfire only made checkpoint more immersive by being an object in the world. And DS developer gave checkpoint/respawn system a lore. I would say it's an improved version of checkpoint system that is more immersive, but not necessarily something totally unique in video games imo.


Edit: Diablo also had respawn and pick up corpse mechanic after death. So it is a mechanic existed before DS overall

Nobody said DS invented this or that. The point is that Nioh has a "bonfire system" because it's copying Dark Souls' approach.

Edit: It's interesting that you mentioned Diablo, since Nioh has the Diablo loot vomit, which I abhorr and is the no.1 reason that holds me back from replaying the Nioh games.

"Bonfire" system which dark souls copied from Silent Hill 1 from back in the day except it was a floating light not a bonfire.

None of that is new. It just became popular with a certain name.

Just like no one remembers what AltaVista is anymore, yet that was the only/best search engine available before google.

But if you search for anything online you're googling it not altavista-ing it.

If someone tells me is a "soulslike" game, I'm assuming the following criteria is involved:
third person
stamina management
cant mash attack, need to rely on dodging and learning movements
a safe hub (ie: bonfire) to replenish stock, respawn enemies, and hopefully fast travel

One thing I hate about Nioh is the randomized augments on equipment from a pool of like 200 possible augments. FFO;SOP did this too, and its *** annoying. Of course, both games made by Team NINJA.

Edit: Nioh may not have been that bad with the random augments, but I know FFO had a stupid list of augments.

News to me, unless it's meant as a joke

You're right it wasn't Silent Hill, there was a horror type game in the 90s that had it though, completely forgot the name.

https://x.com/geoffkeighley/status/1858558214666940883

Looks like they kept GOTY honest, I didnt see much DEI garbage in any of the other categories either (and rightfully so because they were mostly very very bad games in general). Lots of big big mad in the comments about Erdtree being there cuz "its DLC". I kinda get their point, but there was a LOT of brand new content in said DLC. ~50 hours of content for a DLC is more than some games offer.

Using main story/full completion timings from howlongtobeat.com:
Astro Bot - 11-18 hrs
Balatro - 7-38-184 (what the ***?????)
Wukong - 36-66
Erdtree - 26-51
FF7 Rebirth - 47-92-166
Metaphor - 65-82-102

Have you not played Balatro?

SPOILER ALERT
50 MINUTES OF GAMEPLAY
OBVIOUS SPOILERS IN THIS VIDEO
DONT PRESS PLAY IF YOU DONT WANT TO SEE POTENTIAL SPOILERS


Now that that's out of the way:


No, I have not played Balatro, and theres a 99% chance I will not play Balatro. This is not my type of game. I'll give them credit for finding a way to mix roguelite and poker.

Well, Balatro is easily the best game on that list and I’d say 180 hours is low for the amount of time you’d put into it if you enjoy playing it.

Graphics are very mid for 2024
Gameplay is boring
Story is non-existant

But ok.

-If more games were concerned about being fun instead of having the most graphics this thread wouldn’t exist.
-Entirely subjective, but I imagine that video you linked is the most of the game you’ve seen. You basically posted the equivalent of that game journalist playing cuphead.
-A game without a story doesn’t make it bad.

facts, I personally have played very "mid" graphics for 2024 and did not even notice them.

I mean my favorite games are from 2003 so it is not like I require amazing mind-blowing graphics to love a game unconditionally for 20+ years.

-Then its not 2024 GOTY material. I'm very far from a graphics nut, but super mario world on SNES looks better.
-I skipped through the 50 minute video in 5 minute increments and nothing changed regarding gameplay. I can safely *** what I've seen in that 50 minute video is the gameplay offered throughout the entire game.
-Then its not 2024 GOTY material


Were discussing game of the year though. The cream of the crop of all games released in 2024. I think graphics and visuals are part of the GOTY metric.

I still think the system for the voting overall is dumb, same with basically all open voting awards.

People cast votes in categories they have not experienced all the nominees, so they pick the 1 game they played out of the 5-6 there because it's all they know. Which is why I find the low ranking of the fan votes reasonable for game awards.

If we wanted to rate game by how many copies were sold we would just do that instead of voting.

GOTY doesn't always excel in every category. It takes two was not technically impressive, but it was fun and unique and it totally earned the slot IMO. I don't care to see what Balatro is, but if it provides a unique experience that some players will find particularly engaging it certainly deserves the chance to compete. That sort of recognition can encourage other games to develop novel mechanics and styles of game.

I do agree sales would be a good metric but:
How do you rank games released on 1 platform vs 3 or 4 platforms? You cant just go "well 1 million on 4 platforms is 250k" because most people do have multiple game systems, but theyre not gonna buy a game twice.
How do you rank games released early in the year then sold more copies 6 months down the line on sale?

They aren’t even playing the same game lol.

I think a lean game that is nearly infinitely replayable isn’t as outlandish as a GOTY as you think it is.

I was not suggesting sales as a good metric just pointing out that what people vote on and sales are likely correlated, which is why having a judge panel casting votes is more informative than just straight fan voting.

I saw people criticizing the 10% weight to fan votes for the awards but that seems reasonable to me. though I can understand the issue if the panel of judges is equally biased by something as well.

pfft pc onry duh!