Atmosphere depth > Gameplay depth
It's all in the map design.
Second most important thing still isn't strictly gameplay, but TECHNOLOGY. After that come the nuanced core mechanics.
>>320376890
>Atmosphere depth > Gameplay depth
According to Undertale, this is true.
>Second most important thing still isn't strictly gameplay, but TECHNOLOGY.
According to Undertale, this is false.
>>320376980
Well there's not an universal formula but said game created a fanbase through imagery and a foothold in a crowd enamored with a well known Japanese series.
TECHNOLOGY comes second because it bears little importance to most people. Some games with outstanding gameplay have very little TECHNOLOGY because it detracts from the experience - you wouldn't be able to have fun in DMC as the devs intended if Dante just sliced through enemies instead of juggling them incessantly.
>>320376890
Then why is Fallout 4 so shitty?
>>320377215
Because it has horrendous map design, art direction, gameplay, dialogue, the whole package?
Thing is, you have to make the maps wind back upon themselves, you have to make the player backtrack but in doing so you have to present the environment to him from a different angle. Create a sense of discovery and alternate view on seemingly well-trod ground. Other and perhaps the most underrated thing is having tons of mundane, simplistic stuff to do, like having him go to a store, browse groceries, rearrange things on a shelf, have dozens of minigames tied to the hub he's walking in - create a sense of place, and this is inherently tied to TECHNOLOGY and/or easter eggs.
Great, might as well say "fun > gameplay". If you're gonna use such vague terms at least make an attempt to define them.
>>320377823
Read the thread you absolute mongrel.
>>320377962
I just did, and instead of being pointless you came off as kinda stupid. Making a distinction between things like exploration and gameplay depth is pants-on-head retarded. Good job.
>>320376890
>Atmosphere depth > Gameplay depth
expectations from games are that they provide unique experiences that can only be achieved by a harmony between gameplay and atmosphere.
this is true regarding what genre of game you choose, and what your own subjective expectations are of it. you wouldn't expect deep story and visuals from a simple puzzle game.
likewise, you wouldn't expect massively complex gameplay in an RPG hack 'n slash. though the OP's statement is true in most situations, it doesn't always mean we appreciate each feature in that way.
sometimes the further you understand the intricate subtleties of gameplay, the better understanding you have of the developers design philosophies and their hopes for your learning curve.
in cases like the super mario bros, level 1-1 is a great introduction stage, subtly introducing each core gameplay mechanic in a natural and fluid way.
however this is where your second statement about the importance of technology is also true. due to the limited nature of the NES, gameplay was all that we had, and atmosphere was created indirectly.
over time as technology improved, the balance tipped in the opposite direction, and now we as consumers value a unique experience through atmosphere rather than gameplay.
say what you will about AAA games being the same shit every year gameplay wise at least. it's the driving story and atmosphere elements that entice us to experience their worlds.
>>320378168
>say what you will about AAA games being the same shit every year gameplay wise at least. it's the driving story and atmosphere elements that entice us to experience their worlds.
And this is also proof how devolution that video game genre is experiencing can pass unnoticed. What draws people to games as a visual medium is often not how nuanced the interaction is but how it introduces core tenets comprising the atmosphere itself. The result is often quite shallow but when mentioning minigames and 'mundane' action I was thinking about seemingly simple games that are far more than a sum of their parts, like Yakuza or Yume Nikki.
>>320378382
As recently i've been slowly drifting from vidya, my friends recently have been trying to get me into DnD.
And one of the most important lessons i've learned from the experience as a DM is that players find value and satisfaction from reacting to their expectations being twisted after being used to gameplay patterns.
Most games i've noticed tend to stick to stagnant patterns and never stray from the set rules and limitations. But when a game turns what we know on our heads, that's when we really get invested.
It's a so satisfying to feel that rush of adrenaline when you feel you're being tested based on reflexes and instincts alone. And games that like to fuck with you are the souls series and several horror series like fnaf.
it's often games that mix up gameplay that get huge fan reactions and massive cult followings, and it was the developer's understanding of player expectations that reached that success.
>>320379384
>Most games i've noticed tend to stick to stagnant patterns and never stray from the set rules and limitations.
This is especially true for dungeon crawlers which stem from pen and paper RPG.
Funny you mention Souls series which recycle gameplay constantly even when doing slight innovations, in fact I think that From is one of the safest, dullest developers on the market when it comes to their gameplay models. And I also think this of Platinum who keep recycling their DMC juggling whether they make Transformers or JRPG. None of this is inherently bad because it once was fresh and no one else does it as well but it's still stagnation. I think stagnation near-always leads to devolution known as streamlining. Like dodge being even easier to execute in Bloodborne or the influx of QTEs in Platinum combat sequences.
Shut up, discount Cooper.
Gameplay>characters>Atmoshphere>Art style>Graphics>Story
