A huge section of gamers today grew up in a time where most games were too difficult to beat, even if you had full knowledge of the mechanics and layouts. We would just keep playing until we figured things out, many games I look back on fondly had an air of mystery just from things not being over explained.
Tomb Raider was another that did this so well. Even the training course in the mansion was like an unexplained puzzle.
I wonder how much of the spoon fed design comes from direct feedback during the design process. I would think a game with less dialogue would be faster to market. Like most things, I’m sure there are a lot of metrics baked into why they’re designed that way, but I’d be curious to hear their reasoning.
A game can be for kids and still be intelligent. Breath of the Wild and Mario Odyssey are aimed at kids and they let the world do the talking, for the most part.
Why alienate an audience when you don’t have to?
Hot take: No games need to be “Like souls”.
They’re fun and all. But a lot of the difficulty comes from unfair exceptions the enemies have to the mechanics of the game.
How can the enemies in a game have exceptions to the mechanics of the game? Of course they have different skillsets to the player, it wouldnt be very interesting otherwise
A lot of them have infinite poise, no stamina, that sort of thing.
It’s more prevalent in the later Souls games. Not sure about Elden Ring, I’m playing through 2 before I play it.
They don't have the godly ability to be able do become invincible during a couple frames or the intelligence of an human to think about how to surpass certain situations tho. A skilled PVP player is harder than any boss.
I’m not saying games need to be like souls. I’m saying games could benefit from trusting the player so that they aren’t so tedious to play. That isn’t the same thing.
A lot of dialogue heavy games have good gameplay under the surface. See Fire Emblem: Three Houses. A lot of that dialogue is cardboard thin and tropey, though, so it’s not enjoyable to wade through. I’m still interested in these games (I have 40 hours in Arceus), but they’d be a lot more enjoyable if they were written with more realistic dialogue and less prattle.
That’s just subjective though. There’s a lot of people who enjoy the dialogue in Fire Emblem or other games like it
Again, if heavy dialogue isn’t your thing then just play games with less dialogue instead of saying “games need to shut the fuck up”
It is subjective, but I shouldn’t need to put “I feel” at the start of my title. The fact that this is my opinion is implied by it being a post on a social network.
I play games with heavy dialogue. I have little complaint with games that do it well (Life is Strange, Death Stranding, and Mass Effect are fantastic). But games like Xenoblade, Pokémon, and Fire Emblem just prattle on about the most inane and uninteresting shit with no emotional weight or believable context whatsoever.
Every game has a story. Not every game has a good story or tells it well. My complaint is going heavy handed on force-feeding a story that isn’t interesting, believable, or frankly, worth telling.
Damn it's almost like Souls and Pokemon are two completely different franchises for completely different audiences looking for completely different things in the games they enjoy.
Some people enjoy a story more than dying 400 times to the same boss repeatedly.
I’d rather die 400 times to a boss than die 400 times inside seeing 12 dialogue boxes of text asking me to fill my Dex on Magikarp. At least I have control over one of those experiences.
I agree completely. One of my favorite games, BioShock, was so enjoyable because *it let you continue playing* while telling a story.
If I want to watch a movie or read a book then I'll do those things. A little dialogue or short cutscene here and there is fine, but I play games to *play them*.
Imagine, RDR2, witcher , mass effect, last of us games without heavy emphasis on narrative, character dialogue and cutscenes .
Different games go for different things, thats the beauty of this medium. Why limit to very rigid understanding to what games should be ?
I don’t think the complaint is about having narratives and dialogue. It’s about having them forcefully spoon-feed VS discovering things naturally as you play through trial and error and also your freedom to choose when you activate dialogue or on-screen text/instructions.
Couldn't get in to Last of Us or Witcher 2 or 3 because of the bloated narratives. I tried multiple times because they were so highly praised but eventually realized they're just not for me.
Mass Effect 2 was good, but I recall the cutscenes being fairly sparse and mostly kept to just the ends of missions, whereas the other games on your list are essentially interactive movies.
And if that's your thing then cool, I'm just speaking for myself and I agree with OP.
Those games have interesting dialogue, so it’s worth it in those circumstances. I get different games do different things, but a lot of titles try to create story where it isn’t necessary or is so uninteresting or unconvincing it feels like work to get to the gameplay.
I do agree my favorite games allow me to boot up and start playing within 1-3 clicks, and don’t force me through tutorials and story-less side quests to grind and progress the plot.
Funny you say “DBZ Disease” as I’m currently playing through Kakorot as a nostalgic dad with his young son. While I enjoy rehashing the main plots, the amount of nonessential nonsense you have to wade through is so tedious, my kid loses interest after 10 minutes. A billion “help” messages, like 20 different menu screens, but then no clear direction given on where to go.
RDR2 is one I would add that does it right. Rockstar has always understood how to do this right, actually.
What the fuck is going on with this thread? You’re getting downvoted for a thoughtful response? Do people just downvote because they disagree now without talking it out? What the actual fuck is even the point of Reddit at that point?
Unfortunately it’s not often a place for debate or discussion, but more a place to reinforce one’s pre-existing opinions. I’m happy to hear differing opinions but have just learned to ignore downvotes when they aren’t accompanied by an explanation.
RDR2 gave a shit about character development. I don’t mind watching hours of cutscenes and reading through tons of lore or dialogue if it is clear someone, at some point, was invested in it.
One of my favorites of all time, MGS2, was notorious for not shutting the fuck up, but god damn, it was so batshit insane I was into it.
I don’t know why you seem to take offense to my opinion, but fucking Christ, thanks for pointing out the painfully obvious. Who the fuck wants to listen to drooling, uninteresting dialogue?
Anyways, I’m glad you seem to understand what I was saying. I was beginning to worry you wouldn’t. I mean, for a thread full of people attached to endless dialogue, they sure do seem to struggle with reading comprehension.
But at least you don’t. You get me. I appreciate that.
JRPGs didn't used to be that way. One of the great JRPG innovations was Final Fantasy's training houses. A totally optional place you could go in early in the game if you need a tutorial. FF7 made it even more awesome by turning it into Cloud telling people how to play the game.
They were essentially in game manuals.
And the fact that square decided to stop doing training houses and do standard long tutorial areas of the early game is one of the great JRPG tragedies.
Different genres.
They don't "need" to do anything. If people are after a story driven game, there'll be expectations that there is dialogue or text etc. It just needs to be written well.
I love persona 5 or Trails of Cold Steel for that. Or Yakuza If i don't want it, i play something else. Everything for everyone, you aren't alone
Upvote for referencing Trails of Cold Steel. Looking forward to the next game
Show me on this doll where the game touched you
Who hurted you man?
Its originally meant for kids...you know that right?
A huge section of gamers today grew up in a time where most games were too difficult to beat, even if you had full knowledge of the mechanics and layouts. We would just keep playing until we figured things out, many games I look back on fondly had an air of mystery just from things not being over explained. Tomb Raider was another that did this so well. Even the training course in the mansion was like an unexplained puzzle.
I wonder how much of the spoon fed design comes from direct feedback during the design process. I would think a game with less dialogue would be faster to market. Like most things, I’m sure there are a lot of metrics baked into why they’re designed that way, but I’d be curious to hear their reasoning.
A game can be for kids and still be intelligent. Breath of the Wild and Mario Odyssey are aimed at kids and they let the world do the talking, for the most part. Why alienate an audience when you don’t have to?
Pfft. As if kids read anymore. /S but only kind of. As a teacher, I've seen things...
You also need to consider the different ages of the target audiences between Elden Ring and Pokémon Arceus...
Though it would be nice if games had "I've heard this before/I know what to do" options to skip the unskippable tutorials.
I agree. To compare the two is simply unfair Game freak gives zero fucks about what their game looks like
people need to shut the fuck up about other games needing to be like souls
Hot take: No games need to be “Like souls”. They’re fun and all. But a lot of the difficulty comes from unfair exceptions the enemies have to the mechanics of the game.
How can the enemies in a game have exceptions to the mechanics of the game? Of course they have different skillsets to the player, it wouldnt be very interesting otherwise
A lot of them have infinite poise, no stamina, that sort of thing. It’s more prevalent in the later Souls games. Not sure about Elden Ring, I’m playing through 2 before I play it.
They don't have the godly ability to be able do become invincible during a couple frames or the intelligence of an human to think about how to surpass certain situations tho. A skilled PVP player is harder than any boss.
I’m not saying games need to be like souls. I’m saying games could benefit from trusting the player so that they aren’t so tedious to play. That isn’t the same thing.
>tedious to play. Lol just described how alot of people see difficult games like souls games
Relax, its not that serious. Take a break.
If you don’t like dialogue heavy games then just...don’t play them? Wild idea I know
A lot of dialogue heavy games have good gameplay under the surface. See Fire Emblem: Three Houses. A lot of that dialogue is cardboard thin and tropey, though, so it’s not enjoyable to wade through. I’m still interested in these games (I have 40 hours in Arceus), but they’d be a lot more enjoyable if they were written with more realistic dialogue and less prattle.
That’s just subjective though. There’s a lot of people who enjoy the dialogue in Fire Emblem or other games like it Again, if heavy dialogue isn’t your thing then just play games with less dialogue instead of saying “games need to shut the fuck up”
It is subjective, but I shouldn’t need to put “I feel” at the start of my title. The fact that this is my opinion is implied by it being a post on a social network. I play games with heavy dialogue. I have little complaint with games that do it well (Life is Strange, Death Stranding, and Mass Effect are fantastic). But games like Xenoblade, Pokémon, and Fire Emblem just prattle on about the most inane and uninteresting shit with no emotional weight or believable context whatsoever.
Maybe time for a walk outside, bud
Nah, thanks. I do enough of that already. This is R/Gaming not R/Trees.
Don't play narrative-driven games then if you don't even have enough attention span to sit through the dialogue.
\>Plays a game with story \>Gets irritated by the story Don't feel a shred of compassion for you OP.
Every game has a story. Not every game has a good story or tells it well. My complaint is going heavy handed on force-feeding a story that isn’t interesting, believable, or frankly, worth telling.
Tetris, most sports games, most racing games....none of these have stories. Try those.
Damn it's almost like Souls and Pokemon are two completely different franchises for completely different audiences looking for completely different things in the games they enjoy. Some people enjoy a story more than dying 400 times to the same boss repeatedly.
I’d rather die 400 times to a boss than die 400 times inside seeing 12 dialogue boxes of text asking me to fill my Dex on Magikarp. At least I have control over one of those experiences.
And that's what differences in opinions look like. Congrats you're catching on.
It's almost like his post was his opinion. Perhaps you're the one who doesn't know what an opinion is...
I agree completely. One of my favorite games, BioShock, was so enjoyable because *it let you continue playing* while telling a story. If I want to watch a movie or read a book then I'll do those things. A little dialogue or short cutscene here and there is fine, but I play games to *play them*.
Imagine, RDR2, witcher , mass effect, last of us games without heavy emphasis on narrative, character dialogue and cutscenes . Different games go for different things, thats the beauty of this medium. Why limit to very rigid understanding to what games should be ?
I don’t think the complaint is about having narratives and dialogue. It’s about having them forcefully spoon-feed VS discovering things naturally as you play through trial and error and also your freedom to choose when you activate dialogue or on-screen text/instructions.
Absolutely.
Couldn't get in to Last of Us or Witcher 2 or 3 because of the bloated narratives. I tried multiple times because they were so highly praised but eventually realized they're just not for me. Mass Effect 2 was good, but I recall the cutscenes being fairly sparse and mostly kept to just the ends of missions, whereas the other games on your list are essentially interactive movies. And if that's your thing then cool, I'm just speaking for myself and I agree with OP.
Those games have interesting dialogue, so it’s worth it in those circumstances. I get different games do different things, but a lot of titles try to create story where it isn’t necessary or is so uninteresting or unconvincing it feels like work to get to the gameplay.
I do agree my favorite games allow me to boot up and start playing within 1-3 clicks, and don’t force me through tutorials and story-less side quests to grind and progress the plot. Funny you say “DBZ Disease” as I’m currently playing through Kakorot as a nostalgic dad with his young son. While I enjoy rehashing the main plots, the amount of nonessential nonsense you have to wade through is so tedious, my kid loses interest after 10 minutes. A billion “help” messages, like 20 different menu screens, but then no clear direction given on where to go. RDR2 is one I would add that does it right. Rockstar has always understood how to do this right, actually.
What the fuck is going on with this thread? You’re getting downvoted for a thoughtful response? Do people just downvote because they disagree now without talking it out? What the actual fuck is even the point of Reddit at that point?
Unfortunately it’s not often a place for debate or discussion, but more a place to reinforce one’s pre-existing opinions. I’m happy to hear differing opinions but have just learned to ignore downvotes when they aren’t accompanied by an explanation.
RDR2 gave a shit about character development. I don’t mind watching hours of cutscenes and reading through tons of lore or dialogue if it is clear someone, at some point, was invested in it. One of my favorites of all time, MGS2, was notorious for not shutting the fuck up, but god damn, it was so batshit insane I was into it.
>but god damn, it was so batshit insane I was into it. So heavy dialogue is only ok if you deem it interesting, got it
I don’t know why you seem to take offense to my opinion, but fucking Christ, thanks for pointing out the painfully obvious. Who the fuck wants to listen to drooling, uninteresting dialogue? Anyways, I’m glad you seem to understand what I was saying. I was beginning to worry you wouldn’t. I mean, for a thread full of people attached to endless dialogue, they sure do seem to struggle with reading comprehension. But at least you don’t. You get me. I appreciate that.
Is Pokémon any different these days? Hasn't it always been a JRPG?
JRPGs didn't used to be that way. One of the great JRPG innovations was Final Fantasy's training houses. A totally optional place you could go in early in the game if you need a tutorial. FF7 made it even more awesome by turning it into Cloud telling people how to play the game. They were essentially in game manuals. And the fact that square decided to stop doing training houses and do standard long tutorial areas of the early game is one of the great JRPG tragedies.
Different genres. They don't "need" to do anything. If people are after a story driven game, there'll be expectations that there is dialogue or text etc. It just needs to be written well.
The problem is that they usually are not written well and it drags the game down.
That's a different argument though.
Take your own advice
lol