What Would You Change?

Skyshark · Post by **Skyshark** » January 29th, 2013, 8:44 pm

For hypothetical reasons, pretend you're the CEO of a big-shot game publishing company such as EA or Activision and you didn't have to sell your soul to get there. You now have a large influence over the greater part of new games that will be coming out in the coming years and have a significant say in their development.

With all this power, how would you change gaming for the better? What major changes would you make to the status quo that would, in your opinion, make the gaming experience better?

I think I'd stop the whole fad of slapping multiplayer onto single-player-focused games, and instead make a game either completely one-player, such as Skyrim, or completely multiplayer, like Team Fortress 2. That way, instead of dividing funds between the two and making an ultimately bland experience, you pour your resources into one part and make it really good. (There'd be exceptions if the multiplayer was central to the single-player experience, but it usually isn't so there you go)

kaiserg · Post by **kaiserg** » January 29th, 2013, 10:29 pm

I shouldn't have to jump through all this excess activation and account signup crap when buying a legit copy of a PC game. Right now it's easier to get a game up and running when you pirate it rather than buying it from an online retailer. This is ridiculous. Rather than focusing efforts on creating more annoying DRM solutions which will eventually be cracked anyway, how about we focus on the game's quality itself.

Magmar · Post by **Magmar** » January 29th, 2013, 10:43 pm

Skyshark wrote:I think I'd stop the whole fad of slapping multiplayer onto single-player-focused games, and instead make a game either completely one-player, such as Skyrim, or completely multiplayer, like Team Fortress 2. That way, instead of dividing funds between the two and making an ultimately bland experience, you pour your resources into one part and make it really good. (There'd be exceptions if the multiplayer was central to the single-player experience, but it usually isn't so there you go)

I'm sort of 50-50 on this.. while I agree with you that it usually turns out bland, I think multiplayer should be included with singleplayer (or vice versa) if the concept of the game is suitable and you have a solid idea on how to do both types of play. Surprised you didn't mention Super Smash Bros. Brawl as an example for one of those bland opposite gameplay experiences. That singleplayer adventure was just a waste. of. time. >_>

One thing I'm not particularly fond of is the insane amount of M-rated games being produced, especially First-Person Shooters. If I owned my own company, or one of the bigger companies, I would go back to the days of fun games that everybody could play and enjoy. It seems that many are beginning to believe that violent games produce violent people, with the talks rising especially after the Auroua, CO shooting and Sandy Hook massacre. And while I don't believe it to be completely true, I do believe that if the number of violent shootings continues to go up in America or throughout the world, all violent games, even those that are fantasy-based such as Skyrim, will become outlawed and unable to be purchased unless you truly are 17+ or whatever it is.

The future of America and perhaps many countries elsewhere seems.. different. I'm not sure how to put it, but sometimes I feel like our future generations of people will be... stupid. Genuinely stupid. The kids I always hear about from Xbox Live are idiots and should not be playing those games and hearing what other, older people are saying on these games. These kids will feel it it okay to be like that, and end up looking completely immature and stupid. But no, they are cool because they play Call of Duty til 1 o'clock every night at eight years old.

Hopefully that sounded correct and easy enough to understand. I have trouble getting my point across sometimes.

Post by **Phantomboy** » January 30th, 2013, 5:27 pm

A few things, as a younger gamer I grew up with more "recent" titles, such as; Super Mario 64, StarFox 64, Jet Set Radio Future and Halo. Which I am happy about on the fact that I entered life a fair bit of time before the motion buzz kicked the already complex gaming controllers and designers wanted even more methods of to give developers even more methods of manipulation.

My changes would be to put focus on the game aspect of the industry, making games work right before ever making them look nice. Often times we see games with way to much attention in the graphics that they are physically hard to control. I noticed this even more as I introduced myself to older games on the NES and SNES where the art was important, but the game design was even more so.

Also most consumer level games today are far far to easy, when a 4-5 minuet tutorial is required at the beginning of a game you know something is wrong. Games hardly ever teach a play how to play by making them play the game and use clever level design to make them learn as well.

In other words I would be the single handed destroyer of my company...

Miniike · Post by **Miniike** » February 2nd, 2013, 9:04 am

I would defiantly make more challenging and interesting games, open ended and non-linear games especially.

Semesto · Post by **Semesto** » February 5th, 2013, 1:33 am

I wouldn't put "i" in front of the title of everything I make.