Steam Greenlight

Help pick new games for Steam

Browse through the entries here and rate up the games you want to see made available via Steam

Submit your product
Matador1 Apr 7, 2013 @ 2:48am
how about this!!
How about the game makers ask us what we want in a game ,preferbly first and third person games.
The compition can say make a draw after a month and we can give you some insight of what is needed and wanted in a game.
I've been playing first person games since wolfastiegn days on a commodore 64 so i think i can say a few things of what works or what doesn't , and NO I'm not a programmer or it guy but i believe that some games can go from goo to fantastic by simply allowing more space witin the games for things like , " mmm I might climb that wall insted of using that ladder" do you see what I mean?
Let me give you an example.
In FARCRY 3, which i must say is one of the best games I have played for a while not that any of the others aren't any good infact, they are all good in their own way.
it's just that FARCRY3 is a fun and riveting game that give you so many options of how to play as well as, Be possible to have continuing fun even after the sorry /game , has been played.
now here comes the curly part , while its great and all, you come to a large rock say , but it looks to be climable and if you could climb that rock or bush or box or wall and so on and so on,
hell, reading back over this I'm not sure what i was going to say, so i think what i mean is if there is a rock infront let us climb it if its a wall let us climb over it ..............

Put it this way... If you can ware a yellow suit around continuously and jump off a cliff at any time and fly not to mention have a parracute on as well, why can't you allow a simple move like "climb", I'm not saying "the out side of a flat surface scaling a wall" No , I'm saying "oh look , there is a good spot to shoot from or see from ,I'll CLIMB up there and see" .... OOps the spot is a prop but its in the middle of say a walk way or even a tree , why can't we sit in a tree when the damn thing looks like it can support a rhino ?

What i find is that there is too much propping and not enough usable space with in a game.

Anyway, hope i didn't go off topic too long but think about it read this with expression and you will see what i'm thinking about.


by the way , CO OP's is great fun when all players play as a "team".
I mean that in all honesty.
try and do your own thing ? risk starting all over again because your not watching your team mates and by the time you realize it, your either out of action or dead hence around we go again... Hell sometimes you could be working as a team and that still happens but when it does I'll bet your sitting there either laughing because it was so close and the effort was felt by all not sitting there thinking ,"what a twit, he/she didn't help and went straight past me "
hence not giving a stuff because they want to get a better score than everyone so try an finish to the next check point alone ! but gets killed and ba bow , restart!!

sorry i dribble too much bye!
Showing 1-15 of 30 comments
< >
Skoardy Apr 7, 2013 @ 3:02am 
Originally posted by ROCKETMAN1113:
How about the game makers ask us what we want in a game ,preferbly first and third person games.
'Too many cooks spoil the broth' - applies to game design too.
Matador1 Apr 7, 2013 @ 3:06am 
'Too many cooks spoil the broth' - applies to game design too.

Sure but who wants to eat ham and eggs everyday?
Skoardy Apr 7, 2013 @ 3:12am 
Originally posted by ROCKETMAN1113:
'Too many cooks spoil the broth' - applies to game design too.

Sure but who wants to eat ham and eggs everyday?
What does that even mean?
C0untzer0 Apr 7, 2013 @ 4:03am 
Having read his OP, you expect him to MEAN something? I envy you your boundless faith in humanity.
Last edited by C0untzer0; Apr 7, 2013 @ 4:03am
Gorlom[Swe] Apr 7, 2013 @ 1:41pm 
Wow, the OPs trail of thought really is all over the place isn't it? I'm having a hard time finding any coherence.
No One Apr 7, 2013 @ 3:12pm 
basically what you want is a fps/3rd person shooter that things you could do in reality could be done in game like climb a chain link fence or hide in a tree and snipe people . there are some games that give you more options that your run of the mill fps . there mainly 3rd person but single player

but you never know . the genral concept of interactive inviorments gets tossed around from time to time and you would expect them to do more of what your talking about .
Snaeng Apr 8, 2013 @ 1:25am 
Would you be willing to pay for this?

All the environment interaction possibilities must be taken in consideration with level design and game play design. The more options you have, the harder it is and the more time it will take to design these things. With all those things you want.. Would you be willing to pay the price? I highly doubt it, was 50 € is nowadays already too much for people to pay for a game.
Matador1 Apr 8, 2013 @ 7:21am 
Originally posted by NoOne:
basically what you want is a fps/3rd person shooter that things you could do in reality could be done in game like climb a chain link fence or hide in a tree and snipe people . there are some games that give you more options that your run of the mill fps . there mainly 3rd person but single player

but you never know . the genral concept of interactive inviorments gets tossed around from time to time and you would expect them to do more of what your talking about .



you hit the nail on the head,Its not that the games aren't good , its just that there is no room to move.
Obiously, this will require more space on our drives and online but given the current technology i can't see this to be a problem.

I am sorry for my opening jibba but its so frusrating to express yourself when Wild Turkey is in the house !!
Matador1 Apr 8, 2013 @ 7:24am 
Originally posted by Skoardy:
Originally posted by ROCKETMAN1113:
'Too many cooks spoil the broth' - applies to game design too.

Sure but who wants to eat ham and eggs everyday?
What does that even mean?


lol so sorry, what i mean is, it might be time to change...
Matador1 Apr 8, 2013 @ 7:30am 
Originally posted by Snaeng:
Would you be willing to pay for this?

All the environment interaction possibilities must be taken in consideration with level design and game play design. The more options you have, the harder it is and the more time it will take to design these things. With all those things you want.. Would you be willing to pay the price? I highly doubt it, was 50 € is nowadays already too much for people to pay for a game.


But we are paying for it , they make a ♥♥♥♥ load on these games and could double or even triple their profits simply by doing this its just that are lazy thats all and as we know , a lot of these games share the same engine right? so if they do a bit of tune up to their engine these things are very possible.
If they had it we would pay and don't say you wouldn't
wilco64256 Apr 8, 2013 @ 8:04am 
It might seem simple to someone who doesn't know anything about it, but the stuff you're recommending can actually be extremely complicated to implement, test, and debug.
C0untzer0 Apr 8, 2013 @ 8:10am 
Originally posted by wilco64256:
It might seem simple to someone who doesn't know anything about it, but the stuff you're recommending can actually be extremely complicated to implement, test, and debug.
And Play, Imagine the control interface that let you do EVERYTHING your character could do in a given situation... Yikes!
Gorlom[Swe] Apr 8, 2013 @ 8:21am 
Originally posted by ROCKETMAN1113:
Originally posted by Snaeng:
Would you be willing to pay for this?

All the environment interaction possibilities must be taken in consideration with level design and game play design. The more options you have, the harder it is and the more time it will take to design these things. With all those things you want.. Would you be willing to pay the price? I highly doubt it, was 50 € is nowadays already too much for people to pay for a game.


But we are paying for it , they make a ♥♥♥♥ load on these games and could double or even triple their profits simply by doing this its just that are lazy thats all and as we know , a lot of these games share the same engine right? so if they do a bit of tune up to their engine these things are very possible.
If they had it we would pay and don't say you wouldn't
No, I don't think they wouldn't double or tripple their profits. they would more likely double or tripple their cost and get the same ammount of money from sales as if they hadn't.

Lazy? Should you REALLY be using those kinds of words? You have yourself said that you are not a programmer and know nothing about what goes into developing a game. Have you even played as a playtester or have you only played finished products? (It rather baffles me to think that just because you have played a lot of games that you understand why they work or not. From what I've read in your posts that is not likely to be the case. :( At the most you know what you would like based on how you play games, not how other gamers play games if they play differently from you.)

I believe that the restrictions in the game world is about the complexity of controls and how to lead the gamer along the story. I belive the developers understand propper gamedesign and what happens if you loosen up the restrictions and gives too much freedom in movement a lot better than you.

Edit: Bah C0untzer0 beat me to it about the control scheme :p
Last edited by Gorlom[Swe]; Apr 8, 2013 @ 8:23am
AusSkiller Apr 8, 2013 @ 10:02am 
It can be done, and it can be done well, just see Assassins Creed for that sort of thing, but if you do have that kind of freedom of movement then as in Assassins Creed you need to design the ENTIRE game around having such freedom of movement, it's not something that can just be added to a game because doing so will typically wreck any kind of progression and planning that level designers and game designers want for the game.

It also drastically increases the amount of tech needed to support being able to climb up to really high places that you normally couldn't get to and makes it very hard to have close to the same level of detail that you see in the more common first/third person games. It also makes the animation systems immensely complicated and the motion capture extremely expensive because it is very difficult to animate a character to believably look like they are climbing something, ladders make that a lot easier as all ladders can be made the same way allowing for a single animation that can easily match up to the uniform positions of ladder rungs, but when climbing walls and buildings the footholds can be all over the place.

It also limits the kind of events you can have the player experience, most events will need to be cut scenes because with freedom of movement you can't ensure players would be in the right positions in the right order to see the event the way it is supposed to play out, this in turn limits the immersion of the game and to a lesser extent it also limits what you can do with the story. You also have to find ways to notify the player of where they are supposed to be going, when you have freedom of movement almost any direction is a valid direction so level design alone cannot encourage the player to go in the correct direction to progress the story. You also run into issues where the player is so used to being able to climb everything that when they reach the edge of the map it's really hard to always have some kind of justifiably unclimbable obstacle preventing them from leaving the map area.

Freedom of movement also opens up a very large number of exploits that can ruin a difficulty curve, it's very easy to notice that most NPCs will not be able to use the same movements as you can (most people in real life will climb ladders but not walls) so you can lure them into "traps" where you can get to a place they can't and take them out with very little risk. This can often make even the hardest difficulties far too easy and there's very little that can be done about it. The only real way to avoid that is to allow the same freedom of movement for all NPCs but having everyone be able to climb walls can look really weird and it's often way too expensive as the animation costs would skyrocket for all the characters because they would all need the same level of expensive animation as the player character. Not to mention you can still exploit it by finding a spot where only one NPC can climb up at once and just pick them off as they try to climb up

Freedom of movement is also often problematic for multiplayer, even games with very little freedom of movement have exploitable positions that provide way too big an advantage, with a high degree of freedom of movement this opens up a lot more exploitable positions and it can be very hard work for a level designer to deal with such problems. It can also be a lot more frustrating for newer players as experienced players will know to hide in places most people wouldn't think to check such as in trees or on top of lamp poles which can give them the advantage of surprise, an until the newer players learn these places too they'll be at a significant disadvantage, in games without such freedom of movement it's pretty easy to guess where the good hiding spots are making it a lot easier for new players to compete.

TBH I do not think the controls are much of an issue for freedom of movement though, many games have been able to have such freedom of movement without any additional controls or using just a single context sensitive button, but it is a hell of a lot more work to get such systems working in a way that feels nice to play. It can also be quite difficult to let the player know what they can climb up without having ugly hints pop up all the time.


There are many very good reasons for developers not to have much freedom of movement in their games, and very rarely does it have anything to do with laziness, it's usually just a very poor design decision to include it in a game because it would make most games play a lot worse without design changes that would completely change the kind of game it is.
Last edited by AusSkiller; Apr 8, 2013 @ 10:09am
Skoardy Apr 8, 2013 @ 6:03pm 
Originally posted by ROCKETMAN1113:
lol so sorry, what i mean is, it might be time to change...
When the public stops buying near identical yearly iterations of the same game, publishers might consider trying new things. Saying "Hey, I know you've found a formula that the public keeps buying but why don't you invest/risk even more money on developing unproven ideas supplied by random individuals." probably isn't going to convince them.
Showing 1-15 of 30 comments
< >
Per page: 15 30 50
Date Posted: Apr 7, 2013 @ 2:48am
Posts: 30