Revolutionary game concepts that never caught on

[metalhead848]

Motion sensor controllers. If you try and tell me they've caught on in any way you deserve to be shot

 

[Aedwynn]

Dont forget it people, you heard it here first.

sorry boss, I've heard that one a long time ago, from many different people... *snip*
...but seriously, I'd like to see good space combat make a revival. Tie Fighter nailed it years ago, but anymore it's a long stretch finding a good one like that.

Yes, I'm getting by on the Freespace 2 Open Source Project. I'd dearly love another great space combat sim.
Here's a link to some info on the Open Source Project, for anyone interested;
http://www.hard-light.net/wiki/index.php/FSSCP_Introduction

For my own contribution I'd like an RPG where you don't gain experience points or abstract D&D-style 'levels' but instead increase skills based on how often and how well you use them. The only game I remember doing this was Stonekeep. It's definitely a concept you don't see often enough in RPGs.

I'm not saying levelling up is necessarily bad or wrong, but I'd like some experimentation with character development that didn't rely on the level, exp concept.

 

[Johnnyallstar]

Dont forget it people, you heard it here first.

sorry boss, I've heard that one a long time ago, from many different people... *snip*
...but seriously, I'd like to see good space combat make a revival. Tie Fighter nailed it years ago, but anymore it's a long stretch finding a good one like that.

Yes, I'm getting by on the Freespace 2 Open Source Project. I'd dearly love another great space combat sim.
Here's a link to some info on the Open Source Project, for anyone interested;
http://www.hard-light.net/wiki/index.php/FSSCP_Introduction

For my own contribution I'd like an RPG where you don't gain experience points or abstract D&D-style 'levels' but instead increase skills based on how often and how well you use them. The only game I remember doing this was Stonekeep. It's definitely a concept you don't see often enough in RPGs.

I'm not saying levelling up is necessarily bad or wrong, but I'd like some experimentation with character development that didn't rely on the level, exp concept.

Thanks for the props, but your want is exactly how the Elder Scrolls games work. Morrowind and Oblivion are about all you're about to find like that. Both games I recommend playing because they're worth a trip around.

 

[Aedwynn]

Dont forget it people, you heard it here first.

sorry boss, I've heard that one a long time ago, from many different people... *snip*
...but seriously, I'd like to see good space combat make a revival. Tie Fighter nailed it years ago, but anymore it's a long stretch finding a good one like that.

Yes, I'm getting by on the Freespace 2 Open Source Project. I'd dearly love another great space combat sim.
Here's a link to some info on the Open Source Project, for anyone interested;
http://www.hard-light.net/wiki/index.php/FSSCP_Introduction

For my own contribution I'd like an RPG where you don't gain experience points or abstract D&D-style 'levels' but instead increase skills based on how often and how well you use them. The only game I remember doing this was Stonekeep. It's definitely a concept you don't see often enough in RPGs.

I'm not saying levelling up is necessarily bad or wrong, but I'd like some experimentation with character development that didn't rely on the level, exp concept.

Thanks for the props, but your want is exactly how the Elder Scrolls games work. Morrowind and Oblivion are about all you're about to find like that. Both games I recommend playing because they're worth a trip around.

No problem!

I've actually played your suggestions;

Morrowind came *close* - but still had the whole 'levelling up' and Oblivion actually required me to be a certain level for a quest at late game, I think. I had some fun with those games, but I have seen few (Except Stonekeep - but that game had problems of it's own...) that ditch the whole "Level of Experience" system completely.

 

[zoozilla]

What about lives for a player's character? You know, like, things that let you continue on even after you fail at some point?
I think those'd be keen.

I don't see why you'd want the archaic lives system back.

The only reason that was in so many Genesis-era games was because it was a design hold-over from the arcade days. There are no arcades left; you don't need a system that is made to deprive children of their hard-earned quarters.

 

[sheic99]

What about lives for a player's character? You know, like, things that let you continue on even after you fail at some point?
I think those'd be keen.

I don't see why you'd want the archaic lives system back.

The only reason that was in so many Genesis-era games was because it was a design hold-over from the arcade days. There are no arcades left; you don't need a system that is made to deprive children of their hard-earned quarters.

Dave & Busters.

 

[Ballistic Bum]

One thing that im glad never caught on is uses for weapons like in fire emblem

Agreed.

 

[GDW]

I don't see why you'd want the archaic lives system back.

The only reason that was in so many Genesis-era games was because it was a design hold-over from the arcade days. There are no arcades left; you don't need a system that is made to deprive children of their hard-earned quarters.

Well, Nancy, since the sarcasm and general theme of the opening post of this thread seemed to bounce right over your head without so much as glancing down at you, let me post a serious response to your serious response to my comment made in jest...

Yes, I'm well aware what the "lives" system was and what it was originally intended for, but when I now see games like "Prince of Persia" and that annoying 360 port of "Duke Nukem 3D" that let you die time and again with next to no consequence, I'm slowly growing more and more pissed that the "lives" system isn't the norm, anymore. Once upon a time I use to play games for a challenge or a feeling of accomplishment. When I died in "Ninja Gaiden" on NES three times, I was penalized with having to do all the shit I just did all over-again until I learned from my mistakes.

Games these days are condescendingly easy. Hell, even "Devil May Cry" implimented the lives sstem with great results. Archaic as it is, it should still be around. I'm getting sick of beatign a game in 8 hours and never needing to play it again.

 

[KapnKerfuffle]

Smell-o vision.

I'm only half joking. I remember a story about a scent "speaker" system that would warm these various chemicals (I'm imagining like a Glade Plug-in) that would combine to make a scent. So if you blew something up you could smell the sulfur smoke of the explosion.

I don't think I would ever play Fallout 3 with this system. >.<

 

[Captain_Ne-San]

While I never liked the way the Final Fantasy X tried to force you to do it. I really liked being able to swap out your characters in battle. It actually made me use the other characters, not just pick my favorite three and go through they entire game like that.

 

[Freiss]

Digimon World (one) I thought had great potential, seeing what it achieved in the PS1 generation and what is being achieved in the current console generation. All other Digimon games were really tame though (other than Digimon World 2003, which also had a unique context, but was still rather lame).

I loved Harvest Moon (snes version <3) and I wished the most recent one for gamecube/wii wasn't so dissapointing.

 

[zoozilla]

Well, Nancy, since the sarcasm and general theme of the opening post of this thread seemed to bounce right over your head without so much as glancing down at you, let me post a serious response to your serious response to my comment made in jest...

Yes, I'm well aware what the "lives" system was and what it was originally intended for, but when I now see games like "Prince of Persia" and that annoying 360 port of "Duke Nukem 3D" that let you die time and again with next to no consequence, I'm slowly growing more and more pissed that the "lives" system isn't the norm, anymore. Once upon a time I use to play games for a challenge or a feeling of accomplishment. When I died in "Ninja Gaiden" on NES three times, I was penalized with having to do all the shit I just did all over-again until I learned from my mistakes.

Games these days are condescendingly easy. Hell, even "Devil May Cry" implimented the lives sstem with great results. Archaic as it is, it should still be around. I'm getting sick of beatign a game in 8 hours and never needing to play it again.

Well it seems obvious that your post in jest now. Now that you've told me.

The sarcasm didn't just go over my head, it went over the clouds above my head and hit an airplane.
My sarcasm detector must be malfunctioning.

I still don't thing the lives system should be adopted in modern games, though; there are other ways to make a game harder or longer without resorting to a now-defunct system that penalizes the player for making a few mistakes and throwing away all their progress.

Oh, and my name's not Nancy.

 

[GDW]

Well it seems obvious that your post in jest now. Now that you've told me.

The sarcasm didn't just go over my head, it went over the clouds above my head and hit an airplane.
My sarcasm detector must be malfunctioning.

I still don't thing the lives system should be adopted in modern games, though; there are other ways to make a game harder or longer without resorting to a now-defunct system that penalizes the player for making a few mistakes and throwing away all their progress.

Oh, and my name's not Nancy.

Well, Susie, I agree that there are ways, but I've yet to see any that stick like being forced back from all you've done after sucking one too many times. Very few games still have the guts to force you back to the starts of stages after a good, long dick-about and even fewer of those don't have checkpoints.
Games pride themselves on being "playable" which should translate to "simple". RPGs and Adventure games are the worst about this in modern days, looking back to older adventures where you had a handful of spots that you could save you adventure, and the ones that offered open saves ATLEAST made you start an entire level over once you lost it all (particularly the classic "Zelda" games and the like). A lives system is justpractical most of the time. It keeps me from feeling like I bought something I could have rented and got the same experience from, which annoys me to NO end.

Maybe I'm the only one, but the easier games are becoming the less incentive I have to play them. Sometimes these old relic systems just work.

 

[Bobble_Hat]

Anyone remeber Die By The Sword with its unwieldy, unintentionally comical but innovative mouse-controlled attack system? That should have caught on, as subsequent games could have developed the idea properly.

Also: Proper stealth. Loads of games copied Thief and Metal Gear Solid, but seemed to fail to get what made them so great. Actually being able to complete a level without harming anybody was far more satisfying. I can't think of a game which has done it so well since then (Splinter Cell comes to mind, but more often than not it was easier to go round silently murdering everybody in the level, just like most other so called 'stealth' games. Kind of misses the point, really.)

 

[Reqium]

Something along the mechanic of Shadow of the Colossus would be nice, i mean to me it was one of the most amazing games ever made but it appeared to dip under the radar and never to be seen or heard from or spoken about by anyone

 

[fenrizz]

Fighting games aren't usually made with background scenery & destructible environments because it takes away the sense of perfect 50/50 balance between two opponents. A fighter which is perceived to be unbalanced is unlikely to be popular.

Personally I think it's a shame that the Bushido Blade series never caught on. Competitive matches between skilled players would be awesome.

LOVED Bushido Blade.

^This. Bushido Blade was awesome!

 

[paasi]

Dont forget it people, you heard it here first.

sorry boss, I've heard that one a long time ago, from many different people... *snip*
...but seriously, I'd like to see good space combat make a revival. Tie Fighter nailed it years ago, but anymore it's a long stretch finding a good one like that.

Yes, I'm getting by on the Freespace 2 Open Source Project. I'd dearly love another great space combat sim.
Here's a link to some info on the Open Source Project, for anyone interested;
http://www.hard-light.net/wiki/index.php/FSSCP_Introduction

For my own contribution I'd like an RPG where you don't gain experience points or abstract D&D-style 'levels' but instead increase skills based on how often and how well you use them. The only game I remember doing this was Stonekeep. It's definitely a concept you don't see often enough in RPGs.

I'm not saying levelling up is necessarily bad or wrong, but I'd like some experimentation with character development that didn't rely on the level, exp concept.

Thanks for the props, but your want is exactly how the Elder Scrolls games work. Morrowind and Oblivion are about all you're about to find like that. Both games I recommend playing because they're worth a trip around.

No problem!

I've actually played your suggestions;

Morrowind came *close* - but still had the whole 'levelling up' and Oblivion actually required me to be a certain level for a quest at late game, I think. I had some fun with those games, but I have seen few (Except Stonekeep - but that game had problems of it's own...) that ditch the whole "Level of Experience" system completely.

To me it seems like if you take the leveling system away, the players can't effectively gauge their characters potential and leves them feeling unsure and possibly as if missing something, like if you take the candles away from a childs birthday cake.

I haven't tried Stonekeep, but Elder Scrolls skill system I am attached to. All I would add to it would be the uniqueness of each character class by giving feats or special powers at certain levels of a specified class or when a skill gets high enough. The problem in the ES series is that no matter which race, no matter which class you can still become omnipotent given a bit of time.

Roleplaying people like it when the game awards them with a little speech and special ability that will, say, with transmutation turn a harmless mushroom into a toxic mine... actually I think I'm on to something here.

Ok, so I am generalizing, but I like it! It gives me a sense of accomplishment, like spendind all those drakes and hours of hacking at the shins of my fellow man are actually paying off, and Oblivion pulled it of... mediocrely. So high Marksmaship allows you to paralyze your opponents... if you're lucky. At that level you don't care. The powers are gained far too late in the game.

 

[Aedwynn]

Dont forget it people, you heard it here first.

sorry boss, I've heard that one a long time ago, from many different people... *snip*
...but seriously, I'd like to see good space combat make a revival. Tie Fighter nailed it years ago, but anymore it's a long stretch finding a good one like that.

Yes, I'm getting by on the Freespace 2 Open Source Project. I'd dearly love another great space combat sim.
Here's a link to some info on the Open Source Project, for anyone interested;
http://www.hard-light.net/wiki/index.php/FSSCP_Introduction

For my own contribution I'd like an RPG where you don't gain experience points or abstract D&D-style 'levels' but instead increase skills based on how often and how well you use them. The only game I remember doing this was Stonekeep. It's definitely a concept you don't see often enough in RPGs.

I'm not saying levelling up is necessarily bad or wrong, but I'd like some experimentation with character development that didn't rely on the level, exp concept.

Thanks for the props, but your want is exactly how the Elder Scrolls games work. Morrowind and Oblivion are about all you're about to find like that. Both games I recommend playing because they're worth a trip around.

No problem!

I've actually played your suggestions;

Morrowind came *close* - but still had the whole 'levelling up' and Oblivion actually required me to be a certain level for a quest at late game, I think. I had some fun with those games, but I have seen few (Except Stonekeep - but that game had problems of it's own...) that ditch the whole "Level of Experience" system completely.

To me it seems like if you take the leveling system away, the players can't effectively gauge their characters potential and leves them feeling unsure and possibly as if missing something, like if you take the candles away from a childs birthday cake.

I haven't tried Stonekeep, but Elder Scrolls skill system I am attached to. All I would add to it would be the uniqueness of each character class by giving feats or special powers at certain levels of a specified class or when a skill gets high enough. The problem in the ES series is that no matter which race, no matter which class you can still become omnipotent given a bit of time.

Roleplaying people like it when the game awards them with a little speech and special ability that will, say, with transmutation turn a harmless mushroom into a toxic mine... actually I think I'm on to something here.

Ok, so I am generalizing, but I like it! It gives me a sense of accomplishment, like spendind all those drakes and hours of hacking at the shins of my fellow man are actually paying off, and Oblivion pulled it of... mediocrely. So high Marksmaship allows you to paralyze your opponents... if you're lucky. At that level you don't care. The powers are gained far too late in the game.

Yeah, I guess the system is quite intuitive. A player will instinctively understand that his level 3 character is better than when he was level 2, and he should be able to stomp all over the level 1 character but should stay away from the level 10 dude, for example. I can see the appeal. But all the abstractness can sometimes throw me out of suspension of disbelief and immersion sometimes. (How would I 'know' what level I am? Is my character like Red Mage from 8-bit theatre? Does he carry around a copy of his own character sheet? And somehow, by stabbing a potted plant to death with a knife, I now know how to use more spells and am a lot tougher, for some reason...)

To be fair, I do like the levelling system. I do. Been a big D&D fan for years, but, I'd just like, I dunno, something else occasionally.

I won't go into my rant about Oblivion, but the fact that all the enemies level up at the same time you level actually makes levelling up a bit, well, a bit less useful than normal levelling up in RPG's. Possibly an understatement there. Morrowind is actually one of my favourite games of all time.
Stonekeep, well... it's the spiritual successor of the old 'Eye of the Beholder' series of games and you may find it very dated and tedious now. But you can get it here if you are morbidly curious;
http://www.gog.com/en/frontpage/

 

[paasi]

Morrowind was awesome. I played it for years after it came. But yes, the level aspect may take away some of the immersion from the game. The levelled creatures/treasure is an aspect I'd remove too.
In Morrowind you could at least stuble across an artifact that would make life so much easier at lower levels. In Oblivion the arifacts are give only after you complete a quest which has a level requirement. It is so much more rewarding that you bumble through a dungeon and come across an axe stuck to a wall than having it handed to you after a brief quest.
It is really annoying.