What makes a game great for you

[PapaGreg096]

Whether it be in terms of combat, aesthetics, music, story, exploration, level design, movement, environments, or etc what makes a game truly great for you

 

[Squilookle]

Maybe kick this thread off with your own example?

Hard to say for me. Probably more than anything, it's a game's ability to make me lose track of time. How it does that is hard to pin down, but it's probably a range of factors working in concert

 

[gorfias]

Maybe kick this thread off with your own example?

Hard to say for me. Probably more than anything, it's a game's ability to make me lose track of time. How it does that is hard to pin down, but it's probably a range of factors working in concert

I don't think I can beat that.

Bud asked me how often I game. I told him I try to play for even 10 minutes in a day to have the satisfaction of having done it. Other times? Like with Fallout 3 for PS3? I'd go to play in the AM, it gets dark out and I'm like, "what happened to the day?!?!"

It's immersiveness. Did I get lost in the game and lose track of time?

I will write, I need easy. If it is hard and frustrating, I'll rage quit. No time lost. So the game has to allow those with limited abilities a path to grow and enjoy the game

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

The main, but vague, things that I feel make the very best games are a clear vision and passion. You can just tell when a game is basically produced by a marketing team with the devs not being emotionally invested in the product. Past that I believe an extremely solid core of the game needs to be present and extremely well-executed whether it's the combat in Bayonetta or companionship in ICO. Every element of a game should only be there to support and enhance that core so that the experience always stays on point. So many modern games throw in so much junk (whether it be a crafting system, skill trees, leveling, loot systems, etc.) that the core, if there even is one, is buried. So many games are open world for really no other purpose other than that's what everyone else is doing or RPGs having 100s of quests just to say there's 100+ hours of content. Even Spiderman from last year had an amazingly solid and fun core but just about everything the game had you do were basically chores. Imagine what Rocksteady in their prime would've done with that Spiderman core.

I think this Game Maker's Toolkit video perfectly encapsulates what I look for in a game or really any experience in any medium.

 

[Johnny Novgorod]

I think this Game Maker's Toolkit video perfectly encapsulates what I look for in a game or really any experience in any medium.

I love ICO and that's a pretty good video, glad you posted it.

 

[Dalisclock]

For me it's a combination of factors

-Fun to play, due to mechanics, controls, etc.
-Engagement with story, characters due to writing and presentation.
-A world that befits the game and is compelling in its own right(map design/background).
-Visuals and sound that enhance the above. It doesn't have to be 4K HD 60 frames per second crystal clear incredibly detailed graphics but it does have to fit the game and help push it a bit further.

A good game can exist with one or two of these but a great game pretty much needs everything to work together to make a great combination.

 

[Kyrian007]

Its simply the amount of personal enjoyment I get out of playing it. Some games I consider great have no(or a really dumb) story, but fantastic gameplay. Some games I consider great have almost no gameplay at all but a story I find captivating. A couple of games I find great have outstanding visuals, most of the games that I find great didn't even have cutting edge graphics at the time they came out. Another marker, timelessness. Sometimes I have gone back to playing a retro game and thought, "that used to be pretty good, but it doesn't hold up now." A GREAT game... never. Ultima 7, Silent Hill 2, TIE Fighter, Masters of Orion 2, Chrono Trigger and Cross, Perfect Dark, every Fallout except NV and 76... I get as much enjoyment from these now as I did when I first played them.

I should explain that last bit. I can play through every other Fallout game, again and again and have a great time. I really loved NV when I played through it the first time... but it somehow doesn't have that timeless factor the others do. I think maybe it was a little TOO good, as far as stories go. I can't engage in the story anymore because my canon fallout story happened the first time I played NV... and all I'm left with is clunky game design and buggy modding.

 

[gorfias]

The main, but vague, things that I feel make the very best games are a clear vision and passion. You can just tell when a game is basically produced by a marketing team with the devs not being emotionally invested in the product. Past that I believe an extremely solid core of the game needs to be present and extremely well-executed whether it's the combat in Bayonetta or companionship in ICO. Every element of a game should only be there to support and enhance that core so that the experience always stays on point. So many modern games throw in so much junk (whether it be a crafting system, skill trees, leveling, loot systems, etc.) that the core, if there even is one, is buried. So many games are open world for really no other purpose other than that's what everyone else is doing or RPGs having 100s of quests just to say there's 100+ hours of content. Even Spiderman from last year had an amazingly solid and fun core but just about everything the game had you do were basically chores. Imagine what Rocksteady in their prime would've done with that Spiderman core.

I think this Game Maker's Toolkit video perfectly encapsulates what I look for in a game or really any experience in any medium.

I have renewed desire to play this! I have the PS3 HD version that came with Shadow of the Colossus. Thanks for posting.

For me it's a combination of factors

-Fun to play, due to mechanics, controls, etc.
-Engagement with story, characters due to writing and presentation.
-A world that befits the game and is compelling in its own right(map design/background).
-Visuals and sound that enhance the above. It doesn't have to be 4K HD 60 frames per second crystal clear incredibly detailed graphics but it does have to fit the game and help push it a bit further.

A good game can exist with one or two of these but a great game pretty much needs everything to work together to make a great combination.

Story and character sure help enjoyment. I do prefer games where you get past a challenge and then are treated to a cut scene advancing the story.

 

[Casual Shinji]

A good world. That needs to be the one thing that a game succeeds at.

A game can have dodgy characterisation, gameplay, graphics etc, but if the gameworld succeeds in making me believe in it I can usually overlook its faults. And this doesn't mean it has to be AAA level presentation -- I've been playing Hollow Knight recently for the first time, and even with its 2D cartoony artstyle it's able to breath life into its world and completely suck me in. This is also why Platinum games never really do anything for me, because despite the deep combat mechanics I'm just running around empty corridors and parking lots.

 

[Casual Shinji]

I think this Game Maker's Toolkit video perfectly encapsulates what I look for in a game or really any experience in any medium.

It's surprising to see how much has changed since 2015, since a lot of what's being said in this video would be deemed regressive for the medium by todays standards (that being the standards of contemporary videogame essayists). Any game that dares focus mainly on anything other than gameplay or tries to make its more "game-iness" invisible (healthbar, items menu) is usually looked at with a bit of distain. The 'how dare it not be a Platinum/Fromsoftware game' attitude.

It's also kinda funny how it brings up that games today give you 2 dozen guns as a point of contention, when the 2-gun limit that preceeded this is widely viewed as a detriment to the shooter genre, and people were overjoyed when they could finally have a whole bunch of guns to cycle through again.

 

[Yoshi178]

The main, but vague, things that I feel make the very best games are a clear vision and passion. You can just tell when a game is basically produced by a marketing team with the devs not being emotionally invested in the product. Past that I believe an extremely solid core of the game needs to be present and extremely well-executed whether it's the combat in Bayonetta or companionship in ICO. Every element of a game should only be there to support and enhance that core so that the experience always stays on point. So many modern games throw in so much junk (whether it be a crafting system, skill trees, leveling, loot systems, etc.) that the core, if there even is one, is buried. So many games are open world for really no other purpose other than that's what everyone else is doing or RPGs having 100s of quests just to say there's 100+ hours of content. Even Spiderman from last year had an amazingly solid and fun core but just about everything the game had you do were basically chores. Imagine what Rocksteady in their prime would've done with that Spiderman core.

I think this Game Maker's Toolkit video perfectly encapsulates what I look for in a game or really any experience in any medium.

RPGs having 100s of quests just to say there's 100+ hours of content

an RPG Dev fills your RPG with more "game"play?

how dare they!

 

[Neurotic Void Melody]

For a game to be truly great, am not asking for much, just a couple of simple key points;

- adaptive difficulty. Not your normal adaptive, no...the game must sense through the controller how alert or tired i are through finger temperature and activity and adapt specifically to please that state of consciousness. Meaning tired me will only have to fight against catatonic enemies so it all balances out.

- adaptive AI. Not your typical adaptive, no...the AI must not only pass the Turing test and present enough variety of emotions to make me question my murderous intent, but it should also be able to persuade me to not play the game at all and just turn it off to save them from further eternally cycling punishment at the behest of my unquenched power fantasy. Bonus points for making me seriously reconsider how I live life and spend free time these days too. Basically counseling from a videogame AI.

- biases. It must appeal to all of them. Even the ones I don't yet know about. They change on a daily basis too, so it's not overly important to hit them all, but something to keep in mind. It's better to try and die than to not try and stay healthily alive, or whatever that saying was.

- failures. It must make up for all of my failures in life. It has to compensate all of them. There are a lot. And there's more coming every day. To the point where they cause collateral failures leading to more failures on a level of multiplication so high that it's as hopeless as trying to reach the parts of the universe exanded into so fast that the light from there will never reach us at all. Good luck.

- ecstasy. Playing it must feel like the very first time I... experienced each of life's joys. Every. Single. One.

- womb. It must feel like I am safely back in the womb, but also as dangerous as hurtling through a meteor shower in a tin can ship covered with volatile space lemurs. It's a fine tightrope to walk, you'll figure it out.

- true love. It must literally be my true love that I would want to have husbandly relations with. Hopefully the AI will be smart enough to consent to this astonishing, generous husbandly offer of mine, otherwise I will be very sad and maybe not play the game as much.

- mortal enemy. Its existence must agitate my mortal enemy so much they suffer a mental breakdown at the mere mention of the damn thing. I've no idea who my mortal enemy is yet, but if you're reading this and are annoyed by the sound of the game already...well, welcome to mortal rivalhood, asshole! (Am just getting you in the mood with some cute fighting talk, no hard feefees. Plz don't run or call the police).

- arousal. It shouldn't be arousing me. Concentrating on a bloody videogame is the last thing on my mind if I'm aroused. Sorry, true love point. It's a fine tightrope, you'll figure it out.

- heat death of the universe. It should, optimally, stop the heat death of the universe. It needs to counter the second law of thermodynamics if it wants to get in my good books!
Ok, alright...I'll concede that might be expecting too much, but it should at least inspire a solution to cosmic entropy and solve this existential dread.


...


Now, people often say to me ...uh, Neurotic...why you gotta be so hedonistic all the tine? Bringing everyone down for your unmet, unrealistic expectations of pleasure? To which I reply this isn't hedonism...it's needonism! And I need you to begone with your pitiful low standards!

I think that's fair. Not asking for much. Just perfection.

 

[CritialGaming]

Take a good look at the Witcher 3 and you have my answer. Story, setting, combat (yes i liked it, fuck anyone who says I shouldn't), and boobies! I mean it's the perfect game.

 

[Grouchy Imp_v1legacy]

Solid worldbuilding and characters that I can immerse myself in for hours at a time without even noticing, for one thing. Plenty of replay value, for another. Quests/missions that can be completed more than one way, factions/guilds that work against one another, a reputation/morality system that makes the world react to your choices and game progress (and not in the "You're the person who did that thing! Well done!" sense). Locations that are interesting and rewarding to explore, rather than just interchangeable backdrops to endless copy-pasted battles. And a stunning score (seems an odd one, but if I'm going to be spending hundreds upon hundreds of hours in a game I want a decent soundtrack).

Basically, if you've ever lost yourself in games like TES: Morrowind or Fallout: New Vegas you know exactly what I'm after.

 

[sXeth]

Mostly that all the parts mesh together cohesively. Rather then disconnected elements that feel tacked together. Obviously whatever the main focus is should past the muster of "good", but all the attachments need to work alongside it as well.

If the game starts having stuff that exists to exist (insert AC2-whatever with their various estate management sims, and the like), or if its a story that is just kind of haphazardly bolted to some semi-popular genre because they had a story idea but no gameplay idea, is when it kind of starts falling down.

 

[B-Cell_v1legacy]

Excellent Level design
Excellent Combat
no hand holding and QTE
no cinematic BS
Good story telling without interrupting gameplay
etc

thats what make game excellent

 

[Something Amyss]

Usually, it's "fun" which is hard to specifically quantify. It's a lot like porn: I know it when I see it.

But I will forgive a lot for engaging characters or an interesting story. Not enough to enjoy RDR 2, but still.

The quickest way for me to put down a game is if I am not having a good time. Even quicker, I've discovered, than if I have no idea what I'm doing.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

It's surprising to see how much has changed since 2015, since a lot of what's being said in this video would be deemed regressive for the medium by todays standards (that being the standards of contemporary videogame essayists). Any game that dares focus mainly on anything other than gameplay or tries to make its more "game-iness" invisible (healthbar, items menu) is usually looked at with a bit of distain. The 'how dare it not be a Platinum/Fromsoftware game' attitude.

It's also kinda funny how it brings up that games today give you 2 dozen guns as a point of contention, when the 2-gun limit that preceeded this is widely viewed as a detriment to the shooter genre, and people were overjoyed when they could finally have a whole bunch of guns to cycle through again.

I think he meant more along the lines getting a bunch of same-y guns like say 10 assault rifles for your 2-gun system is different than carrying 8 vastly different guns. Games should only have what they need basically.

RPGs having 100s of quests just to say there's 100+ hours of content

an RPG Dev fills your RPG with more "game"play?

how dare they!

Modern RPGs have become the worst genre in gaming by far. They are so concerned with wasting the player's time vs giving them engaging content. RPGs are the longest games with the lowest percentage of quality content, that's a pretty horrible combination. Every quest should be of quality and be there for a specific purpose, not just be a copy-pasted thing to do on a list of chores. You can make an RPG that is less than 50 hours and be "more" RPG than just any other RPG, for example the Mass Effect series. More is not necessarily better, that's why editors exist to remove anything that doesn't add anything to the work (whether its a game, movie, TV show episode, book, etc.).

 

[Casual Shinji]

I think he meant more along the lines getting a bunch of same-y guns like say 10 assault rifles for your 2-gun system is different than carrying 8 vastly different guns. Games should only have what they need basically.

You can't be precise on that though. Not even Ico has all it needs - no more no less. We don't know if a better alternate Ico with more mechanics could have existed, because it never got made.

Modern RPGs have become the worst genre in gaming by far. They are so concerned with wasting the player's time vs giving them engaging content. RPGs are the longest games with the lowest percentage of quality content, that's a pretty horrible combination. Every quest should be of quality and be there for a specific purpose, not just be a copy-pasted thing to do on a list of chores. You can make an RPG that is less than 50 hours and be "more" RPG than just any other RPG, for example the Mass Effect series. More is not necessarily better, that's why editors exist to remove anything that doesn't add anything to the work (whether its a game, movie, TV show episode, book, etc.).

How is modern RPGs' "wasting time" different from how RPGs used to be? RPGs have always been huge time sinks where the individual parts are kinda dodgy. The whole appeal of an RPG is putting a lot of time into it, carving out your own story with your own character. The trade off for that amount of freedom and content being that not everything is as polished as it would be in a non-RPG. And heck, it's not like these games force you to do every side-mission, you CAN just skip content if it doesn't interest you or you find it lacking in quality. And Mass Effect might be considered an RPG, but it is the least role-play friendly of any RPG I've ever played, apart from maybe ME1.

Content in games can't and shouldn't be some mathmatical equation, where everything has an exact purpose. Some things are going to work better than others, and something might lack a real purpose in the game. You can't tell me every single aspect of Ico, every shadow creature, every puzzle, served a specific purpose. It didn't. There's things that don't work in that game, and there's things that do work.

 

[CaitSeith]

In general, if it stays in my mind after I'm done playing it for the good reasons. What I want to stay in my mind from the game depends on the genre.

A great horror game should give me nightmares.

A great tactics game should have me thinking better strategies.

A great RPG should have me interested on learning more about the lore or the characters.

A great Metroidvania should have me want to keep wandering through the map.

etc...

A great game makes me want to replay it just for the sake of it.