Full Games List
Featured Games
New Games
Reviews
Media
Images
Blogs
Game Updates
Images Feedback Summary
Game Design Highlights
Tutorials
Articles
Scripts
Utilities / Plugins
Resources
Engines
Engine Bulletins
What is Makerscore?
Past Events
Achievements
Misaos
Forums
Post History
Chat
New to RMN?
Full Store List
RMN Music Pack (free)
"WHEN DOES THIS GET GOOD?"
Posts
zacheatscrackers
View playlists
Closeauthor=Crystalgate
Mind you, I do believe in delay of gratification, but not in delay of having fun. For example, letting the player start with a basic weapon and giving it that awesome sword or gun later is a good way to handle delay of gratification. However, making the game boring at first and not introducing the fun until after a few hours is a shitty way of handling it.
Yeah, that pretty much sums it up for me. Introduce all the big stuff gradually so the player isn't overwhelmed, but keep it fun along the way. e.g. don't give us a 3 hour (or at least really long, maybe 3 hours is a bit of an exaggeration but it sure as hell felt like it) tutorial ala Kingdom Hearts II.
Games like Bastion do this pretty well; starts you off in a fun first level and gradually feeds you the basic controls and some enemies but doesn't throw everything on your plate (weapon upgrades/Shrine Idols/etc in that game's particular case) at once.
I'm actually kind of surprised how heated the discussion got earlier in this thread because I thought RMN was pretty much agreed on a consensus of "the burden of hooking the player in the first 15 minutes is on the game".
I think if you ask ten different people when the same game got good for them, whether it's Mass Effect or Dark Souls or whatever, you'll get a bit of a range of different answers. I think people get "hooked" at different points and by different things, get "bored" at different points by the same games, and have different thresholds for "waiting".
I think a lot of people don't really have time for really playing real (add inverted commas to taste) videogames anymore because of the mundane requirements of real life and when I think about that it generally makes me pretty sad. But it's totally understandable. Real life is a big deal. But it does always make me sad when 30 somethings and 40 somethings come up to my booth at conventions and say "oh yeah, RPGs, I used to play those...they were so much fun...but now I've got a job and kids and I can't anymore". There is something heartbreaking about that.
I am in a fairly unique position that really nothing stops me from spending eight hours a day everyday playing videogames. Before you envy me this, probably understand it is in large part the result of a horrible incurable disease that has made my entire life a shit-show. So its "envy" factor is questionable. Even in my unique position, I am unlikely to actually play videogames for eight hours a day everyday because that is not a great way to feel good about yourself.
And even in my unique position I'm pretty stingy with the amount of time I'm willing to gamble on new games that aren't "proven fun", or for that matter the amount of time I'm willing to invest in playing videogames without having an awesome time, period. Like the story of Xenosaga was pretty good and the gameplay was like "alright" but I just did not have the time or energy to invest in actually trying to beat it. So at the first major lull in the "what-would-happen-next" factor I just kind of wandered away from it. The reason for this stuff is usually that other games already have their hooks in me and their hooks are deep, and barbed. Like, say, Skyrim.
I think if you ask ten different people when the same game got good for them, whether it's Mass Effect or Dark Souls or whatever, you'll get a bit of a range of different answers. I think people get "hooked" at different points and by different things, get "bored" at different points by the same games, and have different thresholds for "waiting".
I think a lot of people don't really have time for really playing real (add inverted commas to taste) videogames anymore because of the mundane requirements of real life and when I think about that it generally makes me pretty sad. But it's totally understandable. Real life is a big deal. But it does always make me sad when 30 somethings and 40 somethings come up to my booth at conventions and say "oh yeah, RPGs, I used to play those...they were so much fun...but now I've got a job and kids and I can't anymore". There is something heartbreaking about that.
I am in a fairly unique position that really nothing stops me from spending eight hours a day everyday playing videogames. Before you envy me this, probably understand it is in large part the result of a horrible incurable disease that has made my entire life a shit-show. So its "envy" factor is questionable. Even in my unique position, I am unlikely to actually play videogames for eight hours a day everyday because that is not a great way to feel good about yourself.
And even in my unique position I'm pretty stingy with the amount of time I'm willing to gamble on new games that aren't "proven fun", or for that matter the amount of time I'm willing to invest in playing videogames without having an awesome time, period. Like the story of Xenosaga was pretty good and the gameplay was like "alright" but I just did not have the time or energy to invest in actually trying to beat it. So at the first major lull in the "what-would-happen-next" factor I just kind of wandered away from it. The reason for this stuff is usually that other games already have their hooks in me and their hooks are deep, and barbed. Like, say, Skyrim.
I've had multiple people tell me the story in V is probably best in series but so far it is lackluster
Of the DQs I've played (I, II, III, IV, VIII, IX) it has had the softest and least enticing start.
I is like "ur the fucking hero of legend! go kill the dragonlord!"
right away you know your goal and purpose and the big threat
II is like "we are under fucking attack! cue wounded soldier dragging his bloodied corpse across the country to find help"
III is more grandiose but its still "ur dad was topnotch! where'd he go??" and gives you some purpose
IV was all like "THE CHILDREN! THEY DO BE MISSING. go save 'em RAGNAR (best name)"
VIII was cool like "whoa the KING is a toadman wtf?? how mysteryish!"
IX was all "BOOM HEAVEN JUST EXPLODED"
V is so far "hey ur on a boat."
so, unlike all of the other DQs I've played, I wasn't given a hook before I even embarked on my first quest. WHAT IS THE POINT OF DQV?
Of the DQs I've played (I, II, III, IV, VIII, IX) it has had the softest and least enticing start.
I is like "ur the fucking hero of legend! go kill the dragonlord!"
right away you know your goal and purpose and the big threat
II is like "we are under fucking attack! cue wounded soldier dragging his bloodied corpse across the country to find help"
III is more grandiose but its still "ur dad was topnotch! where'd he go??" and gives you some purpose
IV was all like "THE CHILDREN! THEY DO BE MISSING. go save 'em RAGNAR (best name)"
VIII was cool like "whoa the KING is a toadman wtf?? how mysteryish!"
IX was all "BOOM HEAVEN JUST EXPLODED"
V is so far "hey ur on a boat."
so, unlike all of the other DQs I've played, I wasn't given a hook before I even embarked on my first quest. WHAT IS THE POINT OF DQV?
I think it's important for a game to grip you from the start. I'm realizing more and more that the way that a game grips you can be different from the way a movie grips you. Yes, you can grip the player with an amazing cutscene to start off with. But I've found that most games that have had an immediate effect on me from the intro are the ones that let me have control of my player almost from the very start, i.e. within the first minute.
Because games are an interactive medium, sometimes the sooner the interaction, the better.
And lest we forget that games can have a gripping intro *and* develop into a satisfying experience later on. Both can exist ;)
Because games are an interactive medium, sometimes the sooner the interaction, the better.
And lest we forget that games can have a gripping intro *and* develop into a satisfying experience later on. Both can exist ;)
Housekeeping
3571
I've heard that 5 has the best story, too, but I don't think Dragon Quests really have notable stories. 5 has a subversion of a major RPG trope, which is why I think it gets classified as having the best story, but as far as "good writing" is concerned, subverting tropes is the easiest, most obvious thing you should do in writing, and it's not even really that interesting, frankly. To answer your question, the point is to kill the demon king, which is the point of every Dragon Quest; there's just more buildup leading into that.
I think that 7 has the best story in terms of the central premise and world. 8 has the best story in terms of writing relatable characters. 7's my favorite overall (I've only played the first 8), both from a gameplay and writing perspective. The story's pretty stripped back like every Dragon Quest, but there's a great sense of mystery built into the central premise that works really well for me. People often say that 7 has the best NPCs, which I guess is true, but their individual stories didn't stick with me that well.
I think that 7 has the best story in terms of the central premise and world. 8 has the best story in terms of writing relatable characters. 7's my favorite overall (I've only played the first 8), both from a gameplay and writing perspective. The story's pretty stripped back like every Dragon Quest, but there's a great sense of mystery built into the central premise that works really well for me. People often say that 7 has the best NPCs, which I guess is true, but their individual stories didn't stick with me that well.
spejoku
0
Man, the first few minutes of the game are the hardest to get through, especially if you have a heavily story laden game and want to provide backstory. As amazing as persona 4 is, the only way I actually got through the three hours of cutscenes before you can actually play the game was through strong writing and little mysteries to keep interest.
exposition is hard. The dragon quest games pretty much ignore it, for a few of the games its like a zelda or mario game where your plot is "stop bad guy" rather than something more personal. But torneko will forever be my favorite dq character.
exposition is hard. The dragon quest games pretty much ignore it, for a few of the games its like a zelda or mario game where your plot is "stop bad guy" rather than something more personal. But torneko will forever be my favorite dq character.
I never thought of it that way before. Yeah, V doesn't really have much of a hook does it? I'd totally understand bowing out before it gets good.
I will say that it is a bit lackluster because its trying to set up the relationship between the hero and his dad Pankraz/Papas for later down the road. The goal is to make you seem like a regular kid hanging out with your dad who is awesome hero-guy. It serves as a contrast for later on when you are no longer a kid. Most Dragon Quest games have good hooks, but no set up. This one is setting stuff up.
It starts to get good once you visit Bianca's town. Which doesn't take long.
I will say that it is a bit lackluster because its trying to set up the relationship between the hero and his dad Pankraz/Papas for later down the road. The goal is to make you seem like a regular kid hanging out with your dad who is awesome hero-guy. It serves as a contrast for later on when you are no longer a kid. Most Dragon Quest games have good hooks, but no set up. This one is setting stuff up.
It starts to get good once you visit Bianca's town. Which doesn't take long.
