Randy Smith FIRED from Ion Storm by Warren Spector!

Games that are ostensibly simple in nature can be the most complex and rewarding of all. Don't be fooled by endless menus and options, for these can mask a very simple game.

By someone's flawed logic, most of Nintendo's games would suck simply because there aren't very many options in them. Play the games, feel the depth.
 
[quote name='Firebrand']By someone's flawed logic, most of Nintendo's games would suck simply because there aren't very many options in them. [/quote]

:roll:

I love how people twist my argument into some kind of bullshit. You people really need to stop listening through your ass. Just the fact that you people won't get off the "options" issue in light of my other examples and points shows how dense you people are.

Simple games in and of themselves are not bad, but when you weight simplicity vs. complexity, complex games are better because they offer more gameplay options to the player. Both kind of games are capable of being fun and good, and both are capable of being boring and bad - it's up to how the developer puts the game together.

And for you morons, complexity is far more than just a damn options menu so pull your heads out of your asses and pay attention to what I am saying.
 
I guess what people are confusing is what exactly about the game is complex. A game with a simple presentation can still be complex. The best example I can come up with is trying to read a book like the Iliad or the Odyssey. Reading it in the original greek can be more pleasurable to those who know greek but translating it into English doesn't take away from the complexity of the story.
 
My points are about GAMEPLAY, not about story, graphics,etc.

So if you pick up a game and like the story and want to say that it is deep and complex, fine, but I am talking about GAMEPLAY.
 
[quote name='Scrubking'][quote name='Firebrand']By someone's flawed logic, most of Nintendo's games would suck simply because there aren't very many options in them. [/quote]

:roll:

I love how people twist my argument into some kind of bullshit. You people really need to stop listening through your ass. Just the fact that you people won't get off the "options" issue in light of my other examples and points shows how dense you people are.

Simple games in and of themselves are not bad, but when you weight simplicity vs. complexity, complex games are better because they offer more gameplay options to the player. Both kind of games are capable of being fun and good, and both are capable of being boring and bad - it's up to how the developer puts the game together.

And for you morons, complexity is far more than just a damn options menu so pull your heads out of your asses and pay attention to what I am saying.[/quote]

Oh good, you've moved to insults, now I can discount your already laughable opinion on the subject.
 
[quote name='jmcc'][quote name='Scrubking'][quote name='Firebrand']By someone's flawed logic, most of Nintendo's games would suck simply because there aren't very many options in them. [/quote]

:roll:

I love how people twist my argument into some kind of bullshit. You people really need to stop listening through your ass. Just the fact that you people won't get off the "options" issue in light of my other examples and points shows how dense you people are.

Simple games in and of themselves are not bad, but when you weight simplicity vs. complexity, complex games are better because they offer more gameplay options to the player. Both kind of games are capable of being fun and good, and both are capable of being boring and bad - it's up to how the developer puts the game together.

And for you morons, complexity is far more than just a damn options menu so pull your heads out of your asses and pay attention to what I am saying.[/quote]

Oh good, you've moved to insults, now I can discount your already laughable opinion on the subject.[/quote]

Like I give a fuck! :D

And for the record you have been nothing but an arrogant ass completely closed minded to my argument - evidenced by your own admission above so don't pretend that you are just now not going to stop listening. And only a fool would discount someone's view because of the manner in which it was relayed. You may not like it, but it doesn't mean they are wrong.
 
This is my last example for those smart enough to understand it.

Which version of Action bill would you prefer? This is a totally made up game.

Simple Version A, where you just side scroll shooting bad guys and fight bosses.

or

Complex Version B, where you side scroll AND jump AND switch weapons, AND switch ammo types and shoot bad guys and fight bosses.

It should be clear that the more complex version is better since it offers more gameplay options.

Have a nice day.
 
"Unless there is some new news no one really knows since ISA is not saying anything specific. I assume he was fired since I believe Randy would not just quit on his game so close to seeing it realized."

http://xbox.gamespy.com/xbox/deus-ex-invisible-war/504144p1.html

His interview at GameSpy indicated that he quit, and that his departure wasn't (directly, at least) Warren Spector's doing.

Side note: Goddamn, this post was typo-city...and I only wrote one sentence!
 
[quote name='jmcc']Yes, I have disproved your equation, you just don't acknowledge that there there are games out there that have simple rules and techniques, yet at the same time present extremely deep gameplay.

As for reloading, I ask you how that effects the gameplay of IW. How would the game be significantly deeper with the addition of having to press a button to switch a clip instead of being able to fire until you run out of ammo completely?[/quote]

Tetris anyone? :p

And if manual reloading made a game great, then go down to the arcade and play all the House of the Dead you want. I'll take DX:IW any day.

You have to remember, Scrubking, there is a fine line between being a fanboy and designing games that a lot of people want to buy (i.e., making a profit on investment). There is such a thing as simplifying techniques while rewarding the gamer with complex gameplay. As far as first person shooters are concerned, look at Goldeneye and Halo, two games which were "simplified" for console gamers yet are regarded as the two best FPS titles ever for the console market.

EDIT: GameSpot interview with HS up:

http://www.gamespot.com/news/2004/04/06/news_6092978.html

Looks like the parting was on good terms. He seems like a real wack job! :roll:

Jeremy
 
[quote name='Scrubking']This is my last example for those smart enough to understand it.

Which version of Action bill would you prefer? This is a totally made up game.

Simple Version A, where you just side scroll shooting bad guys and fight bosses.

or

Complex Version B, where you side scroll AND jump AND switch weapons, AND switch ammo types and shoot bad guys and fight bosses.

It should be clear that the more complex version is better since it offers more gameplay options.

Have a nice day.[/quote]
You think much too highly of yourself and your flawed arguments, and to top things off, you resort to insulting people when your arguments are smashed to pieces.

Complexity doesn't make games better. Better level design and superior gameplay mechanics, etc...these are the things that can make better games.

A solid game of Tetris Attack (or any Tetris game for that matter) can make you appeciate the depth a seemingly simplistic game can provide. Depth isn't exclusive to complex games. That seems to be your argument, more or less. It has been shot down. Perhaps Simple Version A has a superior gameplay mechanic, or better level design?
 
[quote name='jrutz'][quote name='jmcc']Yes, I have disproved your equation, you just don't acknowledge that there there are games out there that have simple rules and techniques, yet at the same time present extremely deep gameplay.

As for reloading, I ask you how that effects the gameplay of IW. How would the game be significantly deeper with the addition of having to press a button to switch a clip instead of being able to fire until you run out of ammo completely?[/quote]

Tetris anyone? :p

And if manual reloading made a game great, then go down to the arcade and play all the House of the Dead you want. I'll take DX:IW any day.

You have to remember, Scrubking, there is a fine line between being a fanboy and designing games that a lot of people want to buy (i.e., making a profit on investment). There is such a thing as simplifying techniques while rewarding the gamer with complex gameplay. As far as first person shooters are concerned, look at Goldeneye and Halo, two games which were "simplified" for console gamers yet are regarded as the two best FPS titles ever for the console market.

EDIT: GameSpot interview with HS up:

http://www.gamespot.com/news/2004/04/06/news_6092978.html

Looks like the parting was on good terms. He seems like a real wack job! :roll:

Jeremy[/quote]

Halo was a rushed hack job of a game for a platform that needed something that would sell games. I like the game, but placing it in the elite catagory of being one of the greatest of all time is wrong. Goldeneye was good at the time, but does not hold up. I am not a graphics whore but playing a game with one control stick in teh FP perspective blows.

NOLF 2, and UT(entire series) come to mind as much superior games.

Lets just face it. Warren Spector wanted to be like Liz Phair. Both betrayed the auidences to try and get the big dollars and failed miserably
 
The hardcore gamers thing they are the industry's target audience. What they fail to realize is that they are not - the mass, or casual, gamer is who the industry is targeting.

Make a game too complex and you've just eliminated a few hundred thousand potential customers. Games might be developed for the lowest common denominator (casual gamers), but that doesn't mean the games themselves have to suffer. It is the zen of game design when a title can be as complicated as the gamer wants it to be.

What people also fail to realize is Warren Spector works for a company who depends on profit to survive. His job is to make games that will sell, and in order to do that he needs to target the mass market. In the case of DX:IW, it still received high praise by the gaming press. It just didn't sell as well as projected because it was released late in the holiday season. In that sense, he didn't betray anyone.

Jeremy
 
Scrubking:

Take an existing design that is successful. Tetris Attack. Add more gameplay options - say, the ability to switch tiles vertically as well as horizontally.

Add an extra piece to Chess, or an extra move to the rook's vocabulary.

Add three extra weapons to Quake.

Is the result a better game?
 
[quote name='jmcc'][quote name='XboxMaster']Wait, I thought DE:IW was supposed to be good. I played it and it was more than fairly decent. Anyway, explain more of what the guy that got fired did for the company please.[/quote]

Well, he'd generally come in at least fifteen minutes late, ah, he'd use the side door--that way Spector couldn't see him, heh--after that he'd sorta space out for an hour. He'd just stare at his desk, but it looked like he was working. He'd do that for probably another hour after lunch too, I'd say in a given week he'd probably only do about fifteen minutes of real, actual, work.[/quote]
hahah what a great movie :)
 
On the subject: After they crapped out the newest Deus Ex and ruined my hopes for another good Deus Ex game I'm probably not going to get the next Thief in fear of it succumbing to the same fate.

I loved these games dearly from day one. Deus Ex was so much fun, and I had many nights of Thiefing fun with the originals.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top