Now when I ask that question, I don’t mean male/25-30/married
or whatever. I mean, what kind of games do you primarily play? Because I find
it to be an ever evolving process; one I’m currently in the middle of. I’ve
recently thought that I was in a bout of something most gamers have at some
point; that is, gaming apathy. But that’s not really true. I’m playing the same
amount of games as I always have, but it’s just the games have changed. And so
have I.
Not that long ago, I was primarily a multiplayer gamer. Now?
I can barely work up the enthusiasm to hit ‘start matchmaking.’ Time was I
would have enjoyed nothing more than a Friday night in, plonked in front of the
TV, beer in hand, playing whatever the newest game out was with my friends, starting
around 9 and continuing, more often than not, long into the wee small hours of
the morning. It was great fun, and I remember it fondly but these days it’s a
Herculean effort to get a bunch of us together to play online (which nicely,
makes it slightly more of an event than it would have been normally when it
does happen). But this isn’t necessarily a trend that affects all gamers,
perhaps just those of a certain age, because one look at the figures for Xbox
Live online play shows you that a ridiculous amount of people are still happily
shooting each other in the face every hour of every day. But I’m willing to bet
that at least 80% of those huge figures are all 11-16 year olds.
You see recently, and maybe this is simply a getting older
thing, I’ve come to expect a lot more from my time spent gaming. I want to be
invested, I want to be entertained, and I want to be excited. What I don’t want
is to be constantly annoyed that I’m having a bad game, and worrying about my
K/D ratio (and also getting destroyed by 12 year old American kids). I want to
feel like I’m actually progressing rather than simply upping my kill count and
you can only get that from the campaign element of gaming. A worrying trend
recently in quite a few shooters has been that the multiplayer option is
actually the primary choice on the menu screen; this should never be the case
in my opinion. In fact, DICE’s Battlefield 3 from last year actually has disc 1
dedicated to multiplayer, while the campaign part of the game is relegated to
the second disc, almost like it’s an afterthought. Don’t get me wrong, there’s
nothing wrong with online multiplayer (aside from the seemingly thousands of
racist, misogynistic, homophobic people)
You see, I love campaigns. I love a good story to play
through. I don’t have the time or the patience anymore to sit online and shoot
people in the face ad infinitum; I want to enjoy the story the game has laid
out for me. I feel it’s my duty to play what the developers put time and effort
into. I’m probably the easiest gamer to cater for as I love a good linear
campaign. For all the stick Call of Duty gets, it does produce good, strong,
and yes, linear campaigns that tell a good, albeit ridiculous, story. I like to
feel like I’m getting somewhere in a game; that’s there’s a specific endpoint
to work towards. It’s why I get a little bored with open ended games after a
while. Yes, I can appreciate the entire world that has been created but with a
game like Skyrim, there’s almost too much to do, and no restriction on when you
have to do it. It’s very unfocused and again, I do not have the patience to
play something like that either, or the willpower to stick to the missions the
game gives you; I could very easily spend hours just riding around the
mountains killing anything I come across, but I always feel like I’m wasting my
time I could be spending elsewhere. In, you know, real life. And while my game
experience will more or less be the same as everyone else that plays it, it’s
still very enjoyable. It’s telling that the games I’ve enjoyed the most
recently are linear single player campaigns, like Alan Wake, Bioshock, Dead
Space 2 as well as recent XBLA games Deadlight, and The Walking Dead. Linear is
often used as a criticism, but if the game itself is as involving as the ones
I’ve just mentioned any such criticism is null and void in my opinion.
So I ask you, would you rather play for hours and hours and
hours online in Call of Duty doing nothing more than killing and getting
killed, or play and become involved in a good strong 10-12 hour campaign that
you’ll never forget? I know what I’d choose.
I'm on board with this, a good campaign with a clear and rewarding ending is what I want. I actually prefer brief games these days! That's why I loved Portal and Limbo! It's tricky staring down the barrel of a 60+ hour game and thinking just how you're going to complete it before boredom/apathy/real life sets in.
ReplyDeleteActually, do you know what kind of gamer I am at the moment? A crappy Facebook-game gamer. Have been playing Edgeworld around once a day since last October. Think of all the proper games I could have played!
Outside of FB games, I like to buy games from the the last 2-3 years that made it into top ten lists that I didn't get first time round. Means I get a AAA game for around £15 usually.
Yeah i skip the majority of multiplayer only/focused titles. And ive skipped the Witcher +fallout so far because of 70 hrs in one game seems like too big a commitment
ReplyDeleteYeah i skip the majority of multiplayer only/focused titles. And ive skipped the Witcher +fallout so far because of 70 hrs in one game seems like too big a commitment
ReplyDelete