New Games... Dated Gameplay

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

And you try so hard to defend the difference between mechanics and gameplay 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Do I ? Where exactly do I do that ?

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

If all that gives the same feel as the previous game... then NO  <_<

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

But now you have contradicted your own provided defintition. Nothing in your defintion says anything about different.

 

Could it be that you just dont know what gameplay is so you made up your own definition ?

[BattleCookiee]

Do I ? Where exactly do I do that ?

 

Here for example:

Arena, Daggerfall and Morrowind have the same core mechanics, but they feel totally different to play.

 

Half Life feels very different to Serious Sam. But they have the same FPS core mechanics.

 

Well just said that flying walking and driving were exactly the same gameplay. Changed your mind on that now?

 

If you played a mage like you played a fighter you would become very familiar with the reload screen  If you play a mage in a different way then you have by default changed the gameplay according to the accepted defintion of the term.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

Here for example:

 

Arena, Daggerfall and Morrowind have the same core mechanics, but they feel totally different to play.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Note the word CORE MECHANICS not GAMEPLAY MECHANICS.

Edited March 11, 2006 by ShadowPaladin V1.0

[BattleCookiee]

But now you have contradicted your own provided defintition. Nothing in your defintion says anything about different.

 

Could it be that you just dont know what gameplay is so you made up your own definition ?

 

The definition mentions that gameplay is the total of all features. If the new features do NOT add anything to the total gameplay stays the same.

 

With your "definition" gameplay changes if you add in an extra shader or shadows or whatever other meaningless little thingie...

 

Arena, Daggerfall and Morrowind have the same core mechanics, but they feel totally different to play.

 

Note the word CORE MECHANICS not GAMEPLAY MECHANICS.

 

Can you really no longer read your own post. Yes. You said CORE MECHANICS. But you also said "feel totally different to play"... meaning sperating the two as it are different things... while by your "definition" and the site you got it off this is one and the same...

 

Could it be that you just dont know what gameplay is so you made up your own definition ?

 

Says the person who thinks the gameplay as Rambo Deus Ex'er is the same as the gameplay as Rambo Doom3'er

 

EDIT: Triple-posted :"> Posts merged...

Edited March 11, 2006 by BattleCookiee

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

The definition mentions that gameplay is the total of all features. If the new features do NOT add anything to the total gameplay stays the same.

 

With your "definition" gameplay changes if you add in an extra shader or shadows or whatever other meaningless little thingie...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Not according to the definition you provided.

 

No it does not. Perhaps you should have read the article rather than just picking the bits out that suited you?

 

Generally, the term "gameplay" in video game terminology is used to describe the overall experience of playing the game excluding the factors of graphics, sound, and the storyline. The term "Game mechanics" refers to sub-elements of the gameplay, but particularly the primary control and movement features of the game (thus excluding things like level design or AI).

 

The definition I provided is based on interaction with elements in the game and how what the player does changes what is provided by the game.

[BattleCookiee]

Then the gameplay would change if you add a movable rock on the road of a racing game... No freakin' way...

 

EDIT; and who want's to half-read own stuff;

On the other hand, some game critics feel that gameplay is in fact to games as story is to book, the very essence of the game to which elements such as story are added. Current academic discussions tend to favor more practical terms such as "game mechanics".

Edited March 11, 2006 by BattleCookiee

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

Then the gameplay would change if you add a movable rock on the road of a racing game... No freakin' way...

 

EDIT; and who want's to half-read own stuff;

On the other hand, some game critics feel that gameplay is in fact to games as story is to book, the very essence of the game to which elements such as story are added. Current academic discussions tend to favor more practical terms such as "game mechanics".

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

You don't want to accept any known definition of gameplay even one you provided yourself.

 

Hades asked about gameplay which is why were are using that term. If adding features means adding elements of gameplay which is what every definition as well as common sense suggests. Then as long as you add new features gameplay will not become stale.

[BattleCookiee]

You don't want to accept any known definition of gameplay even one you provided yourself.

 

I do. Just not your twisted version of it... Mr. Doom plays like DX

 

Hades asked about gameplay which is why were are using that term.  If adding features means adding elements of gameplay which is what every definition as well as common sense suggests. Then as long as you add new features gameplay will not become stale.

 

Adding features does not automatically causes different gameplay. Your problem is that you truelly believe this and twist anything you see to make it "more features is other gameplay"

 

Let me tell you 8+8/2 is the exact same as 8+8+8/3 or 8+8+8+8/4... and thus gameplay does not changes. The amount does NOT matter on the gameplay.

Oh, and how about "altering storyline (NO feature!!!) or alter existing gameplaystuff (NO features!!!). OMG! Gameplay changes without features!

Edited March 11, 2006 by BattleCookiee

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

I do. Just not your twisted version of it... Mr. Doom plays like DX

 

Adding features does not automatically causes different gameplay. Your problem is that you truelly believe this and twist anything you see to make it "more features is other gameplay"

 

Let me tell you 8+8/2 is the exact same as 8+8+8/3 or 8+8+8+8/4... and thus gameplay does not changes. The amount does NOT matter on the gameplay.

Oh, and how about "altering storyline (NO feature!!!) or alter existing gameplaystuff (NO features!!!). OMG! Gameplay changes without features!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Is that the best you can do

 

Gameplay is comprised of features. That should be pretty clear. Change the features and you change the gameplay. Example remove the abilitiy to target (which is a feature) from Fallout and you have radically altered the gameplay.

 

 

I don't need to twist anything the evidence is pretty clear. And supported by the definitions as well.

 

 

Generally, the term "gameplay" in video game terminology is used to describe the overall experience of playing the game excluding the factors of graphics, sound, and the storyline. The term "Game mechanics" refers to sub-elements of the gameplay, but particularly the primary control and movement

features of the game (thus excluding things like level design or AI).

 

I've already shown in the Fallout example how removing a feature can alter the gameplay.

[BattleCookiee]

<_< Can't respond on the Fallout example (never played Fallout) but if it is just 10% extra if you hit the head I cannot see the gameplay change if it is removed...

 

There are many times removing or adding features don't mean jackass for the gameplay. ESPECIALLY if said "features" are not commonly used anyway.

 

Tweaking of your car in a racing game removed; no gameplay difference

Removing of a health/mana bar at your char in a RPG: No gameplay difference (if shown elsewhere)

Removing of "new items" tab: No gameplay difference

Removing of mini-games: No gameplay difference

Etc. etc. etc.

 

But since we never will agree; let's start discussing about the definition of "feature"... as you seem to think a game exists out of XXX features and it is as simple as adding/removing features as to make a good game...

[alanschu]

Just ****ing agree to disagree for pete's sake.

[Llyranor]

Er, no. Only one will come out of this thread alive.

[alanschu]

Cue kirk vs spock music.

[BattleCookiee]

Tell me where you found your nicely "universal agreed" definition (which I totally do not agree with)...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I already agreed to disagree

[Llyranor]

You didn't agree. You just disagreed.

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

Tweaking of your car in a racing

But since we never will agree; let's start discussing about the definition of "feature"... as you seem to think a game exists out of XXX features and it is as simple as adding/removing features as to make a good game...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Lets not. Lets just put you on ignore

Edited March 11, 2006 by ShadowPaladin V1.0

[Gabrielle]

Fallout for the win.

[metadigital]

Loquacious eloquence admixed with tolerant discussion FTW.

[Dark_Raven]

I wonder if this topic has ran its course?

[BattleCookiee]

Guess so... hard discussing when you are on ignore