Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!
We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).
But what Video Games have thus-so-far almost always failed to do is make your character what your doing at the time. They make your character=your character's options during an encounter/dungeon. Its like saying Batman is Batman because he's always crazy-prepared...but in truth your arsenal and skills are only a small percentage of your [i]character[/i]. Your character is your background, personality, etc... and not just "how well you faire/what you use against obstacles in life.
Of course, its hard to establish a character in games where everyone does the same routine quests. At one point I tried to emerge myself in WoW towards the lower levels...but seeing people in chats asking for help with a quest I completed levels ago just made me lose any interest. "Kill this guy at this castle? I already did that. Whats the point if he's just coming back to life?"
Of course customized quests with long term and game-changing effects would require a staff devoted to a handful of characters. "GMs" in MMOs, as they are so inappropriately called, are really just bug-managers and moderators. They no more add to the flavor, story or immersiveness of a game than anything else.
And, of course, single-player games are trying to tell their story (or stories) and will inevitibly force you into the same plots that have been completed ages before you get your hands on the game (unless your a developer or beta tester who plays before the game ships).
In the end, playing Electronic RPGs is no better than playing a DnD group that only uses modules with a DM who hates improv.
The gaming world is straying too far from their roots. Meeting players/designers that openly mock tabletop gaming is becoming all too common. Video Games, especially RPGs (including MMOs, despite the lack of an RP element), take most of their core systems from Tabletop Games...from the 80s. With the exception of Dungeons & Dragons, which is just keeping itself classic for the sake of nostalgia, most tabletop RPGs have abandoned the "level" system ages ago. Few, if any, still use Hit Points. And Mana Points have gone the way of Vancian Casting. The next design company that takes from the modern non-Wizards of the Coast model of Tabletop Gaming without simply copying and pasting existing mediums is going to make a lot of money. Or is going to make Blizzard/Valve/etc... a lot of money when they take their stolen ideas and repackage it for the masses. Why a modern RPG still uses the level/class/HP/MP system is beyond me. Even life-bars are embarrassing at this point.
That being said: I'm very pleased with this list. There is some obvious blizzard fandom. Starcraft didn't really add much to the RTS genre other than revitalizing it with brilliant marketing and lots of nice bells and whistles. Diablo feels like Gauntlet, which wasn't on the list. I think TIE fighter should have beaten out Diablo given how it honestly added almost nothing to the gaming world (it was successful and good; just not precident-setting). Same with Goldeneye; if they wanted a precedent setting FPS they should have looked towards Half-Life or Quake for its mods--not that they aren't "Doom Clones".
Separating the categories by console with 4 games in each was just silly. There's plenty of more worthy games on the "PC" than the PS3--not surprising given there's hundreds of thousands of more games. Especially if they leave out consoles like Gameboy.
Seeing world of warcraft on a list without Ashnod's Call or Everquest is kinda weird. No dwarven fortress either.