| Nick Halme |
|
Comparing the videogame space to an arms race seems apt.
I think what you'll always find is that the more variety (more guns) a game provides, the more the quality of each of those elements decreases (moving away from having the best guns). So, from an end user perspective, it's really more beneficial to have a smaller game with better content rather than a larger game with worse content. Having more content only makes up for the lower quality by making sure the player can move on when they get bored; variety is a solution for lack of quality, but once the player sees that it's a solution it stops working. If anything in this age of DLC, a smaller, higher quality game acts as the carrot on a stick for further content. Team Fortress 2 is still expanding because it didn't begin with much. What it began with was great, and so it is still exciting for players to be getting new content. |
|
|
| Anonymous |
|
True, but there's still something to be said for games that offer the "complete world experience" like, say, Oblivion. It's not the best combat ever seen, and the role-playing is my no means the deepest seen, but what it does is strike the balance between breadth of content and quality gameplay with such precision that it creates a truly remarkable game. Likewise, I wouldn't trade the unique dialogue and story of Deus Ex for Halo quality shooting.
|
|
|
More: Console/PC, Exclusive