PDA

View Full Version : New Game +



OwlSolar
5th Oct 2010, 05:28
I read somewhere that the developers are thinking of including a New Game Plus feature if they have the time. For those who don't know, it's where when you start a new game, you can carry over some stuff from a completed save file. So, who would be interested in this?

I'd personally like it. I always enjoy going on an unstoppable rampage once in a while every playthrough after the first.

And before anyone says that it'd ruin the challenge, no one's forcing you to use it. Not that anyone's going to say it, right? :o

Pinky_Powers
5th Oct 2010, 06:07
Yeah, I'm always up for features like this. They can be a lot of fun. And as you say, it's not a forced idea, it's just there if you want to be naughty and see how buff you can get your character without resorting to cheat codes.

I says yes. :thumb:

I have to ask though, where did you read that Eidos was thinking about this? I don't remember hearing word one on the subject. But that might just be because I had no idea what Game + meant... so even if I had heard mention of it, it could've slip in one ear and out the other.

Senka
5th Oct 2010, 08:07
It was cool when Quake 2 did it.

So yeah, why not.

Irate_Iguana
5th Oct 2010, 09:15
Don't care one bit for the feature. I really like collecting things and building characters. What good is starting a new game to me if I can carry over stuff?

Senka
5th Oct 2010, 10:40
Optional.

Irate_Iguana
5th Oct 2010, 11:02
Optional.

It is, but the question was "who would be interested in this?"

AlexOfSpades
5th Oct 2010, 11:26
Ooo, loved the idea! Really!

Just watch out with certain features, such as using endgame augmentations to glitch the start of the game or something

mad825
5th Oct 2010, 11:31
sounds a bit off-topic...oh well.

I think it's too early to make a decision, I have only noticed Bioware are the ones trying to make it mainstream with their games however there are problems and lack of "changes" that do occur are rather disappointing and very often renders the whole thing as a gimmick.

until the content that is featured in today's games exceed to a point where there are many twists and turns within the story/plot that could make nearly each transferred save file into a unique gaming experience,there is no point.

AxiomaticBadger
5th Oct 2010, 17:38
I approve. It's usually optional, and it provides a different experience in future playthroughs than your first, even if you play it in generally the same way.

xsamitt
5th Oct 2010, 18:01
I approve. It's usually optional, and it provides a different experience in future playthroughs than your first, even if you play it in generally the same way.

As optional is great.It's your choice,and as we know DX universe is all about choice.

Fluffis
5th Oct 2010, 18:48
Meh. I could take it or leave it. It's not the kind of feature I like to use, but hey... if people like it. Same kind of reservation as with all extras though. If they are put in, and there are still bugs in the game, I'll be very disappointed/angry.

Dead-Eye
5th Oct 2010, 19:19
Well I'm going to voice a minority opinion here but I think it's a bad idea. In Mass Effect the whole game scaled based on the players level. So high explosive rounds where a common pickup at level 50. Yet in Deus Ex the whole game is balanced (although admitingly not vary well) for the player to start fresh everytime. The big change on a new game was that the player had learned a lot and was an overall better player when they played it again. That was the deciding factor in saving Paul and Jock on the second play through for me.

I just think it's too much of the "industry has grown up" mentality that sort of derails a lot of the good things from Deus Ex. If JC Denton could just go invisible and run to the front door in the Ton when they raid Paul's apartment the player learns nothing.

Kex
5th Oct 2010, 19:56
The more features the merrier, however I doubt I'd use it myself, although It's always nice to have the option incase.

Although I'd HAVE to be able to start the game from scratch anyway.

Pinky_Powers
5th Oct 2010, 19:58
I just think it's too much of the "industry has grown up" mentality that sort of derails a lot of the good things from Deus Ex. If JC Denton could just go invisible and run to the front door in the Ton when they raid Paul's apartment the player learns nothing.

If it's optional, it doesn't derail a goddamn thing.

In a linear game like Deus Ex, where you cannot go back and revisit Liberty Island after you've buffed up your character and have a little sandbox fun with your Superman... to do this in DX you must use cheat codes. At least with the Game + idea, you've EARNED all those points and previous augs. You've earned the right to hit the streets of Detroit like some mutant yeti.

It's about playing through the whole game like a serious gamer, and then getting to come back and enjoy some unbridled ridiculousness.

As a strictly Take it or Leave it option, how can can anybody claim it hurts their own game?

AlexOfSpades
5th Oct 2010, 20:02
I'm with Dr. Pinky.

If its implemented just like it was in Chrono Trigger back in the Super Nes, it would be just great.

(Does DXHR gets also 13 different endings?)

NKD
5th Oct 2010, 20:26
I'm with Dr. Pinky.

If its implemented just like it was in Chrono Trigger back in the Super Nes, it would be just great.

(Does DXHR gets also 13 different endings?)

Yes, 13 endings, and the sequel, Deus Ex Invisible Enemy will mix them all together when deciding on how it proceed with its story ;)


If JC Denton could just go invisible and run to the front door in the Ton when they raid Paul's apartment the player learns nothing.

Am I bad because that what I do in every playthrough? I always keep a thermoptic camo on hand for initiating a rapid GTFO maneuver in that part.

Anyway, seeing as how this would be optional, and has proven to be a great way to add additional replay value, I don't see a downside. I mean I don't think they are going to implement it, but it would be a great option to have.

Fluffis
5th Oct 2010, 20:49
If it's optional, it doesn't derail a goddamn thing.

In a linear game like Deus Ex, where you cannot go back and revisit Liberty Island after you've buffed up your character and have a little sandbox fun with your Superman... to do this in DX you must use cheat codes. At least with the Game + idea, you've EARNED all those points and previous augs. You've earned the right to hit the streets of Detroit like some mutant yeti.

It's about playing through the whole game like a serious gamer, and then getting to come back and enjoy some unbridled ridiculousness.

As a strictly Take it or Leave it option, how can can anybody claim it hurts their own game?

One question: isn't this "Game+", basically, just a way for lazy people to get all endings, without actually having to play the game "correctly" each time (i.e. making sure you get to see everything, without actually earning it)?

Like I said (with my reservations), it's really no skin off my rosy nosy if they implement it - but Dead-Eye is not wrong, about this being part of the "derailing" process. Many drops make a river.

Pinky_Powers
5th Oct 2010, 21:22
One question: isn't this "Game+", basically, just a way for lazy people to get all endings, without actually having to play the game "correctly" each time (i.e. making sure you get to see everything, without actually earning it)?

Like I said (with my reservations), it's really no skin off my rosy nosy if they implement it - but Dead-Eye is not wrong, about this being part of the "derailing" process. Many drops make a river.

Actually, this is another one of those situations where anybody who thinks differently than you gets screwed... like with Achievements. Anybody who want's the option to take a break and have nonsense fun with the game is considered an evil blight to your world perspective.

Everybody has to fall in with your ideas, and any choice given to the player to do something different, is wrong.

Fluffis
5th Oct 2010, 21:35
Actually, this is another one of those situations where anybody who thinks differently than you gets screwed... like with Achievements. Anybody who want's the option to take a break and have nonsense fun with the game is considered an evil blight to your world perspective.

Everybody has to fall in with your ideas, and any choice given to the player to do something different, is wrong.

Uh... I don't think I wrote that.

The only question is whether people enjoy the "derailing" (N.B.: Not my word!) or not. I don't. Others do. I didn't even say I thought they should avoid implementing it. I just don't want them to do it at the expense of more pressing issues (something that I fear is far too common). I honestly don't give a **** if they do bring it in, because I won't use it. (If it is optional, that is.)

You said that Dead-Eye was wrong ("this is another one of those situations where anybody who thinks differently than you gets screwed", ;)), and I pointed out that he isn't. It's just a matter of whether you like it or not.

Pinky_Powers
5th Oct 2010, 22:01
It's just a matter of whether you like it or not.

Not in your words...


One question: isn't this "Game+", basically, just a way for lazy people to get all endings, without actually having to play the game "correctly" each time (i.e. making sure you get to see everything, without actually earning it)?

According to you, anyone who wants the option, "after they've played the game correctly", to have a crazy-ass balls-out run-through is just lazy. There's no room for fun outside your definition.

You can try and disguise it all you want, but...
Collum A: You get to play your way. I get to play my way.
Collum B: There's only your way. ...well, you and Dead-Eye.

;)

AlexOfSpades
5th Oct 2010, 22:12
Hi, i'm a lazy person and i have a save in Area 51 so i can see the ending, then reload and see the others

Anu
5th Oct 2010, 22:21
In ME & 2 it´s a nice addition to rush through a game with a different face (even with the same game all over again, that somehow gives a narcissistic ´different´wiew) and an easier startoff. For when you´d like to re-live some points of the game but wouldn´t bother to start up a proper game.

Since I only have a vague idea as to what DX:HR will be, I´m open to that. Now, at least. If optional.

Fluffis
5th Oct 2010, 22:30
Not in your words...



According to you, anyone who wants the option, "after they've played the game correctly", to have a crazy-ass balls-out run-through is just lazy. There's no room for fun outside your definition.

You can try and disguise it all you want, but...
Collum A: You get to play your way. I get to play my way.
Collum B: There's only your way. ...well, you and Dead-Eye.

;)

Ah... I see you misunderstood me. (Edit: or it may be that I'm really bad at expressing myself.)

I wasn't talking about who actually does play it that way. I was talking about the intent behind the concept. The reason for why it is implemented. And I was actually asking a question, not making a statement, because everything I've read on the subject seems to point to it being implemented to make it easier for people to experience the whole game (i.e. the developers taking for granted that some gamers are lazy and/or have concentration issues), as opposed to being for... well, ****s and giggles (edit: that would actually fit more into a Clear Game scenario), basically. I was asking if I had misunderstood it.

Nothing I've seen so far seems to indicate that.


Hi, i'm a lazy person and i have a save in Area 51 so i can see the ending, then reload and see the others

There's a big difference between having a save at a crucial point, and having a whole concept, built into the game, focused on making it easier the second time around. The effect may be roughly the same, but the design decision is completely different.

NKD
5th Oct 2010, 23:20
The idea behind NG+ is somewhat about laziness, but then, we're talking about games here, not a 25 year sentence to hard labor. A game can provide additional fun on further playthroughs, but depending on the game, there may be some time before you unlock all the features. In DXHR, for example, I'm guessing you could solve early missions in additional ways if you had augmentations that you don't usually get until later. Easier perhaps, yes, but also different and new.

AlexOfSpades
5th Oct 2010, 23:22
Well, with cheats and editable content by SDK's, we pretty much already have New Game + in the first Deus Ex.

DXHR would just make it "official" instead of "cheating".

OwlSolar
5th Oct 2010, 23:45
Well, I'm a lazy person. I don't want to have to earn a whole ton of experience points again from stratch... over and over. Wanna fight about it? :D
Personally, I don't care about making it easier. I just hate the idea of having to build up my character from stratch if I wanted to say, enjoy the story again. Or maybe I don't care about the challenge and just want to mess with the enemy goons (because I do).


Ooo, loved the idea! Really!

Just watch out with certain features, such as using endgame augmentations to glitch the start of the game or something
Maybe they could just give you all your XP and money, but have augs available at the same time as before.

Fluffis
5th Oct 2010, 23:48
The idea behind NG+ is somewhat about laziness, but then, we're talking about games here, not a 25 year sentence to hard labor. A game can provide additional fun on further playthroughs, but depending on the game, there may be some time before you unlock all the features. In DXHR, for example, I'm guessing you could solve early missions in additional ways if you had augmentations that you don't usually get until later. Easier perhaps, yes, but also different and new.

Well, yeah. It's kind of what I've been saying. It's all about whether you like it or not. I don't, but then I won't even be using the feature (if it's optional), so it's really a non-issue for me. What I think is kind of crappy is that developers (N.B. not just Eidos) are repeatedly making design decisions that ensures that gamers will become lazy/lack concentration, if that's not already the case. By offering an "easier way out" (that is a clear part of the game, unlike cheats for instance (at least that's how it used to be with cheats)), they are effectively saying "Don't worry about actually getting better at the game - we'll just make it easier for you, so you don't have to put in an effort."

As with most of my rants, this has more to do with the attitude of the developers themselves, than with the people who actually play the games.


Well, with cheats and editable content by SDK's, we pretty much already have New Game + in the first Deus Ex.

DXHR would just make it "official" instead of "cheating".

True. But people actually had to make an effort to construct those things. And it wasn't a "Hey look at THIS!" kind of thing. When developing DX, they let the community decide if those things were needed. Now the devs themselves decide that it is.

Edit: Patronizing! That's the word I was looking for. I think it's patronizing.

OwlSolar
5th Oct 2010, 23:50
Why is it so important to put in effort? Believe it or not, a lot of people play games for fun, not to get better at them.

Fluffis
6th Oct 2010, 00:01
Why is it so important to put in effort? Believe it or not, a lot of people play games for fun, not to get better at them.

Something tells me that a lot of those people won't be playing DX:HR. Just a hunch.
I could be wrong, of course...

The idea here (for my part) is that if you have to put in effort, the reward is that much greater. I think a lot of people think that way, and even more may find that that is the case - if they weren't being patronized by developers.

Believe it or not, all games ever constructed throughout history have an element of personal improvement. Sometimes it's prominent, sometimes not. Because most, if not all, games have originated (way, way back in some cases) from some form of need for improvement - be it intellectual, academical, physical, tactical or whatever. Why deny us the basis for the entire concept of games, by making them easier as we go along?

TrickyVein
6th Oct 2010, 00:11
Why deny us the basis for the entire concept of games, by making them easier as we go along?

In principal, yes I get what you're saying.

But

at some point - just as when you're playing with your cat, waving a piece of string in its face - you need to be able to reap the benefits from your trial. The cat's going to lose interest and walk away if you don't let it have the string at some point. Similarly, it's just another way of eating your cake if you get to start a new game with a higher-level character. I don't think it defeats the purpose of gaming, however - and I don't think that's what you were saying, ;) but I had to set that up in order to say what I wanted.

OwlSolar
6th Oct 2010, 00:14
I play games for fun. This game looks fun to me. So no. Of course I won't be playing this game.

The idea here for my part is that if I have to put in effort and lose the reward later, I will be very annoyed. I think a lot of people think that way. Seriously, the whole point of a new game + vs cheat codes is that you did put in the work before; you're just keeping the reward this time.

I honestly have no idea where you get the idea that the entire concept for games is "personal improvement." And I see no reason why it should apply today. If games are only for personal improvement, I would be studying or excercising instead of sitting on a couch playing video games, because studying or excercising is a far better way to improve myself.
Can you come up with examples of games that are for personal improvement? I bet I can come up with a lot of games that aren't.

TrickyVein
6th Oct 2010, 00:37
I think it's fair to say that many games are good mental-exercise, and for that matter, probably do much to keep your brain active further into old-age.

Even if it's a mindless shooter, you're improving hand-eye coordination, building mental-maps of the environments where you roam around, and needless to say, you're in a heightened state of awareness that can be very stimulating.

Fluffis
6th Oct 2010, 00:42
I play games for fun. This game looks fun to me. So no. Of course I won't be playing this game.


I didn't say "all".



The idea here for my part is that if I have to put in effort and lose the reward later, I will be very annoyed. I think a lot of people think that way. Seriously, the whole point of a new game + vs cheat codes is that you did put in the work before; you're just keeping the reward this time.


But cheat codes aren't a clearly visible part of a game. Well... it didn't use to be, anyway.

With cheats, you have to find them. If you want to. That's two conditions that have to be fulfilled to even be able to cheat.
With New Game+, the developers are saying: "Hey! Next time you won't have to work so hard. You'll get to see everything you missed, without having to work as hard for it." You don't even have to find it, or want it, to be able to use it. That makes "cheating" (for lack of a better word) much, much easier. It will lure people to use it. The more people use it, the more they will expect it in later games. It's just one of those slippery slopes that I'd rather see we didn't start going down.

That's the real difference between cheats and New Game+.

Seriously: No matter if you have a save at the crucial point in Area 51, in DX, you still have to work as hard for all three endings.

Oh... And why would they lose the reward?
Edit: Ah, you mean fail? D'oh! :)

That's why there are different games, with different levels of difficulty.



I honestly have no idea where you get the idea that the entire concept for games is "personal improvement." And I see no reason why it should apply today. If games are only for personal improvement, I would be studying or excercising instead of sitting on a couch playing video games, because studying or excercising is a far better way to improve myself.
Can you come up with examples of games that are for personal improvement? I bet I can come up with a lot of games that aren't.

I didn't say "only". I said that most, if not all of them have their basis in personal improvement. I even said that it is not as prominent in some games. I know that some developers are doing their damnedest to remove that part of the gaming experience, but the fact still remains: All games have an element of personal improvement. That's just the nature of the beast, because that's the origin of games. It's where they came from. "Entire concept" may have been a bit too strong a word, that I'll admit, but personal improvement is the foundation on which most, if not all games rest on. You can't escape that. It's a historical fact.

OwlSolar
6th Oct 2010, 00:57
With cheats, you have to find them. If you want to. That's two conditions that have to be fulfilled to even be able to cheat.
With New Game+, the developers are saying: "Hey! Next time you won't have to work so hard. You'll get to see everything you missed, without having to work as hard for it." You don't even have to find it, or want it, to be able to use it. That makes "cheating" (for lack of a better word) much, much easier. It will lure people to use it. The more people use it, the more they will expect it in later games. It's just one of those slippery slopes that I'd rather see we didn't start going down.
Well, why shouldn't it be in all games? Of course more people would be able to use it. I think a big assumption you're making here is that this feature is bad in itself. It isn't, really.


Oh... And why would they lose the reward?
Edit: Ah, you mean fail? D'oh!
No, I mean if I start over. :p It's just a pet peeve of mine. I don't really like losing all my stuff when I start over and going through the effort again just to get back to where I was before.


That's just the nature of the beast, because that's the origin of games. It's where they came from. "Entire concept" may have been a bit too strong a word, that I'll admit, but personal improvement is the foundation on which most, if not all games rest on. You can't escape that. It's a historical fact.
That's interesting. But I'd still argue that it's not a necessary part of games.
And this is just because I'm curious: Can you provide some examples? I really am curious about the origin of games.

Fluffis
6th Oct 2010, 02:15
Well, why shouldn't it be in all games? Of course more people would be able to use it. I think a big assumption you're making here is that this feature is bad in itself. It isn't, really.


I just think that, along with all the other trends toward simplification in games, this could be something that will go "the other way", so to speak. I.E. come to exclude people that want to put in a bit of effort, in order to get to the reward. Every time they play the game. I'm just scared if those kinds of games really start to disappear, that they may become little more than a memory. I may just be paranoid, but I really, really don't want to find out for myself.



No, I mean if I start over. :p It's just a pet peeve of mine. I don't really like losing all my stuff when I start over and going through the effort again just to get back to where I was before.


To each their own, I suppose. For me, games have almost never been about the end rewards - it's the journey that's important. (It's one of the reasons why I never became a really good WoW player. Alt-itis. :D)



That's interesting. But I'd still argue that it's not a necessary part of games.
And this is just because I'm curious: Can you provide some examples? I really am curious about the origin of games.

All shoot-em-up games, along with tactical games have their basis in... well, military matters. The same thing with games like Chess, Checkers, Go, Shogi etc (hell, even Tic-Tac-Toe, to some extent). That tactical thinking has its basis in pure physical survival. The first time a couple of monkeys (apologies to any creationists... sort of ;)) ganged up on a predator, tactical thinking was born. (Even the most brutal "Fire and Forget" games have places you can't get through without using at least a small amount of tactics.)

Puzzle games, adventure games, and different types of sims (The Sims, Sim City, for instance) to a certain degree, and suchlike have their basis in problem solving; enhancing intelligence and intellect. Again, survival. However, this time it's about mental survival - inventions and so on. The first human to use any kind of tool, used fire etc. could be said to have started this.

Survival games (Survival Horror being the most prominent, but also games like Fallout and S.T.A.L.K.E.R.) has its basis in dealing with predators. Either trying to beat them, or getting the hell out of there. Also dealing with harsh climates and environments. Don't think I need to comment any further on this one. :)

These are things that go back as far as we can collectively remember, basically.

As for improvements:

Then, of course we have such basic physical skills as hand-eye coordination, which twitch-style games increase with a massive amount. To a certain extent, there is sense of direction, hearing and sight (more important, the better visual equipment we get for our computers/consoles) as well.

Games like Go, Tic-Tac-Toe, and that others in that vein, help with pattern recognition. Tetris does this too, as well as a limited spatial awareness (2D). Any kind of 3D "building-game" helps with spatial awareness (all 3D games do, but to a varying degree).

There are more recent phenomena, like this thing I started hearing about a couple of years ago. Some companies take into account the fact that applicants have been heads of guilds in games like WoW, in the same way that they consider training any kind of sports team an asset. It shows (at least burgeoning) leadership potential.

No matter if these things are put into games deliberately or not, they are there, and most have their roots in the most basic human survival and improvement traits. Some have their roots in more "modern" pursuits, like economy, corporations, Law and the Arts.

Wow... this became longer than I'd thought. :)

Shralla
6th Oct 2010, 19:45
It is, but the question was "who would be interested in this?"

Everybody that posted before you?

Not to mention the fact that it's literally impossible to upgrade everything in one playthrough. New Game+ would let you do that, so you'd still be building your character.

JCpies
6th Oct 2010, 20:18
I'm up for it, I died so many times in MGS4 I was awarded corpse camo, it's fun to play with and the rewards add something new for each playthrough.

jtr7
6th Oct 2010, 20:19
Actually, this is another one of those situations where anybody who thinks differently than you gets screwed... like with Achievements. Anybody who want's the option to take a break and have nonsense fun with the game is considered an evil blight to your world perspective.

Everybody has to fall in with your ideas, and any choice given to the player to do something different, is wrong.

Development time needed and debugging and resources used for it are not optional. Like achievements, which are developed and take time and budget, as opposed to screwing around with the game for nonsense fun all by yourself without expecting the devs to have something special pat on the back for you for doing so, it falls under the category of potentially "...expensive to develop, because you're creating data that the player might not see." My favorite games let me choose whether to have nonsense fun or not, and don't have congratulations built in, just the tools, movement, bug exploits, ourselves, and the unexpected. And then we have forums to post about our zany stuff.

Pinky_Powers
6th Oct 2010, 20:53
Development time needed and debugging and resources used for it are not optional. Like achievements, which are developed and take time and budget, as opposed to screwing around with the game for nonsense fun all by yourself without expecting the devs to have something special pat on the back for you for doing so, it falls under the category of potentially "...expensive to develop, because you're creating data that the player might not see." My favorite games let me choose whether to have nonsense fun or not, and don't have congratulations built in, just the tools, movement, bug exploits, ourselves, and the unexpected. And then we have forums to post about our zany stuff.

You are positively hopeless.

Every bit of fun you can have in a game is due to someone making something. This is good and right.

OwlSolar
7th Oct 2010, 06:40
I'm actually a lot more impressed when I do something that I think is crazy only to find that the developers actually anticipated it and acknowledged it.
...Helps the immersion, I guess.


I just think that, along with all the other trends toward simplification in games, this could be something that will go "the other way", so to speak. I.E. come to exclude people that want to put in a bit of effort, in order to get to the reward. Every time they play the game. I'm just scared if those kinds of games really start to disappear, that they may become little more than a memory. I may just be paranoid, but I really, really don't want to find out for myself.
I think you're being paranoid. Really, if you think about it, a new game plus doesn't really dimminish the effort you need to put in. You still need to gain all the experience points and money and whatever, you just get to keep it. Even if it's specifically put in a game, it's still functionally a lot better than cheat codes, which are incredibly easy to find anyway.


To each their own, I suppose. For me, games have almost never been about the end rewards - it's the journey that's important. (It's one of the reasons why I never became a really good WoW player. Alt-itis. :D)
It's the same with me to a certain extent, but it's more because I can enjoy the rewards more since I know I earned them. Also, I really like having fun with my rewards.


Wow... this became longer than I'd thought. :)
You obviously know more about this than me, so I'm just gonna concede this point. :p

pringlepower
7th Oct 2010, 06:54
I'm actually a lot more impressed when I do something that I think is crazy only to find that the developers actually anticipated it and acknowledged it.
...Helps the immersion, I guess.


I think you're being paranoid. Really, if you think about it, a new game plus doesn't really dimminish the effort you need to put in. You still need to gain all the experience points and money and whatever, you just get to keep it. Even if it's specifically put in a game, it's still functionally a lot better than cheat codes, which are incredibly easy to find anyway.


It's the same with me to a certain extent, but it's more because I can enjoy the rewards more since I know I earned them. Also, I really like having fun with my rewards.


You obviously know more about this than me, so I'm just gonna concede this point. :p

Or you could be like Chrono Trigger and have alternate endings that can only be achieved by beating the boss really early in the game (like 10 minutes in), which is only possible using new game plus. In Chrono Trigger's case there's a secret button that lets you get to the boss even in a regular game, but you're so low level that you just die.

E.g., in Sarif Industries there's a wall that can be destroyed by the arm aug that does so. There is no normal ingame way of getting that aug at that point in the game, and you can never return to that area when you DO have that arm aug (or that area is just a normal room when you return). HOWEVER at that point 10 minutes in the game the big baddie just HAPPENS to be in that room, leading to a quick 10-minute end to the story.

Just for funsies, obviously.

singularity
7th Oct 2010, 06:55
Why is it so important to put in effort? Believe it or not, a lot of people play games for fun, not to get better at them.

There we go.

Online shooters -- I play to get better at.
Sports Games -- I play to get better at
Devil May Cry (Damn you to hell!) I play to get better at.
Ninja Gaiden... better at.

Single player RPGs (like Deus Ex), and a whole ton of other games: The ONLY reason I play is to have fun. And I usually have a lot of it.

I fully support the Game+ option. Even if I won't use it until a 3rd or 4th play through, I want it.

OwlSolar
7th Oct 2010, 07:03
...So you do play games for self-improvement? :confused:

My point was actually that the main reason for games is for fun. It's true that we don't want to suck, but my (quite possibly untrue) assumption was that getting better either takes a backseat to having fun, or is a way to have fun in the first place.

Irate_Iguana
7th Oct 2010, 10:47
Everybody that posted before you?

Not to mention the fact that it's literally impossible to upgrade everything in one playthrough. New Game+ would let you do that, so you'd still be building your character.

Or you could try and understand what I wrote. I gave my opinion on the system and what it meant to me. To which someone replied that it was optional. I gave clarification that it was indeed optional, but that the original question only wanted to gauge the opinion of people posting in the thread, which was what I had done in my original reply.

Maxing out everything is not the same as character building. Just getting the last few levels to make you an overpowered jack of all trades is not the same as building a level 1 char up to the max that a playthrough allows.

Ninjerk
7th Oct 2010, 11:12
I would like this idea if it was integrated with the ability to take the story to new places (a la, extra endings from Chrono Trigger).