Episode 569: Red Dead Memories

The guys talk about Resident Evil 3 (and by extension Evolve), but most of the episode delves into the Gaming Flashback, Red Dead Redemption and its sequel Red Dead Redemption 2, focusing on where the original succeeded and where the sequel failed.

The news items this week include:

  • Valorant closed beta rushes to 1.6M viewers on Twitch
  • Rumor: Resident Evil 8 is first-person, takes “serious departures”, and will be out next year
  • E3 2020 won’t hold an “online experience” after all

Let us know what you think!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related Post

Gaming Podcast 204: River City BarfGaming Podcast 204: River City Barf

This week we’re covering a few stories fresh in 2011 or at least our reactions are fresh! We’re hitting up some community comments, as the usual, and doing a flash back of River City Ransom, last covered in episode 4–don’t go find the old one, listen to the new one (we only had 3 listeners back then!). The stories of the week:

This weeks question of the week: What game did or do you love that no one else seems to have ever heard of?

Evolution of RPG’s – Gamers Don’t Want an End?Evolution of RPG’s – Gamers Don’t Want an End?

I remember a day when old RPG games had either a level cap or a definite ending. From Pool of Radiance to Secrets of the Silver Blades to Final Fantasy the game had a final boss or stage and often had some type of level cap. Today, gamers don’t want it to end, they’d rather have the option to wonder around aimlessly or completing minor quests in order to soak up every ounce of money they spent on the title.

linkNow even Bethesda is saying “we’ve learned our lesson” from the whiplash of ending their game title and capping levels. Gamers want to go back and re-try content they missed, they want to run side quests and talk to everyone in the world they want to grind themselves to über powerful levels and become a god in their fantasy world. Can you blame them?

You can’t really blame them for wanting to maximize the content, although it’s slightly more evolved than RPG’s of old. Perhaps it was World of Warcraft and other MMORPG’s that brought us to the stage in life where we all want to squeeze every last RPG dime out of the title. As a kid I wondered the world of Hyrule and covered every tile of graphical color, burned every bush, bombed every stone looking for all the content. However, even Zelda had an end with scrolling credits – you didn’t just land on a platform with your master sword and a dream.

Other titles have used level caps to limit you and draw you into the next release of the game. This was popular in the D&D world because the game is designed to target specific levels of difficulty. They may only allow you to gain level 10 because the enemies are no tougher than level 13, allowing the challenge to be good but not overwhelming. If they allow you to get to level 50 they’d have to design the game so all the enemies grow powerful along with you — that’s not always a desired result.

Final Fantasy is a popular franchise that typically allows you to grow infinitely powerful depending on how much time you want to spend repeat killing the same enemies. Gamers aren’t always into the grind, they just want to grind “enough” to make the challenges a little more do-able.

Today, however, with larger storage capacity, larger development teams and the desire to build more value into your gameplay experience titles have dozens of side quests and sub-plots that are totally optional. The result of so many sub-quests results in a player who is much more powerful at the end of those quests compared to a player who sticks to the narrow path of the main plot. So, games much grow dynamically challenging to keep the fun per dollar high.

Do you like your RPG’s to have a definite end and a high but capped level?

E3 Needs FanboysE3 Needs Fanboys

It’s official, E3 would be a lively show if they packed a few fanboys into the press events to cheer on their favorite brands. As Microsoft’s Peter Moore said it, “let’s invite the community. With the right planning, involving our biggest fans in E3 would bring back some of the raw passion the event has lost.” (kotaku)

The offhand comment may not go as unnoticed as those the rest of the blogging community have been making. It seems most “normal gamers” are telling the industry E3 needs more fans to liven the show, but it’s going to take “top executive” like Peter Moore and others to make it a reality.

Imagine going to a rock concern where all the fans are critics waiting to see your performance, stoned faced and unexcited. Obviously your show is going to be a little limp in comparison than a stage full of crazy fans excited to hear anything at all from you.

We’re not saying to bring in 100,000 ravaging fans, we’re just asking for a few rows of excited fanboys to help cheer everyone on. The show would be less flat if you knew you were going on stage to present information you’re fans have been waiting to hear.

E3 doesn’t have to be another Woodstock nor does it have to be an staged audition with critics waiting for you to screw up.