Recommend a game with depth please

Mad Mike

cosgrove80 wrote:

A game with a fully realised world and characters is what I’m looking for really. If the “universe” for a game is strong enough it doesn’t matter if the game world is rendered with dynamic shadows and particles or is simply a grid of squares.

I have to give another vote for Mafia - It has to be the closest I ever felt to "living a film script". The game world and story are beautiful and totally immersive.

I have a few more suggestions that you may not have thought of:

Gothic II: A bit like a German version of Morrowind. Although it isn't as big and as open ended it has the advantage of having better sound and more fleshed out characters. Unfortunately the control interface takes quite a bit of time to get used to but once you put the effort in it pays back big time.

Homeworld 1: A fabulous real time strategy game set in space. Apart from the fact that the game is damn good the atmospheric music does it for me every time. Make sure you start with this one and not the later Homeworld 2. The earlier game is a better game and a far more immersive experience.

And finally a shooter:
Far Cry: OK not exactly known for its storyline but has the most beuaiful graphics (imho) of any game out there and a level of freedom rarely seen outside of Morrowind. The tropical islands are so beautifully realised, the sense of freedom is so great, the controls are so slick and responsive that you quickly fall under the spell and feel you are living the experience. Its bloody hard however - so be prepared to put some time into mastering this one.

Karl Hungus

Zillah wrote:

Neither you nor any of the character's showed anything more than a hint of personality. The entire universe quite clearly existed to serve you. There was no conversation. It was done through a HTML-style link clicking system. Opponents charged mindlessly at you.

It was entertaining, but don't confuse scope with depth. It being on a huge island does not mean it has depth.

You know, I find that some people felt rather disconnected from the experience simply because you had to read the dialogue, but to say that there is no conversation or no depth is a laughable conclusion to jump to. I honestly have to say it was one of the best games I've played in a very, very long time, especially the expansion Bloodmoon, which I found had an immensely engrossing plot that really had me utterly gripped; quite possibly one of the best game experiences I've had. I wouldn't hold it against someone who wasn't able to get into the experience because they didn't like to read the dialogue, because lets face it, some people don't or won't even read a book, but to say it has no depth seem ridiculous.

And as a matter of fact, I seem to recall the exact same dialogue system in Planescape: Torment, so I don't see why you pick that out as a fault with Morrowind when you suggest Planescape yourself. Though with that said, I wouldn't call the games equal by any stretch, Planescape clearly had far better writing, but that's certainly no reason to write-off Morrowind either.

I also find it ridiculous to say how the entire universe exists for you, when we're talking about a game here.

The only part I'd agree with here is about the enemies charging mindlessly, but since when did AI equate depth? Besides, the game is hardly something that is entirely combat orientated, so I don't see how that would matter as much as it would in a game like Half Life.

Razgriz

if you want a good story, i'd recommend Max Payne 2. superb story, with some excellent voice acting/script. its bloody short (7-10hrs) but great fun to play.

for bigger games, with less story, i'd recommend Morrowind, or maybe.....cant think of anything else, sorry.

oh wait, Mafia also has a fantastic story, with good voice acting too....although that bloody race annoyed the hell out of me.

RE*AC*TOR

here's a (IMO) hugely underrated game....

Silent Storm. Its a tactical turn based strategy game, set in world war 2, it includes excellent use of physics and destructable environments. It really makes you think and when you pull of something cool - there's a great sense of success. I don't think this game can really be appreciated unless you try it - an easy one to overlook.

cr1spy

I'm glad I'm not the only other person to buy Vampire. Fantastic game, but does have a few flaws later on. Well worth the €15 I got it for, only a few weeks after its release. When that doesn't sell and FIFA Street does, it makes me cry

Anyway, if your looking for depth, Deus Ex, Fallout, and Baldur's Gate are all good choices. All the games are kinda old, has anyone got anything new that matches up to these greats? I haven't played a decent RPG style game since Vampire. Is Fable any good for PC?

koneko

Have you tried KOTOR yet, cr1spy? The first one is really good (the second one is alright, but disappointing after the first was so great).

cr1spy

Never got round to playing KOTOR, that and Planescape are two games I've always meant to get at some stage. Think I might go buy it this weekend. I need some good RPG-ing!

stevenmu

If you're willing to overlook story lines...

Nothing has more depth than a good flight sim, you can throw away days just perfecting take offs and landings, before going anywhere near the really complicated stuff. Lock on: Modern Air Combat is cheap and easy to get in shops, IL2 Sturmovik cheap too but a little harder to find, Falon IV is a little dated now and you'd probably have to try amazon or ebay (very hard to get into too, no inbuilt tutorials).

Tac-sims can be good too for FPS style excitement but lots more depth, Ghost Recon and Rainbow 6: Raven Shield being the most notable. Both should be available cheap in bundled with their expansion packs. Ghost Recon 3 should be out in November and apparantly a new Rainbow 6is either due soon, or doesn't exist at all.

cosgrove80

Zillah wrote:

I'd also reccomend the new morrowind. The older one we were talking about earlier was The Elder Scrolls 3: Morrowind. The new one, coming out later this year (hopefully) is The Elder Scrolls 4: Oblivion. Its looks absolutely stunning (graphics and gameplay) but you'll need a monster of a PC to run it.

RopeDrink wrote:

cosgrove80, if you're looking for something to pass the time, you should give it a try... If you like it in any way at all, well, let's just say we probably won't see much of you here on Boards.ie

I didn't think that Morrowind would be my cup of tea but I watched the videos on gametrailers.com toady and The Elder Scrolls 4: Oblivion looks like it could be a fine game indeed. A copy of that and a Xbox360 could pass the December evenings quite nicely

A few people mentioned Mafia which I thought was just a poor GTA clone. I'm sure I could pick it up fairly cheap.

Thanks for the RTS suggestions but I always seem to play them for a while and stop for no real reason.
Also I have an aversion to flight sims etc. I can understand the appeal for some people but they are just not for me. My brother has had every version of Flightsim and Lock on, so I've tried them.

I saw where Vampire Masquerade: Bloodlines is £5.99 on Play so I'll order that and a relative had Suikoden II so I'll have two to keep me busy anyway.

KOTOR is a very good game and an even better one if you're a Star Wars fan.

Zillah

Karl that was an obnoxious and despicable misrepresentation of what I said.

Karl Hungus wrote:

You know, I find that some people felt rather disconnected from the experience simply because you had to read the dialogue, but to say that there is no conversation or no depth is a laughable conclusion to jump to. I wouldn't hold it against someone who wasn't able to get into the experience because they didn't like to read the dialogue, because lets face it, some people don't or won't even read a book

I said nothing about having difficulty reading the dialogue. And there was no conversation. You weren't involved at all. It was a thoroughly artificial means of presenting the bare minimum information to the player. I read plenty thank you, and I've trawled through the near endless dialogue of the BG series, neverwinter nights series and planescape.

I honestly have to say it was one of the best games I've played in a very, very long time, especially the expansion Bloodmoon, which I found had an immensely engrossing plot that really had me utterly gripped; quite possibly one of the best game experiences I've had.

I didn't play Bloodmoon.

And as a matter of fact, I seem to recall the exact same dialogue system in Planescape: Torment, so I don't see why you pick that out as a fault with Morrowind when you suggest Planescape yourself.

Just plain wrong. Not even similar. Planscape had actual conversation, line by line, you select a response that is in character dialogue. Morrowind simply had you click on a webstyle link to open up another page of the encylodpedia.

but that's certainly no reason to write-off Morrowind either.

I didn't write it off. I said it was immensly entertaining. But it does lack depth. There was no trace of personality in the entire game. Every character was just an information terminal.

I also find it ridiculous to say how the entire universe exists for you, when we're talking about a game here.

Then you know nothing of storytelling. A good game developer will always try to let the player forget it is just a game. Of course the world is there to serve the player, but it still shouldn't seem like it. It should feel like a real world.

The only part I'd agree with here is about the enemies charging mindlessly, but since when did AI equate depth?

How your opponents behave is important to keeping a believeable world. A world that keeps reminding you that its just a game is not a very deep one.

Please pay attention to what people write before you criticise. And get your facts straight.

Karl Hungus

RopeDrink wrote:

Wasn't aware of a new Morrowind title coming out, so maybe it would be best to wait for this one rather than fork out on the old one (Even though it wouldn't be a wasted purchase).

"New Morrowind" is a misnomer. New Elder Scrolls would be more accurate, as it's Elder Scrolls 3: Morrowind, and Elder Scrolls 4: Oblivion. Sorry, can't help being anal.

Zillah wrote:

Karl that was an obnoxious and despicable misrepresentation of what I said.

Why thank you, I do try my best. :rolleyes:

Zillah wrote:

I said nothing about having difficulty reading the dialogue. And there was no conversation. You weren't involved at all. It was a thoroughly artificial means of presenting the bare minimum information to the player. I read plenty thank you, and I've trawled through the near endless dialogue of the BG series, neverwinter nights series and planescape.

That's real funny coming from someone who was fussing about "Missrepresentation" because, at no point did I say you had difficulty reading the dialogue, I said I wouldn't hold it against something if they didn't read it, and I said that I find people are often disconnected from the experience because they had to read the dialogue.

Just look at what Ropedrink said:

I did find myself just bashing dialogue links half the time to get through some of the conversations in a hurry...

I find this fairly common with the game, and was not accusing you of anything per se, but rather saying that this might be the case.

Zillah wrote:

Just plain wrong. Not even similar. Planscape had actual conversation, line by line, you select a response that is in character dialogue. Morrowind simply had you click on a webstyle link to open up another page of the encylodpedia.

Now, the thing here is, as far as the main character goes, we're practically talking about two different genres, as the whole aproach is entirely different in both games. In Planescape you had a set character; The Nameless One, and although you could shape his stats to become a fighter, or mage, his dialogue is pretty much set in stone, as is his character, and your actions can effect your reputation, and other game characters will respond accordingly, but having played the game through a large number of times (It is definetly an all time favourite of mine), it is pretty rigidly scripted. Morrowind on the other hand, you're not playing a character that's been so meticulously scripted, you're playing a character that you create from scratch. It's a completely different aproach, chalk & cheese if you will. In the case of Morrowind though, it's not something you can really create so much scripted dialogue for.

I wouldn't say one approach is better than the other here, because if I cite the Vampire: The Masquerade games as an example, the first one, Redemption, had a very set character for you to play, and while it was a good game, I found Bloodlines considerably better. Bloodlines had the character you create for yourself aproach, and it was a game I found myself far more immersed in than the previous one. Yet, I did find myself totally encapsulated in Planescape, so from my perspective, it just goes to show how good both ways are of doing things.

Likewise, I wouldn't say either way is presupposed to being deeper. You mention you didn't play Bloodmoon, so I think you might be seriously missing out, because thinking about it, I remember myself being moreso caught up in the happenings of the Bloodmoon area of the game, than the main plot of the game. So I certainly felt that it had all the plot, character, and depth as Planescape had. I felt myself being wrapped up in the goings on of the plot, feeling concerned for the characters, and as the plot thickened, feeling utterly betrayed as I was quite literally used by certain characters. It was as deep and immersive a gaming experience as any other I've had.

Perhaps you might be at a loss, having not played Bloodmoon, and perhaps I myself might be at a loss aswell, as I doubt I could seperate my experience of the expansion from the overall game experience. I will say that the Bloodmoon storyline was most certainly better written than the main storyline of the game.

Anyway, with all that said I still think Morrowind is an excellent game to recommend to someone who's after a game with some real depth, because if you were to buy the game now, both expansions are included with it, and you'll get the excellently plotted Bloodmoon storyline to enjoy.

So, if Cosgrove80 is still reading at this point, you should seriously get the game!

Zillah wrote:

Then you know nothing of storytelling. A good game developer will always try to let the player forget it is just a game. Of course the world is there to serve the player, but it still shouldn't seem like it. It should feel like a real world.

I find that pretty arrogant to say I know nothing of storytelling, and not only that but you miss the point entirely. I know well that a good game is one that you forget it's even a game, but that wasn't anywhere near what I was saying. I was simply pointing out the irony in your statement.

Zillah wrote:

How your opponents behave is important to keeping a believeable world. A world that keeps reminding you that its just a game is not a very deep one.

Just like Planescape then. Because as far as I recall, the instant you see an enemy, he runs and attacks you.

koneko

RopeDrink wrote:

[and favourite] character was a gorgeous Malkavian psycho bitch)

Mine too
It was fun freaking people out, they run away screaming sometimes. Though I did end up talking to a stop sign once...

Jazzy

Karl Hungus wrote:

Eh, why? I honestly though HL2 was pretty poor, it was so on rails it felt like an old arcade shooter where you kept advancing automatically and just pointed you gun a shoot. Hardly a game with depth now is it?

hmmmm, dont really see that
if u were talking about a game like House of the Dead id agree but HL2 is a completely different kinda game. Its one of the few games that i was actually pissed off that i finished it cos the whole experiance was over.... I will admit it was a bit too short but has it got depth?? quicksand has nothing on it.

also, if u have played through Deus Ex 1, give 2 a shot. I thought it was an excellent game, again not long enough but the whole thing is alot smoother then deus ex 1 and is quite involving.... one of the cosiest games i played last year and quite satisfying.

and finally for the PS2 - I would reccomend the massivly underrated (by us europeans neway) Kingdom Hearts. buckets of depth, the main thing that may annoy u is the whole disney setting (some ppl would say its "cutesy") but this is not true of the story at all. Plenty of side quests aswell to play through and keep u occupied (try killing that rat-fat b*st*rd Sephiroth in the battle arena equivilent!! :mad: :mad: still yet to do it, MOST UNFAIR BOSS EVER!!). The story is great and the whole game has again a very comfortable feel to it + its cheap + if u liked it the second one is coming out before xmas (i think ) and its looking even cooler again

Retr0gamer

Kingdom Hearts is out on budget now and is indeed brilliant. Don't be put off by the disney characters. This is one of the most challenging games you will ever play. The story is also very dark and quite good. Can't wait for the second one.

Goodshape

cosgrove80 wrote:

A few people mentioned Mafia which I thought was just a poor GTA clone.

I enjoyed Mafia a fair bit more than any of the GTA games. Not the same drunken rampage replay value but a FAR better story and outstanding atention to detail.

I think if you go at it thinking 'GTA clone' you'll be disapointed. It's got similar gameplay but it's really a whole other kettle of fish.

Morrowind was great too Should be cheap enough these days but try and get it with the two expansion packs (Game of The Year Edition); also comes with dev kits for making your own custom mods. Enough to keep you busy for a very long time.

koneko

RopeDrink wrote:

Would love to find out how the conversation with the Stop Sign went

It was... bizarre. I was walking past the sign when the dialog options came up.
I had options like "..." or "no, YOU stop".

I had that fight with the TV aswell, they insisted the cops were coming to get me.

It was so funny it just makes me want to replay the whole thing as a malkavian *again*.

humanji

You could try Fahrenheit. IT's got a fantastic storyline thatflipped completely from what I thought it would be. The action sequences make the those in the Matrix look bad. It can be a little easy, I finished it in a day, but went straight back to the start and began again. It's got a fair bit of replay value, as there are different endings and a load of bonus material to unlock. Plus, it even has a sex scene with gratuitous nipple shot! It's worth getting it just for that!

Zillah

Karl Hungus wrote:

That's real funny coming from someone who was fussing about "Missrepresentation" because, at no point did I say you had difficulty reading the dialogue, I said I wouldn't hold it against something if they didn't read it, and I said that I find people are often disconnected from the experience because they had to read the dialogue.

Maybe you didn't intend it, but your post certainly implied it. If thats not the case then reduce my hostility by 60%

Now, the thing here is, as far as the main character goes, we're practically talking about two different genres, as the whole aproach is entirely different in both games. In Planescape you had a set character; The Nameless One, and although you could shape his stats to become a fighter, or mage, his dialogue is pretty much set in stone, as is his character, and your actions can effect your reputation, and other game characters will respond accordingly, but having played the game through a large number of times (It is definetly an all time favourite of mine), it is pretty rigidly scripted.

At least it is scripted! And I think you missed the point of planescape. When you first play he is a blank slate. Literally. He has no memory or personality and his morality is absolutely neutral. As you play you morality changes (literally, its a stat). You usually gain a significant number of very different responses to people. At least it has some character.

Morrowind on the other hand, you're not playing a character that's been so meticulously scripted, you're playing a character that you create from scratch.

There is no character. The being you play is a faceless entity that only exists so that the player has a method to interface with the world. He doesn't feel like a person. It lacks depth. Once again, its a fun game, but it doesn't have depth. It has no emotions, no morals, no drive.

I wouldn't say one approach is better than the other here, because if I cite the Vampire: The Masquerade games as an example, the first one, Redemption, had a very set character for you to play, and while it was a good game

No its not. Its a terrible game.

I found Bloodlines considerably better. Bloodlines had the character you create for yourself aproach, and it was a game I found myself far more immersed in than the previous one.

You had in character dialogue in redemption. Thats one of the things that gave it some depth. It made you feel like a character in the story, rather than a person in the game.

Perhaps you might be at a loss, having not played Bloodmoon, and perhaps I myself might be at a loss aswell, as I doubt I could seperate my experience of the expansion from the overall game experience. I will say that the Bloodmoon storyline was most certainly better written than the main storyline of the game.

The inherent lack of actual dialogue on the PCs part is a major failing regardless of the rest of the game.

I was simply pointing out the irony in your statement.

My point contained no irony. It was a very accurate observation. It only seems ironic if you don't agree with it, and theres no valid reason to disagree with it.

Just like Planescape then. Because as far as I recall, the instant you see an enemy, he runs and attacks you.

Planescape is six years old. Morrowind is only two. Morrowind should have vastly superior AI. It could have had. But it didn't, they were lazy.

And planescape's enemies did behave intelligently. It was crude, but they did it. Fighters ran right at you, mages stayed back and cast spells. Many characters ran away. Whe you started beating an enemy force they often fell apart and ran.

From a game with four years worth of programming advantage they still had suicidal wizards in morrowind, happy to charge my armored fighter with a knife.

_CreeD_

Actually (Splitting hairs) Morrowind is 3 years old.
I'm not getting into a pissing match here but what you've really said over and over again is that you weren't drawn into the story at all in Morrowind. That YOU, not the character as defined by the confines of the game, felt disconnected from it all. Simply, I didn't, and neither did it's vast following - nothing wrong with that, some games grab you some don't. But stop trying to ultimately define it as lacking depth based merely on your own lack of immersion.
To me Morrowind was a vast lviing breathing realm, certainly not perfect but the range to which I could develope my character (none of this class business, absolutely everything right down to how fast I walked was defined by my choices and actions) was unparalleled. I did stop and read just about every book and was blown away by the sheer amount of lore the developers added to it.
I spent the first few days playing it doing the main arc and then disappeared off for another 3 weeks or so literally walking all over the land, none of that Strider puffing around .
Basically imho depth is not defined by the scripting vs. ai level or necesarily by the story - but by the amount of control you have over events and in how your character developes to meet them, how free they are within the story/game realm etc.. You could (Practically) go anywhere, do anything, be anything depending on how much time you wished to spend on it.

But it's not your cup of tea. Fair enough. Roll on Oblivion.

Zillah

_CreeD_ wrote:

But it's not your cup of tea. Fair enough. Roll on Oblivion.

Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed the game. And I also read a bunch of the books the developers threw in, and credit to them for it. But I still find the dialogue web link style interface to be unforgivable.* And sure there was plenty of development of your "character", its just that he didnt have much character. I decided how fast he could walk, or how well he could swing a sword etc. But I couldn't for the life of me give him a trace of personality. He was still just a point of view for the player to run around the world in.

*And im not the only one. The devlopers themselves said in an interview that they had gotten loads of criticisms for it and that it was one of the first things they would change for Oblivion.

Actually (Splitting hairs) Morrowind is 3 years old.

The date I got was for the XBox version apparently

Maximilian

You can actually buy Planesape from here

I presume they are reputable as I got the info from Home of the Underdogs

BLITZ_Molloy

I find the idea of RPG's having depth pretty hilarious. Aside from the odd turn based strategy title they all require little or no skill.

The games that have depth are ones that have a system you learn, interpret and use how you see fit. Like learning a musical instrument. Virtua Fighter 4, Devil May Cry 3, Psyvariar 2, Total Annihilation, Street Fighter III.. etc.

Zillah

Wait wait wait. You're defining depth as "needing skill" now?

koneko

I'm sorry, as much as I enjoy Street Fighter II, depth? That's just funny. Depth is more to do with story, richness, character development, not how much time it takes to learn moves. That is not depth, not in the sense I'm talking about, and I'm pretty sure it's not depth in the sense anyone else in this thread is talking about.

Zillah

koneko wrote:

I'm sorry, as much as I enjoy Street Fighter II, depth? That's just funny. Depth is more to do with story, richness, character development, not how much time it takes to learn moves. That is not depth, not in the sense I'm talking about, and I'm pretty sure it's not depth in the sense anyone else in this thread is talking about.

I second this post.

On another point entirely, you gain extra points for the HK47 quote.

Karl Hungus

Right, **** all this crap, I'm going off to re-install planescape, providing I can find it.

BLITZ_Molloy wrote:

I find the idea of RPG's having depth pretty hilarious. Aside from the odd turn based strategy title they all require little or no skill.

The games that have depth are ones that have a system you learn, interpret and use how you see fit. Like learning a musical instrument. Virtua Fighter 4, Devil May Cry 3, Psyvariar 2, Total Annihilation, Street Fighter III.. etc.

Oh, rofflecakes!

I really do hope that's an attempt at humour tbh.

qwertz

Have a look at Syberia 1 and 2, the most beautiful game I ever played. Highly recommended.

projectmayhem

tetris

monument

jomanji wrote:

You could try Fahrenheit. IT's got a fantastic storyline thatflipped completely from what I thought it would be. The action sequences make the those in the Matrix look bad. It can be a little easy, I finished it in a day, but went straight back to the start and began again. It's got a fair bit of replay value, as there are different endings and a load of bonus material to unlock. Plus, it even has a sex scene with gratuitous nipple shot! It's worth getting it just for that!

As said before, try Fahrenheit (aka Indigo Prophecy) (PS2), KOTOR (PC), and, if your into old-style adventure games, Syberia 1&2 (PC)...

BLITZ_Molloy

I just don't think storytelling in games is being done properly at all. You might as well buy a book or rent a movie instead, because that's all they're aping, and very badly (stuff like old Lucas Arts adventures, Planetscape Torment and Landstalker being some of the rare exceptions). Games for me are like a sport, or a board game. Football or chess don't have a story but they have tons of depth.

In most RPG's you don't have to think or interact. You just sit there and bash monsters. Hell, you can tape the button down and leave your computer on while the characters level up enough for you to cruse to the end. That's not depth. That's mindless slogging. If your going to do a story, do a story, but leave out all the tedious busy work. Most RPG storylines are two hours long, dragged out over 80 hours of limp gameplay.

I wasn't saying that depth is how long it takes you to learn moves. That's ridiculous. I'm not some elitist. You should be able to pick up a game without having played the previous ones for 10 years. I'm saying that it should have a system that makes sense, and you should be able to use it as you see fit. Alot of RPG game mechanics are incredibly stale; they're just hiding behind their storylines (most of which are **** by any literary standards) instead of trying to offer you a fresh gameplay experience.

It's the same mentality you get from people who think Nintendo are kiddy. Because Gran Tourismo 4 looks more realistic (and has this incredibly broken, monotonous career mode) they assume it has more depth than Outrun 2. People dismiss Outrun 2 because you can finish it in 20 minutes. But they don't see the depth in the handling, trying to maximise your speed with the drifts. Yes, you get games that are 80 hours long. They're long, but they don't have depth. I can think of tons of games that can be finsihed in an hour that I've played for 50+ hours. Not for a storyline conclusion, not for unlockable content, but because the gamplay was still offering new surprises.