Time Limit Games

  • 56 results
  • 1
  • 2

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#1 Posted by jg4xchamp (46629 posts) -

Hello System Wars. Let's get the too long; didn't read part out of the way

Time Limit Games as in games that have some kind of time limit set from start to finish(ala Majora's Mask and Dead Rising). I like these. Not enough that I'd want to see it used and abused. But I like that it forces a play to be aggressive and efficient for an entire game. It provides a source of tension, and it makes games that do them unique from anything else on the market.

What are your thoughts on time limit games System Wars? What do you like, dislike, would like adjusted in a game built around this concept?

Fettuccine Alfredo or Penne Ala Vodka?


So here is the long story addition

So what sparked that? I don't know, been playing some Dead Rising(1) and Pikmin 3 lately. And it got me thinking that

A: I love this kind of structure
B: This structure only really works when there is a punishment

Why? Well I don't like how Pikmin 3 does a time limit. To my memory of the original Pikmin might be fuzzy, but I remember the time limit being relatively strict in one(never played 2). You had a set amount of days to get your work done, or you were fucked.

In 3 the time limit is there to keep the days going, but what dictates your survival is based on Juice which you get from gathering fruit. Well the game has such an over abundance of fruit that before the halfway mark you'll have a quick surplus of juices. It also doesn't help that boss fights give you large fruits that are like 2-3 juices themselves. So how does this effect the time limit?

Well what the fuck is the point of it? If the survival side of it becomes a joke before the halfway mark, all the time limit does is provide some arbitrary game structure that only highlights that the games design has nothing more than glorified fetch quests and some solid pattern based boss fights. Not bad necessarily, but without any pressure or any form of impunity it robs the game of any concept of difficulty. Not that I go to nintendo games for hard games(because come on, they make wuss games these days), but this just feels like a pointless addition.

The one point where the game could have provided a source of tension(where it chooses to just be like fuck it, taking all your juices, back to zero bro). You get dropped in a mission that has 3 easy fruits to gather, and boom you set again. Boss fights themselves lose any tension since the damage carries over day to day. So you can just go in, chip at some health, and so long as you have juice(which you will), just come back next day and finish him off. Carry his big ass carcus and that large ass fruit he gives you and call it a day. In a way the time limit/survival thing only really pads the game out instead of being a meaningful aspect of the game.

Like I get that people don't like being rushed. I also personally don't like time limit segments as one offs in games that aren't built with time limits in mind. Too me it's a lazy trope level in the same vein as a rail sequence or the arbitrary stealth segment in a shooter. But for games built around the concept if the time limit isn't meant to force aggression than what good is it? No what I'm saying?

Too long; didn't read for my long story: Time limit games with no impunity just make that aspect pointless. As arbitrary some might find a system that rushes you and forces you to be aggressive, it is equally arbitrary for a game to have a time limit that doesn't really force you to do anything. When you create a game with such basic environmental/mission designs you get a game that feels like the time limit is only there to pad the game out.

More importantly fuck Pikmin 3, go Dead Rising.

You people: Champ this isn't a system wars topic

Teuf: Yeah Champ time to suspend you for not making a system wars topic.

Um excuse me, I didn't get to that part yet.

Playstation doesn't have time limit games because Playstation players are scrubs at games

Xbox players ruined Dead Rising's time limit because they were too dudebro to handle a game that required effort

Nintendo players can't handle this kind of structure, because they like Nintendo themselves are allergic to anything that would resemble being unique, interesting, progressive, or anything that doesn't fit the more of the same status quo

Time limit games are only really capable of being appreciated by the PC master race as it's the only fanbase capable of enjoying things outside of their comfort zone.

Yeah there you go. I met your SW criteria.

P.S. What shitty options for creating threads. I wanted to put that whole thing in one big spoiler block, but couldn't do that without only doing it on just the middle stuff alone. It has to do it on the whole mother fucking thing.

#2 Posted by mems_1224 (45752 posts) -

F time limits in games. That was my biggest complaint with the first two Dead Rising games.

#3 Edited by Xaero_Gravity (8678 posts) -

I might be in the minority, but I think a time limit during the escape sections of 999 and VLR would have been interesting.

#4 Posted by Slashkice (12980 posts) -

I like time limits the way Majora's Mask did it. If you want to get shit done you have to hustle, but if you want to dick around you can just reset time before the moon falls on your face. A strict, constant limit of time would have made me enjoy the game less, I think. At that point it crosses from having fun in my own way to completing a game like it's a job.

#5 Posted by DJ-Lafleur (34080 posts) -

Majora's Mask is probably one of my favorite games of all time, so I certainly have no issue with such a structure, assuming it is handled well.

#6 Edited by jg4xchamp (46629 posts) -

I like time limits the way Majora's Mask did it. If you want to get shit done you have to hustle, but if you want to dick around you can just reset time before the moon falls on your face. A strict, constant limit of time would have made me enjoy the game less, I think. At that point it crosses from having fun in my own way to completing a game like it's a job.

I would say that's a nice balance.

To beat the game you have to adhere to the game and be aggressive, but there are fail safes in place to make sure you can enjoy the extras and take a break. It helps from a pacing standpoint as it allows you to catch your breath. I can dig that.

#7 Edited by good_sk8er7 (4320 posts) -

I didn't really like it in Dead Rising or Lightning Returns. But it worked pretty well for Majora's Mask.

#8 Posted by IamAdorable (381 posts) -

I didn't really like it in Dead Rising or Lightning Returns. But it worked pretty well for Majora's Mask.

How is it implemented in Lightning Returns?

#9 Edited by Desmonic (12670 posts) -

I really like the time "limit" in Persona 4 Golden. You only have X days to do Y actions. However, you must commit to a single action per day. Be it fighting, social links, working, whatever. Therefore you need to pick what you want to do and deal with the consequences of doing it or not as the game unfolds. Meaning you can never complete it 100% in any single playthrough. You need to to do several ones to see everything the game has to offer.

And I'm liking it even more in Persona 3, especially in regards to the combat. Unlike P4G, where you can explore several dungeons in each day (if you so wish), in Persona 3, once you exit a dungeon, that's it. You need to come back another day. Plus your main character and your party get tired, therefore it may be a couple of days before you can actually go back in. Therefore each time you go in you better make it count. And that, IMO, is awesome :P

--

I feel that time limits, when well implemented give you a sense of urgency and much larger meaning to even the crappiest of tasks. When badly executed they just make the game feel broken. I don't think they necessarily need to punish you, that's just the easiest way to make them work. They should make you commit to an option and force you to deal with whatever comes out of it, which doesn't necessarily mean it's a punishment. If you made a "correct" option it should in fact reward you for it.

#10 Posted by charizard1605 (54389 posts) -

The two games I have played with time limits imposed in them are the two that you mentioned in the OP- in both these games, I thought the time limit added immensely to the game's atmosphere and mechanics, and I enjoyed what it brought to the table.

Majora's Mask especially handled it very well, as with the potential to reset at any time, you were free to explore the world if you wanted to.

Apart from that, I do find time limits often add unnecessary stress in some sections- I mean, yes, having a countdown timer in Metroid every time you have to escape is cool in the beginning, but by the end, it's just annoying and it loses its novelty.

#11 Posted by Bigboi500 (28804 posts) -

This thread is as uninteresting as Lightning Returns. 5/10

#12 Posted by k2theswiss (16598 posts) -

Not reading that garbage... what is wrong with you

#13 Edited by jg4xchamp (46629 posts) -

I might be in the minority, but I think a time limit during the escape sections of 999 and VLR would have been interesting.

Curious, why?

#14 Posted by jg4xchamp (46629 posts) -

@Desmonic said:

I really like the time "limit" in Persona 4 Golden. You only have X days to do Y actions. However, you must commit to a single action per day. Be it fighting, social links, working, whatever. Therefore you need to pick what you want to do and deal with the consequences of doing it or not as the game unfolds. Meaning you can never complete it 100% in any single playthrough. You need to to do several ones to see everything the game has to offer.

And I'm liking it even more in Persona 3, especially in regards to the combat. Unlike P4G, where you can explore several dungeons in each day (if you so wish), in Persona 3, once you exit a dungeon, that's it. You need to come back another day. Plus your main character and your party get tired, therefore it may be a couple of days before you can actually go back in. Therefore each time you go in you better make it count. And that, IMO, is awesome :P

--

I feel that time limits, when well implemented give you a sense of urgency and much larger meaning to even the crappiest of tasks. When badly executed they just make the game feel broken. I don't think they necessarily need to punish you, that's just the easiest way to make them work. They should make you commit to an option and force you to deal with whatever comes out of it, which doesn't necessarily mean it's a punishment. If you made a "correct" option it should in fact reward you for it.

Essentially a risk/reward system?

#15 Posted by Desmonic (12670 posts) -

@jg4xchamp: Yeah, pretty much. I think that ends up being the best way to use time limits (or any sort of limit imposed upon the player actions).

#16 Edited by jg4xchamp (46629 posts) -

@Desmonic said:

@jg4xchamp: Yeah, pretty much. I think that ends up being the best way to use time limits (or any sort of limit imposed upon the player actions).

I don't like the notion of "best" because I think you can totally make a game satisfying that is strict and uncompromising, but it's probably the fairest in a broad sense.

Rewards aggression over conservative play, or can burn you a bit if you make an incorrect decision. My wording was probably bad on punishment, but more or less I feel like if it's all reward and no risk then it's just there. It doesn't actually serve a purpose or compliment the game in any meaningful way.

#17 Posted by Desmonic (12670 posts) -

@Desmonic said:

@jg4xchamp: Yeah, pretty much. I think that ends up being the best way to use time limits (or any sort of limit imposed upon the player actions).

I don't like the notion of "best" because I think you can totally make a game satisfying that is strict and uncompromising, but it's probably the fairest in a broad sense.

Rewards aggression over conservative play, or can burn you a bit if you make an incorrect decision. My wording was probably bad on punishment, but more or less I feel like if it's all reward and no risk then it's just there. It doesn't actually serve a purpose or compliment the game in any meaningful way.

Oh yeah, of course. If you mess up you should have to deal with it. What I'm saying is that whatever limits the devs want to impose over you (be it a time limit, an attack limit, an item limit, whatever) should always be executed in a risk/reward kind of way. It can pay off immensilly if you commit to decision X OR it can mess you immensiley if you go for option Y. And the game should be designed in way that it advances regardless of what option you take, but makes you deal with it as it goes on. It's even better when those options aren't "black and white"; when you can't (without prior knowledge) discern whether a decison will be good or not.

Though I do realize not all game genres allow for this, thus other systems must be used. If a system is mostly just "reward" or mostly just "risk/punishment" it just ends up feeling broken though.

#18 Posted by jg4xchamp (46629 posts) -

@Desmonic said:

@jg4xchamp said:

@Desmonic said:

@jg4xchamp: Yeah, pretty much. I think that ends up being the best way to use time limits (or any sort of limit imposed upon the player actions).

I don't like the notion of "best" because I think you can totally make a game satisfying that is strict and uncompromising, but it's probably the fairest in a broad sense.

Rewards aggression over conservative play, or can burn you a bit if you make an incorrect decision. My wording was probably bad on punishment, but more or less I feel like if it's all reward and no risk then it's just there. It doesn't actually serve a purpose or compliment the game in any meaningful way.

Oh yeah, of course. If you mess up you should have to deal with it. What I'm saying is that whatever limits the devs want to impose over you (be it a time limit, an attack limit, an item limit, whatever) should always be executed in a risk/reward kind of way. It can pay off immensilly if you commit to decision X OR it can mess you immensiley if you go for option Y. And the game should be designed in way that it advances regardless of what option you take, but makes you deal with it as it goes on. It's even better when those options aren't "black and white"; when you can't (without prior knowledge) discern whether a decison will be good or not.

Though I do realize not all game genres allow for this, thus other systems must be used. If a system is mostly just "reward" or mostly just "risk/punishment" it just ends up feeling broken though.

Do you have an example of a game that uses time limits that you felt were poorly done? For instance either Majora or Dead Rising?

#19 Posted by seanmcloughlin (38161 posts) -

I hate time limits in any game in any form. I usually end up sucking and getting frustrated

#20 Posted by heretrix (37250 posts) -

Normally I'd disagree, BUT- I've found for some weird reason, it never bothered me in the Dead Rising games as much as timed sections have in most other games. It seemed like they were able to strike a good balance in giving the game a sense of urgency, but at the same time making it possible to explore the game world. This is strange considering how janky the game is and how annoying almost everything else is in the games.

#21 Edited by 2Chalupas (4976 posts) -

It only works in very limited circumstances.

Better as a secondary goal, or a separate difficulty. Not so much if the main game imposes a time limit - and you have to replay large chunks due exceeding the time limit.

#22 Edited by Xaero_Gravity (8678 posts) -

@jg4xchamp:

More so in 999 than VLR due to the 9 hour time limit that is placed within the narrative. I think it would add a sense of urgency and dread that just isn't there. Then again, I could see it become extremely annoying unless the time limit is removed durning the novel sections, which then makes the idea of a time limit completely pointless.

#23 Edited by jg4xchamp (46629 posts) -

@jg4xchamp:

More so in 999 than VLR due to the 9 hour time limit that is placed within the narrative. I think it would add a sense of urgency and dread that just isn't there. Then again, I could see it become extremely annoying unless the time limit is removed durning the novel sections, which then makes the idea of a time limit completely pointless.

Kind of yeah, you'd have to alter how that game paces itself. Like the movement itself, the way some of those puzzles are designed, etc. Like there relatively simple puzzles as they are, but I'd imagine they would have gotten play tested into being better suited for even quicker answers. It would in a sense make the plot aspect of the game interesting. Putting some pressure on you to make your choices quickly. Throwing thought out of the equation and more gut reactions to things.

It's the one thing I liked about Heavy Rain. It had segments where you were given choices you need to make quickly without any chance to think it through.

#24 Edited by Desmonic (12670 posts) -

@jg4xchamp:

Have you ever played The Simpsons: Hit and Run? Every single mission in that game was time based. And not the fair kind either :P The bullsh!t kind in which you almost needed to break the game itself in order not the be dependant on lady luck (especially on the 2nd half of the game)!

Some strategy games sometimes get a bit too pushy with their own time limits, but in hindsight those do have a tendency to be fair and it proabbly were my own mistakes that lead to some of those situations.

Hmm. Honestly this gen, that sort of system has been rarely used (I mean, besides one or two specific missions/actions). Or I just didn't play enough games. Though in the 6th gen it was thing. I recall plenty of games having time based missions. Though few of them used them properly; you could usually ignore the time limit.

---

As for Majora, never played it so I can't really say anything.

In the case of Dead Rising 2 (the only one of the series I've played) I think time limits made the game progression intentionally slow and it ended up boring me. I never also felt an urge to save NPC A over NPC B (or vice-versa) either.

So while the limits in the game had some effect, they didn't really add much to it. It would have been quite a bit more fun to have a daily timer (instead of an hourly one) and having you decide one of the following: rescue survivors, find zombrex (which could imply doing one of the other actions too), advance the story, search for weapons or just f*ck around.

Ideally you would be locked into no more than two of those, thus always being forced to make a decision.

#25 Posted by good_sk8er7 (4320 posts) -

@good_sk8er7 said:

I didn't really like it in Dead Rising or Lightning Returns. But it worked pretty well for Majora's Mask.

How is it implemented in Lightning Returns?

Well certain things happen at certain times of the day, you only have so much time so it almost makes you want to not look around and explore the open world because you want to make sure you don't miss something that's coming up. The fact that everyday at 6 you get pulled from the world kinda sucks. It might just be that it's really not what I'm used to in an RPG, but I really am not digging it. I'm actually really upset with it so far. I enjoyed XIII and XIII-2, and I like the new battle system, but the game just seems like I shouldn't have paid so much for it. Oh well, Cloud and Yuna costumes and victory fanfare are worth it haha

#26 Edited by PrincessGomez92 (3230 posts) -

I liked it in Majora's Mask, and I loved that game. I didn't like it in Dead Rising 2 though. I just wanted to kill zombies with awesome weapons, but I couldn't enjoy that. And I hated the save system as well. Just ended up making it feel tedious.

#27 Posted by treedoor (7478 posts) -

As long as the game is structured for it, and built well, then I don't care.

I'm playing Roller Coaster Tycoon, and each scenario you have to accomplish something before a certain date. I don't mind that.

It'd make some games better if they utilized a time limit like in games where you are given an urgent quest to save the world. Instead, you get that quest, and then proceed to run off for fifty hours doing fetch quests for old ladies, and killing mud crabs.

#28 Edited by IamAdorable (381 posts) -

Well certain things happen at certain times of the day, you only have so much time so it almost makes you want to not look around and explore the open world because you want to make sure you don't miss something that's coming up. The fact that everyday at 6 you get pulled from the world kinda sucks. It might just be that it's really not what I'm used to in an RPG, but I really am not digging it. I'm actually really upset with it so far. I enjoyed XIII and XIII-2, and I like the new battle system, but the game just seems like I shouldn't have paid so much for it. Oh well, Cloud and Yuna costumes and victory fanfare are worth it haha

Wow. I didn't know stuff like that was happening in the game. Thanks for informing me.

I bet you love some of those costumes :p

#29 Posted by Sphire (2066 posts) -

@good_sk8er7 said:

Well certain things happen at certain times of the day, you only have so much time so it almost makes you want to not look around and explore the open world because you want to make sure you don't miss something that's coming up. The fact that everyday at 6 you get pulled from the world kinda sucks. It might just be that it's really not what I'm used to in an RPG, but I really am not digging it. I'm actually really upset with it so far. I enjoyed XIII and XIII-2, and I like the new battle system, but the game just seems like I shouldn't have paid so much for it. Oh well, Cloud and Yuna costumes and victory fanfare are worth it haha

Wow. I didn't know stuff like that was happening in the game. Thanks for informing me.

I bet you love some of those costumes :p

LR:FFXIII's time limit has been a mixed baggage for me. When you just miss something, or find out your whole trek to a certain place was pointless because you aren't there at the right time, it can be extremely annoying. That said, you can still do a lot and can still get things done rather well. I haven't been looking at a guide for in-game things (just finding out how many quests there are and such), and I've done a hell of a lot in 3/4 of the time period allowed. There are many people complaining about the time limit, but it is pretty fair. If you suck at the battle system you will struggle though. The time limit exaggerates that.

I will say though, one reason I liked Catherine over Portal 2 was because the puzzles in Catherine had a greater sense of emergency. You had a kind of time limit to solve puzzles, whereas in Portal 2, you usually didn't. It personally made the puzzles more satisfying to me in Catherine than in Portal 2.

I don't particularly like the time limits in Persona games. Mostly because you will fail without a guide to do a lot of things. I feel that cheapens your first experience of the game. It's part of why I don't really care for the Persona series.

I guess it's not just down to the time limit set, but how the game is built around it.

#30 Edited by chessmaster1989 (28952 posts) -

Time limits are a great way to ruin a game.

#31 Edited by millerlight89 (18338 posts) -

Time limits suck in anything.

#32 Edited by speedfreak48t5p (6179 posts) -
#33 Posted by silversix_ (13585 posts) -

I hate time limits. I want to explore at my pace, not forced to run/skip crap cuz devs gave a stupid timer

#34 Edited by Bigboi500 (28804 posts) -

@chessmaster1989 said:

Time limits are a great way to ruin a game.

@silversix_ said:

I hate time limits. I want to explore at my pace, not forced to run/skip crap cuz devs gave a stupid timer

@millerlight89 said:

Time limits suck in anything.

@seanmcloughlin said:

I hate time limits in any game in any form. I usually end up sucking and getting frustrated

I agree with these sentiments, but a few games have done it right in my opinion: Persona 3 & 4 and Majora's Mask.

#35 Edited by getyeryayasout (6884 posts) -

I want to explore when I play games. I hate time limits. Edit: There are exceptions, but typically, if there's a Time Attack mode in a game, I'll ignore it. I'm on my time, I'mma do my thing at my pace. @Champ: Nice topic.

#36 Posted by whiskeystrike (12068 posts) -

I might be in the minority, but I think a time limit during the escape sections of 999 and VLR would have been interesting.

Oh no water is pouring in the room. I need to get out before I drown!

*45 minutes later

I made it!

#37 Posted by foxhound_fox (86864 posts) -

When done right (i.e. Dead Rising) it's amazing.

#38 Edited by Zidaneski (8435 posts) -

Love the time limit in Lightning Returns, which in turn makes it one of my favorite games so far that captures the atmosphere so well. Everything fits in the game thanks to the time limit. I don't understand how people could feel rushed since guess what,...YOU CAN STOP THE CLOCK! I nearly completed all quests and I'm only on day six, SIX! There are seven days left to go and I ran out of things to do, just trying to kill off all monsters in the world now because I can. Can you kill all monsters in other RPGs? No, because there's no time limit.


#39 Posted by jg4xchamp (46629 posts) -

@chessmaster1989 said:

Time limits are a great way to ruin a game.

@silversix_ said:

I hate time limits. I want to explore at my pace, not forced to run/skip crap cuz devs gave a stupid timer

@millerlight89 said:

Time limits suck in anything.

@seanmcloughlin said:

I hate time limits in any game in any form. I usually end up sucking and getting frustrated

I agree with these sentiments, but a few games have done it right in my opinion: Persona 3 & 4 and Majora's Mask.

Well the fact that there are exceptions would be proof that design can work.

Seems like a lazy opinion to just dismiss it if you can easily name games that do it in a meaningful way.

#40 Posted by jg4xchamp (46629 posts) -

@Desmonic said:

@jg4xchamp:


In the case of Dead Rising 2 (the only one of the series I've played) I think time limits made the game progression intentionally slow and it ended up boring me. I never also felt an urge to save NPC A over NPC B (or vice-versa) either.

So while the limits in the game had some effect, they didn't really add much to it. It would have been quite a bit more fun to have a daily timer (instead of an hourly one) and having you decide one of the following: rescue survivors, find zombrex (which could imply doing one of the other actions too), advance the story, search for weapons or just f*ck around.

Ideally you would be locked into no more than two of those, thus always being forced to make a decision.

I think that works in Persona's case better than it does in Dead Rising. I think Dead Rising's gameplay is about being efficient and aggressive. I do see what you mean about NPCs(maybe add more of a dynamic to them than being random people). But Persona's limit is more about making a choice so to speak, Dead Rising is about pure tension and efficiency.

Though fair enough I get that people don't like that game for its save system, dumb enemy AI, and all that jazz. But I dig the shit out of that game.

#41 Posted by lamprey263 (22431 posts) -

I liked it in Metro 2033 how when you go to the surface you had to worry about time limits on the air filters, it adds to the tension and atmosphere. It was a nice effect, though at times it bugged me since you can't always pick the same filters up at same locations on different playthroughs, it seems to only allow you to pick them up if you're in urgent need of them... then at other times that doesn't appear to be how it is. But I guess that adds to the panic effect. Last Light I felt rewarded exploration more but at the same time I got a lot more filters to the point worrying about my air didn't have the same effect.

#42 Posted by Master_ShakeXXX (13361 posts) -

I have no desire to ever play a time limit game. I like to play at my own pace, explore, fuck around, that sort of thing.

#43 Edited by soulitane (13380 posts) -

It works well if it fits the game's style, like for Dead Rising as you're waiting for 3 days to be rescued. I'd like to see it as an option in a lot of "save the world RPGs" as at times it makes no sense to be running off and having unlimited time when the world needs saving. That being said though I'd prefer to see games make it an option rather than force it on you (unless the whole game is designed to have it) so that if you do just want to fuck around you can.

#44 Posted by ShepardCommandr (2131 posts) -

I absolutely hate it.It's a bs concept and should never be implemented in an entire game,especially an rpg(...cough LRFF13 ....cough...)

I simply refuse to play games with time limits in them.

#45 Posted by ChubbyGuy40 (26062 posts) -

I like time trials and time limits. I don't enjoy forced time limits that want you to accomplish some meaningless fluffy woo-woo BS for a worthless reward, if even that.

#46 Edited by Pikminmaniac (8582 posts) -

I love a good time limit when it's done effectively. That's a major reason I consider the original Pikmin the best in the series. It forced you to think better and manage yourself more carefully. I'd never trade my first play-through of Pikmin for anything in the world. That's a special memory.

That same pressure can be present in Pikmin 3, but it isn't forced. They put leaderboards in for faster completions (a major staple in the Pikmin series) so the tension comes from being as efficient as you can be against yourself and others. It's still one of the most addictive things in the world.

I also believe that the original Resident Evil had something that caused a similar effective. Thaat game had a set number of saves based on how many ink ribbons you find. This also forced you to plan carefully and only save when you feel you accomplished enough to merit it or scrap your progress in favour of doing a better run.

I wish more games implemented these kinds of mechanics that put more weight behind your decisions.

#47 Edited by jg4xchamp (46629 posts) -

I love a good time limit when it's done effectively. That's a major reason I consider the original Pikmin the best in the series. It forced you to think better and manage yourself more carefully. I'd never trade my first play-through of Pikmin for anything in the world. That's a special memory.

That same pressure can be present in Pikmin 3, but it isn't forced. They put leaderboards in for faster completions (a major staple in the Pikmin series) so the tension comes from being as efficient as you can be against yourself and others. It's still one of the most addictive things in the world.

I also believe that the original Resident Evil had something that caused a similar effective. Thaat game had a set number of saves based on how many ink ribbons you find. This also forced you to plan carefully and only save when you feel you accomplished enough to merit it or scrap your progress in favour of doing a better run.

I wish more games implemented these kinds of mechanics that put more weight behind your decisions.

Major objections

The fact that Pikmin 3's challenge is self forced falls into a "I could do this, but why would I want to?". I could understand if there were some major nuance to the game mechanics or at the least there wasn't an example of a Pikmin game that provided that sense of pressure out right, but in this case there is.

And in the case of RE, too much novelty, not enough actual execution. Yeah you are pitched the idea that you have limited saves and resources, But reality is that it's disgustingly easy to get a shit load of ink ribbons and keep your ammo in check. Planning really wasn't part of the process. At best it just out right rewards super conservative marathon driven play.

I like the idea of old school Resident Evil, but in execution? it's a facade at best. Certainly not after seeing indie stuff like State of Decay or stuff like DayZ implement those type of concepts in a far more meaningful and tangible way.

#48 Posted by Sword-Demon (6871 posts) -

eh. I like taking my time to explore and plan things out.

time limits are fine for short sections in games, but for games based on time limits, such as Majora's Mask or Pikmin, it makes the whole experience feel a bit too rushed and like I missed out on a lot.

#49 Edited by JangoWuzHere (15926 posts) -

I liked Majora's Mask, but the time limit in that game was a double edged sword. The game used it's time limit system to create tons of doable side quests and create unique hidden experiences. However, I remember being really frustrated with Majora's Mask as a kid. The game doesn't do a great job of telling you where to go and what to do. You can waste tons of time in one area and not have enough time to finish what you were planning to do. Two of the most frustrating moments in that game for me was the Great Bay temple and hunting for the Zora eggs. It's not very fun to get far in a dungeon or a quest and have to do it all over again

I think I enjoyed the time limit in Dead Rising better. Non-stop pacing all the way to the end game.

#50 Edited by edwardecl (1779 posts) -

Time limits should only ever be used in sections of a game. Time limits do put people off of games, it does me I don't like to be rushed even if i could easily finish the game with plenty of time to spare that countdown would be a major distraction. Maybe put in time limits at harder difficulties or something for the people who love them.

The second thing that annoys me in games are escort quests, add that and time limits together and I won't play the game.

The save limiting is not a bad idea if implemented well. You could have checkpoints in the game (I don't mean every 3 mins) after boss battles perhaps because they know everyone is going to save there anyway just give you that for free, then have a limited amount of saving between checkpoints (which are saved separately) so you can't break the game. I seem to remember specifically in RE3: Nemesis I managed to save the game in a place where I could not go back and access my storage but also did not have an item I needed to continue and pretty much broke my game. One of the only games to have ever managed to do that.