Comments on: How Tron 2.0 upstaged Far Cry 2

By: Gerard Delaney

Gerard Delaney — Sun, 11 Oct 2009 14:40:30 +0000

@Justin Keverne: I really do enjoy how progressive the sub-routine element of the game is for its time, especially how restrictions are placed on the character when you reach a new area. It prevents the players from falling into certain comfortable patterns of play. Imposing permanence on the choices of subroutines would be interesting I agree, and it would still be possible as a kind of player imposed metagame (FarCry 2 permadeath style). However, given the game was released when it was I am not surprised that player planning is not something that was considered by Monolith.

@Chris Dunkley: I chose Far Cry 2 because I happen to be playing it at the same time I rediscovered Tron 2.0. I saw the two games as representative of two different eras in the FPS and both having alot of positive elements that the other did not. I actually just finished my playthrough of Arkam Asylum tonight and agree that the collectibles in the game were too much of an intrusion. I do think they can have a place in games if they can be justified. The Riddler trophies are a good example of this. They justify the act of collecting as means to develop the character of The Riddler, with his insecurity about the intelligence of Batman. It is still annoying because of all the HUD messages that pop up but at least it has some justification, it is not just shooting flying rats in Liberty City

By: Chris Dunkley

Chris Dunkley — Sun, 11 Oct 2009 14:11:08 +0000

I’m not quite sure why you’ve chosen to single out Far Cry 2 for comparison to Tron 2.0 but I agree with what you’re saying about the game. It’s extremely thematically cohesive. It’s a game about games… or atleast programs… so it’s easy for the devs to thematically justify everything.

I haven’t played Far Cry 2 yet, but the diamond collection mechanic seems to fit in with a trend I’m increasingly worried about; that is the need to fill every empty corner of a game world with collectibles that create a constant dribble of “rewards” for the player. This, by itself, isn’t that offensive. What’s more offensive is the way these collectibles rarely make sense within the context of the world and the fact that they usually trigger pop-up messages informing you that you’ve just unlocked some tiny piece of meaningless content.

All of these pop-up messages and counters (I’m looking at you Arkham Asylum) are increasingly abrasive when everything else about the game is aiming to “immerse” the player in a world and have them forget that they’re playing a game. At a certain point I don’t want to be interrupted.

By: Justin Keverne

Justin Keverne — Sun, 11 Oct 2009 13:02:01 +0000

The consistency of Tron 2.0 is certainly a key factor in my appreciation of it. Not only does it use the central metaphor of being inside a computer system to explain away traditional game design tropes it also uses it to create interesting aesthetic experiences of it’s own. I’ll never forget how I was nearly “formatted” out of existence for example.

The manner in which the number of abilities, sub-routines, available to you differs between systems is a fascinating one and I think it goes some way toward promoting emergent gameplay as sometime certain sub-routines will be unavailable. However allowing you to change them at any time seems to mitigate that, and I might personally have preferred to select my sub-routines upon entering the system and not be able to change them until and unless I was able to upgrade some of them to create more “memory” for additional sub-routines. That would have required a degree of planning and emergent gameplay that would have been interesting to see alongside an otherwise straight first person shooter mechanic.