for me a good game nees to be addictive, have good controls, be very fun to play and not be really really difficult!
I don't know about 'addictive' But I will keep going back to a game if it's good enough. There have been cases I guess where I have been hooked though too. Little nostalgic moment just came to me too - Mashed! Man, that was one addictive multiplayer game!
Yeah, I think this is a pretty crucial area. I don't like it when two games of the same genre have completely different controls, especially driving games and shooters. I do prefer the new R2 idea though I've just about got used to that.
Dunno about this comment; I like a good 'challenging' game. I remember the first Crash drove me MAD. But I eventually got past it and it was very satisfying. I prefer it when games have varied difficulty settings though because I just go straight in at the deep end.
Honestly I could have told People that a game like GTA would sell really good now-of-days, and I whould have said the samething when GTA was on the Commodore64 too.
I think something that makes a story better is free will of the player. Take the resistance series, for example. The first one was told from Parkers point of view in the future, so people were fine with listening to decisions by Hale that already happened. Fast forward to R2 and the story degenerates, why? Because you are not in the story, every time a decision has to be made Hale makes it, not you. When you split up, do you pick the path, no. Hale picks it. Almost any other game follows this profile: this is your goal, do it and improvise. R2 follows it this way: This is your goal, do it this way and only this way or die.
In RPGs does your character get taken over by the computer and go to wherever you need to go? No, you go yourself because the writers make you want to.