# Are games getting worse, or are we just getting jaded? **URL:** \ **Category:** The Game Room\ **Created:** [August 5, 2010, 11:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-games-getting-worse-or-are-we-just-getting-jaded/549347 "2010-08-05T23:03:51Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 7
**Author:** ![Trepa\_Mayfield](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/edb3f5/32.png) [@Trepa\_Mayfield](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trepa_Mayfield)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2010, 12:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-games-getting-worse-or-are-we-just-getting-jaded/549347/121 "2010-08-12T00:59:52Z")
Truly innovative games of the 21st century? Hmm. How about: Achievement Unlocked Kaizo Mario World Desktop Tower Defense Canabalt (And honestly, I have very little experience with old games, so if I’m wrong just tell me) ---
**Author:** ![Spectralist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Spectralist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spectralist)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2010, 1:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-games-getting-worse-or-are-we-just-getting-jaded/549347/122 "2010-08-12T01:28:14Z")
> [@RickJay](#): > > If there were two versions of Civ 5 being released, one with the fancy 3D graphics and one with solid but simpler 2D graphics, I absolutely would buy the 2D version. And I have a computer to run the 3D version. Why? Far be it for me to defend pointless graphical glitter but 3d isn’t really that anymore. There are a lot of legitimate reasons for a game like Civ to be 3d. The most obvious being able to render at your monitor’s native resolution and being able to support all 3 common aspect ratios far more easily than can be done with 2d. The ability to zoom in and out without seeing a pixelated mess. And, most importantly, the ability to reuse animations in ways that you cannot in traditional spritework. For example you can make a standard “human” model. Which you can then modify into an “archer” model very easily. Which can then be given animation. You can then go back and tweak the “archer” model without effecting the animation. For example making an England version and an Egyptian version. And more versions for any country all the while preserving/reusing the same animation set. And many of the animations for the Archer can be reused for the Spearman, like the basic walk animation, or at least portions of it. Compare that to sprite work where all you can really do is a palette swap. Anything more than that would require completely, or nearly so, redoing every single frame of animation. You can do keyframe animation in 2d but in my experience it looks really cheesy compared to 3d or traditional 2d. And there’s really no reason to do it unless you’re on a system that can’t handle 3d well and don’t have the time to do traditional 2d. ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2010, 1:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-games-getting-worse-or-are-we-just-getting-jaded/549347/123 "2010-08-12T01:45:08Z")
> [@Spectralist](#): > > > [@RickJay](#): > > > > If there were two versions of Civ 5 being released, one with the fancy 3D graphics and one with solid but simpler 2D graphics, I absolutely would buy the 2D version. And I have a computer to run the 3D version. > > Why? Far be it for me to defend pointless graphical glitter but 3d isn’t really that anymore. There are a lot of legitimate reasons for a game like Civ to be 3d. The most obvious being able to render at your monitor’s native resolution… Why can’t you render 2D graphics at the monitor’s native resolution? As to answer your question, because 3D graphics add nothing of consequence to the game. It hogs system resources for no good reason, and I would argue often makes the game a far WORSE experience. Civilization IV, while I enjoy the game very much, has graphics that, while technically far more advanced than previous versions, are frankly not very good. The game has a washed out appearance, it’s hard to tell the difference between a lot of the units, and even on a decent system it slows things down. In some games, advanced graphics vastly enhance the quality of the game. “Bioshock” would not be the game it is with inferior graphics. The graphics are a critical part of the experience. > [@](#): > > For example you can make a standard “human” model. Which you can then modify into an “archer” model very easily. Which can then be given animation. You can then go back and tweak the “archer” model without effecting the animation. I agree that this is very helpful to the programmer; it is of no consequence to the user. I don’t care how hard it was to make the little guys. In fact, if you used sufficiently clear unit symbols I don’t care if the game has little guys that move at all. Why should they be animated? They can be NATO map symbols. The units in the original Civilization weren’t animated at all, but in terms of serving the needs of the game that game’s graphics were just as good as Civ 4. The improvements since then, IMHO, have been in game mechanics, not graphics. ---
**Author:** ![Spectralist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Spectralist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spectralist)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2010, 2:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-games-getting-worse-or-are-we-just-getting-jaded/549347/124 "2010-08-12T02:32:17Z")
> [@RickJay](#): > > Why can’t you render 2D graphics at the monitor’s native resolution? Because 2d graphics aren’t rendered they’re just copied to a frame buffer. Unless they’re vector anyway. But I haven’t seen many games use vector. I think a few DS games do. In my opinion vector graphics look worse than sprite/raster or 3d for a video game. > [@RickJay](#): > > As to answer your question, because 3D graphics add nothing of consequence to the game. It hogs system resources for no good reason, and I would argue often makes the game a far WORSE experience. Civilization IV, while I enjoy the game very much, has graphics that, while technically far more advanced than previous versions, are frankly not very good. The game has a washed out appearance, it’s hard to tell the difference between a lot of the units, and even on a decent system it slows things down. It shouldn’t slow the game down on a decent system. Games aren’t programmed like they were in the SNES and earlier days where objects moved X pixels per frame and so slowed when the system was taxed. Now they move X units per second. So the framerate doesn’t matter for the speed the game runs at(within reason, of course). And as far as, say, calculating what the AI is doing on it’s turn the 3d graphics are completely irrelevant. I just don’t get the idea that it’s more “washed out”, difficult to interpret, or in any significant way inferior to previous Civ games. That was true of some early 3d games, like say FF7 whose out of battle graphics were a blocky mess, but hasn’t been the case in many years. Outside of handhelds anyway. NDS 3d graphics are pretty terrible for every game I’ve seen. > [@RickJay](#): > > I agree that this is very helpful to the programmer; it is of no consequence to the user. I don’t care how hard it was to make the little guys. In fact, if you used sufficiently clear unit symbols I don’t care if the game has little guys that move at all. Why should they be animated? They can be NATO map symbols. Well I can see where you are coming from. But most people do want their units to be animated and so it will be. As long as that is the case having them be more easily animated means there can be more variations of them which is useful in adding depth and complexity to the game. And slight nitpick it’s not at all helpful to the programmer it’s helpful to the artist. Programming 3d is a much bigger pain in the ass than programming 2d. But luckily unless you’re trying to push the boundaries of what’s currently being done the 3d code is out there and can be easily reused. ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2010, 4:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-games-getting-worse-or-are-we-just-getting-jaded/549347/125 "2010-08-12T04:25:58Z")
> [@Spectralist](#): > > It shouldn’t slow the game down on a decent system. It shouldn’t, no. But they often do; Civ IV with the animations on had noticeable slowdowns even on good systems. Shoulda, coulda, woulda; I’m talking reality. > [@](#): > > I just don’t get the idea that it’s more “washed out”, difficult to interpret, or in any significant way inferior to previous Civ games. Because it is. That’s just the way the game appears. ---
**Author:** ![kevlaw](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kevlaw/32/2281_2.png) [@kevlaw](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kevlaw)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2010, 7:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-games-getting-worse-or-are-we-just-getting-jaded/549347/126 "2010-08-14T19:47:48Z")
If you look at other mediums (movies, popular music), they went through a period of organic growth with artists trying to appeal to connoisseurs before they were taken over by commercial interests. Good movies and great records still get made, but they are drowned out by populist pap, because pap makes more money. Production values get better and better but this, perversely, results in worse movies because the real innovators can’t get any momentum or airtime. Adding insult to injury, the only innovation that does occur is with gimmicks like 3D glasses and auto tune. To summarize, 1. The mainstream industry is not interested in great games 2. Great games still get made but they rarely make headlines (see #1) Creating the perception, if not the reality, that games are getting worse. ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2010, 11:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-games-getting-worse-or-are-we-just-getting-jaded/549347/127 "2010-08-14T23:50:54Z")
> [@kevlaw](#): > > If you look at other mediums (movies, popular music), they went through a period of organic growth with artists trying to appeal to connoisseurs before they were taken over by commercial interests. Good movies and great records still get made, but they are drowned out by populist pap, because pap makes more money. Production values get better and better but this, perversely, results in worse movies because the real innovators can’t get any momentum or airtime. Adding insult to injury, the only innovation that does occur is with gimmicks like 3D glasses and auto tune. Do you actually believe this is true, though? Movies in the 2000s were not any worse than they were in the 1990s, or the 1980s, or the 1970s, or the 1960s. They’ve been putting out both good and bad movies for much longer than I’ve been alive. Music, similarly, did not start out good and end up bad. How was music in 1985 any better than it is now? How was it any better in 1960 than it was in 1985? TV today is, in my opinion, significantly BETTER than it used to be, not worse. Your assertion just doesn’t seem to hold water. ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2010, 2:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-games-getting-worse-or-are-we-just-getting-jaded/549347/128 "2010-08-15T02:21:46Z")
Cable TV is better because it does not have to appeal to 12 year olds and suffer censorship so badly. But I liked games like Nobungas Ambition, Romance of the 3 Kingdoms and others like that. they seem to have died.Good RPGs are hard to find. They overload the graphics at the loss of game complexity. ---
**Author:** ![kevlaw](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kevlaw/32/2281_2.png) [@kevlaw](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kevlaw)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2010, 2:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-games-getting-worse-or-are-we-just-getting-jaded/549347/129 "2010-08-15T02:36:58Z")
> [@RickJay](#): > > [ > > Movies in the 2000s were not any worse than they were in the 1990s, or the 1980s, or the 1970s, or the 1960s. They’ve been putting out both good and bad movies for much longer than I’ve been alive. > > Music, similarly, did not start out good and end up bad. How was music in 1985 any better than it is now? How was it any better in 1960 than it was in 1985? > > TV today is, in my opinion, significantly BETTER than it used to be, not worse. > > Your assertion just doesn’t seem to hold water. My point was not that movies got worse…it’s that mainstream movies took all the attention away from the more creative movies. In music, I think it’s much easier for crass, commercial stuff to be successful now than it was in 1960. The good stuff is still there, but it harder for the casual listener to find because all the mainstream outlets play watered down stuff for the masses. It’d be much harder for a led zep or a Dylan or a pink floyd to break out now. I’m not so confident that my point holds for TV. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Pearse](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/richard_pearse/32/13144_2.png) [@Richard\_Pearse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Pearse)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2010, 7:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-games-getting-worse-or-are-we-just-getting-jaded/549347/130 "2010-08-15T07:26:35Z")
> [@kevlaw](#): > > In music, I think it’s much easier for crass, commercial stuff to be successful now than it was in 1960. The good stuff is still there, but it harder for the casual listener to find because all the mainstream outlets play watered down stuff for the masses. It’d be much harder for a led zep or a Dylan or a pink floyd to break out now. > > I’m not so confident that my point holds for TV. I like Pink Floyd, but I’ll just point out that the first truly successful PF album (Dark Side of the Moon) was considered by many fans to be watered down for the masses. ---
**Author:** ![Zeriel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/58956e/32.png) [@Zeriel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zeriel)\ **Post date:** [August 16, 2010, 8:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-games-getting-worse-or-are-we-just-getting-jaded/549347/131 "2010-08-16T20:52:05Z")
> [@RickJay](#): > > > [@Spectralist](#): > > > > It shouldn’t slow the game down on a decent system. > > It shouldn’t, no. But they often do; Civ IV with the animations on had noticeable slowdowns even on good systems. Speaking based on playing CivIV, though, those slowdowns are all in frames of animation and not on underlying move/action resolution speed, at least based on my experience…and if I get bored tonight, I’ll swap out my Radeon 4870 for my old Radeon X1800XT and see how Civ handles it. ---
**Author:** ![enbi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/3ec8ea/32.png) [@enbi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/enbi)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2013, 10:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-games-getting-worse-or-are-we-just-getting-jaded/549347/132 "2013-01-21T22:38:34Z")
> [@Justin\_Bailey](#): > > I think it’s a combination of “I’m old, games were better when I was younger” and “I’m old and I don’t have a lot of time to play, so I’m not very good, so games suck now.” > > In other words, made up drivel. > > Games are no better or no worse than they were five, ten, fifteen or even twenty years ago. And there’s just as much variety today as there was back then. And anyone who tells you otherwise doesn’t look beyond the top ten bestsellers of the month. > > Again, the notion that games aren’t as good as they used to be is pure drivel. i think what’s worse then the publishers telling the developers not to make risky/creative new games are people like yourself accepting crap as the new normal… great games that have been destroyed by publishers: great: rainbow six \> rainbow six rogue spear \> rainbow six ravenshield terrible: rainbow six vegas, lockdown, vegas 2, etc. great: heroes of might and magic 1,2,3,4 terrible: heroes of might and magic 5,6 great: supreme commander terrible: supreme commander 2 great: hitman \> … \> hitman blood money worse: hitman absolution … those games have been changed in game mechanics to become mainstream from before being something new that gave the player freedom in creativity. so there is proof for what is happening. the irony in all this is that the original games have all been succesful and the bad sequels live from their predecessor(s). ---
**Author:** ![Ludovic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7ab992/32.png) [@Ludovic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ludovic)\ **Post date:** [January 21, 2013, 10:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-games-getting-worse-or-are-we-just-getting-jaded/549347/133 "2013-01-21T22:39:48Z")
Am I getting jaded, or was this thread better the first time around? ---
**Author:** ![tagos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bbe5ce/32.png) [@tagos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tagos)\ **Post date:** [January 22, 2013, 3:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-games-getting-worse-or-are-we-just-getting-jaded/549347/134 "2013-01-22T15:00:04Z")
> [@Alka\_Seltzer](#): > > A bit of both, your 20th FPS game won’t have the same impact as playing Doom for the first time. Some very old and simple games have aged well (off the top of my head, Joust, Defender, 2 player Bubble Bobble, Lords of Midnight), the original Lords of Midnight has just come out on the iPad. 🙂 Loved that game. ---
**Author:** ![Mavic\_Chen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e56c9b/32.png) [@Mavic\_Chen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mavic_Chen)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2013, 5:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-games-getting-worse-or-are-we-just-getting-jaded/549347/135 "2013-01-23T17:00:33Z")
> [@Bosstone](#): > > And I bet you can’t even name one of that “untold number.” [PaRappa the Rapper…?](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PaRappa_the_Rapper) ---
**Author:** ![bump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7c8e57/32.png) [@bump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bump)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2013, 6:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-games-getting-worse-or-are-we-just-getting-jaded/549347/136 "2013-01-23T18:31:07Z")
> [@Illuminatiprimus](#): > > Well sure, because it’s a very formative time for us and it has a bit impact on our subject view of things in the future. No doubt the same debate will be had in 15 years time by the current 15 year olds who will say that WOW, COD4 and GTA4 were the pinacle of gaming and it has all been downhill since. You fall into the same category as the 15 year olds 15 years hence. I started gaming at about 10 or so… in 1982 on an Atari 2600. Games like the ones you mention like X-Com, Master of Orion, Civ, etc… were all games that came out while I was in _college_. While they’re great games, there were great games that preceded them as well. Stuff like the Ultima games, the Bard’s Tale games, Wasteland, F-15 Strike Eagle, the original John Madden Football, et al. I think a lot of what we’re seeing these days is a combination of two things. First, video games are a major source of entertainment these days- not only do you see TV commercials for the big ones (COD, Portal, etc…) but you see them in prime-time and during sports events. Video games used to not be such a big deal- they were viewed as primarily a children’s and nerd’s thing, so they didn’t sell so well. Now that they’re a big deal, you have a lot more pressure to make them as friendly to the average gamer as possible, which tends to kill a lot of the really interesting and difficult gameplay and tends to channel money into things that are thought to sell- branded franchise games like Madden, FIFA, Civilization, Call of Duty, Battlefield, the various Lego games, etc… and starves money and resources from innovative stuff because it’s not predicted to sell as well. I also think that the mass-marketization tends to emphasize the whiz-bang stuff- 3d graphics, sound and cool visuals over gameplay, much the same as what’s happening in film today. The other thing is that with so much money to be made, the signal to noise ratio just went way down- there are a LOT of crappy derivative games being made, and the good ones are more of a needle in the haystack than ever before. ---
**Author:** ![bump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7c8e57/32.png) [@bump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bump)\ **Post date:** [January 23, 2013, 6:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-games-getting-worse-or-are-we-just-getting-jaded/549347/137 "2013-01-23T18:37:46Z")
Oh, and comparing great games of yesteryear to today’s and saying that today’s are better because the old ones had crappy graphics or clunky interfaces is patently retarded. That’s about as braindead as saying that “Citizen Kane” sucks because it’s in 4:3 regular definition black and white, and because it doesn’t have any explosions or killer robots. It’s about playability and innovation and that "wow’ factor that comes from playing a really good game- that doesn’t change over time. ---
**Author:** ![Shooby](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/f475e1/32.png) [@Shooby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shooby)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2013, 12:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-games-getting-worse-or-are-we-just-getting-jaded/549347/138 "2013-01-24T00:57:44Z")
This topic is insane. Mainstream games (not all of them) may show some of that dumbing down effect to achieve more popularity, but check out all the amazing indie games being developed that basically take a lot of the same gameplay styles as older games and polish them or offer really cool twists. For starters, some great indie games with really meaty gameplay that I’ve played in the last year or so: Braid, Super Meat Boy, Bastion, Binding of Isaac, FTL, Misadventures of P.B. Winterbottom That’s just off the top of my head in 10 seconds. Download Steam (or hit the discount sites) and get a ton of games for fairly cheap (and ridiculously cheap if you wait for one of the sales). Not every one you try will be to your liking, but indie developers are experimenting with so many different game concepts and combinations now that you’ll inevitably find some that really just do it for you. Honestly, I’ve never been more excited about the state of gaming, and I’ve been around since the Super Mario Bros. / Duck Hunt (original) NES era. ---
**Author:** ![msmith537](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d9b06d/32.png) [@msmith537](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/msmith537)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2013, 2:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-games-getting-worse-or-are-we-just-getting-jaded/549347/139 "2013-01-24T02:18:56Z")
> [@bump](#): > > I started gaming at about 10 or so… in 1982 on an Atari 2600. Games like the ones you mention like X-Com, Master of Orion, Civ, etc… were all games that came out while I was in _college_. > > While they’re great games, there were great games that preceded them as well. Stuff like the Ultima games, the Bard’s Tale games, Wasteland, F-15 Strike Eagle, the original John Madden Football, et al. > > I think a lot of what we’re seeing these days is a combination of two things. First, video games are a major source of entertainment these days- not only do you see TV commercials for the big ones (COD, Portal, etc…) but you see them in prime-time and during sports events. Video games used to not be such a big deal- they were viewed as primarily a children’s and nerd’s thing, so they didn’t sell so well. > > Now that they’re a big deal, you have a lot more pressure to make them as friendly to the average gamer as possible, which tends to kill a lot of the really interesting and difficult gameplay and tends to channel money into things that are thought to sell- branded franchise games like Madden, FIFA, Civilization, Call of Duty, Battlefield, the various Lego games, etc… and starves money and resources from innovative stuff because it’s not predicted to sell as well. I also think that the mass-marketization tends to emphasize the whiz-bang stuff- 3d graphics, sound and cool visuals over gameplay, much the same as what’s happening in film today. > > The other thing is that with so much money to be made, the signal to noise ratio just went way down- there are a LOT of crappy derivative games being made, and the good ones are more of a needle in the haystack than ever before. I’m about the same age as bump and I have to agree. While a lot of games are just incremental improvements on games going back decades. Every now and then, something new and groundbreaking is released. Look at games like Minecraft. Or the DayZ mod for the relatively obscure ArmA II. What I would like to see is something new and groundbreaking in Real Time Strategy games. Something that is not just another updated and rehashed version of Dune 2 / Command & Conquer / Starcraft / Total Anihilation / Age of Empires / Supreme Commander “collect the resources and peon rush your enemy” gameplay. ---
**Author:** ![msmith537](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d9b06d/32.png) [@msmith537](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/msmith537)\ **Post date:** [January 24, 2013, 2:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-games-getting-worse-or-are-we-just-getting-jaded/549347/140 "2013-01-24T02:33:44Z")
Ok, this game from the people who made Total Anihilation and Supreme Commander might be pretty cool: > **[Home](https://planetaryannihilation.com/)** > > Planetary Annihilation brings Real-Time Strategy to a new generation of gamers in a way they’ve never been seen before. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-games-getting-worse-or-are-we-just-getting-jaded/549347.md?page=6) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-games-getting-worse-or-are-we-just-getting-jaded/549347.md?page=8)