Are you insane? One million copies is a hugely successful game. For that matter, few games sell more than 100,000 copies. But you’re right, it’s not a mega-blockbuster in a world where Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 sells 10 million copies.
As for why that’s the fault of game consoles (the game industry grew in 30 years, who knew?), I have no idea what you’re talking about.
And this just shows how people’s memory is so selective. Before Baldur’s Gate/Fallout 2 the RPG genre was considered nearly dead. I remember that being an incredibly dry spell when it came to RPGs then out of nowhere Baldur’s Gate came along and revived it. So your Golden Age was actually the Gold Box period a long patch where people were talking about how that type of game was gone and dying and its revival.
It’s also revealing how Baldur’s Gate was at first hailed as too modern with its realtime/pause battle system that would destroy ‘classic’ RPGs. Now it is considered the classic and it is games like Dragon Age and Mass Effect is the new modern games that are destroying classic RPG gaming.
I’m confused. You said games today aren’t any worse than before, but then said that we can all agree the heyday of gaming was 91-95, which suggests that games were better then? So we agree?
(even though I’d personally change those years to 1990-97)
There are more games with fewer differentiations. Nearly every shooter and open-world game feels practically identical to the others to me. There is only so many times I can play a game where the core mechanic is ‘point and shoot,’ with almost no other distinctive characteristics.
With that said, some of my favorite games have been shooters, including Half-Life and Goldeneye. And there’s a couple of reasons for this: one, both felt *fresh * when they were released. Secondly, their core mechanics were superior to modern gaming, imo. Today’s regenerating health nonsense has fundamentally changed the way these games are played, turning practically every game into a cover-based shooter. Also, few games have tried to build on the mission objectives of Goldeneye in any meaningful way (usually they just ignore them entirely) and none have had a better narrative than Half-Life 1–not even its sequel.
Should I write a list? I seriously could go on forever. Almost any of the Grand Theft Autos (though I liked 3 initially for its unique open-world gameplay–not so much anymore), Metal Gear Solid 4, any Call of Duty or Modern Warfare, most Halos after the first, any modern realistic sports/racing game, almost every RPG except for the Mario ones…should I go on?
I can assure you Sin and Punishment 2 did not change this, regardless of how great it may be, as it would seem that its impact on the market was inconsequential. Regardless I liked it, but didn’t like it as much as say Star Fox 64.
There’s nothing to “know” as it’s all subjective. But it is true, I still love games. I just don’t love or like as many games these days as I used to. Mario Galaxy 2 is fantastic and Super Smash Bros. Brawl may very be my favorite multiplayer game of all time (I still play that almost weekly!). However, the best games of today are rarely as good as the best of yesterday, including the modern Zeldas. I’m having a blast right now playing through the Gameboy versions (LA again, and Seasons/Ages for the first time) and am reminded of how great that series used to be.
Is that a challenge? 
Please note that we have added a consequence for failure. Any contact with the chamber floor will result in an unsatisfactory mark on your official testing record, followed by death.
Portal was a great game, but it wasn’t mould breaking like buddy wants. The gameplay mechanic was developed for ages for Prey, which was first demo’d way back in the 90s. The Unreal engine had support for it.
I’m unaware of any other games where your sole goal is to escape from the tutorial because the tutorial narrator is an insane homicidal AI. But then I was also unaware of Prey. shrugs
Shopping Online at Shopping.com | Price Comparison Site I like RPG’s . they are getting heavier on graphics and lighter on complexity and character development.
I largely lost interest in new games when the adventure game genre fell out of favor. Those were the kinds of games I liked, but there just aren’t that many of them anymore. I don’t know if there are ANY American game companies still regularly making adventure games. The few new-ish adventure games I’ve played in the last decade or so were all produced in Europe.
While my fondness for some of the old adventure games must be colored by nostalgia, several of the “classic” titles in my small collection are things I tracked down years after their original release. I didn’t play the first Gabriel Knight game, which was originally released in 1993, until 2002 or 2003. Although the graphics and music are almost comically bad by modern standards, it’s still a great game.
For all I know practically every new game today is at least as good an example of its genre as Gabriel Knight: Sins of the Fathers was of the adventure game genre, but that doesn’t mean that I personally would enjoy them. Whatever the best first-person shooter in the world is, I still don’t want to play it. Some of the new-ish European adventure games I’ve played over the past few years have been pretty good, but The Longest Journey is the only one I considered worth replaying…and that happens to be the oldest (1999!) of my “new” adventure games.
Even TLJ irritated me because it ends with so much left unresolved. This seems to be a problem a lot of the newer adventure games have. I don’t know if they’re trying to be edgy that way or if they’re just trying to suck you in to paying for the sequel, but it seems cheap and lazy to me. The worst offender I’ve encountered is 2005’s Still Life, a murder mystery that ends without revealing the identity of the killer! This did not make me want to play the sequel, it made me want to ask for my money back. (And I got this game from the bargain shelf!) I expected a better reward for solving so many tedious lockpicking puzzles, not to mention the totally pointless cookie baking puzzle.
My God, you haven’t heard about Telltale Games? They’ve almost single handedly resurrected the adventure game as a viable genre. Sam and Max, Monkey Island, Strong Bad - they’re working on an adventure game based off of Back to the Future now. It’s like the golden age of LucasArts all over. Mostly because the company is made up of the people originally responsible for LucasArts’ golden age in the first place.
I’m still hoping they’ll somehow finagle the right to Loom. Stranger things have happened!
What are you, 13? Having been a long-time gamer, I’d say that where console FPS’ fall down in comparison to PC ones is in 4 categories:
Fine control- you can just get better control with a mouse than you can with a control stick/pad.
Console games are limited by their controllers; on my Xbox controller there are 2 triggers, 6 buttons, 2 sticks and a pad. My keyboard has 101 keys. You can do things with games using the keyboards that you couldn’t really do effectively with a console controller. The best example is if you ever played Rainbow Six: Raven Shield. It’s a tactical FPS (the first real one ca. 1997, IIRC) and it uses the typical WASD movement controls, but Q and E would let you peek around corners without exposing your entire body. On the Xbox games, you have to pop out, so it pays to be more run-and-gun than stealthy and sneaky.
A good example is Left4Dead / Left4Dead2. I had L4D on the PC, and kind of felt like it was a little hamstrung controls-wise vs. the FPS I was used to playing. On the console, you have about all you can control (yes, you could do a little more, but you get my meaning)
3. Lack of user-generated content. This is the one I miss the most about having gone console for FPS games (my friends did, so I followed suit). Many PC games have user generated maps, levels, mods, player models, skins,etc… for consoles, fucking Microsoft charges you $12 for 5 maps, if you play COD:MW2.
I don’t think that gamers are better on one or the other; the experience is just different. There are definitely games that you just flat-out can’t play on consoles- for example the Total War series or any good flight simulator.
There are great games made for the console- Mass Effect and Bioshock are two that will hold up with any games ever made. It’s just that console gaming lends itself to a more arcade-ish experience, primarily due to the controllers.
And yet what during your time frame of the best games was so different? You can call FPSes as ‘point and click’ the same way you can call side scrollers ‘move from left to right’ adventure games as ‘click the entire screen until something happens’. You can reduce any genre to its component parts and dismiss it. As I stated before there may be slightly less revolution and far more evolution today but that is purely because we have discovered what works and what doesn’t so there is less likely to be anything totally brand new. Which is what happens in any new medium.
You stated you were 25? Of course they felt ‘fresh’ You were what 13 when Half Life came out? Today there is someone who is 13 who is picking up Mass Effect 2 and talking about how ‘fresh’ it feels.
I like regenerating health so that is a judgment call not some objective measure of the quality of today’s games. It turns most encounters into interesting potentially deadly situations over battles of attrition where all I have to worry about is if I left a health back 20 feet back in the level or if I know there is one around the corner. Also the narrative of Half life? It was impressive as hell in 98 for a FPS but if it came out today? Everyone would talk about how it had barely any plot.
And I’m sure there’s someone out there that would disagree on every one of those games. I know you were prompted by another poster and I actually haven’t played many of the games you listed so I’ll just move along…
Of course! You’re older. You’re less easily impressed. Things that were set as your defining taste have evolved past you. I hardly like any new music but it doesn’t mean music today has gotten worse or there is less ‘fresh’ music out there it is just my subjective tastes that haven’t changed with the times. Also my playlist is full of songs I loved the ones that for me still have meaning. If I compared my favorites of yesteryear to the average song of today of course I will say ‘music today just isn’t as good as it used to be’. Forgetting that for my sins I grew up in the late 80’s early 90’s which has some of the crappiest music in the world.
Oh I missed the edit window. Another thing that I think is interesting is how the same people that complain there isn’t enough innovation today are the same people that complain that games aren’t what they used to be and don’t like new mechanics. You want things to be the same yet different. I see the same thing every single time a sequel to a beloved game comes out.
Not that I’m any different of course. Fallout 3 had me worried and I still don’t like that it is a ‘sequel’ to my beloved Fallout 2 though I like the game for itself. Dragon Age 2 has me worried as all the press releases so far sound like they’re screwing up everything I enjoyed about the first.
Yes, you can, which is what I didn’t do, hence why I also stated “with almost no other distinctive characteristics,” which really was the defining point of that comment.
Explaining it doesn’t justify it. And I seriously doubt we’re anywhere near tapping the potential of games.
You seem to know so much about me. :rolleyes: Learn this: I didn’t play Half-Life 1 until 5 years after it came out, when I was 18, well past when other shooters that drew inspiration from it had been released.
I’m not going to argue this because it’s subjective. But your analogy isn’t exactly apt considering the 13 year-old is unlikely to have played games spanning most of video game’s lifespan whereas I have.
No shit. And this is something you would have realized I’ve been arguing all along were you to pay attention to anything I stated beside the chosen quotes you pulled.
I respectfully disagree. Maybe I’m just too good, but it turns every battle into a lame game of hide and seek whenever ones energy runs low. I miss the feeling of being on the verge of death after a battering, but having to persist in spite of such.
Narrative and plot are not synonymous, and until you can draw such a distinction, there’s no point in discussing this further.
No shit, again. Did I ever argue otherwise? Was the OP not asking for our thoughts on the matter? I think games are getting worse, you don’t. It’s really simple, actually.
Perhaps the first smart thing you’ve said.
Being older has nothing to do with it. Being experienced does. I think games are getting worse because they’re rehashing the same ideas and concepts to death.
Please :rolleyes:
I quite like many modern bands, thankyouverymuch. So I don’t know how that fits into your theory.
You sure do like to jump to conclusions a lot. New does not automatically = Better. Actively disliking a design choice is not the same has suppressing innovation. Besides, in the one specific case I cited, there are many more ways in which shooters could be innovated upon besides being health-based (and for the record, I quite like its implementation in Halo 1. I just don’t think it’s the right choice for many games, but they adopt it anyway since all the “cool” kids are doing it.)
The “gameplay mechanic” of Portal went far beyond merely having portals.
Defining point? You deliberately removed any distinctive characteristics and dismissed them. Which was my point.
Of course I wasn’t saying that there will never be another genre. I’m just saying it’s less likely as time goes by until the hardware changes.
Wow a little sensitive? Ok so at the old old age of 18 long past you were a burned out jaded gamer of Half Life clones you were blown away by the original.
Which is my point. You’re saturated so you remember the time of when you first started as something special and unique which is rightfully was. Now you’re seeing games today from a different perspective but obviously that doesn’t make games today less then before it makes your point of view different.
Anyway I know you said ‘imo’ but considering the issue is if games are better or worse now and you stated you didn’t like this core mechanic. I do. Many people do. You don’t it’s immaterial unless you’re saying this is somehow objectively worse.
Heh too good eh? You wouldn’t have to play hide and seek would you? Shall we pull out our epeens and compare? I don’t miss walking past a dozen health packs and thinking ‘hmm boss fight coming’. Or thinking ‘Well I’ve taken 15 damage should I walk back and pick up that +25 two rooms back or go forward?’. 99% of the fights I fought had zero impact on the game as the only important thing was if I took no damage or a tiny sliver of damage that made me think about how far I was willing to backtrack.
Yes yes I bow to your superior knowledge of narrative and plot. There’s no way I can understand the concept of both and disagree that Half Life had little of either and though remarkable and special for the time is crude by today’s standards. I love that game. It is what made me realize that FPS’s didn’t suck as pointless maze crawls but it wouldn’t be anything notable today.
Simple indeed. This leads to discussion. I don’t remember the OP asking for a poll.
Why are you taking things so personally?
Older more experienced. My point still stands. Games aren’t worse you’ve just seen it before so you’re less impressed.
I was just trying to get the discussion away from games to point out it happens with other areas of taste. MOST people don’t like movies as much as when they were a certain age. MOST people don’t like music as much as they were from a certain age. It doesn’t mean that games, music, movies, whatever has decreased in quality it means that life goes on. Music is still good to you as it was when you were young. Great! I feel the same way about games. I don’t feel that way about music.
Did I say new = better? I told you two games where the ‘new’ filled my gamer’s heart with fear. I’m just saying there’s a weird tendency for people to complain when their favorite game is changed and complain when it’s not changed enough. I do it. I don’t know if you do it as I don’t know you well enough but I have seen it over and over again in threads like this and on other gaming boards.
Christ I’ve seen 100+ posts pre-Starcraft II arguing that multiple building selection would destroy the game forever and now those same people are complaining about how the game is ‘too similar’ to Starcraft
I wouldn’t say video games as a whole are getting worse, but a few genres definitely are.
MMORPGs, for instance, are no longer the bastions of immersion that they once were. Activision-Blizzard (the behemoth of the genre) has spent the last three years bent over in prostration before the altar of the idiot. The Chuck Norris-related garrulity and general retardation that was once confined to Barrens chat has now metastasized through the entire game with their blessing. Overuse of instancing, gear resets every patch, lack of commensurate rewards, inability to distinguish oneself, mind-blowingly retarded limitation mechanics, and the general dumbing down of the game for neophyte gamers has created a legion of reactionary players like myself who yearn for days past.
I’m fully aware there have been improvements to the genre. But, unfortunately the overwhelming trend is towards simplifying what shouldn’t be simple. It’s not some angry nostalgia borne sentiment, either.
The worst part of it all is that other game developers, eager to taste a piece of Blizzard’s pie, are destroying the complexity in their games too. SoE, for instance, is incapable of doing anything besides emulating Blizzard.* Is crafting too “tuff” for Timmy? It’s gone. World PvP? Can’t have that – let’s add BGs. Hey, we’re hemorrhaging money because our game is awful. Should we focus on providing a quality gaming experience or nickel and dime our customers with cash shops? *
I feel enormous amounts of pity for the younger generation of gamers who will get their first taste of MMOs from today’s polished turds. I still remember my first steps in EQ like it was yesterday. The immersion was fantastic. From Kurn’s tower, to Kelethin, EQ was the closest thing to a living breathing world inside of a computer game. Nowadays, I feel MMORPGs shouldn’t be called such. Perhaps they could be called something a bit more honest:
MIWFIGG, or Massively Instanced World Focused on Instant Gratification Game.
Point by point replies have several drawbacks. There is almost always a lot of needless repetition in the individual points, quite often insults creep in, and many people just skip such posts altogether on the grounds that they’re entirely too pedantic. I invite you guys to ditch the individual quotes and instead write coherent narratives.
Ellis that may be true but I’ve already made my overall statement in the beginning of the thread. A discussion is more interesting to me then a series of monologues. And if you try to reply to an overall post without doing point by point you always get accused of ignoring part of their statement. Heck even my nearly word for word reply was accused of selective quoting when I cut a few parts I didn’t feel it necessary to reply to. This is especially tricky when two posters are engaged and you feel you can add to it but they are already specifically replying to another’s post that you don’t have an interest in replying to.
Though it is true about the insults. I wonder where that impulse comes from. I didn’t feel like I was being aggressive in my post but from all the rolleyes I got in reply it clearly was somehow annoying to him/her which made it hard not to be dismissive/condescending back.