Why older games are still better and why games do not depend on trends.

Discussion in 'Game Design, Development And Publishing' started by Misty, Jul 10, 2018.

  1. Toque

    Toque Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2017
    Posts:
    575

    I had hair 20 years ago.
    I had amazing hair.
    Much better than the hair I see today.


    So I watched a video for goldeneye. Ok it’s a cool first person shooter. Actually it looks like a great fun game.

    So I played Fortnite for the first time yesterday.

    So if you think goldeneye is better. I’m cool with that. Might even be true on some level. But there might be a couple 16 year olds that like this Fortnite thingy game more. That’s cool too.
     
    Last edited: Jul 11, 2018
  2. MishMash

    MishMash Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2016
    Posts:
    362
    Wanted to chime in a few thoughts. I do disagree with OP, though I won't claim either one is better, but want to throw in a few observations:

    - It is generally natural for you to be more impressed with old games, when you first experience a new kind of game, especially as a kid, it can feel like a magical experience. It is interesting that you talk about how Goldeneye was so great, yet Nightfire was so bad. I got into gaming a little later, and Nightfire was the game everyone was playing when I was young. For me, I pretty much had the experience you described with goldeneye with nightfire, given it was the very first FPS game I played, and I loved it! Similarly, when I first played games like Rollercoaster Tycoon, Minecraft, sims, even CoD for the very first time, with every single one of them, I was immersed in the game's culture and truly blown away by how good they were. MW2 was the very first "modern" AAA game I had played, both graphically and functionally, it was a huge step up from the previous PS2 games I had been playing up until that point, and for me, that excited me so much. The way the multiplayer worked for me was also exciting, given that I had never really played another game which had online functionality at that point (only local multiplayer). In my eyes, that made the game seem fantastic, not only that but the cinematic experience and the soundtrack also blew me away, and thus I think it does carry value.

    - A lot of people seem to also have a very draconian opinion of modern developers, throwing around statements like "games lack feel", "developers dont care about x/y/z", "there is no focus on gameplay anymore" while only quoting very set examples. What I will say is that I agree that there are many franchise games (sports games like Fifa, CoD, Battlefield) which have a certain expectation, though these games also have massive audiences and often aim to be a bit more general to please the masses. When I play games like Skyrim, I instantly think statements like that become entirely unfair. If you want to be really fair, you need to compare apples to apples and also acknowledge the downsides of old games. Consider what wonderful things modern technology enables: - Seamless open worlds, - massive pools of content, - smooth gameplay and interaction (How about we just ignore that older games tended to feel clunky and have a certain amount of input lag or delay compared to modern games).

    - On the note regarding the "graphics arms race", I think its very important to consider that even with old games, a tremendous amount of time was put into the game engines and graphics. Back then, it was essential for you to spend time, not only to make the game look good, but even just to enable the gameplay you wanted. Some games were only possible due to really finely tuned components. If you read this article on the development of Crash Bandicoot, it gives you an idea of the sort of things developers had to do: https://all-things-andy-gavin.com/2011/02/02/making-crash-bandicoot-part-1/ I'm also sure everyone here has watched plenty of videos talking about the exploits of John Carmack and ID in general as well :p

    Technology and games will always come hand in hand, and no matter what, developers will keep pushing the limits of what is possible. I imagine one downside however is that as graphics get more complex, the time taken to actually develop graphical content will go up, even if the time to develop the core technology remains the same.

    Now, I think what we can do however, is find some good takeaways from this discussion:
    - One thing I have tried to do with my game is develop it for my younger self. That is, certain features I have added to the game are things that I know would have excited and inspired my younger self. While the game seems underwhelming to me, as I know every inch of it inside out, I always try to imagine myself playing it as a kid, and wondering what feeling i'd have when encountering new content and discovering new features within the game.

    - Obviously, game design is important, and I think its a much better use of time to learn from the mistakes of the past rather than relish in how good "things used to be". We can take forward things that work, but keep in mind everything needs re-evaluating and context is important.

    - Innovation is good, there's nothing wrong with pushing our horizon further forward. Sure, it may mean a load of bad prototypes and flops along the way, but as technology improves, we really do set ourselves up for some real gems to come out down the line.
     
    Bentley, chance, Nocturne and 4 others like this.
  3. Rob

    Rob Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2016
    Posts:
    434
    I'm not really seeing hatred towards misty or the thread, just different opinions. Were you able to read all of the previous posts because I feel there are some great examples of new > old.

    Why do I feel like Misty and JelllyJake are the same person? lol

    I think everyone can relate to what MishMash is saying about having those memorable moments as a kid. Secret of Mana was the first game that wrenched an emotional feeling out of me... that poor sprite!!! bwahahha *cries*. I have a story about Daggerfall that I love to tell but then every awesome game ill give you those stories and that's why I disagree with OP.
     
    Last edited: Jul 11, 2018
    Bentley likes this.
  4. Siolfor the Jackal

    Siolfor the Jackal Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2016
    Posts:
    513
    Yeah, you can't make this big statement then just compare two games of your choice like that. You're really clinging to Halo 5 as your comparison but everyone knows the post-Bungie Halo games are trash. I mean, why don't you try comparing Halo 5 to say... Daikatana or 007: The World is Not Enough, or South Park 64? They are all shooters from that era too and they were a bit garbage.
    Goldeneye was great, they did a lot of amazing things for the time. But it is heaps dated. The graphics are just bad, no matter the resolution. The base resolution of those textures don't change on PC, and neither do the amount of polygons. They tried a sense of realism andit was passable back then but now it's a bit hard to look at. But yeah, Goldeneye was the exception, not the rule...
    And N64 version is best because it was designed for that, controller was perfectly fine at the time, but now we are used to controllers and layouts with two sticks. And playing it emulated on PC with presumably mouse and keyboard is just a slap in the face to the guys who made the first good console fps that basically every other console fps took notes from.
     
  5. Toque

    Toque Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2017
    Posts:
    575
    An excellent read.
     
  6. Misty

    Misty Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2016
    Posts:
    840
    God of war was made in 2005, I'm assuming you mean the 2018 version?

    Anyway, I watched a clip of it, it looks okay. Seems like a boss battle exploration type of game. Still it didn't really knock my socks off watching the gameplay. Far as those type of games Metroid Prime is the one that knocked my socks off. And Metroid Prime 3 was a downgrade of Metroid prime 1 really.

    And now they made a game called Recore, which is mix of Metroid Prime and Borderlands, but a downgrade of both. And then Sunset Overdrive, which is a downgrade of Borderlands 2. Then APB reloaded, which is a downgrade of GTA. Then Prominence Poker, which is a downgrade of the Poker game of the Xbox 360.
    And let's talk about racing.
    In the olden days we got amazing games like Daytona, Rush 2049, F-zero gamecube.
    Sure the physics weren't exactly the same as real life, but now what do we get, sterile british games like Forza with no personality. And this is a metaphor of the game industry as a whole, its usually generic stuff with no real personality.
    Oh and you know what, I tried to play Fortnight, but I couldn't because you know everything is online only as part of scam to get you to pay Comcast for internet fees and xbox gold. Bill Gate's girlfriend probably works for Comcast or something.
    And what was the deal behind that modern Minecraft and Terraria craze? Those voxels hurt my eyes. Thank goodness it finally got rated the 3 stars it deserves. I thought Roblox graphics were bad, but minecraft looked like a space abomination Borg disaster. Kids have no taste these days.

    Got to be honest, I think the original Mario and Sonic sucks kind of. But still they had a level of production value and richness of characters that just aren't replicated in modern games. The Mario music is still special to this day, and the mario atmosphere is really its own world, most modern games just don't have that level of artistry in their games.

    The very first FPS game I played was Heretic and both Doom and Nightfire seemed like a downgrade.
    This is actually an objective statement because, Nightfire was made with the Half-life engine and half-life knocked my socks off. Although I enjoyed Nightfire there are simply objective reasons why it is not as good as Half-life.

    Really your argument for a good modern fps is COD? This is sad.
    Don't even get me started on how bad COD is.

    Battlefield is also bad as well, especially Battlefield 4. Though I haven't played Battlefield 1 yet.

    And lets talk about the abomination that is Enemy Territory Wolfenstein, and how they turned a good Quake3 engine game into another modern disasterpiece.
    Consider what it really implies. Generic gameplay and interactions. Proc gen levels that have no artists touch. Overburdened artists who resort to generic applications in order to compensate for the massive size of the project.
    And yes even know a days they are making games on xbox one that are even laggier than the n64, sad but true.

    Yes and now rather than fine tuning they resort to the same old formulas and generic pre-made gameplay.

    This argument wasn't a luddite argument about badmouthing technology. It was more about how game devs nowadays lack the talent to make good games, and that technology seems to losing emphasis on user-friendlyness so that people lack the skill to understand how to properly use it.

    You are very confused about this.
    First I dont use mouse and keyboard, I use a gamepad with analog.
    Second of all, the slap on the face is to themselves, with games like Goldeneye Wii, TimeSplitters, and Perfect Dark Zero tainting their ancient legacy.
    Second your argument is borderline luddite, saying Goldeneye is better played without 60 fps framerate, and with eye-watering graphics that give you a migraine.
    The N64 controller n of itself was a terrible design in terms of ergonomics.


    Finally lets talk about how when I walk into Family Video, to rent some games, and yet for xbox one there are no good games to rent, and no games which pique my interest.
    Lets also talk about the modern disasterpiece known as Gears of War, which is a multiplayer only game because the campaign is litterally only pieced together by the story, and if you aren't into the story then you will find yourself very bored just hiding in cover and waiting for the auto-regen system to nurse you back to health as you navigate your way through endlessly linear levels. Except that this style of gameplay is the rule not the exception, all games follow this format nowadays, all the new bond games, COD games, 3rd person games, Halo games all follow this same boring format. Walk through a linear level, take cover and just wait for your health to recharge, rinse and repeat.
     
    Last edited: Jul 11, 2018
  7. GMWolf

    GMWolf aka fel666

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2016
    Posts:
    3,123
    So iplayed metroid prime 1 back in the day, its was good. (quite good). I them played prime 3 (never got my hand on echoes). Very fun too, ithough the wii controls where a bit... eh.
    Went back to prime 1 on gamecude... GOD AWEFUL! seriously, its not that good. Sure the setting is good, but the graphics couldnt display the richness.
    Sure the action and puzzles was good, the the controls would just frustrate you straight away.
    I mean, I think i enjoyed playing the ds version more than the GC version...
    OK, that game was dope, and aged resonably well, but the single player campaign was a little lackluster. (but man did i love that game).

    Check out nier automata, thats fairly rencent, and quite artistic. So is the witcher 3 too. in fact, many games manage to convey a lot of atmosphere even today!
    OH, FROSTPUNK, man, its a strategy/city building game, and yet it still has far more atmosphere than any game i have played to date!
    ah, also overwatch, the character design is really good.

    That's not an objective statement.

    Actually COD and BAttlefield offer very solid online experiences, if thats what you are looking for. If not they would not be nearly as popular as they are today. And even the single player experience is good if not unimaginative.
    Again, just because they rehash the same franchise does not make them worst games. If we where to judge them purely on their quality as games, you have to agree that they are refining the genre quite well.

    Well, thats just bad proc gen. but actually we see a lot of good proc gen, where the artist have gone in and tweaked, built and assemble.
    its would be impossible for an artists to place every blade of grass in a 16x16 km world afterall.


    It feels like you are trying to hate just to hate.
    You may not like COD and Battlefield. Online shooters may just not be your thing, I know its not my thing. But the truth is that they are very well crafted games.
     
    Toque likes this.
  8. GMWolf

    GMWolf aka fel666

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2016
    Posts:
    3,123
    thats not true whatsoever.
    Play some overwatch, play some frostpunk, play some... *opens steam library* ... niere automata, play some PUBG (not be cause its super good, but because it doesnt follow the same format), play any fighting game, play some GTA V (wow, 5 years already?), play some kingdome, play some KSP, Motorsport manager, planet coaster, Elite dangerous, play some Civilization... the list goeas on quite a bit.

    Most of those are great games, and all of them have a different format!
     
  9. MishMash

    MishMash Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2016
    Posts:
    362
    This topic is tiresome, idk why i'm bothering to reply but Misty, you need to check yourself, seriously.. First of all, my entire post was built off the premise of how good/bad games is entirely perceived by your own current situation at that given time. You said it yourself YOU thought Nightfire was a downgrade. I had no frame of reference, so to me, the game WAS good. Similarly, as I said CoD:MW2 was the VERY FIRST modern AAA game I played. For me, it was a huge step up at the time because only a week before, I was still playing PS2 games. Let me also add that if you read my post, nowhere did I hail it as the best shooter of all time or even claim it to be a benchmark for modern shooters. I said it was amazing to me at the time, because it was, and still is a quality game. Regardless of whether its the best or worst, there is a certain amount of production quality that goes into a title like that, and especially if its your first major gaming experience as far as entering the world of modern games is concerned, its going to feel great to you.

    This point particularly resonated with me in the wrong way. I think its naive and rude to claim that games these days lack talent. Who are you to judge that? Making blind assumptions is incorrect, and in general, there are far too many people who assume developers are bad because they "don't make optimizations like they used to". As someone who has a rather indepth understanding of computer graphics and high performance computing, I can safely tell you that sure, the way optimiastions are done are definitely not the same anymore, however if you ever tried to write your own engine from scratch in C++, you would be amazed by what modern developers pull off. People don't quite realise how well modern games really do run, and this is just a byproduct of the standard being so high, that everyone begins assuming its the norm.

    The well-optimised games of the past did used to stand out far more, but while that was definitely a reflection of a few exceptional studios, it was also a reflection of the fact that the "average" developer was not as good at optimising a game. The lines are far far far closer now between modern major AAA studios than ever before, and it's sad that we've gotten to a point where developers who under-optimise slightly are instantly branded as incompetent. I know that No Man's Sky was a bit of a flop, and an easy example to use in this case, but equally a bit of an exception.

    But yeah, i'm done with this topic, don't want to make a personal attack against you, but this is just a portrayal of an entitled, bitter and arrogant consumer who cannot see the bigger picture and attacks anyone who says differently. Though fair enough, you are well within your right to dislike gaming right now, but I can tell you that I personally love it, and I know millions of other people do as well.
     
    HayManMarc, chance and GMWolf like this.
  10. chance

    chance predictably random Forum Staff Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2016
    Posts:
    718
    This is an interesting area for discussion. I had a similar discussion recently about classic vs. modern cinema. Many of the observations made here apply to that as well.

    It would be disappointing to close this topic, after so many excellent posts. I hope we can avoid that.
     
  11. Siolfor the Jackal

    Siolfor the Jackal Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2016
    Posts:
    513
    Firstly, Timesplitters was excellent and a great continuation of the work the guys had done on Goldeneye and Perfect Dark(Most of the original devs for those left Rare to form Free Radical, who made Timesplitters). And the people responsible for PDZ and the Goldeneye remake were not the same people who made the originals so great.
    And I'm not confused about anything, I never mentioned frame rates or anything, I don't really care that much about them until they are a problem(which was only in intense scenes anyway so no big deal), and I said presumably because I didn't see you say what you used.(Though to be fair, with a bit of tinkering it works pretty well with mouse and keyboard controls). My point was mostly about controls. In the day, those controls were perfect, and the only reason they aren't now is because we're used to a new twinstick layout.
    I had a friend in high school who was amazing at Goldeneye on N64, it was one of the only games he played. A few years ago, I met up with him after a long time and thought it would be fun to play a few rounds with him. I loaded up the emulator and since he really hadn't played many games since then, he chose to use my N64 controller. I thought I would stomp him with my 360 controller setup but he still had a mastery of that controller which the game was designed around.
    (nothing wrong with the controller either, the ergonomics were good enough that part of it was the base for the Wii Nunchaku).

    And if you're missing F-Zero and the likes, try Fast Racing RMX on Wii U or Switch.

    There are still plenty of good games being made now, but there are also a lot of games spread across various systems so it can be more trouble to find them. You're very hung up on the ones you consider bad, it doesn't really sound like you have tried to find good new games because you've already decided that all new games must suck because you don't enjoy these handful of newer games you keep comparing to old ones that you did enjoy.
     
  12. Smiechu

    Smiechu Member

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2017
    Posts:
    589
    OK, so on Wikipedia there is couple of rankings (unfortunately can't say how much precise and competent they are), which would add a objective factor to the discussion. In case of computer games the only objective factor can be the no. of sold copies, and or net income.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_video_games
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_video_game_franchises

    The ranking below is more subjective based on journalists opinion, but I would say it's quite reasonable:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_video_games_considered_the_best

    I'll leave you with interpretation of this.
    For sure era 1993 - 2001 is a complete explosion of gaming industry, with new genres popping every year, and massive investments of game developers / producers. 2002 - 2010 is the era of sequels. 2010 - now - is era of "oddities" (Minecraft, Pokemon Go).

    What I would like to add to the discussion and what was couple of times stated - the market is over-saturated, and all of the game genres are already explored in every possible direction. It's very hard to came up with something "astonishing".
    The gaming industry needs a "kick", something similar to technology break through in late 90'. Many people thought VR would be such a kick (I also hoped so), but surprisingly it's not getting thru, or am I missing something?? I would be really thrilled to play some nice space RTS with gameplay designed strictly for VR.

    On the other hand, the audience is changing, and it's not the same as 25 years ago. Kids today are thrilled with Minecraft - game stripped of any deeper emotions and purpose, or even worse they have no will to play the games and just watch on YT how other people play (wtf????!!!!). The adult audience raised on games in it's classic form (single player - gamplay - challenge - story - objective) doesn't have time to play games. One or two titles / year is quite much for a average adult video game fan.
     
  13. Morendral

    Morendral Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2016
    Posts:
    322
    Imo, vr didn't take off (and probably never will) for a couple of reasons.

    First, most people don't want to buy extra hardware, like a joystick. Unless you are playing a flight sim and are really into it, you won't bother. Same with a headset.

    Second, you lose all sense of the outside world. Most people don't want to be trapped in a small box for a long time.

    Third, you can't control your whole computer from it's interface, so it's annoying to switch from any special hand held controls to keyboard and mouse, much the same way that bad controls on a game here are chastised if it is keyboard only and has mouse necessary for menus.

    I don't disagree with your sentiment though. The games industry does need a lock in the pants, and I believe it is because too many developers seek out or are pushed to make their market as broad as it can be, as opposed to developing for a niche sector like they did in the past. The ones that do that though, cough Bethesda cough, make the best games ever and keep improving with each iteration.
     
  14. RichHopelessComposer

    RichHopelessComposer Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2016
    Posts:
    1,282
    Have to disagree with this. Mario *still* destroys basically every other platformer that comes out, critically and financially. 30 years on top of the heap proves how great it is and how talented Nintendo's developers are. Mario wouldn't be "just another" platformer no matter when it released. The *very first one* is simple enough that it would have the toughest time catching attention, but even that one has such great physics and game feel, that I think it'd do very well. The rest of the Mario games are so good that they'd *easily* make big splashes, even released today; Mario 3, three decades old, is still one of the best games ever made.

    Have to call bull**** on the "it's just nostalgia" crowd, too. I'm playing half these retro games for the first time *now,* and they're still amazing games. Fantastic game design is timeless. There's a reason classic games are classics. Most of them are so well designed that they'll never get old. At least to people who give them a fair chance.
     
    Last edited: Jul 12, 2018
    Toque and HayManMarc like this.
  15. Toque

    Toque Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2017
    Posts:
    575
    Thank-you.

    Misty says Mario kind of sucks but then goes on about the great things about it.

    I would like him to give an “objective” list of all the flaws of Mario brothers. Haha.

    I still play it on the DS and Miyamoto still blows my mind. There is so much genius in that game. Zelda, Donkey Kong a couple other of his crappy games.

    I think there are gems in every generation.
     
  16. Orak

    Orak Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2016
    Posts:
    58
    In the end, opinion about a game is fondamently subjective. What makes a game good or bad is up to you. My little cousin won't enjoy Goldeneye and I don't blame him, he'll prefer to play Minecraft which has a lot of qualities too! If I don't like a game, it doesn't mean the game is bad. I even surprised myself enjoying games like rocket league. I had it for free with my graphic card and I find it very entertaining and competitive. The concept is simple but very effective and original. I didn't use to play online games (I had a crappy laptop) but today it is a big thing and I understand why. It wasn't the case in the 90's.

    What is an old game by the way? Minecraft is pretty old.
    And what are we talking about? AAA games? Today everybody who own a computer can create a game. 10 years ago, it wasnt possible. And every year more games are on the market. I think it is a good era for videogame (not for indie dev but that is another topic) I've so many games i would like to play but i can't, i don't have enough time. And I still go back to older games sometimes, emulators are great for that.

    I played so many great new games this year, and they are all very different. While I m quite disapointed to find every time the same skill trees and boring items to pick up in quite a lot of AAA games, I honestly don't care I just don't play them. I find games that suits me better for cheaper. And if it sold well, it is because quite a lot of people enjoy it. They will need to be more creative anyway, I don't think it will work like that for ever... I'm pretty sure players will get bored of it.
     
    Khao likes this.
  17. Dragon Studios

    Dragon Studios Member

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2016
    Posts:
    8
    I'll just say that while the 90s gave us gems like Ocarina of Time and The Lion King, they also gave us this...
    [​IMG]
     
    Guest User and Bentley like this.
  18. Misty

    Misty Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2016
    Posts:
    840
    Seriously? Because Metroid Prime had better graphics than Halo 1 in my opinion.
    Also, the internet says metroid prime trilogy looks worse than the originals.
    Kind of like how the perfect dark remake looked worse because they put photoshop filters over the original textures.

    Really? Because the ds graphics were objectively worse than the gamecube versions.
    So I don't think you are being very objective.

    The single player campaign got boring because you already know the story and item placement.
    Contrast this to modern games, which are just boring inherently when you even first start playing.

    Those are the exceptions not the rule. Square Enix is one of the few companies you can count on nowadays to create an immersive experience.

    Anyone who thinks Nightfire is better than Half-life is not an objective game reviewer.

    Solid as in a solid turd of constipation.

    Ah, argument ad popularum. Use it to prove religion for me.
    Redefining it, not refining it. What cod has done to the FPS genre is what the News has done to objective reality.

    Look how good COD is. All games now have a stupid X graphic when you make a hit. And have awkward aiming that relies on constant quickscoping.
    And have hordes of camouflaged, eye-straining enemies that just blend in with the environment while they swarm you around and you just, hide in a corner and wait for your health to regenerate.
    Such fun. Dont even get me started on how broken the killstreaks turn the game into.
    Most world gen nowadays is as bland and soulless as it gets.

    Online shooters are my thing. Well at least before COD took over the industry.
    Well crafted?
    Not really when they just reuse the same game over and over and just put in different graphics and items.


    Timesplitters is garb, the level editor makes levels that look like garb, and the gunplay is garb, you just shoot slow bullets that look stupid. It lacks any kind of serious feeling or visceral feeling to the gameplay, plus the music sucks and is stupid.


    You must be joking.
    You mean the same Mario that has physics like he is walking on ICE (even when he is walking on grass) and AI that is so predictable and boring it makes Big Rigs look like a technical achievement?

    Exactly.
    And I've tried to give modern games a fair chance, but they all bore me to tears.
    Except then I get told that deep down I secretly love modern games.
    I can count the amount of modern games I can even tolerate playing for more than 5 minutes, on no more than 2 hands.


    I already stated the N64 version doesn't count. Did you offer him the PC version or the n64? Who would want to play 320x240 eyesore graphics? Nausea is a valid argument, except it isn't valid in your case because I specifically said we are discussing the PC emulated version of goldeneye, and its getting old since I had to say that 5x over the course of this discussion already.
    And yes Minecraft has bad graphics and looks like literal trash.

    It is a generation stripped of its soul. South Park discusses this new phenomenon:
    http://southpark.cc.com/full-episodes/s18e09-rehash
    (Note: The episode has been removed and you must pay money to watch it.)
     
    Last edited: Jul 12, 2018
  19. Smiechu

    Smiechu Member

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2017
    Posts:
    589
    I've already seen it. THX :D
    (Note: Not if you live in Germany, Poland, or some other EU country :p )
     
  20. RichHopelessComposer

    RichHopelessComposer Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2016
    Posts:
    1,282
    You most be joking. Go and try to make a platformer that plays better than old-ass, over-thirty-year old OG Mario. It should be easy with over three decades of reference material and GML. Go ahead. I'll wait. :p
     
    Toque likes this.
  21. GMWolf

    GMWolf aka fel666

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2016
    Posts:
    3,123
    I played the original, on the GameCube.
    Not because of graphics, because of playability, and controls.


    Item placement in Fzero...
    Fzero is not about the item placement.
    It's not even about story really.

    Again, that was the case in the past.
    Games in the past were terrible just like today, but you it remember the good ones, because that are the one we ended up playing most.
    People believimg in something, does not make it true.

    But a game selling well, and being well recieved amongst he player base is direct evidence of a game being good.

    Again, not saying the studios are better.

    But if you look at the individual titles, in isolation, they are very good titles.

    Now granted, I do agree that, especially in COD, studio s could inovation a bit more, or just make new IPs.
    But that doesn't change that the games themselves are quite good.

    Think of new gamers, maybe trying out their first FPS, will they have more fun with the first COD, or the latest COD?
     
  22. BaBiA Game Studio

    BaBiA Game Studio Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2016
    Posts:
    604
    Unfortunately, neither are you:
    All of those above are your opinions. There are a lot of people that will love games that you hate, just the same as you love games that others hate. It is the way things are. If everyone loved exactly the same stuff, the world would be boring and there would be no innovation - because what would be the point?
    Yes, the current game.
    And you are entitled to your opinion about it. Exactly as everyone else is entitled to their opinion - like I fail to see anything about the Metroid games that is entertaining to me. Also my opinion on this:
    Although I have never played Nightfire, I did think that Half-Life sucked when I played it as soon as it came out. It just didn't appeal to me back then. That's my opinion, and I know that a lot of people think differently to me on HL - yet I don't try to change their minds about it, because it is only my opinion.
    You do know that Doom came out first, right? So of course there is a likelihood that it will not match the quality of Heretic. Heretic was built from the original Doom engine, and included a lot of modifications to it.

    I have been playing games for >35 years now and have seen the innovation of games from way back when players were a pixel/square, and marvelled at the changes that came along (even though the FMV era of gaming too, which the majority were bad but innovative). You may get to points where gameplay innovation slows down and makes way for technical, graphical, atmospheric/storytelling advancements and that is all good. Then you get another resurgence in gameplay which helps ramp things up to the next phase of innovation. Then you get those developers and publishers that just want to keep pumping out the same games over and over (looking at you COD, Battlefield, Assassins Creed) with minor changes/updates to the gameplay, and that gets into people's heads that things have stagnated in the games industry - and that is simply because those can be the biggest IPs which the majority of people will know.
     
    PlayerOne likes this.
  23. HayManMarc

    HayManMarc Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2016
    Posts:
    758
    I think I kinda see where Misty is coming from. Back in the late 90's/early 2000's, I had a PlayStation, then a PC. I remember the RTS was huge (warcraft, command & conquer), other isometric games (simcity, diablo), the Sims was just taking off, racing games were becoming fantastic (Gran Turismo), and FPS was gaining in popularity.

    I remember being put off by the industry trying to make everything 3D, because 3D was popular. A lot of titles suffered, IMO, because the gameplay was changed too drastically. (making a 2D platformer into a 3D, 360 degree "platformer", as one example) A lot of these games just never felt right to me, and seemed "forced" by the company that produced them.

    Magic oriented games were boasting "1000's of spells!" (sorry, who has time to sift thru that many options?) and previous titles were adding content instead of gameplay or story arc. (Unit types in RTS games, weapon choices in shooters.) These just made the games that felt fun to me become overly complicated.

    Then, everything started becoming First-Person. Everything from mech warriors to cartoon characters, and mmo's took over. Everything was 3D, FPS and super competitive. You couldn't play a game without cheats and a high end PC or you'd be killed instantly, unless you spent weeks (or months) practicing the game. It was too much like a job, and the fun was being lost (to me). Most of these games were pretty much the same thing....running around in a limited space and shooting/axeing people.

    Story arcs were always linear. Many games made you play a certain character and put you through a single story. If you played again, you played the same thing again. It didn't change. That's kinda what I loved about SimCity... the gameplay remained constant, but you would always end up with a new city in the end. I guess, in story arc type games, it's just too hard to incorporate alternate story lines and endings.

    I think that is the biggest next step for gaming that hasn't really happened yet. If someone can create a game that can truly progress according to the player's actions and decisions, altering the course of the story line, they'd be on the road to million$.

    However, all that being said, these comments are still from my own point of view and based on my own likes and dislikes. Still subjective opinions.
     
    Last edited: Jul 12, 2018
  24. PlayerOne

    PlayerOne Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2018
    Posts:
    252
    From reading this thread I wonder if it's not that newer games suck but whether the games feel less diverse and more bog standard as the industry as a whole are just chasing trends and not actually creating experiences from a place of art?

    All games are good or bad and can be subjective by a players taste. For me, I always enjoyed games that tried to do their own thing whether the game was actually Good, bad or weird and not chasing trends like COD or Battlefield which are bland / boring experiences all around.

    That said the mark of a bad game these days - from a console players perspective - if it has a day one patch that requires it to run. Argh.
     
  25. Bentley

    Bentley Member

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2017
    Posts:
    576
    Loved Ocarina of Time. And if you're talking about The Lion King movie, loved that too : ) (I think I remember a Lion King game, but I couldn't tell you whether I liked it or not, it was too long ago).
     
  26. Misty

    Misty Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2016
    Posts:
    840
    Thats actually a decent argument, unlike most of the other arguments here. But still, lukewarm games suck. Even if modern games are just lukewarm, who wants to play a lukewarm game, it feels like a chore.

    So DS controls didn't suck? And what about the game was more playable than Prime?


    Was not talking about F-Zero, thought that was obvious.

    No I draw comparisons. For instance, Wave Race 64 compared to that Racing Utopia on the Xbox.
    Hydro Thunder Hurricane compared to that Hydro Thunder ripoff game.
    Mario Golf compared to xbox one golf.
    Sure the tech is better but the games feel dead.

    So if a religion is popular, that is evidence of the religion being real?
    Or maybe just evidence they are good at fooling people to buy into it.

    Cod games are not good, they really are not good.

    I remember COD 2 being the only cod that evoked any kind of positive emotion out of me.



    World without innovation? Sounds a lot like modern games to me.


    If you fail to see why the metroid games and half-life are universally held as good games by almost every game reviewer, then maybe its you who's not being objective.


    Yes but DOOM 2 was still worse than Heretic. And also the sequels to Heretic has less shooting and were a downgrade. hexen got 3.7/10 on ign. heretic got listed in the top 100 of all time.
    Surely the IGN reviewers are objective game reviewers?
     
    Last edited: Jul 12, 2018
  27. RichHopelessComposer

    RichHopelessComposer Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2016
    Posts:
    1,282
    Sales don't prove anything, though.
    Otherwise McDonald's would be the best restaurant in the world, some ****ty rap star would be the best "musician," and Fortnite would be the best game.

    That's all trash, obviously. The most popular stuff in the world is the most popular stuff in the world because it appeals to the lowest common denominator. Read: idiots with no taste.

    Not that McDonald's or Fortnite can *only* be enjoyed by idiots, obviously. Just that when you include idiots in your sales plans, your potential audience is suddenly much, much larger, hahah. Nothing to do with the actual quality of your product sometimes.

    I'd rely on Metacritic/Gamerankings scores way before sales. Even that is subjective (and critics suck sometimes), but at least they're reviews by people with a lot of experience (and hopefully love) for the medium.
     
    Last edited: Jul 12, 2018
    Misty and HayManMarc like this.
  28. Smiechu

    Smiechu Member

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2017
    Posts:
    589
    Of course not. But it's the only objective factor which could be taken into account, everything else is a purely subjective opinion.

    Talking about South Park!!! Stick of Truth is a very cool game. I really loved it. Simple, uncomplicated, fun. I've didn't play The Fractured But Whole, but I assume the gamaplay is similar, only the story is new.
     
  29. PlayerOne

    PlayerOne Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2018
    Posts:
    252
    As Zero Punctuation would put it: More money than sense.

    Resident Evil 6 is the prime example of that problem. Appealing to to many people (casual, hardcore, old school, etc) and ended up falling on it's sword for how inconsistent of tone it came across. Mercenaries mode was the only highlight sadly. That said this industry and the games it churns out has become that: appealing to a larger audience. Money over art which would be my core argument for the problem and why games come off as similar and samey instead of unique and fun.

    Black Ops 4 is poised to be the new Resident Evil 6 in that regard.

    Can't blame you there. Still lukewarm games have their moments. Walking Dead survival Instinct springs to mind.
     
    Misty and RichHopelessComposer like this.
  30. Samuel Venable

    Samuel Venable Time Killer

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2016
    Posts:
    946
    Why games are getting worse not better: as Indie game developers grow in number, more people working on a lower budget and hobbyists come into the market, younger developers join the scene, inexperienced and non-talented, uninspired gamers become game makers, and thus the industry is overrun by crap-ware, making the good AAA games get outnumbered by such turds. Less games find originality as time goes on; this is true with good and bad games alike.

    Also game popularity does depend on trends, not actual game quality. Just look at Flappy Bird: 100% trend. 0% quality. Enough said.
     
    Last edited: Jul 13, 2018
    HayManMarc and PlayerOne like this.
  31. BaBiA Game Studio

    BaBiA Game Studio Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2016
    Posts:
    604
    I never said I was being objective, I clearly said that it was my opinion. Also, if you cannot see that there are games nowadays that rate better than those (and are heralded by almost every game reviewer, then you are also not being objective). As with everything every single person is posting - including you - we are stating our opinions. Or opinions are not objective, because it is based on each of our personal feelings towards something. Just because you say something does not make it true for everyone. I could say that coffee is the best thing in the world. Just because I say that does not make it true (especially if there are people that have an aversion to coffee), and I am certainly not being objective as I am a bit of a caffeine addict - I am merely stating my opinion. You are also stating your opinions throughout this topic but you are claiming that because you say it, it is objective and therefore the total truth about something.

    Again, that is your opinion. And you never mentioned DOOM 2, you said DOOM was a downgrade from Heretic - not that DOOM 2 was a downgrade from Heretic (again in your opinion).

    In your opinion. A lack of innovation would have meant that we would never have progressed from single-screen 2D platformers to 3D. We would also never have innovated from First Person to 3rd Person perspective. And aside from graphical innovations, we would never have storytelling at greater depths that rival stories told in movies and TV (if not deeper and more complex), which also allows the player to feel like they are actually influencing the narrative - even if this is actually only at a minimal scale compared with the overarching story. Without innovation in depth of story we would not be in a world where games are now considered art in their own right, and have budgets that are on par with films.

    I think that no matter what anybody says in this topic, you will find ways to still say that you are right and that nobody is being objective (even when you yourself are not objective in the matter).
     
  32. CleanWater

    CleanWater Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2018
    Posts:
    48
    Well, time changes.

    I still think that Sonic (Mega Drive) and Super Mario World (NES) are great compared to the newest versions I played later. But most people will complain about things like the lack of Save and Load.

    The fact is these games were made to "not be saved". Every time you play again, and tries to discover new paths, you will discover new things on these paths. Unlike newer 2D platformers that are just straight forward. All of this was part of the game design itself, even being due to a limitation of that time. That's (IMO) why using Save States might ruin the purpose of these games, and many newcomers from this generation won't get the whole greatness of what Sonic and Mario used to be.

    Now, we have save and load on games, so, what's the point in finding the "easiest" path, or the path that leads to a "secret extra life", more "continues", a warp point to later leves, etc?
    You don't need none of these anymore, you can just "continue" from the last save.

    If you decide to try this old Sonic/Mario recipe, everyone will complain, because they are used to the save and load system on new games.

    People don't care to think "what's behind this" from the game design's perspective. For me, it's sad, because it narrows your possibilities as a designer. You always will be "stuck" with some newer trends, no matter what.
     
    Toque likes this.
  33. Roman P.

    Roman P. Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2017
    Posts:
    211
    I always thought that older games were better till quite recently (past 5-odd) years
    nowadays you get a lot of great quality/innovative stuff that you couldn't imagine back then and also you get simply good games by that 'old' standard.

    there was such a drought of quality 2d games starting around 95 till 2010 till indies picked up the slack.
    everything had to be 3D 3D 3D! then came the flash and early '00 mobile games... dark ages
     
    HayManMarc likes this.
  34. RichHopelessComposer

    RichHopelessComposer Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2016
    Posts:
    1,282
    Sales are the direct results of people's tastes, or worse, fads. They're just as subjective, if not more so, than a Metacritic score, and definitely less accurate in judging how good a game is.
    1998, lol.

    Most of the nineties, actually. That decade was an explosion of amazing games and new genres. Halo and Fable came and basically faded already. Metroid, Mario, and Zelda are still here (and still amazing.) The 90s really were fantastic for games. PS2 era was great, too. I think we took a huge dip the last ten years, and now we're recovering again. The last few years have been pretty great again, thanks in large part to Nintendo suddenly entering ultra instinct mode. :'D

    Not just Nintendo, though. The whole industry as a whole has been seriously picking up these last few years. I've been excited about games again for the first time in a very long time.
     
    Last edited: Jul 13, 2018
  35. PlayerOne

    PlayerOne Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2018
    Posts:
    252
    Yet I want to point that the first half of those 10 years saw lots of new IP's in the 360, Wii, and PS3 era. Crackdown, AC, Resistance, Valkyria Chronicles, Uncharted, Left 4 Dead, Portal, Bioshock, Saints row, and more. Between 2007 to 2011 were great for games. Great franchises when introduced but it wasn't until around the later half of the last generation did things start going down hill with more companies playing it safe and releasing more well established franchises instead of creating new ones. With Activision-Blizzard kicking things off by playing it safe with releasing COD every year.
     
  36. RichHopelessComposer

    RichHopelessComposer Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2016
    Posts:
    1,282
    We have different tastes in games, I think, hahah. I think what you listed is a pretty bad five years. L4D, Portal, and VC (from what I've seen, never played it) are great, but the rest range from mediocre to pretty good, but not amazing. I think just *last year* was ten times better than half that decade. :x
     
  37. PlayerOne

    PlayerOne Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2018
    Posts:
    252
    I see your point. My argument wasn't about taste but about games that carved their own unique identity instead of following trends.
     
    RichHopelessComposer likes this.
  38. Misty

    Misty Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2016
    Posts:
    840
    Incorrect. An opinion is like saying coffee, or minecraft, is good. Maybe its good for you, but not for me.
    A fact is like saying, water, or pizza, is good and healthy. If you dont eat meat eat a veggie pizza. If you dont eat gluten eat a gluten free pizza. But the bottom line is, eat pizza. Everybody likes pizza. Even my mom likes pizza. And she doesn't like hardly anything. If you dont like pizza I can guarantee you are an unhappy person. Maybe you are not obsessed with pizza, and you dont eat pizza everyday. But I can guarantee if someone hands you a pizza, you will enjoy it.
    Yeah but in the last few years where are the innovations?

    New Super Mario Bros IS garb. I mean it is. Give me the old mario anyday.

    Greatness as in a masochism fest.



    Last 5 years the games have been terrible and lackluster.

    No I'm pretty sure its just Nintendo.

    All of those games are garb except for Portal. AC is extreme garb so is crackdown, my cousin told me it is so.
    Also left 4 dead is extreme garb. Bioshock has a nice story but the demo had gunplay that was so lackluster I can't even remember what it was like.
    Valkyria Chronicles looks kind of good though.
     
  39. Samuel Venable

    Samuel Venable Time Killer

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2016
    Posts:
    946
     
  40. BaBiA Game Studio

    BaBiA Game Studio Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2016
    Posts:
    604
    Your opinion. not fact.
    Opinion, not fact or objective - you are telling us your opinion on something, not showing an objective stance to explain how/why something is not as good as everyone claims.
    Opinion. Where are your facts? What, objectively, determines if a year is "lacklustre"? Where are the non-biased, factual, definitions showing that these years have not been anywhere near as good as any of the last 30-40 years of gaming?
    Opinion, not fact. Also one of those is not even your opinion, it is the opinion of your cousin.

    With all of your statements that you are trying to tell us are objective - where are the facts that show, objectively, that what you are saying is anything other than your personal opinion?
     
  41. Misty

    Misty Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2016
    Posts:
    840
    Pizza is a fact.

    Pizza is inherently good for the soul. Good gaming is inherently good for the soul.

    My heart tells me.
    When my cousin says a game is garb, you can be rest assured that it's garb. He said Shadowrun was garb back in the day when it was still hype. And low and behold, now they realize it is garb.

    Because I knew France would win the soccer cup.
     
  42. BaBiA Game Studio

    BaBiA Game Studio Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2016
    Posts:
    604
    As suspected, this topic will basically never go anywhere as long as @Misty is able to say what is and is not fact - and I would suspect that it could end up in Off Topic as it has absolutely nothing to do with factual information of what is and is not good over the last 40 years of gaming.

    Hey what do you know, I just made a fact (because I say it is one). And just like Misty because I feel that it is a fact, it must be true for everyone in the world therefore is an objective statement that nobody can contradict because I said so. :eek:
     
    Morendral and Toque like this.
  43. Toque

    Toque Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2017
    Posts:
    575
    His cousin would disagree and what ever his cousin says is fact. That’s a fact.

    An interesting topic but logic really has gone down the rabbit hole.
     
    Last edited: Jul 13, 2018
    BaBiA Game Studio likes this.
  44. BaBiA Game Studio

    BaBiA Game Studio Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2016
    Posts:
    604
    How dare you contradict my obviously factual fact?! o_O
    I call garb on your statement. :D
     
  45. Toque

    Toque Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2017
    Posts:
    575
    Funny.

    Yeah this is one Schrodinger's box I wish I had not opened and jumped into. The box smelled funny from the start.

    Interesting topic but I think I won’t participate.
    I am a retro game guy so I’m glad I’m not the only one who loves those games.
     
    Last edited: Jul 13, 2018
  46. RichHopelessComposer

    RichHopelessComposer Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2016
    Posts:
    1,282
    Mostly, yeah. They're pulling enough weight for everyone right now, though. :'D
     
  47. GMWolf

    GMWolf aka fel666

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2016
    Posts:
    3,123
    You guys are getting confused between what is a good, or what is a good franchise or studio.

    If a game does not innovate more, or does not make the game itself garb.
    The game should be judged individually.
    Otherwise someone who plays a lot of TF2 would have to judge overwatch really poorly, just because they are stuck of the genre. That's not how we would be judging games. (Studios is another story).

    If a game becomes a fad, it must have done something right.
    If a game is bought by one person, then it's down so subjective taste.
    But if a game is bought by many, it means many people think it's good.
    If a have appeals to many people, I think it's safe to say it was a success; it was a good game. If you don't like it you are the odd one out.

    That being said, we also need to look at target audience, etc.
    If we look at games for young kids. I wouldn't say I personally enjoy them. To me, it's not a good game. But if kids like them, if it speaks to them as a whole, the game is objectively good.

    Let's look at cod. I don't personally enjoy it that much. I'm happy playing black ops with my brother from time to time, but I wouldn't buy the have and play every day.
    That being said, the game is solds. The controls are good, the maps are good, the mechanics are good, there is a wide variety of guns. It's a very well crafted game, and I have lots of fun when I do play it.
    Although I wouldn't personally but the game, black ops 2 is also very good, the zombie mode is improved, there are new maps, the controls are as solid as ever... It's also a very good game (slightly better than the first black ops). (Though, I would nt buy the second of I already had the first)

    Now it's still not a game I would play avidly, it's just not my style, but it doesn't stop me from enjoying the game for what it's worth.


    Its due that of you start judging a game by things like the charters, or the storyline, you are not going to like many of the games that come out today, that's because many of those games are not about that, they are about the action, the multiplayer experiences, etc.

    When judging a game, you have to keep in mind who is for, what it's trying to do. Not just "do I like it".
     
  48. Toque

    Toque Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2017
    Posts:
    575
    I think you got it. “Experience”!

    How else can you explain McDonald’s?
    It’s a good experience. It’s not only the food your judging.

    Do you play a game just for the music? Probably not.

    I played Fortnite and I thought ok I get why millions of people are playing this. It’s a pretty good gaming experience.

    I don’t like rap music but I get why some people do. But it’s much easier to say music today sucks.

    Movies. I watch a successful movie and think “that was dreadful”.
    Is it really bad movie? Are the masses right all the time?

    Does Misty and ‘his’ cousin got it right? The masses are the stupid ones?

    I played Adventure for the Atari for hours and hours. Loved it. It was a great experience. How do you even start to compare a game like that to any game today?

    Where does Adventure or pitfall fall in the world of Misty?

    I think if you want to objectively judge a game you need to outline the exact PARAMETERS you are comparing.
     
    Last edited: Jul 13, 2018
    GMWolf likes this.
  49. Alessio

    Alessio Member

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2016
    Posts:
    109
    Pretty much right, but i hate to see certain games that are actually average but are hailed as the greastest masterpieces of all time only because "im wojak muh feelz", because the storylines "made them cry", and actually force others to say they are objectively right. Some of these games are actually good for very different reasons, but others just get an undeserved reputation. Not nice. To be fair i'm even tired of seeing these kind of themes in games, even in fine ones. To me, less story means more focus on gameplay and experience.
     
    RichHopelessComposer and GMWolf like this.
  50. Toque

    Toque Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2017
    Posts:
    575
    But gameplay is part of the experience! You can’t separate the two!

    Story line is part of the experience.

    Emotional connection is part of the experience you can’t separate the two.



    I think I’ve concluded for myself that that Misty is wrong. There are no facts.
    Art IS a emotional experience and is impossible to objectively compare the two without personal bias and opinion.

    If it was!!!!! We could easily pick the best game ever made and all agree on it.


    That’s never going to happen.

    Now that’s a fact.........

    Or could we?
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice