|
|
| Page 2 of 4 |
|
|
 Posted: Fri, 14th Oct 2011 02:19 Post subject: |
|
 |
| sabin1981 wrote: | | every single person who says "nostalgia, lolololol" is a fucking scummy graphics whore |
Guess you include me there? since I used the word nostalgia
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nerrd
Posts: 3607
Location: Poland / USA
|
| Posted: Fri, 14th Oct 2011 02:19 Post subject: |
|
|
Wow. Just wow. I'll stop here.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Epsilon
Dr. Strangelove
Posts: 9240
Location: War Room
|
| Posted: Fri, 14th Oct 2011 02:23 Post subject: |
|
|
| korkin wrote: | But seriously why not pick a year and start listing good games that came out that year and all the other games that came out that year(should be just a number of released titles minus the number of good games) and do the same for the next year, etc, etc till we get to 2010
edit for sabins edit: never claimed sales equaled quality |
Pick a year and start listing good games that came out that year? erm since this is a highly subjective area; personal taste and preference in genres and whatnot. It's doubtful that anyone would ever fully agree with any one person's list.
Thats the qualitative approach.
Now lets think about it quantitavely, that would mean whatever the masses can agree was the best games of any given year, is the best games.
Meaning depending on the people or persons you ask you would get a very different picture, around here you would most likely, or atleast I hope, be told that the games of the nineties and the very early 2000's were the best.
But if you ask around youtube or gamespy.com forums it's highly doubtful you'd get the same picture.
Now ask on rpgcodex and your picture is likely to look like that you'd get around here atleast concerning rpg's.
Different things for different people. And there will always be more shall we say, less cerebral people than more cerebral people. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 14th Oct 2011 02:26 Post subject: |
|
|
Yes I was thinking of a metacritic type system. Obviously no one is going to do it here so it's just a thought
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
smith01
Posts: 337
Location: A Diner
|
| Posted: Fri, 14th Oct 2011 03:11 Post subject: |
|
|
| pikachupi wrote: | well...the reason is money!
creators going with the same stuff and sometimes run too fast and even do not complete products and sell them.
in the past creators were creative with new idea's , the creativity was the lead, but today...need for speed 100, fifa107 etc.
it works for them=no need to work harder and to invent the wheel again.
btw i like nfs and fifa lol..it was just example. |
It's almost the same as the movie industry. When it was new and fresh, money wasn't the goal and you had quality films. I'm not saying these days you don't get a good flcik every now and then, but non compare to classic cinema.
Today they will make sequels and prequels that are shit, but proven to generate money because the audience will come and see what they know. It's a no risk business. Make Spiderman 5 - people will pay to see it, regardless if it's good or not.
Same for games, in the beginning all that mattered was quality in this new business. Now, after sales have surpassed the movie industry, gaming has gone mainstream and the inevitable happened.
-0
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 14th Oct 2011 03:31 Post subject: |
|
|
Whether you'll admit it or not, the main reason old school games were so "good" was because video games were a relatively new medium back then, most genres were still being "invented" and explored, so they felt fresh and magical.
Now, if you think its easy or even reasonable to expect the same amount of awesomeness decade after decade, you are being delusional.
When i go back to some of the games i used orgasm over, it becomes clear that it was more about the novelty than it was about the objective quality of the game.
There are exceptions obviously but still.
Its true that there is a large number of shit nowadays, but that's more to do with the massive growth of the industry and subsequent massive growth in the number of sub par designers than anything else.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 14th Oct 2011 03:51 Post subject: |
|
|
I find I just lost interest too fast so I have trouble finishing an entire game.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 14th Oct 2011 04:59 Post subject: |
|
|
| Epsilon wrote: | | korkin wrote: | But seriously why not pick a year and start listing good games that came out that year and all the other games that came out that year(should be just a number of released titles minus the number of good games) and do the same for the next year, etc, etc till we get to 2010
edit for sabins edit: never claimed sales equaled quality |
Pick a year and start listing good games that came out that year? erm since this is a highly subjective area; personal taste and preference in genres and whatnot. It's doubtful that anyone would ever fully agree with any one person's list.
Thats the qualitative approach.
Now lets think about it quantitavely, that would mean whatever the masses can agree was the best games of any given year, is the best games.
Meaning depending on the people or persons you ask you would get a very different picture, around here you would most likely, or atleast I hope, be told that the games of the nineties and the very early 2000's were the best.
But if you ask around youtube or gamespy.com forums it's highly doubtful you'd get the same picture.
Now ask on rpgcodex and your picture is likely to look like that you'd get around here atleast concerning rpg's.
Different things for different people. And there will always be more shall we say, less cerebral people than more cerebral people. |
I agree completely. Also, I believe it depends on the age of the gamer. When I was younger I always used to play and finish games. Even shitty ones. Today, I typically only play a few genre's and even though I grew up a gamer, I only play barely double digits games per year. No time plus I lose interest in the games quickly (and of course shitty ports).
PS. For me, any type of detailed and deep rpg's or a good story/action FPS, and I'm in.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 14th Oct 2011 06:50 Post subject: |
|
|
I totally agree on the OP.
Most games these days really lack the "punch", for me meaning that they don't offer enough diversity in gameplay, and just stay flat.
The games that surprised me were the Assassins Creed games. Those were really well thought through, and with all the anti-religion and anti-corporate stuff in the background made it fell like it wasn't a mainstreamtitle like many others. Unfortunately those games are WAY too easy in my opinion. They really should add another difficulty option to that game, to make it more Dark Souls style. Now THAT would be awesome.
Dark Souls is another example of a fine modern game, because it is hard, FUCKING hard but not too hard in the end. I like how you really have to memorize what to do, and even if you die you gain something, and not some items or so, but personal experience on what to do better, and that is unfortunately very rare in games these days.
Really having to think through what you are doing in a game is pretty much unneccesary nowaways, you can just go trial and error and still finish a game rather quickly...
To those calling out "Nostalgia". I suggest you go and play some of that old games. Think CoD is a good game? Go back to Jedi Knight or something similar, and then tell me which game hooks you up more. Or like the OP says, Jagged Alliance or something, those games are still very addictive, it's not about production cost or graphical quality, it's about quality gameplay that went into those games.
“The only way to deal with an unfree world is to become so absolutely free that your very existence is an act of rebellion.”
- Albert Camus
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 14th Oct 2011 08:26 Post subject: |
|
|
Well I keep finishing game after game even if they end up being crap. What I do is that I pick them before buying/downloading them based on genre/previews/dev reputation etc. so i kind of minimize the chances of getting an awfully bad game that no one would stand for more than 30 minutes. Compared to a lot of people here I don't play so many titles a year. I agree however with folks here that the really good games are scarce nowadays.
If someone asks me about excellent AAA games in 2010 I think I would say Assassin's Creed 2, S.T.A.L.K.E.R. Clear Sky and that's about it (maybe GTAIV Episodes). This year has been a little better with at least three amazing games already released like Portal 2, The Witcher 2 and Deus Ex HR. I would include AC Brotherhood there too. And there's a big chance of adding at least one more title to that list before 2011 ends (thinking Arkham City here). Sadly we can't expect a good game a month anymore.
I guess I will keep playing PC games, good ones and bad ones, as long as I'm still motivated and can still squeeze some fun from bad games like Duke Nukem Forever and the likes.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 14th Oct 2011 08:46 Post subject: |
|
|
trying for like 5 minutes to wrote something about this.
really cannot.
/back to dungeon keeper 1 + x com 1 until diablo 3 arive. or a good patch to might and magic 6. really good one.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 14th Oct 2011 08:56 Post subject: Re: In PC gaming, do you feel like... |
|
|
| tolanri wrote: | [quote="Breezer....And as for a gameplay of fps games I gotta say I'm starting to hate all these military shooters. I say it's time to bring back some good old scifi shooters where you need quick aim, fast reflexes, superb movement skills, map awareness, and zero unlocks. Bring back Quake or Unreal...alas as long as fps are on consoles with derpads it's not going to happen.
|
+1
I feel completely the same about this!
Back in the days you needed skills in fps games to be good.
Everyone could pickup the bazooka, 100% body armor, quad damage etc....
Now you can only use the bazooka if you reach 'level 150 or whatever'.
So a kiddie with zero skills who played a lot of days and reached level 150 and beyond can kill you in an instant with his bazooka, because you are a new player (level 1) and can only use the knife.......
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 14th Oct 2011 09:31 Post subject: |
|
|
a problem with todays game is too much focus on the story.
yes i said it, i find stories like the metal gear series awesome, but then everything else ( i barely played RPGs ) are total lacklusters for me.
For me its all about gameplay, be in control of what you do, the freedom to play how you want, feeling like the input you give to the game is what makes you succesful.
Mario series is so awesome cause of the gameplay, who cares if its about saving the princess 20 times, for all i care it has no story, a game is there to play, not to be an interactive movie.
everyone has seen the picture of the DOOM map and COD rail comparison, which speaks volumes.
Also games have become too simple, not just in difficulty ( when is the last time anyone died in a videogame? ) but the amount of options of how to play the game.
Course not everything in the 80s and 90s was A+, but cause of games being more simple graphics was there was more time and effort being put into the gameplay. IT was a bunch of guys saying "how can we make a great game?". Now its a bunch of managers throwing a bunch of cash to a producer who hires programmers and artists to make an amazing looking game, however you would define amazing, and then 4 times as much is invested in hyping the game.
So many sorts of games have vanished, or derpified beyond reconition. I still play tie fighter on dosbox, and i still think it kicks ass, so dont throw the nostalgica point to me. for 5 mins you notice the VGA resolution, and then you play it and enjoy it. Its the other way around with games these days, you play 5 mins to check how it runs on the computer, it looks and sounds decent, and then you play it.... to just uninstall it right after. Imagine this, put COD MW3 or whatever crap that comes out today, give it playstation 1 graphics, release it in 1997 and i bet my mega drive on it that it would have flopped harder than any mega cd FMV game.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
VonMisk
Posts: 9472
Location: Hatredland
|
| Posted: Fri, 14th Oct 2011 09:54 Post subject: |
|
|
| Paintface wrote: | For me its all about gameplay, be in control of what you do, the freedom to play how you want, feeling like the input you give to the game is what makes you succesful.
Mario series is so awesome cause of the gameplay, who cares if its about saving the princess 20 times, for all i care it has no story, a game is there to play, not to be an interactive movie.
everyone has seen the picture of the DOOM map and COD rail comparison, which speaks volumes.
Also games have become too simple, not just in difficulty ( when is the last time anyone died in a videogame? ) but the amount of options of how to play the game.
Course not everything in the 80s and 90s was A+, but cause of games being more simple graphics was there was more time and effort being put into the gameplay. IT was a bunch of guys saying "how can we make a great game?". Now its a bunch of managers throwing a bunch of cash to a producer who hires programmers and artists to make an amazing looking game, however you would define amazing, and then 4 times as much is invested in hyping the game.
So many sorts of games have vanished, or derpified beyond reconition. I still play tie fighter on dosbox, and i still think it kicks ass, so dont throw the nostalgica point to me. for 5 mins you notice the VGA resolution, and then you play it and enjoy it. Its the other way around with games these days, you play 5 mins to check how it runs on the computer, it looks and sounds decent, and then you play it.... to just uninstall it right after. Imagine this, put COD MW3 or whatever crap that comes out today, give it playstation 1 graphics, release it in 1997 and i bet my mega drive on it that it would have flopped harder than any mega cd FMV game. |
I could not say it better.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 14th Oct 2011 10:29 Post subject: |
|
|
Sometimes I'm in a mood to play something that I didn't like before. It doesn't last long but it's enough to have some fun time. E.g. currently I'm playing Dragon Age 2, it took a lot of psychological preparations  but once I released I'm playing a fantasy KotOR, everything went smooth onwards. But it's for this run, the next one (if there will be any at all) will probably bore me right from the start, same thing happened with Alpha Protocol, first run was "this game actually ain't bad at all", the second was "omg wtf is this shit, uninstall pronto". But it just happens occasionally, right game for the right moment.
Yet I find this approach to be much better than back when I was an enthusiastic gamer, hunting for AAA titles and getting nervous because new games are crap. Now I play when I feel like playing, not just because i HAVE to play because it's my way of life or whatever. Sincerely, I dont give a shit if there will not be a single quality game in future, there are just enough extremelly good games already released and they are just about enough to cover all my free time. I'm certainly thru with upgrading my computer for the sake of gaming.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 14th Oct 2011 10:41 Post subject: |
|
|
We're getting a LOT more games than we did in the past, and the shit to quality ratio seems to be somewhat higher. Still, I find there are still many great games being released - and I find myself still waiting impatiently for each one. I wouldn't say that has changed all that much.
But what I DO lament, and I mean in a very big way - is that the audience has changed so much, and the developers are so driven by pleasing them. This means that while we still get the occasional quality title - we could get much more, and the quality titles could be SO much more - if only developers were able to be truly innovative and creative, instead of focusing on huge (in many cases needlessly huge) budgets that need to be justified.
So, while I don't think gaming is that much worse - I do think it's much worse than what it could be, which wasn't really the case in the golden age of gaming innovation.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Neon
VIP Member
Posts: 18935
Location: Poland
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 14th Oct 2011 11:40 Post subject: |
|
|
The PC is a pretty damn boring platform now, that's for sure. The graphics ceiling imposed by consoles doesn't bother me personally, as the graphics are this generations biggest reason we are stuck with safe remake after remake.
It only gets worse as technology continues to get better, and I'd rather it fall the fuck over at this point; many games on handhelds are far more interesting than what we're getting here now.
That said, even after twenty whole years of gaming, I am still finding great games made years ago which I haven't seen or heard much about (not necessarily PC or even english ones). I guarantee you can still find old games worth playing, nostalgia is not a factor for me.
I agree with the majority of points made in the thread. In the end I am (and no doubt, most of you here) just writhing around squirming as there is nothing that can be about this anymore.
Random awesome finds on PC (~6 months for me):
Hardwar (1998) - Recommend setting up a dualstick gamepad and UIM06+enhanced mods, has decent multiplayer. Probably the only serious elite-style game I've been able to get into and enjoy.
Nox (2000) - Played the hell out of this back in the day, no one told me they added a unique cooperative mode in a patch! Good diablo fix.
Starshatter (2004) - Last hard sci-fi capital sim.. it got teabagged so hard in its day that it pretty much never saw light. This is the war sim version of Freespace + X3 for me. Retail source was released in the past month, so I'm expecting this shit to now have a future. (read: the only future, for capital sims.)
Spellforce (2004) - I actually touched on this game when it was first released and hated it. Turns out it's actually pretty good coop, and the campaign ain't small either. Persistent characters in coop, solid difficulty curve, plenty of loot and stuff to collect. Great RTS/RPG blend. Still can't get into the second one sadly.
Solium Infernum + expansion (2010+2011) - Don't see a game this complex every day; no I'm not referring to its terrible interface either!
http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2010/01/25/the-complete-gameboys-from-hell/ If this shit doesn't ignite your interest at all, you should curl up into a ball and play the latest mind-numbing FPS immediately.
Natuk (1999) - Old school dungeon crawl, top down view. I usually can't stomach these sorts but I thought this game was great after some time with it.
Enclave (2002) - Deceptively sweet third person action. There's something odd about this game that screams labor of love to me; it was geniunely interesting to explore the game.. be at peace with your inner console however, it was a port.
That's probably enough off-topic
I'm still looking forward to a couple PC titles in 2011, but they all have a very 'samely' feel. I am still ignorantly hyped for Skyrim.
I have to agree with the 2005+ decline..
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 14th Oct 2011 11:44 Post subject: |
|
|
Oh baby, jermore just made THE most epic post this thread is ever likely to see. I can't imagine how much time I spent in Hardwar, despite the economy bugs that required fanpatches to fix, the game is fantastic and I always wished they'd bring out a sequel or at least revisit the game again. Not these days though, not any longer, as it's pretty obvious it would be made into a cover-based FPS.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 14th Oct 2011 11:59 Post subject: |
|
|
just wait till your diablo 3 is gonna suck too
and protip - don't join the army...
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 14th Oct 2011 12:23 Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 14th Oct 2011 12:25 Post subject: |
|
|
I'm completely cool and you are utterly wrong. But hey, I'll add "IMO" to make it ok.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 14th Oct 2011 12:29 Post subject: |
|
|
| korkin wrote: | | But the lists is incomplete in my opinion, there are some good games that go unmentioned. |
It was made in 2010 from what I rembember and it is a BRIEF history, not a complete one.
NZXT S340 ELITE : EVGA Z370 FTW / [ Intel i7 8086k @4.0Ghz ][ ASUS TUF RTX 3060 Ti 8GB ][ 16GB G.Skill Trident Z @3200mhz CL16 ][ 128GB Intel760p Series + 1TB Crucial MX500 + 3TB WD RED ][ Thermaltake Toughpower PF1 650W ]
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 14th Oct 2011 12:30 Post subject: |
|
|
| korkin wrote: |
But the lists is incomplete in my opinion, there are some good games that go unmentioned. |
That's why your request will never work - because it's subjective and what I find enjoyable, you won't.. and vice versa. That's why I disagree with grapper and his comment that games from 10 years old don't "hold up today" -- in what way? Graphics? There's a shocker. Because he sure as hell couldn't have meant gameplay.
Let's see, ten years ago;
Baldur's Gate II.
Let's see, today;
Dragon Age 2.
Oh snap. Now let's expand the "don't hold up today" by using DarkRohirrim's brief gaming history image. Year 2000:
Deus Ex.
Diablo 2.
Baldur's Gate 2.
Thief 2.
Red Alert 2.
Icewind Dale.
American McGee's Alice.
Unreal Tournament.
Sacrifice.
Counter-Strike.
The Sims.
Noone Lives Forever.
Holy FUCK. You know that each and every one of those games is considered by many to be some of the best videogames ever made? Naw, I'm wrong though.... it's nostalgia. Baldur's Gate II, when you look back at it with an objective eye unfettered by nostalgic emotion, is really a bland and uninspiring game with too much talking, not enough explosions and too difficult to get into. Amirite?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Page 2 of 4 |
All times are GMT + 1 Hour |
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB 2.0.8 © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
|
|
 |
|
.
