Are today's gamers, on average, dumber?

[GrimSheeper]

I do miss the 4X space RTS games that seem to be nearly completely gone, just like 4x Simulations like X, Freelancer, Freespace and Evochron, they're almost nonexistant as well, safe X:Rebirth and Evochron Mercenaries. Modding and player community are still very much alive for Homeworld, Sins of a Solar Empire, X and Freelancer, but apparently publishers do not seem to consider them a big enough market anymore. I also miss C&C style real time strategy, not Tiberium Twilight, not Tiberium Wars, but Tiberian Sun Firestorm or Yuri's Revenge level of fun.

I don't know if gamers really are dumber. There's just more of them since technology improved and games became more accessible. Of course, X-Com and Jagged Alliance are also damned hard, but usually gamers from the mid-90s were a bit on the hardcore end, since PCs were obscure, hard to understand machines then and not the clean polished ready to play monoliths that you buy like a TV. I still built my PC from parts instead of buying one and I started gaming early enough to call CnC 95 one of the first games I played, but I don't think newer games require less thinking.

Maybe they are more reflex based rather than thinking, which I'm not entirely a fan of.

Kein Mitleid für die Mehrheit!

KMFDM you say?
Could you possibly be a connoiseur of the ultra-heavy beat?

 

[veloper]

The TS did hurt his argument with that example (he should have posted a shot of Alpha centauri and MOO2), but you guys are cherry picking.
And none of these games had dodgy controls.

I would, but the 4X genre hasn't, surprisingly, been hit as bad. The inertia of Civilization games resulted in civ5 - 2010. And the latest space 4X I remember was GalCiv 2 with it's latest expansion pack in 2008.

On a sidenote I think MOO3 is a pretty interesting case. MOO2 couldn't get any more complex because computers wouldn't handle it - in essence video games became more and more complex as computing power was available. MOO3 followed this trend and ended up a game overly complex. It's about this time that computing power stopped being a limiting factor in the depth of gameplay design.

Civilization is the only 4X left that is somewhat high profile and the series going down the crapper.
I keep some hope alive that Civ5 will become better again with a final expansion, like Civ4 did with Beyond the Sword, but it doesn't look good sofar.

The last things we got were Civ:revolution (simplified for consoles), Civ5 and a whole bunch of cheap DLC adding nothing but maps and civilizations.

Galciv2 cannot measure with Master of Orion 2. The rest is small indie projects like Space Empires (SE4 is pretty decent btw, but again nowhere near MOO2).

OK, so not quite as bad as the other genres, but not good either.

 

[bakan]

In my opinion this 'problem' came around when streamlining got mixed up with dumbing down content.
A lot of people want to have easy success in games therefore we get games like Kirby's epic yarn and one shooter after another.

A resulting problem is that the attention span of your average gamer nowadays is that of a goldfish and they aren't able to play more complex games anymore, forget about reading a manual even if it is in small parts ingame.

 

[Evaheist666]

They sure are much lazier. But not dumber.

 

[Aprilgold]

Because most games are targeted at an American audience.
And what do Americans love more than anything else in the world?
Guns.

If you want a thinkers game, go grab a JRPG or two. Because that's the only haven left for you.

Ready to get blocked, FUCKING CATHERINE! This is only one, now, FINAL FANTASY, THE SIMS, MINECRAFT, MAGICKA, TERRARIA, COUNTER STRIKE [this counts because terrorists is just anyone against your countries beliefs, and use violence to try and KILL your country] KILLING FLOOR, PORTAL, THE CIVILATION GAMES, HALF-LIFE, WORLD OF WARCRAFT [I can do this all day] TEAM FORTRESS, GARRIE'S MOD, WORMS, CAT AND THE COUP, AMNESIA, THE SABOTEUR, ALMOST EVERY MMO.... KINGDOM HEARTS, HITMAN, NO MORE HEROES! Most of these games cater to the gameplay mechanic, and most aren't about catering to us Americans, that was a good block by me, and I'm a american, and have played and LOVE all of the games I mentioned, along with several tycoon sims and rts's.
Now then, if you think all American Gamer's are stupid, check your own at the door.
Now then, no, no gamer is dumber because the play X genre over Y genre, having First Person does not always mean shooter [minecraft, garrys mod, both about building, with slight action] and I have played game all my life, and have recently got more involved in the indie scene along with more thought provoking games, the genres I played before this point was shooters, and sandbox games, a little puzzle series on the side, but nothing to big. And yet I have made it this far in life, and I'm good, so you guys mis-consepting this, you can go check your stupidity at the forum IP.

no, you are just not looking in the right direction. nowadays we have games that are much more complex than 10-20 years ago.

dwarf fortress isnt that old, now is it?

As if indie titles were the topic of conversation.

Their games, so yes, they ARE the topic, the man is saying that gamers now in days are dumber for playing X genre, Dwarf Fortress, however indie, is still a game, which is the point of the forum

 

[Neonit]

no, you are just not looking in the right direction. nowadays we have games that are much more complex than 10-20 years ago.

dwarf fortress isnt that old, now is it?

As if indie titles were the topic of conversation.

that is what i said. you are not looking in the right direction.

its like with tv, you want pop you watch tv. you want art bullshit you watch... i dunno, they have channels with those things i guess.


as a medium becomes popular this is what happens. its not bad if you ask me, but it does mean you have to look harder for those "gems"

 

[Hamish Durie]

*ahem* sorry to point out the obvious but those games you showcase are
first i have no idea

No idea? Try finding out more about it. Otherwise, don't comment on it.

no i'm saying that i have no idea what i'm saying, no what saying is i'm looking at it and I have no idea what i'm looking at

second a real estate game with a horrible interface

No shit, that game is bloody old. Graphics are not the point of discussion here.

your right graphics were never in discussion

modern game that's fun and mentaly challenging PORTAL 2

Portal 2 was mentally challenging? Seriously?
yes it was and don't act like a smart ass just because you didn't

i know that there will be a comment saying that portal 2 was dumber then portal 1 to which i say
how many people have been introduced to gameing because of portal 2 and how many people where introduced to gameing because of portal 1

This isn't even me comparing Portal 2 to Portal 1. It was a game made for 6 year olds to beat. The fact that it, as you say, introduced many people to gaming (which I would find hard to believe anyway), doesn't mean that it isn't part of the problem. Going by your logic, every game that introduces a certain amount of people to gaming should be simple enough for a toddler to deal with. This is not the way forward.
actually it is but i never meant all games should be like that

ok i'm hoping to rap this up.
pull your head out of nostalga, shave your metaphorical and stop shaking your equally metaphorical walking stick
games are getting better and if you choose to live in the past fine i have no problem with that, no what i see fault in is that you only came out of your little nostalga cave to troll on new gamers

 

[Ashcrexl]

gamers are dumber today simply because the term gamers encompasses such a greater number of people than ever before, and as we all know, when you start taking averages of the entire human population, instead of simply the top tier, the intelligence of the group does go down.

 

[AnAngryMoose]

You're very selective about the examples? You failed to show the fact that there were shooters in the 90s (DOOM, Duke Nukem) and there are plenty of good strategy games these days (Europa Universalis, Starcraft, Total War etc etc). It makes it hard to take your point seriously if you fail to mention important facts like that. Just because someone doesn't play a complex game doesn't mean their an idiot.

 

[Asti]

Actually, "smart" games exist still too. You just choose to not aknowledge them. You're cherry-picking, good sir. To your arguments about how gamers are dumber nowadays because of Cod and Cod and Cod, I reply with DOOM, DOOM 2, DOOM 3, Duke nukem, ect. "Stupid" games will, and always will, be made. It's not because they're made for stupid gamers. It's because not everybody goes home from 8 hours of work so that they can sit and be mentally tested again. That shit is draining. Not everybody wants to pay for a second job as a middle-manager for the city's industrial center. [...]Just don't expect us to feel ashamed for having fun.

Thank you! This! A thousand times this!
I'm currently writing my bachelor's thesis and no, for some odd reason I don't feel like doing some real mental labour when I come home. I want to relax. I want to smash things with shiny swords.

 

[Bleedingskye]

Explained by one thing. Pandering to the lowest common denominator. Trying to appeal to as many people as possible. The simple fact of the matter is that less people enjoy cerebral challenges compared to getting to point a gun and shoot stuff.

I'm gunna have to agree...when the consumer stops demanding certain aspects of a medium...it just goes away while the co.'s build new easier games for people who would be less apt to play more complicated games.

 

[Signa]

Not this shit again.

People of the internet, get this through your heads - the games and entertainment you choose do not make you who you are. No, that person playing CoD isn't a dumbass. No, that guy who likes Transformers isn't a moron.

And most of all, I mean most of all, NO, you're not a fucking genius just because you played old-school strategy games.

Moreover, how in the world does it matter that people are playing "smart" games? At the end of the day, you're just playing a game, and if your intelligence doesn't contribute to society, then what's the point, really? If you're playing them to raise your IQ, I can guarantee that you're not going about it the right way.

It's not that playing them makes you smarter, it's that if you're smart, playing with a baby's toy is not going to keep you engaged for very long. That's where the problem lies.

 

[Macrobstar]

Not this shit again.

People of the internet, get this through your heads - the games and entertainment you choose do not make you who you are. No, that person playing CoD isn't a dumbass. No, that guy who likes Transformers isn't a moron.

And most of all, I mean most of all, NO, you're not a fucking genius just because you played old-school strategy games.

Moreover, how in the world does it matter that people are playing "smart" games? At the end of the day, you're just playing a game, and if your intelligence doesn't contribute to society, then what's the point, really? If you're playing them to raise your IQ, I can guarantee that you're not going about it the right way.

End of thread, you win, can everyone just read this post then this whole thing can be over adn done with a lot quicker

 

[Blackpapa]

Not this shit again.

People of the internet, get this through your heads - the games and entertainment you choose do not make you who you are. No, that person playing CoD isn't a dumbass. No, that guy who likes Transformers isn't a moron.

And most of all, I mean most of all, NO, you're not a fucking genius just because you played old-school strategy games.

Moreover, how in the world does it matter that people are playing "smart" games? At the end of the day, you're just playing a game, and if your intelligence doesn't contribute to society, then what's the point, really? If you're playing them to raise your IQ, I can guarantee that you're not going about it the right way.

Thank you for this post. What you said is entirely true and is exactly the type of thinly veiled argument I'd like to avoid in this thread.

Edit: In fact, I'd say there are a lot of interesting and reasonable posts in here and not many of the kind you speak of, which is what I was hoping for.

 

[Sockerbit]

One thing that is fairly important to remember about video games is that the average age of gamers have gone up and with that age increase, less time can be devoted to mastering and learning the rules of video games. Not to mention the fact that there are so many other distractions that simply didn't exist back in the day. Video games have a hard time competing with those and that means that games need to be easier to understand and learn and quicker to reward the player and make them have fun.

Some developers go for a "give the players a gun and throw enemies at them" while other, however this style has been around since Asteroids and some of the most popular games ever made have basically just been "go forth and kill things". I mean the FPS-genre today is generally hailed as the low point in the medium, but for some reason the people that say this usually grew up playing Contra, Castlevania, Metroid, Mega Man and Mario, which were all basically the same style of games where the only real objective is "Go forth and kill". The games usually rewarded twitchy play styles and lighting reflexes, exactly what FPS games do. They rarely innovated beyond giving the players new weapons and powerups and most were just basically clones of whatever sold the most last year.

The rise of FPS games parallel the fall of platforming games since they were generally played by the same kind of people.

 

[badgersprite]

Hey! I'm not as think as you dumb I am.

...Wait...

 

[Hellfire00]

i have to say they are getting dumber, just on one fact. tht most people use the internet to figure out a puzzle or what to do next, or to get some cheat so they become invicible. i think that is fine if you just want to have some fun but doing that with every game, just to say you 'completed it' just ruins the game experience.