Games getting worse with every generation?
- Thread starter Giygas
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Well, that's what I'm saying is important. You're being more discerning and skeptical, which, I believe, is what we all need to do. Once I started doing that, I found myself noticing not how many games are coming out now that are disappointing, but how many are coming out that are truly good. Not only has this calmed any fears I may have had about a decline in the quality of games, but it's probably saved me a good deal of money I may have otherwise spent on games that I would not like.Giygas said:
ive just been actively gaming for like 6 years or so but i do notice more and more games become mediocre but the games that do spring out totaly overwhelm me sometimes like for instance mercinaries at that time i didnt have an internet conection so i didnt know anything about this game all i knew was what i heard from a friend he said hart pounding acction well most of my friends arent that intelegent but i thought wat the hell lets give it a try that game was so awesome i played it over 3 times or something wich shows that the general level of awesomenes in games dusnt go down its just less euqaly divided
and owyea i just expect every game to suck and i on purpose dont get hyped so that when something nice does come round its emediatly very very nice (try it it works)
and owyea i just expect every game to suck and i on purpose dont get hyped so that when something nice does come round its emediatly very very nice (try it it works)
Some games are worse but most are just easier but games like Smash Bros and Legend of Zelda and Metroid are still good.
Honestly, I don't think there's really been any change in the how good the gaming industry is. I think it's just how we view games and what we like about them. We're always going to love our old favorites (Final Fantasy 7 and Final Fantasy 8 are enshrined in my room), and we'll always compare new games to what we liked back then and if it's a complete favorite, no other game is going to hold a candle to it in your mind. But you'll also find some new favorites as you go along and then everything else isn't going to hold a candle to that either.
I think to answer the question you have to define what measures 'better' or 'worse'. If you're thinking of story telling, then I think great strides have been made. If you talk about graphical excellence, then of course games have gotten better. In terms of game play and a little something called 'soul' then no.
After all, the games that retain interesting and compelling game play can still be played and enjoyed irrespective of storyline or graphics. They retain a certain je ne sais quois about them that makes us come back for more. Even though they may not fit the mould of a modern day blockbuster, it bypasses all the normal checks of what makes a game 'good' or 'bad' in modern times.
That being said, you can not fully judge a game without the ultimate judge of a game's worthiness. Time.
So ask me in 5 years whether or not Halo 3 will go down in the annals of history in the same way that Starcraft, Grim Fandango and Deus Ex do.
After all, the games that retain interesting and compelling game play can still be played and enjoyed irrespective of storyline or graphics. They retain a certain je ne sais quois about them that makes us come back for more. Even though they may not fit the mould of a modern day blockbuster, it bypasses all the normal checks of what makes a game 'good' or 'bad' in modern times.
That being said, you can not fully judge a game without the ultimate judge of a game's worthiness. Time.
So ask me in 5 years whether or not Halo 3 will go down in the annals of history in the same way that Starcraft, Grim Fandango and Deus Ex do.
I have to side with the dissenters here. The OP lists 'Shadow Of The Colossus' and 'Okami' amongst others. Fantastic games from what, one generation ago? In fact despite being PS2 based, I hesitate to say they are from a previous generation at all.
From a purely objective viewpoint, what games from the eighties could possibly stand up to them in any way?
Today's mediocre games would have been awe inspiring by the standards of yesteryear. Turning Point: Fall of Liberty sucks; Ikari Warriors rocked. But really, which one is better?
Fire up an emulator and start playing those old classics (legal roms only please). Very few of the old classics stand the test of time. They (nearly) all have descendants that have taken their basic blueprint and surpassed them utterly.
In more recent years the situation gets muddied, because the concept of generations is slightly flawed. Xbox 360, PS3 and modern high end pcs don't really allow for anything new over the previous 'generation' - they're just flashier... and I seem to be losing my point. Damn.
I think the overall standard is probably as high as it has ever been, but invariably we look to the games that stand out as being above and beyond the rest, and there maybe aren't as many of them as there used to be.
From a purely objective viewpoint, what games from the eighties could possibly stand up to them in any way?
Today's mediocre games would have been awe inspiring by the standards of yesteryear. Turning Point: Fall of Liberty sucks; Ikari Warriors rocked. But really, which one is better?
Fire up an emulator and start playing those old classics (legal roms only please). Very few of the old classics stand the test of time. They (nearly) all have descendants that have taken their basic blueprint and surpassed them utterly.
In more recent years the situation gets muddied, because the concept of generations is slightly flawed. Xbox 360, PS3 and modern high end pcs don't really allow for anything new over the previous 'generation' - they're just flashier... and I seem to be losing my point. Damn.
I think the overall standard is probably as high as it has ever been, but invariably we look to the games that stand out as being above and beyond the rest, and there maybe aren't as many of them as there used to be.
i agree there is less revolutionary stuff, but it isnt that bad. however i am REALLY hoping XNA that microsoft launched will help people with good ideas make some great arcade game which some big company will buy the rights to. butcher the mechanics of it but still create a very creative game which will be different from the cardboard shooter.
First off, I think it's unfair to point to one game as the defining game of a generation. I'm the first the point out the many problems of Bioshock, so I'm not being an apologist. But I think your complaints are misdirected, it was the mainstream press that gave it all the undue praise.
I myself share your (the OP) sentiment that gaming is taking somewhat of a downhill, but I think it may be for reasons differing from your own. Regardless, I think it's gaming journalism today that failed to point out the flaws in Bioshock, and I find it a little disconcerting that Bioshock is the benchmark set for future games.
The low standard of gaming today is due to in part by the lack of proper criticism (and in some cases, integrity) of journalists, who are apparently the voices that shape public opinion. Another large factor is simply, business. Clearly the biggest trend is 'market penetration', and that simply means developers have to pander to the lowest common denominator.
I myself share your (the OP) sentiment that gaming is taking somewhat of a downhill, but I think it may be for reasons differing from your own. Regardless, I think it's gaming journalism today that failed to point out the flaws in Bioshock, and I find it a little disconcerting that Bioshock is the benchmark set for future games.
The low standard of gaming today is due to in part by the lack of proper criticism (and in some cases, integrity) of journalists, who are apparently the voices that shape public opinion. Another large factor is simply, business. Clearly the biggest trend is 'market penetration', and that simply means developers have to pander to the lowest common denominator.
So who were these people who said games were going down hill during the 32bit- 128 (Dreamcast era)?
I think the Dreamcast and PS2 era has been the best so far. Yeah, 99% of PS2 games suck, but give me an hour I could list a good 30-50 PS2 titles that are worth playing. Same with the Dreamcast- didn't get as many games on the system, but the number of great to crap games is more 70/30.
I think it's mainly about holding your horses for a good, small selection of games to come out for a system. I've already Little Big Planet, Motorstorm, Ico Team's next game, Gradius 6 and Soul Calibur 4 to look forward to when I buy a PS3. And when that happens in 2 years time, I'm sure there will be double if not triple the number of titles waiting to be played.
I agree with other posters when they say "chill out". Be positive man, gaming is yet to have its finest hour -don't argue, just agree with me
I think the Dreamcast and PS2 era has been the best so far. Yeah, 99% of PS2 games suck, but give me an hour I could list a good 30-50 PS2 titles that are worth playing. Same with the Dreamcast- didn't get as many games on the system, but the number of great to crap games is more 70/30.
I think it's mainly about holding your horses for a good, small selection of games to come out for a system. I've already Little Big Planet, Motorstorm, Ico Team's next game, Gradius 6 and Soul Calibur 4 to look forward to when I buy a PS3. And when that happens in 2 years time, I'm sure there will be double if not triple the number of titles waiting to be played.
I agree with other posters when they say "chill out". Be positive man, gaming is yet to have its finest hour -don't argue, just agree with me
Naw, methinks it's only the retro gamers who think like that, in much the same way the older folks look down upon the kids these days. I might be out of place to judge, me only this year turning fifteen and all, but games are getting better. Bioshock isn't a bad game, and in may ways it's one of the deepest games in existence, but it mightn't be your game, especially if you still hug your copy of Okami close to yourself at night.
I would sort-of agree with the maker of this thread.
I upgarded my PC about a month ago with the latest hardware.
The main reason why I did it was because I wanted to enjoy long-awaited Crysis, Call of Duty 4, Gears of War etc. New computergams that my old rig could not possibly run.
After a month I end up spending time playing old games way more than the titles mentioned.
I beat all those games once and never touched them again.
I spent my current time playing old gmes like Far Cry, Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion, The old classical Command & Conquer (bought the First Decade Boxset) etc, and yes I'm one among teh few people that thought that Far Cry was waaaay better than Crysis.
I wouldn'tsay the games get WORSE with every generation, just that the modern day games are just waaay too short, have no replay value and are dumbed down and dull. Also add to that a $60 retail price and you have yourself an old-school generation of games that doesn't like much of what is being released today.
I upgarded my PC about a month ago with the latest hardware.
The main reason why I did it was because I wanted to enjoy long-awaited Crysis, Call of Duty 4, Gears of War etc. New computergams that my old rig could not possibly run.
After a month I end up spending time playing old games way more than the titles mentioned.
I beat all those games once and never touched them again.
I spent my current time playing old gmes like Far Cry, Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion, The old classical Command & Conquer (bought the First Decade Boxset) etc, and yes I'm one among teh few people that thought that Far Cry was waaaay better than Crysis.
I wouldn'tsay the games get WORSE with every generation, just that the modern day games are just waaay too short, have no replay value and are dumbed down and dull. Also add to that a $60 retail price and you have yourself an old-school generation of games that doesn't like much of what is being released today.
Bargain-bin gamestop shopper for life. You just wait a couple of years, look-up all the must-plays for the last generation, and keep yourself busy until there's another bucket of must-play games available.
Trust in the critical consensus, not the hype.
Trust in the critical consensus, not the hype.
I'll make this short to not ruin readability of the post further (there is no discussion view in this forum, right?):
I completely agree with the OP. Some things already said. One reason games are shallow has been said is they are a business. And a risky one at that! Long gone are the days a small team could put together a brilliant creative peace and be noticed in the marketplace. There is literally too much noise going on. Gamers seem to have changed as well. Would anybody play Monkey Island today? Nobody would dare to make it, because it would be plain too expensive.
Apart from that growing teams and production values of course mean less creative direction. It is plain impossible that a mainstream game is made by just one person with a great idea. That was possible at the time of Roberta Williams and Al Lowe.
But there is light at the horizon. Graphics will be become a commodity. Game designers will be noticed publicly and people will ask for great game design. Graphics will be neglected. There is no way the industry is going to invest more time and money for small visual improvements.
I completely agree with the OP. Some things already said. One reason games are shallow has been said is they are a business. And a risky one at that! Long gone are the days a small team could put together a brilliant creative peace and be noticed in the marketplace. There is literally too much noise going on. Gamers seem to have changed as well. Would anybody play Monkey Island today? Nobody would dare to make it, because it would be plain too expensive.
Apart from that growing teams and production values of course mean less creative direction. It is plain impossible that a mainstream game is made by just one person with a great idea. That was possible at the time of Roberta Williams and Al Lowe.
But there is light at the horizon. Graphics will be become a commodity. Game designers will be noticed publicly and people will ask for great game design. Graphics will be neglected. There is no way the industry is going to invest more time and money for small visual improvements.
Nostalgia just ain't what it used to be. It used to be about horses, or radio plays, or sock hops... now it's about fiddly little bytes.
Feh, back in the old days we really knew how to pine for the good ol' days...
-- Steve
Feh, back in the old days we really knew how to pine for the good ol' days...
-- Steve
Every once in a while, I have to plug this guy's idea when it's appropriate..._daxter_ said:
http://grassrootsgamemaster.blogspot.com/2008/02/way-forward-for-lottery-ticket.html
There are so many positives to this proposal that I wouldn't be surprised if The Escapist interviewed "the man with the plan." *wink, wink, nudge nudge* ;-)
Funnily enough, this is something I was thinking to myself last night.
I'm not sure that games are getting worse with every generation, but they are certainly getting shorter. With development costs rising with each generation, and so much emphasis put on presentation, something has to be sacrificed. I wonder how much we can blame developers for this though, as the video game industry is exactly that, an industry. To survive, developers have to make money, and if bland, monotonous games sell well, then that is what they'll make.
To claim that current games lack depth is a harder argument to make in my opinion. Pac Man and Super Mario are fun, but they are essentially one trick ponies. The original Doom was highly entertaining, and I remember it fondly, but it's impossible to deny that it doesn't exactly have a lot of gameplay elements.
I'm not sure that games are getting worse with every generation, but they are certainly getting shorter. With development costs rising with each generation, and so much emphasis put on presentation, something has to be sacrificed. I wonder how much we can blame developers for this though, as the video game industry is exactly that, an industry. To survive, developers have to make money, and if bland, monotonous games sell well, then that is what they'll make.
To claim that current games lack depth is a harder argument to make in my opinion. Pac Man and Super Mario are fun, but they are essentially one trick ponies. The original Doom was highly entertaining, and I remember it fondly, but it's impossible to deny that it doesn't exactly have a lot of gameplay elements.