I am finding games dissapointing because i'm getting older or because they aren't as good?

[Chaosut]

Lately i've seen quite a few threads about how games have either; lost their spark, becoming shallower or don't have the substance they used to. When i look at my experience with games it seems to be a bit of a Decrescnedo, not a drastic one, but a decrescendo nontheless. It's not that i hate every game that's released nowadays, but i find myself being more and more dissapointed and less and less impressed. I remember when i was a kid and getting the N64, and even games that i probably wouldn't play for the life of me now, seemed impressive at the time. It just seems that in my life, with age i've come to question and be far more picky about video games (i'm 19 btw).
Just to take an example, i played COD 5 for the first time, and whilst it's an alright game (just personally), i wasn't hugely impressed. But i imagined that if i had played that same game as a kid i would've loved it. Though sometimes i think that games seem to be doing a bit of a downward slope in quality. When i look back at the games of the previous generation consoles and on PC, the games on the seventh generation consoles just seem really meek in comparison. So i just wanted to see what people's thoughts were, and if they are experiencing something similar.

 

[WrongSprite]

Because your getting older. Same with me. I was more excited and mystified by games as a kid.

 

[BolognaBaloney]

Probably a little bit of both, because their is a noticeable decline in innovation, but it isn't crippling the industry like some people seem to believe.

 

[Chaosut]

Because your getting older. Same with me. I was more excited and mystified by games as a kid.

Yeah, i think you're right. They've certainly lost some of their mystique and affect they used to have on me.

 

[ThePocketWeasel]

I do agree to an extent; games I had when i was 7 or 8 like Spyro:GateWay To Glimmer, all the old pokemon games (Before there were 4578543 Pokemon) and Sonic. I'd still consider much better than some of the games out today. Maybe the problem today is that there's so many games out there that they'd all been done before.
But on the other hand if you look at a game like Spyro, I loved Gateway to Glimmer, infact I was obsessed with it, but the newer games they just seem to lack the fun. So maybe it is that we're getting older or maybe the developers just can't cut it anymore

 

[Yudas]

Same with me. The only games that impress me just the slightest today are the original ones or the ones with an original setting/story.

 

[Chaosut]

Probably a little bit of both, because their is a noticeable decline in innovation, but it isn't crippling the industry like some people seem to believe.

I also think that whilst games have lost a bit of substance it's not the end of all video game quality as we know it.

 

[Librarian Mike]

First of all, great picture Yudas. Bill Hicks rules!

Anyway, I feel that I'm getting a little old for gaming. I'm kinda living the cliche (married, job, kid on the way) which is great, but it also means I can't play Oblivion for 6 hours a day.

I do also think that gaming has stagnated a bit, where we're seeing an endless stream of 'badass shooters' that frankly look interchangeable. I realize that that is not completely accurate, but I think back fondly to the days when it seemed like there was a cool new idea every month.

But then again I'm old.

 

[BolognaBaloney]

Probably a little bit of both, because their is a noticeable decline in innovation, but it isn't crippling the industry like some people seem to believe.

I've also thought that whilst games have lost a bit of substance it's not the end of all video game quality as we know it.

Yeah, in my opinion, it's just a sort of innovation recession. It's not going to kill the industry, it's just not it's most productive period. But I'm sure it'll get a new breath of life sooner or later, til' then, I'm playing mostly older games.

 

[NoNameMcgee]

I'm sorry to say that I think it is because you are getting older.

While there is definately a lot of crap out there, it's always been that way, and the good games of today have more features, better graphics and more satisfying gameplay than the good games of 10 years ago. Sure, it's all subjective, but there aren't many reasons to suggest games are worse now unless you miss the excruciating difficulty, repetitive simplicity and trial-and-error type of gameplay that used to be dominant in past games.

I think you might be letting nostalgia get the better of you. But hey, each to their own. It's just that i've played those 'gems' everyone talks about from the Playstation and N64 and they're mostly not that fun to me.

 

[Chaosut]

I'm sorry to say that I think it is because you are getting older.

While there is definately a lot of crap out there, it's always been that way, and the good games of today have more features, better graphics and more satisfying gameplay than the good games of 10 years ago. Sure, it's all subjective, but there aren't many reasons to suggest games are worse now unless you miss the excruciating difficulty, repetitive simplicity and trial-and-error type of gameplay that used to be dominant in past games.

I think you might be letting nostalgia get the better of you. But hey, each to their own. It's just that i've played those 'gems' everyone talks about from the Playstation and N64 and they're mostly not that fun to me.

Yeah, it could just be age. There definately were poor games earlier on. But i guess when i think of what most people consider the best games on the sixth or fifth generation consoles and then the games that people consider the best on this generation, they just don't seem to compare at all for me. But as you said, it might just be nostalgia.

 

[Darathy]

Perhaps you're simply playing the wrong games?

 

[insanelich]

Gaming has expanded commercially.

This means that it's now catering to the mainstream much more than before. Which is why the "best games" of this generation (Bioshock, Killzone, Gears of War, Halo, Fallout 3) are in fact utter crap. Just Sturgeon's Law in effect - and the masses haven't seen all of it done before and better.

Now, the larger size of the market also allows for a lot of small indie companies making games - and these small games are more or less what you should look at if you want good games. They have less money involved, which means they're less polished and look worse, but they also don't have the utter blandness and aversion to risk-taking that comes with appealing to the mainstream.

tl;dr Sturgeon's Law is in full effect, gaming isn't worse, just a wider concept and significantly more popular.

 

[Jandau]

It's a matter of "Been there, done that". I've had it for quite some time myself. I've seen all the elves, the oversized guns, the aliens, the zombies, deadly planets, alternate dimensions... And now I'm stuck looking for the occasional deviation from the norm.

Young gamers haven't seen it all before. A kid might pick up Halo as their first FPS and be amazed by it. I can't, at least not in the same way. A lot of experienced gamers are like that and they get upset that games are being made mainly for the gamers who aren't quite so saturated.

I've decided not to fuss over it. I just take greater care when picking my games. I don't buy as often as before. I try demos, rent or even torrent stuff. A lot of it is just too boring for me to play with any zest, so I just move on. On occasions when I find a game I really like and that does something new (or something old in a new way), then I go for it.

Times change, and so do we. Learn to live with it and adapt.

 

[Chaosut]

Gaming has expanded commercially.

This means that it's now catering to the mainstream much more than before. Which is why the "best games" of this generation (Bioshock, Killzone, Gears of War, Halo, Fallout 3) are in fact utter crap. Just Sturgeon's Law in effect - and the masses haven't seen all of it done before and better.

Now, the larger size of the market also allows for a lot of small indie companies making games - and these small games are more or less what you should look at if you want good games. They have less money involved, which means they're less polished and look worse, but they also don't have the utter blandness and aversion to risk-taking that comes with appealing to the mainstream.

tl;dr Sturgeon's Law is in full effect, gaming isn't worse, just a wider concept and significantly more popular.

You raise very good points, and i agree. I've really gotta play more india games.

 

[Gladion]

It's not because you're older, it's because after all your experiences it just has become harder to show you something you haven't seen yet. I know what you mean, but there have been some things that impressed me in the last few months, e.g. extreme situations being shown to me from the first-person perspective in Condemned. Wouldn't have been possible like that with 32-bit technology

Gaming has expanded commercially.

This means that it's now catering to the mainstream much more than before. Which is why the "best games" of this generation (Bioshock, Killzone, Gears of War, Halo, Fallout 3) are in fact utter crap.

Now, I'm the first to call you a dick if you're sacrificing quality and originality to money, but claiming all popular games are crap because they are popular is just dumb. Don't get me wrong, I like my mainstream far away from me (especially in the music business... uah), and I understand why people felt Bioshock was just a dumbed down System Shock 2, but that didn't make it a bad game. The overall experience was better, after all (e.g. due to the atmosphere), which is what it's about for me.
Independend games aren't yet where independend movies are, namely crushing their competition with their astounding quality. And mainstream gaming isn't where mainstream filming is yet (mostly). There are some 'Blockbuster' games, which I won't name, that perfectly fit into this category, but it's not as bad yet, so please don't make it look like that.

 

[BolognaBaloney]

(Bioshock, Killzone, Gears of War, Halo, Fallout 3) are in fact utter crap.

Your opinion, not a fact.

 

[Wargamer]

It's easy to understand why people like me (and presumably, you) become jaded with gaming.

We defeated Dr. Robotnik. We saved the Princess (in fact, we saved several princesses, several times). We won World War Two more times than we care to count. We defeated the legions of Hell. We became the ruler of Hell and saved it from the heroes. We've run Theme Parks and Hospitals and Cities and Any Colonies. We've lost track of how many worlds we've saved with sword and sorcery. We defeated Ganon. We won the First Tiberian War (one way or the other). We've slain so many Orcs and Goblins Khorne could build his palace out of our trophies alone.

We've reached the point where we approach the task of saving the day with a matter-of-fact calmness and justified self-assured swagger; we beat the Bydo, why should the Locust or Chimera worry us?

In short, we feel that we've seen it all, and done it all... and thus we are jaded, and with that comes a lack of appreciation for the medium. We think old games were better not because they were, but because every game felt new and wondrous to us.

Oh, and anyone who can work out each reference in that list, Kudos indeed to you!

 

[blipblop]

yep your getting older friend, im feeling the same thing...
it´s not the same childish amusment and overwelming feeling when playing anymore
even if a game is realy good nowdays and probably have good replay value I hardly ever replay a game.