Kids and Videogames

[Bob_McMillan]

As a "millennial kid" or whatever you old coots call us, I have no idea what a "Doom" or a "Quake" or "InsertRetroGame" is. So I do get kind of annoyed when I see Top 10 lists that are chock full of old games that can NOT possibly be better than their more modern counterparts. In a list of Top 10 Stealth games, Thief was number one, due to be the first game where light and sound mattered. So? That's great and it was an important advancement in gaming, but how can it be better than any FPS stealth game out now with similar mechanics? But that's another topic.

Anyway, my real subject is this: Gaming has evolved, and its now seen as a more adult oriented hobby, and i guess that's what developers think as well. So what the hell are we kids supposed to play now? Try to think, right now, of any game that is rated below mature that was actually good. I cant think of one, and I've tried. So now kids are picking up more mature games which ratings do not even allow them to play. And now, games like CoD are supposedly populated by 12 year olds, which everyone hates, but could you blame those kids? What are they supposed to play, Mario? No one, and I mean no one, i know in my class even CONSIDERS playing Mario, or indeed any Nintendo game. We just really arent interested in them. And in the absence of good games, people who i played games with for years just stopped, because they lost interest. Majority of gamers now are adults, who i assume started playing as kids. They are the backbone of the gamer community, and without them games probably would've been banned or censored or whatever. But when you guys pass on, who is going to make up the gaming community? Even the people in my generation who play games are just casuals YES I BELIEVE THERE IS A DISTINCTION who only play one game on their consoles. When we grow up, I'm certain none of them would care to invest in a new console and games.

So, do you think is a problem? If yes, then how would you solve it? I for one would like developers who produce kids games make them about things I actually care about, when I see kids playing video games usually its some time-waster of Clash of Clans clone on mobile. I for one would enjoy cartoon/comic games that aren't blatant cash grabs.

 

[Daft Ada]

Games, like films aren't made obsolete by their successors. Mario World plays as well today as it did when it was released; New Super Mario Bros U isn't automatically better just because it's newer. There are a lot of games that had a huge impact in their day and are still playable. That's why Top 100 lists are full of games from the olden days.

 

[veloper]

The solution is to make your own top 10 list.
Make your criteria graphics and graphics.

Enjoy your list!

 

[Mezahmay]

Old games can still be mechanically sound even if 9.9999 times out of 10 they had worse graphics than modern games. Believe it or not, you can still purchase and play a lot of those older games too in one form or another, making the totality of the gaming experience to date largely available today. Last generation a lot of games that were any good at all were rated M, but not all of them were. This is called overgeneralization, which is not aided by your limited perspective of what I assume is a minor. This is something called a logical fallacy, which you should look out for in the future by adding additional perspectives to your own through research and watching what you say/type carefully.

A lot of Nintendo games are not rated higher than T and a lot of them are really good. If you and your friends aren't considering playing Nintendo games because they're made by Nintendo, then that belies your original point that ALL games that are "any good" (which is another issue of subjectivity in and of itself) are rated M.

 

[seris]

i was born in 1997 and i know what doom is, ive played doom and quake, and they are both very good games. older games are very much so still good, and a lot of games released today are generally more or less the same with a few changed mechanics. But, OP, it is still possible to play a lot of old games like quake. hell, quake live is on steam and free, go try it.

 

[communist gamer]

All right here is what you need to do, now play fallout 1 and 2, then play fallout 3 and NV, done? Now play Planescape: Torment, then play Dragon Age 1 and 2, done? Right one last thing, play Painkiller, then play CoD or battlefield, done? You now know why the older games are on the top 10 and the new ones are not, because compared to their new counterparts thouse games are good and are not only about flashy graphics while holding your hand through a long corridor filled with invisible walls and regenerating health. Thank you for your attension


P.S: Im not saying that the new games are shit, im saying that in many aspects they are not even near as good as the older games even though the newer games have beter tech.



edit: im 20 by the way so probobly not much older/younger then you

 

[Evonisia]

What I wanted to say has been said (though in harsher words). All I will say is that I probably should have guessed that "new games are indeed crap" would have popped up (which is what is being said regardless of whether it's only by comparison to older games).

Bottom line: Play the damn games. Example: I never would have said Half-Life 2 was a boring snorefest if I'd never played it (and then I played BioShock, a much better game which basically does the same stuff).

 

[Bad Jim]

So what the hell are we kids supposed to play now? Try to think, right now, of any game that is rated below mature that was actually good.

That is . . . a good question. It's not easy is it? But there are some answers.

Minecraft is suitable for kids and also good.

Strategy games have a decent chance of having a low age rating. Galactic Civilizations 2 is 7+. Civilization 5 is 12.(Those two games aren't related btw). Crusander Kings 2 is teen. It's not necessarily the kind of games kids want to play, but at least you can.

Racing games also stand a decent chance of carrying a low rating. Not just Mario Kart, but proper racing games.

Brawlers like Street Fighter 4 often have fairly low ratings.

Also, there are some decent Nintendo games. On my 3DS I've played Luigi's Mansion 2 and Zelda - A Link Between Worlds, which were good. Ignore the Mario games, they've been going downhill for a long time.

 

[KingsGambit_v1legacy]

Games, like films aren't made obsolete by their successors. Mario World plays as well today as it did when it was released; New Super Mario Bros U isn't automatically better just because it's newer.

Old games can still be mechanically sound even if 9.9999 times out of 10 they had worse graphics than modern games. Believe it or not, you can still purchase and play a lot of those older games too in one form or another, making the totality of the gaming experience to date largely available today.

I'm quoting the above because they basically nailed it. Newer games aren't necessarily better on simple account of being newer. Granted, swanky graphics, voice acting and what not *can* add a lot to a game...when done well.

But Square Enix is a perfect example of not doing it well. Eidos gave us Thief 1-3 and this latest reboot. I have played all of them and can say that the first three were ALL better than the newest instalment. And this is in spite of the fact they had swanky voice acting, incessant cut scenes and mocap that was unnecessary. Our own Shamus Young spelled it out here [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/articles/view/video-games/columns/experienced-points/10290-Thief-s-Risky-Reboot] on this site.

I'm sure full-performance capture is an impressive and interesting bit of technology. I'm sure it will look lovely. But it's a feature you can't afford, for fans that don't want it, in service of a game that would be just fine without it.

The original Thief games had so much atmosphere. All maps were one map with no loading screens so there was no immersion breaking transitions. The stealth was a brilliantly implemented mechanic and it used to brilliant effect. In the reboot, there are endless transitions and QTEs, combat and level up mechanics. All of this stuff made the game *worse*, not better.

I still think Mario Kart 64 is the best in the whole series and to date, hasn't been superseded. I believe Baldur's Gate II is the superlative RPG and the best game BioWare ever made. That is their isometric, 2D 2002 game is better than Mass Effect. The first four Hitman games were all much more enjoyable than Absolution. Morrowind does many things better than Skyrim or even Oblivion did. GTA: Vice City is still my favourite of the GTA series (tho GTAV isn't bad). Both The Saboteur and Mafia II are 50x better than Watch Dogs as open-world games go.

Certainly, there are great games available today but they don't reduce what came before. They may be technically superior but that doesn't make them better games (just better looking ones). And for those of us who've played both what came before and what we get now, we can safely say that there are many cases where the older games are better.

Also, original Star Wars trilogy > Prequel Trilogy.

 

[Artaneius]

As a "millennial kid" or whatever you old coots call us, I have no idea what a "Doom" or a "Quake" or "InsertRetroGame" is.

Quake is the first online multiplayer shooter that allowed up to 16 players in a match. To be quite frank if modern games played like Quake, most people would commit suicide before playing online ever again. Only the best of the best ever won matches which is how it should be. Work, effort, and dedication is what decided who ever won matches. No random factors, all skill. No matchmaking system to have similar skilled players play each other. Only the elite of the elite won and enjoyed the full benefits of the blood, sweat, and tears they shed into being good in games in the first place.

Nowadays, being good means nothing because the majority are sheltered from getting their asses handed to them. Such a sad attitude to have to think your entitled to win matches without dedicating a large amount of work and effort into the games. Trust me, if I could ever single person that left Quake and UT for CS, Halo, BF, and CoD would immediately be banned from those games and forced to play Quake and UT for the rest of their life. They deserve no mercy or pity for killing off arena shooters and thinking THEY deserve anything just because they paid for the game.

 

[Silence]

OP actually tackles a question I had myself (I'm older, so it does not really matter to me, but still):

Where are all these "Banjo Kazooie" and "Spyro the Dragon" and "Kingdom Hearts" games? All I see is Call of Duty, Assassin's Creed and shitty Final Fantasies. Why does nobody make the games anymore that made most gamers into gamers?
While most gamers are between 20 and 35 right now, we NEED younger people. The games industry is just so shortsighted. We need a steady influx of new "toys" for younger ones, that's just how it works.


Oh, but Thief 2 IS the best stealth game ever made.
(And Mafia 2 sucks as an open-world game.)

Anyways, games industry is playing dumb and dumber with their trends. Nothing new, really.

 

[Mezahmay]

OP actually tackles a question I had myself (I'm older, so it does not really matter to me, but still):

Where are all these "Banjo Kazooie" and "Spyro the Dragon" and "Kingdom Hearts" games? All I see is Call of Duty, Assassin's Creed and shitty Final Fantasies. Why does nobody make the games anymore that made most gamers into gamers?
While most gamers are between 20 and 35 right now, we NEED younger people. The games industry is just so shortsighted. We need a steady influx of new "toys" for younger ones, that's just how it works.


Oh, but Thief 2 IS the best stealth game ever made.
(And Mafia 2 sucks as an open-world game.)

Anyways, games industry is playing dumb and dumber with their trends. Nothing new, really.

Ooohhh. Making new classics like Spyro and Banjo-Kazooie. I didn't actually reach that conclusion after reading the initial topic post. That thought also occurred to me when I was replaying Banjo-Kazooie a few weeks ago. [sub]God I love that game.[/sub]

I actually just finished texting my 12 year old cousin instructions how to fix his xbox live headset and I know he's huge into Minecraft and Call of Duty games. Now that I'm thinking about the crap he plays (other than Minecraft) I now am somewhat concerned with the games today's youth play. God I hope they don't start making games like they used to when I was his age that are filled with microtransactions and season passes. I'm generally okay with DLC when it actually adds decent content. That boy needs a 3DS or a decent PC so he can learn about games that don't involve holding a gun.

 

[MirenBainesUSMC]

OP actually tackles a question I had myself (I'm older, so it does not really matter to me, but still):

Where are all these "Banjo Kazooie" and "Spyro the Dragon" and "Kingdom Hearts" games? All I see is Call of Duty, Assassin's Creed and shitty Final Fantasies. Why does nobody make the games anymore that made most gamers into gamers?
While most gamers are between 20 and 35 right now, we NEED younger people. The games industry is just so shortsighted. We need a steady influx of new "toys" for younger ones, that's just how it works.


Oh, but Thief 2 IS the best stealth game ever made.
(And Mafia 2 sucks as an open-world game.)

Anyways, games industry is playing dumb and dumber with their trends. Nothing new, really.

Yeah I'll second that. I do believe the industry has pretty much left the kids behind in turn for the young adults/adult bracket. 16-25+. I imagine trying to find wholesome games for Jr is a big challenge although to curtail that, you could focus on mobile games... but the product PR and ads would just torpedo you every holiday and the other kids wanting the assassins creeds et al.

Its just the culture and environment, really, the entire spectrum of entertainment leaves children behind.

 

[MirenBainesUSMC]

I can't say Baulder's Gate was better than Mass Effect only for the simple fact they are two different genres one being fantasy and the other being Sci-Fi... character and story wise. Now better than Dragon Age? Yes. Dragon Age was fun but its a button mashing action-RPG. In Baulder's Gate... well every encounter was a dice throw. Could go well...or you could could end up dead. The way it should be. There was no rushing into rooms and clashing with enemies, if you did that, you were def toast.

I will def agree with Hitman Absolution. More of an action game then its earlier predecessors. There was absolutely no planning ahead, the maps were much smaller and far more scripted, and it was lacking in many areas. I'd rather re-play Hitman: Blood Lines. Now that was a Hitman Game.

 

[CpT_x_Killsteal]

Delivery was a bit poor but GREAT point.

There aren't all that many big PG rated games coming out anymore. Poor old Spyro needs some more games, ones that stay true to the old formula. All the PG games are on the Wii-U now mostly and the DS, so parents would probably have to buy one of them.

As for your comments on old games, you're wrong. They reach the top of many lists because they had soul, whereas many AAA games today do not. These people innovated like F'ing mad to have their vision become reality. As for Thief, it's the only real stealth game around. Modern 'stealth' games are all shit, easy to play, and don't care if you kill a trillion people because the AI are all retarded.

 

[Liquidprid3]

As someone around your age, I highly disagree with your first point. But, I'm not going to delve into that, as you said that wasn't the topic of your post.

I do see a strong lacking in Non-Nintendo E-T rated games. I'm a huge Nintendo fan myself, so finding non shooter-games is extremely easy. But for people who only have, say, a 360? It cand definitely be difficult. Obviously PC is a great way to play games of so many different genres, but PSN and XBL Arcade have a fair amount of downloadable indie games that aren't shooters.

In fact, I'd say the E-T rated stuff has moved on from big name developers making 3D Platformers to indie developers experimenting in different genres. It is a shame that AAA games are usually rated M, and some sort of shooter, but gotta have dem monies.

 

[briankoontz]

I was talking about this exact same problem with a friend recently that the OP brings up - the lack of great *recent* games, especially for young people.

Minecraft is a legendary game, great for all ages. How many other great games for kids have been made in the past five years?

Dark Souls isn't for kids in my opinion.

Other than Minecraft kids have to go to the indie and free-to-play circuits to find great games worth their time, and that's a shame.

Kids can always play the old games, but it's a lot of fun for kids to have "their own" games, games that are new and they identify with, while their parents don't.

 

[giles]

Mario World, Ocarina of Time+Majora's Mask, Baldur's Gate 2, Chrono Trigger etc. are timeless games that can measure up to even the good titles of today. Their graphics don't feel terrible because they go for their own style rather than trying to look realistic. Obviously the style was a necessity due to lack of graphical power, but that was overcome by creativity.
Some games have not aged well. I have played FF7 and Planescape Torment and I thought they felt very dated, despite being revolutionary games in their own right.

You could argue that good modern games like Rayman Origins are superior to their genre predecessors like Mario World. Now I fucking love Rayman Origins, but I think Mario World can be just as good even though it is technically inferior. That's the "art" part, I guess.

 

[Verlander]

My kids play Minecraft loads, platformers still exist, and they enjoy older games. Done.