Modern gaming... is this decline actually a real decline in quality? or are we fooled by nostalgia?

[Lord Mountbatten Reborn]

Usually people just want to think they had better games back in the days they were toddlers. If we think about it, (you are going to hang me for this) Half Life didn't really have a groundbreaking new idea or a truly unique story. Aliens and marines, multiverse travel, an accident in a hi-tech facility... the list goes on. Nothing truly outstanding. Of course, it was all done in a whole new way and I really like it.

I myself being a member of the yoofz of today, played Half-life 2 before the first one, and loved it. However, when I played the first Half-life, it was fun but never enjoyable enough for me to even be bothered playing through to the end. It isn't that good to be honest, and this is coming from someone who deviated from the mainstream twats at his school (twats in the sense that they really are twats (and yes, "twat" as in "jerk"), not just because of their gaming preferences) to play classics much beloved by older gamers (right now I'm playing through Earthbound with my little sister). There are many awesome blasts-from-the-past, but to me Half-life isn't one of them. Filled with original concepts perhaps, but it didn't implement them as well as it could've. Ah well, Valve more than made up for it with it's other releases.

 

[j0z]

snip

Well that's awfully unfair. It WAS a sequel, keep in mind.

Snip

Bioshock. Was a sequel to System Shock 2. It just didn't share the name. And more of a prequel really, but you get what I'm saying. It's in the same series of games.

Uh? Bioshock was a spiritual successor to SS2, but certainly not a prequel,
If I may quote Wikipedia:

The game incorporates elements found in role-playing and survival horror games, and is described by the developers and Levine as a "spiritual successor" to their previous titles in the System Shockseries.

Here is the source for that:
http://au.pc.ign.com/articles/556/556421p1.html

BioShockhas absolutely no relation to the System Shockseries in terms of the intellectual property, characters, settings etc.

 

[Woem]

I've noticed a lot of threads with some comments saying that modern games aren't as good as classics, that we'll never again see the quality of such classics as Final Fantasy VII, Ocarina of Time, Sonic the Hedgehog 2, Half-Life 1, and some lesser known titles such as System Shock 2.

Are comments like these valid, or are many gamers simply clouded by nostalgia?

Those game? Bah! I yearn for the days of System Shock 1, Daggerfall, Stonekeep and Bioforge!

 

[mannaroth]

I believe that there is a decline but it's not the games that cause it it's things like DLC you got to pay for and subscrption fees and stuff like that, that just make you feel like video gmae developers have no care in their work because they can't seem to muster up the effort to finish a game when they are bloody making it! (Yes I am aware you could counter this by saying that developers care because they make all of this stuff after they released a game but NO! if you want to do something right you got to do it FULLY the first time)

 

[Skeleon]

Wow, one sentence. Good to see you put some thought in to your post.

I had little time at that moment.
I'll expand upon my statement now.
Also, don't bother me.

I'm a person who mostly buys old games (except for some exceptions). I make a habit of buying budget titles or used games and only renting newer ones. This way, I have a look at both older titles and newer ones at the same time.

When looking at PC games, they tend to become simpler and more console-ish while the graphics improve and improve. It seems like they try to blind people with flashy graphics while disregarding putting any soul into their games. This is even true for newer games that I liked, such as Bioshock. Compare it to System Shock's complexity and you'll be disappointed to see how simplified this game has become.

There seems to be a general fear of trying new things, and (I'm afraid) rightly so. Innovative new titles, while becoming cult classics and being critically acclaimed, rarely have any real economical success. No, the masses want the 1000th samey WW2 shooter or another driving game.
Games like Psychonauts or Sacrifice (to mention an older example) barely get a chance.

Developers see this, too, of course, and unless they can rely on some big funding or at least a mediocre title beforehand to fuel their new work, they can't afford or don't want to take the risk of going a different route than the rest.

 

[farmerboy219]

i think gaming is better than ever

 

[cowbell40]

The thing is is that these "N64 era" games aren't really good games, but have an undeniable charm about them that still makes them fun to play.

 

[L3m0n_L1m3]

Gaming is improving as time goes on. I played old games like Megaman 9 and Super Mario World 2, and I really didn't find them that fun. True, our current generation gaming consoles have a few bad games, but at the same time, last generation consoles had quite a few bad ones as well.

We ARE starting to run out of ideas for gaming though, only so many times a futuristic super soldier in power armor can save the universe from aliens.

 

[Ericb]

As someone who cherishes progress, nostalgia is a highly unattractive feeling for me.

Originality and experimentation are still very low compared to two or so decades ago, BUT it's been steadily improving compared to five years ago.

Most of the (western) industry is still stupidly focused on the so call "realism" but only going down the Uncanny Valley further and further, all the while ignoring healthy design practices in the name of deadlines and risk-aversion.

So, as far as I can see from most of what comes out in the market, the videogame realm is still low on quality, but I don't think we are in decline anymore.

Discussions of art, impact and potentials in videogames are getting stronger by the day, and the hardcore crowd will eventually become a niche in a vast array of different gamers. It's already happening.

It just ain't gonna be fast. But at least it will be lasting.

Gaming is improving as time goes on. I played old games like Megaman 9 and Super Mario World 2, and I really didn't find them that fun. True, our current generation gaming consoles have a few bad games, but at the same time, last generation consoles had quite a few bad ones as well.

But the ratio between bad and good games before were much more tilted towards the good ones than nowadays.

There were not that much "brown and grey is gritty" games to begin with, aside from the ones intentionally towards that direction for the sake of a rather original atmosphere. For all the technical limitations, they managed to create a lot content (gameplay-wise, but especially visual) that was interesting to interact with.

Back then, I could only wonder what developers could accomplish with better machines, and honestly it's disheartening to see it wasted in what you already pointed out, yet another xenophobic macho space marine game.

 

[Numb1lp]

Real decline. The future portrayed in the Mike Judge comedy Idiocracy will come a lot sooner. The world is being dumbed down to maximize profits. Soon people will expect less and less from their entertainment and someday we all will be watching Ow My Balls!

I like money

 

[hermes]

We are blinded by nostalgia and by games with big price tags...

 

[A random person]

It's the nostalgia. People tend to remember older things fondly and denounce newer things. For evidence I present every fandom ever and the masses of people who go on about how America is morally decaying.

 

[Nazulu]

The thing is is that these "N64 era" games aren't really good games, but have an undeniable charm about them that still makes them fun to play.

Thats your poor opinion.

All I can say is that games are getting bigger with new technology while completely lacking originality. However I have seen a lot of flaws in some of the big popular titles, some that even ruin the game play!

 

[MiracleOfSound]

It's absolutely not true.

The technology has evolved and the good developers are learning from the errors of the past.

Goldeneye and Doom are still great fun, and solid shooters but they have been surpassed by the technical marvels of Gears and COD.

However with more data there is more chance of bugs and glitches, so this generation of games is the buggiest so far. It's harder to make perfect games nowadays, we've come a long way from Pong.

 

[Manji187]

Real decline...in overall challenge level, design ingenuity (due to hardware limitations in the day) and storytelling.

Sure...games look better nowadays (yay for all you graphical hookers out there, you know who you are) but I'm sure many of you agree an "ugly" game (measured by todays standards) can still beat a "pretty" game and that's not surprising cuz gaming is more than just looks. Heck, there are plenty of aspects that weigh heavier than graphics. Story, atmosphere, gameplay..to name a few.

 

[Amnestic]

However with more data there is more chance of bugs and glitches, so this generation of games is the buggiest so far. It's harder to make perfect games nowadays, we've come a long way from Pong.

But with technology comes the means to help get rid of those bugs after release. If you released a NES game with a bug on it, the only way to fix it would be to go back and have a re-release with a 1.1 cartridge with the bug fix on it causing people to pay X amount of moneys to get a bug free version. Today we have the internet hooked up to all the consoles with Xbox LIVE and the Playstation Network and...whatever the Wii is using as well as the (obvious) PC/Mac. Games can recieve patches and updates to help get rid of the bugs which was a previously unused practise. It's more buggy - yes, but we also have more opportunities to get rid of the bugs without having to bother with releasing an entirely new disc.

Though I do wish Bethesda would stop releasing their games with so many goddamn bugs

 

[MiracleOfSound]

However with more data there is more chance of bugs and glitches, so this generation of games is the buggiest so far. It's harder to make perfect games nowadays, we've come a long way from Pong.

But with technology comes the means to help get rid of those bugs after release. If you released a NES game with a bug on it, the only way to fix it would be to go back and have a re-release with a 1.1 cartridge with the bug fix on it causing people to pay X amount of moneys to get a bug free version. Today we have the internet hooked up to all the consoles with Xbox LIVE and the Playstation Network and...whatever the Wii is using as well as the (obvious) PC/Mac. Games can recieve patches and updates to help get rid of the bugs which was a previously unused practise. It's more buggy - yes, but we also have more opportunities to get rid of the bugs without having to bother with releasing an entirely new disc.

Though I do wish Bethesda would stop releasing their games with so many goddamn bugs

Yep, all true, but a lot of games are still buggy as shit even after thier updates and patches. (Bethesda being a prime offender)

 

[Pimppeter2]

AI know a good game when I play one. I loved OOT and SM64, but I also loved Jack & Daxter and Morrowind.

 

[Fauxity]

snip

Well that's awfully unfair. It WAS a sequel, keep in mind.

Snip

Bioshock. Was a sequel to System Shock 2. It just didn't share the name. And more of a prequel really, but you get what I'm saying. It's in the same series of games.

Uh? Bioshock was a spiritual successor to SS2, but certainly not a prequel,
If I may quote Wikipedia:

The game incorporates elements found in role-playing and survival horror games, and is described by the developers and Levine as a "spiritual successor" to their previous titles in the System Shockseries.

Here is the source for that:
http://au.pc.ign.com/articles/556/556421p1.html

BioShockhas absolutely no relation to the System Shockseries in terms of the intellectual property, characters, settings etc.

Yeah, that's why I said more of a prequel. I understand that it's not really related in anything but gameplay, but I know that a lot of people expected something more similar.

Sorry about that, I guess I wasn't too clear as to what I was thinking.

 

[YuheJi]

I think a lot of people are blinded by nostalgia. I remember loving Diddy Kong Racing when it came out, but I recently gave it another play, and I was shocked that I ever enjoyed the game. It just wasn't close to as good as I had remembered it.