• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

were older games more creative?

F

FloatOn

Member
I have a hard time answering this one. It's not a matter of them being better or not, I'm simply talking about creativity here. Most of the games we have today are the direct result of these genre defining games. Games had more to prove back when they became a medium. There are so many horrible, odd games that just did things because they could, but damn if they were not ridiculously creative.

Today's games are not limited by technology so much as they are by creativity and what sells. So we see lots of the same genre trends over and over. Sequels that are essentially the same game as the previous entry and so on.

However, when we do see a unique game (usually in the indie scene) these days I think about what I would have thought had I seen them as a kid and it's no contest, the modern creative games absolutely destroy what came out in the 80s. It's just a shame that those truly unique experiences are so few and far between.

TL;DR - I think creativity was more common back in 80s but perhaps now it's better despite it being less frequent.
 
M

Midou

Member
I've played titles like Deus Ex, Planescape: Torment and System Shock 2 for the first time in the last few years, and I can tell they were awesome without nostalgia goggles, and felt genuinely better in mechanics than most modern games. It is unfortunate as they went towards a wider audience, they had to appeal to the lowest common denominator.

Not saying all games inspired by those or sequels to those that are modern are bad, just a general idea.
 
M

Mr_Antimatter

Member
Not really. From what I remember of the early days, you had just as many derivative and me too titles. the SNEs era was basically arcade ports, platformers, side scrolling shooters, etc, dominating sales.

Now, there was innovation as new genres opened up, mostly from the arcade side of stuff for consoles and the PC, as well as people starting to blend two genres together to get a unique game.

Honestly, I think there is just as much innovation and creativity now, it's just people are blinded by the blockbusters, and start to ignore all the little guys. It's very similar to movies these days.
 
H

Hanmik

Member
my commodore 64 was overjoyed by the amount of crazy games I could play on it.. but I guess you could just go to Google Play or Apple´s app store to get the same.. lot´s of crap, with the occasional good creative game hidden somewhere..
 
N

Not Spaceghost

Spaceghost
In a way yes they were, perhaps not as far back at the 80s but definitely late 90s early 2000s. The reason is simple, it was easier and less expensive to develop a video game. We would see more risk taking with games back then because it was possible to do without fear of a huge loss.

Just one example, God Hand - had that project been envisioned to day in the way that it was back then I don't think it would have ever been green lit.

This generation killed the "B" game, everything now is either triple A or indie. The "B" game is where a lot of experimentation and creativity was expressed, so that is why it feels so dead. The only possible contender for a B game I can think of this gen is Nier.
 
S

Stephen Stills

Member
I think so. Smaller budget means less risk which means more original ideas and less sticking to the same shit.

Not to say there weren't plenty of shitty unoriginal games back in the day or that there aren't any creative, fun games being made these days, but as a rule I'd say yes.
 
B

Bjoern the Smexy

Member
Mr_Antimatter said:
Honestly, I think there is just as much innovation and creativity now, it's just people are blinded by the blockbusters, and start to ignore all the little guys. It's very similar to movies these days.
Click to expand...

I totally agree with this.
Nowadays it's all dominated by "AAAA titles", and the smaller games get shoved aside, no matter how good they are.
 
Ü

Übermatik

Member
I don't think so. There were countless shmups and platformers, all of a similar style back then.

Today we have things like Flower, Journey, Mario Galaxy etc. We have greater technnology now to realise more creative ideas, where as back then devs were limited to the hardware, and making similar games was too easy of a habit to fall into.
 
K

kodt

Banned
I think enjoying a game is at least 50% other life circumstances, perhaps even more, than the actual quality of the game.
 
M

m3r4

Dufter Typ taking lurking to the next level
I think gamers back then where more creative on average, since they had to use their imagination to make something out of a game that's severely limited by its technology.

... and thus, games themselves would end up feeling more creative, aswell.
 
S

Sephzilla

Member
There are times where I think the technical restrictions of older systems encouraged more creative thinking in developers and thus games ended up feeling a bit more creative.

For example - Metal Gear became a stealth game due to technical limitations on the number of bullets that could be on the screen at once.
 
stuminus3

stuminus3

Member
The videogame industry has always been like this. We might remember the halycon days of Pac-Man and Donkey Kong and remember things as being more creative, more daring... but for every Pac-Man, there were a thousand clones of generic spaceship shooting games. I'm too lazy to do it, but if I were to sit down and try to compose a list of games that were "creative" back in the late 70s/early 80s that weren't in some way a clone or sequel of something else that was popular, it'd be a struggle to come up with a longer list than I could with modern games.
 
T

TomJoadsGhost

Member
I think it was easier to find new ideas to explore back then, most of the more interesting games these days tend to be aesthetically creative rather than featuring new modes of gameplay.
 
P

PuppetSlave

Member
Sounds like you need to check out the PC scene.

Not gonna start a list war but really, the amount of creativity out there in "smaller" indie PC games is really amazing.

However, bigger studios tend to play it safer, hence shooter #82.

But considering the amount of studios going under the last 10 years or so... Can't really blame them too hard.
 
D

Dr Dogg

Member
Creative? Probably not but certainly more focused and not the homogenized mess that some games turn out to be at the moment.
 
A

Arthea

Member
In my eyes, yes, they were more creative, that's not even a contest in most cases.
But it's also true, that when a game is good and creative in modern times, it's usually not worse than old games, or not by much.
Still... talking about first impressions Civ 5 isn't even close by "whoa I can do all that" impressions than Civ 2 or Alpha Centauri.
The same is true with RPGs, Arcanum (or even first Diablo) made more impression on me than all modern RPGs together. OTOH the Last Remnant was surprisingly creative as Resonance of Fate, but they are much more flawed than let's say FF7 and Suikoden II.

OTOH driving games (all kinds of them) never were that good as now.

Can't say about shooters, because I think they got boring and samey. Unreal Tournament was a thing, DooM was. Modern? not sure, can't play long enough to see what's good about them, too boring.
 
F

FloatOn

Member
PuppetSlave said:
Sounds like you need to check out the PC scene.

Not gonna start a list war but really, the amount of creativity out there in "smaller" indie PC games is really amazing.

However, bigger studios tend to play it safer, hence shooter #82.

But considering the amount of studios going under the last 10 years or so... Can't really blame them too hard.
Click to expand...

I mentioned that in the OP. I do all of my gaming on my PC.

I haven't picked them up yet but Proteus and Antichamber seem creative as it comes.
 
B

BolognaSoup

Member
I do not think older games were more creative. Or at least, the variety of design was far more limited in the 80's and 90's in my opinion. Today's AAA titles are rather common and predictable but outside of that there has been a ton of interesting, creative stuff happening on XBLA, PSN, and Indie games in general. Flower, Journey, Sword and Sorcery, Antichamber, fez, Mark of the Ninja, Portal, and so on.
 
eXistor

eXistor

Member
Games these days feel compromised (I've been using that word a lot lately) whereas back in the day there may have been a lot of shit (moreso than today), but there were so many exciting things being done, it felt like a creative breeding ground. It's all rules and restrictions nowadays. You only really find that same kind of unbridled creativity in indie games anymore.
 
P

PuppetSlave

Member
RealityExists said:
I mentioned that in the OP. I do all of my gaming on my PC.

I haven't picked them up yet but Proteus and Antichamber seem creative as it comes.
Click to expand...

Oh missed that when reading the op. Don't really see the 80's having more creative games though in that case.

The list of really creative games would be quite long even if you took only the last 3 years.

The tools and the ways to reach you audience feels like they are getting better and better all the time as well.

I personally feel quite optimistic about the future. There's more out there then ever before.
 
A

Atomski

Member
If you just play modern AAA games then yes games did use to be more creative.

However if you arent one of those people and actually take the time to play some indie games then nah there is stuff just as creative.
 
D

Dylan

Member
I say yes for Japanese games and not so much for Western games. Now its seems to be the other way around.
 
Mihos

Mihos

Gold Member
Ugh, no way. It seemed like 90% of the stuff I bought on NES/Genesis back was a crappy thrown together platformer. There was very little in the way of art direction except for maybe in the music. It was few and far between that there was really ever anything new on consoles back then. I think there has been more interesting and creative things in the last two years than the entire lifespans of some of those early consoles.

Today I think the barrier of entry is so much lower and allows for much more creativity from people from much wider backgrounds than in the 80s instead of just coders.
 
L

LonelyGreyWolf

Banned
Absolutely not. There's at least ten times more creativity now than back in the old days, especially thanks to all the things we can do now.
 
A

Arthea

Member
LonelyGreyWolf said:
Absolutely not. There's at least ten times more creativity now than back in the old days, especially thanks to all the things we can do now.
Click to expand...

Isn't it other way around? You have many tasks automated now, alone on that, you can do much less in a game than you used to, not talking about good or bad now.
 
R

robovanburen

Member
SgtCobra said:
Nostalgia.

Shooters now are like platformers in the 90's.
Click to expand...

Pretty much. It was like 7-8 years of companies trying to make the next Mario or Sonic:

1148.jpg


aero.gif


Bubs.png
 
stn

stn

Member
I feel like developers were more creative and risk-taking back then. Nowadays projects aren't taken on unless there is significant profit to be had, though of course there are exceptions. Re-hashing and multiple sequels have also been much more common in modern times.

Still, there has been innovation and creativity even now.
 
W

we.are.the.armada

Member
I think that there are two major factors:

  1. Suspension of disbelief elevates the abstract; a young mind looks at lo-fi graphics and imagines that things are greater than they seem
  2. Nostalgia contorts conviction; even a broken game mechanic that required hours of trial and error can seem like the greatest thing ever in retrospect, detached from the feelings of frustration, the elation carries on

A common theory is that humans will try to connect to the positive aspects instilled in them at a younger age and will defend things (games, movies, food) in association to these positive aspects.
 
D

Derrick01

Banned
Midou said:
I've played titles like Deus Ex, Planescape: Torment and System Shock 2 for the first time in the last few years, and I can tell they were awesome without nostalgia goggles, and felt genuinely better in mechanics than most modern games. It is unfortunate as they went towards a wider audience, they had to appeal to the lowest common denominator.

Not saying all games inspired by those or sequels to those that are modern are bad, just a general idea.
Click to expand...

Yeah this pretty much. If you haven't played most of those games as well as others like Thief 1&2 (which let's be honest most didn't), play them and they'll make you wonder what the fuck happened in the last 7-10 years.
 
L

LonelyGreyWolf

Banned
Arthea said:
Isn't it other way around? You have many tasks automated now, alone on that, you can do much less in a game than you used to, not talking about good or bad now.
Click to expand...

What are you talking about? "Many tasks automated"? Like what? Name some example, because it's the exact other way around. There are many more tasks now and much more variety. And "much less to do in games now"? It's the exact opposite. I seriously don't know what you're talking about.
 
J

Jacobi

Banned
You definitely had more creative games in the PSX/N64/DC era. Today, we have indie games... Pretty much...

Remember when we had shit like
Jet Set Radio, ShenMue, Crazy Taxi, Silent Hill, Beatmania...

It was just easier to fund niche/creative games back then... And I guess those creative games might have killed Sega...
 
R

Raziel

Member
Yes. You'll get a lot of people with poor perspective and memory that will say no, nostalgia glasses, etc, but there being less risk taking today is acknowledged fact, not myth.
 
M

megalowho

Member
I found it very interesting hearing Mark Cerny talk about working at Atari in the early 80s on that awesome YouTube interview that made the rounds. Originality was prized above all - if someone else had made something that resembled a fighting game, no one could ever make a game in that style again. Having to think outside of the box is likely how we ended up with Marble Madness - certainly an original concept. I don't know many studios that would have the balls to do that today.
 
S

Shion

Member
Retail games were definitely more creative in the old days.

But non-AAA games are still fine.

There are tons of interesting and unique stuff outside the AAA scene.
 
P

patapuf

Member
I don't think so, but the more creative games are often not as visible as the blockbusters.

let's not only think of the good games back in the day but also of huge amount of me too games that existed as well. I'm pretty sure the ratio creative/uncreative is not all that different today. However the budget difference between games is.
 
M

MightyHedgehog

Member
Yes, because they all had more limitations that mattered to what they were capable of spending their effort on, ensuring that they would focus on the most important parts of their vision. When everyone was in that boat, it created more daring competition. It also allowed more games to be a great deal more unrealistic, which allowed them to more easily explore different and new ideas because the consumer base wasn't so locked into having these high expectations (of following standards of production value and design approach) that seem to come at the cost of more interesting design and content. Not to say that there isn't plenty of creativity nowadays, but it's definitely more about regurgitating and using older games as a basis for their design, uninterested in challenging the assumptions of a genre or concept. Refinement and superficial value has become a lot more sought after over the last decade and a half.
 
R

Rubius

Member
Nope.
We had the platforming phase, then the fighting phase and now we are in the Shooter phase.
We will go through other phases later on. People do what is popular.
 
A

Arthea

Member
LonelyGreyWolf said:
What are you talking about? "Many tasks automated"? Like what? Name some example, because it's the exact other way around. There are many more tasks now and much more variety. And "much less to do in games now"? It's the exact opposite. I seriously don't know what you're talking about.
Click to expand...
For example, autoupdating saidequests journals. In older times, you had to talk with people again, or write down everything to keep track of a game. There were no autoopening doors, autoreloading guns, autochanging them, autoimproving terain, autobuilding, autoaiming, autoequiping best armour, or even knowing which is best without trying, no autohealing, no autosaving, you name it.
 
W

Waldo Lydecker

Member
I think so. Also we are living in a ADHD society in which instant enjoyment has become the norm and things like adventuring and exploring has become less important. Movement speed has become faster, dialogues and script less intelligent and differences between games became less. And then I mean AAA games and big budget games. Like with movies and music, if you search better outside the mainstream you'll find the gems (luckily still!).

Also, it has nothing to do with this post but I just wanted to say I really miss this game:

zB2ieSbh54gUBaTbaLF96fA_.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Sega: Creative Assembly will return to genres it knows best after Hyenas’ cancellation | It's implied the studio's focus will return to offline RTS
News Game Dev 2
53
3K
REDRZA MWS replied
Sega sells Relic and will cut 240 jobs across UK studios | Creative Assembly, Sega HARDlight and Sega Europe will be impacted by the changes
News
40
3K
Angry_Megalodon replied
Games Industry Reacts to Tango Gameworks Closure: "Why?"
Game Dev 2 3 4 5
208
11K
bender replied
The state of Japanese to English official game localizations today
24
2K
March Climber replied
What is your stance on AI assets in games?
2
80
3K
sachos replied
Top Bottom