thats why my deciding factor when it comes to a game is the writing , there is nothing to innovate there , its either good or not , i dont mind if games dont evolve too much as long as i have fun and its not an easy game made for braindead people , i want the game to challenge my intellectThe 90s/00s were about innovation. Which means that there were many more genre -defining titles, a lot more variety, a lot more jaw dropping moments, etc. Ironically enough, the still immature technology at the time was a conduit for such experimentation. As an example, the director of the fist Resident Evil game has come out on the record and said that the fixed camera design was not on purpose, it was a workaround for the PS1's limitations. That alone gave birth to a whole new genre.
Gaming now is largely about iteration. Which means that, as far as things like visuals, controls, etc, gaming is the best it has ever been. But that's all at the expense of gameplay variety and true innovation. Also, the ability of platform holders to directly sell games to people via their digital platforms has given way to us having an absolute explosion in the amount of games from all sorts of publishers ranging from mainstream AAA companies to indie outfits run by, in some cases, literally a single dude.
People blame nostalgia for anything when in reality it isnt, games that are old but 100% still playable like burnout revenge, burnout 3, star fox, f zero gx wind waker, soul calibur 2 hitman 1 to blood money viewiful joe 1 and 2 and many more still play incredibly wellI had a debate with some friends about the quality of gaming these days , we are all 30+ so we have been gaming for over 20 years , ive played games like the old 2d prince of persia , carmageddon , fallout , dangerous dave stuff like that , and we just couldnt decide if gaming was better back then than it is now
i think that nostalgia can play a huge factor , its like that 1st girlfriend that you had in highschool and go on your separate ways once you go to college , you might hook up with better looking women in your 20's or 30's but you will always remember that 1st one , lets take resident evil for example , resident evil 4 is one of my fav of the series but if resident evil 7 released in that same year and someone would ask me which is the better one ofc i would choose resident evil 7 because of the immersion , i cant decide if the story is better but graphics and the way the world is designed helps alot
i think that the technology helps in creating games that are much better than the ones we had , sure the dev might not use it properly and instead feed us microtransactions and dlcs but still there are alot of good games releasing , if i had to count i think i finish more games that released in 1 year since the launch of ps4-xbox one gen than i was in the 90's - 00's
the only thing that changed in me is that i put way more focus on story now , when i was 15 i didnt care about the story at all , finishing the game made me happy and as long as the gameplay was fun i was fine with it
what do you think ?
how did ur taste for games change as years passed ? im 32 and i cant stand bad writing anymore , between age 15-20 i could play anything as long as it had fun gameplay but now its not enoughI'm 38 and have been playing video games since I was 5 years old.
Games haven't changed, I have.
It was better.
At the time. If you go at it now, it'll be a lot less interesting.
It was an era of change and experimentations. Everything was exciting. The switch from 2D to 3D. The prolifiration of FMV as a storytelling device. Better audio quality or even a worse one is also amazing due to the fact that you had to work around constraints and that produced ingenious ways to make music. MMO and online MP in general.
Games were a lot more personal in nature, more emphasis on word of mouth in regards to strategies so you can effectively hold huge advantages in terms of knowledge.
Games also weren't afraid to hyperfocus on their audience and not try to go mainstream and effetively lose its identity in the process.
Shit, I could go on but it was definitely the golden age of gaming.
i dont know about those racing games but hitman 3 for me is the best of them all , it gives so much freedom and the levels are so well designed , they really give you the freedom to do whatever you wantPeople blame nostalgia for anything when in reality it isnt, games that are old but 100% still playable like burnout revenge, burnout 3, star fox, f zero gx wind waker, soul calibur 2 hitman 1 to blood money viewiful joe 1 and 2 and many more still play incredibly well
I don't know if games were "better" back then or not. I enjoyed my time with those games and go back and played them regularly.
What was better back then and really sucked the fun out of gaming is the proliferation of the internet and YouTube videos.
What made most of those games special was finding secrets or solving a particularly tough puzzle.
You got a sense of accomplishment from it and it felt rewarding to finally figure it out or find that hidden door that maybe not many had discovered.
Now with the proliferation of YouTube and influencers, it feels like everything is already discovered before you even boot the game.
Sierra games (Space Quest, Kings Quest,) used to take weeks or months to get through. Now if you get stuck, look it up. It takes 3 or 4 hours instead.
It makes it feel mundane, if you are just playing through with someone telling you the answer, or how to make your guy OP from the start.
In reality I think that is where most of the magic of these games got sucked out, and why I try to avoid it at all costs. I also think that's why I seem to enjoy games more than most ppl here do
I think this is what made Breath of the Wild really stand out. It was an established franchise going into a really large sandbox for the first time that allowed players to approach and strategize however they like, and then on top of that was world/physics engine that very, very few games have anything quite like it. Nintendo set out to do something totally new and fresh and in the process made something old fresh and new. At the same time, the actual game world has become a toy.
Most modern day Triple A sandbox games are nothing like that. Some very limited amount of the sandbox is interactive, and the rest is usually narrative with a lot of repetitive running about the map.
A lot of these concepts and qualities are not new to the industry. I remember Half-life 2 having its own hyped up big deal physics engine. The problem is that HL-2 released almost 20 years ago, and while modern FPS look much better and include a lot of QoL features, many of them don't do anything more than what the 20 year old game allowed players to do. Most buildings are indestructable in the games. There's no shooting through a brick wall and seeing it crumble away with each shot. You can play with fire in Elden Ring, but you can't burn the forest down or set a field on fire while beating up a giant. You can't because the world is static and plastic and not real at all in any sense.
They're simply not pushing the envelope in any sort of meaningful way besides visuals. I still can't hack a dude's arm off while battling him. If I shoot his leg off, I expect him to see him crawling afterward. Nope. Nothing even close. Progress on this type of thing stopped over a decade ago....
Older games were 100% better, this is coming from a dude that plays retro and new games.People blame nostalgia for anything when in reality it isnt, games that are old but 100% still playable like burnout revenge, burnout 3, star fox, f zero gx wind waker, soul calibur 2 hitman 1 to blood money viewiful joe 1 and 2 and many more still play incredibly well
Well... looking back on the years, I would say there were 4 distinct phases to my gaming.how did ur taste for games change as years passed ? im 32 and i cant stand bad writing anymore , between age 15-20 i could play anything as long as it had fun gameplay but now its not enough
That is my gripe with a lot of the modern games with light "puzzles" you enter the room and the side characters start pointing you in the direction of the solution like you are some idiot. This is beyond annoying if your IQ is above your shoe size.What made most of those games special was finding secrets or solving a particularly tough puzzle.
You got a sense of accomplishment from it and it felt rewarding to finally figure it out or find that hidden door that maybe not many had discovered.
Thanks for that wonderful insight.Calculating amount of fun / MB...
Yeah, they're better.
have you played outer wilds , the talos principle , braid , the witness , myst 2021 , creaks , filament 2020 , syberia a world before , escape simulatorThat is my gripe with a lot of the modern games with light "puzzles" you enter the room and the side characters start pointing you in the direction of the solution like you are some idiot. This is beyond annoying if your IQ is above your shoe size.
You sure about that? I'd say the same (or less) amount of fun has been aggressively spread across ever greater file sizes over time if we're talking AAA.Calculating amount of fun / MB...
Yeah, they're better.
It was better.
At the time. If you go at it now, it'll be a lot less interesting.
It was an era of change and experimentations. Everything was exciting. The switch from 2D to 3D. The prolifiration of FMV as a storytelling device. Better audio quality or even a worse one is also amazing due to the fact that you had to work around constraints and that produced ingenious ways to make music. MMO and online MP in general.
Games were a lot more personal in nature, more emphasis on word of mouth in regards to strategies so you can effectively hold huge advantages in terms of knowledge.
Games also weren't afraid to hyperfocus on their audience and not try to go mainstream and effetively lose its identity in the process.
Shit, I could go on but it was definitely the golden age of gaming.
Today there‘s likely 100x the crappy games there were back then. The difference is there’s so many games coming out today, and the publicity game is so rigged towards the highest-budget ones, 90% of games simply don’t exist unless you actively go out of your way to find out about them. That’s why quality seems higher on average today. In the age of magazines, even bad games got some review space. Now there’s no big outlet diving into the bottom of the online store barrel to tell you about this crap game you really shouldn’t waste your time and money on.No. You just remember the really good ones and forget the crappy ones. Hell, you may not even remember the other games that were good but didn't get popular.
Hard agree. There's way too much design by committee these days.The different numbers of genres, higher instances of innovation and the (relatively) larger leaps in technology were definitely better....
But in terms of graphical showcase, storytelling and multi-player possibilities it's much...much better now.
in terms of level design , writting , gameplay mechanics , were these things done better in the past ?Specify in detail "better"
in terms of level design , writting , gameplay mechanics , were these things done better in the past ?
Are you on fucking crack?Final Fantasy VII Remake > original FF VII
I doubt any developer had as prolific of a timespan than Squaresoft did in the 90's.90's SquareSoft > 00's Square Enix
Im sorry but what are you talking about lol. What did BOTW do not just as a sandbox but as a game as a whole that was new or better? Its a bare bones world where you can literally walk/run for 10 minutes and reach nothing of significance . Most people found the breakable weapons annoying, physics....these are 10+ year old traits I mean I'm not sure what you played but there's absolutely nothing in BOTW that pushed any envelope. They just made the franchise open world, they still had the same ol voiceless characters, same enemy designs from like the past 5 3D ones, enemy respawn because like I said there world was so barebones that if the enemies didn't respawn you literally would run into nothing.I think this is what made Breath of the Wild really stand out. It was an established franchise going into a really large sandbox for the first time that allowed players to approach and strategize however they like, and then on top of that was world/physics engine that very, very few games have anything quite like it. Nintendo set out to do something totally new and fresh and in the process made something old fresh and new. At the same time, the actual game world has become a toy.
Most modern day Triple A sandbox games are nothing like that. Some very limited amount of the sandbox is interactive, and the rest is usually narrative with a lot of repetitive running about the map.
It doesn't seem that you read my post completely but rather just captured the gist of it and arrived with your own arguments. It's fine if you don't like the game. It's not perfect. There are things about it that I don't like. However, it's the best selling Zelda ever and it appealed to over ten million players. The game obviously does some things extremely well even if you don't like the game.Im sorry but what are you talking about lol. What did BOTW do not just as a sandbox but as a game as a whole that was new or better? Its a bare bones world where you can literally walk/run for 10 minutes and reach nothing of significance . Most people found the breakable weapons annoying, physics....these are 10+ year old traits I mean I'm not sure what you played but there's absolutely nothing in BOTW that pushed any envelope. They just made the franchise open world, they still had the same ol voiceless characters, same enemy designs from like the past 5 3D ones, enemy respawn because like I said there world was so barebones that if the enemies didn't respawn you literally would run into nothing.
Anyone that holds BOTW in such high regard as an RPG obviously haven't played RPGs before. Fallout 2 from 1998 has more content than BOTW.