-
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.
are the 90's and 00's games really better or is it just nostalgia ?
- Thread starter samoilaaa
- Start date
NiiloPielinen
Member
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.
CuteFaceJay
Member
Halo 3 (2007) has more content and is just more fun than Halo Infinite (2021)
I'm sure Gaf can give more examples.
I'm sure Gaf can give more examples.
Last edited:
JohnnyTropics
Neo Member
I'm 38 and have been playing video games since I was 5 years old.
Games haven't changed, I have.
Games haven't changed, I have.
TheBROgamer
Banned
Games really haven't evolved since 2007.
Also 90s - 00s gaming blows away modern gaming.
Also 90s - 00s gaming blows away modern gaming.
InfiniteCombo
Banned
The 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.
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.
samoilaaa
Member
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 intellect
Shut0wen
Member
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
samoilaaa
Member
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
TheBROgamer
Banned
100%
Reizo Ryuu
Member
A lot of the 2d games by the 2d gods like konami and capcom still play great today, for many of the early 3d games is just pure nostalgia; most of them control like absolute ass, have terrible framerates or just have terrible mechanics altogether; it's only really the absolute best studios that managed to create 3d games that still play well today.
Even back then moving between mario 64 and tomb raider was kinda jarring, with how smooth mario 64 controlled.
Even back then moving between mario 64 and tomb raider was kinda jarring, with how smooth mario 64 controlled.
samoilaaa
Member
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 want
jabberwookie
Banned
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
Before everyone had the internet there were still paper strategy guides and hotlines to call if you were absolutely stumped. Some games actually came with a hotline in the instruction manual that cost X amount per minute to call.
I find it way less frustrating as an adult now to look up a quick youtube video once in a while if I'm getting tired of running around aimlessly for days. Like The Witcher III and some of those armor set locations. One piece I never would have found the rest of my life if I didn't watch a video.
I've always thought developers do this sort of thing on purpose to sell guides and now flood the internet with a million walkthrough videos that draw attention to their games. The only thing that really changed is how we can access the information.
TheBROgamer
Banned
Well said, games only improving in graphics (slightly + diminishing returns).
TheBROgamer
Banned
Older games were 100% better, this is coming from a dude that plays retro and new games.
It's not nostalgia, it's reality.
Operations66
Member
These days I mostly look forward to remasters or remakes of classic games. They're more fun than new games.
Wildebeest
Member
People have changed and also games have changed. I don't need to speculate on how all different people have changed.
The two major ways games have changed is:
1. Technology formats, always online player base, large numbers of people who only play on mobile phones, and so on.
2. Corporatization of games, as in turning games into repeatable product with reliable predicted demand, like paper towels or tins of soup.
A big phase of corporatization was standardizing product, leaning very heavily on known intellectual properties and hyped up "stories" like the film industry. Sadly, this phase of soulless corporatization is what many people are nostalgic for when faced with games as a service, brutal FOMO monetization, grinding out battle passes, and so on.
The two major ways games have changed is:
1. Technology formats, always online player base, large numbers of people who only play on mobile phones, and so on.
2. Corporatization of games, as in turning games into repeatable product with reliable predicted demand, like paper towels or tins of soup.
A big phase of corporatization was standardizing product, leaning very heavily on known intellectual properties and hyped up "stories" like the film industry. Sadly, this phase of soulless corporatization is what many people are nostalgic for when faced with games as a service, brutal FOMO monetization, grinding out battle passes, and so on.
JohnnyTropics
Neo Member
Well... looking back on the years, I would say there were 4 distinct phases to my gaming.
1. The imaginative years: This was between the ages of about 5 to about 12. During this time, the game worlds seemed alive. I can still feel it to the center of my soul when I play a game like Super Mario Brothers 3, or StarTropics today. It's not just pixels on a screen... it's a world. I still remember the first time I made it to Larry's airship in Grass World. I remember what I had for dinner that night. I was living IN the games. It was magical. I had no "taste" in games, per se, it was whatever my parents bought me.
2. The gameplay years: This was from the ages of about 12 to 21. This was just me enjoying the gameplay of videogames. I must have put thousands of hours into games like Final Fantasy 1-9 and Chrono Trigger, and had not the slightest idea what the story was. I would play a game like GTA3 and have no clue what the context for any mission I was running was--yet I could entertain myself for hours and hours outrunning a 5 star wanted level. Tiger Woods golf was another big one here, mashing the circle button while the ball was in the air to attain maximum forward spin. "Beating" a game never entered my mind during these years, it was just playing on a virtual playground, reading rumors on the internet, and trying to have as much fun as possible in a virtual world. I would make custom Warcraft 2 maps with 8 competing armies... I would spend all day making a map for it and have nothing to show for it in the end. It was just... experimenting with the medium, I suppose.
3. The trophy years: This went from exactly July 2008 to 2015 (when I became a dad.) Before this point I had almost shelved video games. I had a PS3 but Uncharted hadn't really grabbed me, and (thought) I was growing up and moving on with life. And then Sony patched in trophies. I still remember coming home from a night out with friends, reading that Super Stardust HD had trophy support, having no clue what that meant, firing it up, downloading an update patch, and... staying up all night trying to get every trophy. Uncharted was next. Suddenly, that game was a lot more fun. Suddenly every game was a lot more fun. Next thing I knew I had a Gamefly subscription, spreadsheets tracking games with trophy support I wanted to play, and was following video game news more carefully than I ever had. I loved, loved, loved this era. Burnout Paradise stands out to me as a game I likely never would have played if it didn't have trophies, but the trophies integrated so well with gameplay that it stands as one of my favorite gaming experiences of all time.
4. The analytical years: From 2015-now. After I had a kid, I stopped playing video games and started to read more. A friend introduced me to the concept of being a DM. I became fixated on how to build an adventure. From there, I began studying video game adventures. Now, my interest in the hobby is going back and replaying all of the great games from my past, and seeing/understanding how their stories are structured, how their level progression is structured, how their reward systems are structured, how they give quest hooks, how they deal with exposition, etc. I try to understand them like they're TTRPG campaigns--I try to think how I would run, say, Halo at my table. What are the elements of the story, the nature of the quests you have to run, that make Halo.. Halo? Why is FF7 different than FF6? This has been an incredibly rewarding, sentimental, and enlightening part of my video game journey. I feel like I understand them on a level I never could have hoped to before, and it has made me have a deep, deep love for the hobby.
I think, the way it's heading, that Phase 5 is going to be teaching my son about gaming history and appreciation. Explaining to him why Chrono Trigger is an objectively good game. Teaching him not to be a graphics queen. Teaching him how the Legend of Zelda is predicated on exploration, not fast twitch button mashing. Maybe getting a CRT-TV so he can see what Mario 3 was supposed to look like. Things of that nature.
All of this is to say: games are what they are. But my perspective on them changes considerably as I grow and discover new things about life itself.
And yes, games are art. All games.
alabtrosMyster
Banned
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.
TMLT
Member
Theres still great games around, and stuff that would have been considered pretty mind blowing from a technical and sheer scale perspective back in the day. But for me its not just about the games themselves. Back in the 90s and 00s you didnt have the constant GAAS, always online, dont physically own the shit you buy situation. Your console didnt want to know what your favourite flavour of ice cream is or ask for a retinal scan. Games (and the games media) hadnt been co opted by a bunch of people who dont even particularly like games outside of using them as a vessel to push their political ideals. You could expect to see new entries to franchises (not just sports games) typically within 3 years. Game stores were all over the place. There were tons of games mags out there to buy. There was much less of a reliance on going for the nostalgia bucks. Etc etc.
Last edited:
darrylgorn
Member
Calculating amount of fun / MB...
Yeah, they're better.
Yeah, they're better.
TheGecko
Banned
Thanks for that wonderful insight.Calculating amount of fun / MB...
Yeah, they're better.
samoilaaa
Member
have you played outer wilds , the talos principle , braid , the witness , myst 2021 , creaks , filament 2020 , syberia a world before , escape simulator
Shifty
Member
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.
COD hasn't changed its implementation in god knows how long, but it's sure inflated that MB count with each passing game.
Last edited:
Rat Rage
Member
The highlighted part is what I probably hate the most about today's gaming industry.
Astral Dog
Member
Final Fantasy VII Remake > original FF VII
game devs these days have so many tools, presets and scripts to use that other have wrote these days it's like they aren't even designing games really anymore, just following tutorials. kind of like script kiddies but with game design. it seems a lot of studios are shameless about making cookie cutter games with no real innovation or talent, cause they know that kids will buy it anyway as long as it's got the right trendy hooks.
if necessity is the mother of invention, convenience seems to be the mother of stagnation.
if necessity is the mother of invention, convenience seems to be the mother of stagnation.
NeoIkaruGAF
Gold Member
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.
I loathe the day the games market managed to convince people that writing is a huge part of a good game, and that story lines are best voiced than written. That’s exactly where you can pinpoint a significant drop in the storytelling quality of games, and an even more significant drop in the relevance of good gameplay and the rise of filler content. Remove some brutal design choices from some very old games, and they still play fine. Not a few of them still play fine as is. Ask yourself if you’d still give a 10/10 to your favorite Sony first-party game if all dialogue was written in text boxes, and you’ll know how much you actually care about the “game” part of games.
Barakov
Member
Hard agree. There's way too much design by committee these days.
samoilaaa
Member
in terms of level design , writting , gameplay mechanics , were these things done better in the past ?Specify in detail "better"
Last Prime
Member
90's SquareSoft > 00's Square Enix
The AAA games were better. Then again I was a big jrpg fan back then. We are still getting some great games today but a lot of it is indies. Pretty much if you love the ps1 era you should pay more attention to indie games.
In defense of games of today they do have to deal with a lot more complexity/details. Which is why I do think that they should focus more on smaller more interesting areas/words versus this massive open world do everything games.
In defense of games of today they do have to deal with a lot more complexity/details. Which is why I do think that they should focus more on smaller more interesting areas/words versus this massive open world do everything games.
Arcadialane
Member
Another aspect as well, I think it was more fun to be a gamer back then. The culture just seemed more enjoyable to be in, whether you were playing a rubbish game or the best game ever.
Last edited:
22:22:22
NO PAIN TRANCE CONTINUE
Well. All our experiences of those aspects you mentioned were inherently tied to that time. We didn't know better.
I'm not sure if you can a deep and honoust comparison.
At least back then creators has to be more creative. Genre's also were born that were mind blowing and taken for granted now.
Although gaming is in the top of my hobbies I'm not such and aficionado or expert on level design etc to make a comparison and back it up with facts (also difficult for me in english).
Better? I don't know.
But the only games I put hundreds of hours into are from the last years. (Except Halo CE and 2MP)
So yeah. I don't know man.
Seems like a topic for
01011001
01011001
Banned
The thing is both periods got us great, timeless games, but we probably only remember the great ones from the past.
I'd rather play bloodborne than most of the games of my younth but I feel some genres have regressed gameplay-wise. No fps has gameplay that can compare to quakeworld or quake 3. No fighting game compares to Vampire Savior (which I missed at thje time and only learned last 2 years so no nostalgia on this one).
I'd rather play bloodborne than most of the games of my younth but I feel some genres have regressed gameplay-wise. No fps has gameplay that can compare to quakeworld or quake 3. No fighting game compares to Vampire Savior (which I missed at thje time and only learned last 2 years so no nostalgia on this one).
Last edited:
TheGecko
Banned
Are you on fucking crack?
German Hops
GAF's Nicest Lunch Thief
I doubt any developer had as prolific of a timespan than Squaresoft did in the 90's.
Maybe Sega comes close? Capcom?
AeonGaidenRaiden
Member
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.
PapaEmeritus
Member
Half and Half. For me what I liked about the 90s 00s, you buy a game after reading reviews and that's it, no extra LOOK AT THIS FUCKIN GIANT THING THATLL GO IN THE TRASH pre order bonus. No BUY THIS BLUE ARMOR for an extra perk. Buy the game and play the hell out of it. Also in those years, I think that's when a lot of the best thinking was going on, to advance the medium. Think of how many games now, use a template from those years, slightly expand on it, but largely the same thing. The 2D Castlevania/Metroid formula, as an example. That being said, there are some stand outs for me - basically since Demon's Souls anything From has touched, to me has been gold, I'd go so far to say my favorites games ever.
Basically it's a mixed bag.
Basically it's a mixed bag.
GamesDontSuck
Member
Hard thing to answer as there can be valid debates for either answer.
However, one thing I miss is the leaps and bounds between console generations. For example I remember playing Dead Rising when it came out back in 2006. It was amazing (still is) but seeing 100s of zombies on screen at once? The scale and amount of weapons? Imagine going from og xbox or ps2 to that. I miss that.
However, one thing I miss is the leaps and bounds between console generations. For example I remember playing Dead Rising when it came out back in 2006. It was amazing (still is) but seeing 100s of zombies on screen at once? The scale and amount of weapons? Imagine going from og xbox or ps2 to that. I miss that.
StormCell
Member
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.
What did BOTW do not just as a sandbox but as a game as a whole that was new or better?
Well, for starters, the game's climbing/stamina mechanic and paragliding worked really well for a lot of players. It made exploring fun and interesting. I can honestly say that I haven't seen it implemented quite like that. It resonated well with players. Then there's the Sheikah slate that granted extra abilities, some of these we've seen implemented in other games and some we really hadn't. The ability to exploit magnetism, pause something in time, or freeze it -- just that combination in one game is new. It's not just new to Zelda but new period. I could do some similar things in Elder Scrolls, but not to environments or environmental objects. If we could, like, imagine how cool it would be to pause a boulder in time, load it up with a ton of kinetic energy, and send it flying at a dragon. But you can't. Not without a mod. You also can't knock trees down or set them on fire. There's no traveling across Skyrim via flying log. I mean, really, what did this game do that was new or better?? (sarcasm)
Its a bare bones world where you can literally walk/run for 10 minutes and reach nothing of significance.
Refreshing, isn't it?!
Seriously, though, I kinda think you're exaggerating. On the one hand, though, only the castle is truly significant, and that's because anything else is actually optional. Now, I loved exploring all of Hyrule in this game, but there is plenty here that I would have liked something more. I really don't enjoy that there are only 5 or 6 "dungeon-like" locations in the game. I would have enjoyed more keeps and fortresses that were worth storming. And this brings me to another issue that I would like to see addressed going forward: even though there's arguably more items in this game than previous Zelda games, there's just not enough significant items to be had once you leave the Great Plateau. So, even though I'm having fun exploring, there's never a feeling that I'm going to find anything of much consequence besides armor pieces.
Anyway, there's still a lot here. There's like 9 towns/villages, a few remote buildings, a couple of traveling merchants, etc., shrines, koroks, fountains, etc. Hopefully, the sequel will feature more.
Most people found the breakable weapons annoying
And yet they continued to play it for hundreds of hours....
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
That's mostly your opinion, and also it's not my fault that so many games have basically stripped the physics from their formulas. Take Crysis for example: that game is absolutely awesome and great fun to play around in because stuff breaks, collapses, there's gravity, you can throw things, exploded objects fly and tumble, and so on... and then you sit down to Far Cry 5, and that stuff is no where to even be found. Some of these newer games include a wide variety of vehicles to drive, and it's like the vehicles have no mass or inertia........... I'm with you in that things like gravity and magnetism are old gimmicks, but then they're no where to be found in newer games. That's why I love Breath of the Wild: like Crysis and Half-Life 2 before it, BotW has got great gravity physics, and the objects in the game are detailed in ways you would never notice unless you knew what to look for, meaning they have mass. As sure as the rain that falls in the game puddles in low lying areas, things that are metalic all exhibit magnetic properties, things that are flameable all burn, and if it looks like there's water, you can create blocks of ice on it. For the detail that does exist in the world, it's very consistent through and through as far as what you would expect is what you get.
Is that 10+ year old traits? I don't see anybody else having done it this well. Go ahead, burn the whole god dang forest down, if it pleases ye.
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 feel like tackling these all at once because this is already long-winded.
There's voice acting. All of the relevant characters except Link have voice actors. They simply didn't do voice work for all of the dialog.
Same enemy designs from the past 5 3D Zeldas? You're easily wrong here. I'll even list the last 5 3D Zeldas for you to go google image search to see that you're waaaay wrong. 1. Skyward Sword, 2. Twilight Princess 3. Wind Waker 4. Majora's Mask 5. Ocarina of Time -- there's only been 5 3D Zelda games, and every one of them has chosen a different art direction for world and enemy design. Come to think of it, I don't even recall having ever even encountered a Wizrobe in a 3D Zelda. I think the last time I saw one was in Link to the Past.
Finally, let's talk about enemy respawn. I've seen far worse systems than BotW's blood moon. Everyone expected some form of respawn. Most games do that every time your character sleeps or every time a new day begins. BotW is better than that.
Like I said, hate the game if that's how you feel. It's one of the last games I really truly enjoyed.
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Poll