bigdaddygamebot
Member
It is better...and it would be nice to go into a thread without the "master-race" shitting it up with "lulz consolez" posts.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Have videogames really gotten better over the years?
- Thread starter Mariah Carey
- Start date
It is better...and it would be nice to go into a thread without the "master-race" shitting it up with "lulz consolez" posts.
Criminal Upper
Banned
God no.
NVM I think 1998 might be my favorite year ever.
Zelda OOT, MGS, StarCraft, Half Life, Buldar's Gate, Thief, Unreal, Banjo Kazooie, Heart Of Darkness, Xenogears, Commando's, Resident Evil 2, Grim Fandango. Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six AND Fallout 2.
And all of those games are AAA and none of them play alike.
Manmademan
Member
I agree with you EXCEPT for this. Pre-PSX games (and the N64, as well) were DRASTICALLY more expensive than games today. yeah, you might have to buy more systems to experience everything, but in terms of console games, a PS3 and a Wii, or a 360 and a Wii will get you 95% of what's out there.
Remember, the concept of "greatest hits" didn't exist back in the SNES/Genesis/etc days, the used game market was in it's infancy, and prices didn't drop like a rock in 60 days like they do now. I recall games like Dragon Warrior II getting low print runs, becoming impossible to find, and costing 3 figures used at Funcoland. This doesn't really happen anymore.
Absolutely. Not only better, but more accessible... in the good sense.
Lately when I play Skyrim, I can't help but be reminded of the old days playing Legend of Zelda. In many ways, Skyrim is the full-scale, 3D realization of that 8-bit experience. And because it has full voice, a detailed map, and interesting quests, it's easier for the average person to get sucked in.
Lately when I play Skyrim, I can't help but be reminded of the old days playing Legend of Zelda. In many ways, Skyrim is the full-scale, 3D realization of that 8-bit experience. And because it has full voice, a detailed map, and interesting quests, it's easier for the average person to get sucked in.
jim-jam bongs
Member
There are things which are objectively different between a console with a single all-purpose controller and a PC which can use any peripheral you like. Look at this way, would fighting games be the same if the developers started designing the base games to be best played on a keyboard? Incidentally, master-race is frowned upon around here these days I believe.
D
Deleted member 80556
Unconfirmed Member
It's hard to say if they really have improved. Games are done for specific times. That's why you don't see a Goldeneye re-release being so popular (or good), because the game mechanics would be outdated for today's standards. But still, you could focus on specific game franchises, and you would see that there's a clear improvement in many fields (like the jump from GTA2 to GTA3), so pretty much, yes, I think there has been an improvement in games.
I just hope that developers don't see this improvement as a way of making games easier however. That would be a shame.
I just hope that developers don't see this improvement as a way of making games easier however. That would be a shame.
Gaming is only more expensive if you own multiple consoles.
Gaming is actually cheaper now than it's ever been (at least in Australia it is)
Sega Saturn $899AU in 1995! and games were $99AU
Hell, my mum paid $120AU for Strreet Fighter 2 CE on Megadrive back in 92 or 93! I picked up Super Street Fighter 4 for $39AU last year.
bigdaddygamebot
Member
It's a completely sound point. I get it.
It doesn't detract from my irritation over pc guys feeling the need to toot their horns. I wasn't aware of the fact that the master-race has fallen out of favour.
Absolutely they are. Sure not everything is a diamond-encrusted treasure, but that's always been the case.
I love that developers (both big-name and indie) can create games that match their creative vision more easily than ever now. The problem is that this generation has gone on so damn long that all we're getting now are sequels, no one wants to start a new IP with fresh ideas when a console cycle is coming to an end (can't say I blame them).
Although I agree with earlier statements that people are really starting to overrate the PS2/GC/Xbox era of consoles, as if games had zero problems back then and only games of immense quality were released. Nostalgia is seriously one of humanity's best and worst feelings.
I love that developers (both big-name and indie) can create games that match their creative vision more easily than ever now. The problem is that this generation has gone on so damn long that all we're getting now are sequels, no one wants to start a new IP with fresh ideas when a console cycle is coming to an end (can't say I blame them).
Although I agree with earlier statements that people are really starting to overrate the PS2/GC/Xbox era of consoles, as if games had zero problems back then and only games of immense quality were released. Nostalgia is seriously one of humanity's best and worst feelings.
Manmademan
Member
Not in the US. For instance, I paid around $80-90 for copies of Chrono Trigger, 7th Saga, Mortal Kombat, and FFVI new at release on SNES.
That's $113-127 in today's money. And again, no Greatest hits or online shopping to drive the price down. Miss the initial print run, prices go UP. yes, UP.
In contrast, I was in gamestop and best buy and found new copies of El Shaddai ($20) and Dead Rising II: Off the record (for $39) new. Both of those games released this year. They're not old by anyone's definition. Games were NEVER this cheap in the 8 or 16 bit era.
The consoles on the other hand aren't really much more expensive (launch PS3 aside.) I have a collection of about 40 current gen games for the Ps3. The more games you buy, the cheaper this gen is compared to previous ones.
I dunno, I think in the past if you only owned a PS2 you could conceivably experience 90% of everything that there was to want in a generation.
While certainly games have gotten cheaper (I agree with you, absolutely, when factoring in downloadable titles and steam and such), I think now there are a lot more games spread out over all the platforms and delivery systems, and it takes owning a lot more systems to actually get to a point where you have accessibility to an equal number of pure quality games as, say, owning only that PS2.
Of course if you're into buying a lot of games, then you're probably right - buying more systems probably evens itself out after the savings you get from the cheaper games over time. Although games were pretty cheap during PS2 gen, and now they're $60... I dunno, I'd say it's hard.
Manmademan
Member
Ps2 gen was pricewise the same as this one, factoring in inflation. That's why I picked everything Pre-Psx (plus the N64) to make my example.
With the ps2- yeah, you'd still be playing ps2 games right now if you tried to play everything worth playing on that system.
D
Deleted member 81567
Unconfirmed Member
Gaming philosophical threads make my meals more enjoyable. To not be an entire ass, it really depends on who you ask. I think technology has, yes, enhanced videogames in general. I feel more attached to them and a videogame on its own has much more to offer than one from a few years ago.
Manmademan
Member
SNES had online play with X-band. no achievements though.
Having given this more thought, I still say no.
I downloaded the original Tetris on 3DS today. I played it and I can't say that I enjoyed it any less than Mario 3D Land. I suppose this lends to the techno angle, in that the original game boy had the power to execute the gameplay of Tetris perfectly, fancy graphical effectssuch as colourwould in no way add to the game.
I think that once you are "playing", that's job done. I'd guess that the first humans who played real life games enjoyed themselves just as much too.
So, I suppose it comes down to whether you are actually "at play", or expecting to be entertained, which is something else entirely.
I downloaded the original Tetris on 3DS today. I played it and I can't say that I enjoyed it any less than Mario 3D Land. I suppose this lends to the techno angle, in that the original game boy had the power to execute the gameplay of Tetris perfectly, fancy graphical effectssuch as colourwould in no way add to the game.
I think that once you are "playing", that's job done. I'd guess that the first humans who played real life games enjoyed themselves just as much too.
So, I suppose it comes down to whether you are actually "at play", or expecting to be entertained, which is something else entirely.
RoboGeorgeForeman
Banned
I think that there are a lot more "good" games and less bad ones nowadays, but I will take most of the best games on the NES/Genesis/Super Nintendo over the titles considered the best of the past few generations.
Note: This doesn't include handheld games, as despite my love for Super Mario Land, Link's Awakening, and Kirby's Dreamland; I would definitely take the Nintendo DS and PSP's catalog of titles over any other handheld's.
Note: This doesn't include handheld games, as despite my love for Super Mario Land, Link's Awakening, and Kirby's Dreamland; I would definitely take the Nintendo DS and PSP's catalog of titles over any other handheld's.
Some games were not possible before, some apples and oranges games were much better in prior years and many flavours of oranges are no longer sold. I enjoy lots of older games as well.
There has probably been talk of this thread about budget and target audience making different types of games and some people preferring a point lower on the ladder. Other people probably love what has happened with animated and fully acted RPG dialogs or worlds like Assassin's Creed.
A Twisty Fluken
Member
Games have gotten safer and more uniform. That can be taken as both a positive and a negative.
thehypocrite
Member
This.
Who wants low res sprites? I want high res ones!
While I will sometimes prefer the classics over more modern games, I am 100% certain most of that comes down to nostalgia, and that modern games are by and large superior to anything that came out previous. Why wouldn't they be? a title released in 2012 benefits from all the trial and error that took place in the previous 30 years.
Even a mediocre current gen console release runs and controls better than all but the best PS1/N64 titles, not even taking graphics into consideration. Improved technology has given us game experiences that weren't even possible 5-10 years ago.
I suppose you could argue that the classics seemed more creative due to the fact that they weren't as beholden to mainstream marketing pressures, and they were creating a lot of current gaming conventions for the first time. However, even if you consider 1985-1995 (or so) to be the golden age of gaming creativity, I would argue that with the rise of indie gaming and digital distribution, we are currently in the silver age of creativity. The creative energy and ingenuity that was a hallmark of the 8/16-bit generations (and the equivalent years on PC) is still going strong to today. You just have to look beyond mass-marketed $60 retail titles sometimes (though retail titles can still be creative as well).
Ignoring retail releases which often have to sell 1-5M copies (depending on the budget) just to break even, and therefore trying to appeal to as many gamers as possible, how do you figure this is true? Look at this year's Steam sale and the holiday gift promotion: The promotion challenged gamers to get achievements in about 60 titles in exchange for various gifts. The games featured were largely released in the last 2 years, and I think all of them were released withing the last 4 years. I would bet you that you would have a hard time finding as much diversity in the entire NES library as you would in those 60 games (all from this gen).
Even a mediocre current gen console release runs and controls better than all but the best PS1/N64 titles, not even taking graphics into consideration. Improved technology has given us game experiences that weren't even possible 5-10 years ago.
I suppose you could argue that the classics seemed more creative due to the fact that they weren't as beholden to mainstream marketing pressures, and they were creating a lot of current gaming conventions for the first time. However, even if you consider 1985-1995 (or so) to be the golden age of gaming creativity, I would argue that with the rise of indie gaming and digital distribution, we are currently in the silver age of creativity. The creative energy and ingenuity that was a hallmark of the 8/16-bit generations (and the equivalent years on PC) is still going strong to today. You just have to look beyond mass-marketed $60 retail titles sometimes (though retail titles can still be creative as well).
Ignoring retail releases which often have to sell 1-5M copies (depending on the budget) just to break even, and therefore trying to appeal to as many gamers as possible, how do you figure this is true? Look at this year's Steam sale and the holiday gift promotion: The promotion challenged gamers to get achievements in about 60 titles in exchange for various gifts. The games featured were largely released in the last 2 years, and I think all of them were released withing the last 4 years. I would bet you that you would have a hard time finding as much diversity in the entire NES library as you would in those 60 games (all from this gen).
jim-jam bongs
Member
To be honest I just can't comprehend anyone giving a hard answer to this question. It's like saying "has the weather been better this year?" There's no judgment metric implied by the question for one thing, and you could have "great" weather then a hurricane, so how would you compare that with a year where you had "bad" weather but no natural disasters?
Seriously, I promise that analogy makes sense. But for a more concrete example, you could have a year where you think that every game bar one is terrible, and then your favourite game of all time suddenly drops. Is that a good or a bad year in gaming?
The only true and correct answer is that there is no true and correct answer.
Seriously, I promise that analogy makes sense. But for a more concrete example, you could have a year where you think that every game bar one is terrible, and then your favourite game of all time suddenly drops. Is that a good or a bad year in gaming?
The only true and correct answer is that there is no true and correct answer.
NervousXtian
Thought Emoji Movie was good. Take that as you will.
Of course they've gotten better, to say otherwise is just being nostalgic.
AngelSoldier
Banned
Nope. Pretty sure gaming has steadily gone down the pooper with dumbed down everything from story to gameplay.
We go from classics like FF 4,6,9 to crap like FF 11 and 13.
We go from Castlevania SOTN to the trash that was Castlevania Lords of Shadow.
Apparently gamers have become so uhm ... "special" that we need all flanking routes closed off with invisible walls and AI teammates to open doors, drive vehicles, and stop infinite waves of enemies. Games are no longer challenging either, but hey, whatever, that's what everybody wants apparently. And seriously, Achievements/Trophies have somehow hampered my ability to just play a game for fun.
Now sure, I still like games today, and sometimes a rare gem with great story pops up like NieR, or well ... NieR. Uhm, never mind, gaming is getting worse. Of course this is all opinion, that's all any of this is really so yeah ....
We go from classics like FF 4,6,9 to crap like FF 11 and 13.
We go from Castlevania SOTN to the trash that was Castlevania Lords of Shadow.
Apparently gamers have become so uhm ... "special" that we need all flanking routes closed off with invisible walls and AI teammates to open doors, drive vehicles, and stop infinite waves of enemies. Games are no longer challenging either, but hey, whatever, that's what everybody wants apparently. And seriously, Achievements/Trophies have somehow hampered my ability to just play a game for fun.
Now sure, I still like games today, and sometimes a rare gem with great story pops up like NieR, or well ... NieR. Uhm, never mind, gaming is getting worse. Of course this is all opinion, that's all any of this is really so yeah ....
I'm 24 and 7 of my favorite 10 games were released this generation, and two of the three left over were a bit on the fence. Persona 4 not getting in the states until 2008, persona 3 also being on psp.
I owned a gameboy/gameboy advance/genesis/dreamcast/N64/Ps1/Ps2/xbox/gamecube so it's not like I haven't played many of the "classics" just find that even at the time many of the classics were insanely overrated. Not going to name names to avoid thread derail but older exclusives in particular are guilty of this.
I will say many of the long running Franchises have gotten much worse.
FF
Sonic
Castelvania
Metroid
Madden
Prince of Persia
Devil May Cry
Soul Calibur
Pokemon
Donkey Kong
All franchises that I used to love in previous generations that have turned into shit imo.
I owned a gameboy/gameboy advance/genesis/dreamcast/N64/Ps1/Ps2/xbox/gamecube so it's not like I haven't played many of the "classics" just find that even at the time many of the classics were insanely overrated. Not going to name names to avoid thread derail but older exclusives in particular are guilty of this.
I will say many of the long running Franchises have gotten much worse.
FF
Sonic
Castelvania
Metroid
Madden
Prince of Persia
Devil May Cry
Soul Calibur
Pokemon
Donkey Kong
All franchises that I used to love in previous generations that have turned into shit imo.
Sir_Crocodile
Member
The ability to make games bigger and shinier exists thanks to the march of technology, but yeah, that doesn't really automatically result in better games.
Seminal stuff from my youth still holds up against the best of today - SMB3, Zelda 3, Super Metroid, Xcom : enemy unknown, Indy & the fate of atlantis...so the best of today is definitely not superior to the best of yesterday. I'd have to play a lot more games then I do to be able to speak more generally with any authority but I suspect it's not the case there either.
Seminal stuff from my youth still holds up against the best of today - SMB3, Zelda 3, Super Metroid, Xcom : enemy unknown, Indy & the fate of atlantis...so the best of today is definitely not superior to the best of yesterday. I'd have to play a lot more games then I do to be able to speak more generally with any authority but I suspect it's not the case there either.
sixteen-bit
Member
Was he banned for this?
If you say 'well obviously duh they're way better' then I have to ask, why?
The graphics have gotten better.
The feature list has gotten better (online, achievements etc)
But what about the gameplay? The majority of games have actually lost a lot of depth. For example, take a look at the PC RPGs of old, Morrowind vs Skyrim, Daggerfall vs Skyrim - the scope in gameplay terms has actually gotten a lot smaller. Even for console games, I'd argue that any SNES JRPG has more depth than FF13 and any PC FPS of old has more depth than MW3 / BF3. It's really quite depressing when you consider the potential that exists but then short-term profit will always come first.
The graphics have gotten better.
The feature list has gotten better (online, achievements etc)
But what about the gameplay? The majority of games have actually lost a lot of depth. For example, take a look at the PC RPGs of old, Morrowind vs Skyrim, Daggerfall vs Skyrim - the scope in gameplay terms has actually gotten a lot smaller. Even for console games, I'd argue that any SNES JRPG has more depth than FF13 and any PC FPS of old has more depth than MW3 / BF3. It's really quite depressing when you consider the potential that exists but then short-term profit will always come first.
this is how i feel.I play my genesis more than i do my new consoles.I think people have been concentrating on the wrong part of video games.I blame 3D graphics, but that's another discussion all together.
So you've never owned an NES or SNES...they're just "overrated".
Do you know how to read? "many" does not mean the same thing as all. They are two completely different words.
I did own a Nes/snes but wasn't until I was already into the dreamcast so only the games I knew I would love like 2d Zelda ever ended up in my system.
Also many (see I said many not all) of the biggest/best nes/snes games have gotten hand held re-releases. Due to endurance run I'm trying out chrono trigger for the first time ever now on my ds lite. It wouldn't displace any of my favorite games but it's certainly good.
For sure, objectively better. 99.99% of the games of the PS1 generation control like garbage, most of that console's library is unplayable trash today. Devs didn't have a fucking clue how to manage controls in a 3D space. Games are leaps and bounds better in that department today. We can always, at the very least, expect competent controls from most games.
The same could be applied to the Atari -> NES jump. Nearly all 2600 games have shit game design, shit controls and pretty much shit everything. Again, devs didn't really know what they were doing.
The same could be applied to the Atari -> NES jump. Nearly all 2600 games have shit game design, shit controls and pretty much shit everything. Again, devs didn't really know what they were doing.
2nd post gets it.
This so much. Even at the time everything except the greatest games of the Ps1/N64 era seemed like complete garbage. Now going back even many of the games I thought were great at the time seem downright bad even if I overlook the graphics.
The "bad" games today are so much better than the bad games I played in the ps2/ps1 eras.
Even junk like Rogue Warrior or call of Juarez the Cartel are good compared to alot of the bad stuff I stumbled upon the last two generations.
Glorious_Paradox
Member
This guy knows what's up.
Whether games are better or not, I think it's a difficult question to answer because it's inherently pointless. It's like asking "are movies better now than they were 30 years ago?", "is music better now that we can use more instruments" and so on and so forth. Sure, perhaps the cinematic action of Call of Duty wouldn't be as effective with 8bit sprites, but the brilliance of A Link to the Past cannot be replicated by merely throwing more polygons at your game either.
The way I see it, one way any medium benefits from better technology is that the entry barrier is lowered, so more people can contribute to the medium, and the same things can be done with less effort. Everyone talks about better AI, more polygons, more storage space etc. that provides more possibilities than ever before, but those don't automatically make a game better (or even good); they simply offer more options for the creative minds out there to take advantage of should they choose to.
Back on the topic of comparisons: there are gems and turds across every era of any medium, and there is rarely (if ever) a clear reason that one era would be superior to another. Every game is doomed to be a product of its time, along with the limitations, annoyances and charms that come with that. We look back on early arcade games now and they appear hollow and simplistic, but maybe in 10 years today's games will appear convoluted, complex and pretentious. Every era has something special to offer, and not being capable of recognizing this usually means missing out on some great experiences.
Salacious Crumb
Junior Member
Console style games have gotten better.
PC style games have gotten worse. PC gaming in the 90s must've been a glorious thing to experience.
PC style games have gotten worse. PC gaming in the 90s must've been a glorious thing to experience.
As a guy who grew up gaming in the 80's, 90's, and 2000's, I can say, without a shadow of a doubt, "Yes, yes, yes," gaming has improved.
It's an evolving medium, and I've been fortunate to see it through the majority of it's milestones as an entertainment medium.
This generation has been one of the most enjoyable for me so far. I feel this way because, interestingly enough, there have been less games released on consoles (so it seems to me), but I've owned more games this generation than I've owned in any generation before it.
I feel that developers are finally able to convey their concepts, big or small, effectively for the first time in gaming's history.
I'll always have a soft spot for old school gaming, and games that mimic that old school style (Scott Pilgrim, 3D Dot Game Heroes, Outland, etc), and I'm glad that the various downloadable networks (PSN, Steam, XBLA, Virtual Console, etc) are there to keep that aspect of gaming alive and strong.
It's an evolving medium, and I've been fortunate to see it through the majority of it's milestones as an entertainment medium.
This generation has been one of the most enjoyable for me so far. I feel this way because, interestingly enough, there have been less games released on consoles (so it seems to me), but I've owned more games this generation than I've owned in any generation before it.
I feel that developers are finally able to convey their concepts, big or small, effectively for the first time in gaming's history.
I'll always have a soft spot for old school gaming, and games that mimic that old school style (Scott Pilgrim, 3D Dot Game Heroes, Outland, etc), and I'm glad that the various downloadable networks (PSN, Steam, XBLA, Virtual Console, etc) are there to keep that aspect of gaming alive and strong.
It really was a thing of beauty.