|
| Thread: Let's be honest here... |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 3 4 · «PREV / NEXT» |
|
Geny
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
What if Elvin was female?
|
posted May 27, 2013 07:33 PM |
|
|
I could pick up FFV or FFVI and play them right now.
____________
DON'T BE A NOOB, JOIN A.D.V.E.N.T.U.R.E.
|
|
JoonasTo
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
What if Elvin was female?
|
|
posted May 27, 2013 07:38 PM |
|
|
6 is better than 7. 
I also liked 8 better than 7.
____________
DON'T BE A NOOB, JOIN A.D.V.E.N.T.U.R.E.
|
|
Doomforge
Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
|
|
posted May 27, 2013 07:48 PM |
|
|
Me too. I consider 10 the best (still waiting for the Vita HD remaster), then 8. FF7 felt overrated to me. X-2 is worst imho.
____________
We reached to the stars and everything is now ours
|
|
carcity
Supreme Hero
Blind Sage
|
|
posted May 27, 2013 07:56 PM |
|
|
X is my favorite, then IX and after that VII. I do like X-2, it kinda butchered the story of X, but the gameplay is nice.
____________
Why can't you save anybody?
|
|
JoonasTo
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
What if Elvin was female?
|
|
posted May 27, 2013 07:57 PM |
|
|
Also only women for playables 
|
|
carcity
Supreme Hero
Blind Sage
|
|
posted May 27, 2013 09:02 PM |
|
|
Fanservice is good service!
____________
Why can't you save anybody?
|
|
blizzardboy
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Nerf Herder
|
|
posted May 27, 2013 09:16 PM |
|
|
The aspect where video games can be worse is because developers can sometimes go so over-the-top with cinematic effects that I end up rolling my eyes. The movie industry has the same problem, where animation is used as a crutch rather than a tool. Other than that, newer games generally mean better UI as they are able to hone off of past shortcomings. As far as story quality, I'd say that has stayed roughly even.
____________
"Folks, I don't trust children. They're here to replace us."
|
|
Zenofex
Responsible
Legendary Hero
Kreegan-atheist
|
|
posted May 27, 2013 09:26 PM |
|
|
Quote:
As far as story quality, I'd say that has stayed roughly even.
Excluding Blizzard games, Heroes games after Heroes IV and every sequel that has ****** up the story potential of its predecessors.
|
|
william
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
LummoxLewis
|
|
posted May 27, 2013 09:39 PM |
|
|
Quote:
I would say OoT is a horrid, bug-ridden mess, but so is just about every zelda game.
What are you on about? I have played that game to death and never had any bugs.
____________
~Ticking away the moments that
make up a dull day, Fritter and
waste the hours in an off-hand
way~
|
|
carcity
Supreme Hero
Blind Sage
|
|
posted May 27, 2013 10:47 PM |
|
|
Really? Amongst my friends, we have a running gag about all the bugs we've come across in various LoZ games, OoT included.
____________
Why can't you save anybody?
|
|
yogi
Promising
Famous Hero
of picnics
|
|
posted May 27, 2013 11:35 PM |
|
Edited by yogi at 23:51, 27 May 2013.
|
Quote:
It's hard to be innovative when everything's already been invented.
Hard, but not impossible.
Quote:
There're only so many things one can come up with.
Amazing games do come far and few between, by definition.
Quote:
I agree, Nomura did a fine job on FFVII, but in essence, all he did was polish what was left after FFVI,
I'm not sure what you mean here^
Quote:
which many hardcore fans deem even better than VII.
Having played them all around the time that they were each released, I feel the series piqued at IX (perhaps VII). Supposedly Sakaguchi is of the same opinion. While the earlier games were amazing, I don't feel they were as original. Like Sonic2, HoMM2, A Link to the Past, Super Metroid, Mario3, Street Fighter 2 - each of these games polished mechanics that would go on to define entire genres, even into the 3D transition. All of them could be remade with updated graphics and new levels and/or abilities, and they would be far better than most games released today (this is actually a trend on Kickstarter). Like a new deck of cards with a different design on the back, Squaresoft is doing quite well with their remakes of the "old" FF games. Ubisoft's lack of insight in this regard is simply baffling.
I do feel however, that Squaresoft's crowning achievement is Chrono Trigger.
Just to add:
Gaming used to be something a few extremely dedicated people participated in, now it's an international communications industry. The former produces quality, the latter - quantity. Good games are still being made, but so are many more bad ones and copy cats.
|
|
OhforfSake
Promising
Legendary Hero
Initiate
|
|
posted May 27, 2013 11:38 PM |
|
|
I certainly find some aspects better back then than now, but others not so much.
Games which requires internet connection to play are games I won't be buying, just to give an example.
There were however many many games which were horrible to play back in the 90's. Even games which were semi-recognized as entertaining. Sure tastes differ, but e.g. some games were unplayable on many different computers, were they either went too slow or too fast.
One thing I've noticed which seems to have changed between these two periods is the general procedure of game making.
I believe in the 90's games had a pretty unique audience which was rapidly growing, but still far from the "common man". On the same time, developing a game could be done (and can still be for smaller games) by a few individuals who worked together, and still manage to make bestsellers. Piracy was still a thing back then, but it was not the main focus of game developers and at most some code would be shipped with the game (which later evolved into cd-keys and later again into "always online").
From the period Doom came out (early to mid 90's) were a company like ID Software could spit out games like there were no tomorrow without fear of bankruptcy and up till around the early/mid 2000's were 3DO went bankrupt over a single game failure (Heroes 4), games had rapidly changed from being something which was the game developers project into something which was a company project, were the game developer were merely one of many hired personal. Also suddenly were a game before would cost a few dollars, it would now as brand new cost around 50 dollars, or so.
From here it went into the obvious route of making gaming appealing to the common man, dumping down many games, but also a higher focus on advertising. Back in the 90's, while I'd say the ratio of good to bad games were a lot lower, neither bad nor god games were heavily advertised, so what game you got mainly depended on the taste of those you got your games from, and since the audience was smaller, unless you were unlucky, you'd often have a good amount of good games. Many bad games true, but you'd entertain yourself with the good games anyway.
The advertising of bad games on equal basis as good games, on the same time removing the good old 'demo' of games, meant that consumer could easily lose a few hundred dollars on bad game purchases, which simply didn't appeal. From which it leads to certain companies having certain brands of games they're good at, making each company have their own audience and fight for each others audience on regular basis, trying to appeal through different new games.
All in all, I think the best games of today is probably a lot better than the best games of the 90's. Gaming industry have a larger audience, meaning a higher likelihood of skilled artists seeking out this profession, and more artists doing so as well. But I also think it's more difficult to find games which are really appealing to you, because it's now more difficult to sort out what is actually aimed at your preferences.
From a nostalgic perspective old games will always be better than newer games simply because I have different priorities now, and as such, every time I play a video game I feel like I'm wasting time on something I ultimately don't really enjoy very much, if at all.
In regard to the games I've played, I can say that with old games, I seemed to enjoy every part of the game, whereas with newer games, I'd plan for a certain scenario, play hours upon hours to reach this scenario which only lasted a few minutes and wasn't anything special, it was even more interesting just to dream about it than experience it. Again I'm sure it's mainly nostalgia talking as playing the older games as well feels like nothing special, but because of these games being older and entertaining for a younger audience, they're also more linear and as such, there are no special events to use for differentiating much between the different game states.
Quote:
It's hard to be innovative when everything's already been invented
Spoken like a physicist of the 18th century!
____________
Living time backwards
|
|
jhb
Famous Hero
|
|
posted May 28, 2013 03:53 AM |
|
Edited by jhb at 04:26, 28 May 2013.
|
I miss the good old days too, everything was more fun ..
I also miss my dog and my invisible friend. =(
|
|
blizzardboy
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Nerf Herder
|
|
posted May 28, 2013 05:48 AM |
|
|
Eh. The best stuff usually happens when you stop fretting over purposely trying to make an original masterpiece and simply make something that you think is awesome. Usually, even if the basic plot has been used a million times, it ends up having its own charming flavor.
____________
"Folks, I don't trust children. They're here to replace us."
|
|
jhb
Famous Hero
|
|
posted May 28, 2013 07:16 AM |
|
|
|
Plenty of good games today, the only thing I miss is when I had more free time for playing. =P
|
|
b0rsuk
Promising
Famous Hero
DooM prophet
|
|
posted May 28, 2013 01:50 PM |
|
Edited by b0rsuk at 14:10, 28 May 2013.
|
Everything has been invented ? Nonsense.
Some games which have been very successful back then have no equivalents today, for example Syndicate. Imagine a game that plays like an action RPG, but with a party, in a cyberpunk setting, and in an open world. And instead of a linear path and loot collection you have research between missions. Also, you choose the order in which you play the missions.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CqELIqeYAlo
Do you think there are no games like Syndicate because it was crap ? No, publishers won't greenlight anything that's not a FPS, cinematic RPG, aRPG, MOBA or Tower Defense. Then once in a blue moon someone makes an innovative or memorable game (Notch with Minecraft) and everyone is copying that.
And something like Magic Carpet would be denied because it's sympathetic to Arabs.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r6p4ZaOGPyA
A shooter/god game/RPG hybrid with deformable terrain, great in multiplayer.
Quote:
From the period Doom came out (early to mid 90's) were a company like ID Software could spit out games like there were no tomorrow without fear of bankruptcy and up till around the early/mid 2000's were 3DO went bankrupt over a single game failure (Heroes 4),
1. DooM 2 had a budget of slightly over $200,000. They were boasting about it. But you are correct, it took only a few years to develop.
I don't know how much time it took to develop Heroes 1, but Heroes 2 was developed in a year. Heroes 3 took 3 years, as the name suggests. Might&Magic: Heroes VI took 5 years, and for what?! Heroes 1 is more fun, and I mean it.
2. 3DO didn't go bankrupt because of a single game. Let's blame consoles ! No, really. 3DO was pushing its own console very hard, and we all know consoles are often subsidized. 3DO also made crappy Army Men games, wasting more money.
The elephant in the room is that 3D games are awfully expensive to make, and come with many technical limitations such as inability to render a ton of objects at the same time and difficulties making deformable terrain. Worms serries went from 2D to 3D and now back to 2D, because it's more fun to play. The latest Worms has partially 3D graphics, like backgrounds, but it's still a 2D platformer/TBS tactics game. Starcraft 2 is a 2D game with 3D graphics. So is Diablo 3 and all MOBAs.
____________
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u5um8QWWRvo RSA Animate - Smile or die
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted May 28, 2013 02:45 PM |
|
|
|
One more thing to mention is, back in the early 90's there were no internet walkthroughs so you were trying to explore the game and outsmart the tricks yourself, which was sometimes troublesome but fun.
|
|
b0rsuk
Promising
Famous Hero
DooM prophet
|
|
posted May 28, 2013 03:28 PM |
|
Edited by b0rsuk at 15:32, 28 May 2013.
|
Quote:
One more thing to mention is, back in the early 90's there were no internet walkthroughs so you were trying to explore the game and outsmart the tricks yourself, which was sometimes troublesome but fun.
Games were designed to be beaten in the first place. The arcade machine mentality was still alive. Arcade machines made you insert coin to play, which meant a player who lost made room for another player. For better or worse.
In any case games were meant to be hard, whereas today they're more like roller-coaster ride. It is increasingly less common to make games in which you can actually lose or fail to progress. Publishers and game developers often say things along the lines that a player who hasn't finished the game is a lost opportunity and a waste of development resources. They're working on flattening the difficulty curve so everyone sees the whole game.
(For people who haven't played a hard game or aren't programmers - completing a hard challenge gives a lot of satisfaction)
____________
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u5um8QWWRvo RSA Animate - Smile or die
|
|
jhb
Famous Hero
|
|
posted May 29, 2013 01:35 AM |
|
Edited by jhb at 01:40, 29 May 2013.
|
I still think most of people miss their childhood more than anything else. ;]
For me, games are meant to be fun in the first place. Ofc, if it can be more challenging (or hard) in a proper way it'll more likely to be even more fun.
Imho, today there are plenty of nice games and plenty of crappy games like always. But, you know, everything changes with time.. I think we also need to open our minds to the new things and new changes ..
Today I see the devs getting a lot more feedback from the players than before. However, I see that they need to "dance" a lot to "drible" some problems like bureaucracy and a market that is not easy to please like elvin said.. and man, piracy. In the two decades between 90-2010, the piracy increased in huge proportions. The industry of music had to readapt, and ofc the other branches also had its changes. So now, more than ever, I need to make a good game AND give a good reason to the people buy my game, instead of easily get a hacked version of my good game. The interesting part of this is that the better a game is, the more widely accessible its hacked version will be.
Another interesting change is that more ppl like to "powergame" today. Some ppl are stopping playing games for fun, they are playing for "efficiency". Back in 90's if someone asked "what's the most efficient way to play this game?", ppl would say "ask your psychiatrist, and don't forget your pills".
The good news for the gaming industry (maybe bad news for some ppl) is that this market has increased by A LOT. Today we have a ton of gamers with 40+, 50+, even 60+ years old. Again, the industry will adapt itself.
But guys, saying that the good graphics we have today is the reason for the bad games is silly, really. Now, if you wanna be like "I just play perfect masterpieces", I would say "then, have patience".. because masterpieces aren't made everyday, sadly.
|
|
OhforfSake
Promising
Legendary Hero
Initiate
|
|
posted May 29, 2013 02:00 AM |
|
|
The "powergamer" mentality predates video games. There's nothing odd or wrong in finding enjoyment in efficiency.
Piracy does not have to be a problem. One of the most successful webcomics today provide all the essential parts of its story for free, yet the author is able to live off book sales.
____________
Living time backwards
|
| |
|
|
