Its not just me, games used to be better

[Albuquerque]

I feel like we've looked right past another core challenge in this thread... More than a handful of posts in this thread have complained how the umpteenth version of a game, or the remastered version of an older game, is somehow "not good" like how old games were. Why are you playing the same tired franchises, or even worse, remastered versions, but then somehow expecting something new and boundary pushing and different?

There are so many good games in the world, chances are some (many?) folks are missing them because they're trying to keep buying the same old rehashed garbage. Actually get out of your rut and try something completley different, as in, COMPLETELY different. Not a twitch first person shooter like all other ones in your pile, or not another remaster, or not another ... Whatever the cool Japanese 3rd person ones are. I mean something different like you don't have a single flavor of in your current big pile of stuff.

Use a different part of your brain, like you did dozens of years ago, and enjoy a new source of excitement.

 

[digitalwanderer]

I could never understand people saying that there is no change. It would be same if you said that the music and movies are of the same quality as 80s and 90s stuff, it's just your age. I couldn't disagree more. We really did have a golden age of console AND pc gaming...

It's my age? I was amazed when the arcade version of Pong came out when I was around 6-7 and I've been hooked on gaming ever since. I started with a home pong machine, breakout, and stunt cycle machine before the 2600 came out. I played Intellivision when it was new and you put the cellophane on your TV screen and it never fit right. I played Temple of Apshai on the Apple II before it became the Ultima series. I lived my teens in the golden age of US arcades and followed it 'til it died. I've played every major console released in the US before '95 and owned quite a few of them. I started playing MS flight sim on a 386 and had to set up my config to boot to DOS to run so many pre-windows/windows 3.1 games that it's not funny. Also spent a few decades with board games and pen and paper gaming. Been staying current on gaming for a while and I strongly disagree with the original statement of this thread as I feel games are much, much better today than they were before.

Where's your perspective on gaming coming from? Oh shoot, I forgot to mention my beloved VIC-20 and how much fun I used to have coding games on it. Seems relevant as it got me even more into gaming once I got a better appreciation for how much work went into them.

I feel like we've looked right past another core challenge in this thread... More than a handful of posts in this thread have complained how the umpteenth version of a game, or the remastered version of an older game, is somehow "not good" like how old games were. Why are you playing the same tired franchises, or even worse, remastered versions, but then somehow expecting something new and boundary pushing and different?

There are so many good games in the world, chances are some (many?) folks are missing them because they're trying to keep buying the same old rehashed garbage. Actually get out of your rut and try something completley different, as in, COMPLETELY different. Not a twitch first person shooter like all other ones in your pile, or not another remaster, or not another ... Whatever the cool Japanese 3rd person ones are. I mean something different like you don't have a single flavor of in your current big pile of stuff.

Use a different part of your brain, like you did dozens of years ago, and enjoy a new source of excitement.

Yup, so much of this! Yeah there are a TON of crappy remakes around, the GTA trilogy of sad stands out for me along with the Mafia series, but there are great games coming out all the time! It's just finding them can be hard.

I'd argue games like American Arcadia and Dave the Diver would count as a few that really surprised me lately. I don't know what I was expected and neither game reinvented the wheel but they were both insanely fun for me and a breath of fresh air.

 

[Scott_Arm]

Modern games aren't as good because developers aren't limited by hardware now, and haven't been for years.

It was the hardware limitations that lead developers to come up with creative solutions to solving hardware limitations, and this positively affected game design choices and meant they had to place more emphasis on story telling and gameplay mechanics.

I don't know. Indie games have lots of great design and mechanics. I think the issue is more that the big studios don't want to take risks because of financial investment, so they try to distill well established genres down to a formula. It's less risky to make a pile of cutscenes or an on-rail sequence that you barely play with a lot of exciting stuff happening then sit down and come up with something new that potentially no one will like.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Odd thread. There are way more games than ever before. If you look at everything, there are amazing games out there. From crazy AAA blockbusters with depth and complexity, to indie darlings that push boundaries in gameplay, presentation...everything. Meanwhile, a lot of historic games were plain crap. At the time they were amazing, but we didn't know any better, and couldn't achieve any better due to technical limitations of the hardware, or even early coders not understanding what was truly possible.

In short, it's no different now. You had the incredible 80s, and the incredible 90s, and the incredible 00s, and the incredible 20s. You can find landmark titles in any period.

If you are having trouble enjoying games now, it's not because they are worse. You've just likely outgrown gaming. I know I play far less, and find far less appealing, but I'm not blaming that on lazy devs or a burnt-out industry or any delusion that there's an objective measure of games being better in the past. The only thing I truly lament are some game types just fall out of favour, notably local coop. Some years ago there was a poll here what we thought of backwards compatibility, and back then I didn't care for it because I wanted sequels that improved. But those sequels don't happen, and so if I want to revisit a classic game just to remember it, I wish I had BC and all my library on one machine.

Being generous to the original point, if there's any validity to it, it'd be that a certain class of game from big-budget devs have lost some artistic investment for the sorts of reasons given. But for all the AAA devs who maybe took their foot off the gas because they could coast by on the engine's powers, there's an indie leveraging those engines to do amazing things that were plain beyond the scope of solo devs back in the day.

 

[cheapchips]

You had the incredible 80s, and the incredible 90s, and the incredible 00s, and the incredible 20s. You can find landmark titles in any period.

Obviously the less said about the 10s the better.

 

[Davros]

I wish I had BC and all my library on one machine.

And so it came to pass that the Gaming Gods did hear the cries of Shifty

 

[ZebMacahan]

Odd thread. There are way more games than ever before. If you look at everything, there are amazing games out there. From crazy AAA blockbusters with depth and complexity, to indie darlings that push boundaries in gameplay, presentation...everything. Meanwhile, a lot of historic games were plain crap. At the time they were amazing, but we didn't know any better, and couldn't achieve any better due to technical limitations of the hardware, or even early coders not understanding what was truly possible.

In short, it's no different now. You had the incredible 80s, and the incredible 90s, and the incredible 00s, and the incredible 20s. You can find landmark titles in any period.

If you are having trouble enjoying games now, it's not because they are worse. You've just likely outgrown gaming. I know I play far less, and find far less appealing, but I'm not blaming that on lazy devs or a burnt-out industry or any delusion that there's an objective measure of games being better in the past. The only thing I truly lament are some game types just fall out of favour, notably local coop. Some years ago there was a poll here what we thought of backwards compatibility, and back then I didn't care for it because I wanted sequels that improved. But those sequels don't happen, and so if I want to revisit a classic game just to remember it, I wish I had BC and all my library on one machine.

Being generous to the original point, if there's any validity to it, it'd be that a certain class of game from big-budget devs have lost some artistic investment for the sorts of reasons given. But for all the AAA devs who maybe took their foot off the gas because they could coast by on the engine's powers, there's an indie leveraging those engines to do amazing things that were plain beyond the scope of solo devs back in the day.

Im mostly talking about AAA action adventure, platforming, because those are the kinds of games I mostly play.
Yes, there are still amazing games. Thushima is one of my top 3 of all time, it takes two was amazing as well. I do agree very much what the guy who directed space marine 2 said, that todays games are too complex and time consuming etc. Its very hard to find a high budget shooter game which is like the old halos, gears etc, and those series havent been very good for quite some time. I dont think its about me outgrowing gaming. When I played space marine 2 (didnt get it until my second run), astrobot, halo 3 and the gears 1 remaster gaming felt like it should.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Then you probably need to change the title.

 

[homerdog]

Just glad I got to experience the late 90s and the 2000s. It was a beautiful time when the most popular games were also the best. Kind of like how it was with The Beatles or Led Zeppelin in their primes. That is simply not the case anymore, with both games and music.

There have been some games in (somewhat) recent history that fit this. Witcher 3 comes to mind. But it isn't generally true anymore.

 

[London Geezer]

Not sure about this. If you played the same games from the 80/90/00's now, would they still feel as amazing now as they did back then? Or clunky and dated? Are we not just much older, and after 20+ years of gaming we simply feel differently, and everything is no longer 'new' as it was back then?

 

[ZebMacahan]

Not sure about this. If you played the same games from the 80/90/00's now, would they still feel as amazing now as they did back then? Or clunky and dated? Are we not just much older, and after 20+ years of gaming we simply feel differently, and everything is no longer 'new' as it was back then?

I think games were generally to primtive in the 80 and 90s compared to now to be a fair comparison. I think the comparison need to start a bit later.

 

[Deleted member 2197]

I think games were generally to primtive in the 80 and 90s compared to now to be a fair comparison. I think the comparison need to start a bit later.

I think there were some 90s notables that are enjoyable to play now. Daggerfall is one I can think of and more so now with the changes brought about with the Daggerfall Unity development group.

 

[ZebMacahan]

I think there were some 90s notables that are enjoyable to play now. Daggerfall is one I can think of and more so now with the changes brought about with the Daggerfall Unity development group.

I was more thinking about shooters, action adventures, etc. Some types of game can be timeless I guess, regardless of the technical limitations of the time.

 

[digitalwanderer]

I think games were generally to primtive in the 80 and 90s compared to now to be a fair comparison. I think the comparison need to start a bit later.

Those "primitive" games were cutting edge and breath taking at the time. Comparisons need perspective.

Good gods the opening of the original Unreal was absolutely stunning and mind blowing. Unbelievably so at the time, now it looks all pixelated and clunky.

Modern gaming is built on the shoulders of giants just like everything else.

 

[homerdog]

Not sure about this. If you played the same games from the 80/90/00's now, would they still feel as amazing now as they did back then? Or clunky and dated? Are we not just much older, and after 20+ years of gaming we simply feel differently, and everything is no longer 'new' as it was back then?

The point I was making (not sure if you were responding to me) was that by and large the most popular games of their time were the best games of their time.

Also many of those old games are still very fun to play today. Mario 64, Ocarina of Time, Baldur's Gate 2, Half Life 2 (HL1 shows its age but is still good), FEAR, Halo: CE etc. Others haven't faired as well but are definitely not bad games.

 

[Zombietoid]

Yeah. Games were better years ago. Especially the Resident Evil games, which have ended up really freaking stupid.

This is your RE? Uh? Nah.

 

[hughJ]

The big games have gotten bigger and more expensive, the businesses have tried to grow their audience so they've become more accessible/accommodating, and there's naturally going to be way more risk aversion. I think games and Hollywood movies are pretty much interchangeable in these regards, and I wouldn't put up much of a fight if someone argued that movies were better 20+ years ago than they are today. The big productions are boom or bust, the mid-sized productions have diminished, and the indie productions are the only place where anything remotely interesting is being done.

 

[Zombietoid]

Be sure to give me your thoughts on Silent Hill 2.

 

[Davros]

Good gods the opening of the original Unreal was absolutely stunning and mind blowing. Unbelievably so at the time, now it looks all pixelated and clunky.

Does it though, considering the massive resolutions we can now run it at and the insane amount of AA we can apply ? (tried to run it but it's just giving me a gpf)

 

[Nesh]

I would say it's a mix of our age and how games evolved. Games were simpler and shorter. Games from AAA studios were usually a big surprise and they were coming up with more games. New IPs were coming all the time with fresh experiences from big studios. Now we have more games in general but it is not from the big studios.

Remember how besides FF games, Squaresoft gave us masterpieces like Vagrant Story, Xenogears and Parasite Eve on PS1?

Big studios now rely too much in milking the franchises that started decades ago and new IPs are a hit or miss. Remakes and remasters were uncommon to nonexistent before. Now it's all we get.

Microtransactions and DLCs make the games feel unfinished.

Tekken games for example had the full roaster and were complete in the past. Now they are not.

Street Fighter games at launch are an incomplete mess compared to the final rereleased versions

Resident Evil games were complete and had the right length. Now you know that the first purchase will be followed by the complete version later.

Many Games are unnecessary larger, demand a lot more hours and are full of fillers that are not fun, in order to extend length.

Our expectations of course evolved too.
I played FF7 the original years after and by today's standards the game design is broken. But still it was fresh in many ways for it's time. Back in 1997 it was a heartwarming experience.

We also have examples were the newer next gen versions of games were far worse than their very first versions. Sonic games in particular had a physics model that were a trademark of there genius game design. 3D Sonic games were never as fun and Sonic 4 threw the original games' physics into the trash and felt awful. It was garbage. It is with Sonic Mania that we got a proper Sonic game again.

Similarly all Wipeout games after the PS1 versions had a very bad physics model. They never played the same. It was like playing a different game.

The original Wipeout and Sonic games are certainly much better in many ways.

Naughty Dog used to create new IPs every gen. What did we get this gen? Remasters, remakes and cancelled projects.

In the past we were eager to see the next big announcement from the big studios. Now we are bored.

But we are also bored in general and have more serious things to worry about as we mature