Its not just me, games used to be better

[Seanspeed]

Sounds like you favour SystemShock, BioShock, Deus Ex ect

Those are some of my favorites, yea. Love myself an FPS with that immersive sim/RPG-lite element to them.

That said, I'm still down for some classic Doom/retro shooters and whatnot. But again, those weren't as mindless as people might assume on first thought. Doom had complex maps and lots of secrets and whatnot - things that stimulated my brain outside of just 'aim gun and shoot things'. Games like Dusk, Prodeus, Amid Evil, Forgive Me Father - they all have other things going for them. Or what I think is the king of the modern retro-shooter - Turbo Overkill, which is just super creative in its aspirations, straying well outside any idea of just shooting things.

Like, one of my biggest complaints(and I wasn't alone) about Doom 2016 was that in the second half of the game, it felt like it was throwing too many arena fights at you. Which can be fun in moderation, but I much preferred the old Doom formula where the encounters were more spread around throughout the level. Doom Eternal unfortunately doubled down on arena fights, and as well designed as the gameplay was in that, it felt a bit disjointed in how it went from 'no enemy platform/exploration section' to 'arena battle' and back and forth constantly, which again I feel is far inferior to the more mixed formula of the originals.

So yea, just action alone doesn't cut it for me. I need games to at least be two dimensional in terms of things it brings to the table.

 

[Tkumpathenurple]

It wasn't meant to be insulting, just pointing out that there's more to video games than just 'action'.

I like good gameplay as much as anyone, but games can and should be more than just big explodey action.

There's more to the medium, sure, no-one expects non-stop action in Broken Sword, but you weren't just pointing out that there's more to them than just action, you were being condescending regarding games that *are* just action.

I agree that games can be more than just action, but I think it's totally wrong headed to state that they should be. They should be allowed to be, but if they want to just be explosions, that's fine too.

I'm fine with criticizing how well a game like Tomb Raider does in humanizing Lara or something, but I definitely dont like hearing the idea that games just shouldn't have that kind of stuff.

You didn't at all discuss the degree to which humanising Lara was done well. You went straight to sneering.

And the most that was said was that a character crying after an action set piece isn't appealing. Which, in the context of TR3, I very much agree with: it's ham-fisted nonsense written by half-witted autists "and then there's a helicopter, and Lara has to fight it, and then it explodes, and then Lara's upset, and then Lara cries."

JFC writers, spend some time with actual people FFS. And don't try giving me social commentary or emotional depth when you've just had me FIGHT A HELICOPTER! If you're going to make me do silly things, accept that you're dancing in the realm of the silly. Predator didn't need an Arnie soliloquy on the evils of foreign interventionism.

I really dont, no. Same with movies.

If I'm not invested into the characters or story, some big spectacle set piece does absolutely nothing for me. And even sometimes when I am invested, if it takes away too much control or has some boring gimmick(like a turret section or something) then I might also be ready for it to be over ASAP. I need some kind of drama, not just spectacle.

Also, we're talking action/adventure games. For me, the adventure part is usually the bigger draw.

Then action isn't really the genre for you. You seem not to like it on its own merits. Which is fine - I don't like country music or puzzle games, for example. But don't earnestly criticise a genre for being itself.

It's like disliking Indian food, going into an Indian restaurant, and then complaining that it's not pizza.

 

[Seanspeed]

Your whole post ignores basically ALL the context in which I made my comments.

I merely pushed against the idea games should be more than just 'action'. That's all. It shouldn't be remotely controversial.

You didn't at all discuss the degree to which humanising Lara was done well. You went straight to sneering.

I actually did both. And propagandists like you were never going to be happy with either.

Then action isn't really the genre for you.

It's crazy how you guys have no ability to think critically at all.

 

[Tkumpathenurple]

Your whole post ignores basically ALL the context in which I made my comments.

I merely pushed against the idea games should be more than just 'action'. That's all. It shouldn't be remotely controversial.

There you go again with your proscriptive attitude, acting baffled that anyone might take umbridge with it.

"Hey, all I did was call people stupid for not liking exactly the same things as me, why's that controversial?"

I actually did both. And propagandists like you were never going to be happy with either.

Quote where you did either.

And "propagandist!?" Laughable, feeble, false ad hominem.

It's crazy how you guys have no ability to think critically at all.

Stop copying insults you've read on Twitter and applying them erroneously.

And who might "you guys" be? People capable of having interactions without getting on their high horse?

 

[ZebMacahan]

I'm fine with criticizing how well a game like Tomb Raider does in humanizing Lara or something, but I definitely dont like hearing the idea that games just shouldn't have that kind of stuff.

Humanizing the protagonist is good for some games (like last of us or a plaugue tale) but not for others. Bungie got it real right when they said they deliberately made Master Chief an empty vessel for the player to put themselves in. 343 messed up the series in a bunch of way. One was wanting to flesh out master chief as a charcter, totaly missing the point.

I havent played much Tomb Raider so I dont know much about the franchise, but I always saw her as a female Indiana Jones. So having her have an emotional breakdown after a big epic action set piece where she fights a freaking helicopter is very unfitting because
*the type of game it is, lighthearted treasue hunter adventure
*the fact that its right after an action set piece
*as pointed out earlier she has killed hundreds of people before this, at close range, buy strangeling them or killing them with her climbing axes. The way she does it is made to look cool, not brutal and desperate like in last of us.

And aside from these points, I dont think its done very well anyway. It just feels contrived and ham-fisted with her bursting out crying. I found it much more heartbreaking in Mass Effect when Mordin

Spoiler

decides to sacrifice his own life to be able to cure the genophage, and he sings his little song to calm him self before his imminent death.

As opposed to "if she cries alot then people will know she hurts alot". Sometimes less is more.

 

[see colon]

*the type of game it is, lighthearted treasue hunter adventure
*the fact that its right after an action set piece
*as pointed out earlier she has killed hundreds of people before this, at close range, buy strangeling them or killing them with her climbing axes. The way she does it is made to look cool, not brutal and desperate like in last of us.

Unless you guys are talking about a different scene, the Lara breakdown in in the survivor Tomb Raider game is at the start of the game, and is after here first kill, and is the breaking point between the Lara that got on the boat, and the Tomb Raider that she becomes on the island. I wouldn't describe that game as a lighthearted treasure hunter adventure, as the deaths of both the enemies and Lara are pretty brutal, and it has a dark tone overall. There's a reason why that trilogy is a reboot and not just sequels or prequels to the previous TR games.

 

[Scott_Arm]

Unless you guys are talking about a different scene, the Lara breakdown in in the survivor Tomb Raider game is at the start of the game, and is after here first kill, and is the breaking point between the Lara that got on the boat, and the Tomb Raider that she becomes on the island. I wouldn't describe that game as a lighthearted treasure hunter adventure, as the deaths of both the enemies and Lara are pretty brutal, and it has a dark tone overall. There's a reason why that trilogy is a reboot and not just sequels or prequels to the previous TR games.

Yah, the new trilogy was quite a bit different. The first game in the series is like an adventure game mixed with survival horror. After that they kind of removed the horror elements, but it's definitely meant to be a different take on the character. Things are allowed to be different. That said, I'd be very happy if the industry stopped doing so many reboots and making so many sequels.

 

[Nesh]

Widescreen Fixer will sort you Fov issue

Releases · dlrudie/WidescreenFixer

Contribute to dlrudie/WidescreenFixer development by creating an account on GitHub.

github.com

When you've finished that you should play DeadSpace 3 it's also a good game

Dead Space 3 was such a disappointment for me

 

[ZebMacahan]

Unless you guys are talking about a different scene, the Lara breakdown in in the survivor Tomb Raider game is at the start of the game, and is after here first kill, and is the breaking point between the Lara that got on the boat, and the Tomb Raider that she becomes on the island. I wouldn't describe that game as a lighthearted treasure hunter adventure, as the deaths of both the enemies and Lara are pretty brutal, and it has a dark tone overall. There's a reason why that trilogy is a reboot and not just sequels or prequels to the previous TR games.

No, I was talking about the third game. The scene we´re talking about is I belive in the later half of the game.

 

[Tkumpathenurple]

Unless you guys are talking about a different scene, the Lara breakdown in in the survivor Tomb Raider game is at the start of the game, and is after here first kill, and is the breaking point between the Lara that got on the boat, and the Tomb Raider that she becomes on the island. I wouldn't describe that game as a lighthearted treasure hunter adventure, as the deaths of both the enemies and Lara are pretty brutal, and it has a dark tone overall. There's a reason why that trilogy is a reboot and not just sequels or prequels to the previous TR games.

As mentioned by Zeb, it was a point in the latter half of the second game that was being referenced.

My memory's more hazy regarding the first two, but I do think the first entry in the rebooted series got the balance right in terms of stealth action and narratively earning and displaying the toll it took on Lara. I suppose leaning towards a horror tone helped in that regard.

The second I seem to recall was more of an action romp; a bit more akin to Indiana Jones. Although it sticks in my memory the least of the 3.

It's only the third where I started to chuckle at the incongruity of the ice-pick-to-the-temple gameplay and the "je suis conflicted. Fin." story.

 

[see colon]

It's only the third where I started to chuckle at the incongruity of the ice-pick-to-the-temple gameplay and the "je suis conflicted. Fin." story.

I can see where you guys are coming from, but I can also see how the first 2 games were more about Lara in a situation where things were happening to her, and the third game is more about her causing the events that antagonize here in the game. It's different in that way. I'd have to replay the third game to get a real feel for how the scene plays out, but I also think it's important to remember that video game character writing is notoriously bad, and the main character in most action games ends up killing hundreds or thousands without remorse or consideration most of the time. And if they are written feel conflicted for their actions, it's usually without regard for their player controlled actions and more often about their activities in cut scenes.

So yeah, the player character is both a serial killer and a "good person" in most games. Tomb Raider just sort of points out that she should feel conflicted, though it's played out fairly ham fisted, from memory.

 

[Tkumpathenurple]

I can see where you guys are coming from, but I can also see how the first 2 games were more about Lara in a situation where things were happening to her, and the third game is more about her causing the events that antagonize here in the game. It's different in that way.

I think that's a fair assessment of all three games. In isolation, I quite like what the developers were narratively aiming for in the third, I just think that it missed the mark.

I'd have to replay the third game to get a real feel for how the scene plays out, but I also think it's important to remember that video game character writing is notoriously bad, and the main character in most action games ends up killing hundreds or thousands without remorse or consideration most of the time. And if they are written feel conflicted for their actions, it's usually without regard for their player controlled actions and more often about their activities in cut scenes.

So yeah, the player character is both a serial killer and a "good person" in most games. Tomb Raider just sort of points out that she should feel conflicted, though it's played out fairly ham fisted, from memory.

Agreed on all points.

I suppose my main issue is that they tried to have their cake and eat it. I'm on board with a version of Tomb Raider that focuses on Lara Croft's character and the struggles and conflicts she faces, but I'm not convinced it's viable to combine that with the tone of gritty realism wrapped in the action genre.

An action game with struggles/conflict can work, but the primary enemies can't be humans. So the gritty realism is out.

An action game with humans as the primary enemies can work with gritty realism, but the story needs to be more tongue in cheek. I'm thinking something like the Sin City film (probably the comics too, but I haven't read them.)

A game with humans as the primary enemies and a narrative focused on struggle and conflict can work, but it needs to be something other than an action game.

 

[Grizzly Teddy]

RE9 rumours indicate that it will be like RE4. Although how is that even surprising by this point? Look at all the RE veterans who are in it to clean house.

 

[Seanspeed]

There you go again with your proscriptive attitude, acting baffled that anyone might take umbridge with it.

"Hey, all I did was call people stupid for not liking exactly the same things as me, why's that controversial?"



Quote where you did either.

And "propagandist!?" Laughable, feeble, false ad hominem.



Stop copying insults you've read on Twitter and applying them erroneously.

And who might "you guys" be? People capable of having interactions without getting on their high horse?

My initial response was made to a post that insinuated that nobody wants to see 'humanization' in action games. That's all. Everything I've seen since has been in context of that. At no point was I condescending or saying anybody was stupid for liking something different than me. I was merely disagreeing with what somebody else said.

And whether Tomb Raider did it well or not was not part of the context. They were suggesting it straight up isn't important and doesn't have a place.

I also dont use Twitter, hate Twitter.

 

[Grizzly Teddy]

So RE9 will supposedly be like RE4. Enemies using weapons.

As long as it's enjoyable, I don't care anymore. But RE has ended up very commercial.

 

[ZebMacahan]

So RE9 will supposedly be like RE4. Enemies using weapons.

As long as it's enjoyable, I don't care anymore. But RE has ended up very commercial.

What really make classic RE style games hard for me to enjoy is that you can save ammo in storage boxes. Say I survived a difficult encounter, but I might have used too many healing items or shotgun shells which I might need in a boss fight 5 hours later in the game. I like it better when theres a limit on high much of that stuff you can hoard so you dont have to plan for the whole game.

 

[tuna]

As long as it's enjoyable, I don't care anymore. But RE has ended up very commercial.

Yeah, it started out as a indie game given away for free.

 

[see colon]

Yeah, it started out as a indie game given away for free.

I remember. I used to go to Resident Evil shows when they were playing dive bars in Prague.

 

[Cyan]

I sold a £4k gaming PC set-up and moved to the set-up in my signature and have zero regrets.

There's just something about newer games that I just don't like, like they've lost that special thing that makes them games.

well, you can always get a new mini PC and play games like Heroes of Might & Magic 3 on it, using the best mods for HoMM 3 on 2024 and things like that.

https://heroes3wog.net/10-best-heroes-of-might-and-magic-3-mods/

On the main subject, this is a bit like the current NBA vs the NBA from the 80s, 90s, 2000s, and early to mid 2010s. There were so many charismatic players, which current NBA lacks. 80s were amazing, 90s were amazing, 2000s and early/mid 2010s were amazing. After Bird, Magic, Jordan, you had Nowitzki, KB, Vince Carter, Steve Nash, Shaq!, then Curry and Thompson etc etc etc ect, a PLETHORA of charismatic players I could be all day typing names, those eras were constant awesomeness. The new NBA commissioner isn't good either.

Something similar happens with many games nowadays, not all. In many aspects good indies and great ideas are better made than in the past.

 

[Cyan]

Most games are no longer made by people who wanted to make games because they loved games. That is one of the primary reasons.

You might have a point when it comes to AAA games. But there are games out there made by passionate developers I can assure you. It's just that you aren't going to see those featured in articles, videos, etc, and people don't know about them.

i.d. Unfrozen Studio developers, which are working on the spiritual successor of Heroes of Might & Magic 3, a game called Heroes of Might & Magic: Olden Era.

https://www.unfrozen.studio/

This is how they describe themselves.

About

www.unfrozen.studio

We are an international team of gamedev veterans united by our passion for challenging turn-based games.

And also.

We are united by our passion for the old school
We like games that are easy to learn and hard to master. Games that offer the player numerous factions, classes, skills, and options — and beg for one more turn, one more run, one more mission. Try this new party composition! Pick an unusual strategy for a faction! What about a no-magic run? This is the mindset we’re after — and we’re doing our best to provide the systems to make it fun.

This is their motto.

The only thing missing is using the word local co-op or split-screen co-op more, but other than that they sound pretty awesome to me.