The worst of both worlds (PCs & Consoles)

[skace]

If you think gaming sucks now, what do you consider the "golden age" to be? The 8-bit NES era? 16-bit SNES era? The PlayStation + N64 era?

Late 90s. Something to think about during this time frame:

Quake - 1996
Duke Nukem 3d - 1996
Diablo - 1996
Ultima Online - 1997
Starsiege: Tribes - 1998
Starcraft - 1998
Everquest - 1999
Quake 3 - 1999
Diablo 2 - 2000

 

[WhipperSnapper]

Unreal Tournament was released in 1999, too. IMHO it's the greatest online multiplayer FPS of all time and should be included on any list of great games from that era. If you didn't play it back in 1999-2003, you really missed out.

 

[taltamir]

Unreal Tournament was released in 1999, too. IMHO it's the greatest online multiplayer FPS of all time and should be included on any list of great games from that era. If you didn't play it back in 1999-2003, you really missed out.

YES!
I love unreal tournament gold. Best FPS ever! Way better than anything that came afterwards.

 

[AstroManLuca]

Yeah I remember how big a disappointment UT2k3 was. Didn't take them long to overhaul it as UT2k4, which is still really fun as well.

 

[Veliko]

Late 90s. Something to think about during this time frame:

Quake - 1996
Duke Nukem 3d - 1996
Diablo - 1996
Ultima Online - 1997
Starsiege: Tribes - 1998
Starcraft - 1998
Everquest - 1999
Quake 3 - 1999
Diablo 2 - 2000

If you went back to those times you would be saying the exact same thing as now - that the older games from 10-15 years ago were the best and that all you get now are clones of the same thing, no originality, etc.

 

[gothamhunter]

Lately I've been so displeased in the quality of games spewing out that I've mainly been playing classic PS1 games on my emulator and only play current gen games when I get bored with those.

Spyro and Chrono Cross FTW.

 

[skace]

If you went back to those times you would be saying the exact same thing as now - that the older games from 10-15 years ago were the best and that all you get now are clones of the same thing, no originality, etc.

Um, considering I lived through those times and never said that, I'm pretty certain you are wrong. Quake, D3d, UO, EQ, Tribes, these were all games without comparison. They were unique and fresh.

 

[zinfamous]

If you want a crash, both PC and Console gamers need to stop buying the DLC that game makers put out.

PC: Stop buying from Steam, Direct2Drive, etc.

Consoles: Stop buying DLC and Map packs from Live, Sony Online, and Nintendo Store.

Boom Reset Button.

Bolded: absolutely.

But, no: I will continue to buy from Steam. I see no reason not to.

 

[zinfamous]

This thread is full of nonsense.

Want good games ? Let game makers make money. There's even a pirate in here complaining about the quality of his stolen games..

DLC is a way for developers to make money, that means it's an incentive to produce. And as consumers, we should want more production, not less.

2. Complaints about innovation. Want new designs ? stop buying the same games and expecting something new. Buy sequels if you want more of the same, not something new.

3. Steam. I've been buying PC games since 1987 or so. I've never had it so good. Steam makes games easy for me to buy, and developers get to make some money.

4. Casual games. Casual games don't hurt gaming, they help it grow. There are gonna be more hardcore gamers than ever, if hardcore gaming is fun.

Honestly, there has never been more games, and kinds of games, than there is right now. I think some of you are just suffering from game burn-out, you know too much of anything isn't fun. Especially something as meaningless as gaming often is. Gotta spend some time being useful to humanity, then you'll feel better.

DLC is not about innovation, it's a means to release incomplete games and charge premiums for games that are still sold at "normal" prices.

It is also a DRM scheme. non-obtrusive, sure, but it is not about innovation and development. It's nickle-and diming and anti-piracy.

 

[Veliko]

Um, considering I lived through those times and never said that, I'm pretty certain you are wrong. Quake, D3d, UO, EQ, Tribes, these were all games without comparison. They were unique and fresh.

You just don't remember saying it. In every field of entertainment - music, games, film, sport, etc. - there will be a large bunch of people reminiscing about the good old days.

It's human nature to remember the good stuff and forget about the bad stuff. If you opened up a gaming magazine from back then the reviewers would be complaining about the same kind of thing as they are now. Style over substance, lack of innovation, buggy releases, etc, etc.

 

[skace]

You just don't remember saying it. In every field of entertainment - music, games, film, sport, etc. - there will be a large bunch of people reminiscing about the good old days.

It's human nature to remember the good stuff and forget about the bad stuff. If you opened up a gaming magazine from back then the reviewers would be complaining about the same kind of thing as they are now. Style over substance, lack of innovation, buggy releases, etc, etc.

The question is what do I consider my golden age. Which is a question that you cannot really argue with. Who are you to argue my golden age for gaming?

Additionally, I've been around playing video games since pong. If it is human nature to only remember the good stuff then I'd be unable to pick a single time period because they would all be seen as excellent. However, that is not the case.

 

[AstroManLuca]

The question is what do I consider my golden age. Which is a question that you cannot really argue with. Who are you to argue my golden age for gaming?

Additionally, I've been around playing video games since pong. If it is human nature to only remember the good stuff then I'd be unable to pick a single time period because they would all be seen as excellent. However, that is not the case.

That's your opinion.

I haven't been gaming nearly as long as a lot of people, but I still can't think of any one time that stood out as being a "golden age" of gaming for me. All I know is that I've never had trouble finding enjoyable games, so it's basically been a continuous golden age for me.

I can't even name my favorite game for this reason. I've enjoyed many games but I can't pick a favorite.

 

[Veliko]

The question is what do I consider my golden age. Which is a question that you cannot really argue with. Who are you to argue my golden age for gaming?

I am looking at things objectively.

Additionally, I've been around playing video games since pong. If it is human nature to only remember the good stuff then I'd be unable to pick a single time period because they would all be seen as excellent. However, that is not the case.

It is the case and I demonstrated as much by pointing out that everyone looks to times past for what they see as a golden age for any entertainment medium. Ask someone to remember some games from 15 years ago and they will usually list the ones they enjoyed but would struggle to remember the rubbish ones and probably couldn't name them.

 

[Cerb]

You just don't remember saying it. In every field of entertainment - music, games, film, sport, etc. - there will be a large bunch of people reminiscing about the good old days.

It's human nature to remember the good stuff and forget about the bad stuff. If you opened up a gaming magazine from back then the reviewers would be complaining about the same kind of thing as they are now. Style over substance, lack of innovation, buggy releases, etc, etc.

I know very few gamers, myself included, that read gaming magazines, ever. They have always been wastes of paper, only useful for the discs that came with them, before we all got broadband.

There was junk back then, too, but creative people could get games out there much easier, where there is now a higher barrier to entry. Websites dedicated to flash games, Steam, etc., are beginning to offer the chances needed to turn this trend around, and I hope it works. There is the catch that the small guys can't advertise like the big guys, but like with music and movies, as enough people get bored enough of what is being pushed to them for long enough, it will fix itself from the demand side.

 

[Tom]

DLC is not about innovation, it's a means to release incomplete games and charge premiums for games that are still sold at "normal" prices.

It is also a DRM scheme. non-obtrusive, sure, but it is not about innovation and development. It's nickle-and diming and anti-piracy.

You're are conflicted. You want great games, and want them easy to steal. Or to be cheap.

That doesn't make any sense.

 

[Tom]

I know very few gamers, myself included, that read gaming magazines, ever. They have always been wastes of paper, only useful for the discs that came with them, before we all got broadband.

There was junk back then, too, but creative people could get games out there much easier, where there is now a higher barrier to entry. Websites dedicated to flash games, Steam, etc., are beginning to offer the chances needed to turn this trend around, and I hope it works. There is the catch that the small guys can't advertise like the big guys, but like with music and movies, as enough people get bored enough of what is being pushed to them for long enough, it will fix itself from the demand side.

Why do you think it was easier to get games out back then ? I don't think that's true. What was different was people who took risks and worked hard.

Versus people who want a cubicle and a safe life these days.

btw, magazines. You never read Computer Gaming World ? the old one, filled with real articles. Or Computer Game/Strategy Plus ?

Those were great mags IMO.

 

[KeithP]

But I have notice another insidious trend... console games being ruined by PC trends...

That has nothing to do with a "PC trend". It is simply a function of the consoles getting internet access so they can now download updates. It happened on the PC first because PCs had internet access first.

But I get your point.

-KeithP

 

[Dankk]

Additionally, I've been around playing video games since pong. If it is human nature to only remember the good stuff then I'd be unable to pick a single time period because they would all be seen as excellent. However, that is not the case.

Sorry, but for as long as video games have existed, there have always been bad games. Always. And there will continue to be bad games for as long as the industry is around. You may not know about them or pay attention to them - which is fine, because you know, they suck - but they're there.

 

[zerocool84]

Sorry, but for as long as video games have existed, there have always been shitty games. Always. Always has been, always will be. You may not know about them or pay attention to them - which is fine, because you know, they suck - but they're there.

Yea it's no different. People said that music is the 60's suck, people said music in the 70's sucked. It's the same just with a different title.

 

[zinfamous]

You're are conflicted. You want great games, and want them easy to steal. Or to be cheap.

That doesn't make any sense.

easy to steal? wtf did you engender this shit from what I said?

I am not conflicted.

 

[Cerb]

Why do you think it was easier to get games out back then ? I don't think that's true.

How many games made profits? How big were the teams making them? Even big budget games way back did not have the Hollywood-sized crews working on them, and expensive marketing teams. Yet today, if you have a vision greater than Minecraft, that is fairly expected. I have no doubt that it was easier to get a game out in 1995 than in 2005. Today, I'm not entirely sure.

What was different was people who took risks and worked hard.

That is not different. I think you've taken to heart too much of what talking heads keep saying.

Small groups could get very little done, after the shareware era died, until fairly recently.

Right now, I think we're in a transition period, and I dearly hope for several of the big companies to experience a crash (chances are it will be a more gradual shift, but I can hope, right?). Small simple games from small teams are abound, but there is generally a wide gap between that, and a what might be considered a more complete and complex game. Even games similar to what we got in the 90s (in terms of overall game depth, length of play, etc.) are fairly rare, outside of big publishers with big content teams. Even the 'casual gamer' that everyone is targeting is bound to get tired of it, too, sooner or later.

Versus people who want a cubicle and a safe life these days.

Versus implies that group being exclusive to the other. They aren't. Only in the very early 80s might they have been. Late 80s on, real companies employing real people have definitely been part of video gaming, and those companies have created many great games.

What is different now is that video games are mainstream, and big media, the general essence of banality, has been doing its thing, just like with movies and music. Right now, the pathways around it are still being paved.

btw, magazines. You never read Computer Gaming World ? the old one, filled with real articles. Or Computer Game/Strategy Plus ?

Those were great mags IMO.

No. I might skim a review here or there, but that's about it. It's not about magazine quality, but that I really don't see much value, beyond pointing out some really bad games that look they aren't, in such magazines.

 

[shortylickens]

All that shit isnt cuz of PC trends, its cuz console gamers specifically wanted it on their consoles.
Most of them dont even know or care you can do all that stuff on a computer. They just want more cool stuff on their TV.

And its not going away. In fact theres solid evidence to suggest all the next gen consoles will be mostly cloud based.

 

[paperfist]

Yea it's no different. People said that music is the 60's suck, people said music in the 70's sucked. It's the same just with a different title.

You can't deny that music in the 2010s sucked hard.

 

[zerocool84]

You can't deny that music in the 2010s sucked hard.

I don't like modern music but to say it sucked is just retarded. Everyone from an older generation always says newer things suck.

 

[ImpulsE69]

Is it just me or do the internet forums suck harder than they did 25 years ago?