This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

Do Games Suck Now a Days Or Am I just Older

#71P00DGEPosted 1/29/2013 12:12:40 PM
true_gamer80 posted...
there is a limited amount of older games


huh? theres thousands upon thousands...of course out of all those there is few actually worth playing let alone great ones....unless thats what you meant?


There is still a limit though. There can never be any more older games than there are now. It is nice to experience something new, even if you prefer older things. Read the rest of my post instead of fixating on that one piece.
#72true_gamer80Posted 1/29/2013 12:18:38 PM(edited)
P00DGE posted...
true_gamer80 posted...


Games were filled with glitches, bugs etc and you were always stuck with them, they were extremely short, the list of negatives goes on and on. Being a kid growing up in the 80's most games ppl got ended up in dissapointment cause either they were bad or over in twenty mins and your only option was to curse whoever made the cool looking boxart that made the game look so bad ass lol.



I would also like to take a minute to talk about this paragraph in particular. Compared to the SNES-PS2 days, games today actually seem to be SHORTER. 5 hour campaigns are the standard now in big budget AAA games. The standard used to be 40+ hour adventures. And while the removal of bugs can be a good thin 95% of the time, sometimes it makes a game feel too narrow and soulless. For example: In Mario Kart 64, just about every track had an unintentional shortcut you could take. It was FUN to use these. However, in today's Mario Kart games, if you so much as cross over the border of the designated track, you are immediately dragged back onto the track. It was more fun when it was just a map with few limitation, allowing for exploits and shortcuts. Now it is a rule heavy game with limitations and measures put in place to prevent unintentional "fun".


sounds to me like your picking and choosing what to apply what to.....I can name hundreds of games that were very short and pick current gen games that are far longer....some games were longer back then most were not however. Also as the further back in gens you go the more laughable 40 hour games becomes

There is no argument to be had here.....games today in genral are far far longer then games in the past,the further you go back the shorter the games were,...this is fact, nobody can argue that. lso when Im saying games of the past I dont consider ps2 that old lol....

Am I getting old or what here lol? Talking about games of the past Im thikng like old school, not games from yesterday(ps2)
---
Real Hip Hop...I miss the 90's-Puppets Of Chaos - Tru Dat
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AqxBDN-cv08
#73regsantotomasPosted 1/29/2013 12:16:56 PM
P00DGE posted...

I would also like to take a minute to talk about this paragraph in particular. Compared to the SNES-PS2 days, games today actually seem to be SHORTER. 5 hour campaigns are the standard now in big budget AAA games. The standard used to be 40+ hour adventures. And while the removal of bugs can be a good thin 95% of the time, sometimes it makes a game feel too narrow and soulless. For example: In Mario Kart 64, just about every track had an unintentional shortcut you could take. It was FUN to use these. However, in today's Mario Kart games, if you so much as cross over the border of the designated track, you are immediately dragged back onto the track. It was more fun when it was just a map with few limitation, allowing for exploits and shortcuts. Now it is a rule heavy game with limitations and measures put in place to prevent unintentional "fun".


I take issue with that bolded statement.

Most games fall way short of that 40 hour "standard" you speak of in that era unless you only played RPGs.
---
the bitter truth is that in the grand scheme of things, the average piece of junk is probably more meaningful than our criticism designating it so. ~ Anton Ego
#74true_gamer80Posted 1/29/2013 12:20:05 PM
regsantotomas posted...
P00DGE posted...

I would also like to take a minute to talk about this paragraph in particular. Compared to the SNES-PS2 days, games today actually seem to be SHORTER. 5 hour campaigns are the standard now in big budget AAA games. The standard used to be 40+ hour adventures. And while the removal of bugs can be a good thin 95% of the time, sometimes it makes a game feel too narrow and soulless. For example: In Mario Kart 64, just about every track had an unintentional shortcut you could take. It was FUN to use these. However, in today's Mario Kart games, if you so much as cross over the border of the designated track, you are immediately dragged back onto the track. It was more fun when it was just a map with few limitation, allowing for exploits and shortcuts. Now it is a rule heavy game with limitations and measures put in place to prevent unintentional "fun".


I take issue with that bolded statement.

Most games fall way short of that 40 hour "standard" you speak of in that era unless you only played RPGs.


thats why I said to him picking and choosing....I spit my coffee out reading that when talking about games of the past, I can tell you right now unless it was an rpg, the further back oyu go the more laughable the thought of a 40 hour game is
---
Real Hip Hop...I miss the 90's-Puppets Of Chaos - Tru Dat
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AqxBDN-cv08
#75regsantotomasPosted 1/29/2013 12:29:55 PM
true_gamer80 posted...
regsantotomas posted...


I take issue with that bolded statement.

Most games fall way short of that 40 hour "standard" you speak of in that era unless you only played RPGs.


thats why I said to him picking and choosing....I spit my coffee out reading that when talking about games of the past, I can tell you right now unless it was an rpg, the further back oyu go the more laughable the thought of a 40 hour game is


Agreed. Difficulty levels and artificial barriers had to be created to prolong the game play of the early games because the single player campaign were usually only a few hours long - if that. Games like Castlevania, Mega Man, Super Mario, Contra, et al could be completed pretty quickly.
---
the bitter truth is that in the grand scheme of things, the average piece of junk is probably more meaningful than our criticism designating it so. ~ Anton Ego
#76PopSmorePosted 1/29/2013 12:35:24 PM(edited)
alot of games suck this gen to me because so many are focused on an 'open world' aspect to them. all the open world does to a game is artificially add more gameplay time going from point A to point B and water down the gameplay in a big empty, world. many people will disagree with this, being that an open world game is the most amazing thing ever, but when I hear open world included into a game, i think of watered down gameplay compared to something that is linear.

take for instance.. Uncharted 2 vs Assassins Creed 2.
U2 can give such a more exciting, richer gameplay experience, not only graphically, but interactively, yes it's linear, but atleast it has a direction to go into to give you those 'wow' moments.

AC2 you have to make your own 'wow' moments, which since it gives you the option to do anything, it's not going to have any direction to it what so ever... making it so that it could actually be a pretty crappy outcome an anti climatic once you go in for that assassination. the game can't really set up particular gameplay elements such as buildings collapsing while you're going in for the kill, its generic and cut to the point as possible, where as in a linear game like U2, the game can set you up for anything

so it comes down to wanting a more rich and better experience with some control over what happens, or comes down to full control, but just an ok experience

i take the better experience over the control

also another reason why alot of people say older games are better than current ones could be for the same reason, linearity was actually better than this open world junk now a days. most of us remember when nearly every game had a level, and we had to go from left to right to complete it, that was it.
#77Kira0987Posted 1/29/2013 12:39:18 PM
Psh. I'm older now and my love for video games has only gotten stronger. I'll be gaming when I'm 90 and in a wheel chair. But I'll tell you that it's most likely because games have gotten worse. For example, before games used to be complete when you bought them, with real things to unlock. Now it's all held back content only to be re-sold again as DLC. It's ruining the gaming industry. Also, square's downfall and japanese rpg's becoming non existent also hurts things a lot for me.
---
Soul of the lost withdrawn from its vessel, let strength be granted so the world might be mended.
PSN - Makohazard
#78true_gamer80Posted 1/29/2013 12:42:16 PM(edited)
PopSmore ,you can avoid games without openworld, I mean in the bigger picture of things they make up only a miniscule amount of whats available.


Also I would like to say sorry to anyone I may be talking with if I seem hostile lol, I dont mean to be, I just have a passion for gaming my whole life, from the early 80's to now and I strongly strongly think in general gaming is far far far better then gaming of the past. I'll always love gamings past but in general games of the past are complete crap compared to games of today in most cases. I get right into these topics, so if I seem aggressive Im sorry lol :)
---
Real Hip Hop...I miss the 90's-Puppets Of Chaos - Tru Dat
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AqxBDN-cv08
#79KaliestoPosted 1/29/2013 12:44:28 PM
I actually agree games in the RPG bit are way longer now. There is quite abit of difference. I remember back in the day there were very very few old games that were way past the 40+ mark. Star Ocean 3 comes to mind, and Dragon Warrior VII was quite long.
---
"GameFAQs is a giant MMO text adventure." - Clarifinatious
"I've beat it twice." - TheLichLord
#80PopSmorePosted 1/29/2013 12:45:00 PM
yea i know you can avoid them, and mostly i do. but like how online gaming has become the trend now a days, so has open world games too.

i'm not a COMPLETE hater of open world, there are some open world games that i really like, but the majority of them are so generic to me