| (Pages: 1, 2) | |
Paperboy Posts: 35 Joined: 8 Jul 2008     | |
Gone Gonzo  Posts: 1292 Joined: 24 Feb 2009     | my main issue is that games have to be safe and a guarantee profit, no originals allowed |
Gone Gonzo  Posts: 4932 Joined: 22 Feb 2009    | Not really sure what to take from this. Games are good but they have bad points? Console fanboys are idiots? Although I will add, I only pre-order things because I can never be arsed to go down and buy a game from the shop. |
Press Junketeer  Posts: 453 Joined: 22 Apr 2009  | I like you article writer you speak my mind. On the subject of logo screens I got Dawn of War II recently. I loved the game but the first time I ran it I had to watch five unskippable logo screens then a really long and boring cinematic also unskippable. Then due to WIndows Live or something I had to watch them all over again. Ahhhhh! Fortunatly I can skip them now. |
Muckraker  Posts: 316 Joined: 11 Feb 2009   |
I agree. However, I wholeheartedly concur with your appraisal of 1998. It was a special year, in a special era. I still feel all nostalgic just thinking about Voodoo 2! |
Pulitzer Laureate  Posts: 923 Joined: 24 Feb 2009     | I pretty much agree with everything, except 10. This year, it seems, the innovative new IPs of today are indie games. You came off as very nostalgic (and, thus, not particularly credible) in that last part. And number 7 is ridiculous. Everyone will always classify secondary game mechanics (i.e., mechanics that aren't directly related to killing or shooting) as "gimmicks," because everything in an FPS is designed to get you to kill, and kill, and kill; whether it's to get you to kill faster or more efficiently or in a cooler fashion or more believably is up to the developer. Everything that doesn't pertain to killing (whether directly or indirectly) is fluff, because FPSs are, were, and will always be about killing. |
Gone Gonzo  Posts: 1812 Joined: 8 Apr 2008   | "This is a serious question - do people actually enjoy this form of gameplay?" Sure do. I admit that the dead birds sound a little out there, but plenty of gamers, myself included, enjoy exploring game worlds to find all the collectibles and hidden treasures. A few things I'd add to the list: 1. Game of the Year Editions -- Modest much? After the Academy Awards, the winner of Outstanding Film doesn't rerelease in theatres with a few deleted scenes. 2. Faithless Gamers -- Every game developer is now completely incapable of creating a good game, they've all ruined every franchise they've ever touched, and they're all evil douchebags out to steal your money. Great, stop gaming and leave the rest of us alone. 3. The Stereotypical "Frat Boy" -- They are the reason I facepalm whenever I see or hear about video game coverage on MTV, Spike, and lately IGN. |
Anonymous Source Posts: 10 Joined: 20 Apr 2009     | Hey I'm guessing you guys are all american right? I buy all my games off steam now. *note* I dont hate americans, i hate that my country isnt a significant market *note* |
Gone Gonzo  Posts: 1214 Joined: 6 Oct 2008    | Remakes. Why do I hate remakes? Well if the original game is good, then great. But if the original game is good and maybe just a graphical update, then it's just laziness on the part of the design team. Take Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles IV: Turtles In Time Re-Shelled for example. Turtles in Time was a pretty decent arcade beat-the-shit-outta-'em game, but it's not like it needed repeating. Plus it was monotanous as shit. Look, I'm not asking you to reinvent the wheel, just to try something other than rip-off and re-make. Or at least re-make games that warrant it, like Battletoads (the original, kick-your-ass-inside-out version). I'd like to see those XBLA smacktards try to beat the Turbo Tunnel. |
Gone Gonzo  Posts: 1939 Joined: 9 Apr 2008   | Cool article, I have a lot of the same pet peeves if not a slightly different perspective on them: Sorry to bore you point for point but that was a good list... and I'm still waiting for my game to run through the beginning credits and I already rolled something. |
On the Record  Posts: 5973 Joined: 7 Feb 2008   | Sure I guess I'll give my things, that should be pretty self explanitory 1. The Death of Story (Story does matter, I don't care what you say) 2. The Rise of the Manditory Multiplayer Game (L4D, Team Fortress 2, Resident Evil 5 etc. I have no friends that like shooters, and I hate playing with random assholes, do the math) 3. Digital Distribution (Hooray, now I don't actually own my games anymore!) 4. Online Only Multiplayer (I can't sit in the room with friends and game anymore, it needs to be over teh webz) 5. Massively Multiplayer Online RPGs (I know they basically print money of you succeed, but their gameplay is boring and I don't like being FORCED to play with other people) 6. The 5 Hour Game (I don't like paying $70 for such a short thing, unless the replay value is amazing) 7. The Graphics Obsession (It's why games cost so much, scale back on graphics a wee bit and work on things that matter more like story, level design and gameplay) 8. The Gimick Shooter (I'm with you on that one, build better levels and refine core gameplay, there's still plenty to improve without resorting to "bullet time" over and over again) 9. Mature Immaturity (The pointless blood, guts and profanity in many games is why they aren't taken seriously) 10. The Ignoble Death of the JRPG (It's dying because it won't grow up, the genre has stagnated and I don't want to see it die just because the game designers are to lazy to take what's good about them and move it into the next generation) |
Gone Gonzo  Posts: 1605 Joined: 28 Aug 2008  | Have to agree with the Pre-Order bollocks. Am I really going to order Marvel Ultimate Alliance 2 just to get Juggernaut? No. It's just as bad as having to, or in my case not being able to, use DLC to get some meaningless extras or even worse, worthwhile extras that will actually alter gameplay to some degree. As for Pre-owned market. I would never buy a Wolverine at full price for a few hours gameplay, but if it was maybe £30 at release I probably would. It's the old argument, car manufacturers don't bemoan second hand sales and maybe if some of these games were worth a damn we'd be more willing to fork out. |
Gone Gonzo  Posts: 2225 Joined: 27 Jul 2009    |
I have to disagree with number 10. Batman: Arkham Asylum, and for games not out yet we have Boarderlands, Left 4 Dead 2, CoD: MW 2, ODST, and more |
Pulitzer Laureate  Posts: 790 Joined: 28 Mar 2009     | *At #10* if im correct, the next perfect storm is coming out March-July. everyone did push all their major releases back 4-6 months in anticipation of SC2. now SC2 simply barged into that time release slot, thus possibly creating the first truely great time in gaming since 1997-2000 |
Copy Clerk  Posts: 113 Joined: 13 Jun 2009   | I'd agree with the '98 theory. I also agree with Pedro, fuck online only multiplayer, one of the main reasons I have a console is to game with friends at my place or theirs. |
Pulitzer Laureate  Posts: 935 Joined: 15 Apr 2009   | exclusives - these are not good for the players but for the console owners, remember the whole infamous prototype battle? because i dont own a ps3 i never got the opportunity to play infamous, and they keep on doing this, making games that allot of people would enjoy but deciding that only the people who owns one specific console gets the opportunity to do so. different release dates - maybe its just me being extra cranky about this because IO interactive, the only danish game developers that are worth anything, released their new game in America before Denmark, and the new batman game, i have to wait what seems like an eternity for it to even come to the pc, and i doubt that its is because they just needed those 14 days more to make it work on the pc. mature content - i love the mature rating because it gives the developers complete freedom, they could write deep and horrifying story's that would touch you deeply, but instead they use it to cramp as many profanities and as much cleavage in the game as possible. DLC - first of all im not talking about for an example the fallout dlcs here, im talking about the sims and other games where it seems like they on purpose choose not to release parts of the game in order to sell it to you later. from xbox to pc - i despises those games, the last game i can think of i bought where they screwed it up was The Last Remnant, they didn't change the controls or the menu, when i played it was in complete confusion, press a+x now! and because the menu was in xbox gibberish too i couldn't change the controls to suit the keyboard. making me regret paying for the games - they keep raising the prices and they ruin parts of the experience for me in order to make up for the loses they get by people getting their games free and they make it harder for them, but also for me. so not only could i get the game at the same time as north America but i could also get it for free and get better service, its hard being an honest man when i get punished for being so. its not 10 reasons but its all i have time for before going to bed. |
Press Junketeer  Posts: 383 Joined: 5 Apr 2009    | While its true, 1998 was the last amazing year of gaming, there have still been some shining rays of hope over the last decade. There are still some examples of good games, but the distinct quality over games have declined. It's more nowadays about graphics and innovation and making people spend more money, and less on wanting good, fun titles. That's what we forget about gaming. It's supposed to be FUN. We're doing this for ENTERTAINMENT. And frankly, if you are still entertained by games nowadays and still have fun, then no complaints, I guess. But for people who loved and adored the games of the late 90s and early 2000s, right now, we're in a bit of a slump. |
Gone Gonzo  Posts: 1424 Joined: 10 Feb 2009    |
That is evil how you guys have to wait forever for a release assuming it is not outright banned and then pay double. I'd send angry boxing kangaroos to all the developers who delay the Australian release by more than a month and watch the Youtube videos of the execs, bloodied and black eyed, saying "Sorry we won't pointlessly delay the games for you anymore." |
Pulitzer Laureate  Posts: 720 Joined: 24 Mar 2009  |
What made 1998 so awesome for games, is they were all ORIGINAL and new. If you two feel the need to applaud sequels, thats all good, but you are arguing for an old tree dying from within. I am looking forward to Starcraft 2 myself, but all it is going to be, especially in the multiplayer, is the same gameplay as Starcraft, with only better graphics. Batman:AA: I tried the demo, found it way too easy, the guy does most of the work for you(practically a QTE game). Frankly I would get more out of the pirated Gimpy Batman. And putting that much hope into games that aren't out yet, comparing them to games that set standards, I will be watching for your reactions when they do come out, and chuckle to myself when you cry why they are so much suxxors.
Can thank the publishers for that. Many a developer would love to put something new out, but they get quashed when the accountants and market analysts of the publishers show the charts to them. If you want more original, then buy only the product that fits that, and stay away from sequels. Then the charts will read something different, and the publishers will be bugging the devs for more original product. |
Pulitzer Laureate  Posts: 858 Joined: 9 May 2009    | Remakes. If you don't have anything significant to change about the game, then don't do it. There are just SO many Final Fantasy ports and remakes, to the Playstation, Game Boy, DS, PSP, and so forth. Most of these revamps have only been minor graphical tweaks, and in some cases are either too soon or just unnecessary. Mainly Final Fantasy IV (GBA), then Final Fantasy IV (DS) a bit after the other. I understand how remakes/ports are important though, bringing your games to generation in their console series, or a completely new system altogether creates a broader audience, heck, if I hadn't bought Disgaea DS I would never have become a fan of the series. The actual content of the game is questionabble though, it lacked much of the voice-overs and audio power of it's original (which is fair, considering the hardware it's using) so then why wasn't it ported to Wii like the Phantom Brave port? Was the option not available? This isn't such a big complaint but it stills amuses me. The game also featured a couple nuances, but it was really the same, just some tweaks to fit the DS. A good example of remaking is one that changes the game, for good or bad. The remake of Final Fantasy III (the NES one) come to mind. They take the 8-bit graphics and music, and give it a complete overhaul. The diaogue has been switched up, names are different, but it shows the game is taking on a seperate identity. Essentially the game has been truly 'remade', built from the ground up and a seperate entity in it's own right. |
Paperboy  Posts: 11 Joined: 17 Feb 2009 | Nice off-the-cuff article, though I have to disagree on a couple of points: On original IP vs. retread/sequel: You obviously didn't live through the same 1998 I did. Most of the games out at the time were the same kind of derivative crap you bemoan. Sure, games like Half-Life, Starcraft, Unreal et al. were amazing, but they were the bright lights in a sea of piss-awful crap. Remember Tomb Raider III? Turok 2? Yeah, me neither. I had them so thoroughly blocked out of my mind that I had to do a Metacritic search to pull up specific examples. As for genre-defining games of this generation, they're present and accounted for, if you have the wit to look. Mirror's Edge, Portal, Arkham Asylum, Left 4 Dead, Bioshock; these are all outstanding games that have come out in the last few years, and will probably leave as strong an impression on young gamers of today as the games on your list did on you. Regarding console fanboyism and whiny boycott groups: these are two subsets of a larger group known as loudmouthed jackasses, and sadly we're never going to get rid of them. The proper response is not to shut them up, but for sane, intelligent gamers to speak up more. The vocal minority will only be recognized for what it is when a larger portion of the gamer contingent speaks up. Just my $0.02 |
Gone Gonzo  Posts: 2947 Joined: 21 May 2008   | You forgot cliffhangers.... |
Press Junketeer  Posts: 400 Joined: 5 Feb 2009 | I was only 10 in 98 but that was the year I became a full-fledged gamer, for good reason. Aside from those he mentioned other gems I played were Brave Fencer Musashi, Warhammer: Dark Omen, MediEvil and last but not least Die by the Sword. What do all these games have in common? They don't deserve their title of an underdog and should have been hailed. Hell both Dark Omen and Die by the Sword have almost become forgotten and the Total War series wouldn't be where it is at all without Dark Omen's mechanics. I've been playing games for almost two decades and it takes more than nostalgia to realise commercial game developers have chickened out. Indies don't have as much to lose, sure, but any entrepreneur worth his/her salt knows a company will never grow and surpass its competitors unless it takes risks. |
Pulitzer Laureate Posts: 790 Joined: 28 Mar 2009 |
What made 1998 so awesome for games, is they were all ORIGINAL and new. If you two feel the need to applaud sequels, thats all good, but you are arguing for an old tree dying from within. I am looking forward to Starcraft 2 myself, but all it is going to be, especially in the multiplayer, is the same gameplay as Starcraft, with only better graphics.[/quote] SC2 is becoming a far different game from the original, even without the graphics. even if it is a sequel, its the most anticipated one that will eve be made, assuming Duke Nukem 4ever stays in developement hell |
Pixel Thief  Posts: 429 Joined: 7 Jul 2008  | Yes. 1998 was gold. I actually had a similar thought a while ago: http://www.shamusyoung.com/twentysidedtale/?p=1861 And check out 1999: System Shock 2, Quake III Arena, Unreal Tournament, Planescape: Torment, Age of Empires II: The Age of Kings, Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri, Homeworld, Outcast, Kingpin: Life of Crime, Rollercoaster Tycoon, Freespace 2 And that's just PC games. I know there were a few console gems in there as well. We've had some good years here and there, but nothing like those days. My own theory is that somewhere in the early 00's we crossed the threshold where the price of game development got to be really, really steep. So much so that everyone stopped taking risks, games started getting shorter, and the list of publishers began to consolidate into the handful we have today. |
Muckraker  Posts: 239 Joined: 24 Oct 2007   |
Most of those games are not from this year, and in fact go back as far as 2007. If that isn't proof that not as many classics come out now I don't know what is. |
Muckraker Posts: 239 Joined: 24 Oct 2007 |
Super Smash Bros. and Tony Hawk's Pro Skater were both released that year. |
Gone Gonzo  Posts: 2826 Joined: 28 May 2009   | Amazing article. Very eye-opening and hilarious. But screw the developers, I'm not going to stop buying used games. Hell, I bought Crackdown used at a pawn shop for $5 Canadian! There's no way you'll get me to spend more than $20 on a game unless I know it'll be a life-changing experience on par with FFVII or Half-Life 2. |
Press Junketeer  Posts: 394 Joined: 7 Apr 2009 | This seems like a bit of a hate rant, and considering that I was surprised to find that I agreed with everything. I did feel that there used to be more variety of games out, but I didn't realise exactly how much until I saw this article. Wow. We were spoiled for choice in 1998. Now we are facing some sort of gaming drought where there is limited numbers of new games, a lack of development (or even improvement) on previous games and a lack of creativity in exploring game themes and genres. The future of gaming used to look bright, but now despite some of the things that have been announced (like Natal) the future still looks... Generic. |
Anonymous Source Posts: 3 Joined: 23 Jul 2009 | You lost me at the point where you complained that gaming isn't as good as it was in 1998. You instantly lost what credit you had over that whole article. Gaming isn't any more unoriginal than it was back then, your speaking through a giant chunk of pure nostalgia when you talk about old games. Give it a few years and you'll be telling everyone about how the new generation of gaming sucks, and you miss the old games like Grand Theft Auto and Guitar Hero. |
Anonymous Source Posts: 9 Joined: 30 Jun 2009  | Personally I like modern games. Sure there are plenty of bad ones, but there were plenty of bad old games too. It's a shame though that more people don't support good indie developers. I was reading a post on intoversions website about their financial trouble after multiwinia didn't sell as much as expected. That makes me sad. If there is anything I find lamentable about modern gaming, it's good developers going under. |
Gone Gonzo  Posts: 1921 Joined: 31 Jan 2009 | number 10 I have to agree its sad to see good new IPs not sell well this console generation or the last one unlike during Ps1/n64/sega saturn and dreamcast. |
Gone Gonzo  Posts: 1687 Joined: 1 Nov 2007 |
Just off the top of my head I'll say Donnie Darko and Star Wars (Which has seen a few different re-releases for the IV-VI each with a fancy GoTY like title). But I imagine given a weekend and some alcohol I could give you a list that would break Escapist in half under its massive weight. They tend to call them "Directors Cuts" or "Unrated Editions" or "Straight to Smut" but its just another name for the same basic idea.
Though just saying Arkham Asylum gets my nipples hard. I'm still astounded at the quality of that game. It didn't move me as much as say Pokemon when Red/Blue hit (for their time they just blew everything out of the water) but compared to its competition AA is epic freaking gold to me.
I've pretty much come to the same conclusion. It takes a small group of people to create something new and fun like World of Goo. All companies like EA and Activision tend to do is spit out short, expensive, overhyped poppycock.
Never mention games that aren't out yet. Because you'll end up feeling cheated in the end. People used to praise SPORE like it was the second coming of Jesus. Then it hit and people realized that much like the actual second coming of Jesus it was to be nothing short of the end. Left 4 Dead 2 for instance had a mile long (it felt) line at Pax of peopel waiting to play. Thing was that you got a free shirt if you did. The MOMENT they ran out of shirts you saw almost nobody giving that booth the time of day. |
Muckraker  Posts: 260 Joined: 19 Aug 2008   | Wow; an actual reasonable "Top Ten" list where I can agree with everything. Especially No. 1; I do miss the 90's =/ |
Gone Gonzo  Posts: 3508 Joined: 20 Aug 2008  | 1998 was good (you left out Railroad Tycoon II, which I still play to this day), but my money's on 2004 as gaming's best year. Rome: Total War, GTA San Andreas, Katamari Damacy (when it was fresh and original), Port Royale 2, The Sims 2, World of Warcraft, Ninja Gaiden, Half-Life 2 (and the launch, albeit gods-awful at the time, of Steam, which we all adore today), the Nintendo DS, Metal Gear Solid 3, Paper Mario TTYD...for my money it beats 1998, but it may have been that "perfect storm" of having lots of money and lots of free time (the year before I got married) that did it. |
| (Pages: 1, 2) | |
Reply to Thread
|
|
Not registered? Sign up for a free account! |
Ten Things I Hate About You, Gaming
Spend too long staring at games and you'll see them staring back at you - with hate in their eyes. These are the things that get Christian Ward's goat about his supposed favorite hobby.
Read Full Article