old VS new games why new games suck

I think all the newer games just get worse and worse gameplay wise, but the graphics get better. Anyone agre with this?

Examples:

Operation Flashpoint cold war crisis vs Arma 2: I could not even bare to finnish arma 2 campaign, while i played flashpoint campaign several times

Baldurs Gate vs Dragon Age: Again dragon age gameplay was very boring compared to the Baldurs gate series.

Alien vs Predator from 2000 VS alien VS predator from 2010: the first one was very scary and maybe the first of its kind? The second one was not scary and just a run and gun game

Gothic 4 VS Gothic 2: Gothic 2 was legendary at its time and Gothic 4 was a choir of crap.

I can give tons of more examples but the point is why are all the new games crap compared to the older ones?

The ONLY new game i really enjoyed was Mirrors Edge, all the other new games i tested which is VERY MANY (150 single bought games on steam) all of them is just boring or medicore, most of them just feels like a choir to complete.

Rant over and out!

 

The word is chore. Choir of crap doesn't make sense either, or chore of crap. Pile of crap would be better.

But yes I would agree today developers focus on features, not gameplay. BF3 is all about features. It features a new type of global illumination and transparency. It features improved destruction. It features some DX11 optimizations. But the gameplay is not improved. I don't see much difference in gameplay from BC2, it feels like BC3 to me. Most of my complaints of BC2 exist in BF3.

Starcraft 2 I think is a great game though. And I did enjoy Darksiders and I do like Warhammer 40K Space Marine. I also enjoyed Rage immensely. Borderlands I think is a great game as well even though Gearbox are among my least favorite developers, I think they spit in the face of PC gamers whenever they can.

 

ok am not english speaker bottom line is they r a pile of crap

 

So if I list a bunch of good games which came out this gen, does that nullify the argument?

 

Well you can try but i doubt il agree with you

 

I see only one good advantage with you statement. Sell you gaming laptop and buy a cheapo one because retro games don't need to run on good hardware so you save tons of money!

 

I still want to be able to play mirrors Edge maxed

 

I don't see how arma2 was bad? I heard arma2 was good and one of the most realistic shooters ever.

 

Meh, I think things like destructible environments have greatly improved the overall gameplay. The most obvious scenario comes to mind when you have a guy camping a corner of a house or 2nd story window. With older technology you had two choices: 1) rush inside and hope you get the drop on him or 2) camp 50 feet away and wait for him to stick his head out the window and hope you're a good shot. Now you can simply blow up that part of the building with C4, mortars, RPGS, you name it! I just find it incredible...

Another great thing in "newer" games is the sound quality. People can diss Bad Company 2 and Battlefield 3 (BC3? ) all they want about graphics, rubber banding, hit detection, nerfing this and that, but hopefully they all agree that the sound effects are truly spectacular (I'm also fond of the suppression effects).

And you have to wonder, there will be a time when gameplay "plateaus" and all you can really do is add features to keep it fresh, like a new coat of paint. Many of my friends cite the Call of Duty franchise as a good example. Gameplay "plateau'ed" around Call of Duty 4. It was just THAT good! Then came the next few games and people were saying "oh, it's just the same gameplay as the last game, why haven't they done anything new?"

The funny thing about this comment (and I'm sure everyone has read a different variation of it either online or in a gaming magazine) is that when you have a successful franchise like Gears of War, Halo, Call of Duty, etc, gameplay "plateaus" and developers can go two routes.

1) They can keep the core gameplay the same and add features to make it fresh (this of course gets criticism saying how it's just the same as the game before it, why should I pay $60 for new maps and better graphics
or
2) They alter the game enough that it strays away from the traditional gameplay that it successfully turns the franchise in a new direction (this of course gets criticism saying how the developers have "butchered" a classic formula to appeal to the "casual" or "hard core" crowd).

Is there a healthy balance between the two? Probably. I don't buy many games and I'm often years behind the times as I wait for amazing Steam sales, but it would be interesting to see if any long-lasting franchises have successfully altered their gameplay in a new direction and have it perfected in reponse to criticisms saying it went down a previous gameplay path far too long with too many $60 feature expansions.

 

Dreamfall is 10x worse than TLJ
Fallout 3 is a fail compared to Fallout 2
Dragon Age 2 is worse than DA1. DA1 is worse than NWN2. NWN1 is awesome.
HMM6 is worse than 5, 5 is worse than 3.
Supreme Commander is nowhere near Total Annihilation.
Mass Effect 2 is worse than ME1
Half-life 2 is worse than 1
------------------
Skyrim is better than Oblivion
FNV is way better than FO3
KOTOR 2 is better than KOTOR1
Civ V is better than previous.

 

You sir, have just invalidated your entire argument on that statement alone.

 

oh man COME ON!! crysis 1 + skyrim + NEVERWINTER NIGHTS 2 + SC2 + MW1 + MW2, man I really can count million of them...

I think both genres are just fine, the problem is I am getting old and not that much into gaming anymore, definitely I had the most fun of my gaming life with BG2, however I don't think it was because the game was much better, it was because I was much younger

 

You listed at least 4 games that were/are grossly overrated.

 

which ones were overrated? man, you not liking a game doesn't mean it is not a good game... everybody has different opinions, some of my best gaming experiences ware the storyline of MW1 and MW2 (I did not list MW3), and I am sure a ton of people will say the same...

 

I'm fairly objective when it comes to games, and because I don't like a game does not mean that I rate it badly (Also I do not rate games highly simply because I like them).
MW1 was a feat and an incredible game, MW2 was a slightly better looking MW1 with some terrible mechanics added. SC2 did not go leaps and bounds above SC1. It's still a good game, but with the huge time gap between SC1 and SC2 I expected more and was horribly disappointed. NWN2 was not that great of a game. Skyrim, while a solid title, didn't do anything to impress. It's not visually amazing, nor is it unique in any way.

 

well, I am seeing your points but let me put it my way

MW1 is a marvelous game, and MW2 continued the storyline just fine, come on, prisoner 627, weren't you a little bit too excited to see Price showing up after such an intense battle

SC2 is a really good game, although some people (I am sorry but like you) were expecting Blizzard was going to come up with the best thing since sliced bread and were disappointed.. come on, computers still DO have limitations.. and I think they added new units strategies just fine.. (also please don't do the same to Diablo 3, it won't be a miracle! it will be a solid game to remember )

NWN2 is one of the best games ever, maybe you didn't like it, but being a DM for the past 15 years, I think it is the best computer RPG that comes a little bit close to (still too far away though) the actual tabletop FRP, yet it is another marvelous piece of gameplay..

SKYRIM, I am sorry, I totally disagree with you It perfectly gave me the nordic gameplay feeling, not only with immense graphics but the landscape, open-world gameplay, and plain simple beautiful scenery, I think you should stare at the mountain views more in skyrim than to hack and slash... that makes it a different game than others...

 

Star Wars: Episode I - The Phantom Menace must be your favourite movie.

 

MW1 and 2 was just like looking at a teenage drama series with guns... yay...

NWN2 was a good game but not comparable to balduts Gate series

Skyrim i actually didnt try yet because i really dont like single player MMORPG type of games

 

do you even know what MMORPG is? anyways, I don't think MW1 and 2 are teenager games, try them, you will see they are quite different than what you thought...

 

fallout new vegas is linear compared to fallout 3, hence the NV has a lot of options and more dlcs, not so good story compared to fo3 imo.

fear 3 and 2 are not as scary as their predecessors, the original fear 1 is the best, but fear 2 having a dark shadowy corners and fear 3 having the solid cover system. new and old versions have their ups and downs.

COD series are good after mw1, the SP are all okay to me (at least there's a plot so your money meant something, duh) but the MP is...yeah.

The franchises that still lives up to the name imo.

Assassin's creed series
Dead space series
Batman arkham series

in the long run, i don't think that the games are to blame, well not generally, but we the gamers, i think on how we judge a game depends on how long we played such games, (let's say, gaming maturity) if you let a noob gamer see mw3, he will be all eyes are ears, but for a gamer who have played the COD series may be impressed or not even. our outlook for the game also progresses as we play one to infinite gaming franchises. we have alot of what IF's that we want to add by retrospect to what we think new games really are.

my 2c.

 

No it isn't. In fact you must think that the Blu-Ray Complete Saga release is officially canon.

 

All I can say is...nobody should be able to complain about a game until they try and create one themselves!

 

so true...

 

I think that, while the Modern Warfare series is not incredible, it is extremely fun to play with friends, as is BF3. Until you've played Bf3 in squad deathmatch with 3 of your closest friends, you can not say a single thing about the multiplayer.

Skyrim I think is the best Elder Scrolls game, and I own all of them.

And, you know what the best part of all of this is? Its an opinion, which people shouldn't get offended over.

 

Given that we're paying for them we have every right to complain, especially given that the earlier games had smaller budgets compared to todays AAA games costing millions.

 

Exactly. Using that same logic we shouldn't complain about anything.

 

If new games suck to you, then just keep playing the games you loved in the past. There's no reason to torture yourself and waste money if you think the industry isn't selling games to your standards these days.

 

come on guys, he meant not to be too critical, the games we are criticizing takes very long time to code and market, definitely I won't say we shouldn't say they were bad or good or whatever, but saying gaming market sucks is a really big complaint considering these people are making a living out of it..

 

I've seen quality of games decline greatly over the years, decades, whatever. Sure graphics are better, and mechanics of gameplay have improved, but the gaming experience has been dumbed down, with little thought or risk put into making a game. Everything is formulaic. You won't find games with the complexity of MechWarrior anymore. Study sims like F-15, Longbow, Falcon, Enemy Engaged, Steel Beasts, M1 Tank Platoon are pretty much non existent. Single player components of FPS games last all of 6-8 hours when older games would last dozens of hours and a lot more engaging storylines like original Half-Life, No One Lives Forever, Deus Ex, Riddick Butcher Bay. Even military shooters have gone soft, compared with classics like Rainbow Six, original Splinter Cells, SWAT. RTS's have even become more arcade.

All of this why? Consoles. 8 button controllers. A.D.D. kids. The games that still follow the "old school" of gaming are PC only: Sins of a Solar Empire, Witcher, STALKER, Starcraft, Total War, etc.

 

Like in Skyrim, I'm sorry but every time I press tab, I think "analog stick".

 

FF3 (SNES) / FF7 (PS) / Chrono Trigger (SNES) >>> Any current or recent Final Fantasy

Total Annihilation >>> Supreme Commander

Heroes of Might & Magic 3 >>> Heroes 5 and 6
(#6 has terrible bugs but is better than 4/5, making it 3/6/4/5).

Command & Conquer RA2/Yuri >>> C&C:RA3

These days the majority of game companies rush out unfinished products in their Alpha/Beta stages and then patch it up months down the road if you're lucky.

Back then, it was all about quality. Now, it's all about money.

 

Total Annihilation really that good? I see it's on sale on GoG.

 

Best RTS for its time.

The soundtrack is incredible (Jeremy Soule) and the gameplay is extremely fun. There's hundreds of user-made mods that you can pick up for free through Google searching. It's two factions that have ground, air and sea units which have two tiers each.

You have a commander as a builder which you need to protect the entire game (think of him as the president and you're the secret service). There's other builders you can make later in the game but they aren't as powerful at building.

There are two main resources: Energy and Metal. Your goal is to acquire these materials through base-building and balance the +/- throughout the game to achieve success later by being able to move to tier 2 and build the ultimate ground, air and sea attack units.

Another good grab on gog is Heroes 3 for 4.99$ (one of the greatest games of all time in my opinion).

 

Total Annihilation has 3d terrain and the game realistically calculates projectile collision. If there's a hill between the unit and the target, lasers and missiles will hit the hill while shells might fly above it depending on the angle. In most other RTS you'll see some shooting animation and the target's hit points will decrease lol.

There's a mod for it called TA Spring w/ better graphics but I never tried it.

 

Sim City 2000 >>> Everyone other Sim City since then.
Roller Coaster Tycoon 2 >>> Roller Coaster Tycoon 3

 

Sim City 3000 was awesome, the best Wal-Mart game I got for $2 when I was a kid.

 

Yet we expect much more from them.

on a whole were wuite a fickle bunch

complain that a games is the same as the ones before and not "orginal"
or complain that theyve changed the game and broken a winning formula

at the end of the day no one game will ever please everyone.

 

I really liked this article... there's so much true in it. I'm 34 years old. A lot of gaming in my back

 

THANK YOU!!! +rep

 

+1 (edit: wups, out of rep atm, will do later if I remember). I'm 91 years old and still wonder why we have all these new fangled things like TV's and cars with more than 10 horses. I mean when I was a kid we used to play marbles and escape the crazy farmer.

Nah. I actually got a good chuckle out of that article, and could relate to a lot of it. In some respects it's true. But it doesn't change the fact that things have changed, companies are afraid to take risks, or do something different. Games used to be the labor of love of one or two programmers. Granted graphics were all 2D sprites, and resolutions were pretty much along the lines of 640x480. But still these days they have entire studios dedicated to the development of a game, yet it's the same old crap pushed out year after year.

With so much money invested in game development these days, I'm just surprised there's not a lot more emphasis on the actual game plot. It used to be games were single player entities with multi-player tacked on. Now they're all multiplayer with a decent 4-6 hour single player game tacked on. Multiplayer means no creativity. Lack of focus on plot and uniqueness. It's just how can they skin guns differently.

Interestingly, average age of a gamer is 37 years old, and 29% of Americans over age of 50 play video games. Given my Generation (X) really were at the forefront of PC gaming (i.e 1980's Commodore 64, etc) the average age will probably continue to rise and the distribution widened more evenly across all age ranges.

 

Wow great article, i actually think what he says is true. The older u get the less imaginative you get.

That explains all the 14 year old COD console fanboys and so on.

I remember when quake 2 just came out i LOVED playing it on lan on my older brother computer, it was the most fun i ever had in my life. The game was just so simple but i guess my imagination made it so fun.

Time to get a new hobby... hmmm maybe i should take a PUA class and get laid with some random chick instead

 

man, just loosen your grip on the quality of games, I am 27 and I don't expect too much from games yes we spend too much money to play skyrim for 10-20 hours then leave it there, but what the hell, it takes my mind away from business for friday night, that worths it seriously, back in the good old times, when I was playing dune 2000, I was feeling as if I was swallowed by the worm when my harvester was gone or staff of the magi was almost in my hands when I put it to my character's being a kid rocks

 

I got some games this weekend.

And I look forward to them.

Shogun 2 for 7.49
Fear 3 for 7.83

And I got 2 Portal 2, one for me, one for a long time online friend. We may make some Let's Play videos for his Youtube channel with Fear 3 and Portal 2 co-op.

I'm also in my late 20s, working full time in IT industry and am also a jaded gamer. But there are games out there to have fun with. I'll be picking up Batman AC later this year after I play these 3. I look forward to Borderlands 2 in the summer and Guild Wars 2 as well. I've already demanded that ViciousUXUSMC reserve me spots on his Borderlands 2 co-op play and look forward to his Guild Wars 2 guild.

I'm looking forward to upgrading my laptop this year as well for gaming.

 

That's true. I can't seem to find time to play the way I want... but when I do have some time, I get bored quickly... that's why I tend to have a huge backlog so I can try multiple games always. There are A LOT of good actual games... right now I'm stuck with Orcs must Die, Bit.Trip Runner, Capsized, Hard reset... ok, I must admit I love Indie games but also AAA like Metro 2033, Darksiders, GTA, Ghost recon...

I don't hope to find a game to match Ultima 7, but there are other RPG games (Witcher, Fallout series, ME...) that are great too!

Also, I love Fallout 2... AND fallout 3. Different and GREAT games on their own. Also I love a game many people hate: Clive Barker's Jericho. IS NOT Undying, but IMO is a good game.

 

You sure it's not nostalgia getting to you? But either way, I can see how video game industry becoming more of a business than trying make games fun can interfere with games being worse than they should be.

 

It's important to consider cognitive dissonance as a possible explanation for this disillusionment towards modern gaming rather than just the standard of games, which is roughly touched upon in the article brought up on the last page. One could say that it is almost a general fact that with age, our imagination and flare for the creative take a nose-dive.

Having that said, I don't think that it's entirely a case of mind over matter. I do genuinely believe that with the expansion of games and gaming audience, we do have a larger number of mediocre titles, but this shouldn't be taken to mean that quality games have been left in the retro category.

 

Quality games have not been left in the retro category, but like the games I mentioned previously, you don't get the detail or involvement required in games that you used to... primarily due to consoles. PC exclusive titles tend to be more expansive, utilize more commands, and have a deeper single player experience. Very few PC only titles are made any more.

Today, it's all about making a game so it works across multiple platforms. While I understand the business reasons for this, it doesn't mean it's acceptable from a gaming standpoint. Can't they use the same basic concepts and tune it specifically between consoles and PC? I know it would take more resources, but so what. It would separate good games from great games.

 

I disagree.
Frequently Asked Questions
Nobel Prize Winners Age Statistics

 

This is quite appropriate:

<param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/W1ZtBCpo0eU?version=3&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/W1ZtBCpo0eU?version=3&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width='560' height="315" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true"></embed>

<param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/C4yIxUOWrtw?version=3&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/C4yIxUOWrtw?version=3&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width='560' height="315" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true"></embed>

 

easy / simplified / watch bots do it

love it!

about the first video though, still I am not sure we were better than the kids nowadays, I used to be pretty good at CS for example, but new kids on the block (BF3) scares the s**t out of me every once in a while... 400m headshot and so on... zzzzzzz...