Discussion Forums > Gaming

Do They Really Not Make Them Like They Used To?

<< < (13/22) > >>

logos:

--- Quote from: nstgc on June 13, 2012, 01:41:26 PM ---Also, Logos, are you going to deny that games are dumbed down and have stories that lame?

--- End quote ---
yes, I am going to deny that "some" games are dumbed down, "some" games have lame stories.
Newer games in all aspects are more complex than older games...Doom's mechanics are lolsimple compared to any recent shooter.  FF1-X have much simpler mechanics than 12/13, madden '95 is stupidly simple compared to madden '11

As for stories that's generally a personal thing, ex: imo mass effect 1-3 is one of the best stories ever told in a game, but it was like the entire internet wanted to crucify bioware for 3's ending, FF13 also seems to be hated, which I think is funny since 13 seems to be the only FF game that square actually attempted to do something new in, but w/e.

RPGs-a lot of really solid RPGs have been released recently, skyrim, kingdom of amalur, mass effect 3 were all released in the last...year? that's 3 really good games rpgs in 1 year and that doesnt include the many games I havent played.

vicious796:

--- Quote from: logos on June 13, 2012, 09:10:15 PM ---
--- Quote from: nstgc on June 13, 2012, 01:41:26 PM ---Also, Logos, are you going to deny that games are dumbed down and have stories that lame?

--- End quote ---
yes, I am going to deny that "some" games are dumbed down, "some" games have lame stories.
Newer games in all aspects are more complex than older games...Doom's mechanics are lolsimple compared to any recent shooter.  FF1-X have much simpler mechanics than 12/13, madden '95 is stupidly simple compared to madden '11
--- End quote ---

Once again, you're confusing complexity with difficulty. Just because something is overly complex does not make it truly challenging. It's the mechanics that are difficult - not the game. I know that seems like a "one-in-the-same" kinda deal but it isn't. If a part in the game is hard because you have to use the menu, three submenus, a series of buttons, etc. that isn't the game being challenging - that's the mechanics being overly complicated.

Once again, let's use Chrono Cross as an example since it's really what brought this to mind. You choose between 3 levels of attack that increase in hit chance as you combo. Each level builds up stamina so you can use your heavy hitting abilities. Those abilities have a color to them that fill up a 3-level field. If you get the field all red, for example, your red attacks have an extra bonus multiplier. Beyond that, everyone has an element color that can be exposed or buffed. You can also change people's element colors to fit your playstyle.

It's complex, in its own way, but the delivery of it is elegantly simple. It's an "easy to learn, tricky to master" type system that is very rewarding and helps prevent combat from getting stale. This was on the PS1 in 2000. Today, it seems like you either have 2 options or 20. One is very simple while the other is a bit extreme and you end up only using half a dozen of those 20 options. The others are just fluff or very specific and, honestly, they don't add much to the actual gameplay experience.


--- Quote ---As for stories that's generally a personal thing, ex: imo mass effect 1-3 is one of the best stories ever told in a game, but it was like the entire internet wanted to crucify bioware for 3's ending, FF13 also seems to be hated, which I think is funny since 13 seems to be the only FF game that square actually attempted to do something new in, but w/e.
--- End quote ---

It is a preference thing but, I hate to break it to you, the overwhelming majority of the RPG community is on our side of this and have been for quite some time. I have to give you Mass Effect but, once again, that's a series. All-in-all, 1-3 could easily be considered one RPG because it's a continual story.

Final Fantasy, however, I will argue to the death. Not just FF, either, but just about everything SE has put out in the last 6 years. The script for 13 was horrible. No, it was God-awful. The characters were very, very, very 1 dimensional and the few evolutions that did occur were very stale. I swear to God, if I ever hear someone talk about being a "hero" and that this is what "heroes" do again I'll stab my eyes out with a fork. I understand they were trying something new - a fantasy/steampunk collaboration - but that doesn't excuse the bad dialogue.


--- Quote ---RPGs-a lot of really solid RPGs have been released recently, skyrim, kingdom of amalur, mass effect 3 were all released in the last...year? that's 3 really good games rpgs in 1 year and that doesnt include the many games I havent played.

--- End quote ---

KoA was hit or miss and did a lot of missing. There's a reason that the studio is declaring bankruptcy now. It was an amazing accomplishment for a first-time studio but, at the end of the day, wasn't "fantastic". As I said before, ME3 can be considered a simple continuation of the ME series and, on its own, isn't something that stands alone. Skyrim, however, is fantastic and everything we've come to expect from Bethesda's Elder Scrolls series.

But that's it. Really, honestly, and truly, that's it. Take a look at 99-early 2000s for a comparison. We had Chrono Cross, FF8 - 10, the start of Xenosaga, and Zone of the Enders just to name a few.

I had forgotten about 4X games until I started playing Sins last night - that's a field that has seen improvement over the years. Civ 5 and Sins are great examples. It's always been a niche market with games few and far between but, honestly, it's not the type of game that COULD have annual releases that aren't just expansions.

logos:

--- Quote from: vicious796 on June 14, 2012, 02:10:41 PM --- (click to show/hide)
--- Quote from: logos on June 13, 2012, 09:10:15 PM ---
--- Quote from: nstgc on June 13, 2012, 01:41:26 PM ---Also, Logos, are you going to deny that games are dumbed down and have stories that lame?

--- End quote ---
yes, I am going to deny that "some" games are dumbed down, "some" games have lame stories.
Newer games in all aspects are more complex than older games...Doom's mechanics are lolsimple compared to any recent shooter.  FF1-X have much simpler mechanics than 12/13, madden '95 is stupidly simple compared to madden '11
--- End quote ---

Once again, you're confusing complexity with difficulty. Just because something is overly complex does not make it truly challenging. It's the mechanics that are difficult - not the game. I know that seems like a "one-in-the-same" kinda deal but it isn't. If a part in the game is hard because you have to use the menu, three submenus, a series of buttons, etc. that isn't the game being challenging - that's the mechanics being overly complicated.

Once again, let's use Chrono Cross as an example since it's really what brought this to mind. You choose between 3 levels of attack that increase in hit chance as you combo. Each level builds up stamina so you can use your heavy hitting abilities. Those abilities have a color to them that fill up a 3-level field. If you get the field all red, for example, your red attacks have an extra bonus multiplier. Beyond that, everyone has an element color that can be exposed or buffed. You can also change people's element colors to fit your playstyle.

It's complex, in its own way, but the delivery of it is elegantly simple. It's an "easy to learn, tricky to master" type system that is very rewarding and helps prevent combat from getting stale. This was on the PS1 in 2000. Today, it seems like you either have 2 options or 20. One is very simple while the other is a bit extreme and you end up only using half a dozen of those 20 options. The others are just fluff or very specific and, honestly, they don't add much to the actual gameplay experience.


--- Quote ---As for stories that's generally a personal thing, ex: imo mass effect 1-3 is one of the best stories ever told in a game, but it was like the entire internet wanted to crucify bioware for 3's ending, FF13 also seems to be hated, which I think is funny since 13 seems to be the only FF game that square actually attempted to do something new in, but w/e.
--- End quote ---

It is a preference thing but, I hate to break it to you, the overwhelming majority of the RPG community is on our side of this and have been for quite some time. I have to give you Mass Effect but, once again, that's a series. All-in-all, 1-3 could easily be considered one RPG because it's a continual story.

Final Fantasy, however, I will argue to the death. Not just FF, either, but just about everything SE has put out in the last 6 years. The script for 13 was horrible. No, it was God-awful. The characters were very, very, very 1 dimensional and the few evolutions that did occur were very stale. I swear to God, if I ever hear someone talk about being a "hero" and that this is what "heroes" do again I'll stab my eyes out with a fork. I understand they were trying something new - a fantasy/steampunk collaboration - but that doesn't excuse the bad dialogue.


--- Quote ---RPGs-a lot of really solid RPGs have been released recently, skyrim, kingdom of amalur, mass effect 3 were all released in the last...year? that's 3 really good games rpgs in 1 year and that doesnt include the many games I havent played.

--- End quote ---

KoA was hit or miss and did a lot of missing. There's a reason that the studio is declaring bankruptcy now. It was an amazing accomplishment for a first-time studio but, at the end of the day, wasn't "fantastic". As I said before, ME3 can be considered a simple continuation of the ME series and, on its own, isn't something that stands alone. Skyrim, however, is fantastic and everything we've come to expect from Bethesda's Elder Scrolls series.

But that's it. Really, honestly, and truly, that's it. Take a look at 99-early 2000s for a comparison. We had Chrono Cross, FF8 - 10, the start of Xenosaga, and Zone of the Enders just to name a few.

I had forgotten about 4X games until I started playing Sins last night - that's a field that has seen improvement over the years. Civ 5 and Sins are great examples. It's always been a niche market with games few and far between but, honestly, it's not the type of game that COULD have annual releases that aren't just expansions.
--- End quote ---
So, again, I understand that chrono cross is what brought on the subject, I have never played it, but for arguments sake lets say it is a shining example of all that is awesome, but it's still just 1 game and even with the other "great" games of the past there are just as many (probably) great new games.

As for the difficult=/=complex, true enough, but higher complexity grants more freedom with difficulty, nowadays we have AI like in skyrim, puzzle games like portal, ntm innovations like xbox kinect or the Wii that allow a whole different aspect of difficulty.  I also heard catherine is hella difficult, but never played it so i cant comment.

I still think that most gamers just "remember" stories in games as being better when they were younger, its much easier to amaze a 10 yr old than a 25yr old and ofc newer is always better, so after you play through your 50th rpg no matter how good the story is its probably full of shit you've already seen, even if in actuality is just as great if not better than the first great story you've encountered...but that's just how I feel, again judging stories is subjective and I don't really want to argue for or against.

Nikkoru:
I don't think I'm suffering from nostalgia, for one thing I still have most of all these games in original or digitized format - so I can go back and compare directly. On the whole, games have improved immensely in the last 30 years. Platformers, racing, FPSs, puzzle games, whatever. RPGs, I think, are the exception.

Role playing has been done well since before video games, it requires more effort out of the participant to make it enjoyable and RPGamers are more than comfortable with this. When table-top gaming, immediate and mindless success is just masturbatory and everyone knows it. It's also not about the dice throwing, it's a cognitive activity primarily, not Yahtzee. In short, I want games which let me play a role, think through problems, and consider strategies. I don't want to watch a movie, with occasional button pressing to break the scenes up. Nor should clicking or mashing buttons for hours on end be the determining factor of everything. On the other hand, I don't need pointless complexity, everything you should have to know about your character and the game should be within memory, or written on two pieces of paper. Logical limitations to keep the story going. Increasing sophistication with gaming consoles and computers doesn't change the base requirements for what makes role playing games an enjoyable experience -- it should make the story telling easier and the player more involved.

My only issue with games outside of RPGs is simple redundancy -- while games have been improving in a linear fashion over time, they've grown far more expansively horizontally. While many SNES, Genesis, PSX, and other retro console games did suck quite a bit -- every time something like a Mario or Metroid did come out, there weren't a dozen or so similar games to dilute the experience. Nor did Nintendo release Mario 1.1/1.2/1.3 and so on, they spent time developing their original idea until they genuinely believed they improved it, not simply changed the aesthetics and asked for more money.

The problem with modern gaming is, in short, the feeling that you've played that game a hundred times before.

krumm:
This topic comes up in all forms of entertainment, and it is total bull shit.  When there is more of something the direct amount of bad goes up.  The amount of bad might go up percent wise as well, but that is just because making something good is harder then making something bad.  But even if the bad is going up, that does not mean the direct amount of good is going down, you just have to weed through more.  This is just a small part of the problem.  Old memories and hype are the biggest problems with new [games/movies/TV shows] not seeming as good to some people. 

Old memories make it harder to see improvement and hype makes you think there is something in the new that was not even in the old.

Also when it comes to story telling there is next to nothing that has not been told before.  If you think something is original, it is just because you personally have not found it.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page