PDA

View Full Version : did you enjoy games more back in the old days?



nathanj
26th Jun 2010, 09:58
i was going through my "old games" folder figuring out which to play to pass some time away. i got a bit of the nostalgia bug and started remembering the final fantasy games, even though i couldnt play them today they were friggin awesome back then. my collection of the good resident evil games 1-3. all my other ps1, supernes, sega genisis games. maybe im just old now but there is something missing in todays games that was fairly commonplace back then. i could probably name 10 games of the recent years that are WOW games. i can name alot more than 10 from back in the 90s and early 2000s.

obviously if you are an old fart, you might have to explain those games that you played back then like rock banging, kick the rock, stick toss, hit the rock with the stick, and whatever else people did prior to the 80s and 90s. :)

Pinky_Powers
26th Jun 2010, 10:50
and whatever else people did prior to the 80s and 90s. :)

They listened to awesome music, ate a lot of savage chemicals, drank heavy liquors and had bizarre babies like you and I.

It was Shangri-La.

jtr7
26th Jun 2010, 11:10
Everything was all new and exciting, and there were more and more frequent periods of stagnation, with explosive breakthroughs followed by everyone jumping on the bandwagon to copy but not copy too much. The more components involved in just being able to play the game, the less I enjoy them, unless I am fortunate enough to play them on a friend's system where it's all set up, but the more I have to purchase, and the more I have to rely on third parties, the less I even get a chance to try, so I read up on games that I have a remote interest in, and watch gameplay vids if I know I won't get to play it myself, just so I'm not entirely out of the loop. The cost and DRM and necessity of Internet just kills my chances, and without the option to play at my own pace most of the time, I won't be able to enjoy playing the games, but I might enjoy watching someone else and enjoy the unfolding story and seeing things for the first time vicariously.

I started out playing a neighbor's Pong on their Atari 2600 in 1978, and I found the tech more interesting than the game. The game Pong itself wasn't fun for me, but the novelty was.

And then Space Invaders and Asteroids and GORF were the games I could play if I asked for a quarter or had money left over from a dollar after buying a snack. But the best thing about Space Invaders and Asteroids for me was that my father and I would play together and cheer each other on. It was great father/son time.

Eventually, we got our own Atari 2600, and later, the 7800, and we had over 80 games before the end, with 30 or so more that we tried and traded over the years.

In 1984, I was handed a well-used Timex Sinclair 1000/ZX81, with a 16Kb expansion module, and in 1985, I was gifted with an Atari 130XE, before it was repackaged years later as just a game system with big pastel buttons and no keyboard.

In the early 80s, we had a few Arcades spring up, and I played a dozen favorites and a smattering of others, but really was limited by a lack of dollars to get good at any of them, or to bother trying games that didn't appeal just looking at them. So, the home systems really got a workout when I wasn't growing more absorbed into messing with Atari Basic programming.

I didn't get a Windows PC until late 1995 (though I'd messed about and repeatedly fatally crashed a friend's father's Macintosh in the late 80s), and was woefully ignorant about maximizing power for price, and so it was a Pentium 75, with 16MB RAM (which I had upgraded to a thrilling 24), and a 1.26 GB hard drive (which I had to compress to get 1.99 GB), and since it was before CD-burners, if a project couldn't fit on a 1.44 MB floppy (which I would compress to get me closer to 3.5 MBs), I had to say goodbye to it, eventually. I was able to enjoy Diablo, and the Duke Nukem 3D demo, but the rest of my drive was filled with cheap applications for making and manipulating images and sounds, and a bunch of writing projects.

I didn't get another PC until late 2006, but I had fully played Thief: The Dark Project and Thief: The Metal Age on a friend's computer back in 2001, the second one first, and because it came free with my friend's EAX soundcard, as well as the Deus Ex demo. Aside from TDP, he ended up getting Diablo II. I was the only one that played them through, twice only, and I don't think he ever did, even though it was his own system and games. He purchased Thief Gold and I don't think he touched it, and by that time, I was nowhere near it to try it myself, and he even purchased Thief: Deadly Shadows and never played it. I hope he was at least collecting them for a future complete package sale, or something. I eventually got my own copies of all four Thief games (TDP & Gold, TMA, & TDS) to compliment my 2006 laptop, and have been content since, and keep hoping for the next game and system that will bring me new joy in the next decade.

I don't see much that I like AND can play AND can afford for all that's required for it, and so it goes. I've run out of a lot of play time to give to a game properly, having still gotten more satisfaction from my many projects and forum participation and watching videos online--all of which I can do intermittently, and jump one from another casually, unlike the concentration and immersion and timewarping that comes from gaming properly and for maximum enjoyment. I'm not participating in gaming, really, and so, yes, the olden days were golden days, and now, there's a dearth for a multiplicity of reasons, so I watch and wait and hope for the next thing I can really get into.

Jerion
26th Jun 2010, 11:54
Did I enjoy it more in the 90s? Hrm, not really. I thoroughly enjoyed it back then to be sure, but I still find gaming very fun and adore the medium. Sure there were some golden nuggets back in the 90s, but I'm not clinging to them (expect maybe DX, we're all guilty of that here :) ).

ChfMojoRising
26th Jun 2010, 11:59
97-00 was the golden age for me~ other than that, the quality of games have been pretty consistent.

~except I think there was a greater percentage of experimental game design back then~ I'd like to go back to that. I want a new Bushido Blade! T_T

IcePure
26th Jun 2010, 12:02
You could argue that since we're more likely to only go back and play games, or indeed, remember the games that we enjoyed, as opposed to those we didn't, games from the past will always be more enjoyable, especially when combined with nostalgia ;)

Nonetheless, the 90's were a time of great gaming innovation; developers were not afraid to try things, a new FIFA being brought out every year had actual improvements to the games, and we had games that were actually Beta tested, unlike Unreal 3 and Fallout 3, which have had about over 9000 patches since release.

I can only really talk about the 90's since that's when I was born, but for me, the Mega Drive was king - what other console could you repair by blowing the dust out of it?

xsamitt
26th Jun 2010, 12:03
JtR7....That was an interesting read.

I had the Atari equivalent back in the day.Gemini.Loved it.We moved to the city and I foolishly lent my system to a friend who lived in the same building and he never gave it back.Once bitten twice shy as they say.
In late 2000 I bought the parts for this pc that I'm still using.And Deus EX was included with my sound card.
I figured all titles were going to be mature like this,after all I had graduated to PC finally.Clearly I was wrong and since Deus EX was my first PC game you can imagine the thrill of this game that felt like it was some kind of military thing that felt so alive for so many reasons.
Fast forward to now and my back then PC that was a pretty high end build is almost useless.LOl.But history shall repeat it self when The 3RD DX title hits the streets and will build that new PC.

K^2
26th Jun 2010, 13:06
Well, yes, the fact that it was all new added a lot to it. I think, that's a big part of why new generation doesn't see problems with today's games. It's new to them. When I play some of the old games I used to enjoy, I really don't feel the same way about them anymore.

But then there are a few games that still feel as fresh as they did back then. X-Com, Duke Nukem, Heroes of Might and Magic, Worms, Death Rally... I still boot these games up every once in a while and replay them. And still enjoy them more than most games that come out now.

So no, all in all, I don't think that we just feel like games used to be better. They were better. Not all of them, by no means, but there were more good games than there are now.

ZakKa89
26th Jun 2010, 13:42
Games are getting better and better and I find myself enjoying them more and more.

Manho221
26th Jun 2010, 13:57
My first real computer and the games that followed were like magic. I spent way to much money on the first computer. It was a compaq or however you spell it. A pentium 100 with 32 megs of ram and a 3.2 gig hdd. As the salesman told me I would never need more space than that :lol: Then we got it home and it was like I didn't want anyone to mess with it cus they might screw up. after about a month, i discovered the games. Oh I knew they were there before but I wasn't interested :D

I bought a copy of Quake. That was my first game. I was hooked, addicted whatever you want to call it. I played night and day untill completion. It was all down hill after that. I was at EB games more than I was home. Duke Nukem, Tomb Raider, Tomb Raider 2, Quake 2, then somehow I had a Playstation then an N64 and the Days of endless hours of 4 player 007. Ohh my god that was fun. Along with Twisted Metal 2 I don't think we never left the house, In fact we covered the windows in the summer to cut out glare. The days started to clump together and I never knew what season it was. I took a week off work when Resident Evil 2 came out and finished all the different paths before I had to return to work :lol:

Yeh those were pretty cool times :thumb:

Pretentious Old Man.
26th Jun 2010, 14:21
Games are getting better and better

U srs?

Ephemeral
26th Jun 2010, 14:30
The problem with gaming is it went mass market. Just like how movies have come to revolve around formulaic blockbuster hits with a couple of indie and experimental films in between, so to are games shifting towards pandering to the lowest common denominator. It's already happening as games are being vastly simplified in design complexity and overall game difficulty, and the problem will only get worse with time.

jtr7
26th Jun 2010, 14:44
Yep. And people confuse better tech with the quality of the game aspects of the product.

ZakKa89
26th Jun 2010, 14:49
U srs?

Yes I srs. While other franchises like Fallout may have decreased in in quality (1/2 way better) and there are some popular huge franchises that are overrated imo, there are still great games being made. I name everything valve does, ME2, lots of indie games, the upcoming starcraft 2 (in the beta) and many more.

yes, games are getting better. Not all of them ofcourse...

Sirviani
26th Jun 2010, 15:12
Zakka doesn't even know what he's talking about. Half Life was far better than Half Life 2 in absolutely everything. Mass Effect 2 has nothing to do with the good old classics from Bioware and Black Isle. Starcraft 2 is a bad joke.

Perhaps games are getting better for the ordinary people like you. Not for me.

Icky6
26th Jun 2010, 15:48
Zakka doesn't even know what he's talking about. Half Life was far better than Half Life 2 in absolutely everything. Mass Effect 2 has nothing to do with the good old classics from Bioware and Black Isle. Starcraft 2 is a bad joke.

Perhaps games are getting better for the ordinary people like you. Not for me.

Half Life was a great game for its time, but its sequel was much better, I thought. Unlike a lot of other game sequels, while the production values went up the quality of the game itself also went up. Story was more prominent, graphics were much better... you name it, better game imho.

Sirviani
26th Jun 2010, 16:11
Half Life was a great game for its time, but its sequel was much better, I thought. Unlike a lot of other game sequels, while the production values went up the quality of the game itself also went up. Story was more prominent, graphics were much better... you name it, better game imho.

The game itself is saddled with a disappointing story. The first half of the game feels unfocused, while the second half seems rushed. Even worse, the story leaves behind a mess of unanswered questions, and it doesn't touch on any of the lingering questions left over from the first game.

Another bad thing, disappointing performance by the game's artificial intelligence. Even on the tougher difficulty levels, most of the humanoid enemies don't seem to show the same kind of intelligent behavior that they did in the previous game. The two words that come to mind when I think of HL2 is "distinctly average".

K^2
26th Jun 2010, 16:41
Starcraft 2 is a bad joke.
Have you actually played it? It's good. Don't fix what ain't broken, and Starcraft wasn't broken. Though, I do admit it's not for everyone.

I'm with you on HL vs HL2, though. I enjoy Garry's Mod, which really brings up the value of HL2 for me, but as far as the games themselves, HL was... deeper.

Pretentious Old Man.
26th Jun 2010, 17:22
Have you actually played it? It's good. Don't fix what ain't broken, and Starcraft wasn't broken. Though, I do admit it's not for everyone.

I'm with you on HL vs HL2, though. I enjoy Garry's Mod, which really brings up the value of HL2 for me, but as far as the games themselves, HL was... deeper.

Yup. HL1 > HL2.

Oh, and Zakka, it's "I are srs". Get it right! :rasp:

pringlepower
26th Jun 2010, 18:46
Zakka doesn't even know what he's talking about. Half Life was far better than Half Life 2 in absolutely everything. Mass Effect 2 has nothing to do with the good old classics from Bioware and Black Isle. Starcraft 2 is a bad joke.

Perhaps games are getting better for the ordinary people like you. Not for me.

Oh don't flatter yourself. Mass Effect is different, sure. Maybe because it's a completely new IP and universe, not related in any way (gameplay-wise) to Baldur's Gate. It's still got the Bioware standards: engaging storyline, deep, interesting characters. Oh lookie, Bioware has the balls to take some risks and try new things. Let's hate them!

Starcraft 2 is a good game. It does everything people on this forum are asking of a sequel. Keep the core mechanics and fundamental gameplay. Add new, interesting, and deep mechanics. Update graphics, and add interface changes that aren't from 1998 (and of course, no health regen or TP cover. Heh. They even tried to implement cover. Didn't work, scrapped it).

Battle.net 2.0 is a different story.

Sirviani
26th Jun 2010, 19:04
Oh don't flatter yourself. Mass Effect is different, sure. Maybe because it's a completely new IP and universe, not related in any way (gameplay-wise) to Baldur's Gate. It's still got the Bioware standards: engaging storyline, deep, interesting characters. Oh lookie, Bioware has the balls to take some risks and try new things. Let's hate them!

Can't kill any none player character at sight, two or three selective conversation options which lead you to nothing, closed landscapes with no freedom at all...

There are so many points, that it isn't funny anymore.

Knights of the Old Republic, Jade Empire, Mass Effect, Dragon Age... Don't these games look all the same to you?

Why should i be forced to ingest all this childish crap?!

A new and distinct concept of role playing games is ascending. A potential market based upon the commercial propaganda is transforming the "PC" ideology into a little playground with lollypops. All the hardcore role playing philosophy has flunked. A new generation based upon the influence of consoles is conquering and destroying all the inspiration that titles like Baldur's Gate, Fallout, Deus Ex or Gothic left us...

Just because they destroyed this genre, doesn't mean im done with the fighting. I just want the restoration of the era, where players such as us played as we should. When we were young, the video game industry needed men like us, we were valued then, we were desired...

But things are different now. With all the hypocrites running this industry, games aren't what they used to be... We're losing our place in a world that no longer needs us, a world that now spurns our very existence.

Pretentious Old Man.
26th Jun 2010, 19:06
Oh lookie, Bioware has the balls to take some risks and try new things. Let's hate them!


Well, (Barrett? :)), that's just the problem I have with Mass Effect.

Not enough RPG, too much linear movie moments. It seems like they wanted to create the best machinima ever, and then suddenly thought "**** people are expecting a game!" and added in some gameplay to cover the difference. Even on the hardest difficulty levels, I feel that Mass Effect and Mass Effect 2 are really more of an "experience" than a "role-playing game". I never felt that I had any choice what was going on, I was just a participant in what the game designers had planned. Way too much like CoD, in that respect.

Admittedly, Mass Effect's graphics, story, characters and mythology were top-notch. Really good stuff. I just couldn't discern any actual, y'know, gameplay.

pringlepower
26th Jun 2010, 19:36
Well, (Barrett? :)), that's just the problem I have with Mass Effect.

Not enough RPG, too much linear movie moments. It seems like they wanted to create the best machinima ever, and then suddenly thought "**** people are expecting a game!" and added in some gameplay to cover the difference. Even on the hardest difficulty levels, I feel that Mass Effect and Mass Effect 2 are really more of an "experience" than a "role-playing game". I never felt that I had any choice what was going on, I was just a participant in what the game designers had planned. Way too much like CoD, in that respect.

Admittedly, Mass Effect's graphics, story, characters and mythology were top-notch. Really good stuff. I just couldn't discern any actual, y'know, gameplay.

Haha yeah just noticed, you sneaky boyscout.

Well I think Bioware was going for that cinematic experience feel, and they're not going to apologize for it (even making Mass Effect 2 more cinematic with the dynamic conversation camera). I agree about your feelings of linearity. I played Mass Effect for the first time after another playthrough of BG, and it took a while to get used to. It's obviously not as open-ended, and the mako drove me to hissing fits of rage and amusement after it climbed a 87 degree slope, etc. I just you just have to take it for what it is. It's still a role-playing game, in that you define Shepard and his/her actions, but toned-down a bit, and I don't see that as a bad thing, since they haven't completely abandoned traditional RPGs. Mass Effect is just another aspect of Bioware.

And to respond to KOTOR's lack of some openness. If you use the Star Wars license, you need to make the game Teen-rated, because Star Wars isn't intended to be a mature series like Deus Ex (not saying it has a childish plot, I mean no mass-murdering every citizen of Anchorhead just for kicks, no lesbians, etc.).

And there were profound moments in their classic RPGs where your lack of choice was apparent. For example after spending about 5 minutes around Melissan it became obvious that she was an evil prick, but I could never kill her until the end, even when she was two feet away from me during conversations.

Serendipitous
26th Jun 2010, 20:06
And to respond to KOTOR's lack of some openness. If you use the Star Wars license, you need to make the game Teen-rated, because Star Wars isn't intended to be a mature series like Deus Ex (not saying it has a childish plot, I mean no mass-murdering every citizen of Anchorhead just for kicks, no lesbians, etc.).

I never played as a female character, but I heard Juhani was a lesbian. The sith route/ending is more evil than Deus Ex in my opinion, but kotor is also far less varied in the decisions it gives you. It always felt like kotor was giving you a choice between being normal, and evil. I guess that's sort of what they were going for, but I prefer difficult or tactical decisions. It also bugged me that some dialog choices evoked the exact same dialog and consequences from characters.

On topic, I think people give preference to things from the decade they were born in. I like things from every decade, but most of my favorite stuff is from the 90s.

pringlepower
26th Jun 2010, 20:20
I never played as a female character, but I heard Juhani was a lesbian. The sith route/ending is more evil than Deus Ex in my opinion, but kotor is also far less varied in the decisions it gives you. It always felt like kotor was giving you a choice between being normal, and evil. I guess that's sort of what they were going for, but I prefer difficult or tactical decisions. It also bugged me that some dialog choices evoked the exact same dialog and consequences from characters.

On topic, I think people give preference to things from the decade they were born in. I like things from every decade, but most of my favorite stuff is from the 90s.

Hmm, never pursued Juhani myself. I guess no lesbians isn't accurate. Maybe sex? I mean the Carth and Bastila romances culminated in a kiss, which was sweet, but perfectly okay for all ages.

Star Wars was never a series of "moral gray" areas. It's Lightside/Darkside. However they did manage to throw an axe into that with the character of Kreia. Good ol' Obsidian.

And I wouldn't say born in (especially if you were born in the later half). Grew up in is more accurate.

ChfMojoRising
26th Jun 2010, 20:28
Well~ KotoR romance spoiler I guess but on the Juhani thing:

>>>The angry girl who's Juhani's friend is implied to be more than that (this when Juhani is all darkside nd you have to resolve the situation as part of your Jedi training). As a female jedi, you can get to know her, pursue a romance, get turned down~ then later she admits her feelings but is still timid. In the end she expresses her love but says that to atone for her past, she will devote herself to the jedi ways completely. As such, they can't be together~ but she can still admit her feelings. <<<

spoiler end~

ZakKa89
26th Jun 2010, 21:09
Well, (Barrett? :)), that's just the problem I have with Mass Effect.

Not enough RPG, too much linear movie moments. It seems like they wanted to create the best machinima ever, and then suddenly thought "**** people are expecting a game!" and added in some gameplay to cover the difference. Even on the hardest difficulty levels, I feel that Mass Effect and Mass Effect 2 are really more of an "experience" than a "role-playing game". I never felt that I had any choice what was going on, I was just a participant in what the game designers had planned. Way too much like CoD, in that respect.

Admittedly, Mass Effect's graphics, story, characters and mythology were top-notch. Really good stuff. I just couldn't discern any actual, y'know, gameplay.

I didnt like ME1 that much but ME2 was incredible IMO. The gmeplay was top notch if you play right. The ability to combo certain powers was amazing. It felt fresh and innovative. If it was more like a tradional RPG llikeDragon Age I would have hated it.
There was a lot fo "gameplay" in me2. More than in Gears of War or in any other third person shooter I have played IMO. Yes, the rpg elements were simple but they were still efective. The combat however, was some of the best I ever had (lots of WOW moments). Slowmotion + grenadelauncher. pull + throw. These are just some of the combinations that looked and played perfect : D.

Ow and I don't agree. I thougt half life 2 was better than half life 1. Both are extremely good though.


And for the people that say starcraft 2 is a joke: The game is f-in amazing. I had so much fun playing the beta, the game is incredible.

Pretentious Old Man.
26th Jun 2010, 21:20
The gmeplay was top notch if you play right.

EXACTLY the point.

Don't get me wrong, I play as an infiltrator who uses cloak to get headshots, I know what I'm doing, I'm not an enraged n00b. Thing is, Mass Effect 1 and 2 are both way too linear (ME2 even more so). OK, it's not as glaringly obvious as, say, CoD, but it's still pretty bad.

As for combat, meh. I still say it was mostly "cover, shoot, cover, shoot, cover, shoot, cover, shoot, OBJECTIVE, talk, talk, cover, shoot". Even on the highest difficulty (insane?) It's too hard to fail. Different ways of playing the game make no difference, the developer has decided the story, and you must play through it.

I like to make my own story.

xsamitt
26th Jun 2010, 21:39
EXACTLY the point.


I like to make my own story.

Me too, but two problems come to mind.First, I don't have the 30 million to finish it.Second, after I spent all that money I would know exactly whats gonna happen.
To sum up I'll keep the 30 million and gain a story that surprises me for around 50 ,or 60 dollars.:lmao::lmao:

Pretentious Old Man.
26th Jun 2010, 22:02
Me too, but two problems come to mind.First, I don't have the 30 million to finish it.Second, after I spent all that money I would know exactly whats gonna happen.
To sum up I'll keep the 30 million and gain a story that surprises me for around 50 ,or 60 dollars.:lmao::lmao:

I normally don't use LMGTFY, as it's a little patronising, but since it's all in good fun:

http://tinyurl.com/24q76wv

:rasp:

ZakKa89
26th Jun 2010, 22:43
EXACTLY the point.

Don't get me wrong, I play as an infiltrator who uses cloak to get headshots, I know what I'm doing, I'm not an enraged n00b. Thing is, Mass Effect 1 and 2 are both way too linear (ME2 even more so). OK, it's not as glaringly obvious as, say, CoD, but it's still pretty bad.

As for combat, meh. I still say it was mostly "cover, shoot, cover, shoot, cover, shoot, cover, shoot, OBJECTIVE, talk, talk, cover, shoot". Even on the highest difficulty (insane?) It's too hard to fail. Different ways of playing the game make no difference, the developer has decided the story, and you must play through it.

I like to make my own story.


Don't play with infiltrator :p Almost no possibilites to combo powers. I played with vanguard and soldier and there was definitely lots of variety in the gameplay. You say "cover, shoot, cover, shoot". Well that's YOUR fault for playing the game that way haha. For me it defintely wasnt like that all. Yes, different ways of playing the game make a huge difference.

PlasmaSnake101
26th Jun 2010, 22:48
Nostalgia often distorts reality. However, I used to play games all the way through to 100%, now I've so many steam games due to large packages that I can't handle them all. A flow of steady income is helpful to more games too. So many games, so little time. It doesn't help that games are getting larger. I got 100% in Ocarina of Time, I couldn't do that in Twilight Princess.

Overall, I say good games are always being released, people just forget about the bad ones of yesteryear. I remember when I got all 120 stars in Super Mario 64, felt so cash. Yeah, as a kid with only a few games you have to forge a good bond with the ones you got. You play them for hours on end and it's no surprise that you fall in love with them. As adults we've either school or work to balance, much more serious than grade school. Also, at least my social life grew when I got out of high school so I do a lot more with friends. Additionally, my friends at work like playing TF2 and L4D. Top that with spending most my days at UNLV either working and learning and you will quickly see that I don't have enough time to grow attached to individual games.

I used to play the guitar and got a lot better when I went to UNR. That's because I was a shut in, my classes were easy and I had no job. Played through Deus Ex like 6 times when I was up there. Played through Invisible War twice as well, did a report on nanotech in media for my English class citing mainly Deus Ex.

On a side note, my English 102 class was awesome. It was on robots, cyborgs, trans-humanism and futurism in literature. So cash, my paper was 23 pages. Cut it down to 11, crying all the while.


SIDE NOTE

My mind often wanders.

nathanj
26th Jun 2010, 22:48
EXACTLY the point.

Don't get me wrong, I play as an infiltrator who uses cloak to get headshots, I know what I'm doing, I'm not an enraged n00b. Thing is, Mass Effect 1 and 2 are both way too linear (ME2 even more so). OK, it's not as glaringly obvious as, say, CoD, but it's still pretty bad.

As for combat, meh. I still say it was mostly "cover, shoot, cover, shoot, cover, shoot, cover, shoot, OBJECTIVE, talk, talk, cover, shoot". Even on the highest difficulty (insane?) It's too hard to fail. Different ways of playing the game make no difference, the developer has decided the story, and you must play through it.

I like to make my own story.

i was also infiltrator on the hardest difficulty and i think that i only died twice the entire game and both of those times could be contributed to "food distraction". the only other time i reloaded was when i was trying to figure out how to keep all my crew alive at the end.

on a related note why do they force you to play a ***** paragon in order to save everyone. renegade is soooo much more interesting to play not to mention frankly more logical and realistic.

Pretentious Old Man.
26th Jun 2010, 22:52
Don't play with infiltrator :p Almost no possibilites to combo powers. I played with vanguard and soldier and there was definitely lots of variety in the gameplay. You say "cover, shoot, cover, shoot". Well that's YOUR fault for playing the game that way haha. For me it defintely wasnt like that all. Yes, different ways of playing the game make a huge difference.

Ugh, soldier's even worse! I came up with infiltrator largely because it meant you could be outside of cover for large portions of combat without being shot to pieces. Vanguard tends to be more "forlorn hope".

I think we just have different ideas on what makes up gameplay. I was being a little facetious, perhaps, when I said there was no gameplay, but really, there isn't that much. "Combo biotic powers" just don't really cut the mustard. The guns feel very similar, and there is very little finesse to the combat. Plus, it has the unholy semi-unified ammo! :)

I think we're just gonna have to agree to disagree on this. Maybe I just play too many things like Ghost Recon or Hidden and Dangerous.

Keiichi81
26th Jun 2010, 23:26
People like old games because they remind them of their childhood, not because of some intrinsic "thing" that old games had and which new games lack. And people view new games in a harsher light because they themselves have become more critical and less accepting with age (for the same reason that most of us couldn't sit through an old cartoon now without rolling our eyes despite having loved it as a child).

I used to feel the same way as the OP about Final Fantasy VII (and still do, to some extent). But I went back and tried to replay it a few years ago and quit just after the party leaves Midgar. Rose-colored glasses to say the least...

I also have a lot of old console emulators and believe me, once the "hey, I remember that!" novelty passes (usually just a few minutes), you realize how simplistic and sloppy those old NES, Genesis, SNES, SegaCD, and N64 games that you remember so fondly really were.

pringlepower
26th Jun 2010, 23:34
Ugh, soldier's even worse! I came up with infiltrator largely because it meant you could be outside of cover for large portions of combat without being shot to pieces. Vanguard tends to be more "forlorn hope".

I think we just have different ideas on what makes up gameplay. I was being a little facetious, perhaps, when I said there was no gameplay, but really, there isn't that much. "Combo biotic powers" just don't really cut the mustard. The guns feel very similar, and there is very little finesse to the combat. Plus, it has the unholy semi-unified ammo! :)

I think we're just gonna have to agree to disagree on this. Maybe I just play too many things like Ghost Recon or Hidden and Dangerous.

Vanguard is extremely strategic. Knowing when and where to use charge, then pop back in cover, is very important. People either blast vanguard as too hard to too luck-based, but it takes a lot of thinking. Definitely very different playstyle from any other class

nathanj
26th Jun 2010, 23:50
i thought vanguard was the other class that was overpowered besides infiltrator. i actually found the best use of the charge wasnt in killing bad guys but drawing fire away from your companions and forcing the mobs to leave cover and go after me. then my companions would kill them from behind. sort of like using deep strike in dawn of war.

the only shooter type game in recent history that i can think of that had really huge differences in how characters played was borderlands. some enemies were super easy with the soldier but almost impossible with the hunter guy, other enemies were the exact opposite.

pringlepower
27th Jun 2010, 00:46
i thought vanguard was the other class that was overpowered besides infiltrator. i actually found the best use of the charge wasnt in killing bad guys but drawing fire away from your companions and forcing the mobs to leave cover and go after me. then my companions would kill them from behind. sort of like using deep strike in dawn of war.

the only shooter type game in recent history that i can think of that had really huge differences in how characters played was borderlands. some enemies were super easy with the soldier but almost impossible with the hunter guy, other enemies were the exact opposite.

Were you playing on Insanity?

nathanj
27th Jun 2010, 00:53
Were you playing on Insanity?

was the hardest mode available. im not sure if there were harder modes unlocked after the first playthrough since i used new games for the different characters. i started on normal the first time i played but switched after a few hours cause of how agravatingly easy it was. hard mode for me is something akin to "kick me in the jollies" mode for doom. something ridiculously hard. the only game in the last 10 years ive played on anything other than hard was dragon age because real time combat is only workable in easy mode. i still get embarrased when i admit that. :)

i might just be using the right gear and characters cause one thing i liked about mass effect 2 was that your companion choices and ammo types really do make a difference on how easy or hard it is.

i also did a buttload of mining early on so i usually had enough material to get the upgrades and i focused on offensive stuff instead of defensive stuff.

games are just easy these days. i posted here or somewhere else how i had to "relearn" how to play serious sam on the hardest mode cause ive gotten soft lately.

pringlepower
27th Jun 2010, 01:08
was the hardest mode available. im not sure if there were harder modes unlocked after the first playthrough since i used new games for the different characters. i started on normal the first time i played but switched after a few hours cause of how agravatingly easy it was. hard mode for me is something akin to "kick me in the jollies" mode for doom. something ridiculously hard. the only game in the last 10 years ive played on anything other than hard was dragon age because real time combat is only workable in easy mode. i still get embarrased when i admit that. :)

i might just be using the right gear and characters cause one thing i liked about mass effect 2 was that your companion choices and ammo types really do make a difference on how easy or hard it is.

i also did a buttload of mining early on so i usually had enough material to get the upgrades and i focused on offensive stuff instead of defensive stuff.

games are just easy these days. i posted here or somewhere else how i had to "relearn" how to play serious sam on the hardest mode cause ive gotten soft lately.

Oh okay. Yeah the last 2 difficulty modes are unlocked after you beat the game... twice. Or import a new character. They're pretty brutal (unless you're infiltrator). You more or less die in 3 seconds outside of cover (especially annoying when fighting husks).

Dragon Age Nightmare difficulty vs High Dragon was pretty memorable too.

nathanj
27th Jun 2010, 01:57
Oh okay. Yeah the last 2 difficulty modes are unlocked after you beat the game... twice. Or import a new character. They're pretty brutal (unless you're infiltrator). You more or less die in 3 seconds outside of cover (especially annoying when fighting husks).

Dragon Age Nightmare difficulty vs High Dragon was pretty memorable too.

well that explains why i only died twice and that was because i was eating. :D

thats sucks i hate it when games make you have to play through a game more than once to get harder modes.

dragon age was unplayable on the other modes for me cause i HATE pausing the game. its akin to cheating to me. unfortunately the companion AI was a bit retarded and i found out too late that the computer was allocating almost no points to that paladin guys endurance. here is a main tank guy and they didnt even set him up to get endurance so i he barely had any healthpoints.

im gonna have to download a ME 2 save and try out that insanity mode cause that sounds like how the game should have been made from the beginning.

pringlepower
27th Jun 2010, 02:13
well that explains why i only died twice and that was because i was eating. :D

thats sucks i hate it when games make you have to play through a game more than once to get harder modes.

dragon age was unplayable on the other modes for me cause i HATE pausing the game. its akin to cheating to me. unfortunately the companion AI was a bit retarded and i found out too late that the computer was allocating almost no points to that paladin guys endurance. here is a main tank guy and they didnt even set him up to get endurance so i he barely had any healthpoints.

im gonna have to download a ME 2 save and try out that insanity mode cause that sounds like how the game should have been made from the beginning.

Import a ME1 character. Technically that's how the game is supposed to be played, because there's a lot of easter eggs (e.g., old friends, enemies showing up, plot points, etc.)

Yeah Bioware's autolevel is notoriously retarded. I never use it. Dragon Age is a lot like BG II. If you want to do well on the higher difficulty settings, you NEED TO MICROMANAGE EVERYTHING, and pause every few seconds to fire off spells, etc. The AI can't handle high difficulty settings. Dragon Age at least has the tactics screen to streamline things

nathanj
27th Jun 2010, 02:26
Import a ME1 character. Technically that's how the game is supposed to be played, because there's a lot of easter eggs (e.g., old friends, enemies showing up, plot points, etc.)

Yeah Bioware's autolevel is notoriously retarded. I never use it. Dragon Age is a lot like BG II. If you want to do well on the higher difficulty settings, you NEED TO MICROMANAGE EVERYTHING, and pause every few seconds to fire off spells, etc. The AI can't handle high difficulty settings. Dragon Age at least has the tactics screen to streamline things

i did import from ME 1. im gonna have to reinstall ME 2 and load up a save and see what difficutly level it was. i just checked out a couple of youtube videos and they pretty much show how i fought with vanguard. charge people, point blank shots with fire ammo (if you have it) and pull them towards your companions. i did have a harder time with vanguard than infiltrator which is ridiculously easy.

edit: im thinking companion choice is probably a huge factor in how easy the game is. the assassin guy sucked. i mean he was cool as a character but he sucked on missions. and having the krogan is almost a given.

pringlepower
27th Jun 2010, 02:45
i did import from ME 1. im gonna have to reinstall ME 2 and load up a save and see what difficutly level it was. i just checked out a couple of youtube videos and they pretty much show how i fought with vanguard. charge people, point blank shots with fire ammo (if you have it) and pull them towards your companions. i did have a harder time with vanguard than infiltrator which is ridiculously easy.

edit: im thinking companion choice is probably a huge factor in how easy the game is. the assassin guy sucked. i mean he was cool as a character but he sucked on missions. and having the krogan is almost a given.

Well I did adept, so I had Miranda + Mordin to burn through shields and armour respectively. Once they're down to HP, singularity and... bam. But definitely, companions are important. People hate on ME2 for simplifying the skill system, but Bioware did a good job there by making companions have clear distinctions between them, and giving them clear uses.

nathanj
27th Jun 2010, 03:04
my fave was the salearion. i found him actually quite useful. i just downloaded and checked with a save game editor.

little side note.......another reason achievements are incredibly stupid, i can give myself achievements with this thing. :lmao:

i was level 4 out of 6 so im assuming that insanity wasnt available to me at the time. im definitely gonna have to grab a save and try it out now.

maddermadcat
27th Jun 2010, 05:08
I've only really been playing a lot of games in the past three or four years. My first time playing Deus Ex was in 2007, I think. I've been playing modern games alongside old ones, and tbh, the old ones have almost always been more enjoyable.


Starcraft 2 is a bad joke.

That's the only part of your post that I disagree with.

Starcraft 2 is an improvement in nearly every way. Of course, battle.net 2.0 sucks extremely hard now, but blizzard is working on it. The next testing phase is supposed to be for the non-crap version of bnet.

HL2 takes itself way too seriously and pretends to have a better-written plot than it actually does. When the gameplay isn't tedious it's frustrating. It also has a fun habit of introducing new mechanics and abandoning them as soon as that sequence or level is done.

HL1 was a simple, fun shooter that successfully applied subtlety in its storytelling. I played it for the first time after having completed HL2, and it felt like a breath of fresh air.

Ephemeral
27th Jun 2010, 09:09
Really, when they've acknowledged that there won't be LAN or inter-region play in Battle.net 2.0 which is a huge step back, it's hard for it to get any better. Apparently it's being headed by someone of Xbox Live fame, who didn't even understand the importance of chat rooms to communities on launch let alone the need to be able to name custom games or be able to password lock them.

jtr7
27th Jun 2010, 09:55
Also, there's something to be said about games played during one's formative years, and with friends and family, and any other extra intense times of life and moments, that really cement the value and fondness for a game. Games that bring joy and comfort while bedridden. Games that broaden horizons in a big way. Games that transport the player in a mind-blowing way. Good stuff.

ZakKa89
27th Jun 2010, 11:58
Ugh, soldier's even worse! I came up with infiltrator largely because it meant you could be outside of cover for large portions of combat without being shot to pieces. Vanguard tends to be more "forlorn hope".

I think we just have different ideas on what makes up gameplay. I was being a little facetious, perhaps, when I said there was no gameplay, but really, there isn't that much. "Combo biotic powers" just don't really cut the mustard. The guns feel very similar, and there is very little finesse to the combat. Plus, it has the unholy semi-unified ammo! :)

I think we're just gonna have to agree to disagree on this. Maybe I just play too many things like Ghost Recon or Hidden and Dangerous.

We can't agree to disagree if you haven't played with vanguard and at least tried combing some powers : ).

You said yourself that the only thing you was doing was "cover,shootX1000". That really isn't the only thing that the combat in me2 has to offer. It's not Gears of War... and "combo biotic powers" really was THE thing that made me come back to me2 and play it again. Doing a triple combo is just so rewarding both gameplaywise and presentationwise :D

But hey, different strokes for different folks ; )

ZakKa89
27th Jun 2010, 12:01
Really, when they've acknowledged that there won't be LAN or inter-region play in Battle.net 2.0 which is a huge step back, it's hard for it to get any better. Apparently it's being headed by someone of Xbox Live fame, who didn't even understand the importance of chat rooms to communities on launch let alone the need to be able to name custom games or be able to password lock them.

thesew are legitimate concerns/

Husky, a starcraft 2 commentator and really good player, has a good constructive video in which he adresses the issues of battlenet 2.0.

Blizzard said that they are aware of the issues (even referring to Husky's video on the forum) and are looking into it. We can only hope the problems will be fixed.

Still, starcraft 2 is an excellent game. I already played lots of awesome custom maps and the online 1v1 or 2,2 experience, just perfect gameplaywise :D

FrankCSIS
27th Jun 2010, 16:17
People like old games because they remind them of their childhood, not because of some intrinsic "thing" that old games had and which new games lack.

I'd wager this is only mostly the case with games played withf friends and family, when what you remember from them is more the moments you spent than the actual gaming. Goldeneye multiplayer would be the prime example pretty much anyone has experienced. I'm also not surprised that many people are not all that excited about the remake they are doing for the wii. Sure the game itself was good, but better has been achieved since, and we're no longer in high school spending hours with friends with a piece of cardboard separating the 50 inch screen so we could play in teams without knowing where the other two players are in the map.

When it comes to single player though, I can't share the idea. With perhaps the exception of games I played at like 4 or 5 which I remember fondly for no other reason than being the first ones I played, my preferences for games has always been consequent, well into adulthood. The fact that I cannot find as many games which appeal to me the way many did not so long ago really does mean that the way games are intrisinctly constructed is different. I'm not even getting into better or worse here, but unquestionably different.

As to what I actually miss, I'll keep it simple.

1- Diversity. This is obviously due to cost management, but diversity has unquestionably gone out the window in the last ten years. You hardly, if ever, find a game that's released which is ever so different from the current context you wonder how come no one had thought of it. Games like Syndicate, or XCOM, were so very alien from the trends of the time, as they were memorable in their own simple unique way. I've named those two, but we could spend all day exploring all the genres of gaming that were developped within the span of fifteen years. Anyone who had an idea for something new, and a bunch of dedicated friends and employees, would make it happen. Today you have to convince the board before you get the green light to produce it, and without proper funds you can hardly make something that will match the production values of what is being released by major studios.

2-This is more of a personal gripe, but I'm somewhat dispaointed that my expectectations of gaming were never fulfilled. Around 2000 I think many people had an idea of where story-telling and gaming mechanics would be heading, and for a reason which remains rather unexplainable, games headed in an entirely different direction, change which was rather brutal, and anything but seemless. I still daydream every now and then about the kind of games I wish had been done with today's technology, and wonder how come none of them ever actually become reality.

Keiichi81
27th Jun 2010, 17:54
We can't agree to disagree if you haven't played with vanguard and at least tried combing some powers : ).

You said yourself that the only thing you was doing was "cover,shootX1000". That really isn't the only thing that the combat in me2 has to offer. It's not Gears of War... and "combo biotic powers" really was THE thing that made me come back to me2 and play it again. Doing a triple combo is just so rewarding both gameplaywise and presentationwise :D

But hey, different strokes for different folks ; )

You can't really say that ME2 has great gameplay simply because 1 or 2 of the 6 selectable classes spice things up a bit. For many people, Soldier or Infiltrator in specific were their only experience through the game. And yes, when you're playing as any class aside from Vanguard or Adept, the game very much is "cover, shoot, repeat ad nauseum."

Even for the mixed classes that have some biotics, it's usually the case that in the time it takes to set up an enemy and pull off a biotic combo it would've been more efficient to simply shoot them in the head a few times. The combo system, and really biotics as a whole thanks to the ridiculous "rock-paper-scissors" system BioWare implemented, is pretty much pointless especially on higher difficulty levels where even throwaway enemies have shields and/or armor.

That's been my experience after having played a Soldier, Infiltrator and Sentinel anyway...

Ashpolt
27th Jun 2010, 18:33
^^ I played Vanguard in both ME games, and still found the experience to be pretty much "shoot, cover, shoot, biotic, cover, shoot, cover, biotic." I enjoyed both games mind you, but that was definitely far more down to the story and characters than the gameplay.

pringlepower
27th Jun 2010, 19:05
The combo system, and really biotics as a whole thanks to the ridiculous "rock-paper-scissors" system BioWare implemented, is pretty much pointless especially on higher difficulty levels where even throwaway enemies have shields and/or armor.



Warp owns armour. And maybe that makes you rely more on companions? (which was the entire point of the storyline - to recruit people)

ChfMojoRising
27th Jun 2010, 19:17
I played ME2 as a Soldier and found it to be a lot of "take down shields/armor" > shoot & cover > aim and bullet time> shoot & cover > use biotics on the peskier enemies > shoot & cover.

I made good and constant use of my allies. Could get pretty hectic at times.

ZakKa89
27th Jun 2010, 20:09
Lift + throw + concussive shot nuff said : D

Anyway here is a recent blizzard post about starcraft 2:


It always depends on your point of view in the matter. We believe that StarCraft 2 is ready to be shipped. The game is really amazing, loads of fun - all Singleplayer fans are in for a great treat and the cinematics we have in the game are really breathtaking, we are positive that all multiplayer competitive players will find plenty of tournaments to compete in and a skill-based game where they can prove themselves, players who just want to have a bit of fun with their friends can also find their corner with 2v2, 3v3, 4v4 or custom fun maps.

The main complaint we see quite often on the forums these days is about how you are missing certain features on Battle.net. We have a very long list of things that we want to integrate for Battle.net over the next few years ourselves, but we also believe, that the game is ready to ship. We have all the core functionality in the game that we were aiming for. Functionality that players need to enjoy StarCraft II. It was important for us to give players the opportunity to jump into a match quickly, we wanted them to be able to join up in a group with their friends and be able to talk to their friends in the game. We wanted custom games to be possible. We wanted to give the more casual players incentives and also some guidance through the achievement system. The focus for release of StarCraft II concerning Battle.net was really having the base infrastructure to build upon in the years to come. Players can easily find a game against another player of their skill level.

Saying that we are planning to add new features in patches to come, does not in any way mean that we aren't ready - this just means that we won't stop developing Battle.net and improving the service with new features after we released the game

pringlepower
27th Jun 2010, 20:56
Lift + throw + concussive shot nuff said : D

Anyway here is a recent blizzard post about starcraft 2:

That's kinda reassuring. I mean, as pissed off as I am about SC2, it is Blizzard we're talking about. They're still patching WC3, 7 years after it's release, and I think they released a SC patch in 2008 as well

Irate_Iguana
27th Jun 2010, 21:39
That's kinda reassuring. I mean, as pissed off as I am about SC2, it is Blizzard we're talking about. They're still patching WC3, 7 years after it's release, and I think they released a SC patch in 2008 as well

In march they released a patch for Diablo II. This patch included a few new features such as respecs. Diablo II is 10 years old. If there is any company with a good track record when it comes to support it is Blizzard.

Mindmute
27th Jun 2010, 22:23
Honestly, I did enjoy games a lot more back in the old days, mostly because they seemed less focused on the cashflow spreadsheets and therefore weren't afraid to have some real complexity.
Baldur's Gate 1&2 is a good example of this in my book; Deus Ex aside, it's possibly the game that I replayed the most, despite being ridiculously freaking long. There's a reason for that other than my fascination with space hamsters.

mad_red
28th Jun 2010, 13:19
Nostalgia doesn't make a jot of difference to me.

Every time I go back to playing a game like Master of Magic, X-Com, M:TG Shandalar, Ultima Underworld, Battle Isle, etc etc. it's because they have good gameplay. Sure, maybe if I don't play Master of Magic for 10 years, and the first hero I summon is Fang the Draconian, that would be nostalgia. Playing Monkey Island or Police Quest again may be nostalgia.

But if master of magic doesn't have good and diverse gameplay, a good difficulty curve, etc. etc. I'd just as soon be playing Civ 4.

Gameplay is what made the game back in the time of CGA and VGA graphics. Even adventure games didn't pull you in because of their realistic graphics, but because of a good story and an interesting world. What makes you think people enjoy chess and poker more when they are younger?

Pretentious Old Man.
28th Jun 2010, 13:51
To the guy who said that we enjoy games more because of our childhood, I tell him that I started playing games aged about 35, and am now pushing 50.

From adulthood -> adulthood, can you really call that "nostalgia"? Heck I was even in the same job then that I am now! :)

xsamitt
28th Jun 2010, 14:04
To the guy who said that we enjoy games more because of our childhood, I tell him that I started playing games aged about 35, and am now pushing 50.

From adulthood -> adulthood, can you really call that "nostalgia"? Heck I was even in the same job then that I am now! :)


From 1 oldguy to another.This is quite and addictive hobby that's for sure.But at least it better than many other things that one could expose oneself to.:thumb:

pringlepower
28th Jun 2010, 21:45
To the guy who said that we enjoy games more because of our childhood, I tell him that I started playing games aged about 35, and am now pushing 50.

From adulthood -> adulthood, can you really call that "nostalgia"? Heck I was even in the same job then that I am now! :)

Oh you weren't joking about the Pretentious Old Man thing. From hair -> less hair?

Pretentious Old Man.
28th Jun 2010, 21:57
oh you weren't joking about the pretentious old man thing. From hair -> less hair?

>:|

pringlepower
28th Jun 2010, 22:18
>:|

I jest. Uh... sorry, bad taste?
My point is that nostalgia doesn't just have to be between different age groups

OldMir
28th Jun 2010, 22:54
Intersting Thread.

Personally iam not quite sure what it is that makes me believe the "old days of gaming" were better than today.
Maybe you just get older and more critical about things? Maybe because the gameplay of shooters, RTS etc haven't changed much? Or is it simply the studios which are more money driven than ever?

I assume its a mix of all these things. Not just one aspect of it.

Games i really loved back in the days were...

Railroad Tycoon
Creatures
Civ Series
Grand Prix 2
Quake 2/3
Doom 1/2
Wing Commander
Monkey Island 2
Deus Ex
Baldurs Gate
System Shock
Duke Nukem 3D
Thief: Dark Project
Dark Forces 2
Battlefield 1942
Blade Runner Adventure
Starcraft
X-Com
...and iam sure many more so the best time of gaming for me was mid 80s to late 90s

New games i rly love on the other hand are few and rare like...

Mass Effect
Bad Company 2 (nostalgia)
Starcraft 2 (nostalgia)
Borderlands (fresh artstyle)
Portal (new gameplay)

...more dont pop up at the moment there are prob a couple of more but you notice i find it rly difficult to find games that rly impressed me lately.

and games iam looking forward to...
Deus Ex: HR (nostalgia)
Brink (dunno why)
rage (id feel aka nostalgia)
Monkey Island 2: SE (nostalgia)
Formula 1 2010 (nostalgia)
Portal 2


I seem to be a gamer full of nostalgic feelings nowadays :)

As someone else said games ve become like movies - simply too expansive in prodcution so you cant take any risks to do something completely new. Spore has been a real negative example which tried to be sumthing else but totally failed with not smooth enough gameplay. Nonetheless i give credit for having the guts :)

Finally, you could say that it doesnt make any sense to cry about old days which will never come back. There are still some new and fresh game ideas with more and more coming from indie devs (eg "The Void") but if you learn to embrace "new" games they can still be fun but probably wont reach that status old games have due to lack of complexity, revolutionary gameplay and childhood memories. That seems long over in an era where games need to appeal to a mass market in order to cover the enormous expenses publishers invest and still being able to milk that cow :)

One positive example i wanna point out though with Valve who have a different philosophy than most other publishers/studios. They simply buy entire mod teams or indie devs who have great/fresh ideas and simply give them all they need to make their idea happening. Liking that kinda "art houseish" approach.

Word.

Pretentious Old Man.
28th Jun 2010, 23:06
I jest. Uh... sorry, bad taste?
My point is that nostalgia doesn't just have to be between different age groups

I also jest. t'is cool, mine brother.

(That was the meme in my day. Back in the days when 4chan meant channel 4, and Something Awful meant Margaret Thatcher)

pringlepower
28th Jun 2010, 23:10
Intersting Thread.

Personally iam not quite sure what it is that makes me believe the "old days of gaming" were better than today.
Maybe you just get older and more critical about things? Maybe because the gameplay of shooters, RTS etc haven't changed much? Or is it simply the studios which are more money driven than ever?

I assume its a mix of all these things. Not just one aspect of it.

Games i really loved back in the days were...
Civ 1
Grand Prix 2
Quake 2/3
Doom 1/2
Wing Commander
Monkey Island 2
Deus Ex
Baldurs Gate
System Shock
Duke Nukem 3D
Thief: Dark Project
Dark Forces 2
Battlefield 1942
Blade Runner Adventure
Starcraft
X-Com
...and iam sure many more so the best time of gaming for me was mid 80s to late 90s

New games i rly love on the other hand are few and rare like...

Mass Effect
Bad Company 2 (nostalgia)
Starcraft 2 (nostalgia)

...more dont pop up at the moment there are prob a couple of more but you notice i find it rly hard to find games that rly impressed me lately.

As someone else said games ve become like movies - simply too expansive in prodcution so you cant take any risks to do something completely new. Spore has been a rly negative example which tried to be sumthing else but totally failed with not smooth enough gameplay. Nonetheless i give credit for having the guts :)

Finally, you could say that it doesnt make any sense to cry about old days which will never come back. There are still some new and fresh game ideas with more and more coming from indie devs but if you learn to embrace "new" games they can still be fun but probably wont reach that status old games have due to complexity or challeging gameplay. That seems long over.

Word.

Just wondering what your reason is for liking Civ I but not II, III, or IV.

Pretentious Old Man.
28th Jun 2010, 23:12
Just wondering what your reason is for liking Civ I but not II, III, or IV.

See, I'm the other way around. Love Civ III and Civ II, don't particularly like Civ IV, and hate Civ I.

Each to his own, I guess.

pringlepower
28th Jun 2010, 23:18
See, I'm the other way around. Love Civ III and Civ II, don't particularly like Civ IV, and hate Civ I.

Each to his own, I guess.

Yeah I can't stand III. Damned corruption. and IV has more modding options (Fall from Heaven being an awesome example).

jtr7
28th Jun 2010, 23:29
To the guy who said that we enjoy games more because of our childhood, I tell him that I started playing games aged about 35, and am now pushing 50.

From adulthood -> adulthood, can you really call that "nostalgia"? Heck I was even in the same job then that I am now! :)

I wasn't blocking off one period from another or excluding anything.

I also said earlier about the excitement of new things, new experiences, and stepping into those virtual worlds for the first time.

I wasn't being black & white about it.

OldMir
28th Jun 2010, 23:53
Just wondering what your reason is for liking Civ I but not II, III, or IV.

I actually like 1-4 but just didnt mention them :) i just meant the Civ series.

Updated my post :p

Pretentious Old Man.
29th Jun 2010, 00:38
Yeah I can't stand III. Damned corruption. and IV has more modding options (Fall from Heaven being an awesome example).

I raise your corruption with Civ IV's RELIGION! :)

Worst. Implemented. Feature. EVER!

Still, four was still good. 5 looking great, though.

pringlepower
29th Jun 2010, 00:44
I raise your corruption with Civ IV's RELIGION! :)

Worst. Implemented. Feature. EVER!

Still, four was still good. 5 looking great, though.

Hey! Confucism made me rich! Well I was hoping they wouldn't just drop it in Civ V..

Oh NOW I get the don't drop the melee arguments

Pretentious Old Man.
29th Jun 2010, 00:50
Hey! Confucism made me rich! Well I was hoping they wouldn't just drop it in Civ V..

Oh NOW I get the don't drop the melee arguments

MWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! :naughty:

SUCCESSFUL PLAN IS SUCCESSFUL!

xsamitt
29th Jun 2010, 00:59
Personally for me........Gaming now is better than ever....because I've been waiting so long to build a PC I have over 4 boxes of games I've bought that I've yet to play.So it will be like the Mecca of gaming for this old guy.