Jump to content

A gamer with an opinion about today's stunted game market:


JCvgluvr
 Share

Recommended Posts

I agree with everything he said except the Rage Against the Machine part. Putting my musical preference aside, I think he was spot on. I have played games since I was 3 years old and I got my SNES with Mariokart and 2 controllers when I was 5 for Christmas. I grew up playing NES, SNES, and Genesis and even Playstation, Saturn, and N64. I have yet to see a game within the last 5 years provide me with as much fun as I had when playing a game like Zombies Ate my Neighbors.

How old were you when you played that?

I've had more fun with modern games than any game I ever played during my childhood, with the notable exceptions of Super Metroid and Earthbound.

Half Life 2, Vampire the Masquerade: Bloodlines (once properly patched),

Paper Mario 2, and countless others have given me far more enjoyment than any game from my childhood. How do I know that? Because I don't rely on that "feeling" I felt when I first played them oh so long ago; I revisit them every so often and find myself not nearly as enthralled by them as I once was, simply because I had childhood blinders on back then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 60
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Honestly, I think this guy is an annoying Yahtzee wannabe with nothing new to say.

BUT HE SAID "FUCK," SO IT'S FUNNY!

Seriously, it seems like bitching about the supposed decline of the gaming industry is the hip thing to do these days. While it is true your average game now isn't as good as your average game 15 years ago, your average game now is a HELL of a lot better than your average game 8 years ago.

Saying that every game nowadays is a shooter in a brown warzone is like saying that all music nowadays is shitty pop and hip-hop. While the shitty generic stuff is indeed selling well, it's not the only stuff out there, and those who are more sophisticated in their tastes are not left without options.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Oddball" and "odd" are two separate words. "Odd" means "unusual or out of the ordinary, not what is expected." An odd gem doesn't have to be some sort of goofy game with a million colors and anthropomorphic bears. "Oddball" carries a different meaning.

Now you're just arguing semantics. You know as well as I that both terms can easily refer to the same types of games :-P

We DO want the games that are currently "odd gems" to become the norm, because "odd gems" encapsulates a WHOLE slew of games. No More Heroes is an odd gem. So is Portal, Audiosurf, Cave Story, etc etc. This is really exhausting to keep saying over and over. How could you possibly argue against this? It's mystifying to me.

I honestly don't see why it mystifies you, considering what I've said thus far. The way things were in the 8bit and 16bit era got just as old at times as the current crop of stuff, since the mature and more realistic worlds were few and far between in relation to everything else being put out at the time. Having that become the norm again, with realism and such being put into the current "odd" and "oddball" games' role, isn't what I would wish for. As I said, I'd rather have a balance of the two. Oldschool zaniness in story, graphics and sound, and modern day realism in the same things... both getting an equal share on the shelves.

Why don't you actually read why I'm saying?! Come on, man! I didn't say NO games were being created by just one guy. Yes, I know about Cave Story. I'm saying that before, especially in the PC market, POPULAR, mainstream games were being created by very small groups of people, or perhaps one person. These were the games that your average person played. Today, you can still find games created by indie teams, but these are in the extreme minority if you were to take a sampling of ALL game players. They are completely marginalized now. This was somewhat inevitable because with modern hardware capabilities, everyone expects a certain level of presentation and gameplay depth which is BY AND LARGE only possible with a larger team.

I did read your post. Here's your post that I responded to...

And you really can't argue with me about the fact that publishers and developers in general are way less willing to take risks now, because they don't want to lose money, those discouraging people with the resources to potentially make a really cool, unique game to actually attempt to do so. Yes, there are indie developers doing some cool stuff, but they are in the TINY minority, and it is rare some of their awesome ideas actually come to light and get distributed widely. Because of the demands of modern gamers too, it is unlikely that a single person can basically create an entire game themselves like they could before (eg. Al Lowe).

You have to cut me some slack since the above quote I was going off of doesn't say some of the things you said you were talking about in it. If it had, I wouldn't have been discussing those points since we seem to have similar views on them (more plausible to make games in the past single handedly, consoles being tougher to program for today over back then, modern consoles usually needing bigger dev teams for their games).

However, where we seem to differ, is on the "widely distributed" thing. With the Internet as it is today, those small indie companies can distribute their games worldwide without the need of a big publishing giant (and its criteria). This is thanks to downloadable purchases, and on-line shops that deal regularly with the homebrew scene (here and abroad). And with XBox Live, Sony's and Nintendo's online dealies, and others getting into the whole homebrew thing with their original on-line offerings, those indie companies have about as good a chance at getting their work into the public eye as before. Sure, it doesn't get the exposure in stuff like mainstream magazines/websites and such, but it's not exactly hidden either.

Also, I quoted that final sentence earlier, and brought up the games I did, for this simple reason... I don't see a game being made by a single person (or small dev team), and having it become popular with modern gamers, as unlikely. I see it as still quite possible. It doesn't take a big budget with a big publisher to make a great game and get it noticed. It takes a good dev team, and the means to get it easily into peoples' hands. And these days, there are more ways to do that.

I know some of that's idealistic, and people are likely going to pick it apart with "pie in the sky" and "wishful thinking" commentary. But considering all the homebrew games I've heard about just from people talking about them on-line in and real life over the years, I feel there's truth in it :-)

But... it isn't, comparatively speaking. Once again, you need only look at classic games like "Leisure Suit Larry" (which was basically done by one guy) and their massive popularity. The "homebrew" scene was far more influential and successful in earlier years of the computer gaming industry than it is now.

Yeah, the homebrew scene was comparatively bigger and more influential back then. That's something else we agree on. I think that's because of the size of the gaming market at that time. The gaming world has exploded both as a hobby, and as a business, since then. However, I also feel that the homebrew world is still churning away at roughly the same level it was then (perhaps more so in some ways). It just looks lessened because everything around it got so big.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've said it before and I'll say it again: Coop is an amazing man.

Oh, the video? Well, everyone else sure has said a lot (and has been quite verbose at that), so to avoid waxing loquacious I'll just say that I WISH I HAD MONEY so I could actually go out and be a consumer and enjoy new games and impact the market... because as it stands, my say so in the gaming market is about a relevant as the manual to Uniracers is today, or something.

GIVE ME MONEY PLOX :<

I want Okami and No More Heroes and Mario Galaxy and... at least I have Brawl. Yes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nice video, and lot's of valid points.

But odd that EA re-releasing titles yearly is a bad thing, whilst Nintendo's Mario Party is up to the 8th iteration of the game and that's ok. What's up with the double standard?

Although I agree that games today aren't anywhere near the pinnacle of gaming, unlike games of the past. Yeah, maybe games now would be better than past games if they were all released today, no shit.

It's like when we were babies and started to crawl, and that was an awesome thing. Now if you're 10 or 15 or 20 years old and crawling around, you look retarded. Given that the technology behind gaming has gotten so much better over time, there should be a lot more triple A titles. Games that have an impact. But there aren't.

And most developers don't care because there is always some fool who is actually considering paying for something like Action Girlz Racing, and many other games like it that should not have gone beyond the initial brainstorming process.

Oh well, what can you do? =/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unshaven landscaper? Well, yeah. That's what people imagine a hero to look like. Blame the movies.

But that sterotype is just about as normal as the following:

Feminine blonde hair dude <---Blame anime and FFVII for this one

Loud, squeaky underaged girl as comic relief, but still manages to be a sex symbol <-----Again blame anime and FFVII

Tall, black considerate dude <-------Common

Quiet, emo kid uncaring of his surroundings until events force his hand <-----I'll go with... Movies and common gamer audience.

Aged man pulled from inactivity <-------Movies

...and there are more I'm forgetting. Any takers?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But odd that EA re-releasing titles yearly is a bad thing, whilst Nintendo's Mario Party is up to the 8th iteration of the game and that's ok. What's up with the double standard?

Too true. While a couple of Mario Party's are good (and 3 is great), most of them feel "phoned in" by Hudson, year after year. Even 8 was a total mediocre fest...And what possessed them to make DK a board space now instead of a playable character?!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because games like Madden and Mario Party are two totally different concepts.

With a game like Madden, you're playing football. That's it. The game is the same, and the football fields are the same. There's an updated roster every year, and maybe there's some graphical improvement here and there.

With a game like Mario Party, it's a board game. Sure, there's different "rosters" of characters in Mario Party, but you're not playing the same board or the same mini-games in each title. It's the same game as the previous title, but with each title there are new boards and mini-games. It feels like a new game, so-to-speak.

I do agree though that Mario Party 8 is pretty mediocre. :\

I haven't play every single Mario Party, but I assume that some of the same mini games have been carried over to some of the newer titles?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

More or less. There's always been the "spam a faster than the other guy" and the "pound on buttons more than the other guy" and the "run away from the huge death trap more than the other guy". Stuff like that, just with minor variations. But honestly, I'm really surprised how many different unique games they've managed to come up with (even though I've only played 1, 2, 4 and 6).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...