Quality of games

[Komutan]

I think in most cases(but not all) it is not about the games getting worse but the players getting older. I got my first home computer(C64) when I was eleven. Today I am thirtyfive. Games simply can't impress me as easily as they did when I was an eleven year old boy.

[A Nerd]

Games simply can't impress me as easily as they did when I was an eleven year old boy.

This might indeed become a trend with some. Now that I think about it, it is quite true regarding my situation. It will be said, some day, by even the young whipersnappers who have posted within this thread, that back in my day, I played such games as [insert current game here] and the new games of today do not live up to the standards of the ones I played while young. This comment being applicable to the hieght of your gaming experience which might indeed have been when you were young. Oh, the fun I used to have with 4 - 25 cent tokens and a bedroom filled with NES titles!

[Veho Nex]

I think the first true game I ever owned must have been duke nukem 64 or Golden Eye for the N64. No game I've played yet beats those memories. I think you guys might be right.

[a completely inoffensive name]

We can't say whether or not quality of games have gone downhill or uphill.

1. We selectively choose to ignore the failures of the past and remember only the good ones, which imparts a nostalgia effect.
2. There is an inherent risk in complexity which makes such judging difficult since the more complicated a game is the easier it is for one component to screw up an entire delicately created system. An example of this is the inventory system in the first Mass Effect that didnt stack/group items but just left everything in one big super long, repetitive list. It killed the want to get more loot since it became annoying.
3. The industry is based inherently around technology, and is changing at roughly the same exponential rate that computer technology is. New abilities for developers are present that were never around just 5-10 years ago. The 10th anniversary of Perfect Dark on N64 was a week ago, you can't even jump in the game. The improvements in graphics are taking resources away from other aspects because graphics are more rapidly evolving then other aspects of game play from technology. If technology became stagnant today, then a shift toward the best story and game play would occur because graphically everyone would hit an equalizing level.

tl;dr: Everyone is biased and the industry is changing so rapidly from new technological improvements that developers probably are not trying to make crappier games, they are just always having to combat the rapid flow of the gaming river when making a game with a solid foundation that people love. Perfect example: Duke Nukem Forever, always being postponed to upgrade to the next graphical engine, the next generation of consoles, the next whatever. Then they ran out of money and had nothing to show for it.

[A Nerd]

Perhaps new ideas are hard to come by nowadays. Redundancy and repetitions seem to be quite common. How many WWII FPSs do we need? Sequels seem the way to go.

[pevergreen]

Perhaps new ideas are hard to come by nowadays. Redundancy and repetitions seem to be quite common. How many WWII FPSs do we need? Sequels seem the way to go.

To a point, yes.

But it really isnt that hard to come up with a new story. Plently of existing material out there.

[Fragony]

No idea what you guys are talking about, I almost miss the days of limited choice. There is such a wealth of quality nowadays. Take your favorite old game and ask yourselve what else was there at the time. These games are one of a kind a rare gem. Gaming as a whole is soooooooooooooooooo much better.

[Monk]

No idea what you guys are talking about, I almost miss the days of limited choice. There is such a wealth of quality nowadays. Take your favorite old game and ask yourselve what else was there at the time. These games are one of a kind a rare gem. Gaming as a whole is soooooooooooooooooo much better.

Which is to say nothing of the Indie scene that practically exploded a couple years back with a wealth of quality games for very modest prices. It's a great time to be a gamer.

Perhaps new ideas are hard to come by nowadays. Redundancy and repetitions seem to be quite common. How many WWII FPSs do we need? Sequels seem the way to go

I direct you to World of Goo, AI War, Aquaria and Flotilla - and this only from the indie stand point.

[edyzmedieval]

World of Goo is fun, I subscribe to that. I want the AAAAAA - Reckless disregard for Gravity. Any good?

[Beskar]

I think people are forgetting something. Main-stream don't want overly complicated games, because they are "too confusing". In otherwords, blame the 'casuals'. Because the market is trying to focus on the casuals in order to get money. However, this annoys gamers as gamers are not casuals.

[Secura]

I think the current decline in the quality of games currently is down to two things, really.

I think that Facebook games is the first one; they're becoming more popular and prevalent and there's people of all ages devoting large portions of their lives to these Mafia, Pirates, Farmville; I had a look at an old friend of my father's and she was playing Farmville to the point where she was in a huge community for it!

Speaking of Farmville, though... what's so different about that game to the Harvest Moon games I used to play on Gameboy and had other girls saying "why're you playing a farming game?!" What's so different about this absorbing, life-draining community-esque game that means it doesn't draw the same ire as WoW?

Meh, I loathe Facebook games with a passion.

The second is the Nintendo Wii; yes it's a fantastic 'party' machine, and yes it's introducted alot more demographics to gaming whereby I can ask female friends if they want to play a video game and they'll not look at me as if I was speaking Swahili or whatever.

The thing is that this increased market, thanks in part to the Wii, means that developers are flooding us with sub-par games to make a quick buck based on the 'party' aspect of the console; why pour lots of time and effort into the perfect Zelda game which will only sell to fans and the like when they can churn out WiiSports Public Toilet Edition and people of all ages will buy it?

What the Wii has done for bringing gaming to the mainstream is fantastic, but what it's done for actual game quality is discouraging to the developers for the Playstation 3 and X-Box 360; I think this is why you're seeing a shift towards more collectibles (achievements and trophies) and heavier multiplayer focus.

I'm always in the same argument with my father when he pops up and asks why Mass Effect 2 or Dragon Age: Origins isn't multiplayer; he believes that every game should have multiplayer, but then he only plays Fifa and Call of Duty. >.<

[edyzmedieval]

Ditto about Facebook games. They're a disaster. And I loved the South Park spoof - You Have No Friends.