Quote:
Originally Posted by Eagle of Fire
If that's the best you can link to me then I think it prove my point. I never said there was no good games ever made during the 2000s... But the ratio of good games in the 2000s versus the '90s is like between one to five and one to ten.
And that's a shame.
|
Hmm. I think, you switched ratios, because right now it looks like "1 of 5 games is good for 2000s, and 1:10 - for 90s".
NVM, but I can argue with it.
1. 90s have a HUGE UGLY HEAP of bad games. I browsed lot of lists in many places - it's always 1:20 for me in best circumstance for best years. Check (totally incomplete) Mobygames lists, and you'll see.
2. 2000s have exactly the same heaps - but it became thousand time bigger! And for every (good) game we have hundreds of (maybe same good) clones. Look on any shareware site - it have myriads of almost-indistingushable match-3, hidden objects, platformers, tower defences, etc. Every one of it have quite good quality, much better than similar 90s game, but if you seen one of it - you seen at least half of it all.
The same goes to "big" games. We have too many similar ones. They
are different, but will not attract anyone except devoted fans. It's not about "good/bad", but rather "new/the same" issue.
3. Games now much more "visible" than it was fifteen years ago. In 90s Russia, Finland or Brazilia have no any chance to get it's games published outside of country - except very slim amount of "international" teams. And vise versa: I am, in Russia, had almost zero chance to see something off-border in Russia, except "big hits". Now, with global Internet, I can see game in days after release - even one-man games, betas and poor quality releases. It "pollutes" pool of games.
Overall: I don't think that games of 2000s is much worse than 90s was. I even don't think that it worse at all.
But I think that process of
finding good game now became much more complicated than it was before.
BTW, my favorite 4x strategy was released in 2000s.
Dominions 3 it is.