«

[_r.u.s.s.]

play psychonauts, play the void (aka turgor), play katamari damacy

..not all the new games are shitty. there's a fair amount of new shitty games as well as there is a fair amount of old shitty games

[TheChosen]

EDIT: I should learn to read properly before basically just repeating someone else

[Eagle of Fire]

This resume the entire thread for me:

Gaming isn't dying or going downhill, it just changes depending on what most customers want.

Most customers wants shit. So yeah, I do call that going downhill.

'Nuff said...

[Wicky]

The reason why most modern games are crap is because 2010's complexity to programming a new game beats the fantasy out of the software students' brains.
They are transformed from young men with fantasy into robotic databanks who can store a gazillion informations, like full-hd, environmental HDR, dolbysurrounded, triplebuffered, antialiased, softstenciled and physX'ed graphic engines. The minimum requirements to learn these is way too high, and so the gameplay suffers.

For most classic games it's the same problem, just that they have all the gameplay, but wish for better graphics. So I have an idea about Crysis and Dwarf Fortress getting married. Both run simultaneously on a computer, where DF occupies the CPU and Crysis occupies the graphic card. Everything that is happening in the CPU shall be passed on as ASCII-graphics to the graphic card, and Crysis picks those up and creates a vivid 3D-world on the monitor.

[Bejelith]

Originally Posted by Eagle of Fire

Most customers wants shit.

That's what I meant, more or less.
But then again, original and/or brilliant games make their appearance every once in a while. And we've always had both shitty and good titles. So, quality/quantity ratio must be pretty much the same, or so I hope.

Originally Posted by Wicky

The reason why most modern games are crap is because 2010's complexity to programming a new game beats the fantasy out of the software students' brains.

More complex games require more people to work on them, and good teamwork isn't easy to achieve. So yes, it's rare to have even the most talented people work together and produce something worthy of their individual skills. I believe that's why simpler games are getting a little hype and have a steady (if not growing) fanbase nowadays.

[TotalAnarchy]

Originally Posted by Wicky

The reason why most modern games are crap is because 2010's complexity to programming a new game beats the fantasy out of the software students' brains.
They are transformed from young men with fantasy into robotic databanks who can store a gazillion informations, like full-hd, environmental HDR, dolbysurrounded, triplebuffered, antialiased, softstenciled and physX'ed graphic engines. The minimum requirements to learn these is way too high, and so the gameplay suffers.

That can't be true, because today's games are so big, they have huge teams working on them. The idea is made by one person, the art by another, and the coding by others. The results are very polished games, but they tend to lack in originality.

[BranjoHello]

Modern gaming went down like 5-7 years ago.

[Wicky]

Originally Posted by TotalAnarchy

That can't be true, because today's games are so big, they have huge teams working on them. The idea is made by one person, the art by another, and the coding by others. The results are very polished games, but they tend to lack in originality.

Ok then explain me, why big companies with huge teams never have a crazy group of freaks among them, who know shit about coding, who give a damn about political correctness and just want to create a funny game?

If you were right, then the person, who was responsible in Crytek's team for "creating the idea and gameplay mechanics behind Far Cry" must have been a complete sucker. Yeah, he clearly cashed 300.000 dollars for twelves words saying:
"i want a game where you can shoot people with guns, woot!"

I also want 300k dollars for developing an "idea" that can be summarized in twelve words!

You need to realize that "ideas" and "gameplay" have nothing in common with "big companies" and "huge teams"

[TotalAnarchy]

Originally Posted by Wicky

Ok then explain me, why big companies with huge teams never have a crazy group of freaks among them, who know shit about coding, who give a damn about political correctness and just want to create a funny game?

If you were right, then the person, who was responsible in Crytek's team for "creating the idea and gameplay mechanics behind Far Cry" must have been a complete sucker. Yeah, he clearly cashed 300.000 dollars for twelves words saying:
"i want a game where you can shoot people with guns, woot!"

I also want 300k dollars for developing an "idea" that can be summarized in twelve words!

You need to realize that "ideas" and "gameplay" have nothing in common with "big companies" and "huge teams"

Yes, that's what I'm trying to say. Carmack and Meier are making games since the day I was born, also they have huge teams behind them who make their ideas happen. Also both have strived for basically the same goals in these 20 years.

I don't understand what you consider "fun" or "good gameplay", neither why "gaming goes downhill", because Crysis, despite its graphical reqs looks to me like a fun game, and I've played games like Doom3, Half-Life 2, FEAR, Oblivion, and yeah, they were fun. If those didn't satisfy you, then tough luck, look elsewhere. It means it's all about tastes, rather than "graphics".

You people say that games aren't focused on gameplay anymore. So maybe they should have made Gothic in 2D with Attack, Guard, Spell buttons that you must click before pressing Ok to actually do that action, eh? That looks like fun too, in a retro way, but don't expect most of the people to like it too, nowadays. The japanese gaming industry (especially RPGs) has remained relatively stale for 20 years aka they were never focused on graphics, yet their games look the least appealing to me.

Yes, we all like originality, but how far can it go? Castlevania games feel relatively the same after countless of titles and years. How many changes can the devs make and not anger the gamers. For example we could transform it into a sidescrolling shooter or third-person hack and slash game, but aren't those Abuse and Devil May Cry? I think the best idea is to make Castlevania into a sci-fi space flight simulator, then it'd be original There is originality, but with a gaming history that gets longer by the day, I don't expect someone to rediscover America. I mean Portal is a Tetris clone, har har har

There is innovation, but mostly in smaller quantities like Zeno Clash and Portal. If you want greater originality then search for Indie titles, and if you want total weirdness then the freeware games have plenty of that.

[ayoeness]

All I have to say is: YAY nanananananananananana Katamari Demacyyy...