no sorry, there is plenty of fantastic games this gen. skyrim, red dead revolver & castlecrashers to name a few. but they are a rare catch. of all the thousands*? of xbox360 games there is i only like about 10 acceptable ones. compared to on average 30 each on older consoles. single player games have been getting less engaging, gameplay-wise. amoung other things.

Just seems that way. I know not all younger generation children do that. That guy was though.

Well the reason a lot of single player experiences tend to be less engaging is developers have been up till now focusing a lot on multiplayer to be what provides the longevity of their games. Then there is the casual gamer insurgence which brought in loads of money so much that developers could not help, but want a piece of that and the best way to do it is to streamline their games make them more player friendly to pull in the casuals. Which in the long run could be good by stepping things up from there turning casuals into more adapt gamers if not hard core gamers or it can dwindle into treating every game as entry level, but I do not see the latter happening much.

exactly! but why would developers want to do that to their own potential masterpieces. need the monies i suppose.

but as ive said before if devs put a lil bit of extra effort in and add a "hardcoe" mode that gives actual gamers a good time all would be well

What is your point here exactly? What does this contribute to my statement? Or in fact at all on topic?
*About my Avatar and on topic: Yeah its Pokemon, but unlike CoD/BF/TES [censored] I ACTUALLY REALISE ITS A GAME - I don't get worked up at someone who disagrees with my liking by saying Digimon is better, sure it has advantages and disadvantages but I prefer Pokemon and I accept someone prefers Digimon as I know why they do. People that game today are too ignorant and arrogant to realise any of this. This is why it erupts into massive flame wars - ignorance and unacceptance - just like you have shown when pulling up my Avatar, what UM4DBR0? Grow a bear my lil kid. And you're spamming the thread, kid

EDIT; I actually meant to say bear in place of pair: Have you every tried growing a bear, it is hard.

Mostly money it's nothing really new, some developers don't even notice what they are doing may be self sabotage sometimes ego or even just simply wanting to break away from what they have done previously can cause them to make changes the problem I have is when they never clarify that is what their intention was. I guess I am just more optimistic though in the gaming scene, but I have seen this pattern before not on such a scale, but have seen it before. I also do not like to use dumb down as a way to describe things mainly because it gets used a lot sometimes correctly sometimes out of haste or lack of a better word. One example when the first halo came out. I thought it was a great game did some new things improved on some old things, but I went through my phase of saying things were dumbed down especially with that game as I found the targeting reticule a bit on the large side which I felt made the game a bit too easy, but I got over it and started to view the game as more of a show case piece of what the future of shooters were heading as well as saw the game as a great party/lan game where the greater challenges were against live players like other shooters before it with multiplayer.

hardcoe modes would be awesome and I fully support the idea even if it means more development time. I remember a game for the NES I swear it must have had 99 levels, but issue with it was there was no continue dead is dead start over.

and pearl the land lord is always demanding her money.

I agree with this based on our government (won't say anymore as political discussion isn't allowed) and where I work

I played Deus Ex for the first time in late 2010/early 2011 and it is now one of my favourite games ever, so definitely not nostalgia in my case. Certainly way above anything released recently, except maybe The Witcher 1. And seriously, Mass Effect and Dragon Age: Origins better than VtM - Bloodlines? That makes me a sad panda

ahh thank you. deus ex is amazing isnt it? its on a whole other level. and the more times you playthrough the more mesmerising it becomes.

i found halo incredibly boring with its two gun limit, regen shield, un-interesting levels and aliens i could go on forever. multiplayer was meant to be a blast though

No, its a game and when it's off it means nothing - I don't think you realise that either.
It is ignornace when you just pass off someone else preferances because you disagree like a spoiled child who lost their dummy.
You're actually using puncuation but fail to use the correct grammar - why kid?
*Bolded - This is why we get fan boys in place like YouTube and Forums screaming that "their" game is better, when really its only good in the eyes of the holder. Remain immature little one
Spam mostly and other off-topic garbage. How did you make McDonald come off so creepy

Closed for review.

Edit. I have deleted a lot of posts - this topic was dragged down to flaming and unnecessary remarks.

Wrong with gaming? The game sold for more than 1 billion in 16 days. Now mind you, I'm not a fan of that game, but going by the sales there is obviously a huge market for it and a common comment like "all those players are dumb" is a lame excuse, because nobody spends $60 (again) if all previous releases svcked. Just accept that other people have different needs or are you know going to troll Justin Bieber and Taylor Swift videos on YouTube?

First person shooters weren't a thing on consoles at the time.

Well they did make an album that had thrash elements, while not being entirely thrash yeah. People don't tend to get that specific though and just label a genre on any given thing. Same thing happens in gaming.

Anyways, CoD is pretty balanced overall. There are a few guns that get through and have to be balanced in patches but for the most part it's more balanced than this guy is leading you to believe. When you can jump in a game and not be at a disadvantage, while not having a large or any advantage, but pretty much be neutral..then that's balance. That's what CoD has. Battlefield is the same way for the most part, you just have to play it different to be good.

In Skyrim you can have the advantage more often than not, it's a single player game though so it's not as big of a deal. It's not supposed to be Dark Souls where you're mostly at a disadvantage, so I don't mind it. Also, a lot of people fell on the "Elder Scrolls bandwagon" with Skyrim, much like they did with Oblivion. It's pretty much been the same game since Morrowind (first one I played) and it's just gotten a bigger audience each time. So it's not really the holy grail of any gaming and the only reason it'll take home rewards is because there hasn't been anything like it that does what it does as well as it does..for the past 5 years. The reason CoD won't is the same thing..except, since there is a new one each year..people are used to the same old same old to the extent that they can ignore it for GOTY and things like that. But it still usually always wins best FPS because it's brilliant at what it does..addictive competitive multiplayer. Battlefield is good at it too, but it's not as easy to just jump in and play and since the maps are so big it almost seems too expansive.

So what's wrong with gaming today is that most games are just rehashes of previous games..that have a few new mechanics and nothing that really sets the bar. Once every few years we do get a game like that but it doesn't last forever. Then you have games like GTA 5, that will take off like Skyrim did..all it needs is a little love and care and some polish and addictive gameplay. Sure it'll be sorta the same old same old GTA..but since one hasn't come out for 5 or so years..it will be something people have been desiring.

lol that guy is an idiot

I wouldn't say nostalgia is what makes people prefer older games.

I played ME2, DA:O, and Bioshock when they came out. I played V:tM in summer, and Deus Ex in the Fall this year. I think V:tM and DX are better than those three. I prefer making meaningful choices. Those three you basically decide "Mwaahhhh I'm evil!" or "I am the most saintliest of saints". The other two had varying scales on both ends, not to mention all the things you could influence. There was more substance to things and less https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SV97ozaD4vs.

The reason skyrim shuts up the COD players is because they flock to it. Same reasons as Cod, its shallow and requires no thought.

Only difference is an rpg was sacraficed, where there wasnt any depth in CoD to begin with.


I hate the nostalgia arguent. Do people know when IO last played an older game, no so they can shut upvabout nostalgia. People said I liked fab le tlc more than fable 2/3 becuase of nostalgia. I played tlc before fable 2 came out, I played it after.I played it recently (about a month ago).

Games are fine, gaming isn't dying, games aren't dumbed down, and the sky isn't falling.

The biggest problem with gaming these days? The communities. Absolutely horrid. Change anything in a game and it no longer deserves to call itself part of X series and is catering to the masses. Don't change anything, even if it was perfect before, and it's now milking the customers and lazy, uninspired development that deserves to be boycotted until all the devs lose their jobs. Oh, wait, in either scenario a bunch of loud mouths call for boycotting because they totally got screwed over and now their life is going to [censored].

And how could I forget: old games never had bugs. It was totally unheard of. Bugs are a recent development designed to troll you. For srs.

Gaming isn't dieing. Hahahah, if anything it's beginning to rise to the level of acceptance of movies, books, music, and television. Becoming more embedded into society, no it won't be dieing any time soon. Dumbed down? Sometimes.... it's a measurable thing you can actually do. Though this is on a game by game basis, not some catch all blanket statement that the industry is dumbing down because there are lots of good games out there.

Or maybe, just maybe, when devs change games. They could try ADDING content. I know its a crazy idea, but maybe people wouldnt have hated skyrim as much if it werent shallower than oblivion.
Or DA2 if it wasnt reduced to spamming the awesome button. No its just changes fans hate, not the constant removal of the things that madfe those franchises great to begin with.

Belive it or not I got into fallout with fallout 3, they added to it in NV and *gasp* I liked the game even more than 3.

Your right about one thing though, the community is a problem. You only need to see everyone hailing skyrim as the second coming of christ, despite it being so broken in so many ways. So when we get the next bug filled mess, thats left to the modders, its our fault because of the idiots who think a broken PoS = GoTY. Imo fans rent critical enough, because when you have some of these bugs that stop you doing major questlines. Its just not acceptable. Yet only bethesda gets a free pass, there was a [censored]storm over NV, but skyrim has legions of rabid fans defending it. Saying how people are just "whining for the ske of whining". Sp yes, the community is also to blame for the [censored] stte of gaming.

Bugs arent new, but they re getting lot more common. (aside from obsidian who have been consistent with their bugs )

Look at morrowind, now Oblivio, now skyrim. The removl of skills, stats, and spellmaking. Tell me it isnt dumbed down.

I don't see how this is in opposition to anything I've said. Obviously, a game is a different game in a different context, when you've never played a game with better graphics, much more polish, more advanced technology behind it, etc. etc. But that's part of my argument, that outside of that context it's not actually as good as people believed it to be. And I also already noted that very early games had a different demographic+the only thing that could make them interesting considering their limitations at the time was challenge. But they weren't better games because of that, most were worse games and basically one trick ponies.

And yes, there are always new gamers that factor into game developer decisions, that's also part of what I've argued - that "gaming today" isn't that much different than "gaming yesterday", that it hasn't really changed. In fact if anything it's getting better, there are more advlt gamers now than ever actually so there are a fair number of games - mainstream or not - that cater to that crowd. And as gaming gets larger developers have more resources to put into them, and even indie devs and modders are getting more powerful tools and more freedom.

*Odd Hermit

"Yeah, well, you know that's just like uh, your opinion man." is kind of an obvious statement. I never claimed it wasn't my opinion, assumed this was a given considering we're talking about the quality of video games.

Hahahah.... hated? SKYRIM? I think you better get your head checked. All I see is the usual post game rage at everything. Can you give me some good reasons why this nerd rage is different from literally EVERY other game release?