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?

Activision, EA, Steam/Steamworks, Lazy Developers and the DLC pass are what's wrong with gaming today.

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.

Hahaha insults at the strt of my post, will make you take my post seriously.

Sure for starters the game isnt even playable for some people, like 1 frame every 10 seconds. I havent had ny other game this year with such an abysmal issue. Ther you go, a damn good reason. Would you like me to add the lies to that aswell ? *cough*radient story*cough* oh and then we have the wonderful fact the game is rushed (mages guild is a brilliant example) and eft for modders to fix, or dlc to add what shoullld have been ingame content.

Do you understand though???? You didn't grow up in the 80's!!! You can't comment on what it was like to play those games when there was nothing else. You can't judge games of today and games of the 80's on the same field.

I can't know what it was like to play those games when there was nothing else, but I can judge the games of the 80s vs. the games today, with less bias than people who played 80s games when they were the best thing around. I acknowledge that games were made with much more limits back then, but that doesn't mean somehow they get bonus points when comparing them with games made with newer technology.

I've not seen these people reporting one frame every ten seconds. Seems a little unlikely. At any rate feel free to be a small minority that are very outspoken and vocal.

Bot I di love it when people blame pulishers for developer falings.

KOTOR2 being unfinished = Publisher problem.
Mass effect 2, poor writing and choices meaning nothing = developer failings.

People just like to scream how the dev are causing problems, whenever they see something like EA on the box. Mirrors edge, a unique game, original, didnt sell well. Sequal isnt canned. Its an EA product, its original (a rare thing) and despite its salea its getting a sequal. Seems odd for the guys who only care about money and making every game like CoD/whatever is popular at the time.

EA is publishing KoA reckoning, a new IP. Its also not dumbed down, biowre dumbed its games down, hasnt got a new, original IP. So clearly the publisher has no issue with games not being streamlined to hell, or churningout sequals. A problem is people praising devs for all good, and cursing publishers for all bad.

Reckoning is the exception to the EA rule, only because EA doesn't own the developer and I agree about KOTOR II, Obsidian got shafted hard by Lucasarts and you could make a case that Softworks shafted them too with New Vegas.

But I'm not saying they are better!!!! I'm not biased. I admit: Today I could probably beat Super Mario with one hand. I've tried to play those older games and I just can't. They are no where near as fun as they were.

But you have to look at it relatively speaking which is what I'm saying you don't understand.

Someone can say the 8-bit games had horrible graphics. Well, no [censored]. My arguement is that for that time there were games that did a really good job and not being so 8-bit.

Look at one of the newer releases of today "Duke Nuken: Forever". That game looks like [censored] and plays like [censored]. Can you honestly say that you respect that game over Zelda: A Link to the Past (SNES)? You might say yes, and thats where you're wrong. You have to look at it respectively and thats what I'm saying you're not doing.

Do I think Frogger is better than Half Life 2....no. Do I think during their respective times they changed the way gaming was looked at....yes.

You didn't grow up with these games and it's a totally different perspective. Games haven't really changed all that much. Some games are have big open worlds Zelda = Skyrim, some games make you shoot enemies down corridors Mega Man = COD, and so on.

At their core....games have not changed. Thats what I'm basing it on....their fundamentals.

No they don't.
Certainly the main demographic has changed over time, since in video gaming's early age the average gamer was a much different sort of person than the average gamer today, but 80's games were still so basic being challenging was the only thing that made them interesting for anyone. And they weren't even necessarily challenging in a good way either.

I wasn't playing games in the 80s since I wasn't born until 87, but I've played games made in the 80s and let me tell you, it's nostalgia taking over if you really feel games back then were in any way superior to games now.

Being also born in 87, I'll have to contest you on that. I can pick up a hundred games off my shelf (edit: from late 80's & early 90s) that are far more original or thought-provoking, or carefully constructed, or in depth, or customizable, or engrossing, or immersive, or (any positive adjective here) than anything made in the past 5 years.

he is right.

it is just sad how in the name of profit games are being dumb-ed down to cater to unwilling to learn the ropes new players who are willing to cough up 60 bucks for another edition of this or that series. on't succumb to that Bethesda.

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 )

It's the unreal tournament of this age.

I'll never understand the hate for CoD.

It's a fun, action packed game that has really balanced multiplayer. It's the unreal tournament of this age.

But... Halo: Combat Evolved didn't cater to any demographic even remotely, and look what happened to it.