The "Modern" Gamer : Othor Games

» Fri Jun 17, 2011 5:26 pm

Agree'd. It's the same as The Witcher on hard. It's a difficulty game, but it's because it requires you to put a thought into what your doing, rather than "LOLOL I SWING SWORD YOU DIE I WIN". And the only reason people go on about how "hard" Demon Souls is, is because a webcomic some guy did :rolleyes:

Most games these days done in speed runs only take a couple hours total to do. :/
The only real difference is we now have larger storage capacities for new games.

Could you imagine Sonic games being 450 levels long?

It was a rather nice experience, overall, and I can't wait for the second.

I don't do speed runs, but the length of modern-day games are why I'm incredibly picky with what games I purchase and they are why I never purchase any games that won't last me a decent while for $60, but will wait for the price to lower, instead. Exceptions include, but are not limited to, Skyrim.

» Fri Jun 17, 2011 6:01 pm

I still havent found all the parts to complete your ship in Jet Force Gemini :facepalm:

» Fri Jun 17, 2011 2:01 am

Agree'd. It's the same as The Witcher on hard. It's a difficulty game, but it's because it requires you to put a thought into what your doing, rather than "LOLOL I SWING SWORD YOU DIE I WIN". And the only reason people go on about how "hard" Demon Souls is, is because a webcomic some guy did :rolleyes:

Most games these days done in speed runs only take a couple hours total to do. :/
The only real difference is we now have larger storage capacities for new games.

Could you imagine Sonic games being 450 levels long?

I have often imagined a Legend of Zelda game that is in the top-down view with SNES quality graphics, but with 100s of dungeons. The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past *100... and Nintendo is a weird enough company to do it... if that is ever made I will play it forever.

BTW Starcraft and the first FEAR game have pretty stout AI.

» Fri Jun 17, 2011 6:43 am

It was a rather nice experience, overall, and I can't wait for the second.

I don't do speed runs, but the length of modern-day games are why I'm incredibly picky with what games I purchase and they are why I never purchase any games that won't last me a decent while for $60, but will wait for the price to lower, instead. Exceptions include, but are not limited to, Skyrim.

I'm in a similar boat with games I am picky about. I like lengthy games, because I feel story and character development are usually done much better. So I tend to only stick to certain types of games unless it's your typical online style game which doesn't really have much, like BC2].

I got the Witcher 2, and returned it because it wasn't working because the game refused to update, because the key I got in my game was no good. So I won't be playing it I don't think, which is a shame because I loved the first one.

» Fri Jun 17, 2011 2:29 am

Most games these days done in speed runs only take a couple hours total to do. :/

Speed runs in older games, when glitch free, show you the whole game. Runs of most modern games not so much. Sonic in half an hour shows you everything the game has, Portal in half an hour doesn't.

» Fri Jun 17, 2011 4:23 pm

Im still trying to beat SOnic the HEdgehog 2 with old school rules (no saves, no cheats)...

old games were flat out harder.

Old games were harder but.... Sonic the Hedgehog is not a really good example of that.

Stuff like Ghouls 'n Ghosts, Contra, Double Dragon, etc. would never get released these days, because companies want you to finish their games.

» Fri Jun 17, 2011 5:01 am

I'm in a similar boat with games I am picky about. I like lengthy games, because I feel story and character development are usually done much better. So I tend to only stick to certain types of games unless it's your typical online style game which doesn't really have much, like BC2].

I got the Witcher 2, and returned it because it wasn't working because the game refused to update, because the key I got in my game was no good. So I won't be playing it I don't think, which is a shame because I loved the first one.

I meant Demon's Souls.

» Fri Jun 17, 2011 2:25 am

Rolling thunder for the NES is the hardest game i have ever played.

» Fri Jun 17, 2011 9:01 am

Rolling thunder for the NES is the hardest game i have ever played.

Mine's Yu-Gi-Oh: Forbidden memories for the PS1. I still have a scratched-up, case-less copy of it lying around the house, but it still functions. I could never figure out how to get cards that could actually put me on an equal playing field as that of the bosses.

» Fri Jun 17, 2011 6:05 am

I don't know that it's so much the "modern gamer" as it is "the modern gaming industry". The people who want the less forgiving games are still there, and the ones who don't want them were there before. With giant companies and budgets of millions of dollars, games that "aren't for everyone" are rarely an acceptable risk. Modern gamers are more likely just a phrase the companies use to try and make their customers seem separate and special, as customers like to do. These games are for YOU, not for those OLD gamers. Of course, it's not all flimsy labeling; the products available in one generation of a long-lasting medium are subject to change, and by extension the fans are going to be different, but it's more a result of trying to shove as many people into the pile as possible. Originally games were seen as only being for antisocial losers, sitting at computers at a time when it still wasn't uncommon not to own a computer. More competitive things like fighting games and shooters were more frequently seen in arcades, naturally a more social setting. People not into them weren't involved at all.

Now every group is being stuffed into marketing range, creating clear, profitable majorities. Adolescent males are a highly desirable demographic, in this medium and others. They're known to be a big portion of profits. They're also known to be prone toward the competitive and aggressive, multiplayer and action. That doesn't apply to everyone, not even everyone in that group, but this doesn't matter to the company for as long as that group is bigger than the other ones. Games aren't often made for those other people; they're either made for the bigger crowd with "elements" of another game type, or as seems to be the case with the new Hitman, a game for the smaller crowd is taken and then saturated with "elements" preferred by the bigger one. The only group as large, or larger, than the majority players are the non-players, the "casuals", who play something every now and then because it seems fun for the moment or because they want to connect with a gaming member of the family. Their money is also desired. Harsher game elements aren't going to be appealing to non-gamers, so they're removed.

So no, I don't think the crowd has changed so much as "modern gamer" is the industry term for "more money damn it". People like convenience and accessibility, and it's of course the marketing department's job to make everything the game does sound good, so you have genuine "streamlining" to make the game more efficient and fun to play alongside "removing content and challenge" to make the game less frustrating to those unwilling to spend much time on it. Both are advertised as the same thing, and as beneficial to the final product, so you get the never-ending battle between people over whether a change is one or the other. People just see/hear what they want to and block out the negatives, in games as much as every other aspect of life, which makes the whole thing extremely hard to discuss or really examine. It's one of the reasons I can barely stand to go near the Skyrim forum.

» Fri Jun 17, 2011 8:50 am

Sounds like hitman is going to follow splinter cell conviction. I dislike this, games are becoming too dumbed down, I dislike the games that get dumbed down and I dislike the devs too becuase they sell out.
If the industry keeps dumbing things down I may just stop playing games, or I may just end up with a large collection of older games that were actually fun and challenging. I can understand certain issues, I mean you dont want to play a game thats a chore, but now its just going to be a joke where they hold your hand all the way through it.

» Fri Jun 17, 2011 1:43 pm

a game has to have some difficulty in it. if not, it is just a waste: you learn nothing; all you do is burn time on pointless bashing of buttons; wasting electricity; ignoring real life in favor of some cheap thrill. in the old games so to say, you actually have to learn something. like, time management, hand eye coordination got improved, critical thinking and problem solving got a work out. simply put, waste of time, but at least you got something out of the games. today though, spoon feeding and hand holding seems to be the prevalent and principal, no one learns anything and only wastes time--most precious and only irreplaceable thing you have--energy, health, and who knows what else.

» Fri Jun 17, 2011 9:23 am

Usually upping the difficulty setting helps, but then theres games like Fable 3, which can be beaten by 2 year olds and have no higher difficulty option. :facepalm:

Edit - I recently played Baldur's Gate 2 and find it so confusing and challenging that I quit the game. So I do like at least a little guidance in the beginning to get me going, after that no more. Give me the tools, show me how to use them, leave me alone and let me play your game.

» Fri Jun 17, 2011 9:38 am

It seems to imply that "Modern Gamers" are majority younger (teenagers, tweens, children) who are too lazy to live up to the challenge of the old generation of games.

Unlike the rest of us, who as adolescents were paragons of activity.

You haven't met my long found brothers yet.

Not to worry. If you were long lost then it probably means you were adopted.

Seriously. I've tried to go back and play some old games I remember playing as a child; I honestly have no [censored] idea how I was able to play those games as a kid and not gouge my little eyes out. They are so hard.

I remember how I did it: I cheated my scrawny little [censored] off. iddqd, itisagooddaytodie.

» Fri Jun 17, 2011 8:26 am

So I do like at least a little guidance in the beginning to get me going, after that no more. Give me the tools, show me how to use them, leave me alone and let me play your game.

this :thumbsup:

» Fri Jun 17, 2011 1:07 pm

"Dragon Age: Origins is a oldschool hardcoe RPG"
"lol no DA:O isn't oldschool or hardcoe, Kotor is"
"lol not Kotor isn't oldschool or hardcoe NWN is"
"lol no NWN isn't oldschool or hardcoe, BG is"
"lol BG isn't oldschool or hardcoe, Ultima VII is"
"lol Ultima VII isn't oldschool or hardcoe, Wizardry V is"
"lol Wizardry V isn't oldschool or hardcoe, The Bard's Tale is"
"lol The Bard's Tale isn't oldschool or hardcoe, Rogue is"
"lol Rogue is a dumbed down RPG the only thing that's oldschool or hardcoe is Dungeons&Dragons"

Clearly an older generation having a superiority complex over a younger generation with their newfangled ez-mode games is something we have never seen before

» Fri Jun 17, 2011 10:00 am

Clearly an older generation having a superiority complex over a younger generation with their newfangled ez-mode games is something we have never seen before

People enjoying different things? Treachery! ^_^

» Fri Jun 17, 2011 1:11 pm

Seriously? How can you look at something like http://gajitz.com/mario-reloaded-if-super-mario-brothers-was-made-today/ and say that video games are dumbed down?

Next you'll tell me that Michael Bay movies are dumbed down!

Yeah, I think it's the same with everything from books to cartoons. Many of the newer things will always seemed dumbed down to the old timers. Anyone seen the new Monopoly boardgames that use spinning wheels and credit cards? Anyone look at the differences between Saturday morning TV shows Robotech and Power Rangers? Remember when there was no such thing as an official strategy guide, instead your game came with an in-depth manual?

Well, I said my peace. Now I have to go chase some kids out of my yard by yelling about their clothes and their hair and that noise they call music!

» Fri Jun 17, 2011 2:37 pm

Old games are generally all about the challenge. Back then, nothing really had things that are now considered "standard" to video games. Shiny graphics, voice acting, plot, mechanics, and interactivity were nonexistent. So, the success of video games was achieved through the challenge and reward system. Game A is known for being hard, players don http://files.sharenator.com/challenge_accepted_RE_Dragkyre_Vs_Nightmare_Our_minecraft_Challenge-s325x265-177836.png, and you have a lot of bragging points if you make it to the end. It was all about scoreboards, really.

As time progresses, gaming becomes less about your performance and more about experience. Cue the modern gamer. Gaming evolves into much deeper experiences complete with everything I listed above. Nowadays, people can care less about doing everything perfectly and more about the entertainment that comes with it. Games that punish you aren't considered all that fun anymore (not to say people enjoy games that baby you either, there must be some balance

) and a game's quality can be judged on its delivery instead of the "You Win" text at the end.

Video games today are slowly but surely becoming more like interactive movies. Back then, I don't think anyone would believe you if you put forth the possibility of "Drama" or "Psychological Thriller" as a genre of video game. Games today like Heavy Rain prove that video games can be great for a variety of aspects. Story is now important, because no one wants to play a video game that doesn't make sense (unless it's supposed to be that way by design). And by putting emphasis on those aspects, not inhibiting players from progression, they can feel free to enjoy them more without having to work for it (just as you don't need to acquire more audience points or something to watch the second half of a movie". Games become shorter, but that's fine because less people are likely to actually complete longer games.

Multiplayer has also helped advance the industry by creating games that are essentially like competitive sports. It's no longer necessary to create a game with X number of hours in the main story, but the multiplayer included can provide hours upon hours of additional time spent playing. This is possible because a challenge is always present and the experience is different every time. Same applies for MMOs, which are driven entirely by the concept of multiplayer. If you want to be a hardcoe gamer today, multiplayer is usually a requirement.

Fortunately for all of us, nerd rage appears to be slowly going away...

» Fri Jun 17, 2011 4:15 pm

The old Hitman games are clunky? I found them to be pretty top dollar compared to other games on the market.

How's it trial and error? I could get silent assassin on my first try.

» Fri Jun 17, 2011 12:13 pm

I actually agree that the old Hitman games made me Quickload way too freakin' often, but simplifying it to that degree is not quite the answer to that problem I was looking for. :lmao:

Anyway, Rhekarid already said what I usually do in these threads.

Edit: To expand on what I think should have been done to fix Hitman's problems, I simply wanted Agent 47 to have more means of stealth at his disposal. The ability to hide bodies in even more places, hanging over railings, hiding in the shadows (That would be a huge improvement), etc. The developers have it all wrong; the solution is the exact opposite of "Just give them a cheat".

» Fri Jun 17, 2011 1:17 pm

"Dragon Age: Origins is a oldschool hardcoe RPG"
"lol no DA:O isn't oldschool or hardcoe, Kotor is"
"lol not Kotor isn't oldschool or hardcoe NWN is"
"lol no NWN isn't oldschool or hardcoe, BG is"
"lol BG isn't oldschool or hardcoe, Ultima VII is"
"lol Ultima VII isn't oldschool or hardcoe, Wizardry V is"
"lol Wizardry V isn't oldschool or hardcoe, The Bard's Tale is"
"lol The Bard's Tale isn't oldschool or hardcoe, Rogue is"
"lol Rogue is a dumbed down RPG the only thing that's oldschool or hardcoe is Dungeons&Dragons"

Clearly an older generation having a superiority complex over a younger generation with their newfangled ez-mode games is something we have never seen before

I usually don['t include DnD, because it is harder than all of those things. Humans in real life tend to be curious idiots and only the GM can be the invisible wall, and some of them don't like that. So it can end up to be very crazy... very very crazy. A comparison to any modern game doesn't work. There won't be the stupid dialogue wheel to force you forward, only your own actions. So be mindful of them or your going to get thrown in jail and throat cut or worse.

» Fri Jun 17, 2011 1:07 pm

I think Nintendo handles the difficulty level well. Super mario was never that hard but some of those puzzles were challenging. The metroid prime trilogy (not other M) was also extremely difficult and so was the one on the wii. Legend of Zelda is also very challenging but they are adding hints in the game in a different way but i doubt it will be in every room.

» Fri Jun 17, 2011 2:58 pm

Super mario was never that hard

PFT, are you kidding? I have no idea how I played Mario so well before, because those slippery controls make me miss almost all of my jumps now. Maybe I'm just used to the Donkey Kong feel, though.

» Fri Jun 17, 2011 12:06 pm

PFT, are you kidding? I have no idea how I played Mario so well before, because those slippery controls make me miss almost all of my jumps now. Maybe I'm just used to the Donkey Kong feel, though.

it helped if you knew the secret areas to warp to other worlds :whistling:

remember when we used to go ape [censored] crazy over the little easter eggs, cheats we discovered, and secret areas? those elements are very lacking in todays games.