Do you think videogames will ever be as good as in the 80's and 90's

[Lacquer Head]

way more than that in fact, although it varies from game to game. Take Assassins Creed Brotherhood for instance, it has huge amount of different sidequest, from simple ones such as races, collecting feathers, to assassin contracts and destroying Leonardo's devices and schematics, you can train your own assassins and send them to missions, loot around the city, explore entire Roma, invest in it and rebuild it... and I dare not to mention just how much content and replay value you have in games such as Dragon Age Origins. All optional stuff, you have material to double/triple your singleplayer campaign, and often enough there's even a multiplayer.

I was referencing RPGs (not sure why) yet...all of those are grind quests and trade/fetch quests >_>

In other words we had as much as milking back then as we do now, we had tons of bad games back then, perhaps even more than good ones... interesting.

>more

lolque, I'm not saying there weren't bad games, but my comparison is between good games back then and good games now. the "good" games of today are just clones of clones. Back in the day, this shit was original, N64 and PS 1 use similar formulas, but 2D to 3D was a major jump. I will admit though...old school gaming gave us Superman 64, and that's not ****ing cool.

I'm not entirely sure which part of my quote are you referring to so I'll just take a wild guess...

That was my first post in this thread, I was saying that the future of indie gaming will be great, but these bigger companies will die. But it will just start again, as the big companies of today die, the smaller companies will become giants. But big gaming seems to be what most people are referring to, which is what I refer to. Personally, I find consoles to be the problem as well, at this point, releasing "generations" is just stupid, they're basically computers, either allow us to just upgrade or switch to PC gaming completely. Consoles are just more ways to milk money.

I'm kinda curious. Does it really matter if it's a sequel to a long time series if the end product is superb (in most cases it is in fact, Super Mario Galaxy 2, Metal Gear Solid 4 & Peace Walker, Gran Turismo 5, Forza Motorsport 4, Tekken 6... just to name few)? If you're truly bothered by such petty things I'm afraid you're missing out on a lot of fun.

It's superb because it's an old game with a different label. I can understand sequels being similar when they're story oriented, but stuff like Mario and Zelda? That's just blatant cloning. When ever you have series of games like this, they get stagnant and lose ideas.

As far as I'm aware, Steam, Origin, XBox Live and PSN are full of demos, not to forget other two solutions I offered. I almost forgot there's also option to rent a game.

Demos still aren't enough for me to make an informed decision. I mean, take Ocarina of Time for instance, you play a demo and think "BEST GAME EVER" then you make it to the water temple...

I work at a video game company. So I can say that is certainly not the case. The people working on the video games are trying the best to make the best product that they can with the time, money and manpower available to them.

The actual people working on games are great, it's the out of touch owners that don't really care about the finished product and just want their damn profit. So many things end up getting rushed, movies and television have the same problem. It sucks because the people making the game take the bad rap, and not the big companies. It's even worse now that incomplete games just get pushed out these days to make money, then patches and DLC come later...

[Xanatos]

I'm not saying there weren't bad games, but my comparison is between good games back then and good games now. the "good" games of today are just clones of clones. Back in the day, this shit was original, N64 and PS 1 use similar formulas, but 2D to 3D was a major jump. I will admit though...old school gaming gave us Superman 64, and that's not ****ing cool.

When Wolfenstein 3D came out wasn't every FPS just a copy/clone after that, yes even Doom. You could say Doom perfected the formula, had different setting and weapons, though in truth that can be said for a lot of shooters since then. It has always been perfecting the formula with few groundbreaking games in between. Jump from 2D to 3D was impressive to say the least, as was full motion gaming when it first appeared few years ago, video game industry still comes up with new stuff. What people fail to notice is just how much new games perfected the formula and are still pushing forward, multiplayer, story telling, music, and graphics in particular. What I'm trying to say, don't slam a great car just because it isn't as groundbreaking as the very first one, it's still a pretty great car if you know what I mean.

It's superb because it's an old game with a different label. I can understand sequels being similar when they're story oriented, but stuff like Mario and Zelda? That's just blatant cloning. When ever you have series of games like this, they get stagnant and lose ideas.

There's nothing wrong with perfecting a formula, granted you bring something new on the table (I feel a lot of sequels do more than that), I'm pretty sure that's how things work in general. I'm with you on Zelda, Super Mario Galaxy 2 however just might surprise you, give it a go.

Demos still aren't enough for me to make an informed decision. I mean, take Ocarina of Time for instance, you play a demo and think "BEST GAME EVER" then you make it to the water temple...

I'm pretty sure you're winding me up by this point.