Print

Author Topic: Are games losing their quality?  (Read 4283 times)

« Reply #15 on: June 24, 2000, 06:26:52 PM »
I definitely agree that games are going down in quality.  The graphics look great, but usually the storyline is copied/boring/nonexistent.  I believe that the SNES is the best, most well rounded system of all time, with the Sega Genesis a close second.

I guess the only ones at blame for this downfall in game quality is us- the consumers.  If we buy poorly designed games, that is exactly what we will get.  Try to rent a game before you buy, and if it isn't any good, vote with your wallet and don't buy the game.

I dunno... I am actually gravitating more and more toward retrogaming myself.  It is much cheaper, and (surprisingly enough) it is just as much fun.
Someone set up us the bomb!

« Reply #16 on: July 01, 2000, 11:23:28 AM »
Another important aspect to consider, especially in platform-action games, is the toughness factor. In the olden days, you had to be aware of every second you played, scanning the border of the screen for enemies, exactly calculating that long jump, or you had to restart all the way to the beginning.
Nowadays, it seems more like exploring or collecting games, where we search every nook and cranny of every level to find these darn stars, puzzle pieces, golden bananas or other collectibles. And for you game designers, searching can and does get boring rather quickly.
DK64 is a prime example: you cannot, under any circumstances, be Game Over. Never. You have unlimited lives. Not that it's that tough: enemies are few and far between, and easily disposed of. And the greatest danger to all platform players isn't there anymore: holes. There are NO holes in DK64! How do you get less platformy than that?
To increase the difficulty, game designers should just do the Mega Man trick: it's alright to have a strong hero with lots of powers, but put matching enemies with high intelligence and firepower (not a weak hero and even weaker enemies!). And with many modern 3D platformers, this is too often neglected. Ooh, we can't do the levels too tough, everybody must be able to easily finish the game, they think. And when you get bored, you just save and you can return later.
Which brings another aspect of the downfall of quality: the ability to save.
Now, before I get flooded with angry mobs of players, let me tell that I'm not 100% against saving the game, especially for long games. I'm just against the ability to save anywhere. When you can save anywhere, you never play the same level twice, and believe it or not, re-playing some levels over and over trying not to get killed is what creates nostalgia, more often than not. What there should be is a system where you can only save at critical points of the game. This would bring together the benefits of both saving-everywhere and never-saving games.
This was the system that was the most common among Super Nes RPGs, and it worked very well. Game designers should extend this concept not only to RPGs but to the other genres as well.
Before I start to sound a bit too 100% pure retro-gamer, let me tell that a 3D game can be fun, but it has to be more intense. Intensity is what separates, in the end, the fun games from the boring ones. When you will actually be afraid of some enemies, or be overwhelmed in sheer numbers, and finally triumph after many tries and deaths, only to discover that there's even tougher ones just waiting for you around the next corner, that will be when 3D action-platformers will really shine. I hope that designers abandon a bit their collect-em-all mentality and start thinking about what was fun in the old games.

Whew, that was long.

¤Thelo¤

« Reply #17 on: July 03, 2000, 08:19:18 PM »
ok i really doubt that any one is goona agree with me but i think one of the best systems is the atari 2600 now i know i'm gettin' off the topic but the games were just fun i mean they were really fun but the graphics stunk. think of frogger that was fun (don't know if any anyone else thinks that) and THEN they came with frogger for psx i thought it would bee REALLY cool ...well maybe not REALLY cool..(graphics came in) then i played it.... let's just leave it there...
so after sayin' all of this yes they ARE stinkin' up games.....  
stop your grinnin'' and drop your linen!

« Reply #18 on: July 03, 2000, 08:49:19 PM »
Never played Atari 2600 but wanted too.  Mines broken.  But I do like Colecovision alot and its like Atari.  I also like NES alot.

« Reply #19 on: July 04, 2000, 07:14:24 AM »
Unlike anyone else I never felt that games are losing their quality. Nintendo games almost always rule, no matter which system they're on. I look for games that are fun and challenging and I care little about the graphics. It's true that I play N64 alot, but that's only because Playstation games aren't as good, I don't have Dreamcast, and sadly, my Snes broke down for some reason.

 

Print