I've heard a lot of discussions about how old school gaming is better or worse than the newer generation, of how they made games way better back in the day. But when you compare Super Mario Bros. to Mario Galaxy, you might say that this new age is doing just fine. And it wasn't until just recently that I realized what the problem was; games may be getting better, they may be learning from the past generations and building on them, but the game makers aren't. They'll happily gut the policies that made them hits in favor of new policies. Then again, sometimes these new things are even better. I'd rather not choose between one or the other. And the thing is, I shouldn't have to. Developers should be smart enough to keep those things that made them great, while still making new good decisions. So, with that in mind, here's a list of things, old and new, that companies should keep around.
OLD: Arcades.
They may seem antiquated now that everyone owns a $400 gaming machine, but it used to be that a handful of quarters could buy you an evening of fun with your friends. Those days seem to be over, but I don't see why. What arcades there still are are plenty of fun, and it's not like you can't make them nowadays. There's boatloads of cash to be made on a Devil May Cry arcade game, and it's a good way to get your brand out there.
NEW: Backwards compatibility.
Aside from Nintendo's handhelds, backwards compatibility wasn't a thing until the sixth generation of consoles, when the PS2 took advantage of its revolutionary disc format to allow people to play their old PS1 games. Sony and Microsoft both used it for one generation, received praise and critical acclaim, and then said 'screw it' and got rid of it. Nintendo still does it, but it should really be a more widely accepted system. I love it. You love it. So why not?
OLD: Colour.
Ironically, the consoles with the smaller color scheme resulted in more vibrant and colorful games. (I know Nintendo still has bright colors, but I hardly need to sing their praises in every post I make.) Nowadays, you have gray and brown shooters, green and brown platformers (because that's basically what Uncharted is), and other examples I can't think of. It's not quite as big a problem as some have let on - if there's one thing you can rely on from Square Enix, it's a vibrant color scheme - but it's still a big increase from the 0% of games that had dull, muted tones 'back in my day'. There's no reason, so we should evacuate it.
NEW: Independent titles.
Back in the NES days, when people were still learning how to make videogames larger than one screen, there was no big budget or independent, since there was really only so much you could invest into an 8-bit game. Nowadays, with triple-A titles driving up the production costs, it's refreshing to see a Bastion or a Fez squeeze through the woodworks. This is a clear good sign of a broadening industry, and something that's here to stay. Well done, industry.
There's more, but I'm lazy, so I'll let all you people fill in the list. Try to be unbiased. That way, you'll know you're better than the OP.
Bonus round: +2 internets to somebody who can vividly remember the first console wars. Not Nintendo v. Sega, the earlier one.
OLD: Arcades.
They may seem antiquated now that everyone owns a $400 gaming machine, but it used to be that a handful of quarters could buy you an evening of fun with your friends. Those days seem to be over, but I don't see why. What arcades there still are are plenty of fun, and it's not like you can't make them nowadays. There's boatloads of cash to be made on a Devil May Cry arcade game, and it's a good way to get your brand out there.
NEW: Backwards compatibility.
Aside from Nintendo's handhelds, backwards compatibility wasn't a thing until the sixth generation of consoles, when the PS2 took advantage of its revolutionary disc format to allow people to play their old PS1 games. Sony and Microsoft both used it for one generation, received praise and critical acclaim, and then said 'screw it' and got rid of it. Nintendo still does it, but it should really be a more widely accepted system. I love it. You love it. So why not?
OLD: Colour.
Ironically, the consoles with the smaller color scheme resulted in more vibrant and colorful games. (I know Nintendo still has bright colors, but I hardly need to sing their praises in every post I make.) Nowadays, you have gray and brown shooters, green and brown platformers (because that's basically what Uncharted is), and other examples I can't think of. It's not quite as big a problem as some have let on - if there's one thing you can rely on from Square Enix, it's a vibrant color scheme - but it's still a big increase from the 0% of games that had dull, muted tones 'back in my day'. There's no reason, so we should evacuate it.
NEW: Independent titles.
Back in the NES days, when people were still learning how to make videogames larger than one screen, there was no big budget or independent, since there was really only so much you could invest into an 8-bit game. Nowadays, with triple-A titles driving up the production costs, it's refreshing to see a Bastion or a Fez squeeze through the woodworks. This is a clear good sign of a broadening industry, and something that's here to stay. Well done, industry.
There's more, but I'm lazy, so I'll let all you people fill in the list. Try to be unbiased. That way, you'll know you're better than the OP.
Bonus round: +2 internets to somebody who can vividly remember the first console wars. Not Nintendo v. Sega, the earlier one.