My Retarded Theory
- Thread starter MarcusMang
- Start date
If they do a good job with any kind of new controller, I'll happily switch. As of yet, it has only simplified games...which I think is undesirable.
Well, I'm 16 and I never had a SNES or any of that sort. I mean I've gotten the remakes for the GBA and all so it's not like I've never played the classics
but...am I old or new. I suppose new, but not into the whole Wii thing. You know. YAY we're diffrent and can appeal to everyone type thing
but...am I old or new. I suppose new, but not into the whole Wii thing. You know. YAY we're diffrent and can appeal to everyone type thing
Not now though, if you were in the business (don't forget that gaming is a business) would you rather appeal to 8 million "hardcore" gamers or 30+ million people who only can play games for a small amount at a time? It's like asking if you would rather have a smaller pile of "hardcore"'s money or a giant pile or "casual" gamer's money. Also, I don't think that games are being dumbed down for a wider audience, developers are too concentrated on technology and not on making a fulfilling experience.badgersprite said:
I actually take offense to several of the points made in this thread so far.
I am an old school gamer. I'm 28, and was raised on NES and PS1, yet the greatest games I have ever played come from this generation or the last.
The quality of a game is not based on whether it's old school or new school, it's based on several factors, like presentation, pacing, game play, etc.
I think what the majority of us old school gamers complain about with the introduction of casual games and the new 'less is more' attitude is the following:
1. "Everyone's a Gamer" - People who have never played a true a video game in their life are calling themselves gamers now because they played Wii bowling for 10 minutes or own a Wii Fit. Not that being a gamer is an exclusive club, but we're just upset that we now have to add the word "hardcore" to our monikers in order to differentiate ourselves from the soccer moms and amateurs who don't know dick about gaming.
2. Complacency - Promising game companies see stuff like Pop Cap games or casual games on the Wii raking in millions and think... "hey why don't I do that, that's easier than appeasing these hardcore fans" and then we lose talented developers and studios to the almighty dollar, making top quality games all that more rare.
3. Lower Standards - In an effort to reach a broader audience, games are now easier. Every game has built in tutorial levels, scaling difficulties and are generally much less involving than their previous generation's counterparts. The emphasis of most of today's games is on 'exploration' or 'random generation' rather than presenting a challenge. An achievement doesn't mean as much when my 8 year old nephew has it too.
As for the hardcore gamers, we're not entirely blame free either. Someone already brought up Psychonauts, and it's not the only victim, as a game that tried something new but nobody bothered with it. I also think that for a lot of us our expectations out of games are way too high now. Many PS3 owners have certain expectations that games on their PS3 should look better than other games, and this raises the bar for development houses again. This further contributes to the 'complacency' aspect mentioned above.
So there's a lot of blame to be passed around here, but ultimately I feel that the two sides can co-exist, as the casual game gravy train is showing signs of being a fad, which it is, and the hardcore gamer is gradually opening up to accepting new things as well.
I am an old school gamer. I'm 28, and was raised on NES and PS1, yet the greatest games I have ever played come from this generation or the last.
The quality of a game is not based on whether it's old school or new school, it's based on several factors, like presentation, pacing, game play, etc.
I think what the majority of us old school gamers complain about with the introduction of casual games and the new 'less is more' attitude is the following:
1. "Everyone's a Gamer" - People who have never played a true a video game in their life are calling themselves gamers now because they played Wii bowling for 10 minutes or own a Wii Fit. Not that being a gamer is an exclusive club, but we're just upset that we now have to add the word "hardcore" to our monikers in order to differentiate ourselves from the soccer moms and amateurs who don't know dick about gaming.
2. Complacency - Promising game companies see stuff like Pop Cap games or casual games on the Wii raking in millions and think... "hey why don't I do that, that's easier than appeasing these hardcore fans" and then we lose talented developers and studios to the almighty dollar, making top quality games all that more rare.
3. Lower Standards - In an effort to reach a broader audience, games are now easier. Every game has built in tutorial levels, scaling difficulties and are generally much less involving than their previous generation's counterparts. The emphasis of most of today's games is on 'exploration' or 'random generation' rather than presenting a challenge. An achievement doesn't mean as much when my 8 year old nephew has it too.
As for the hardcore gamers, we're not entirely blame free either. Someone already brought up Psychonauts, and it's not the only victim, as a game that tried something new but nobody bothered with it. I also think that for a lot of us our expectations out of games are way too high now. Many PS3 owners have certain expectations that games on their PS3 should look better than other games, and this raises the bar for development houses again. This further contributes to the 'complacency' aspect mentioned above.
So there's a lot of blame to be passed around here, but ultimately I feel that the two sides can co-exist, as the casual game gravy train is showing signs of being a fad, which it is, and the hardcore gamer is gradually opening up to accepting new things as well.
I'm 13 and I HATE digital distrabution, not only can you not sell it if you have beaten the crap out of it, you can't lend it to a friend, and if you hardrive crashes or your computer crashes then oh well too bad you have to buy a new one. Digital distrabution is going to kill gaming, and the only way for to make me be on its side is if you get my $250 worth of Itunes music back.
just to add this as a side note. My PS2 has probably taken away a year of my life, and i enjoyed it. My 360 took away 2 years of my life and i want them back because they werent very pleasent. I don't get how the old consol was MUCH more enjoyable then any of the new ones. My PS3 even doesnt give me the joy of that ol' PS2.
just to add this as a side note. My PS2 has probably taken away a year of my life, and i enjoyed it. My 360 took away 2 years of my life and i want them back because they werent very pleasent. I don't get how the old consol was MUCH more enjoyable then any of the new ones. My PS3 even doesnt give me the joy of that ol' PS2.
Whoops... hit quote instead of edit.TPiddy said:I actually take offense to several of the points made in this thread so far.
I am an old school gamer. I'm 28, and was raised on NES and PS1, yet the greatest games I have ever played come from this generation or the last.
The quality of a game is not based on whether it's old school or new school, it's based on several factors, like presentation, pacing, game play, etc.
I think what the majority of us old school gamers complain about with the introduction of casual games and the new 'less is more' attitude is the following:
1. "Everyone's a Gamer" - People who have never played a true a video game in their life are calling themselves gamers now because they played Wii bowling for 10 minutes or own a Wii Fit. Not that being a gamer is an exclusive club, but we're just upset that we now have to add the word "hardcore" to our monikers in order to differentiate ourselves from the soccer moms and amateurs who don't know dick about gaming, but at the same time adding hardcore to our titles gives us the gamer geek stigma that should only be reserved for WoW players.
2. Complacency - Promising game companies see stuff like Pop Cap games or casual games on the Wii raking in millions and think... "hey why don't I do that, that's easier than appeasing these hardcore fans" and then we lose talented developers and studios to the almighty dollar, making top quality games all that more rare.
3. Lower Standards - In an effort to reach a broader audience, games are now easier. Every game has built in tutorial levels, scaling difficulties and are generally much less involving than their previous generation's counterparts. The emphasis of most of today's games is on 'exploration' or 'random generation' rather than presenting a challenge. An achievement doesn't mean as much when my 8 year old nephew has it too.
As for the hardcore gamers, we're not entirely blame free either. Someone already brought up Psychonauts, and it's not the only victim, as a game that tried something new but nobody bothered with it. I also think that for a lot of us our expectations out of games are way too high now. Many PS3 owners have certain expectations that games on their PS3 should look better than other games, and this raises the bar for development houses again. This further contributes to the 'complacency' aspect mentioned above.
So there's a lot of blame to be passed around here, but ultimately I feel that the two sides can co-exist, as the casual game gravy train is showing signs of being a fad, which it is, and the hardcore gamer is gradually opening up to accepting new things as well.
Yes the fact that I can buy my games in a more convinent manner will kill the entire industry. You are so right I am so sorry.Supreme Unleaded said:
Reselling old games is rather questionable. It cuts developers out of the profits. You save a few bucks, and then get crappy games. Even without Digital Distribution, that's where games are heading. Also, you apparently haven't used Steam, because you can download a game you have bought infinite times, on any number of computers. If a friend wants to try the game, just sign on to your Steam Account on there computer. You can convince me that non-digital distribution isn't outdated if you can re-imburse me for the many games Ive had scratched, lost the discs for, etc.Supreme Unleaded said:
Fear of the unknown is a powerful thing that can make people do or say all manner of retarded things.
COBBLERS I SAY! It was the games that we older gamers played that were innovative, we want to play such things as these again!
It is the newer generation of games that are bland and formulaic without any aspirations of even trying to think outside the box.
and if this is about stuff like the Wii, then there's a damned good reason why that is habitually slated and that is because it stinks and doesn't even forfill (sp?) it's primary goal of being a controller and the games are on par with those i used to type out in basic in the back on Crash magazine.
It is the newer generation of games that are bland and formulaic without any aspirations of even trying to think outside the box.
and if this is about stuff like the Wii, then there's a damned good reason why that is habitually slated and that is because it stinks and doesn't even forfill (sp?) it's primary goal of being a controller and the games are on par with those i used to type out in basic in the back on Crash magazine.
You know, your theory reminds me of something.
"This is the worst generation ever". Every generation, the new generation is the worst. Even I've been accused of saying this. I look at the Miley Cyrus and the Jonas Brothers and the 10 year olds dressing like sluts and think "This is the worst generation ever
"This is the worst generation ever". Every generation, the new generation is the worst. Even I've been accused of saying this. I look at the Miley Cyrus and the Jonas Brothers and the 10 year olds dressing like sluts and think "This is the worst generation ever
I personally don't like the idea of Digital distribution...
But for some people it's fine (just not me)
But for some people it's fine (just not me)
Nintendo have demonstrated with the Wii along with the barrage of massively popular 'casual games' that the popularization of gaming comes hand in hand with the loss of sophistication and depth. The 'core gamers' of yesterday are the 'hardcore gamers' of today and the 'niche gamers' of tomorrow, while the 'casual gamers' of today are the 'mainstream gamers' of tomorrow.
Whether you see it as good or bad, this is a possible, and in my opinion likely shift in the future of gaming. The truly deep and creative - and by that I mean challenging - does not act as a representative of any medium, exceptions notwithstanding. Easy, simple and accessible is what sells to the masses, and something cannot be mainstream without selling to the masses.
Rather than 'hardcore gamer', I prefer to describe myself as a game enthusiast. I have a good share of enthusiasm towards games not only as an entertainment medium but also a creative one. It is only natural that I feel that what I love about games is being threatened by the success of 'casual gaming'. I believe many of the vaguely-defined 'hardcore gamers' feel the same. However, this doesn't mean I hate the Wii or that I hate casual games, but they lack the sophistication, challenge and depth that I am often looking for in the games I want to play. And maybe that is what offends the so-called 'hardcore gamer', that the lack of sophistication is so popular, that the things we love about our games are not popular and mainstream. I can enjoy both worlds, and no doubt other gamers can, and while I cheer for variety, I can't help but feel that the 'casual world' is slowly gaining weight while my world is losing it.
As a more sophisticated consumer, it makes sense that we will not be drawn by the kind of gimmicks that speak to a more casual crowd. We might even find such gaming gimmicks upsetting, just like we might get upset by popular but cheap, shallow crap films. Maybe some people get overworked/passionate about it, but the hardcore gamer is hardly known for his mildness.
As far as digital distribution goes, I find that it might be one of the best things that happened to 'my world' of gaming. It provides an easier method of distribution of titles from indie and other small developers - the kind of developer that has more creative freedom than the mainstream/AAA developer that needs to make sure the millions of dollars invested in his game are returned by as many sales as possible.
Whether you see it as good or bad, this is a possible, and in my opinion likely shift in the future of gaming. The truly deep and creative - and by that I mean challenging - does not act as a representative of any medium, exceptions notwithstanding. Easy, simple and accessible is what sells to the masses, and something cannot be mainstream without selling to the masses.
Rather than 'hardcore gamer', I prefer to describe myself as a game enthusiast. I have a good share of enthusiasm towards games not only as an entertainment medium but also a creative one. It is only natural that I feel that what I love about games is being threatened by the success of 'casual gaming'. I believe many of the vaguely-defined 'hardcore gamers' feel the same. However, this doesn't mean I hate the Wii or that I hate casual games, but they lack the sophistication, challenge and depth that I am often looking for in the games I want to play. And maybe that is what offends the so-called 'hardcore gamer', that the lack of sophistication is so popular, that the things we love about our games are not popular and mainstream. I can enjoy both worlds, and no doubt other gamers can, and while I cheer for variety, I can't help but feel that the 'casual world' is slowly gaining weight while my world is losing it.
As a more sophisticated consumer, it makes sense that we will not be drawn by the kind of gimmicks that speak to a more casual crowd. We might even find such gaming gimmicks upsetting, just like we might get upset by popular but cheap, shallow crap films. Maybe some people get overworked/passionate about it, but the hardcore gamer is hardly known for his mildness.
As far as digital distribution goes, I find that it might be one of the best things that happened to 'my world' of gaming. It provides an easier method of distribution of titles from indie and other small developers - the kind of developer that has more creative freedom than the mainstream/AAA developer that needs to make sure the millions of dollars invested in his game are returned by as many sales as possible.
I just want games that are not gimmicks... but I suppose by those bland, boring gimmicky games existing, those who play them want to play "real" games.
Some of them will wait for the good stuff to come to them, some of them will search for classics like Max Payne and Half-Life and some of them will be content with that gimmicky slop.
Some of them will wait for the good stuff to come to them, some of them will search for classics like Max Payne and Half-Life and some of them will be content with that gimmicky slop.
