...Advances? Modern advances? As in, more than just graphics? Well, okay, I suppose there has been a (very hit-or-miss) general improvement in sound quality, and no one who tried online gaming in the 80's or 90's would dispute improvements in netcode. And modding is probably a lot easier now. But other than that...
System Shock 2 vs Bioshock?
Alpha Centauri vs Beyond Earth?
Fallout 2 vs Fallout 3?
Thief: The Dark Project vs Thief: SCC?
Civ 4 vs Civ 5?
Maybe it's just me, but I don't think stripping out a game's depth and complexity and prettying it up constitute "advances".
Let's look at a more recent example: X-Com vs XCOM. Only a dyed-in-the-wool hardliner who followed Enemy Unknown's development (and played the game) would claim it was a cynical cash-in on the name. It was, very clearly, a labor of love from someone who deeply enjoyed the original game and wanted to bring it to modern audiences. But the update cost us the tactical depth afforded by time units, twice the number of stats, actual ammo management (including relay tossing ammo to your one rocketeer), different types of ammunition for the same weapon, a sufficiently wide range of weapon and armor values that you could send in low psi-strength troops, confident that your autocannons couldn't hurt their friends in flying suits even if they got mind-controlled, different armor strengths at different locations (a grenade rolled at someone's feet isn't going to damage their head, after all), armor ablation (focus enough laser rifle fire on a chryssalid, and that front armor WILL evaporate), and general equipment management (I once had to defend a base with nothing but boatloads of ammunition, smoke grenades and stun rods). And that doesn't apply only to your side, either- it's darned hard to be scared of a chyrssalid that can only kill one member of your squad per turn.
This is not to say that UFO Defense was perfect; the interface could've done with an update, to be certain, the bugs (though easily enough avoidable) were a constant nuisance until you learned them, the 80-item limit (what, you think I left a base undefended save for smoke grenades and stun rods on purpose?) was long out-of-date, and much of the balance was hilariously bad (did anyone ever make much use of heavy lasers?). But as far as I (and many others) am concerned, too many babies were thrown out with the bathwater.
In summary: given that much of modern design seems to stem from the idea that a game that requires reading a manual to play isn't worth making, I'm closer to saying that modern games are no longer enjoyable.
System Shock 2 vs Bioshock?
Alpha Centauri vs Beyond Earth?
Fallout 2 vs Fallout 3?
Thief: The Dark Project vs Thief: SCC?
Civ 4 vs Civ 5?
Maybe it's just me, but I don't think stripping out a game's depth and complexity and prettying it up constitute "advances".
Let's look at a more recent example: X-Com vs XCOM. Only a dyed-in-the-wool hardliner who followed Enemy Unknown's development (and played the game) would claim it was a cynical cash-in on the name. It was, very clearly, a labor of love from someone who deeply enjoyed the original game and wanted to bring it to modern audiences. But the update cost us the tactical depth afforded by time units, twice the number of stats, actual ammo management (including relay tossing ammo to your one rocketeer), different types of ammunition for the same weapon, a sufficiently wide range of weapon and armor values that you could send in low psi-strength troops, confident that your autocannons couldn't hurt their friends in flying suits even if they got mind-controlled, different armor strengths at different locations (a grenade rolled at someone's feet isn't going to damage their head, after all), armor ablation (focus enough laser rifle fire on a chryssalid, and that front armor WILL evaporate), and general equipment management (I once had to defend a base with nothing but boatloads of ammunition, smoke grenades and stun rods). And that doesn't apply only to your side, either- it's darned hard to be scared of a chyrssalid that can only kill one member of your squad per turn.
This is not to say that UFO Defense was perfect; the interface could've done with an update, to be certain, the bugs (though easily enough avoidable) were a constant nuisance until you learned them, the 80-item limit (what, you think I left a base undefended save for smoke grenades and stun rods on purpose?) was long out-of-date, and much of the balance was hilariously bad (did anyone ever make much use of heavy lasers?). But as far as I (and many others) am concerned, too many babies were thrown out with the bathwater.
In summary: given that much of modern design seems to stem from the idea that a game that requires reading a manual to play isn't worth making, I'm closer to saying that modern games are no longer enjoyable.
