Things Older Games Got Right

[Trunkage]

Non-voiced characters in RPGs: Don't give some bullshit about how "we've come too far", if you have to do any guesswork on dialogue THE SYSTEM HAS FAILED. And yes, this includes anything from Mass Effect to Alpha Protocal. I do not accept the idea I should have to make a choice while having to guess what the fucking choice is.

RPGs where my character isn't already decided by the developers: I play RPGs to play as different characters with differing histories, personalities and skills. Not different flavours of the same retarded twat. Yes, it's hard to code and design well. Boo hoo developers. Baldur's Gate, Fallout 2 and PLanescape: Torment managed to do things in the 90s with absolute shit tech that you can't with today's technology and a vastly bigger budget, and quite often the AI even manages to be more intelligent (after all, it doesn't mindless attack every blind, crippled, elderly, mentally retarded bandit that so much as happens to be on the other side of the map, which says more the "AI" of modern "RPGs" than it does games made in the 90s that in some cases, had AI that couldn't fucking open doors).

Okay, So I really don't get the love for the old written out dialogue systems of Baulders Gate and Fallout. They have exactly the same problem as Fallout 4s sarcastic response. You have no ability to control how sarcastic it is. It's even worse as sometime you can't tell the tone or they have to overemphasise the tone making it sounds silly. I also seem to remember that the specific words you selected were changed or added to frequently. I definitely remember it happening in Wasteland 2, which I played after Fallout 4. And I found it more immersion breaking, and I think it was because people keep thinking this written is he better way so I tried it and it failed. I couldn't finish the game

In Baulders Gate you are the chosen one whose been hidden away so bad guys can't find them. That history doesn't change not matter what skills you pick.. In fallout your a vault dweller trying to find a chip. They gave you backgrounds of the character you are playing. Because if you have been alive for 18 years, you will have a past. Both backgrounds shaped the story just like Fallout 4. You never got to play "your" character in those old game, they hand held you just like today. As for skills, I like that Bethsheda literally lets you play how you want. You can be a sneaky tank or a magical archer. But there are also games like pillars of eternity, dragon age and mass effect that you have your skills restricted. Now I understand you want to play a certain type of game, so don't support games you didn't like. I like and see the benefits of both ways.

 

[FPLOON]

It's possible to unlock everything within the game itself... and all the "expansions" did was add even more shit to unlock because it wasn't just handed to you with a drop of the dolla-dolla-make-ya-holla method...

Other than that, unintended intended replayability TO THE EXTREME!

 

[Lindale FF]

Do you really think Steam is going to go down though?

No. I am saying a what if scenario.

 

[step1999]

Not true. Steam Offline Mode lets you play steam games without connecting to a server indefinitely. The only games on steam which you have to be online for are online multiplayer games (obviously) and games with other DRM added.

Obviously, Skyrim must be one of those DRM games. Steam did ask me to login, just to play Skyrim, which is a single-player game. In that case, the point I made about always-online DRM still stands.

Googled it, and an article by Engadget confirms that was added by Bethesda in a patch which also disabled use of certain mods for some reason.

 

[Overusedname]

To sum it up in one word: Focus.

Games feel the need to be so many things at once. You can't just be a pure FPS, you need unlockable RPG content. You can't have turn-based strategy or JRPGs anymore, needs more action and Quick Time Events. You can't have a single player action game without spending 5 months half-assing an online multiplayer mode that will die out in less than half a year. Not every game needs to be 10,000 things all at once. That focus was a good thing. From Snes to Ps2 I feel like that era of about 15 years was a very good year for polish and quality, just because games were allowed to focus on their core ideas and refine the hell out of them.

Some of these packaged deals end up very fun (like Dark Souls) but not every game needs to mash elements together in a clumsy attempt to reach a mass market. It's a waste of resources at best, and an active detriment to a game's success at worst.