Where are all the GAMERS?

Where have all the REAL gamers gone too?

What about those of you who played Tribes 1 before life got too busy to do so? What about the people who modded Morrowind into something completely divine and unforgettable? What about the people in UO who made PvP into an ARTFORM?

What ever happened to MY GENERATION OF GAMERS?

That is the sort I come from. My first 2 games for my first PC were UO and Starsiege Tribes. Yet today, and you can glance at my reviews for reference, I give some pretty serious reviews. Sure, I'm not perfect, but I think it's pretty much agreed upon by anyone worth their weight in the gaming world that Oblivion was garbage compared to Morrowind, and that Tribes 1 was light years better than Tribes 2 as well a most FPS games currently on the market. UO in 1999 had better PvP than most PvP in MMOGs today. I not only believe this crap I say periodically, but I lived it. I was there the entire time. Unlike these fools, I've been playing since the purple box (REAL gamers know what im talking about).

So naturally when people say, "Oblivion was so much better than Morrowind because it has better graphics", or "Tribes 1 sucks because it doesnt have rockets" or "UO Sucks because you cant automate your PvP with scripts" or or or or etc etc etc etc it just keeps going right down the list; I get just a little bit upset about it.

GW EOTN added pretty much nothing to GW except for a few random skills and a bit more PvM. The "expension", if you would even call it that, is so trivial and worthless, and it's no different than EA offering a 14th Sims 2 expansion for $30 USD. How is one different from the other? It's not. It's one and the same.

Speaking of Sims 2, theres another kick-in-the-nuts... who in their right mind is going to release THAT MANY EXPANSIONS FOR JUST 1 GAME? And yet we nag and whine about it and THEY CONTINUE TO DO SO. "Talus! Why do they do that??" I'll tell you why... because there is currently an ENTIRE generation of kids that currently support them doing such.

The idiocy of the current generation of gamers is astounding. This isn't a flame. This is ELITISM, an elitism that exists in gaming because it's mandatory to do so, otherwise you get silly opinions from people gaming for a whole period of 1 year, and suddenly think they are all knowing enough to give their opinion when they really don't even have an opinion at all. How can you say Oblivion is better than Morrowind when its simply NOT? Who plays games for graphics?

You want to see good graphics? Logoff and GO OUTSIDE; great graphics, RL quality.

Im fed up with these newbie noobs lately. Yes, Newbie-Noobs. Something lower than a noob, a noob that is so clearly a noob that such must be expressed twice; once to define, and twice to clarify.

Feel free to report me for flaming, but that won't change the reality of this discussion.

Personally a "Real" gamer is people who enjoy gaming on every platform (I seriously find it hard to believe there isnt one game someone wouldn't play on each platform).

I find it that a gamer is someone who can look at a game and knows he or she is gonna enjoy the game without worrying what a reviewers opinion is, I think its the time when you started gaming is when people pick that trait up (mid 90's) since at a time we gamers only got to see pics of games while now and days people get spoiled with gameplay videos and high expectations.

Dude, I've been playing as long as you have and I have to say you are taking this stuff way to seriously. Yeah, I know, things have changed. I don't care for some of it either. I miss games like Bard's Tale and Ultima VIII and wish the teams that made them were still around.

I never played Tribes so I won't comment on that but I did play Ultima Online, Morrowind, and Oblivion. Morrowind is one of the most boring RPG's I have ever seen. Its the only "game" I've ever played that left me so depressed I couldn't muster up the motivation to load up a game I actually enjoyed. Oblivion is better, but only slightly. Every time I think about this I wish it was Obsidian that got the Fallout lisence instead of Bethesda.

Ultima Online doesn't have PvP. It never did. What is does have is player killing and griefing. People enjoy the PvP in other MMO's because those developers learned from the long list of things Origin/EA did wrong with Ultima Online and gave the players an experience where we feel like we have a chance.

You do have a point about graphics. I've never cared for this so called "next gen" stuff. Most of the levels I've seen have a molded plastic look to them and the characters look like wax museum rejects. Rock solid art direction is far more potent. In fact, it is so important that if it is done well you can get great looking pictures on a graphics card 1 or 2 generations old.

Personally, I blame the parents. I really do. It's their fault that there are all the stupid kids ruining it for the rest of us. I'll tell you why.

Nowadays, almost every kid has a PS2, and maybe a Wii. Let's suppose a boy named Tommy has one. Now, there's going to always be some stupid kid at school whose parents get him whatever he wants, because he's a spoilt little brat. He'll always be going on about how he killed a million people in San Andreas last night. Tommy hears this, thinks "This game is awesome!", and goes home & asks his parents to buy it. The parents, with my prior knowledge of the ratings system, buy the game for him. All of a sudden, Tommy thinks he's hardcore because he owns all the Grand Theft Auto games.

Then, one of the rich kids at school starts going on about how he has an Xbox 360, & how it's graphics, online & sound are so good. Tommy goes home and asks for a 360. Parents say it is too expensive. Tommy starts screaming & throwing a tantrum until his parents buy him a 360. His parents also buy him Gears of War, because the guy at EB said it was good. All of a sudden, gamers everywhere are having their online spoilt by millions of these little Tommy's who cry just because they can't see where the sniper is. And it's al the parents fault for not setting restrictions.

OK, that may have gone on for a bit, and probably wasn't factual, feel free to correct me. I agree with most of your points, graphics aren't everything, games were better back then... I feel old. :P I'm not going to argue about whether Oblivion is better than Morrowind, I've only ever played Oblivion. Now, just to prove some type of point, I'm going to tell you another thing. I'm 14. I own a Wii & a DS. I cold really only call myself a gamer for a year. Yet I have managed to do this whole thing without calling you a "L0lz n00b". Not all kid gamers are bad.

...Let's suppose a boy named Tommy has one. Now, there's going to always be some stupid kid at school whose parents get him whatever he wants, because he's a spoilt little brat. He'll always be going on about how he killed a million people in San Andreas last night. Tommy hears this, thinks "This game is awesome!", and goes home & asks his parents to buy it. The parents, with my prior knowledge of the ratings system, buy the game for him. All of a sudden, Tommy thinks he's hardcore because he owns all the Grand Theft Auto games.

Then, one of the rich kids at school starts going on about how he has an Xbox 360, & how it's graphics, online & sound are so good. Tommy goes home and asks for a 360. Parents say it is too expensive. Tommy starts screaming & throwing a tantrum until his parents buy him a 360. His parents also buy him Gears of War, because the guy at EB said it was good. All of a sudden, gamers everywhere are having their online spoilt by millions of these little Tommy's who cry just because they can't see where the sniper is. And it's al the parents fault for not setting restrictions...TheLordRagnarok

I totally agree.

Well said. But get off your ivory tower.

...People have an opinion regardless of how long they have been gaming or their age. Because you have been gaming since this "purple box" era, does not make you any more of a gamer than me, or anyone else. I still buy the console, buy the games, and enjoy them. If this does not make me a gamer, then i guess i will have to build a time machine go into the past and find me a "purple box".MLBknights58

Well, that's one opinion. But it does not underscore all the true hardcore gamers who actually appreciated good quality games and worked hard to excel at them. The fact that so many of you will buy crap games that are usually overhyped on either polished graphics or name recognition does not degate the fact that more and more people these days have an underdeveloped sense of what a quality game really is.

[QUOTE="MLBknights58"]...People have an opinion regardless of how long they have been gaming or their age. Because you have been gaming since this "purple box" era, does not make you any more of a gamer than me, or anyone else. I still buy the console, buy the games, and enjoy them. If this does not make me a gamer, then i guess i will have to build a time machine go into the past and find me a "purple box".EnigManic

Well, that's one opinion. But it does not underscore all the true hardcore gamers who actually appreciated good quality games and worked hard to excel at them. The fact that so many of you will buy crap games that are usually overhyped on either polished graphics or name recognition does not degate the fact that more and more people these days have an underdeveloped sense of what a quality game really is.

Ah. A very good point. But TC critisized the entire generation for their lack of knowledge in what actually is a "quality" game. The quality of the game is in the eyes of a gamer. That is how i see it. Rather than flame someone for buying what you or the community sees as a crappy game, why not just give your opinion, and recommend something you see more fit, not rant about how this entire generation is "newbie-noobs". As for the hardcore gamers who devoted themselves to the games back in the day, i could understand how todays gaming fads could upset them. I do understand that games back in the day were amazing, and i still actually play some of the higher praised titles on an emulator. BUT. I do strongly believe that Nostalgia plays a part in something when "hardcore gamers" from back in the NES and "purple box" days go on rants about how much better games in that day were then in this day and age.

...As for the hardcore gamers who devoted themselves to the games back in the day, i could understand how todays gaming fads could upset them. I do understand that games back in the day were amazing, and i still actually play some of the higher praised titles on an emulator. BUT. I do strongly believe that Nostalgia plays a part in something when "hardcore gamers" from back in the NES and "purple box" days go on rants about how much better games in that day were then in this day and age.MLBknights58

Well that is highly debatable. There have bben several threads posted recently which support my argument that developers put far less effort into games and yet people still buy them.

I think GTA4 and Dead Rising are perfect examples of this in two different respects. GTA4 lacked most of the features that made the series great. But the game sold on name recognition and unfair review scores. Dead Rising had the foundation to be a truly spectacular game. I love the premise and most of the gameplay. But it has some major flaws. Like the cheap respawn rate of the zombies and the tiny ingame text. (the hell was up with that anyway?)

It seems that developers today take advantage of the gamers. If early previews and marketing hype up a game, then people will buy it. Devs know this so they make a game just good enough to sell. They usually don't put the added time and effort into making a game great, just good enough to sell.

[QUOTE="MLBknights58"]...As for the hardcore gamers who devoted themselves to the games back in the day, i could understand how todays gaming fads could upset them. I do understand that games back in the day were amazing, and i still actually play some of the higher praised titles on an emulator. BUT. I do strongly believe that Nostalgia plays a part in something when "hardcore gamers" from back in the NES and "purple box" days go on rants about how much better games in that day were then in this day and age.EnigManic

Well that is highly debatable. There have bben several threads posted recently which support my argument that developers put far less effort into games and yet people still buy them.

I think GTA4 and Dead Rising are perfect examples of this in two different respects. GTA4 lacked most of the features that made the series great. But the game sold on name recognition and unfair review scores. Dead Rising had the foundation to be a truly spectacular game. I love the premise and most of the gameplay. But it has some major flaws. Like the cheap respawn rate of the zombies and the tiny ingame text. (the hell was up with that anyway?)

It seems that developers today take advantage of the gamers. If early previews and marketing hype up a game, then people will buy it. Devs know this so they make a game just good enough to sell. They usually don't put the added time and effort into making a game great, just good enough to sell.

Im fed up with these newbie noobs lately. Yes, Newbie-Noobs. Something lower than a noob, a noob that is so clearly a noob that such must be expressed twice; once to define, and twice to clarify. Talus057

Sorry man, I disagree, to me it has never been a better time to be a gamer. I play (and beat) a broad diversity of games and I just see the quality of games (not just graphics) increasing all the time.

If you define gamers as those who love a game so much that they modify it, there is an even larger mod community these days than way back when I used to make my own Doom levels -- hell many games these days include the ability to make your own game within the game.

It doesn't negate the fact that as far as the devs are concerned, gamers expect less these days. Rarely have I come across a "decent game" that I couldn't find major flaws in. After over 30 years of videogames, developers should know how to make a decent game. These days, it's all about graphics, hype, achievments or bragging rights, and aesthetics over inner quality.

I could write a few blogs citing several games that could have been much better if the devs had put just a little more time into them. Going back to the Dead Rising game, it truly is an excellant game with a terrific story. Unfortunately, most people don't get to fully understand that story unless they have HD tvs. The in-game text and dialog is so small, it's virtually impossible to read. I tried playing it on a 50-inch projection tv and I still couldn't read the dialog. And the respawn rate was rediculous.

We need to really think about what makes a game great, besides just the graphics and the story. In sandboxes, platformers and FPSs, the AI and the physics are very important. If the game has a strong story, then voice-acting and dialog are very important. RPGs are badly in need of innovation and originality. And overall, we need a lot less linear gameplay.

You can't seperate people into true gamer/noob gamer based on whether or not they know what "the purple box" was. That's rediculous. I probably wouldn't stand a chance against you if we were on a gaming Q&A, but I can hold my own in just about any gaming discussion. No, I don't know the original release date of the Atari 2600...and no, I don't know what a purple box is. Does that make me a non-gamer?

Tell me something, why can't the title of "gamer" be given to people of different generations? You can be considered a gamer of your generation, but I wouldn't be. However, I can be considered a gamer of MY generation, etc, etc. See my point? I'm not offended by what you said...I'm merely trying to get you to understand that people that grew up on the Atari are not gaming ELITE. Everyone who can form an honest opinion about a game and play through that game without it dictating their lives REGARDLESS of what society tells them is considered a gamer to me.

...Everyone who can form an honest opinion about a game and play through that game without it dictating their lives REGARDLESS of what society tells them is considered a gamer to me. edgewalker16

Based on your definition, gamers must be pretty lonely these days..

What about the people who modded Morrowind into something completely divine and unforgettable?

Talus057

I'm right here :)

...but I think it's pretty much agreed upon by anyone worth their weight in the gaming world that Oblivion was garbage compared to Morrowind,

"Oblivion was so much better than Morrowind because it has better graphics",

Talus057

Indeed Oblivion lost the magic of Morrowind, but the issue can be much discussed. To me, Oblivion was not better because of its graphics, but because of more freedom of action, horse riding and all that other cool new stuff that was less appreciated by the older lore fans. The probelm was that the same things that made it a better game also made it a worse game (like fast travel). In fact I would go as far as saying that Morrowind looked better than Oblivion. Morrowind captured the eye and wouldn't let go untill you explored what was around the next corner.

Who plays games for graphics?

Talus057

I do, among other reasons. And by the way, do you remember about the eye of the beholder? It doesn't matter if a gamer only played around for a day or even just one hour. If he pays and plays, he becomes a part of the gaming word, whether you want it or not. His opinion matters because he is the one who makes gaming possible. Your great gaming past is irrelevant.

You want to see good graphics? Logoff and GO OUTSIDE; great graphics, RL quality.

Talus057

Good advice. I'm already following it, limiting my game time and increasing my travel time.

However, I believe you don't understand how to some people a fake picture that looks good can be more interesting than the reality that looks great, because it can. It is vital to understand that in order to understand the hype. It's hard to explain if you don't get it and it would be a long story, but I believe it has something to do with the alternate reality - escapism. I'm an old gamer but to me graphics have been one of the most important things since the times I played SN.


By the way, professionals don't show their anger. Nooby-noobs do :)

It doesn't negate the fact that as far as the devs are concerned, gamers expect less these days. Rarely have I come across a "decent game" that I couldn't find major flaws in. After over 30 years of videogames, developers should know how to make a decent game. These days, it's all about graphics, hype, achievments or bragging rights, and aesthetics over inner quality.

I could write a few blogs citing several games that could have been much better if the devs had put just a little more time into them. Going back to the Dead Rising game, it truly is an excellant game with a terrific story. Unfortunately, most people don't get to fully understand that story unless they have HD tvs. The in-game text and dialog is so small, it's virtually impossible to read. I tried playing it on a 50-inch projection tv and I still couldn't read the dialog. And the respawn rate was rediculous.

We need to really think about what makes a game great, besides just the graphics and the story. In sandboxes, platformers and FPSs, the AI and the physics are very important. If the game has a strong story, then voice-acting and dialog are very important. RPGs are badly in need of innovation and originality. And overall, we need a lot less linear gameplay.

EnigManic

...Do you realise how complex, costly, and time-consuming making games has become over these few years even when you have teams reaching 100+. Yeah Dead Rising had really difficult to read text but I kind of doubt that it was as game-breaking as you say it is. I played it on a 27" standard definition tv from a good 6 to 8 feet away and yes it was hard to read but I was able to read it. I really don't know what to say about the respawn rate but that was the idea of the game to give the player the feeling of being overtaken by zombies. I found it quite effective and didn't have a problem with the game because of it. I also don't get this concept that gamers are accepting less and less in fact I find it quite the opposite, gamers seem to have gotten more and more demanding. They want more extra content to become available ASAP, more online functionality, etc.. From where I see it every aspect of games has constantly been improving from sound, music, voice-acting, stories, graphics, and yes even gameplay. Seriously I don't understand what people expect these developers to do with an 8-button controller with dual analog sticks an a d-pad. I mean it's not like each and every game can come up with something that's radically different all the time. Overall I think some people simply expect way too much from gaming and I think developers as a whole continually do a fantastic job at improving their craft and bringing compelling entertainment out.Archangel3371

There was no sensible reason to have such small text in DR. And the spawn rate was stupid. It's understandable that zombies from within the city could wander into the mall. But to clear an area, leave and then return to find it filled with zombies again? That's rediculous.

As for your other points, as intelligent as they may be -

Let me use GTA4 as an example, a game which has done so much damage to the gaming industry. The game was overly hyped prior to it's release by name recognition due to the series' large pre-existing fanbase as well as a large marketing campaign coupled with the arguably suspicious review scores.

You mention that gamers today are "more-demanding"? How so? From it's utter lack of features in comparison to previous GTA titles not to mention the significant technical problems in the PS3 port and the glitches in the 360 version, this game was a huge disappointment. Yet professional reviewers, suspiciously, all gave it tens, so everyone raced out to buy it, generating record-breaking sales. How much money did Rock* make off of that? Now compare their profits to the cost of making the game. They could easily have spent more time and money to retain some of the great features of San Andreas. But as I stated earlier, they did just enough to make the game marketable. And the fans ate it up.

One more thing, there's been several debates as of late comparing GTA4 to SR2. In a thread last night, a couple people posted that "GTA4 is a great game but I wish it had " -insert prominent features of SR2. What's more, after the game's release, half the people on these forums made several complaints about their disappointment with the game while many others acknowledged its flaws but still call it an incredible game. Why, because it has real nice graphics?

Lastly, most young gamers today don't have the first clue about the business side of video games, and so have no idea how bad they're getting ripped off. They enjoy the games as good as they are, without any comprehension that with the money developers make these days, they could spend the added time and resources to make them much better, but don't because they know they only need to make a game (this good) for people to buy it.

The bottom line is, as great as some games are due to current technology, gamers of this generation have lower standards as far as what high quality in a videogame is. They'll buy a game and love it despite all of its flaws, flaws that could easily have been avoided, play it out then spend another 50 or 60 bucks on the next glammed up terd of a game. They're getting hosed and don't even realize it.

By the way, professionals don't show their anger. Nooby-noobs do :)

Talus057

What more needs to be said?