Are video games getting worse?

[QUOTE="seanmcloughlin"]

[QUOTE="Big_Red_Button"]

Nothing wrong with those individual gameplay mechanics.

My biggest problem is with the regenerating shield and general lack of challenge. That's the crap in every game, and that's the crap making games worse.

mems_1224

Shield? yeah I agree, it sucks and doesn't work right in the game

Challenge? Try 1999 mode instead of playing on normal and saying it's too easy

I think it's just a case of "I don't like the game and I have no idea why everyone else loves it" 

I feel the same about MGS4 around here :P

[QUOTE="Jebus213"]

[QUOTE="mems_1224"]whats the difference? Its still a video game isn't it? It still has a single player and multiplayer right? So by your logic shouldnt both of them be good?mems_1224

The SP is just as good the MP then.

I enjoy making my own missions. There's a lot to do in Arma.

Then stop playing on easy-regular mode.

[QUOTE="ReadingRainbow4"]

I think the two most useful abilites have been devils kiss and posession for the turrets and robots.

Charge is also good apparently, alot of these abilities feel like filler for the most part.

the_bi99man

After a few playthroughs, I've found that Devil's Kiss and Posession are by far the most useful. But most of the others are still quite useful, for a different style of play. Murder of Crows is the only one I've found to be next to useless. I wasn't a big fan of Undertow, at first, either. But it became invaluable in the final fight. Those damn rocket soldiers just have so much armor, and take so much damage. Much more time effective to just use Undertow and throw them right off the ship.

I hate those fvcking bastards.

I still need to take the siren out, I've been stuck on her. the 3rd part of the fight.

[QUOTE="ReadingRainbow4"]

I think the two most useful abilites have been devils kiss and posession for the turrets and robots.

Charge is also good apparently, alot of these abilities feel like filler for the most part.

the_bi99man

After a few playthroughs, I've found that Devil's Kiss and Posession are by far the most useful. But most of the others are still quite useful, for a different style of play. Murder of Crows is the only one I've found to be next to useless. I wasn't a big fan of Undertow, at first, either. But it became invaluable in the final fight. Those damn rocket soldiers just have so much armor, and take so much damage. Much more time effective to just use Undertow and throw them right off the ship.

When you upgrade it a bit, Murder of Crows is actually great. It has a nice stun and can get you out of tough situations. It has a great range too.

[QUOTE="seanmcloughlin"]

[QUOTE="Jebus213"]

 

Arma is a completely different type of game.

Jebus213

Nice cop out. 

Let's treat a game that has been all about it's MP component for years that just recently added an SP component to another game that has been all about it's MP that also has a crap SP

BF has been about SP and MP since BC1.

[QUOTE="seanmcloughlin"]

[QUOTE="Jebus213"]

 

Arma is a completely different type of game.

Jebus213

Nice cop out. 

Let's treat a game that has been all about it's MP component for years that just recently added an SP component to another game that has been all about it's MP that also has a crap SP

BF has been about SP and MP since BC1.

Which in the grand scheme of BF is still "recent" 

it staretd as a MP experience only so you should always be wary of a sudden introduction of SP into games like that. 

Sure BF3s campaign sucked a big fat D but I couldn't care less cos I paid for MP

[QUOTE="ReadingRainbow4"]

I used the water one to push a handy man off the level. That pretty much concluded it's use.

actually I think I somehow got him to jump off the level. I was happy too because that asshole was really driving me up the wall on Hard.

seanmcloughlin

They're a pain in the ass anyway, far too agile for giant metal aging bald dudes lol

Agreed. They kind of go against the tried and true video game logic of "bigger, stronger enemies are slower". They're huge, ridiculously strong, and also by far the fastest, hardest to hit enemies in the game. Almost totally overwhelming, every time one shows up. Especially since shock jockey doesn't even stun them, like it does to everyone else. That said, I still beat the game on 1999 mode, and didn't die in any of the Handyman fights. 

[QUOTE="Jebus213"]

[QUOTE="seanmcloughlin"]

Nice cop out. 

Let's treat a game that has been all about it's MP component for years that just recently added an SP component to another game that has been all about it's MP that also has a crap SP

mems_1224

BF has been about SP and MP since BC1.

I wouldn't say tacked on, Bad Company 1 and 2's campaigns were actually enjoyable. It was BF3 that actually had the horrible campaign.

[QUOTE="mems_1224"][QUOTE="Jebus213"]

 

The SP is just as good the MP then.

 

I enjoy making my own missions. There's a lot to do in Arma.

Jebus213

Then stop playing on easy-regular mode.

[QUOTE="mems_1224"][QUOTE="Jebus213"]

 

BF has been about SP and MP since BC1.

XVision84

I wouldn't say tacked on, Bad Company 1 and 2's campaigns were actually enjoyable. It was BF3 that actually had the horrible campaign.

[QUOTE="Big_Red_Button"]

Nothing wrong with those individual gameplay mechanics.

My biggest problem is with the regenerating shield and general lack of challenge. That's the crap in every game, and that's the crap making games worse.

seanmcloughlin

Shield? yeah I agree, it sucks and doesn't work right in the game

Challenge? Try 1999 mode instead of playing on normal and saying it's too easy

I did play on 1999.

I hope you aren't SERIOUSLY calling 1999 mode challenging.

STALKER on Master difficulty, that's a challenge. System Shock 2 with the difficulty turned up is a challenge. The campaign in any Doom / Quake / Wolfenstein game is a challenge with the difficulty turned up.

1999 mode is "spend slightly longer behind cover and use more ammo that you never run out of."

It doesn't take more skill, it just takes more time.

[QUOTE="seanmcloughlin"]

[QUOTE="Big_Red_Button"]

Nothing wrong with those individual gameplay mechanics.

My biggest problem is with the regenerating shield and general lack of challenge. That's the crap in every game, and that's the crap making games worse.

Big_Red_Button

Shield? yeah I agree, it sucks and doesn't work right in the game

Challenge? Try 1999 mode instead of playing on normal and saying it's too easy

I did play on 1999.

I hope you aren't SERIOUSLY calling 1999 mode challenging.

STALKER on Master difficulty, that's a challenge. System Shock 2 with the difficulty turned up is a challenge. The campaign in any Doom / Quake / Wolfenstein game is a challenge with the difficulty turned up.

1999 mode is "spend slightly longer behind cover and use more ammo that you never run out of."

It doesn't take more skill, it just takes more time.

I find hard makes many of the enemies bullet sponges, which I'm not a fan of.

But I have been flushed out of cover.

[QUOTE="seanmcloughlin"]

[QUOTE="Big_Red_Button"]

Nothing wrong with those individual gameplay mechanics.

My biggest problem is with the regenerating shield and general lack of challenge. That's the crap in every game, and that's the crap making games worse.

Big_Red_Button

Shield? yeah I agree, it sucks and doesn't work right in the game

Challenge? Try 1999 mode instead of playing on normal and saying it's too easy

I did play on 1999.

I hope you aren't SERIOUSLY calling 1999 mode challenging.

STALKER on Master difficulty, that's a challenge. System Shock 2 with the difficulty turned up is a challenge. The campaign in any Doom / Quake / Wolfenstein game is a challenge with the difficulty turned up.

1999 mode is "spend slightly longer behind cover and use more ammo that you never run out of."

It doesn't take more skill, it just takes more time.

[QUOTE="seanmcloughlin"]

[QUOTE="Big_Red_Button"]

Nothing wrong with those individual gameplay mechanics.

My biggest problem is with the regenerating shield and general lack of challenge. That's the crap in every game, and that's the crap making games worse.

Big_Red_Button

Shield? yeah I agree, it sucks and doesn't work right in the game

Challenge? Try 1999 mode instead of playing on normal and saying it's too easy

I did play on 1999.

I hope you aren't SERIOUSLY calling 1999 mode challenging.

STALKER on Master difficulty, that's a challenge. System Shock 2 with the difficulty turned up is a challenge. The campaign in any Doom / Quake / Wolfenstein game is a challenge with the difficulty turned up.

1999 mode is "spend slightly longer behind cover and use more ammo that you never run out of."

It doesn't take more skill, it just takes more time.

oh, you're one of THOSE people. A person still stuck in the past of videogames frowning on everything that happens recently.

If you think newer games are bad then don't play then, go back to nostalgia ville

[QUOTE="the_bi99man"]

[QUOTE="ReadingRainbow4"]

I think the two most useful abilites have been devils kiss and posession for the turrets and robots.

Charge is also good apparently, alot of these abilities feel like filler for the most part.

ReadingRainbow4

After a few playthroughs, I've found that Devil's Kiss and Posession are by far the most useful. But most of the others are still quite useful, for a different style of play. Murder of Crows is the only one I've found to be next to useless. I wasn't a big fan of Undertow, at first, either. But it became invaluable in the final fight. Those damn rocket soldiers just have so much armor, and take so much damage. Much more time effective to just use Undertow and throw them right off the ship.

I hate those fvcking bastards.

I still need to take the siren out, I've been stuck on her. the 3rd part of the fight.

Is her constant ressurrecting of soldiers getting you down? In case you didn't know already, if you kill them with Devil's Kiss, they burn up, and she can't rez them. The strategy I found that turns the siren fights from "overwhelming" to "almost a cakewalk", is to just start the fight by chasing her around, and spamming her soldiers  with charged up devils kiss traps as soon as she rezzes them. After a few batches of dudes, they're all burned up, and she has no one left to rez. Then you just sit back and shoot her.

Also, the Storm hat, and Blood for Salts shirt, are both a huge help. 

[QUOTE="evildead6789"][QUOTE="PhazonBlazer"]

The majority of people seem to enjoy it so I'd say it's pretty good.

millerlight89

Who said i was excited, nothing really excited me anymore since skyrim, dark souls and crysis 2. It's just something that might be good, but excited , no. Allthough you never know, now and then some game surprises you.

But bioshock infinite is certainly not it, pure crap that one, off course if you're still a young gamer , you don't know any better. Just like you think french fries is the best food you ever tasted.

[QUOTE="Jebus213"]

[QUOTE="seanmcloughlin"]

Nice cop out. 

Let's treat a game that has been all about it's MP component for years that just recently added an SP component to another game that has been all about it's MP that also has a crap SP

seanmcloughlin

BF has been about SP and MP since BC1.

Which in the grand scheme of BF is still "recent" 

it staretd as a MP experience only so you should always be wary of a sudden introduction of SP into games like that. 

Sure BF3s campaign sucked a big fat D but I couldn't care less cos I paid for MP

It isn't recent. BF has had an SP campaign since BF2: Modern Combat.

I don't call 8 years "recent" and BC1 came out a long time ago.

[QUOTE="seanmcloughlin"]

[QUOTE="Big_Red_Button"]

Nothing wrong with those individual gameplay mechanics.

My biggest problem is with the regenerating shield and general lack of challenge. That's the crap in every game, and that's the crap making games worse.

Big_Red_Button

Shield? yeah I agree, it sucks and doesn't work right in the game

Challenge? Try 1999 mode instead of playing on normal and saying it's too easy

I did play on 1999.

I hope you aren't SERIOUSLY calling 1999 mode challenging.

STALKER on Master difficulty, that's a challenge. System Shock 2 with the difficulty turned up is a challenge. The campaign in any Doom / Quake / Wolfenstein game is a challenge with the difficulty turned up.

1999 mode is "spend slightly longer behind cover and use more ammo that you never run out of."

It doesn't take more skill, it just takes more time.

SNIPER's got some competition it would seem.

[QUOTE="ReadingRainbow4"]

[QUOTE="the_bi99man"]

After a few playthroughs, I've found that Devil's Kiss and Posession are by far the most useful. But most of the others are still quite useful, for a different style of play. Murder of Crows is the only one I've found to be next to useless. I wasn't a big fan of Undertow, at first, either. But it became invaluable in the final fight. Those damn rocket soldiers just have so much armor, and take so much damage. Much more time effective to just use Undertow and throw them right off the ship.

the_bi99man

I hate those fvcking bastards.

I still need to take the siren out, I've been stuck on her. the 3rd part of the fight.

Is her constant ressurrecting of soldiers getting you down? In case you didn't know already, if you kill them with Devil's Kiss, they burn up, and she can't rez them. The strategy I found that turns the siren fights from "overwhelming" to "almost a cakewalk", is to just start the fight by chasing her around, and spamming her soldiers with charged up devils kiss traps as soon as she rezzes them. After a few batches of dudes, they're all burned up, and she has no one left to rez. Then you just sit back and shoot her.

Also, the Storm hat, and Blood for Salts shirt, are both a huge help.

Yeah I thought about going back to devils kiss.

I was trying to get the drop on her with Charge because apparently you can take her out in 10 seconds if you time it right, but It doesn't seem to be doing much.

Where is blood for salts? all I have is coat of harms.

[QUOTE="Jebus213"]

[QUOTE="mems_1224"] No, it isn't. The single player is pretty bad, the AI barely existsmems_1224

Then stop playing on easy-regular mode.

So the AI diffulty and skill levels mean nothing now? mhm...

[QUOTE="seanmcloughlin"]

[QUOTE="Big_Red_Button"]

Nothing wrong with those individual gameplay mechanics.

My biggest problem is with the regenerating shield and general lack of challenge. That's the crap in every game, and that's the crap making games worse.

Big_Red_Button

Shield? yeah I agree, it sucks and doesn't work right in the game

Challenge? Try 1999 mode instead of playing on normal and saying it's too easy

I did play on 1999.

I hope you aren't SERIOUSLY calling 1999 mode challenging.

STALKER on Master difficulty, that's a challenge. System Shock 2 with the difficulty turned up is a challenge. The campaign in any Doom / Quake / Wolfenstein game is a challenge with the difficulty turned up.

1999 mode is "spend slightly longer behind cover and use more ammo that you never run out of."

It doesn't take more skill, it just takes more time.

[QUOTE="mems_1224"][QUOTE="Jebus213"]

 

Then stop playing on easy-regular mode.

Jebus213

So the AI diffulty and skill levels mean nothing now? mhm...

Sounds like even at higher difficulties the AI is still crappy

[QUOTE="mems_1224"][QUOTE="Jebus213"]

 

Then stop playing on easy-regular mode.

Jebus213

So the AI diffulty and skill levels mean nothing now? mhm...

[QUOTE="Jebus213"]

[QUOTE="mems_1224"] Bad logic. Bumping up the difficulty isn't going to make your AI teammates any less stupid. The single player in Arma 2 is really bad, just because you enjoy it doesn't make it good. It sounds like you're holding the games to different standards because you like one and dont like the other. lostrib

So the AI diffulty and skill levels mean nothing now? mhm...

Sounds like even at higher difficulties the AI is still crappy

[QUOTE="seanmcloughlin"]

[QUOTE="Jebus213"]

 

BF has been about SP and MP since BC1.

Jebus213

Which in the grand scheme of BF is still "recent" 

it staretd as a MP experience only so you should always be wary of a sudden introduction of SP into games like that. 

Sure BF3s campaign sucked a big fat D but I couldn't care less cos I paid for MP

It isn't recent. BF has had an SP campaign since BF2: Modern Combat.

I don't call 8 years "recent" and BC1 came out a long time ago.

You just said it only had SP since BC1 and now you're saying BF2? 

[QUOTE="Big_Red_Button"]

[QUOTE="seanmcloughlin"]

Shield? yeah I agree, it sucks and doesn't work right in the game

Challenge? Try 1999 mode instead of playing on normal and saying it's too easy

evildead6789

I did play on 1999.

I hope you aren't SERIOUSLY calling 1999 mode challenging.

STALKER on Master difficulty, that's a challenge. System Shock 2 with the difficulty turned up is a challenge. The campaign in any Doom / Quake / Wolfenstein game is a challenge with the difficulty turned up.

1999 mode is "spend slightly longer behind cover and use more ammo that you never run out of."

It doesn't take more skill, it just takes more time.

Beat it. Fantastic game, loved every minute of it, really not THAT difficult though.

I had a bit of trouble with the Gargoyles at the beginning, Smough and Ornstein, and the Four Kings, but other than that I never found any part of the game too challenging. It felt great, the level design was amazing, the combat was extremely responsive, the enemies were all really good, and the online components were really cool even if the netcode was broken.

Dark Souls was a great 8/10 game, better than 95% of the trash getting released these days, but the difficulty was maybe a 7/10, with 5 being the average.

[QUOTE="the_bi99man"]

[QUOTE="ReadingRainbow4"]

I hate those fvcking bastards.

I still need to take the siren out, I've been stuck on her. the 3rd part of the fight.

ReadingRainbow4

Is her constant ressurrecting of soldiers getting you down? In case you didn't know already, if you kill them with Devil's Kiss, they burn up, and she can't rez them. The strategy I found that turns the siren fights from "overwhelming" to "almost a cakewalk", is to just start the fight by chasing her around, and spamming her soldiers with charged up devils kiss traps as soon as she rezzes them. After a few batches of dudes, they're all burned up, and she has no one left to rez. Then you just sit back and shoot her.

Also, the Storm hat, and Blood for Salts shirt, are both a huge help.

Yeah I thought about going back to devils kiss.

I was trying to get the drop on her with Charge because apparently you can take her out in 10 seconds if you time it right, but It doesn't seem to be doing much.

Where is blood for salts? all I have is coat of harms.

Which piece of gear you get from any given gear pickup is randomized, I'm pretty sure. The pickups are always in the same spots, but they don't always give you the same gear. You might be unlucky enough that they haven't dropped blood for salts for you yet. I didn't have it at that point in my first playthrough, either. The devils kiss strategy will still work, you just need to be more careful about timing your attacks to get as many guys as possible with each one, and hope Elizabeth finds some salts for you when you get low.

But yeah, I love the blood for salts shirt. Instantly replenishes a little bit of salt when an enemy dies, 40% of the time. Combined with the storm hat, which makes the effect spread to other enemies whenever you kill someone with devils kiss (or shock jockey or bucking bronco), makes devils kiss almost OP in most situations. You can just chuck traps like crazy into the general direction of enemies, and the whole level just erupts, killing almost everyone, and giving you all your salts back.

[QUOTE="ReadingRainbow4"]

[QUOTE="the_bi99man"]

Is her constant ressurrecting of soldiers getting you down? In case you didn't know already, if you kill them with Devil's Kiss, they burn up, and she can't rez them. The strategy I found that turns the siren fights from "overwhelming" to "almost a cakewalk", is to just start the fight by chasing her around, and spamming her soldiers with charged up devils kiss traps as soon as she rezzes them. After a few batches of dudes, they're all burned up, and she has no one left to rez. Then you just sit back and shoot her.

Also, the Storm hat, and Blood for Salts shirt, are both a huge help.

the_bi99man

Yeah I thought about going back to devils kiss.

I was trying to get the drop on her with Charge because apparently you can take her out in 10 seconds if you time it right, but It doesn't seem to be doing much.

Where is blood for salts? all I have is coat of harms.

Which piece of gear you get from any given gear pickup is randomized, I'm pretty sure. The pickups are always in the same spots, but they don't always give you the same gear. You might be unlucky enough that they haven't dropped blood for salts for you yet. I didn't have it at that point in my first playthrough, either. The devils kiss strategy will still work, you just need to be more careful about timing your attacks to get as many guys as possible with each one, and hope Elizabeth finds some salts for you when you get low.

But yeah, I love the blood for salts shirt. Instantly replenishes a little bit of salt when an enemy dies, 40% of the time. Combined with the storm hat, which makes the effect spread to other enemies whenever you kill someone with devils kiss (or shock jockey or bucking bronco), makes devils kiss almost OP in most situations. You can just chuck traps like crazy into the general direction of enemies, and the whole level just erupts, killing almost everyone, and giving you all your salts back.

ah ok then.

I wish i wouldn't have upgraded my shield first it doesn't help much.

[QUOTE="evildead6789"][QUOTE="Big_Red_Button"]

I did play on 1999.

I hope you aren't SERIOUSLY calling 1999 mode challenging.

STALKER on Master difficulty, that's a challenge. System Shock 2 with the difficulty turned up is a challenge. The campaign in any Doom / Quake / Wolfenstein game is a challenge with the difficulty turned up.

1999 mode is "spend slightly longer behind cover and use more ammo that you never run out of."

It doesn't take more skill, it just takes more time.

Big_Red_Button

Beat it. Fantastic game, loved every minute of it, really not THAT difficult though.

I had a bit of trouble with the Gargoyles at the beginning, Smough and Ornstein, and the Four Kings, but other than that I never found any part of the game too challenging. It felt great, the level design was amazing, the combat was extremely responsive, the enemies were all really good, and the online components were really cool even if the netcode was broken.

Dark Souls was a great 8/10 game, better than 95% of the trash getting released these days, but the difficulty was maybe a 7/10, with 5 being the average.

And you're right this was a good game. Amazing what they did with the old tech in the consoles.

Nope, not getting worse. That speaking as someone who's been an avid PC Gamer for over 20 years now. 

First, when people look back they tend to focus on the few gems while they ignore the thousands of derivative, generic games that did nothing but copy the latest super hit. Yes we are seeing tons of shooters that does little but rip off VoD or Halo these days, but it's no different from the flood of games copying Wolfenstein when that came out, then they copied Doom, then they used the build engine to spew out dozens if not hundreds of junk FPS's. 

When dune 2 became a huge hit we quickly saw a flood of bad RTS's, same happened again after Command and Conqure and StarCraft came out. Bad action RPG's after Diablo, the dozen or so Gold Box RPG's released after the first handful became a hit with Pool of Radiance, Curse od Azure Bonds etc.

In short, yes we see a lot of unoriginal and bad games made today, the same was true 5 years ago, 10 years ago and 15 years ago.

These days I'm seeing the game industry improve in just about all areas. There are tons of indie games exploring with different gameplay ideas and concepts, there are resurging excitement for classic adventure games, There's also the 'broad audience' block buster style games, While they tend to lack in originality and often lack in complexity, they are pushing new boundaries in storytelling and how to convey a Hollywood style experience in an interactive form. Mutliplayer games are doing things we couldn't even have imagined just 10-15 years ago (See games like EVE and Planetside 2 for example).

I think the perception of games getting worse are the result of a couple of factors: First, nostalgia. It's human nature to focus on the positive memories and remember the good times. Over time we tend to forget the bugs or the bad designs or the crappy games and instead remember the good times.

Second, we tend to be critical of elements in modern games that we'd have given a pass in the past. I loved the hell out of System Shock 2, but looking back I don't mind admitting that the combat mechanics were crap compared to modern games. Someone posted that BioShock: Infinite had bad combat... Try going back and replay System Shock 1 or 2 and then say that BO:I has bad gunplay or poor controls. People complain that BO:I was linear, but so was Wolfenstein, Doom, Duke3d and plenty of others.

Each to their own, but as far as I'm concerned, this is probably the most interesting time to be a gamer I've ever seen and I've been around pretty much since the beginning.

[QUOTE="Big_Red_Button"]

[QUOTE="evildead6789"] Try dark souls, then we'll talkevildead6789

Beat it. Fantastic game, loved every minute of it, really not THAT difficult though.

I had a bit of trouble with the Gargoyles at the beginning, Smough and Ornstein, and the Four Kings, but other than that I never found any part of the game too challenging. It felt great, the level design was amazing, the combat was extremely responsive, the enemies were all really good, and the online components were really cool even if the netcode was broken.

Dark Souls was a great 8/10 game, better than 95% of the trash getting released these days, but the difficulty was maybe a 7/10, with 5 being the average.

And you're right this was a good game. Amazing what they did with the old tech in the consoles.

In terms of difficulty the best approach to Dark Souls is just slow and methodical. Keep your shield up, make sure to upgrade your favorite weapons and listen for sounds. It's only hard if you run in like an idiot.

If you're having a hard time I suggest using a spear. The basic spear lets you attack while still holding up your shield, it's fast and has a decent range. If you aren't good at reading enemy attacks use that. You can find a Lightning Spear in Sen's Fort, and an upgraded version of that should be effective throughout a good amount of the game.

Enemies in Dark Souls tend to telegraph their attacks very slowly, and once you go through an area once the enemies are always in the same spot. The only hard part is the bosses, but only a couple of those are really THAT hard.

If you're looking for a truly difficult game I recommend Devil May Cry 3, although all four of the original games are pretty challenging. The new one is pathetically easy.

[QUOTE="Jebus213"]

[QUOTE="mems_1224"] Bad logic. Bumping up the difficulty isn't going to make your AI teammates any less stupid. The single player in Arma 2 is really bad, just because you enjoy it doesn't make it good. It sounds like you're holding the games to different standards because you like one and dont like the other. mems_1224

So the AI diffulty and skill levels mean nothing now? mhm...

Now Arma is about gunplay? Shocked.... Arma isn't a full priced AAA game btw. It's a low-budget mill sim.

It meets my standards for what I pay for. The score it has is reasonable.

[QUOTE="Jebus213"]

[QUOTE="seanmcloughlin"]

Which in the grand scheme of BF is still "recent" 

it staretd as a MP experience only so you should always be wary of a sudden introduction of SP into games like that. 

Sure BF3s campaign sucked a big fat D but I couldn't care less cos I paid for MP

seanmcloughlin

It isn't recent. BF has had an SP campaign since BF2: Modern Combat.

I don't call 8 years "recent" and BC1 came out a long time ago.

You just said it only had SP since BC1 and now you're saying BF2? 

"been about SP and MP" not "only had".

[QUOTE="mems_1224"][QUOTE="Jebus213"]

 

 

So the AI diffulty and skill levels mean nothing now? mhm...

Jebus213

Now Arma is about gunplay? Shocked.... Arma isn't a full priced AAA game btw. It's a low-budget mill sim.

It meets my standards for what I pay for.

Are you really trying that hard to worm out of admitting that a game you like may be just as flawed (if not more) as a game you hate?

Nope, not getting worse. That speaking as someone who's been an avid PC Gamer for over 20 years now. 

First, when people look back they tend to focus on the few gems while they ignore the thousands of derivative, generic games that did nothing but copy the latest super hit. Yes we are seeing tons of shooters that does little but rip off VoD or Halo these days, but it's no different from the flood of games copying Wolfenstein when that came out, then they copied Doom, then they used the build engine to spew out dozens if not hundreds of junk FPS's. 

When dune 2 became a huge hit we quickly saw a flood of bad RTS's, same happened again after Command and Conqure and StarCraft came out. Bad action RPG's after Diablo, the dozen or so Gold Box RPG's released after the first handful became a hit with Pool of Radiance, Curse od Azure Bonds etc.

In short, yes we see a lot of unoriginal and bad games made today, the same was true 5 years ago, 10 years ago and 15 years ago.

These days I'm seeing the game industry improve in just about all areas. There are tons of indie games exploring with different gameplay ideas and concepts, there are resurging excitement for classic adventure games, There's also the 'broad audience' block buster style games, While they tend to lack in originality and often lack in complexity, they are pushing new boundaries in storytelling and how to convey a Hollywood style experience in an interactive form. Mutliplayer games are doing things we couldn't even have imagined just 10-15 years ago (See games like EVE and Planetside 2 for example).

I think the perception of games getting worse are the result of a couple of factors: First, nostalgia. It's human nature to focus on the positive memories and remember the good times. Over time we tend to forget the bugs or the bad designs or the crappy games and instead remember the good times.

Second, we tend to be critical of elements in modern games that we'd have given a pass in the past. I loved the hell out of System Shock 2, but looking back I don't mind admitting that the combat mechanics were crap compared to modern games. Someone posted that BioShock: Infinite had bad combat... Try going back and replay System Shock 1 or 2 and then say that BO:I has bad gunplay or poor controls. People complain that BO:I was linear, but so was Wolfenstein, Doom, Duke3d and plenty of others.

Each to their own, but as far as I'm concerned, this is probably the most interesting time to be a gamer I've ever seen and I've been around pretty much since the beginning.

Mazoch

Indie games are nice but there were always indie games and they will always be the poor man's game (apart from some gems maybe)

You can see the game industry improving, true, but there was always improvement and the leaps were much higher in the past. Like I said they made the game first and then thought of the hardware, now it's the other way around. I blame torrent technology and dev / console companies run by money - sharks. I blame especially console companies because microsoft rushed the x360 and sony made their system too unbalanced and too expensive.

They did a lot of good things too though but it seems weird to me that big companies like that can make such bad decisions in timing and engineering.

Comparing older games with new games don't work, newer games use newer technology.

Off course this is the most interesting time to live in, since the games are driven by technology. The present will always be the best time. The point is they could have made a lot more and a lot better things if they only made use of the hardware available, that's what bothers the most of us hardcore gamers.

That there are geforce titans but no game challenges it while in the past when you wanted to max out unreal 1 , far cry, fear , oblivion , crysis, you needed dual setups and these are only a couple of example of games. Every good game that came out you couldn't max out before 2007. Now I max out every game with a 220$ dollar card and it has been like that since 2007 apart from crytek games and off course the badly coded metro.

We're now april 2013...

[QUOTE="Jebus213"]

[QUOTE="mems_1224"]

Are you really trying that hard to worm out of admitting that a game you like may be just as flawed (if not more) as a game you hate?

lostrib

Appearently not.

[QUOTE="seanmcloughlin"]

the SP was just a little thing on the side. 

Jebus213

You really believed that bs PR talk?

For a game to be given a 8.0 and above the enitre package should up to quality.

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/arma-ii

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/battlefield-3

[QUOTE="mems_1224"][QUOTE="Jebus213"]

 

 

So the AI diffulty and skill levels mean nothing now? mhm...

Jebus213

Now Arma is about gunplay? Shocked.... Arma isn't a full priced AAA game btw. It's a low-budget mill sim.

It meets my standards for what I pay for. The score it has is reasonable.

Glitchspot.

Now it's obvious that you all are just trolling now. System wars..

Glitchspot.

 

Now it's obvious that you all are just trolling now. System wars..

Jebus213

[QUOTE="lostrib"]

[QUOTE="Jebus213"]

 

Appearently not.

 

[QUOTE="Jebus213"]

[QUOTE="seanmcloughlin"]

the SP was just a little thing on the side. 

Jebus213

You really believed that bs PR talk?

For a game to be given a 8.0 and above the enitre package should up to quality.

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/arma-ii

http://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/battlefield-3

Popularity is not an argument for quality, especially when the majority of critics take perks from publishers and are clearly not very knowledgable when it comes to video games.

The entire business model of gaming websites basically forces them to give good scores to certain games. Their money comes from ad revenue, which in turn comes from the amount of traffic a site generates. If the site doesn't get enough traffic advertisers pull the plug. What generates traffic? Exclusive interviews, early reviews, and other content like that. Sites can publish early reviews because publishers send them review copies, and a publisher is more willing to give exclusive interviews to sites in their good graces. A major publisher has the power to seriously hurt the profitability of a site, and thus that site is at the mercy of the publisher's disposition towards them.

tl;dr- games journalism is a shill. Form your own opinions, don't buy in to aggregate criticism. Even if I disagree with someone's opinions, I'll respect them more if they came to them critically, rather than just reading the charts and deciding "this is the most popular so it must be the best."

Swallow the red pill.

[QUOTE="Jebus213"]

Glitchspot.

 

Now it's obvious that you all are just trolling now. System wars..

mems_1224

Um no, I haven't. Why do people say I keep trolling? I only do that when FelipeInside makes a post I don't like.

OK BRD, I think everybody gets the message that you despise this generation (for what ever your reasons) and you think everything was better in the "good old days".

That doesn't mean you had to create two other redundant threads to spread your "gospel". You can keep it here and kindly not flood the boards. Thanks.

OK BRD, I think everybody gets the message that you despise this generation (for what ever your reasons) and you think everything was better in the "good old days".

That doesn't mean you had to create two other redundant threads to spread your "gospel". You can keep it here and kindly not flood the boards. Thanks.

AdobeArtist

Holy crap, you're still here!?

I haven't posted here since 2008...

Any of the other old mods still around? Wasn't there a CaseyWagner or something?

[QUOTE="AdobeArtist"]

OK BRD, I think everybody gets the message that you despise this generation (for what ever your reasons) and you think everything was better in the "good old days".

That doesn't mean you had to create two other redundant threads to spread your "gospel". You can keep it here and kindly not flood the boards. Thanks.

Big_Red_Button

Holy crap, you're still here!?

I haven't posted here since 2008...

Any of the other old mods still around? Wasn't there a CaseyWagner or something?

Oh the great CaseyWagner... he's still around, sometimes. No longer a mod.