Has nay game from that gen aged well?
The cartoony stuff like Crash, Mario and Banjo could still be passable but even my beloved MGS and Tomb Raider look like shit.
soul_starter's forum posts
@commander said:
It's something that starts to bother me lately, and it's not only in games. Yesterday I saw star trek beyond and it suddenly hit me, the graphics and presentation are great, but they can't even find an orignal crew, they have to copy the one from 50 years ago.
Even worse, last movie they copied the story pretty much from an older trek movie as well.
Games have just the same disease, we get remasters, rehashes. twists on the same formula over and over and over.
It's not being original is so hard nowadays, on the top of my head I already have dozen ideas for new games but for some reason they don't happen, we get the same crap over and over over.
Apparently it must be selling, otherwise they wouldn't make it, but who buys this crap. Am I suddenly surrounded by idiots, that must be it. The world must be swarmed with idiots all of sudden.
Now I wonder , how this did happen , did they put something in the water? did my lsd-friends have children?
Either way, I am stunned, maybe 'for honor' will shed some light, that seems to be original , and it's from ubisoft, the irony...
100% man! Don't let the apologists on this thread keep you down. I assume lots of gaming companies have their shills on various forums to derail genuine arguments.
There are as many remasters this gen as original AAA titles. Not only that, a number of these so called remasters are essentially re-releases of games we saw a couple years back on the PS3/XB360. Thats a remaster of a 2 year old game. Fuk me thats scraping the friggin barrel.
In all honesty, since I got bored of Fallout 4 my PS4 lay barren till my recent PES/FIFA experience but that only lasted a few days. We're almost 3 years into this console cycle and I can't think of a single killer or original exclusive for Sony or MS.
Console gaming may well be dead and when a console diehard like me is looking to but the witcher 3 and probably the next BF or COD on my PC, you know shit has hit the fan.
@Jacanuk said:
@soul_starter said:
@nirogol said:
@soul_starter said:
Having said that, with PES, it seems like we have time traveled back to 1998-2006 era of FIFA games where you can get your player, at an angel, just at the edge of the box and power a shot into goal. EVERY DAMN TIME. No matter the difficulty. It really is that easy. There were similar complaints about that last year and we were told that it was down to simplistic goal AI.
What are you talking about? are you sure you played PES 2017?
it's clear you loved FIFA more but don't be ridiculous...
First off, right at the beginning of my post I point out there's no point in buying either version this year if you have previous years.
Second, PES 2017 has a far more arcadey, fast, feel to it. That's just a fact. I know hardcore PES fan can't get their heads round them being the inferior simulation but that is the case. It is A LOT easier to score and like I said, at particular angles, your ball always goes to goal. Try it.
Fifa has been more of a simulation for 7 or 8 years now but this year they have slowed it way down, which makes intricate passing (PES excels at this) too difficult to be entertaining.
@Jacanuk said:
Think you posted this "review" in the wrong section. Perhaps try again in systemwars. I'm sure you will get a much "likeable" response from the people there.
But i prefer FIFA , PES has always been to arcade like for me.
Also the Hunter mode in FIFA really hit the spot, only sad thing is that it´s only a single season but i guess you could not really make it any longer.
It's not a system war though, it's a game war!
Which is included in the systemwars forum.
If you want a debate about anything vs anything gaming related, be it software, hardware, companies etc... you should really post it there.
No other forum can get up on each barricade and go crazy :)
I dont want crazy!
@nirogol said:
@soul_starter: I'll try it...it's even hard to get to the situation you can shoot the ball, and this is why i liked PES so much this year. it's harder than ever...you need to plan your moves and not just to run and shoot and that's it. the players you've mentioned are very skilled shooters so it probably be easier to score with them.
Trust me, I did it with a player from one of the lower PL teams too. Multiple times at that.
@nirogol said:
@soul_starter said:
@nirogol said:
@soul_starter said:
Having said that, with PES, it seems like we have time traveled back to 1998-2006 era of FIFA games where you can get your player, at an angel, just at the edge of the box and power a shot into goal. EVERY DAMN TIME. No matter the difficulty. It really is that easy. There were similar complaints about that last year and we were told that it was down to simplistic goal AI.
What are you talking about? are you sure you played PES 2017?
it's clear you loved FIFA more but don't be ridiculous...
It is A LOT easier to score and like I said, at particular angles, your ball always goes to goal. Try it.
Two chances are possible : or you played the game at really easy level, or you are a genius.
i found myself struggling almost every game just to create chances near the box!
i would like to play against you online and see what you're talking about cause it sounds weird to me...
Run to either side of the box, use a player like Sanchez or Messi, cut in and press shoot (I use circle). Bang, it works every time. You can ramp it up all the way to world class if you like. Obviously, you have to be experiences at football games.
I'd play you online (and teach you a thing or 2) but like I said, I don't recommend buying either one if you have previous versions and I've followed my own advice.
@nirogol said:
@soul_starter said:
Having said that, with PES, it seems like we have time traveled back to 1998-2006 era of FIFA games where you can get your player, at an angel, just at the edge of the box and power a shot into goal. EVERY DAMN TIME. No matter the difficulty. It really is that easy. There were similar complaints about that last year and we were told that it was down to simplistic goal AI.
What are you talking about? are you sure you played PES 2017?
it's clear you loved FIFA more but don't be ridiculous...
First off, right at the beginning of my post I point out there's no point in buying either version this year if you have previous years.
Second, PES 2017 has a far more arcadey, fast, feel to it. That's just a fact. I know hardcore PES fan can't get their heads round them being the inferior simulation but that is the case. It is A LOT easier to score and like I said, at particular angles, your ball always goes to goal. Try it.
Fifa has been more of a simulation for 7 or 8 years now but this year they have slowed it way down, which makes intricate passing (PES excels at this) too difficult to be entertaining.
@Jacanuk said:
Think you posted this "review" in the wrong section. Perhaps try again in systemwars. I'm sure you will get a much "likeable" response from the people there.
But i prefer FIFA , PES has always been to arcade like for me.
Also the Hunter mode in FIFA really hit the spot, only sad thing is that it´s only a single season but i guess you could not really make it any longer.
It's not a system war though, it's a game war!
It's clear that this guy is irrationally in love with the original Mafia, considering he just said it's better than every GTA ever, which isn't true AND the two series' are quite different anyway but on top of all that, he is arguing about a game that's not even released yet lol
Btw, am I the only one that enjoyed Mafia 2?
The NBA2K series is jus tway too obtuse for a non basketball fan to get into.
Bioshock is a good series, other than that...you seriously mentioned Duke nukem? lol
Borderlands is essentially carton Rage and the way they've milked it with that episodic crap is plain terrible. In terms of civilisation, that hasn't been inventive or creative in almost a decade.
@Jacanuk said:
Ask yourself that question and think about it for a minute.
Simple answer is because people buy it
Another answer is because game developers went the sneaky way with it, they used it as "extra" for a bit to get us all used to it and once we got used to the idea and paid happily for it, they stopped doing "extras" and just took out normal main game content
But to be fair a more reasonable answer is the above and piracy. People do not have the same morals when it comes to digital content as they do with physical items even tho both is stealing.
So they fought long and hard with different copy protections only to alienate their paying customers, so instead they now go with Micro-transactions and paid dlc´s , which you can´t really blame them for. They are not in it for anyone´s blue eyes, they are there to make money and pay their staff.
You were doing so well till the 3rd paragraph. Don't blame the customer, that's crazy. The middle paragraph essentially sums up modern marketing. Give something out, normally cheap at first or optional, get customers hooked on it and then charge them till the cows come home. Modern economics.
Ultimately, it's down to you and others who buy DLC. I don't even buy games that are half arsed, let alone DLC which should have been part of the core gaming experience. If more people moved in that direction, developers and publishers would stop doing this. In fact, the gaming industry is one of the few industries I can even think of where developers get away with false advertising (NMS ahem) and they don't get sued the f up.
Oh well, if you people don't shape up, then just deal with it.
@Macutchi said:
@soul_starter said:
@ranger_of_steel: Graphics have always been a major part of the industry, especially with the dawn of the polygon. The difference now is that technical mastery is no longer going hand in hand with gaming creativity. Take the examples of games like MGS, Mario 64, Resi 4 and so on, which were both creative and pushing the boundaries of graphics at the time.
agreed. i remember seeing the graphical difference between my commodore 64 and the amiga for the first time and immediately begging my parents for one for xmas. then along came the snes with its fabled mode 7. seeing pilotwings in (admittedly rudimentary 3d, but not back then) for the first time was amazing, then came mario kart, star fox and of course street fighter 2 world warrior, which was practically arcade standard. back then devs were striving to get as close to arcade standard as possible, whereas now software and hardware have advanced so much most devs strive to get them as close to real life as possible.
i do think back then, when games were in their relative infancy, that it was a lot easier to be creative with the gameplay. it was a completely different market back then motivated by different factors and dominated by smaller independent studios not massive multinational conglomerates.
anyway, graphical boundaries are always being pushed and improvements are a big draw to gamers so graphics always have and will be massively influential to a game / system's success, providing gameplay is of a sufficient quality
Agreed, especially with the middle paragraph.
Game developers are making products that cost tens of millions of dollars so the margin for risk is too high if they decide to be too left wing. If modern market trends are moving away from platformers, then we won't and sadly don't see AAA platforming games readily available.
My biggest issue with modern gaming isn't just the lack of variety in AAA titles but the mass decrease in numbers. The current gen has been around for 3 years or so I think and I could probably count AAA releases on both hands.
@ranger_of_steel said:
@soul_starter: I do enjoy seeing indie developers create games with the intention of creative gameplay first and foremost. Shovel Knight has fun mechanics, great music, and although is not graphically pleasing, it is aesthetically beautiful. Yooka Laylee seems to be the revival of an entire lost genre of video games.
I wonder if people just starting feeling like they were in this rut. There will always be a new sports game every year, and it may look slightly better and play slightly better, but it still feels too similar to the previous game. Indie games feel fresh and new, even though design wise they are a step backwards. What is also interesting is that back during the time of the NES graphics and aesthetics were closely linked. The sprites were as good as they could be for the machine and there were only so many colors to use, so developers were forced to be creative with their choices. Now a game like Shovel Knight is purely aesthetic design because we know higher graphically technology exists, but we still enjoy the game just as much.
I'm not thinking of the perfect way to explain all this but hopefully you get what I mean.
I understand but that's beside the point I was making. What I'm saying is that when gaming was at it's peak, great gameplay, creativity and graphical excellence were all part of the same package. Now there are compromises and lazy AAA titles, not to mention decreased numbers.
In terms of indy games, I do enjoy them but let's be honest, they are a genuine step back in almost every case and if I wanted to play a 2D platformer, I'd go back to the original days of Mario rather than playing a Mario clone, or what developers would label as "Mario inspired". that's not to say these are bad games, I enjoy quite a lot of them but they do not advance the industry in the 3 key aspects: gameplay, creativity and graphics. One occurs at the expense of the other.
It's like if movie makers went back to silent, black and white films in opposition to the over indulgence of modern day blockbusters.
Log in to comment