Old boring and crappy

Post Reply New Topic

Lately it seems game companies are dragging their heels. Its like lets me a game look and sound good but lets not add anything to it to make it really stand out from the rest of the crap. Back when I was growing up I played on a NES those were good times because it you wanted your game to sell you had to take risks, you had to really push the limits of the hardware and really pray that the public your new idea. I want to see innovation I want to see new stuff in games not the same recycled ideas so many times I want to cry. Oh get rid of half the buttons on the controller a PS controller has 12 buttons way to many.


I want good guilty games not the garbage we got now.

20 years ago, the term "shovelware" didn't even exist Heck, probably not even ten years ago...

I voted "The same", allthough it depends on what aspects you take into consideration. Like SabbraCadabra previously mentioned, crappy shovelware designed just to milk more money out of franchises practically didn't exist.

On the other hand, long games with complex storylines (take for instance Mafia or Fahrenheit) didn't exist. The overall complexity of the NES games were at the same level as the Java games on the modern cellphones, or the Macromedia Flash Games you play at your office when your boss isn't looking. The best part about NES ("ancient-gen") games are the feelings of nostalgia one get from playing them.

I'm not sure what alternate universe everyone else got their early console games, the 8 and 16-bit eras had just as much utterly crap games made only to milk money out of the consoles' popularity.

It depends where you look. I used to get irritated by games because I thought they just add a few graphics and then not much else.

My best example would have to be the mario kart series, where you could get one copy from the snes and one from the n64, and, apart from graphics, they would have the same weapons and similar tracks (same number of tracks). I just thought that, with todays new hardware, we should be able to get a huge pack of racetracks to play on, instead of the generic 4 cups with 4 tracks each.
The new one is better, but there are still games out there that just give you the bare minimum. I guess the problem today is that you can sell just as much with good marketing as you can with a good product.

20 years ago? Blech. I hate those games. BUT I HATE TODAY'S GAMES TOO! Give me games from 1995-2005.

what i liked about games from the 8-bit/16-bit era was that in terms of serieses, every subsequent game was a quantum leap from the last game. Super Mario Bros is vastly different from Super Mario Bros 3, just like how Super Mario Bros 3 is vastly different from Super Mario World, and how Super Mario 64 is vastly different than all the previous ones.

when the Playstation era came around though, developers seemed content to remake the same game over and over. the Tomb Raider games sold huge for the console but they basically remade the same game five times. the Resident Evil games also sold huge but the differences between the first three games are extremely minimal. what's worse is i feel most of these games weren't even that great to begin with. they were just average. the reason i think they sold so well though is because of the integration of full motion video (which at the time was huge) and appealing to people who hadn't really played a lot of video games before, so these things seemed huge.

what's worse is that the innovators seem to think that this is the way to sell games now! Mario Galaxy was great but it didn't have the sense of wonder that seeing Mario in 3D the first time like Mario 64 did. Twilight Princess was good but it felt too much like Ocarina of Time. Say what you will about Wind Waker but it was miles away from Ocarina of Time, and if they'd made the sailing a little less tedious towards the end I think it would've gotten more praise.

what really disappoints me is when developers release an average to mediocre game, and if it sells well enough they don't see any reason to improve it. pretty much every 3D Sonic game has been s**t but they've sold well enough so why improve the horrible camera, the glitchy controls, and laughable story. there are certain franchises that had similar gameplay that with the sequels managed to make it just THAT MUCH better (MGS1-3, God of War 1 & 2) but these're few and far in-between.

I've played better games

Master System

Mega Drive

Neo Geo

SNES

The NES Bionic Commando came out twenty years ago in 1988. "Bionic Commando Rearmed" is a remake of the old one which just came out about a week ago, and it's a much better game for only $10 new.

Bionic Commando Rearmed PC, PS3, Xbox 360

PC requirement Vista or XP Service Pack 2

I have it on Xbox 360 800 Microsoft Points

a number of Challenge Rooms 30 sec limit

disappointing dreadful game

I've got the PS3 version which is better according to Gamespot.

I think the new games are excellent compared to games 20 years ago, but to be fair, that IS like comparing an 1898 Daimler to a 2008 Ferrari Enzo. Proportianally, that is how much games have evolved in 20 years.