Gaming is dead

[Foxi4]

Even the glorious Nintendo that was the shit in the 90's hasn't been doing great since the Super Nintendo days.

I mean, N64/GameCube/Wii have some gems but it just doesn't compare to how good they were with the SNES. And damn, now they're putting more effort into Happy Meal toys than actual games.

Problem is, Nintendo fans are now preferring those said Happy Meal toys over the games now.

Yup. It's been a downward spiral ever since the N64 came about - they stopped caring about their customers and started caring exclusively about their own content. I remember when Nintendo had an aggressive licensing campaign that just raked in developers, a seal of quality, some damned standards - no more. Now we get whatever they think is right, not what we deserve.

 

[BullyWiiPlaza]

Yup. It's been a downward spiral ever since the N64 came about - they stopped caring about their customers and started caring exclusively about their own content. I remember when Nintendo had an aggressive licensing campaign that just raked in developers, a seal of quality, some damned standards - no more. Now we get whatever they think is right, not what we deserve.

If you look at what they have been releasing gaming-wise in the last few years it's fucking pathetic. All games are almost complete copies of previous versions and it's hard to find something truly new and innovative. It's like Nintendo doesn't do anything but porting textures and bringing out their graphics-updated old games 90% of the time because the gameplay is identical. Do they have like 5 or 500 employees working on stuff? I can't even tell.

 

[Hells Malice]

Gaming these days often is about exposing or trolling others instead of having fun playing (this degeneration is especially true in Call of Duty). Everybody just plays like a jack-ass (camping, best characters, guns, equipment) and thinks that in-game scores matter in real-life (k/d ratio?).

Except not really at all. That's pretty much just Call of Duty, and LoL/DOTA

 

[Foxi4]

Gaming these days often is about exposing or trolling others instead of having fun playing (this degeneration is especially true in Call of Duty). Everybody just plays like a jack-ass (camping, best characters, guns, equipment) and thinks that in-game scores matter in real-life (k/d ratio?).

Are you trying to say that CS 1.6 wasn't like that over a decade ago? Because it sure was.

 

[BullyWiiPlaza]

Except not really at all. That's pretty much just Call of Duty, and LoL/DOTA

What about all the Funky Kongs and Daisys with Flame Runners or Mach Bikes in Mario Kart Wii? Best combination overall statistically. Over half of the lobbies with above-average versus ratings are playing them because they have a speed boost that might get them the few milliseconds needed for a better placement.

Are you trying to say that CS 1.6 wasn't like that over a decade ago? Because it sure was.

I haven't played it but people say the community wasn't messed up.

 

[The Catboy]

You know, I am a 90's child and yes the 90's were pretty awesome, but they are also long dead and gone and we need to move into the future.
The truth is, gaming's not dead, it's changed direction. And quite honestly gaming has always been about changing directions, think about how people reacted when gaming went from 4 Bit lines and barely identifiable figures to greater detailed 8Bit sprites? Hell what about when games when from 8Bit to 16Bit. Kids were happy to see the changes because it meant something new was coming along and but I am willing to bet there was an older generation that was totally against it and even calling gaming "dead" because they didn't like the change.
Of course we can also argue that every single generation believes they are best generation and crap for their generation is the best crap.
Gaming has changed and sales reflect that. If people want games like CoD and sequels, then that's what we are going to get. Take it from someone who is actually the head of the video game department in my store. I have to track sales to know what to order for the store, thus my job to know what's selling. And you know what's selling the best? GTA 5, COD, Borderlands, Pokemon, ect. Games you expect to sell well and thus they do.
The truth be told, the gaming industry has always been about making money and giving the fans what they want by sales reflections. If one style of game shows better results to another style, they will start making games like that. Even if they change some things up, they still attempt to keep the same core elements that get the sales. Even the most innovative companies like Nintendo really doesn't do much innovations. They just take what's selling well and mix it up a bit to see what happens. Platformers sell well for them, so what do they do? They add a new gimmick to the core and see what happens. If it goes well, they start working on more like it. Once they stop selling well, they start a new gimmick, That's how the gaming industry works. It's all about making money through some new gimmick added to something popular.

 

[Veho]

I remember when Nintendo had an aggressive licensing campaign that just raked in developers, a seal of quality, some damned standards

I don't. Nintendo was always willing to slap their "seal of quality" on any piece of crap whose developers were willing to pay for the SDK. Your experience is skewed by nostalgia goggles and the fact your local stores (and friends) only imported hits, but the "Official Nintendo Seal of Quality" also stands on some of the worst games of all time. It never actually guaranteed anything.


Standards, bah. Behold, "standards".

 

[Joe88]

Behold, "standards".

Another quality release

 

[RevPokemon]

Another quality release

Yet they let pieces of shit like this

 

[Hells Malice]

What about all the Funky Kongs and Daisys with Flame Runners or Mach Bikes in Mario Kart Wii? Best combination overall statistically. Over half of the lobbies with above-average versus ratings are playing them because they have a speed boost that might get them the few milliseconds needed for a better placement.

and? Playing optimally isn't trolling or being a jackass. Honestly games like MK suck shit with randoms anyway, it's only fun with friends. You're playing to win online, it's not surprising people will do that. People don't typically find losing to randoms fun. With friends it's 'whatever'. If there's a trend, people will typically follow it so they aren't left behind and thus why you see so many people doing that. Online gaming has -always- been like this. So it's not like anything has changed. Plenty of games have good communities, just like some have shitty ones. A huge amount of games don't even HAVE online multiplayer so your argument was pretty stupid from the start.

I don't. Nintendo was always willing to slap their "seal of quality" on any piece of crap whose developers were willing to pay for the SDK. Your experience is skewed by nostalgia goggles and the fact your local stores (and friends) only imported hits, but the "Official Nintendo Seal of Quality" also stands on some of the worst games of all time. It never actually guaranteed anything.


Standards, bah. Behold, "standards".

Are you trying to say Shaq Fu wasn't the greatest game ever?
Someone ban this guy

 

[sarkwalvein]

Another quality release

Well... Shaq Fu was passable.
But you just threw an elephant into the forum.
An elephant awarded with a reliable golden Nintendo seal of quality.

 

[Foxi4]

I don't. Nintendo was always willing to slap their "seal of quality" on any piece of crap whose developers were willing to pay for the SDK. Your experience is skewed by nostalgia goggles and the fact your local stores (and friends) only imported hits, but the "Official Nintendo Seal of Quality" also stands on some of the worst games of all time. It never actually guaranteed anything.


Standards, bah. Behold, "standards".

I would argue that the bar was considerably higher and there was a lot more third-party devs on-board. The NES and SNES have their share of garbage, but it's nothing compared to the alternatives at the time - 8-bit computers are a mine of terrible software slapped together for a buck in some dark cellar.

 

[cdoty]

I just recently finished watching Atari: Game Over, and I think they captured the reason for the last 'death of gaming'. Atari was trying to sell another "10 million units into a saturated market". We are nowhere near saturated, due to the size of the market. I think the biggest threats to gaming are the free to play games, the race to the bottom in pricing, and the amount of crap games being released. The market is correcting the problems be making it harder for developers to make enough money to fund additional games.

 

[Hyro-Sama]

Go away, Nietzsche.

 

[BullyWiiPlaza]

Plenty of games have good communities, just like some have shitty ones. A huge amount of games don't even HAVE online multiplayer so your argument was pretty stupid from the start.

For me gaming is online gaming because offline gaming is just playing with yourself or some predictable computer player which is the same all the time and eventually people get tired of every random trying to follow trends or play in a douchy way online. You can't play with randoms anyway since they mostly don't how to properly play or just won't. With friends it's still great fun, it's literally the only way where gaming still shines.

 

[Qtis]

Ah, Gaming is dead.

Seriously though, gaming is alive more than before. I find it sort of odd that people think new forms of gamings as something that shouldn't exist "because it didn't exist a few years ago". Imagine if people thought of Steam as they think of mobile gaming now.

Oh, sorry for that. They do think of mobile gaming exactly the same way. Steam was shit when Half Life 2 released and required the platform. If HL2 released now and required Steam, it'd be Game of the Year before the end of the month. No questions asked. Gaming is an experience more than ever. Before, we had technical limitations for many games (why else would we see remastered versions of past games? If the original couldn't be improved, why would anyone remake it? (and no, just money gets you only so far)). Now we are seeing more and more games not limited by memory, RAM or GPU. The future will show something else, don't get me wrong, but as is, there are only few games that actually make use of multiple cores in a CPU or make the GPU feel like the depths of hell. (Those games are also quite badly optimised for current hardware).

ps. No, Final Fantasy et al. are not good examples of games, as the series is has been milked a few times too many without improving the initial experience again. So releases did add content, others didn't. I won't go into the matter any more as it has been discussed to death before.

 

[sarkwalvein]

Ah, Gaming is dead.

Seriously though, gaming is alive more than before. I find it sort of odd that people think new forms of gamings as something that shouldn't exist "because it didn't exist a few years ago". Imagine if people thought of Steam as they think of mobile gaming now.

Oh, sorry for that. They do think of mobile gaming exactly the same way. Steam was shit when Half Life 2 released and required the platform. If HL2 released now and required Steam, it'd be Game of the Year before the end of the month. No questions asked. Gaming is an experience more than ever. Before, we had technical limitations for many games (why else would we see remastered versions of past games? If the original couldn't be improved, why would anyone remake it? (and no, just money gets you only so far)). Now we are seeing more and more games not limited by memory, RAM or GPU. The future will show something else, don't get me wrong, but as is, there are only few games that actually make use of multiple cores in a CPU or make the GPU feel like the depths of hell. (Those games are also quite badly optimised for current hardware).

ps. No, Final Fantasy et al. are not good examples of games, as the series is has been milked a few times too many without improving the initial experience again. So releases did add content, others didn't. I won't go into the matter any more as it has been discussed to death before.

You meant HL3, right, right?
HL3 fucking where?! </end of rant>

 

[Qtis]

You meant HL3, right, right?
HL3 fucking where?! </end of rant>

It's just around the corner, trust me. Valve has never let us down with timelines

 

[Hells Malice]

Even the glorious Nintendo that was the shit in the 90's hasn't been doing great since the Super Nintendo days.

I mean, N64/GameCube/Wii have some gems but it just doesn't compare to how good they were with the SNES. And damn, now they're putting more effort into Happy Meal toys than actual games.

Problem is, Nintendo fans are now preferring those said Happy Meal toys over the games now.

Nintendo had fantastic N64 games. Kirby 64, Donkey Kong 64 and Mario 64 (i'm sensing a trend in titles here...) were phenomenal. Hell Kirby 64 and DK64 are still the best games in their franchise. Not to mention Star Fox 64 and Banjo Kazooie/Tooie.
Even gamecube era games were pretty solid. Windwaker AND Twilight Princess (yeah yeah a wii title too) were both very unique Zelda games that still felt like zelda games. Super Mario Sunshine was pretty neat and was a good sequel to SM64. Pikmin 1 and 2 were fun and solidly made. Gamecube gets shit on since it did start to let a few franchises go (star fox anyone?), but honestly it was still a pretty solid console era for Nintendoh.
As far as Nintendo titles are concerned, N64 blew SNES out of the water. The SNES had some real gems, but most of Nintendo's finest tiles are on the N64.

The Wii and 3DS is really where Nintendo just dropped the damn ball. The WiiU, the ball is just gone, they dropped that shit down a well and there ain't no Timmy to go get it.

 

[Minox]

It's dead? Again?