[HN Gopher] What has changed with video games over the last 25 y...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       What has changed with video games over the last 25 years, and what
       has not
        
       Author : canuck69
       Score  : 84 points
       Date   : 2022-05-31 06:31 UTC (2 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.dynamic-mess.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.dynamic-mess.com)
        
       | _han wrote:
       | The link gives a bad gateway error, here's an archive:
       | https://web.archive.org/web/20220531063207/https://www.dynam...
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | sylens wrote:
       | The biggest change from me is the shift away from dedicated,
       | organic game communities to ones that are cultivated by
       | "community managers" and fed a drip feed of live service seasons
       | and battle passes.
       | 
       | Counter-Strike and Battlefield 1942 are two examples I'll call
       | back to as they were two important games of my youth. At the
       | time, most servers for these games were hosted and/or run by
       | people that weren't affiliated with the developers or publishers
       | of those games; it was just something you did so that your local
       | group of friends or community could have a virtual home to get
       | together and play.
       | 
       | My friends and I would have maybe a dozen servers we would keep
       | favorited and a handful that we played on heavily. Over time, you
       | got to know the other people on the server just by playing
       | against them consistently; for example, when BigCheeseburger
       | logged on and was on the opposing team in CS, you knew you had
       | your work cut out for you. There were rivalries and camaraderies
       | that just formed naturally as a result of this. Some of these
       | servers also had web presences with a site that had their roster,
       | dates and times for regular game nights, etc.
       | 
       | Games would also get occasional patches (patching before Steam is
       | something I don't think was better back then) that would bring a
       | new map or two, but that was generally it until a big expansion
       | dropped, like Battlefield's Secret Weapons of WWII pack. If
       | people wanted new content, they made it themselves - I spent so
       | many hours on custom CS maps like Iceworld or even ones that
       | shoehorned in Half Life's terrible vehicle controls to make
       | facsimiles of Tatooine with landspeeders.
       | 
       | In most multiplayer games nowadays, the developer has one or more
       | employees assigned to "manage" the subreddit or Discord for their
       | game. Custom servers are often not even supported anymore, as
       | matchmaking is used to funnel players into full games and keep
       | them playing even if their friends log off for the night. You can
       | forget about creating your own maps unless it's a special case
       | like Halo's Forge mode; the developer/publisher has a great
       | seasonal rollout plan that might never get realized if enough
       | people don't keep playing the game (Say hi to Battlefield 2042!).
       | Players need to see numbers go up so every game has an experience
       | and leveling system first seen in Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare
       | so that people don't realize how banal and limited the available
       | content is. Cosmetics and boosts sprinkled over a battle pass
       | system layer on top of this as another form of retention.
       | 
       | What has changed in the last 25 years? Games, like everything
       | else, became extremely monetized at all levels, and in the
       | process, conditioned a lot of players to feel that they NEED that
       | monetization or else it's "boring". Look at the reaction to Halo
       | Infinite, a game that plays fantastic but has had limited
       | map/content drops since last fall. Instead of praising the fact
       | that you can ignore its battle pass entirely and just have fun
       | playing a few games with friends every few nights, people are
       | demanding to see their game time rewarded with more progression,
       | more unlocks, etc.
        
         | TheFreim wrote:
         | > Custom servers are often not even supported anymore, as
         | matchmaking is used to funnel players into full games and keep
         | them playing even if their friends log off for the night.
         | 
         | This is one of the primary reasons I still mainly play older
         | games. I like being able to host servers with exactly the modes
         | I like, or find servers that have them. Some of the best
         | experiences I've had in online games has been on servers I've
         | hosted for Halo (Trail AND Custom Edition). Nothing matches the
         | feeling of logging on to your own or favorite server and
         | playing with a mix of regulars and randoms, without servers
         | it's impossible to build communities in the same way.
        
           | sylens wrote:
           | Is there a list of modern games that still support this?
        
             | wilsonnb3 wrote:
             | see here https://nodecraft.com/games
        
             | bombcar wrote:
             | Factorio and Minecraft are two big ones I know of.
        
         | vlan0 wrote:
         | Lack of player generated content also killed it for me. My
         | friends and I spent 1000s of hours playing custom CS and
         | Warcraft III maps. And then 100s of hours playing custom Portal
         | maps. Feels like there is nothing comparable to this today.
         | 
         | Feels bad.
        
           | the_only_law wrote:
           | The one thing I was disappointed in with the AoE3 remaster
           | was the old multiplayer, player created scenarios were not
           | compatible and frankly you just don't see many custom
           | scenario games anymore. Some were quite fun.
        
         | imaginaryNumb3r wrote:
         | The problem is that content-creation has become prohibitively
         | laborious and expensive. Don't even think about creating a
         | Battlefield level (or similar levels) without having a team of
         | people working on it.
         | 
         | 3D models aren't much better. You can easily re-texturing and
         | create new content this way, but adding new models, animations
         | and AI requires huge amount of polish to be somewhere near AAA
         | quality.
         | 
         | Of course I completely agree on the community aspect. Forums
         | have been dying for a long time and left a vast graveyard of
         | former communities. But this is mostly due to social media and
         | how newer generations are using the internet. We have a
         | continuing trend of centralization which has affected the
         | gaming sector big time.
        
           | Arrath wrote:
           | Half-Life 1/Goldsrc was the golden age of modding, and I miss
           | it dearly.
           | 
           | Don't get me wrong, plenty of modern games have vibrant
           | modding scenes (Minecraft, Starsector, Rimworld, Elder
           | Scrolls, Fallout) but we don't see massive total conversions
           | like we used to.
        
           | the_only_law wrote:
           | > but adding new models, animations and AI requires huge
           | amount of polish to be somewhere near AAA qualities
           | 
           | On too, I remember wanting to get into the modding scene for
           | an game I loved to play.
           | 
           | I did some research on the format used for 3D models and at
           | the time the format was completely proprietary and supported
           | only by software that costs tens of thousands of dollars most
           | kidders probably don't have sitting around.
           | 
           | The situation may be better nowadays, as I faintly recall the
           | format being reverse engineered and supported on blender
           | through plugins, but I may be created a hopeful fantasy.
        
       | dudul wrote:
       | One thing that wasn't mentioned: games were much harder before,
       | by design to support the rental business. Devs had deals with
       | game renters to make them hard enough that players would need
       | more than 3hours to finish a game.
        
       | matt_s wrote:
       | I think a huge thing that is missed in the article is how players
       | have influenced gaming. I like to think players brought cross-
       | play to major games, maybe it was also studios but they wouldn't
       | have pushed for it without players requesting it.
       | 
       | For multiplayer games on the internet that is a huge thing that
       | has shifted in 25 years. Its not every game or every platform but
       | major online games allow cross-play whereas before you were
       | basically locked into playing with only people on the same
       | platform.
       | 
       | Maybe there will be other things players want and studios will
       | listen and implement in the next decade-ish?
        
       | hulitu wrote:
       | > What the gaming experience has become Today the gaming
       | experience could be summed-up as follow. * You go on steam. * You
       | buy and download a 4GB game. * You play at it.
       | 
       | I don't know on which planet the author lives but my experience
       | is a bit different: * you go to the store and buy the game.
       | Allmost all games have the same price. * Come home, insert DVD,
       | install it. * after instalation the game wants an online account
       | for which it needs to install a windows service. * account
       | created, try to start the game, it needs an update (couple of GB,
       | it needs one hour) * after update you can finaly start the game
       | (entusiasm is gone) and you play for some time. Graphics is a bit
       | better than 20 years but nothing "wow". * you don't touch the
       | game for a couple of days * you want to play again, try to start
       | the game, it needs another multi GB update, another hour lost. *
       | you decide next time to avoid this company (EA) when buying
       | games.
        
         | dfxm12 wrote:
         | As a PS4 gamer, I don't understand why I can't predownload and
         | install a game's assets. Let me download and install what I
         | need to ahead of time so when I do get the disc and pop it in,
         | it just launches.
        
         | burntoutfire wrote:
         | Yeah, it's like saying "we'll fetch your beer... in 15 minutes"
         | to patron at the pub. Entertainment and leisure is about
         | instant gratification and companies don't seem to get that. The
         | people who absolutely get that though are gambling equipment
         | manufacturers - the UX is extremely smooth and polished, so
         | that people don't fall off the hook.
        
         | TheRealDunkirk wrote:
         | The article laments the death of manuals, but that's because
         | every game has an in-game tutorial-ish start that slowly
         | teaches the mechanics. And given that every AAA game now has
         | completely overloaded controls, you almost have to. I think you
         | can add this to your list.
        
           | toast0 wrote:
           | It's also because the manual needs to be finished so it can
           | go to the printers, but the game is going to get a day one
           | patch that often makes major changes.
           | 
           | A lot of 80s and 90s games in boxes would have the main
           | manual, and then a small pamphlet (printed later) describing
           | last minute changes, because the manuals had to be finalized
           | before the disks, and you wouldn't reprint the manuals unless
           | hell froze over, anyway.
           | 
           | Then there's the expense of localizing that. And the budget,
           | and that nobody will read the manual anyway.
        
             | [deleted]
        
           | Arrath wrote:
           | I miss the days of manuals thick with lore and tidbits and
           | things not directly related to gameplay. You're right, the
           | tutorial can cover bits related to actually playing the game,
           | the controls, etc. Manuals are likely to be overrun by
           | development between the time they're finalized and sent for
           | printing anyway (e.g. I distinctly recall the WoW manual
           | saying that Priests could wear leather armor) but please feed
           | me a bunch of backstory.
           | 
           | I can't count the number of times I read through the manuals
           | for Starsiege, Arcanum, various Jane's simulators, and so on.
        
           | mook wrote:
           | Unfortunately that means if you need a quick refresher (say
           | you put it down for a few months and pick it back up) you're
           | stuck, since you'll need to replay a large chunk to get at
           | the tutorials.
        
         | Havoc wrote:
         | >I don't know on which planet the author lives but my
         | experience is a bit different
         | 
         | Different country or socioeconomic situation perhaps? Don't
         | think I've bought a physical game from a store in the last 10+
         | years.
        
           | cesarb wrote:
           | Probably just using a console instead of a PC for gaming;
           | AFAIK, Steam doesn't exist on consoles (other than the Steam
           | Deck), and you still have to buy physical media (which for
           | some reason seems to act more like a license dongle, since as
           | the parent comment mentions, you still have to download the
           | whole game).
        
             | the_only_law wrote:
             | Don't most of the consoles have their own store though?
             | Like I thought you didn't have to purse the disk, you could
             | go to the Xbox/PS/etc. store and just download the digital
             | copy there.
        
               | filoleg wrote:
               | You are 100% correct. It made me essentially switch from
               | all physical on consoles to "all digital, but physical
               | for games I ended up liking a lot and would want to
               | preserve/have it on my shelf". Mostly out of sheer
               | convenience of not having to swap disks or look for them
               | or having to dedicate space for them in my apt.
        
         | StillBored wrote:
         | Yah, I guess i'm the only one that hard power cycles an xbox?
         | Because its a miserable experience turning it back on when its
         | not been on for a month or so.
         | 
         | It seems ever single one of the 20-30 games it has installed
         | need 20+GB updates, and the download speeds are often a
         | fraction of my home internet connection. Has no one heard of
         | incremental/differential package upgrade? MS should charge
         | companies a bandwidth recovery fee by the size of their
         | updates.
         | 
         | Plus, I hate typing passwords on the controller, and it seems
         | to always want people to sign in/etc.
         | 
         | The Nintendo emulator thing I have blows it away in usability.
         | Turn it on, pick a game, play. Takes less than 20 seconds. The
         | xbox takes that long just to show its logo sometimes. I want to
         | play games not play system admin for a game machine, of
         | schedule my game playing 4 hours in advance.
        
         | ajconway wrote:
         | > Graphics is a bit better than 20 years but nothing "wow"
         | 
         | Maybe 10 years -- in which case the answer is: graphics
         | nowadays is mostly bound to the current console generation. GTA
         | 5 was released almost 10 years ago for PS 4. Uncharted 4 was
         | released 8 years ago. The Last of Us 2 was released 2 years
         | ago.
         | 
         | Now we're entering the next generation -- ray tracing, nicer
         | global illumination, AI upscaling, and much more. The Unreal
         | Engine 5 enables indie developers to produce an image almost as
         | good as AAA titles of the previous generation.
        
           | the_only_law wrote:
           | I'm still trying to figure out how the CK3 console port is
           | going to work. A lot of people compared that the games looks
           | simple/boring because of the fact that they wanted it to run
           | on consoles, but I have no clue how you're going to navigate
           | that UI without a mouse, I would probably have an Aneurysm.
        
         | nottorp wrote:
         | > you decide next time to avoid this company (EA) when buying
         | games.
         | 
         | EA is not worth the time for a multitude of reasons, multi
         | gigabyte updates being the least of it.
         | 
         | But yes, where do you live that you still buy PC games
         | physically?
        
         | benibela wrote:
         | My experience is like this:
         | 
         | * Go to the Epic Store
         | 
         | * Collect the weekly free game
         | 
         | * See that it needs a *40 GB* download
         | 
         | * Go away for now, because I do not have so much free space
         | 
         | * A few weeks later, after cleaning the disk, start the
         | download
         | 
         | * Let the download run for a few days, like 10 GB / day,
         | because my internet connection is slow (either that, or
         | download it at the university)
        
       | jonathanstrange wrote:
       | Graphics are extremely important for me for buying a game, yet
       | the least important for actually playing a game. Sadly, it's been
       | a long time since I've had time and interest to finish a game,
       | most of them I rather just try out and never touch again after an
       | hour of playing. For example, I bought Cyberpunk 2077 and Red
       | Dead Redemption 2 when they came out and never played them - it
       | was too much of a hassle, and even getting into a game like that
       | takes too much time for me nowadays. I basically just tinker
       | around with the graphics settings and enjoy the scenery.
       | 
       | From time to time I fire up games like these again just to
       | realize that I don't have the time to even get through the
       | tutorial.
       | 
       | To cut a long story short, there is unfortunately nowadays a huge
       | divide between making a game that people buy and making a game
       | that people play, and the bias is obviously towards the former.
        
         | AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote:
         | I've seen posts like yours enough that I think there might be a
         | market for Graphics Settings Simulator, where the entire game
         | is just having a ludicrous number of settings to tweak and a
         | small area to wander around and take screenshots of for posting
         | on Reddit.
        
         | becquerel wrote:
         | That sounds a lot like AAA fatigue more than fatigue with games
         | (if I can say that without sounding condescending). There's a
         | wealth of good indie games out there with lovely graphics that
         | respect your time.
         | 
         | One that stands out in recent memory was A Short Hike. You can
         | beat it in about an hour, and the scenery is very pleasing to
         | look at. I also think of Journey, which might be one of the
         | most beautiful games ever made, and is probably less than three
         | hours long.
        
           | jonathanstrange wrote:
           | I've never been interested in indie games because their
           | graphics is not appealing to me. I don't like stylized
           | graphics, comic shaders, pixel art games, etc. The more
           | realistic the graphics, the more likely I will buy it.
           | 
           | I also don't think it's a fatigue, as if it were some kind of
           | disease; it's just lack of time when you get older. ;-)
        
             | nottorp wrote:
             | > The more realistic the graphics, the more likely I will
             | buy it.
             | 
             | May I recommend some text adventures to cure you of that?
             | :)
        
             | ChoGGi wrote:
             | Most of the games with great graphics are AAA, so you're
             | stuck playing open world collect-a-thons, card drops
             | sports, or looter shooters.
        
         | bennysomething wrote:
         | I bought Deus ex mankind divided a year or two ago (I don't
         | play games much anymore) the number of mechanics to learn is
         | just annoying and they don't add much. Everything feels so much
         | clunkier and slower than the orginal.
         | 
         | I recently installed the orginal , what a breath of fresh air.
         | Just left to figure out levels yourself instead interruptions
         | every step.
        
         | TheRealDunkirk wrote:
         | > Cyberpunk 2077 and Red Dead Redemption 2
         | 
         | Both of these are good examples of control schemes that are so
         | complicated that it basically precludes me from playing
         | anything else until I'm done with them. Otherwise, muscle
         | memory will screw me to the point of frustration. I hate this
         | part of modern games.
        
           | psyc wrote:
           | I couldn't discern a control scheme in RDR2. It was like
           | Dragon's Lair. "Press J to execute this half-action/half-cut-
           | scene. Now press P to execute this next one and advance this
           | half-action/half-cut-scene. Now press comma. Now learn these
           | arbitrary mechanics that only exist for this one
           | mission....."
        
           | mrtranscendence wrote:
           | > Both of these are good examples of control schemes that are
           | so complicated
           | 
           | Agreed on RDR2, but I didn't have a problem with Cyberpunk.
           | In comparison to RDR2 it may as well have been the original
           | NES Mario Bros.
        
           | Arrath wrote:
           | This is why I was very glad RDR2 always had on-screen prompts
           | for the various controls since it was so often context
           | sensitive and you were always riding a hair-thin line of
           | waving at a townsperson and saying howdy, or drawing down and
           | getting everyone really, really mad.
        
         | nurbl wrote:
         | It's weird to me that even games that seem focused on story,
         | atmosphere and graphics with pretty simple gameplay - like
         | "Control" or "Death Stranding" - can manage to over-complicate
         | it with confusing menus, lots of micromanagement of upgrades,
         | pointless subsystems, etc. I like both these games well enough
         | but I don't think I will ever get through them simply because I
         | don't play often enough to learn all the fiddling.
        
           | Ruthalas wrote:
           | My approach with control was to max out two skills (floating,
           | throwing stuff) and ignore the rest of the systems almost
           | entirely. I upgraded the single gun I used.
           | 
           | Fortunately this was viable and the game doesn't punish you
           | for not engaging with every facet of the varied
           | upgrade/crafting/salvaging systems.
           | 
           | So that may be an option if you'd like to complete it!
        
       | louissan wrote:
       | *eyes his daggerfall dosbox folder*
        
       | unpopularopp wrote:
       | (I work at a major publishing and developing company)
       | 
       | The biggest change have to be us, the players. Almost every game
       | let it be an indie or a triple-A blockbuster have been researched
       | and min-maxed by most players. Not just the "sweats" but the
       | casuals too. Of course official guides and playthrough books have
       | been a thing back in the 90s too, almost every PS1 game had one.
       | But now with the internet, reddit, Discord etc. people can come
       | together and basically "solve" the game they play. I see this
       | everywhere. It's not even about the game being hand-holdy or not
       | it's the fact that players can datamine and simulate every aspect
       | of the game. Elden Ring is a perfect example recently where
       | builds are min maxed to edge as possible. And that's a mainly
       | single player title, there is not even anything on the line. MMOs
       | are kinda dying because of this mentality, especially WoW
       | everyone expected to have the best build doing the best possible
       | dps or else. Even in very casual games like Animal Crossing you
       | have this mentality of having the best villagers in the game,
       | people asking insane amount of money to visit their islands ot
       | get that best item you need etc. So yeah, I'd say this is the
       | biggest change.
        
         | Levitz wrote:
         | Information goes from one player to other, it used to be that
         | the circles for this were small (relatives, classmates etc) but
         | now it's the whole world.
         | 
         | Besides of what you are talking about, it also affects
         | developers, it is not that strange for games today to be
         | developed assuming you are going to google things out or that
         | you are going to be assisted by a wiki site, I'm frankly
         | worried about this.
         | 
         | I recently played Subnautica, one of the features is that after
         | making a vehicle you can craft upgrades for it, you also have
         | to replace the energy cells they use, yet the game gives no
         | indication on how to do either thing, a quick google search
         | will point out that there are specific areas of the vehicle
         | that can be interacted with, but it really feels like there is
         | a missing prompt or tutorial somewhere.
         | 
         | What will become of these experience in some 20-30 years I
         | don't know.
        
         | kipchak wrote:
         | I think this is something that might be starting to reverse a
         | bit. Just going off of conversations I see online, I would
         | imagine a decent number of players made a conscious effort not
         | to consult guides in order to "spoil" the experience for
         | themselves. Outer Wilds is an example of a fairly popular indie
         | where people are very careful not to spoil or give away too
         | much.
        
           | zbtaylor1 wrote:
           | I think you're right. Anecdotally I, as well as most of my
           | friends that still game, have become increasingly conscious
           | of avoiding "help" when playing a new game. I'd never played
           | a FromSoft game and beating Elden Ring with zero spoilers or
           | advice was just about the greatest gaming experience I've
           | ever had.
           | 
           | I suspect it's partially an age thing. Now that we're older
           | and becoming nostalgic for the wonder that games held for us
           | as children this is a great way to capture some of that magic
           | again.
           | 
           | As mentioned elsewhere, gaming guides aren't a new thing, but
           | for a certain segment of the population they were pretty
           | uncommon for a large chunk of our childhood. So, instead,
           | knowledge was shared around the lunch table or at recess.
           | 
           | It's maybe not quite as exciting in my 30's as it was back
           | then, but it's a hell of a lot more fun to discover things
           | with my friends than it is to watch a 20 minute video about
           | optimal strategy.
        
         | Semaphor wrote:
         | And IMO this is great. My favorite games (Pathfinder: Kingmaker
         | and Wrath of the Righteous) have a very broad difficulty span,
         | story mode essentially plays itself, unfair requires very tight
         | minmaxing of builds. I only play on core (which already comes
         | with a warning popup as it's 2 above normal), because I don't
         | like minmaxing and instead want fun builds (but still have a
         | challenge).
         | 
         | But what I hate are puzzles. Parts of the game would have been
         | completely inaccessible to me, because I'd have either avoided
         | them, or stopped playing because of frustration.
         | 
         | Instead, I can simply look up the solutions online, and the
         | unfair player who doesn't want to spend hours thinking about
         | the perfect build can go to neoseeker and check their list of
         | unfair viable builds.
         | 
         | I'm soon finishing my 3rd time through WotR (with a total play
         | time of over 1400 hours), and for my next run, part of my build
         | was decided by datamined deity reactivity in the game.
         | 
         | Especially in single player games, the options and additional
         | enjoyment coming from datamining, minmaxing, and sharing of
         | secrets are amazing.
        
         | bombcar wrote:
         | One of the counters to this is to have various ways to play -
         | Stellaris for example has _well known_ "best builds" where you
         | pick the proper civics, traits, government, and origin and
         | follow a pretty basic tech rush, and win.
         | 
         | But then after you've done that a huge amount of fun is trying
         | to win with _non-optimal_ builds, often  "for the lols".
         | 
         | In this way it's more of a roguelike (or similar to Dwarf
         | Fortress, et al) where the goal isn't to "beat the game" but to
         | beat it on your terms.
        
           | the_only_law wrote:
           | And if you pull off non-meta strategies, you're not good,
           | you're just "cheesing" or something.
           | 
           | Funny enough, a recent turn based 4X that was supposed to be
           | a Civ killer released and is now looking pretty rough review
           | wise. The biggest complaint is that some of the civs are just
           | straight up better inherently.
           | 
           | Which is probably why I love Crusader Kings, it's the only
           | paradox game I've played where playing as minor nobody
           | nations isn't the most boring grind imaginable.
        
             | jlawson wrote:
             | What game was it?
        
               | the_only_law wrote:
               | Humankind.
        
         | joshstrange wrote:
         | > people can come together and basically "solve" the game they
         | play
         | 
         | There is a very fine line between "providing resources" and
         | ruining a game for me. WoW isn't a lot of fun for me anymore (I
         | haven't played even many years now) because of exactly the
         | reason you list. It felt like the only "right way" to play the
         | game or the only way to be competitive was to find and learn a
         | specific build/play style. That sucks all the fun out of the
         | game for me.
         | 
         | I've run into this with Factorio as well. When I first played
         | it I didn't look up much info at all and I had a blast. On
         | later play-throughs I got deep into online blueprints or "best
         | practices" and in very little time the game lost it's appeal
         | for me. I'm not talking about belt balancer books but malls,
         | research factories, and the like. When I realized why I wasn't
         | having fun I vowed to only use the most basic online blueprints
         | and that has helped a lot.
         | 
         | It's a hard path to walk between "This game is inscrutable and
         | I need help!" and "Well now I'm just a glorified computer
         | following a detailed walkthrough, not playing a game". I have
         | to stop myself from meta-gaming too much or it ruins the game
         | for me (though it's a useful tool to use to quit a game that
         | I'm too deep into).
        
         | matt_s wrote:
         | > MMOs are kinda dying because of this mentality
         | 
         | Maybe the old school ones but there are many examples of games
         | now that have season passes that cost $10-20 for a few months,
         | have cosmetic items you can earn/purchase.
         | 
         | The "meta" in a game is what the min-maxed gear is. Or what I
         | like to call the spreadsheet gear load-out. There are lots of
         | discussions, play testing damage numbers, trying different
         | modifiers/gear combos, etc. done to figure out the max damage-
         | per-second (DPS) and then players gravitate to that gear,
         | grinding for that gear, etc. Some people actually publish
         | spreadsheets of data on the gear.
         | 
         | Then the game devs change the "meta" by tweaking the stats on
         | the gear to make XYZ weapon/armor better, or introduce a new
         | weapon that has better DPS. This sometimes aligns with season
         | passes or map changes. Its endless and probably hugely
         | profitable for them. If you compare the money people spend on
         | these types of games, I bet the average player on season passes
         | spends more than a monthly subscription based MMO (for those
         | that actually spend money).
         | 
         | Its the same "keeping up with the jonses" concept IRL, or in
         | business world, earnings have to always be better than the last
         | time.
        
         | shrimp_emoji wrote:
         | > _MMOs are kinda dying_
         | 
         | They should. MMO is an expired genre.
         | 
         | It's a relic of the advent of broadband, when playing with tons
         | of other players in a graphical game became possible for the
         | first time. That was novel and amazing, even if it meant deep
         | compromises in gameplay and graphics. Now, though, that's no
         | longer novel, and those compromises don't make sense. And the
         | incentives are awful to boot; a company has to run beefy
         | servers, which means it's pressured to find ways to extract
         | ever more money from the players, leading to stuff like pay-to-
         | win.
         | 
         | Although some people think they can be saved, particularly if
         | they're sandboxes instead of theme parks:
         | https://youtu.be/nvK8fua6O64
        
           | Dylan16807 wrote:
           | > And the incentives are awful to boot; a company has to run
           | beefy servers, which means it's pressured to find ways to
           | extract ever more money from the players, leading to stuff
           | like pay-to-win.
           | 
           | They have to run servers that would have been beefy decades
           | ago. These days I could go rent a server for $5/core/month,
           | and as a lowball handle 100 concurrent users per core. And
           | based on some searches, if 10% of players can log in
           | simultaneously that's _much_ more than enough. So that comes
           | out to $60 a year per 1000 subscribers.
           | 
           | I don't see how server costs could be a problem for a game
           | that has _any_ income. You could ask for $5 a year to play
           | and server costs would completely disappear. No need to do
           | any harsh money extraction at all for server costs.
        
         | dgb23 wrote:
         | Interestingly this is something heavily discussed in many game
         | communities. People feel a tension between looking things up
         | while possibly ruining their experience and experimenting,
         | learning themselves but spending much more time.
         | 
         | I think this has to do with a prevalence of frankly stupefying
         | reward structure of many games. I call it spreadsheet
         | progression. Instead of opening up new gameplay options, you
         | often get a huge list of entirely arbitrary choices that only
         | differ in the most superficial ways.
        
           | amlib wrote:
           | This is why I love games like Zelda more than the usual RPGs
           | because even tough the game only offers a few dozen items to
           | find, most of them are unique and introduce new gameplay
           | mechanics.
        
         | RektBoy wrote:
         | Just an idea, let's add into EULA something like, you can't
         | post guides and walkthroughs on the internet, or DMCA/lawsuit.
        
           | matt_s wrote:
           | Game devs would never do this. Its all free marketing for
           | their game and if major streamers play the game, even for a
           | short time, it will boost sales/downloads, etc.
        
           | elliekelly wrote:
           | I don't think it's likely to happen but sometimes I think it
           | would be fun (maybe not the right word) for a really story-
           | driven exploratory game like RDR2 to come with an NDA for the
           | first month or so. Not anything that the company would
           | seriously enforce but just as a way to give players a bit of
           | time to explore the game without any spoilers.
        
             | hhmc wrote:
             | It's pretty straightforward to avoid spoilers if you don't
             | want to be spoiled. Although I guess this depends on your
             | social circles behaving to some extent.
        
           | 0des wrote:
           | Let's not
        
         | helen___keller wrote:
         | Agreed. I realized if I go back and play an old PS1 game, I
         | can't allow myself to do any internet search about it or it
         | fundamentally changes how I play the game.
         | 
         | On the other side, this change in player behavior has reflected
         | back in the game industry. I often see a "softening" in
         | permanent build-based character gameplay, such as choosing your
         | skills and stats in Diablo 2 has gone away in modern Diablo
         | games - because why add this feature when you know your player
         | base will all just google the best build?
        
           | slowmovintarget wrote:
           | So you get Path of Exile instead, where the mechanics keep
           | changing each "league" and you need to run a new "build" each
           | time.
           | 
           | On the upside it can keep the game fresh trying out new
           | things, but if you find one that's fun, it will likely be
           | nerfed in the next league.
        
             | StillBored wrote:
             | <i> but if you find one that's fun, it will likely be
             | nerfed in the next league. </i>
             | 
             | That is what I find infuriating about the game. They are
             | constantly messing with the skills tree and even if it
             | doesn't destroy my characters I don't want to go back and
             | rebuild them everytime I log in. So, when I initially
             | played it, I gave them money and logged in pretty regularly
             | for 6 months or so, then I didn't log in for a couple
             | months and they literally destroyed my character by
             | removing the linkage to opposite sides of the skills tree I
             | was using (yah granted that character felt way
             | overpowered).
             | 
             | If they were smart, they would version the skills tree at
             | the point of character creation, so people in the general
             | global world don't get messed up every time they want to
             | change the league play strategy.
        
               | jpadkins wrote:
               | the game is designed around the assumption you don't play
               | a character for more than 3 months (< 5% of the
               | playerbase plays in standard). I agree they could do a
               | better job setting expectations with new players to not
               | get attached to their characters.
        
               | slowmovintarget wrote:
               | I've sunk more than 2000 hours into PoE, and spent a few
               | hundred dollars to support the devs. I had gotten into a
               | groove where I'd play the "fun" leagues and skip the
               | stinkers (because they tend to alternate: great-broken-
               | great-broken).
               | 
               | I have almost no time for gaming these days, between work
               | and family. I backed the new System Shock on Kickstarter
               | years ago, and I probably won't get to play it.
        
         | barrysteve wrote:
         | Ketroc in the Starcraft 2 AI Arena tournament mentions the same
         | pattern. Starcraft 1 came out before the internet and web had
         | crushed the meta. People would figure out how to play with
         | their friends and then meet up at local tournaments to find out
         | who knew how to play. It was an awesome period of discovery.
         | The guys behind aiarena.net are having a blast running the AI
         | bot tournament because they are making the meta up as they code
         | better bots.
        
         | t0bia_s wrote:
         | I remember playing World of Tanks during early beta. It was
         | fun. Player was mostly mens in around 30s with interest in WW2
         | technology. Game has unbalanced matchmaking, different tanks
         | that has really different stats and specific cons and pros...
         | Then it become publicly more known with lot of ads everywhere.
         | A lot of kids joined to the game. Developers tweaked and
         | balanced everything. And it slowly became game without fun.
         | Everything was so perfectly balanced, that it was almost
         | irrelevant what tank you had. And with casualty of players
         | regular games lacks any strategy. No cooperation, just
         | insulting, grinding, no fun... I quit playing WoT after
         | developers puts more and more imaginary/ridiculous tanks with
         | every patch and balanced specific unique abilities of tanks.
        
         | the_only_law wrote:
         | > But now with the internet, reddit, Discord etc. people can
         | come together and basically "solve" the game they play.
         | 
         | meta gaming kills strategy for me. From back when I first
         | started playing AoE3 I was absolutely infatuated with the game
         | and genre, but found myself incapable of winning MP matches.
         | Some guys from the old pre-DE competitive scene helped train me
         | a bit, and I could win MP matches now, but the game is no fun,
         | instead of being a fun 4X/RTS, it was "follow this foundation,
         | time everything perfectly, micro perfectly, min/max everything
         | and it lost most of the appeal.
         | 
         | Even more recently CK3, which can be a pretty immersive game,
         | often loses that immersion when the game becomes less about
         | what I do as a king, and more about min/maxing mechanics.
         | 
         | A lot of strategy games start to feel less "strategy" and more
         | "who can exploit mechanics and follow predefined path".
         | Ironically one AoE3 legend rose from nowhere a couple years
         | back with strategies different from the meta and winning.
         | People called him toxic for it.
        
           | maccard wrote:
           | I don't agree with your take - I've always loved RTS games
           | (played age of empires 2, StarCraft, Warcraft 3, deviated
           | into lol/dota and back to StarCraft 2 and now age of empires
           | 4) - basic strategies in terms of build orders are table
           | stakes for these games and have been since as long as I can
           | remember. You need to be able to react to changing situations
           | in these games. Nobody executes build orders perfectly, and
           | there's RNG in map spawns and layouts that can give you a
           | subtle edge over your opponent. The game is won and lost on
           | being able to react to your opponents moves and follow
           | through on counters to it, the same way chess plays.
        
             | ericdykstra wrote:
             | RTS has always been my preferred competitive genre. Yes,
             | basic build orders are pretty well mapped out. In Starcraft
             | 2, for example, the first 1:30 or so for beginners, the
             | first 3-4 minutes for intermediate players, and the first
             | 8-9 minutes for pros have "standard" build orders.
             | 
             | But once you get past this, there's so many things to worry
             | about - balancing tech versus units versus upgrades versus
             | economy, micro, scouting, unit composition, harassing and
             | defending harass... And then the meta layer, which is
             | allocating your limited time and APM to those decisions and
             | actions! Really challenging and rewarding to improve at,
             | and the only "e-sport" I find interesting to watch.
        
             | the_only_law wrote:
             | > The game is won and lost on being able to react to your
             | opponents moves and follow through on counters to it, the
             | same way chess plays.
             | 
             | Ok fair enough, though to me personally, I'm not very
             | excited by or immersed in chess games either. I've trended
             | more towards grand strategy in recent years, which on the
             | surface seem to be closer to what I'm looking for, but in
             | practice often end up being me just trying to min/max
             | modifiers for RNG rolls.
        
               | maccard wrote:
               | Totally fair - it's a pity that how RTS games are
               | presented Vs how they play is very different. I was going
               | to say grand strategy games are probably more what you're
               | looking for. I'm a fan of stellaris and the total war
               | games, and they do lend themselves to min maxing but
               | fatless so than many other games!
        
               | wincy wrote:
               | Yeah I mean I totally get it. I've been playing a lot of
               | Stellaris lately and want an emergent fun story of being
               | a space empire. Once it feels like I'm playing a
               | simulation I get bored and look for something new.
               | 
               | I've started playing tabletop role playing games and
               | being interested in those lately because of this. Really
               | I want to tell interesting stories.
        
         | MisterBastahrd wrote:
         | What, exactly, were you going to min-max in Mario 64? Strategy
         | guides have literally been a thing since the 1980s.
         | 
         | The biggest change is not the players. The biggest change is
         | the monetization of games that you have already played for and
         | the sad hamster wheel that companies have put players on. While
         | Elden Ring is mostly about exploration, most AAA games being
         | developed nowadays consist of a set of mundane tasks that don't
         | even make sense when putting them into a real world context.
         | 
         | Kill 10 X. Collect 20 Y. Walk to Z and stand there while you
         | "survey the area." It's all bullshit, but instead of just being
         | able to enjoy the game by exploring to progress through the
         | story, you have to do all this dumb crap.
        
           | PetitPrince wrote:
           | > What, exactly, were you going to min-max in Mario 64?
           | 
           | Time to finish the game, aka speedrun. Not necessarily a bad
           | thing though (I love watching all the performance during
           | AGDQ/SGDQ), but that's an example of "optimizing the fun out
           | of the game".
        
         | TheRealDunkirk wrote:
         | > MMOs are kinda dying because of this mentality, especially
         | WoW everyone expected to have the best build doing the best
         | possible dps or else.
         | 
         | I can't speak for WoW, but I _hope_ this is true for ESO.
         | Despite watching many videos explaining the light-attack /power
         | weaving technique, practicing for many hours, watching build
         | videos, optimizing my build, farming/buying (mostly) BIS gear,
         | and maxing it out, I can still only pull about half the DPS
         | demanded by the hardest trials. Despite paying just as much as
         | everyone else, there's a whole bunch of content I'm effectively
         | gated from playing. So I don't, anymore. And I'm bitter about
         | it.
        
           | yetihehe wrote:
           | It became a competitive game and you are not willing to be in
           | the top tier of players. It is a holy grail for game
           | companies: "How to mix having uncompetitive fun in a game
           | while allowing competition".
        
             | TheRealDunkirk wrote:
             | I thought that detailing my efforts was a clear
             | illustration of my willingness, but ok.
        
               | yurishimo wrote:
               | As a more charitable take, I think they mean that the
               | devs at ESO know that only an upper echelon of players
               | are willing to maximize their builds and they're okay
               | with some players falling off the edges.
               | 
               | I agree that it's shitty.
        
               | yetihehe wrote:
               | Exactly this. Not everyone can be in upper echelons. I'm
               | pretty bad at any competitive game I've tried, even one
               | I've created myself 5 minutes ago (I've lost to a
               | colleague on a tiktactoe game on a graph I've invented
               | when I was learning about graphs in university).
               | 
               | What I meant with my comment: some players play for fun.
               | Some players play to win and make a competition out of
               | any game. Being the best requires some degree of rule-
               | breaking which makes a game less fun. Not every player
               | actually wants to compete in ways that are not fun but
               | required to win a game.
        
       | spywaregorilla wrote:
       | I think the biggest change is content. Games just have a lot more
       | of it now. The ratio of content to mechanics has stretched out
       | hugely. Older zelda games were pretty clear you get one item per
       | dungeon and that's the gimmick and then the item won't be too
       | important going forward. Mario games tend to hit a design theme
       | for a few levels then move on and be done with it.
       | 
       | Now a lot of games just want to be big, even if the variety of
       | gameplay doesn't change. People get validation and a sense of
       | achievement from their numbers going up. People like exploring a
       | big place and running through long scripted social encounters
       | even if there's no autonomy. It's now a long lasting source of
       | social and personal progression that we don't get in real life
       | nearly as easily.
       | 
       | Which is fine honestly. But when a designer fucks up the balance
       | it becomes work because there is no choice but trudging through
       | trivial, reused content to reach the next goal.
        
         | TheRealDunkirk wrote:
         | > Now a lot of games just want to be big
         | 
         | There are several games in my library that I have yet to
         | finish, because it just gets so repetitive to do it all.
         | Spider-Man. Borderlands 3. I love AC:O, but how many bandit
         | camps can you clear before you go mad? When you add in all the
         | DLC, you're talking about many hundreds of hours of gameplay,
         | if you do everything, but 75% of it is the just same fight,
         | over and over again. Going back to Borderlands, Wonderlands is
         | WAAAY shorter than 3, and I, for one, really appreciate it.
         | (They'll probably blow that up with DLC tho.)
        
           | FeepingCreature wrote:
           | Another settlement needs our help!
        
           | georgeecollins wrote:
           | One of the things that made console games need to get longer
           | is the rise of a retail resale market. That's subsiding a bit
           | with online delivery and online content.
        
         | georgeecollins wrote:
         | I think you are thinking about cartridge games vs today's
         | BluRay / Downloadable. CD-ROM Games circa 1997 had a ton of
         | content. Look at games of that era such as Blade Runner, Zork
         | Nemesis, Wing Commander IV various Sierra Games all had tons of
         | art, music and live acting that would make them very expensive
         | games to develop.
        
         | the_only_law wrote:
         | Microsoft's remaster of AoE3 has been suprisingly decent.
         | 
         | The game at its core, is still the same, but they've been
         | adding tons of new content, that's breathed new life into the
         | game to the point where it was even outperforming AoE4 for a
         | bit.
         | 
         | But the new content is a mix of stuff. A lot of it adds new
         | mechanics and diversity that make the game much more enjoyable.
         | Only problem is I never properly learned how to play non-2005
         | vanilla civs.
        
         | dgb23 wrote:
         | That's mainstream games.
         | 
         | A somewhat Zelda related, modern indie game that comes to mind
         | is Hyper Light Drifter. It's one of the best games I ever
         | played, and I have played a ton until about 5y ago.
         | 
         | The features/content are orthogonal, minimal and extremely well
         | balanced. There is almost no unnecessary fluff and stuff that
         | distracts from the core, everything is designed holistically.
         | The gameplay is challenging and varied, while building on a few
         | well thought out primitives.
         | 
         | Still you feel like you're stepping into a world of wonder. The
         | game has a distinct personality and encourages experimentation
         | and exploration.
         | 
         | It rewards you with actual gameplay and not with ego soothing
         | tricks.
         | 
         | Mainstream games that have this kind of polish and holistic
         | design are very rare, even though they have access to humongous
         | resources.
        
           | tinco wrote:
           | This is totally off-topic, but I also own this game and
           | really enjoyed it, but I played it through once and then I
           | was done. Was there some kind of replayability in it that I
           | missed?
        
             | dgb23 wrote:
             | Aside from having secret corners and areas it definitely
             | has replay value, because it is just so damn good. Like you
             | would replay some of the Mario games, just to enjoy it one
             | more time, do things differently, better, and maybe find
             | some new tricks and so on.
        
         | galangalalgol wrote:
         | I think the lack of autonomy is largely due to the move away
         | from written social encounters to voice acting. When good
         | synthetic voicing arrives we may see the options open back up.
         | I have an easier time with written rather than spoken
         | communication, so I miss the walls of text in games like
         | daggerfall or baldurs gate. In daggerfall a lot of the texts
         | was generated, we could do that so much better now. Quest
         | markers, fast travel, and automapping also made the smaller
         | hand sculpted (rather than generated) worlds seem even smaller.
        
         | the8472 wrote:
         | Here's a nice illustration of mechanics vs. graphics.
         | https://twitter.com/robotduck/status/759529875992698880
        
           | spywaregorilla wrote:
           | Amusing. I felt the same way in tomb raider. But then I don't
           | find any video game to be particularly immersive (and to pre-
           | empt the inevitable responses, no VR is not immersive at all
           | either). That's not universally true. Many people freak out
           | when something like this happens to their avatar. But tomb
           | raider was the epitome of the cinematic but braindead AAA
           | gameplay genre. In terms of content its actually pretty lean.
           | The game has a linear story and every moment is handcrafted
           | faux-cinematics. Probably a problem, but certainly a
           | different problem than the bloated content issue.
        
           | elliekelly wrote:
           | Oh my gosh I couldn't disagree more! I have a friend who
           | often plays games muted (on Switch, handheld) and it's like a
           | completely different experience without the dramatic music.
           | The "decorative" aspects definitely make a game more
           | immersive and add to the emotion of whatever it is you're
           | trying to accomplish.
        
             | aconbere wrote:
             | Hmmm, the author of the tweet goes into more detail later
             | in the thread. In this case their point wasn't so much
             | about adding decoration but about lying to the player about
             | the danger.
             | 
             | The game is presenting one thing "this is very dangerous
             | you could slip and fall and die at any minute!" while the
             | mechanics are saying another thing "There is no danger just
             | a linear path".
             | 
             | It's not that the author thinks we should remove decoration
             | but that the decoration should be authentic to the
             | situation the player is is in.
             | 
             | If the game is presenting danger, BE DANGEROUS! If the game
             | is presenting anxiety, BE STRESSFUL! But this in between of
             | presenting danger without the play mirroring the experience
             | is disengenuous.
        
       | eterevsky wrote:
       | > The previous generation stares at the current one with disgust
       | 
       | Is this really happening to video games? I suppose I can think of
       | some old-school gamers disapproving of Fortnight, but I believe
       | anyone would be disgusted with ALL the modern video games. They
       | are simply too diverse. There are modern games created for every
       | possible taste. Whatever your favorite video game from the 90s
       | did well, there are modern video games that do it better.
        
       | pizza234 wrote:
       | > Graphics do not really matter. Do they?
       | 
       | > The quality of the graphics seems to be the most important
       | point in a game.
       | 
       | > However, let's not be assertive: there are still a lot of
       | players, usually not the casual ones, who also consider
       | playability, the scenario, and how much time you need to finish
       | it, the presence of a multiplayer mode... to evaluate a game
       | completely and fairly.
       | 
       | I have a gap of around 10 years in my videogame playing history.
       | After resuming, the difference that struck me the most is how
       | immersive videogames are nowadays (of course, there are many
       | factors, e.g. the genre), which is partly due to graphics
       | advancements.
       | 
       | Graphics don't live in the void though. They're part of the art
       | design and they're a mean of expression; overall, they help
       | providing an immersive experience for the player.
       | 
       | Beautiful graphics also are not relegated to AAA 3D games (which
       | are a narrow segment of the market) like one would think (since
       | AAA games have the most exposure to casual readers/gamers); many
       | indie games have beautiful (in different ways) graphics.
       | 
       | > "Oh, it is so ugly", "They did not age well" for the more
       | diplomats.
       | 
       | I think I've never read this, referring to graphics. In general
       | the aging refers to game mechanics which that considered annoying
       | and obsolete today, e.g. permadeath (where not intended), lack of
       | convenient checkpoints etc.
        
         | rhdunn wrote:
         | Early 3D graphics clearly fit the "haven't aged well" category.
         | Most of that is due to the low polygon count making the models
         | look angular.
        
         | tpxl wrote:
         | >> "Oh, it is so ugly", "They did not age well" for the more
         | diplomats. > I think I've never read this, referring to
         | graphics
         | 
         | The games that tried to have realistic graphics with the best
         | the tech had to offer 15 years ago have definitely aged badly
         | (Crysis 1, Fallout 3). Compare that to highly stylized graphics
         | that didn't push the envelope, and still look good today (Team
         | fortress 2).
         | 
         | That being said, I'm of the opinion that modern AAA titles
         | spend _waaaaaay_ too much effort (money) on graphics.
        
           | 0des wrote:
           | I went through this recently when I played some early Saturn
           | games and its crazy how much either time or the primitive
           | nature of the time allowed your brain to fill in the gaps
           | where graphics fell short.
           | 
           | On the bright side maybe my next computer can run crysis.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | theandrewbailey wrote:
       | > I was very excited because I liked so much Simcity 2000. So, I
       | played to the 3000, not as much, but enough to get the following
       | opinion: it was a very good game, with the same spirit as its
       | predecessors, but a little bit less fun than the 2000.
       | 
       | I spent thousands of hours playing SimCity 2000. I can't speak
       | for 3000 (never played any), but I got 4 soon after it came out.
       | I spent a few hundred hours trying to figure it out, but ended up
       | liking 2000 better. The complicated mechanics in 4 destroyed much
       | of the fun.
       | 
       | It was awkward when my dad needed an example of civil engineering
       | when talking to someone, and asked if they ever heard of SimCity.
       | It happened more than once.
        
         | atomicUpdate wrote:
         | > I spent a few hundred hours trying to figure it out, but
         | ended up liking 2000 better. The complicated mechanics in 4
         | destroyed much of the fun.
         | 
         | A few hundred hours is an insane amount of time to spend on a
         | game where much of the fun was "destroyed".
        
         | 0des wrote:
         | Is there a way to play SC2K on hi res? I went looking a few
         | weeks ago and only found lengthy patch processes. I figured GOG
         | would have it but they're still shipping the DOS version
        
           | AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote:
           | PC Gaming Wiki on the subject: https://www.pcgamingwiki.com/w
           | iki/SimCity_2000#Installing_on...
        
             | 0des wrote:
             | Ah great, you found the lengthy patch process I spoke
             | about. In Wine it is more complex and in the end did not
             | work.
        
               | AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote:
               | My bad, when you said "lengthy" I assumed you meant
               | something more complicated than "install this game
               | normally and then run this single patch executable". And
               | you never mentioned Wine.
        
               | 0des wrote:
               | What can I say, I am my mother's father.
        
           | theandrewbailey wrote:
           | The original Windows release runs in windowed mode, so you
           | should be able to make it as large as you want.
           | 
           | I'm not sure if running it on a modern machine is a good
           | idea, since it has issues with color depths over 256 colors,
           | and the fastest simulation speed doesn't account for Moore's
           | law. I last played SC2k on a retro PC (Win 98, Pentium 3).
           | 
           | https://theandrewbailey.com/article/122/SimCity-2000
        
       | jameshart wrote:
       | The idea that early games prized fun ahead of graphics is
       | ahistoric.
       | 
       | Video game magazines usually rated games on multipoint scales,
       | with usually 'graphics' being a specific category. Games would
       | get high scores just on the basis of their graphics. The main
       | difference between platforms was defined by their graphical
       | capabilities, far more than their performance. Arcade game ports
       | to home computers were almost entirely measured on the fidelity
       | of their recreation of the arcade graphics. A thousand tired
       | movie license tie-ins were released which were just graphical
       | glosses over the same underlying beat-'em-up gameplay.
        
       | svilen_dobrev wrote:
       | do you play.. or are just played with? choose.
       | 
       | anyway, my favorite.. after maaaaany attempts, the recent true-
       | to-original remake:
       | 
       | http://loderunnerwebgame.com/game/
        
         | wazoox wrote:
         | Wow, thank you, that's a hell of a blast from the past.
        
       | gsatic wrote:
       | Not sure where I heard this but games apparently, on a total
       | revenue basis, rake in more than all other categories of software
       | combined.
       | 
       | That was no were close to true back in the day.
        
         | bluescrn wrote:
         | But it's incredibly hit-driven and while the biggest hits rake
         | in billions, the majority of games make a loss, especially
         | indie games.
         | 
         | The market is becoming incredibly tough with so much high-
         | quality entertainment available for very little money via Game
         | Pass, PS Plus, Steam sales, indie bundles, etc. And that's
         | ignoring the F2P side of things.
        
           | maccard wrote:
           | To be fair, the vast majority of games on steam, iOS and
           | Android are shovelware and asset flips. The barrier to entry
           | to publishing on these platforms is $99, so it's not
           | surprising that the majority are not profitable. There's only
           | so many times I will play a passion project 2 person
           | metroidvania with roguelike mechanics before I start to look
           | for something else.
        
         | ido wrote:
         | Also more than music, movies and books.
        
         | burntoutfire wrote:
         | Not a perfect comparison, but Microsoft has higher revenue that
         | entire video games industry across the globe (not perfect,
         | because MS also has some game dev revenue, and is also selling
         | hardware and consulting, so not all of its money come fron non-
         | games software).
        
           | majani wrote:
           | He probably meant that games dwarf the rest of the
           | entertainment industry now.
        
       | sQEjOG4eEBcsVwU wrote:
       | The biggest change that I personally mourn is the death of cheat
       | codes in games. They're all but nonexistent these days, and if
       | you want even the most reasonable gameplay tweaks you have to
       | hope it's both on PC, and mod friendly enough.
        
       | ki_ wrote:
       | personally i find game DESIGN utterly bad these days. It's all so
       | dumbed down also. Mainly talking about online games, because
       | that's the only ones i play. I also find myself keep going back
       | to old games and not new ones. I just find them better.
        
       | notafraudster wrote:
       | > After all, could you really, badly, critic a 30's movie because
       | it is not shoot in HD?
       | 
       | 1930s films did "shoot in HD". Most films were either 16mm or
       | 35mm, both of which have more than enough fidelity to represent
       | video at 1080p or higher without loss of quality. Here's a copy
       | of Wizard of Oz on 4K UHD: https://www.amazon.com/Wizard-Oz-
       | Limited-Anniversary-Collect...
       | 
       | A more realistic take is could you criticize 1920s films for not
       | shooting with sound, and the answer is yes, absolutely. Films
       | went from almost entirely silent to almost entirely talkies in
       | roughly 3 years because of massive, unprecedented, and immediate
       | commercial pressure to do so. Audiences ate up even mediocre
       | talkies and shunned silent works now considered classics. The
       | only reason colour film adoption wasn't similarly fast was
       | because of Technicolor's monopoly.
       | 
       | Flash forward to the 1990s, where cinema as a medium was very
       | sophisticated. Now look at blockbusters beginning to use CG
       | rather than animatronics. The airplane in Air Force One. Jar Jar
       | Binks in Phantom Menace. Hell, take the 1997 re-releases of the
       | Star Wars trilogy which inexplicably added garbage like CG Jabba
       | the Hutt. The purple stuff in The Langoliers. Even going back to
       | Lord of the Rings, even going back to the Hobbit, even going back
       | to "early" Marvel films there are tons of moments where CG is
       | jarring. The Polar Express -- an excellent and heartwarming
       | Zemeckis film -- is mostly known because no one likes the dead-
       | eye CG. Yes, absolutely, technical barriers have affected peoples
       | enjoyment of film and still do!
       | 
       | In video games the most obvious period of time that is
       | conspicuously a donut hole is the Playstation 1 / early 3D era.
       | The PS1s 3d games featured really quite nauseating affine texture
       | warping due to a lack of hardware correction support. Here's one
       | video of many talking about this:
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x8TO-nrUtSI Early 3d controls are
       | atrocious -- the "tank controls" of Resident Evil are famous for
       | this -- because controllers initially didn't have analogue sticks
       | and when they did, they didn't yet have basic paradigms around
       | how to best use them. The Nintendo 64 was built around analogue
       | control, which is why Mario 64 works so well, and yet it has a
       | completely rotten camera system because there's only a single
       | analogue stick and the c-buttons aren't a good substitute. And
       | that's the PS1/N64. If you go back to the earlier era of 3D,
       | especially on the Super Nintendo, you find low framerate, awkward
       | controlling messes with flat polygon shading. Try playing an
       | unmodified copy of StarFox or Stunt Race FX, I dare you.
       | 
       | No one is saying to throw Casablanca out with the bathwater, just
       | as no one is going to throw Super Mario Bros, out with the
       | bathwater. I'm not saying that technical issues mean we should
       | never play old games or watch old movies. I'm saying that it
       | shouldn't be surprising that people do count technical issues as
       | part of the reason why they prefer newer stuff.
       | 
       | I also think the article misses widely when it pretends that "old
       | ways" of making games don't exist today. Games are made in now-
       | dead genres, with now-dead mechanics, all the time. They have
       | commercial budgets at least as large as they ever did and large,
       | warm communities. In many cases, the original teams working on
       | games in the 1980s and 1990s still make games. I can't find an
       | example in the article where you can't find similar games to play
       | today.
       | 
       | The article mentions that isometric games would be anathema
       | today. Disco Elysium is one of the most acclaimed games of the
       | last few years. Wasteland has two recent sequels, both well
       | liked. Hades is also one of the most acclaimed games of the last
       | few years. Age of Empires IV retains a basically isometric
       | perspective for an RTS. Diablo Immortal just launched and Diablo
       | 4 is coming. Huh?
       | 
       | The article mentions unnamed youngsters not liking the real-ish
       | time mechanics of Titanic Adventure Out of Time, or the
       | difficulty of the puzzles, feeling that they're too punishing. I
       | doubt it. Majora's Mask (1999) is considered an excellent Zelda
       | because of its time mechanics. Dead Rising (2006) was one of the
       | first major hits of the HD era of video games and it's on a fixed
       | timer. Final Fantasy XIII-3 (2013) uses a similar mechanic, and
       | while the game is often criticized for being terribly written
       | nonsense, it's not because of the mechanic.
       | 
       | Or if not the time mechanic, then needing to take notes? Hollow
       | Knight is maybe the most critically acclaimed indie game of all
       | time and most people play it with a fan wiki open, to say nothing
       | of From Software (Dark Souls, Elden Ring) suddenly becoming the
       | apex of prestige developer. Point and click adventures are still
       | quite popular: The Return of the Obra Dinn is widely considered
       | among the best games of the 2010s.
       | 
       | The article claims unnamed gamers today are reacting negatively
       | to the visual choices of the new Monkey Island. This just seems
       | entirely untrue. The reaction across the internet, including on
       | gaming forums, reddit, and here, was overwhelmingly positive. A
       | few people said "okay, this style reminds me a bit of the not-
       | great LucasArts Singapore modernizations of the first few Monkey
       | Islands". This does not presage a great backlash against the
       | game, it's just people shooting from the hip, the vast majority
       | of anyone who cares to comment is excited even if they have
       | concerns about the visuals. And anyway, 99% of the people
       | commenting are greybeards like the rest of us, not young people.
       | 
       | Overall I can't find much here that resonates with me.
        
         | mcphage wrote:
         | > The purple stuff in The Langoliers.
         | 
         | I dunno, I think the Langoliers are still creepy. Yeah, a
         | little low poly--but they got it where it counts.
        
           | willis936 wrote:
           | And it's almost completely attributed to direction,
           | screenplay, cinematography, and editing. Even if the
           | langoliers were people in purple jumpsuits it could still be
           | made eery and creepy.
           | 
           | Uncanny CG kinda fits the mood of Steven King anyway. I feel
           | the technical limitations played to the advantage of the
           | movie. Could you make an even creepier langolier today? Sure,
           | but I feel like this train criticizes art because of the
           | tools available.
        
           | amlib wrote:
           | I was deathly scared of these things when I watched this
           | movie as a kid, couldn't sleep well that night. So it was
           | definitionally effective.
        
         | bnralt wrote:
         | > Or if not the time mechanic, then needing to take notes?
         | Hollow Knight is maybe the most critically acclaimed indie game
         | of all time and most people play it with a fan wiki open
         | 
         | As the other poster said, plenty of people play Hallow Knight
         | without taking notes. For people who do want notes or use a
         | wiki, it's often for fairly simple things, like trying to
         | remember exactly where a closed door was.
         | 
         | This is quite different from a game like Myst, where most agree
         | note taking is a necessity (I believe the box came with a
         | notebook). For people who haven't played it, imagine 5 or 6
         | escape rooms linked together, with clues spread throughout, so
         | the first thing you look at in the first room might be
         | something you need to solve a puzzle in the last.
         | 
         | Likewise, the impact of the two games is different. Hollow
         | Knight is a popular indie game, but it's still sold a fraction
         | of the copies that AAA games do. Myst, on the other hand was
         | the top selling computer game for _years_. Often people who
         | never bought any other computer game bought a copy of the game.
         | 
         | Cyan still makes games, but they're niche games that don't have
         | anything like the cultural impact that Myst had.
         | 
         | Likewise, I don't think Majora's Mask should really be compared
         | to games with forward moving time mechanics. It has a time
         | mechanic, but it's basically on a repeating hour schedule. If
         | you miss something, you can just come back to the cycle again.
         | 
         | This is the opposite of games with real time mechanics (time
         | measured in actions - "real action time"?) like The Colonel's
         | Bequest or The Last Express, because the latter games decidedly
         | _don't_ repeat. If you miss an event in the game, it's gone
         | (granted, Titanic isn't quite at that level). Though I suppose
         | such games have always been a bit rare.
        
           | notafraudster wrote:
           | Hollow Knight is likely around 10-12 million copies sold by
           | now (one typical rule of thumb: Steam reviews * 30-40 = Steam
           | sales, 201k reviews, and the game also did gangbusters on
           | consoles). This is half my point. The perceived decline in
           | relevance discussed in the article is not real. It may be
           | real if you measure sales as a percentage of the highest
           | selling game in the extant universe, but that's a foolish
           | measure.
           | 
           | I don't really understand most of the other stuff; yes, some
           | games have slightly more punishing implementations of
           | mechanics than others (Dead Rising uses the real-time
           | forward-only approach). I named some high profile examples
           | which are in the approximate orbit of what was discussed. It
           | can't possibly be the article's thesis that minor variation
           | between two games implementing a quasi real-time progression
           | gate constitutes a major arc in the history of narrative
           | gaming.
        
         | bombcar wrote:
         | Even the original Toy Story suffers from this - they downplay
         | it because they know it's bad, but the _humans_ in it are low-
         | quality animations that are jarring today (YouTube kids shows
         | animate humans better than that now).
        
         | islon wrote:
         | That's the thing I like about HN: you can find comments that
         | are much better and more insightful then the article itself.
         | 
         | As an old time gamer I can't agree more. We are in the golden
         | age of old-style games (hollow knight, disco elysium, stardew
         | valley, etc). People are making this old style games with all
         | the hindsight of modernized mechanics, better control schemes,
         | more accessibility, stylized graphics, PC releases.
        
           | DaveSapien wrote:
           | Here here.
        
             | christophilus wrote:
             | Pedantry: "Hear, hear!" is the phrase, unless you're
             | pointing to a specific location. :)
        
           | [deleted]
        
           | dehrmann wrote:
           | I've watched a decent amount of AVGN. Most of his criticisms
           | are either the game is buggy, the controls are hard to use,
           | or it's too hard. Too hard usually breaks down to either not
           | having enough information to finish the game or places you
           | have to grind excessively. We've learned a lot over 20+
           | years, and making sure you nail these things in an old-style
           | game makes the game much more approachable and enjoyable.
        
         | mrtranscendence wrote:
         | I'll quibble a bit ...
         | 
         | > The article mentions unnamed youngsters not liking the real-
         | ish time mechanics of Titanic Adventure Out of Time, or the
         | difficulty of the puzzles, feeling that they're too punishing.
         | I doubt it
         | 
         | But none of your examples are particularly recent, except
         | arguably Final Fantasy XIII-3. Recent games with a strict timer
         | are rare, and when they exist -- like the recent indie
         | metroidvania Unsighted -- they get a lot of criticism for it.
         | As for difficult puzzles, well, are there _any_ non-indie games
         | with difficult puzzles in recent history? Sure, such games
         | continue to get made, but they 're fairly niche.
         | 
         | > Hollow Knight is maybe the most critically acclaimed indie
         | game of all time and most people play it with a fan wiki open
         | 
         | I don't know how many people play Hollow Knight while
         | constantly consulting a guide, but if they do, it doesn't imply
         | an appetite for taking notes while playing games. If I'd had to
         | take notes while playing Hollow Knight (and I did not, though I
         | did consult a guide a _couple_ times) I wouldn 't have enjoyed
         | it nearly as much as I did. I don't know anyone who takes notes
         | playing games. Heck, I don't remember who it was off the top of
         | my head, but recently a journalist caught a bunch of flack when
         | he suggested taking notes while playing Elden Ring.
         | 
         | > Point and click adventures are still quite popular
         | 
         | The graphical point-and-click adventure is nowhere near as
         | popular, in relative terms, as it used to be. They do get made,
         | but mostly by indies with small budgets and small audiences. I
         | also don't think Return of the Obra Dinn is a great example,
         | but maybe I'm too rigid in what I think a point-and-click
         | adventure is.
         | 
         | All that is to say ... it's no surprise that difficult or
         | otherwise challenging games survive to this day; the sheer size
         | of the market means that niche audiences can have their needs
         | met. But a game like Monkey Island couldn't be made today and
         | expect to be the kind of juggernaut it once was.
        
           | notafraudster wrote:
           | I mean, real time mechanics were uncommon when T:AOOT was
           | released and they're uncommon now. But there are examples of
           | them sprinkled throughout the history of gaming -- which was
           | the purpose of showing examples that are spaced out from then
           | until now), including well after the purported decline in
           | youngster competence described in the article. Want more
           | recent examples? Outer Wilds, Twelve Minutes, Forgotten City,
           | Deathloop are all in the last 5 years and all feature the
           | loop version of the time gating mechanic. The Longing is a
           | game that takes place in real time over a one year period and
           | that's been picking up a bit of notice. Consortium is
           | adventure-ish and uses real time.
           | 
           | I'm not saying that these mechanics don't have detractors
           | now, just as they had detractors then. I'm saying there isn't
           | really a generational gap that would make me believe that
           | kids these days wouldn't have a similar reaction to it as
           | people did back then, and the evidence for this is that lots
           | of minor variations of this kind of mechanic exist and mostly
           | it's been in games that do pretty well.
           | 
           | In Hollow Knight, the use of a fan wiki is less about notes
           | in the adventure game sense and more about optimizing builds,
           | reading about lore, checking quest solutions, and looking up
           | boss strategies. It's possible that some unspecified
           | journalist made some unspecified remark about taking notes
           | while playing Elden Ring and some unspecified Twitter demons
           | gave him some unspecified grief about it. And yet, a huge
           | number of people who play Elden Ring do it with a wiki open.
           | Fandom has raised something like $100,000,000 in VC and its
           | primary business model is being a wiki for video games; it's
           | almost entirely supplanted traditional FAQs.
           | 
           | There are of course games that require more traditional
           | "stuff I learned" notes these days, a prime example is The
           | Outer Wilds (> 1 million sales on Steam despite a one year
           | late release, Overwhelmingly Positive reviews, probably my
           | favourite game of the 21st century, Adventure Gamers Game of
           | the Year 2019 so let's sidestep whether you think it's an
           | adventure game please). You might also think about Stardew
           | Valley (20 million+ copies sold, is played almost entirely
           | with Wiki lookups) or Minecraft (300 million copies, has a
           | thriving ecosystem of secondary information and content,
           | including videos, wikis, etc.) What would convince you that
           | there is still a demand for games that require or encourage
           | the use of supplementary information and thinking?
           | 
           | As to team size, point and click adventures don't require the
           | budget of an open world game like Red Dead Redemption 2.
           | About 15 people are credited on Myst. About 20-25 on Secret
           | of Monkey Island. Tons of PnCs today have much larger budgets
           | and larger team sizes than they ever did. The fact that the
           | market also sustains an Asssassin's Creed game made by 2500
           | people over 3 years doesn't take away from the space for
           | creative adventure games. The relative terms framing is just
           | bonkers. James Cameron has half-billion dollar budget films,
           | but Parasite still exists.
           | 
           | Monkey Island was never a juggernaut. The US sales in the
           | first two years were about 100,000 copies. You don't think
           | Monkey Island could be made today and sell 100,000 copies in
           | the US? Thimbleweed Park (2017, Ron Gilbert) is well over
           | 100,000 copies in the US across platforms. Broken Age is
           | around 100,000 copies on Steam. The Witness over 500k on
           | Steam. Inscryption is over a million on Steam, and that just
           | launched 9 months ago. Papers Please around 2 million on
           | Steam. Agent A, which is I think 3 people in a flash-style
           | animation, is coming up on 100k on Steam. The Grim Fandango
           | re-release is coming on the game's entire original sales run.
           | Phoenix Wright in the 500k range. Gorogoa in the 500k range.
           | The Room around a million units. Granted you can play with
           | the numbers -- lifetime versus first few years sales,
           | discounting, countries of availability, upfront MSRP,
           | availability of console ports versus just PC, whatever. My
           | point isn't to prove all these games outsold Monkey Island,
           | it's to suggest I don't see the apparently cavernous
           | collapsed alleged in demand for PnCs.
           | 
           | It's true that nothing is Myst anymore, but nothing was Myst
           | back then either. PnCs are alive and well.
        
         | gabereiser wrote:
         | To add a little bit to this, to be fair to N64 and PS1, we
         | didn't have a standard texture offset correction using
         | transformation matrices until right around the time they
         | launched. This was considerably noticeable in 007 Goldeneye on
         | N64.
         | 
         | Nintendo had mostly gotten away with not needing it up until
         | then because of the flat shading of their 3D cartoon look for
         | most games. Goldeneye and later Turok suffered from this
         | especially in the level design mapping.
         | 
         | Overall though, you nailed it.
         | 
         | Also, one of the best point and click puzzle games of all time,
         | Myst, was kinda a UX disaster. Kids would spend hours just
         | staring at some 3D rendered scene without knowing what was
         | going on. People figured it out. Puzzles with difficulty have
         | been a part of gaming ever since.
        
           | bennysomething wrote:
           | Genuine question what is offset mapping and what would I see
           | in Goldeneye showing this?
        
           | Thlom wrote:
           | Wow. Turok, that's a game I played to death back in the N64
           | days. Haven't really thought about it since. This brought
           | back a ton of nostalgia!
        
           | amlib wrote:
           | Are you talking about affine transformation vs perspective
           | correct texture mapping? Because the n64 for sure had the
           | later, and ps1 the former.
        
             | midnightclubbed wrote:
             | I was confused by this too. N64 texture mapping hardware
             | has the same capabilities of current generation GPUs -
             | perspective correction, automatic mip-level selection,
             | bilinear/trilinear interpolation.
             | 
             | The blurriness on the N64 was down to the hardware
             | requiring each texture fit into a 4KB cache (and games
             | using low resolution video output to control pixel fill-
             | rate).
             | 
             | The texture unit on the N64 is really powerful but the 4KB
             | size limit and additional usage restrictions leads to its
             | signature look:
             | 
             | - If you want texture repeats/wraps/clamps the texture
             | dimensions must be power of 2.
             | 
             | - If you want mip-maps then you halve the size of the most
             | detailed texture mip.
             | 
             | - If you want detail textures then you halve again (I
             | think, bit fuzzy on that mode).
             | 
             | - If you want to use a color lookup (from 4 or 8bit pixel
             | values) then the LUT takes 2 of your 4KB, even for 4bit
             | pixels.
             | 
             | Most of the pixel formats have options for 1 or 4 bits of
             | transparency, but transparent pixels render at half speed
             | (and the alpha bits further eat into your 4KB limit).
             | 
             | For something like Goldeneye you are likely going to use as
             | many 4 or 8bit mip-mapped, repeating, greyscale textures as
             | possible (64x64 or 64x32) and use vertex tinting to add
             | color. Everything will look a little monochromatic but you
             | will be controlling blurriness as best you can!
             | 
             | On early 3d games the art team would spend enormous amounts
             | of time hand tweaking individual pixels and carefully
             | specifying texture formats per texture in order to get the
             | most detail out of the available resolution. It wasn't all
             | bad though, they had a couple orders of magnitude fewer
             | textures to produce (than a current generation game) and
             | their polygon counts were 2-3 orders of magnitude lower
             | too!
        
               | amlib wrote:
               | Such a shame the SGI engineers didn't try allocating more
               | silicon to that tiny texture memory, this is perhaps (not
               | an expert so don't quote me) the biggest bottleneck and
               | annoying constraint in the system. It gets even crazier
               | when you compare how much space the VI filter/blur takes
               | on the silicon, removing it could easily allow for double
               | the cache memory.
        
         | pmarreck wrote:
         | Thank you for spending the time to write this fantastic
         | comment.
        
       | ArtWomb wrote:
       | Budgets. $500k was enough for dev and marketing of a licensed
       | Nintendo GBA title circa 2004. But the return was higher
       | probability, if the game was high quality, popular IP. Now, you
       | could produce an indie VR title for approx $100k. And expect a
       | return in $1M gross sales. But it probably requires more luck.
       | Marketing to a niche, or popular IP. It's just kinda the
       | fragmentation of the channels. How folks divide attention now.
       | And skyrocketing costs of specialized industry talent:
       | environment art, gpu shader programming, metahumans etc ;)
        
         | bombcar wrote:
         | Super Mario 3 cost something like 800k (in those dollars) to
         | make - and had a 25 million dollar marketing campaign
         | associated with it.
        
           | ArtWomb wrote:
           | Holy guacamole, even I didn't expect these numbers! I'd say
           | $25M well spent, and those old nintendo reveals still hold up
           | ;)
           | 
           | In the United States alone, the game had generated
           | $595,000,000 (equivalent to $1,230,000,000 in 2021) in
           | revenue for Nintendo by early 1992,[20] exceeding the gross
           | revenue of the films E.T. (1982), Batman (1989) and Jurassic
           | Park (1993)
           | 
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_Mario_Bros._3#Sales
        
       | 1970-01-01 wrote:
       | Same-screen multiplayer is nearly gone. This dramatically changed
       | how video games are experienced and enjoyed.
        
         | Arrath wrote:
         | Halo: Infinite not having splitscreen co-op is a crime, imo.
        
       | christkv wrote:
       | The massive amount of time you have to invest in any new game
        
         | haunter wrote:
         | That's debatable. People bring this all the time up but older
         | games were massive too especially if you played any
         | RPG/cRPG/JRPG. Baldur's Gate took me a summer vacation time to
         | beat back then, easily 100 hours or more. But that's just one
         | example.
         | 
         | It's more like a generation grew up and they have less time
         | now.
        
           | nervousvarun wrote:
           | Agreed and to extend this further I wonder how the current
           | summer vacation eligible demo spends their time compared to
           | how "we" did?
           | 
           | I don't have the statistics handy (maybe someone does and can
           | link them) so won't speculate but...do "kids" today spend the
           | same relative amount of time playing games "we" did?
           | 
           | Seems fairly safe to assume they have alternative ways to
           | spend their time (tiktok/current social media flavor of the
           | day etc.) but not sure if that's the case or not.
        
             | sylens wrote:
             | I would hazard a guess that they do, but it is on games
             | like Roblox, Minecraft, and Fortnite
        
           | imtringued wrote:
           | I've played GBA games with ROM sizes of 16MB to 32MB that
           | took 40 hours to finish.
        
         | becquerel wrote:
         | Really depends on the game. There's plenty of smallscale indies
         | out there you can knock out in an evening and have a satisfying
         | time with.
        
           | ZeroGravitas wrote:
           | I think I read the same comment differently, and now I'm not
           | sure what the original intent was.
           | 
           | I read it as:
           | 
           | 25 years ago I had lots of time to invest in games.
           | 
           | But, the other, more likely, interpretation is that you need
           | to invest large amounts of time I to games these days.
           | 
           | Like you, I disagree with the latter. I find the former
           | interpretation resonates strongly though.
        
         | AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote:
         | Only true for certain genres, which has pretty much always been
         | true. There does seem to be an obsession around "content"/$
         | with a lot of today's gamers though, that leads to a bunch of
         | relatively vapid 100hr+ open-world games that frankly all kinda
         | feel like the same game, but again even that is same-as-it-
         | ever-was if you recall when everything was a DOOM clone.
         | 
         | I'm quite pleased that today's game market has allowed for a
         | wide variety of small, often fairly short, games with lots of
         | experimentation.
        
           | tenebrisalietum wrote:
           | Before everything was a DOOM clone, everything was a
           | platformer. Before that, everything was a shmup or
           | Galaxian/Space Invaders clone. Before that, everything was a
           | copy of Pong. Before that, everything was pinball.
        
           | the_only_law wrote:
           | > that leads to a bunch of relatively vapid 100hr+ open-world
           | games that frankly all kinda feel like the same game
           | 
           | And the on occasion you get something that looks like it can
           | shake up the genre, but turns out to be an over promised
           | scam.
           | 
           | But yeah, the whole open world, survival genre has exploded.
           | Notable, Valheim was fun, but I felt like it could use a bit
           | more variety on content.
        
         | 0des wrote:
         | Also stop preventing me from skipping cut scenes and dialogue!
        
       | arriu wrote:
       | With all the advances in AI, I'd expect to be able to walk up to
       | an NPC and just talk to it. No pre scripted options, just traits,
       | background story, and inventories... let the AI figure it out
       | from there.
       | 
       | For example, mass effect without the 4 pre-canned options during
       | each dialogue.
        
         | tsimionescu wrote:
         | Don't expect that to soon. Language models are still really bad
         | at having any kind of purpose to the text they generate. It
         | just meanders around a theme with no ultimate point, which is
         | to be expected given that they don't have any purpose other
         | than producing plausible sounding text (unlike writers who
         | typically are seeking to convey something in their texts, even
         | if it's a banal message like "the game continues only if you go
         | to the left").
        
         | colinmhayes wrote:
         | Can't be long now with the recent advances in LLMs.
        
       | Havoc wrote:
       | >"Creativity has gone". Black and White (2001) and Spores (2008)
       | are perfect counterexamples.
       | 
       | Bit strange having to reach back 20+ years in a 25 year review to
       | prove "recent" examples of creativity.
       | 
       | Game devs do seem to stick to tried & tested formulas especially
       | with AAA titles which are major financial bets.
       | 
       | e.g. If you compare overwatch and say DotA. The one is a 1st
       | person shooter the other a RTS engine. Yet conceptually they're
       | identical. ~5 a side lane push mechanics with two tanks, two dps
       | and a healer with each having unique but complementary abilities
       | to emphasize teamwork and coordination. CSGO, TF2, League
       | etc...same thing over and over
        
         | inkblotuniverse wrote:
         | Hm. Lol and dota are the same, overwatch is TF2 meets lol+dota,
         | and tf2 is CS with classes. There's a spectrum connecting
         | everything you've mentioned, but dota and cs are definitely
         | different enough.
        
           | wiseowise wrote:
           | Tf2 is casual quake and has little relation to CS.
        
         | BlargMcLarg wrote:
         | >Game devs do seem to stick to tried & tested formulas
         | especially with AAA titles which are major financial bets
         | 
         | Because that's what makes the most consistent, safest money.
         | That's really all there is to it. When a marginal improvement
         | on an existing series prints you more money than investing in a
         | risky new IP, of course innovation takes a backseat.
         | 
         | By comparison, aside from personal interest, indies don't have
         | any existing series to draw from, and competing with an
         | existing series on aspects they will most definitely beat you
         | is a bad idea to begin with. At the same time, most popular
         | indies suffer from staying in their lane too, continuing to
         | pump out similar style games, as they notice the same issues.
         | People making RPGs continue to make RPGs, people making
         | platformers continue making platformers, etc.
         | 
         | And in a twist of irony, this is what developers _should_ be
         | doing anyway. Experiment with spin-off games, iterate on your
         | main line games. The only problem with this pattern is the
         | humongous number of games this would create, in a market which
         | is already very cutthroat.
        
         | stryan wrote:
         | > If you compare overwatch and say DotA. The one is a 1st
         | person shooter the other a RTS engine. Yet conceptually they're
         | identical. ~5 a side lane push mechanics with two tanks, two
         | dps and a healer with each having unique but complementary
         | abilities to emphasize teamwork and coordination.
         | 
         | Conceptually identical is a pretty strong claim there.
         | Overwatch has no concept or equivalent to the various RPG-style
         | mechanics in MOBAs (e.g farming, items, XP, shops) while DOTA2
         | only has a single match type (i.e. no Assault vs Push vs etc)
         | and significantly less mechanically demanding gameplay (barring
         | a few micro-intensive characters like Meepo or Brood). Hell,
         | I'm not sure if I'd claim OW even has lanes instead of flank
         | routes (compare an Overwatch lane to a CS lane) and the
         | majority of DOTA supports aren't even healers (maybe 5ish?)
         | 
         | I feel like we often do this with video games, comparing
         | aspects that are very low level to the game and are often just
         | a part of being interactive pieces of media. Would chess to
         | checkers and be conceptually identical? They're both board
         | games and involve the same base mechanics (move pieces across
         | the board, capture enemy pieces). And if they are, would that
         | make one of them a worse game? Should we have not made checkers
         | since we already had chess?
        
       | haunter wrote:
       | Graphics are not the most important thing for sure but they still
       | _matter_ at least to some extent.
       | 
       | For example yesterday Nintendo revealed the new trailer of the
       | next mainline Pokemon game... and it has some insane texture
       | shimmering and apparently zero anti-aliasing in the whole game.
       | And that's how they promote the game in the trailer. It's not
       | even a low budget title, it's the flagship AAA game of the
       | company sold for $60. And the Switch is not a bad hardware so at
       | this point they most likely just don't care which is the strange
       | part. It's like watching a movie in 360p. Sure the story, the
       | characters, the music matter but a low resolution can damage the
       | whole experience, same as the intentionally low quality graphics
       | in an otherwise good game
        
         | aceazzameen wrote:
         | For me personally, art direction is more important than
         | technical limitations/issues with graphics. A game with
         | beautiful stylized art will stand the test of time much longer
         | than a highly polished game lacking any kind of style. That
         | polished game might look "real" today, but not tomorrow when
         | compared to whatever is the latest and greatest tech. And a
         | game with strong unique art will always look good for what it
         | is. You can have both, but it's usually a rarity.
        
           | pradn wrote:
           | Absolutely, with oft-cited examples being the incredible
           | pixel art of Chrono Trigger and the cel-shaded style of
           | Okami.
        
           | BlargMcLarg wrote:
           | Most people would agree art direction is far more important,
           | which is where cartoon styles generally shine and age
           | extremely well compared to their more hyper-realistic
           | siblings.
           | 
           | In GP's case however, it's been pretty consistent how low
           | effort Game Freak has gone with their in-house Pokemon games.
           | The series practically prints money and the hardware has
           | shown us what is possible. Even the new Kirby game looks
           | stunning, and Kirby is one of the less big budget series.
        
         | II2II wrote:
         | I think the best way to put it is that graphics should not
         | distract from enjoyment.
         | 
         | It is possible to create a visually appealing graphics with
         | limited resolution and colour depth, just as it is possible to
         | create glitchy and ugly graphics with the latest technology. Of
         | course, the opposite is also true. Either way, you need people
         | who know what they are doing in order to achieve the desired
         | affect.
        
         | wernercd wrote:
         | To me, graphics are like money.
         | 
         | Money doesn't buy happiness but not enough money causes
         | unhappiness.
         | 
         | Graphics doesn't make a game great... but bad graphics causes
         | unhappiness. Just like bad controls, no tutorial, flakey
         | network connections, etc.
        
         | 0x202020 wrote:
         | Yes Pokemon Legends: Arceus was a tipping point for me. The
         | game does not look good at all to me, and across 3 different
         | switches I tested, it felt like it was hitching and not loading
         | correctly even with the low detail and resolution in docked
         | mode. I'm handheld it's a bit better, but that's not really how
         | I want to play the game.
         | 
         | On the other hand, my most played game is by far Old School
         | RuneScape, which is a restore of a backup of RuneScape from
         | 2007. The game has certainly evolved in style and content since
         | the re-release, and I use a 3rd party client with an "HD" plug-
         | in which adds more render distance, shadows, lighting and anti-
         | aliasing.
        
         | jayd16 wrote:
         | >And the Switch is not a bad hardware
         | 
         | It's a bit long in the tooth. It's a 5+ year old Tegra chip.
        
           | wiseowise wrote:
           | Switch is more powerful than PS3.
        
       | DonHopkins wrote:
       | I love the inconclusive conclusion!
       | 
       | >Conclusion: There is not conclusion. I will let the reader to
       | its own because everything, in art, is subjective.
        
       | Udo wrote:
       | Bad gateway error
        
         | unwind wrote:
         | Yeah, me too. Here [1] is the Google cache result, that might
         | help.
         | 
         | [1]:
         | https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:Rz5tzz...
        
       | mikerg87 wrote:
       | The nature of bug fixes, overall quality and DLC have changed
       | dramatically.
       | 
       | In the old days discovery of fixes was often who you knew and the
       | means by which a game studio provided fixes. sometimes it was a
       | BBS, sometimes it was AOL or Compuserve. You might not be able to
       | win or get to the next level because of a bug and not even know
       | it.
       | 
       | Now the games has built in system that grabs fixes/updates right
       | off the internet. Often automatically. Which has lead to games
       | being in some ways poorly constructed and with the idea "we can
       | ship another version later"
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-06-02 23:02 UTC)