PDA

View Full Version : Gaming (second generation)


Just Gabriel
11-22-2003, 07:13 PM
Remember the feeling back in the day?

Beating the arcade high score in Pac-Man, pounding "King Koopa" in Super Mario Bros., opening that chistmas present to see that your parents really DID listen to your ranting and bought you Super Metroid. Most gamers who were in the scene back then know the feeling. Gaming was meant to be fun, and it was.

Fast forward ten to twenty years and we see a world where the gaming industry is solely based on profits and numbers. Millions of dollars are poured into software and hardware development these days, as the purpose of video games changes from providing fun for the players to selling copies. A quick look at the credits of almost any video game provides a ton of evidence that gaming has changed from what it once was. Development groups used to be small teams of people, but now, over a hundred people are involved in the making of a single game. All these people work to squeeze as much as they can out of the console to make the game as presentable or "desirable" as they can. What would happen if a game with the graphical appearance of an 8-bit generation game appeared in the lineup of a current generation system? It's not hard to guess that it would be shot down in a second. Why is this? Gaming companies shaped gamers to only accept games that take advantage of the best current technology, and paying for a game that didn't take millions of dollars to make for a new console would be a "waste" of money and power.

Look at Sony Computer Entertainment America. Back in 1999, Capcom decided to release a port of the original Rockman (Megaman) games for the psx, so that the current generation would have a chance to play them. When presented with the games, SCEA rejected them and refused to license them for release in North America. Their reasoning? The graphics were inferior and didn't "deserve" to be in the PSone's lineup.

Games nowadays cost so much money to make, they have to sell a ton of copies to make a profit. Game consoles are tossed out the window for new technology about every 3-4 years now, while systems like the NES sat proudly in the TV stand for much more than twice that long. Gamers now, however, will only settle for the newest and best gaming systems, and only the flashiest games.

But it's hard to make profit when it costs so much to keep technology up to date. Competition between the gaming companies forces them all to release new game systems before theirs is made "obselete" by another one. A console doesn't have much time to build a solid list of good games before it's tossed aside for the next new thing. Raising costs of production is forcing publishers to charge more for games, which makes it harder to convince a gamer to buy a particular game. In the old days, you didn't have to hire a fraction of the employees to make a solid development team, so making games was cheap. Not as much was at stake as there is now in the sales of a single game.

Sure, gaming is still fun, but the current generation of gamers has completely changed from that of the past. It used to be perfectly accepted (even coveted) to play a game with Mario in it, but now, any game that has too many colors, isn't about shooting things or running over pedestrians is seen as "kiddy" and labelled as stupid.

I really feel sorry for the "Second Generation" of gamers; they totally missed the golden age of gaming. You don't often see ten-year-olds crowding around a NES like they used to, but when you do, it's a good feeling to see that some of today's gamers actually get to see what great gaming truly is.

Carlos
11-22-2003, 07:29 PM
This is the best post in any forum in a while.....

I totally agree with everything you said....I liked your conclusion, that is SO true.

NES, Genesis, and SNES were all great consoles that everyone enjoyed playing.....AHhhh......memories.

MoN
11-22-2003, 07:30 PM
Um, everything changes. People can say the same thing about movies. Maybe your grandparents have told you that today's TV shows and movies suck, as well as music, but you think otherwise -- you probably think they are stupid. That's just how it is. You like what you're raised around. They don't know what they're missing, and I'm not going to tell them.

That's my outlook anyway.

Professor Go
11-22-2003, 07:34 PM
Yeah things do change.. although in this case, I think gamers have become much more shallow, unable to see games for what they are at the core and instead focus on graphics instead of gameplay and plain fun.

Although the NES is long gone I consider Punch-Out the best boxing game of all time. SMB3, Metroid, Double Dragon, etc.. I consider many of the NES games to be the pinnacle of gaming because they are, at their cores, boiled down versions of today's "best games" with significantly improved graphics.

Carlos
11-22-2003, 07:41 PM
I think movies and TV shows has always been the way they have...Nobody argues on which show is kiddie and whatnot....THEY know which show or movie is for who, and whatnot.

Gaming was always accepted, generally, but now, in flying colors, they forget about the last generation since the leap from 2D to 3D. Once we move into the next generation in graphical achievement....then gaming will never be the same again.

Realistic environments, realistic characters, realistic people, realistic backrounds, backdrops, special effects, particle effects, graud shading, lighting effects, colors, etc.....the list goes on....

Gaming will be changed forever, in time....One day, one era, will change the face of gaming....there will be no kiddie games in the future as we know it....because companies will utilize the power of next generation.....look at today.....and realize how much power they will use on the next wave of consoles.

MoN
11-22-2003, 07:43 PM
Originally posted by Carlos
I think movies and TV shows has always been the way they have...Nobody argues on which show is kiddie and whatnot....THEY know which show or movie is for who, and whatnot. Go watch a black-and-white movie, and then a color one. Preferably a remake of an extremely old movie.

Carlos
11-22-2003, 07:50 PM
Well, not to the certain degree of graphics....I mean, we didn't have the technology before...but now that we do....we have colors...In the early days of gaming, we had colors.....only they went with simplistic colors, and so to speak....

Back then, movies were accepted, no matter what....a lot of them were classics....today, nothing more than waste-your-time movies. A lot of people care too much about CG, and realism in movies like Matrix reloaded...

But my point is that movies were always accepted when it comes to presentation....There were never discussions about kiddie shows and what not....much like this generation's kiddy talk on Nintendo and its games.

Professor Go
11-22-2003, 07:53 PM
I guess it's what you can expect from younger gamers today - they are constantly bombarded with commercials, rapid-fire jokes on TV, fast-cut editing in movies, hundreds of not thousands of times a day -

Now I'm not saying that younger gamers today are zombies, but hey their attention spans are probably shot and what better way to make them happy but putting a lot of fiery explosions, guns, murder, mayhem, car chases and prostitute killin' in a game?

I'm looking at you Grand Theft Auto.

Wh|tE gUy
11-22-2003, 08:02 PM
It all boils down to the fact that there are so MANY games in the market today. No longer can a company sustain itself purely on good games or fun games but attractive games. Graphics carry a game miles for every foot traveled by intuitiveness or ingenuity.

We didn't have this 10 years ago because
a) There wasn't that big of a difference between games, they all look pretty much the same and
b) With a max of 2 systems out at a time the flow of games was much more slow paced so gamers desired great games they could savor for long periods of time instead of just a game to hold them over for a month until the next big release

As i see it, the biggest problems in todays market is that there are too many systems and too many developers. Whenever i look at a release list all i see is a flood of mediocre 3rd party games spread across all three systems.

Carlos
11-22-2003, 08:05 PM
I guess they are alienating the audience in the gaming industry, to adult content, much like the movie industry alienating the critics/consumers of movies - to violence in movies.

I haven't heard a lot of people complaining about violence in movies nowdays, but complaints in violence in gaming is way overboard...because the movie industry does worse things than the gaming industry...

Professor Go
11-22-2003, 08:12 PM
At the same time you aren't as interactive with movies as you are with games.

Just Gabriel
11-22-2003, 08:14 PM
I really wouldn't compare the gaming to movies, ad they're two totally different forms of entertainment.

However, you could compare the current generation gaming industry to that of the movie industry (number one priority is profits, tons of money put into a single game/movie)

Matt
11-22-2003, 08:33 PM
The mainstream gamer perferes to have pretty graphics and stuff, even if there is some gameplay loss.

MoN
11-22-2003, 08:37 PM
Originally posted by Angry Liberal
At the same time you aren't as interactive with movies as you are with games. True, but games are completely fake looking, while movies are actual people. IMO, it's worse to see real people do that than to commit it on a fake-looking game.

Carlos
11-22-2003, 08:39 PM
Originally posted by MoN
True, but games are completely fake looking, while movies are actual people. IMO, it's worse to see real people do that than to commit it on a fake-looking game.

THANK you, VERY much....That is the comment I was looking for.

Matt
11-22-2003, 08:42 PM
What gaming needs is to have the best gameplay, and the best graphics. The best of both, not just one.

GBA
11-22-2003, 08:47 PM
If you have don't have amazing graphics and awesome gameplay, that's still good. But if you have horrible gameplay and awesome graphics you won't go too far. Gameplay is more important than Graphics.

Professor Go
11-22-2003, 08:59 PM
My point was not how things look, my point is that while watching a movie you are not very much a participant in that you sit and your eyes see what happens. With videogames you ARE the character, you make the character do what you want them to and you take on the personae of this person for hours, sometimes hundreds of hours.

I'm not saying videogames make kids kill, I'm just saying videogames are much more interactive pasttime. And I think graphics today can get pretty close to the real thing.

Link
11-22-2003, 09:09 PM
I think that if you read game reviews, you will find that horrible games still get horrible ratings, even if they are full of eye candy.

JustUsOwls
11-22-2003, 09:17 PM
Originally posted by Paladin
I think that if you read game reviews, you will find that horrible games still get horrible ratings, even if they are full of eye candy.

You think so? (http://xbox.ign.com/articles/383/383421p1.html)

Carlos
11-22-2003, 09:18 PM
Originally posted by JustUsOwls
You think so? (http://xbox.ign.com/articles/383/383421p1.html)

But.....but.....its because of the CHICKS! How can you not rate a game higher because of the CHICKS!? :D

Link
11-22-2003, 09:20 PM
Haha! Don't go bringing that up again, you might start another flame war!

But I agree with your point.

This refers to Owls' post.

JustUsOwls
11-22-2003, 09:21 PM
Originally posted by Carlos
But.....but.....its because of the CHICKS! How can you not rate a game higher because of the CHICKS!? :D

They arent real Carlos...

Just Gabriel
11-22-2003, 09:26 PM
The point i was trying to make isn't that good graphics are bad, just more that the current gaming generation are generally missing out on what great gaming is, and that I beleive the industries are going about this whole thing the wrong way. There are still new games coming out that are fun, I just think what we had going before was better than the gaming industry of today.

However, that's impossible to change now, due to the fact that for this kind of change to happen, all of the console companies have to do it, and why would a company just dive right in when they know that they can make a ton of money being the only one to stick to current methods?

Carlos
11-22-2003, 09:56 PM
Originally posted by JustUsOwls
They arent real Carlos...

I know, I know. :D

I'm just saying the game got higher points, and sold well because of the chicks, and that Microsoft paid them to say things. :D

Chicks! :D :cool: You can dream, can'tcha? :D