View Post
bigtakilla said:
DonFerrari said:

People seem to just want to ignore the complexity of the games and how many possibilities for glitches is there on games today compared to Pong. And even at that time you had so many freeze screens.

I had to reboot my console almost everyday because a game froze or as we said "tilt". Nowadays the patches happen off screen and I will run on a need to reset the console maybe once a week but more likely less than once a month due to glitches and bugs.

People just don't understand that what they like up to their 25 years is more or less what they will like forever, so they will keep thinking nothing is as good as it was in the past (because they can't see without the tinted googles of nostalgy to see how bad it really was) and not enjoy today.

How many games were actually 30-60min long but were so badly engineered to be "hard and punishing" to make you think the games where giant that we took 6 months to finish? There is good reasons for that to not fly anymore today, with internet we can discover how to pass or how long the game really is, we can jump to another game fast if the one we are playing isn't satisfying among many other reasons for this type of game design to not be widespread anymore.

There were a LOT (and I mean tens of thousands) of games after Pong was released to the time online updates, season passes, loot box's became a thing and those games for the most part worked great. Get off the pong thing. There were vast improvements in gaming till about the PS2, Dreamcast, Gamecube, and Xbox era. I would say the Wii and Wii U could also be seen as improvements to the past without falling into to many (if any) of the issues in today's gaming.

Now games literally destroy your console (see PS4 and Anthem), yeah, that's not okay. Not to mention the Red Ring Of Death, or the day 1 patched that destroyed consoles if for whatever reason your internet connection was interrupted, or the power cycled. Not to mention how many times has information of gamers been stolen from the online stores of these consoles? 

Also, it's not that "some people can't get over the past" as much as some things were better in the past. Again I am giving reasons that have nothing to do with personal preference AT ALL.This argument is a crutch, throw this out too it's not helping you, though I could easily get into personal preference and experience and lord that would be a wall of text I don't think anyone wants to take the time to read all of.

There were tons of games in the past that were not hard or punishing too. You get the game you want to suit your gaming needs. There are games that are ridiculously hard or complicated today for the sake of being ridiculously hard or complicated. Badly designed games, or punishing games are still being made today. You don't think a ton of games that have loot boxes are purposefully designed to be needlessly grindy? Or games with Season Passes don't have content needlessly ripped out of them?

Your mixing so much things that it becomes strange, but let's go.

I haven't said a word about bad practices like lootboxes and the like. I was talking about complexity in games increasing and with it bugs. It doesn't take much to see that the more complex a system is more prone to defects it is. And them you put improvements basically attached to Nintendo.

There are bad games now and there were bad games in the past. Many games were broken and wouldn't be playable, they just wouldn't affect the console because the console didn't had any system that could be impacted by the SW. Red Ring of Death have nothing to do with games being better or worse but with MS rushing their engineering to reach the market first, so I have no idea why you put it here. And consoles being beyond user repair due to a bad update is something very rare to be even worth mentioning.

Security on the networks also have nothing to do with games being better or worse.

Your reply seems more like why you don't like gaming today than games being worse loaded with a lot of strawman. For you Don Mattrick gave the solution stick to NES.

duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"


Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"