Quantcast
Is 2001 the best year ever for gaming

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Is 2001 the best year ever for gaming

DarthMetalliCube said:
Machina said:

Nostalgia (and legacy) has almost everything to do with it. If most of the games being listed in this thread had been released in their original forms last week they'd be considered dated and mediocre - and that's after just a couple of decades. They may have been amazing games for their time and for quite a few years afterwards, but gaming is in its infancy and is such a technologically-driven field that all games inevitably date and the vast majority do so poorly. 

Hmm interesting, I can't say I agree with this. If this is the case I don't see how something like the SNES Classic can sell so well in 2018-2019 - it certainly can't be all people in their 30s buying it. Or the countless remasters being cranked out that often still sell well even when competing against the flashy modern games. You've also got tons of games even today which return to retro style graphics and gameplay and prove enduring and successful games. Games like Minecraft, Terraria, etc.

To me games are both art and entertainment - both of which transcend time if well-crafted enough, just like all other great forms of art and entertainment. I wouldn't look back at, say, Goodfellas, Godfather, Star Wars, or Citizen Kane is merely renowned to this day because of its "nostalgia" for people in their 60s-70s. Great art is great art. I wouldn't say J R.R. Tolkien's The Hobbit is only considered one of the great fantasy works because of nostalgia. 

I can only speak for myself of course, but I can certainly go back and play Eternal Darkness, Halo, or Monkey Ball and enjoy the hell out of it, and ironically far more than certain games that come out today. It's true some games do age better than others but this is true with all forms of art/entertainment.

I suppose you could argue the tech element in gaming is a major factor moreso than in other mediums but for me it's still only a vehicle in telling the story and the foundation for the experience. It always takes a backseat for the gameplay/narrative/overall craftsmanship.

The snes classic sells for the same reason that android or IOS games sell. There is a market for it. I think a lot here are disregarding how big a role nostalgia plays in these kinda things. Lets take MGS in 1998 for instance. Its my favorite game in the series, but I KNOW its nowhere near as good as MGS3 snake eater, or MGS5 which expanded on the promise of MGS in every imaginable way. However, it was the first game to do a lot of things it did. Or take contra 3, can that game hold a candle to the likes of Vanquish? Or take FF7 nd FF7 remake, FF7 will be better in every conceivable way, but I can assure you it won't become a cult classic like the original. Or look at the links awakening remake, ignoring graphics and sound, the entire game has been modernized with tons of QOL features built in, improving vastly on the original. If they just re-skinned the original and released it now without those improvements it will not sell half as much as the remake will sell. Or look at Vagrant Story, which as far as I am concerned was the first Dark souls type game, is it better than Demon souls? To me it still is.

Saying nostalgia doesn't in any way mean these games aren't good on their own merit, doesn't mean someone can't still play them today, just means they have been vastly outdone already but for whatever reason they still hold some relevance in your heart. The fact that most will go and play an older gam they played before, with whaat in the modern day will be considered as broken features or poor implementation of certain features... is literally 100% proof of the effect of nostalgia.

Want more proof? Take your original halo, how it loks and how it plays, then imagine that that game was released this year looking like that and playing like that. You still think you would have enjoyed the hell out of it in a world where Metro exodus, a ton of CODs and BFs...etc ha come before such a game? 



Around the Network

It happens every decade, on the 7th year.

1987 - Super Mario Bros (worldwide release), Zelda, Metroid, Mega Man, Punch-Out, Final Fantasy.
1997 - Final Fantasy VII, Mario Kart 64, Star Fox 64, Goldeneye 007, Tekken 3, Final Fantasy Tactics, Gran Turismo, Suikoden.
2007- Super Mario Galaxy, Persona 3, Castlevania: Symphony of the Night, Halo 3, Bioshock, The Elder Scrolls: Oblivion, Mass Effect.
2017 - Nier: Automata, Persona 5, Breath of the Wild, Mario Odyssey, Horizon: Zero Dawn, Resident Evil 7, Yakuza 0, Cuphead, Nioh.


Looking forward to 2027 with Suikoden 2 Remake and Chrono Trigger Remake.



DarthMetalliCube said:

Hmm interesting, I can't say I agree with this. If this is the case I don't see how something like the SNES Classic can sell so well in 2018-2019 - it certainly can't be all people in their 30s buying it. Or the countless remasters being cranked out that often still sell well even when competing against the flashy modern games. You've also got tons of games even today which return to retro style graphics and gameplay and prove enduring and successful games. Games like Minecraft, Terraria, etc.

To me games are both art and entertainment - both of which transcend time if well-crafted enough, just like all other great forms of art and entertainment. I wouldn't look back at, say, Goodfellas, Godfather, Star Wars, or Citizen Kane is merely renowned to this day because of its "nostalgia" for people in their 60s-70s. Great art is great art. I wouldn't say J R.R. Tolkien's The Hobbit is only considered one of the great fantasy works because of nostalgia. 

I can only speak for myself of course, but I can certainly go back and play Eternal Darkness, Halo, or Monkey Ball and enjoy the hell out of it, and ironically far more than certain games that come out today. It's true some games do age better than others but this is true with all forms of art/entertainment.

I suppose you could argue the tech element in gaming is a major factor moreso than in other mediums but for me it's still only a vehicle in telling the story and the foundation for the experience. It always takes a backseat for the gameplay/narrative/overall craftsmanship.

Remasters and remakes selling well (and existing in the first place) is nostalgia commercialised. People want to play those games, either because they played them originally and loved them or they've heared so much praise for them, but they want them updated with modern graphics, controls, etc. etc. For me that's an admission of sorts that they're not so timeless after all.

That's not to say the games we're talking about are bad now, or are worse than most modern releases (like you I enjoy certain older games more than almost all modern releases), but there's a huge element of nostalgia at play in these lists.



Intrinsic said:
DarthMetalliCube said:

Hmm interesting, I can't say I agree with this. If this is the case I don't see how something like the SNES Classic can sell so well in 2018-2019 - it certainly can't be all people in their 30s buying it. Or the countless remasters being cranked out that often still sell well even when competing against the flashy modern games. You've also got tons of games even today which return to retro style graphics and gameplay and prove enduring and successful games. Games like Minecraft, Terraria, etc.

To me games are both art and entertainment - both of which transcend time if well-crafted enough, just like all other great forms of art and entertainment. I wouldn't look back at, say, Goodfellas, Godfather, Star Wars, or Citizen Kane is merely renowned to this day because of its "nostalgia" for people in their 60s-70s. Great art is great art. I wouldn't say J R.R. Tolkien's The Hobbit is only considered one of the great fantasy works because of nostalgia. 

I can only speak for myself of course, but I can certainly go back and play Eternal Darkness, Halo, or Monkey Ball and enjoy the hell out of it, and ironically far more than certain games that come out today. It's true some games do age better than others but this is true with all forms of art/entertainment.

I suppose you could argue the tech element in gaming is a major factor moreso than in other mediums but for me it's still only a vehicle in telling the story and the foundation for the experience. It always takes a backseat for the gameplay/narrative/overall craftsmanship.

The snes classic sells for the same reason that android or IOS games sell. There is a market for it. I think a lot here are disregarding how big a role nostalgia plays in these kinda things. Lets take MGS in 1998 for instance. Its my favorite game in the series, but I KNOW its nowhere near as good as MGS3 snake eater, or MGS5 which expanded on the promise of MGS in every imaginable way. However, it was the first game to do a lot of things it did. Or take contra 3, can that game hold a candle to the likes of Vanquish? Or take FF7 nd FF7 remake, FF7 will be better in every conceivable way, but I can assure you it won't become a cult classic like the original. Or look at the links awakening remake, ignoring graphics and sound, the entire game has been modernized with tons of QOL features built in, improving vastly on the original. If they just re-skinned the original and released it now without those improvements it will not sell half as much as the remake will sell. Or look at Vagrant Story, which as far as I am concerned was the first Dark souls type game, is it better than Demon souls? To me it still is.

Saying nostalgia doesn't in any way mean these games aren't good on their own merit, doesn't mean someone can't still play them today, just means they have been vastly outdone already but for whatever reason they still hold some relevance in your heart. The fact that most will go and play an older gam they played before, with whaat in the modern day will be considered as broken features or poor implementation of certain features... is literally 100% proof of the effect of nostalgia.

Want more proof? Take your original halo, how it loks and how it plays, then imagine that that game was released this year looking like that and playing like that. You still think you would have enjoyed the hell out of it in a world where Metro exodus, a ton of CODs and BFs...etc ha come before such a game? 

Disagree for many games.

Kessen 2 was a fantastic unique game, but not many games could replicate what it did. Kessen 3 indeed did come out but it changed the formula, Bladestorm Hundred Years War also was different. I don't think there is a game out there that does what Kessen 2 does.

Dynasty Tactics 2 didn't get a sequel like Kessen 2 did so it is in an even more unique position. While there are plenty of tactics games, they are not done like Dynasty Tactics 2 did it. That is to say Tactics with armies set in historical times.

I could go on with many other examples, but the point is that some of these games are the cutting edge within their niche, because no developer can/wants to try and improve on it.



I'd go with 2013.
- Last of us
- Bioshock Infinite
- GTA V
- Tombaider
- AC: Black flag
- Super Mario 3D World
- Zelda: Link between worlds
- Injustice
- Brothers: A tale of two sons
- Tearaway
- FF 14 Realm reborn
- Rayman legends
- Fire Emblem: Awakening
And of course - Ride to hell: Retribution



Around the Network

2001 is probably out, just because this thread already fails Betteridge's Law.

I'm seeing a lot of love for 2007, which I don't 100% agree with. I mean, Super Mario Galaxy, Bioshock, Uncharted and Mass Effect, sure (also Eternal Sonata, CoD 4, The Orange Box and Zack & Wiki,). They're all great or at least influential. Lots of the other big releases people have mentioned were either a little before a series peaked (Assassin's Creed, The Witcher) or a little after (Metroid Prime 3, Super Paper Mario).

2007 isn't a bad year at all, but greatest ever? Not quite - more like top five. It's for sure better than 2010, though, which, aside from Mass Effect 2, Civ V and Red Dead Redemption, was mostly headlined by games that were good, but weaker than their predecessors (Mario Galaxy 2, Bioshock 2 and DKC Returns are all definitely in this category).

There's definitely a reason why 1998 gets mentioned so often in these conversations: Ocarina of Time, Metal Gear Solid, Half-Life, Banjo-Kazooie, Resident Evil 2, Unreal, StarCraft, Baldur's Gate, Grim Fandango, Panzer Dragoon Saga, Fallout 2. Some of those are a little more niche, but a lot of those games (especially the first three) were ridiculously influential.

I agree with the people mentioning 2017, too, and I think it was the best year we've seen for gaming in quite a while. It was certainly the best year I've seen in a veeeeeeery long time if you're into Nintendo, and depending on where you are in the world it had probably been somewhere between 15 and 30 years since you last saw a new mainline Mario and Zelda game launch in the same year on the same console. That alone is pretty huge.

I'm also really surprised at the lack of mentions for 2004, which had Half-Life 2, GTA: San Andreas, Halo 2, Burnout 3, Metroid Prime 2, The Sims 2, Metal Gear Solid 3, Pikmin 2, Tales of Symphonia, Viewtiful Joe 2 and Paper Mario TTYD (all series-bests or near-bests), as well as launching franchises like WoW, Katamari, Red Dead, Fable, Far Cry, and Monster Hunter. I don't even care for a lot of those games myself, but it's just a crazy-big list of games that I frequently hear mentioned as being some of the best of all time. Also, it had Baten Kaitos. I might be the only person who cares about that, but it was a fantastic game.

If there's a top six (I couldn't narrow it down to five) I'd probably say it's:

1986 (the biggest single gaming year of the 80s thanks to launching Zelda, Metroid, Dragon Quest, and Kid Icarus)

1994 (Super Metroid, SimCity 2000, Earthworm Jim, Donkey Kong Country, Daytona and Tekken in arcades, and uncensored Mortal Kombat II on SNES, which was a huge step for Nintendo)

1998 (frequently mentioned for good reason - third-person action/adventure, shooters, stealth games and survival horror owe so much to Ocarina of Time, Half-Life, Metal Gear Solid and Resident Evil 2, respectively)

2004 (it's a bit sequel-heavy, but almost all the major sequels were excellent)

2007 (seventh-generation consoles were starting to really come into their own - I do think it's a slightly overrated year, but still a strong one)

2017 (the earlier end of the 2010s lacked any killer years as the transition between generations happened, but 2017 was an incredible launch year for Switch and a strong year for software overall)

With 1998 and 2004 at the top.

VAMatt said:
IMO, the current year is pretty much always the best year. Gaming technology continues to progress, as does the ability of devs to take advantage of that tech. So, things are always getting better, and that always makes the most recent time the best.

That's a bit of a limited view; what about games that are influential, or were great for their time? Some years saw a lot of games that have shaped the industry or wowed people and made the year feel exciting. Others, like some of the mid-2010s, definitely did not.



Yes.

Nothing ever since compares to the influence of Halo and GTA 3 had to console gaming, really.



 

 

 

 

 

2001 is a great year but I like 2004 better:

Metroid Prime 2
Tales of Symphonia
Zelda: 4 Swords Adventures
Metal Gear Solid: Twin Snakes
Final Fantasy Crystal Chronicles
Final Fantasy XI
Metroid Zero Mission
Half-Life 2
Halo 2
Paper Mario: TTYD
GTA: San Andreas
Star Wars Battlefront
Pokemon FireRed/LeafGreen
Pikmin2
Doom 3
Gran Turismo 4
Unreal Tournament 2004

And of course the launch of the Nintendo DS.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2004_in_video_gaming



Looking at that list no



Switch friend-code: 6700-1526-7903

PSN: melbye82

Rocket League came out in 2015, so no.



If you demand respect or gratitude for your volunteer work, you're doing volunteering wrong.