this is similar to my view.

When something is really done right, its amazing and it makes me think.  wow games have come so far.  Yet, most of the time its just hyped junk and broken design.  To me there was a larger percent of "good games" rather than now.  Even iif the concept was lame, it still had potential to entertain somewhat.  As far as do I get the same enjoyment?  Thats imposible to judge fairly.  I mean as a kid I was much more easily entertained, so obviously yeah.  Also I had time everyday to play games, so I played them more.  Then again it's true though what he says about played before and the like.  Some concepts really are tiring, Like Street Fighter IV.  To me, do I really need what looks like just another iteration of SFII. 

Last Night my wife and I sat down and played the Original Legend of Zelda (the first Videogame I ever OWNED) and we played.  She didn't really do to well, and not sure that she got it (as far as whats so special about this old game).  but I went on to explain the open-endedness of the game.  I took link straight to Death Mountain with 6 hearts, I mean you could beat the game in whatever order you wanted too pretty much, just get one or two essential Items and the rest is whatever.  As opposed to the new games that are, ok do this, then that, DON't go there, bend over, cough.  so on and so forth, and the THE SAILING!  I'm sorry whoever feels that Wind Waker deserves a 10 is a total dooshe.  Oh my god, so yeah Zelda especially, Metroid Especially, much better original then new.  Mario is still pretty great,  SMGlooked really cool, kinda dizzying too, but it didn't enrapture me like the originals did.  but then again I was a kid...

After submitting the above post I saw what radha posted, and saw the age old DLC argument.

In some ways I agree with what people argue, and how it's an incentive to just release a 90% done game and offer the 10% for more money. Does it happen probably. The new Fallout 3 map could've been in the game originally. Or maybe it wasn't and developed later, but I think we all figure it could've been there all along.

However I see two things wrong with this. Do you think its entirely possible, especially with the cost of games, for them to just axe that shit anyway and it never sees light of day at all. Companies don't wan't to be paying for more content (whatever the price point is) and especially delaying a title because someone wants to add stuff to it. Extra maps and things probably wouldn't have come to light without the incentive for the companies (not the programmers designers, who most likely make a flat salary anyway, i.e. they don't inhibit costs from doing half-assed work) to sell a little bit more after the release through DLC.

2ndly, How does one confer that this really hasn't been done in the past. I think EA Sports and Capcom Milk their customers like Elephant sized cows. My god. Street Fighter alone has definatly purposly gimped the current title so that Super Street Fighter II XX Triple silver version can come out 2 months later with a brand new price tag on it.

I actually think more often than not DLC saves us from biend brutally besieged by remakes and unnecissary sequels rather than causes a precident for incomplete games.

Gaming has changed a lot since my parents brought home Pong on the Coleco Telstar Galaxy... Yes, that makes me a Gen 1 gamer...

Back then, it was about "what the machines could do". And every new release did something exceptionally more exciting and brought in a new kind of gaming that was unimaginable for a console to do.

Now a days it is more about immersion. How realistic can you make your gaming experience feel? Everyone knows it will keep getting better... But, I think it is exciting each step of the way.

OP: No, I don't have as much fun as before. Games are getting more and more boring for me, I miss the golden PC era with cool adventure titles and terrific RPG's like Ultima, Ravenloft: Stone Prophet and Betrayal at Krondor (my all time fovurite book and game!).

Although I still enjoy gaming and would probably spend as much time playing today as I did when I was younger and single but to be honest the fun factor peaked in the early 90s with the Genesis/Sega CD, SNES and my first PC. There was a never ending supply of quality games available that I could rent and return in a couple of days very satisfied in having finished the game.

Highlighting this time in my life were games like Flashback, Out of this World, Super Star Wars Trilogy, A link to the Past, Shining in the Darkness, Shining Force 1 & 2, Wing Commander, Xwing and Tie Fighter and of course the never forgotten The Secret of Monkey Island.

Friend request sent.  Those are my three favorite systems (in that order).  There are just too many good games on those systems for the shovelware-laden systems of today to compete.  I'm not saying today's systems don't have good games, they do...just not nearly as many (especially compared to NES, which has literally hundreds of good games).

On certain very good games yes but in particular no. Back in the nes, snes days I could rent or buy random crap and enjoy it, these days random crap is pretty much all shovelware.

I understand what you are saying, and for many people it might be true.  For me it's not.  I am more likely to enjoy an NES game I never played before than a Wii or PS3 or X360 game.

 This is one way of making one of my points.  Thanks!  I support this post.

DKC series was the bessssst evah! I was a bit too young to really enjoy the NES, Master System Gen. But the SNES and Gensis Gen were great. Better than my Wii though?.. I donno hard to say. I still enjoy playing games almost the same. Although I'm less shocked during plot twists than i was before... Except for the first Baten Kaitos. Didnt see that coming.