By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - We are living in the best era for gaming

Chrkeller said:
mZuzek said:

And that's totally fine, for you. But complaining that the industry shouldn't be trying to make narrative driven games with voice acting because you don't like them, is selfish. It's not like there aren't any games telling stories in different ways, you just listed a few recent examples of games that did.

I mean, I'm with you on this too. I love Wind Waker and Hades. Both Ori games are among my all-time favorites and they both made me cry. But at the same time, I'm extremely grateful that there is a Guardians of the Galaxy game that has a great story, and it being told in a "movie-like" way is what works best for the IP.

I think the more ways in which games can tell stories, the better. Back in the 90's there were games similar in gameplay to the likes of Hades or Ori, but no way they'd have good stories. The games that had good stories were usually JRPGs or point-and-clicks, so gameplay and story were pretty much mutually exclusive. Nowadays games can tell good stories in many different ways and styles and in any genre, if you ask me we're much better off now.

When did I complain?  I simply stated my opinion.  

An opinion can be a form of complaint, but, I guess.

Just thought when you said games were trying too hard to be Shakespeare, and that they were better in the 90's, that sounded like a complain about the gaming industry of today. Which then felt a bit weird once you praised the approach to story-telling of several commercially successful games of the last couple years.




I make music, check it out here on Bandcamp, Spotify, and Youtube!

Around the Network
mZuzek said:
Chrkeller said:

When did I complain?  I simply stated my opinion.  

An opinion can be a form of complaint, but, I guess.

Just thought when you said games were trying too hard to be Shakespeare, and that they were better in the 90's, that sounded like a complain about the gaming industry of today. Which then felt a bit weird once you praised the approach to story-telling of several commercially successful games of the last couple years.

Oh I think some writers do try too hard, TLoU 2 jumps to mind.  Some stories are good, such as Uncharted 1-3.  Didn't like UC4 as much.  Writing from ND had gone down hill a bit, imo.

I do prefer 90s games, but today's games are still excellent.  My overall point was nothing more then sometimes facial expressions and music has more impact than babbling.  I wish media (not just games) would figure this out.

And for the record, I would never suggest a market needs to adjust to my needs.  Many people complain about Nintendo and their business practices, my take has always been 'maybe they aren't for you.'  I apply the same logic to my situation.  Developers aren't there to make me happy, so I would never expect the industry to change for me.  

My GotY is Triangle Strategy, but I will pick on it given it fits into this conversation quite well.  The game could EASILY cut 20% of the talking.  It adds nothing.  It would have been better with less talking and a few more battles added in.  

Another modern game I liked is God of War (ps4)...  lots of story driven during conversations while exploring.  The game doesn't stop with babbling for 10 minutes.  The game is superb.

Last edited by Chrkeller - on 11 July 2022

IcaroRibeiro said:
Bofferbrauer2 said:

And this is where you're wrong. They just gained much more prominence, but back then, there were also tons of indie developers. The reason the indies gained so much more prominence over the last 15 years is because they continued making games with genres/themes that the publishers didn't want to touch anymore as they got more and more risk-averse. But that doesn't mean they just emerged back then, what changed is their visibility.

Even if you're right, this shows how much better market is now. Before, indies needed physical distribution, the odds of them succeeding were close to noexistent. Getting global release? Forget it 

How many 90s indie games turned to be classics? I can't think any

Ever heard of shareware? This is how most Indies sold their games before the Internet allowed to do it completely without physical media. Another way was to develop your game and then mail it to potential publishers, though they risked having to sell the rights to the games when doing so. Finally, several indies simply went and self-published the games, which in the late 90's was relatively easy (They needed just a jewelcase CD in most cases).

As for 90's indies becoming classics, Doom, Wolfenstein, Commander Keen, (well pretty much everything from id software at the time became a hit despite technically being an indie developer until their acquisition by Zenimax in 2009), One Must Fall, The Exile/Avernum series (Avernum was originally just an extended remake of Exile), Constructor/Mob Rule, ADOM, Nethack...



So recently, Ubisoft has taken away a game on Steam and you can't play it anymore even if you bought it. I thought Valve assured us that we would be able to play games even if it delisted, but apparently this not going to be the case. Microsoft has DRM issues and Nintendo is the only one from the Big 3 still "actually" pushing physicals. However I doubt even Nintendo would continue for too long, and the industry is clearly going in the direction of digital. My motto is that there is a pros and cons for everything. I think modern gaming has a lot of pros, but at the same time there are a lot of cons. I think we can all agree with this, it just depends on whether you as an individual have more cons or pros in the current state. I hate to say this, but I think most are on the pro side, majority of gamers are casual and majority wouldn't even care if the future is digital.



Shatts said:

So recently, Ubisoft has taken away a game on Steam and you can't play it anymore even if you bought it. I thought Valve assured us that we would be able to play games even if it delisted, but apparently this not going to be the case. Microsoft has DRM issues and Nintendo is the only one from the Big 3 still "actually" pushing physicals. However I doubt even Nintendo would continue for too long, and the industry is clearly going in the direction of digital. My motto is that there is a pros and cons for everything. I think modern gaming has a lot of pros, but at the same time there are a lot of cons. I think we can all agree with this, it just depends on whether you as an individual have more cons or pros in the current state. I hate to say this, but I think most are on the pro side, majority of gamers are casual and majority wouldn't even care if the future is digital.

Actually Ubisoft posted an update saying you can still play the games even after being delisted.


But yea, DRM is still very shitty though.



             

                               Anime: Haruhi                                                                                                           Nsfw Anime Thread                                     

Around the Network
Captain_Yuri said:
Shatts said:

So recently, Ubisoft has taken away a game on Steam and you can't play it anymore even if you bought it. I thought Valve assured us that we would be able to play games even if it delisted, but apparently this not going to be the case. Microsoft has DRM issues and Nintendo is the only one from the Big 3 still "actually" pushing physicals. However I doubt even Nintendo would continue for too long, and the industry is clearly going in the direction of digital. My motto is that there is a pros and cons for everything. I think modern gaming has a lot of pros, but at the same time there are a lot of cons. I think we can all agree with this, it just depends on whether you as an individual have more cons or pros in the current state. I hate to say this, but I think most are on the pro side, majority of gamers are casual and majority wouldn't even care if the future is digital.

Actually Ubisoft posted an update saying you can still play the games even after being delisted.


But yea, DRM is still very shitty though.

Oh ok, thanks for the confirmation. I only read a post on Twitter and some Youtube videos claiming it wasn't so my bad. 



Captain_Yuri said:
Shatts said:

So recently, Ubisoft has taken away a game on Steam and you can't play it anymore even if you bought it. I thought Valve assured us that we would be able to play games even if it delisted, but apparently this not going to be the case. Microsoft has DRM issues and Nintendo is the only one from the Big 3 still "actually" pushing physicals. However I doubt even Nintendo would continue for too long, and the industry is clearly going in the direction of digital. My motto is that there is a pros and cons for everything. I think modern gaming has a lot of pros, but at the same time there are a lot of cons. I think we can all agree with this, it just depends on whether you as an individual have more cons or pros in the current state. I hate to say this, but I think most are on the pro side, majority of gamers are casual and majority wouldn't even care if the future is digital.

Actually Ubisoft posted an update saying you can still play the games even after being delisted.


But yea, DRM is still very shitty though.

It's still horseshit we have to look to find this information. A physical game is out of print no problem I still can find it used. Hell I been looking at Ridge Racer 7 on Ebay for PS3 new for $20. 



Bite my shiny metal cockpit!

Bofferbrauer2 said:
IcaroRibeiro said:

Even if you're right, this shows how much better market is now. Before, indies needed physical distribution, the odds of them succeeding were close to noexistent. Getting global release? Forget it 

How many 90s indie games turned to be classics? I can't think any

Ever heard of shareware? This is how most Indies sold their games before the Internet allowed to do it completely without physical media. Another way was to develop your game and then mail it to potential publishers, though they risked having to sell the rights to the games when doing so. Finally, several indies simply went and self-published the games, which in the late 90's was relatively easy (They needed just a jewelcase CD in most cases).

As for 90's indies becoming classics, Doom, Wolfenstein, Commander Keen, (well pretty much everything from id software at the time became a hit despite technically being an indie developer until their acquisition by Zenimax in 2009), One Must Fall, The Exile/Avernum series (Avernum was originally just an extended remake of Exile), Constructor/Mob Rule, ADOM, Nethack...

Nope, never heard of shareware, shown how much indies are willing to use it nowadays. For indie developers digital distribution is a Gods send, much easier to release and distributed their games worldwide. That's why so many games were never released outside some markets in past (many never released outside Japan)

I'm perplexed that you listed using big publishers (at risk of losing their legal rights) as a truly viable way to publishing. Seems something hard to hear if you're a small developer. 

From those games I know Doom and Wolfstein, which I'm surprised to discover to be indies. 

Last edited by IcaroRibeiro - on 11 July 2022

Leynos said:
Captain_Yuri said:

Actually Ubisoft posted an update saying you can still play the games even after being delisted.


But yea, DRM is still very shitty though.

It's still horseshit we have to look to find this information. A physical game is out of print no problem I still can find it used. Hell I been looking at Ridge Racer 7 on Ebay for PS3 new for $20. 

This is largely dependent on where you live and how successful was the game. Less successful games are pretty hard to find. 

The odds of a game being removed from digital stores are pretty much noexistintent. They getting out of print in other hand is the standard. It's in fact so common that right now the industry is living from remakes and remasters. It's a direct consequence of the absence of digital stores to preserve older games getting sold years later, with some upgrades in resolution and framers framerates they can be sold 60 USD again 

Digital is just much better to ensure a game can be found permanently... well at least in theory. Nintendo and Sony keep shutting down their stores and they should get more backslash for this. I mean... games purchased 15 years ago on Steam are still possible to find and download. Digital is not really the problem, the problem are console makers. It's not hard to understand why PC gaming is so superior.



IcaroRibeiro said:
Bofferbrauer2 said:

Ever heard of shareware? This is how most Indies sold their games before the Internet allowed to do it completely without physical media. Another way was to develop your game and then mail it to potential publishers, though they risked having to sell the rights to the games when doing so. Finally, several indies simply went and self-published the games, which in the late 90's was relatively easy (They needed just a jewelcase CD in most cases).

As for 90's indies becoming classics, Doom, Wolfenstein, Commander Keen, (well pretty much everything from id software at the time became a hit despite technically being an indie developer until their acquisition by Zenimax in 2009), One Must Fall, The Exile/Avernum series (Avernum was originally just an extended remake of Exile), Constructor/Mob Rule, ADOM, Nethack...

Nope, never heard of shareware, shown how much indies are willing to use it nowadays. For indie developers digital distribution is a Gods send, much easier to release and distributed their games worldwide. That's why so many games were never released outside some markets in past (many never released outside Japan)

I'm perplexed that you listed using big publishers (at risk of losing their legal rights) as a truly viable way to publishing. Seems something hard to hear if you're a small developer. 

From those games I know Doom and Wolfstein, which I'm surprised to discover to be indies. 

Well, that's the thing, the name indies didn't exist, Doom had a normal sized team for the times. Doom was released under the Shareware model, meaning the first of three episodes could everyone copy for free and include on discs on magazines (remember, internet wasn't a thing everyone had back then). For Doom the shareware version contained the first of three episodes. At the end you got this message:

That was pretty usual, about a third of the game as shareware for free copying, so that the game reached a lot of people and paying for the full version. This often involved mailing actual money bills inside a letter and getting a disk back the same way.

Doom was self-published (Doom 2 got another publisher and released without shareware as boxed version), but prior id games including Wolfenstein 3D had one of the biggest publishers at the time: Apogee Software. So was it any less "indie"? Well Apogee also released their games via the shareware model and Apogee at the time were like 10 people. So also indie after todays standards. Because pretty much every game was indie if we apply modern standards. Lot's of the "big" game publishers operated from the garage of private homes. Because gaming was so niche back then.

And that is why todays indies still have it better todays than all game devs in the 90s, as you noted. They can reach a lot of customers via digital distribution. Payment these days can be made via online payment options, not mailed in a letters as dollar bills.



3DS-FC: 4511-1768-7903 (Mii-Name: Mnementh), Nintendo-Network-ID: Mnementh, Switch: SW-7706-3819-9381 (Mnementh)

my greatest games: 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021

10 years greatest game event!

bets: [peak year] [+], [1], [2], [3], [4]