Seventh Generation: The Years of Stagnation

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ace

Another thing I hate: REGION CODES!

---

You know what sucks more? living in a PAL country and getting a VC rom that plays at 50hz.

Fucking Nintendo doesn't know how much it hurts to play a PAL rom after getting a 60hz switch on all my consoles,
but then again.. I had this friend once who got all pissy when i spoke to him about 50/60hz switches,
he was all like "pfff i'll play the game as it was intended to run!"
so i told him how the game is supposed to be played at 60hz and he brushed it off with some lame excuse.

I guess thats the people who Nintendo is aiming at, the ones without a brain.

I should really mess around with my Wii sometime, get the homebrew channel and shit,
because right now its (like yours) also collecting dust.

though that might be more because i just don't care about gaming anymore,
even my Megadrive seems to be about collecting these days.

Remember.. remember when we used to love games? :(

video games have suffered from several bouts of stagnation over the years. its amazing that this industry that requires constant innovation to stay in business has been able to grow as much as it has for the past three decades. motion sensing control schemes seem to be the new innovation of this generation, but there doesnt seem to be enough refinement to make any of the motion sensing games feel like anything beyond a gimmick. WiiSports was amazing, but two years later, nothing seems to have built on its momentum.

I have really noticed a backlash from fans. I sense a whole form of video game nihilism out there. I think thats why sites like this and some old consoles have had life pumped back into them. Old School gamers want nothing to do with this generation.

If im honest with myself, I think I just have a rose tinted view on retro games as the master system/mega drive era are the happiest parts of my child hood. Really though looking back now a large portion of the games have aged horribly and they had as much depth as a kiddie pool. Storys were non existant. Perhaps due to hardware restraints but Games either consisted of a mammal of some sort jumping on things heads or an identikit schmup, which frankly compared to worlds i've seen and experienced and characters and ideas i've seen on newer games frankly blow. Games last longer due to multiplayer modes and as such you get alot more for your money. (especially since I can remember paying more than todays games for some big mega drive releases).Games with the sort of originality like world of goo or Vib ribbon or Shadow of the colossus were non-existant back in the day.
I think the reason why I spend as much time as I do looking back at games is a simple reason really. I've been playing them for over 20 yrs now and tried thousands upon thousands of games. Probably the same as most of you guys. I just don't personally see anymore how after seein so many different games and genre's how im supposed to get exicted with new games really. I mean how many more ideas can there be?

i think the growth of importance of storylines have been a negative to gaming. a game should be a game, a test of skill and strategy, not an interactive story. the absolute best gaming stories feel about as good as the cheese known as star wars

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MrMatthews

And thanks for pin-pointing RE4's origin - I was trying to think of what games might have inspired it, and I supposed Tomb Raider without the platforming is about as close as it gets.

---

I think it's basically a Zelda: OoT clone, but most games are, actually.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NeoVamp

You know what sucks more? living in a PAL country and getting a VC rom that plays at 50hz.

---

Aye, I've experimented to see just how bad games play in 50Hz, and let me tell you, it's NOT PLEASANT. What would it have taken Nintendo to recode the games for 50Hz? Please explain.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NeoVamp

but then again.. I had this friend once who got all pissy when i spoke to him about 50/60hz switches,
he was all like "pfff i'll play the game as it was intended to run!"
so i told him how the game is supposed to be played at 60hz and he brushed it off with some lame excuse.

---

It's like my father said when I was 16, he kept telling me to leave everything the way it was meant to be. That's lame. And that guy is just a total dumb@#^, I'm sorry to say(not my father, your friend). What crap.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NeoVamp

I should really mess around with my Wii sometime, get the homebrew channel and shit,
because right now its (like yours) also collecting dust.

---

Please do. You'll have a much better experience.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NeoVamp

Remember.. remember when we used to love games? :(

---

Oh, damn, during the 5th and 6th generations, that when I was craziest for video games(and a little into the 7th generation, though I've backtracked all the way to the 2nd generation after I've started to build up a console collection). Though now, I seem to be stuck in the 4th generation because that's when I believe video games were at their best.

Although I don't agree with many of the points made in this thread (I think some people have some unfair expectations of current-gen and/or an unrealistic perception of how things operated during past generations), I have my own criticisms of the Seventh Generation of Gaming.

I think the leap from Gen 6 to Gen 7 was made with the smallest amount of advancement than any other evolution, from a visual AND gameplay standpoint.

Remember how amazed we all were when, after spending so much time with our NESs and SMSs, the first screen shots of the 16-bit systems were unveiled?

In my own mind, I compare the 32-bit age to the old Atari/Intellivision era. Yes, it looked like ass, but it was technically amazing. Despite the fact that the graphics and control of many of those early 3D games are almost unbearably primitive by today's standards, no one can deny the incredible evolution of the industry.

The 6th generation also marked a significant step forward. Developers took what they learned from the previous generation and began to "nail it" more and more consistently. With most of the kinks of working with a brand-new medium more or less ironed out, more and more focus was put on refining the gameplay. And the games looked amazing.

The visual difference between this latest crop of games and the last is much more subtle, however. When I first saw the games being played, I didn't think they looked any better than what I was used to on the GameCube or the PS2.

There weren't any major hiccups in the 6th generation, so there weren't too many improvements to be made in the 7th. The 360 and PS3 can't really do much that their immediate predecessors couldn't do. The most notable advancements to the hardware seem to be mostly peripheral, not having a whole lot to do with games directly.

As was said earlier, there are really only so many ideas (the same idea applies to books and movies, as well). It seems that developers used up a lot of the REALLY good concepts in previous generations, so with few exceptions, all there is left to do is build on existing concepts.

But I like to think that if a game was great once, it's worth playing again. Really innovative, fresh ideas are becoming more and more scarce, but I think it's unfair to say (or imply) that the games themselves aren't fun anymore.

Unless there is some huge shift in the industry in the next couple years, I think the 8th generation will be even less impressive. Like I said, the truly original ideas are all but completely used up. I think the next logical step is to increase the level of immersion for the gamer (a step that I would say has been spearheaded by Nintendo).

Quote:

---

Today, hardware cycles and the video game industry itself are becoming too commercialized for some of the more hardcore gamers. Some believe that the industry has sold out and the idea of fun gameplay has been replaced with fast profits. It's tough to argue with that logic given the state of affairs in 2008.

---

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13506_3-10037723-17.html

Well, the quick cash-grabs and shovelware was always there, but I think it's safe to say that the industry is more profitable now than ever, and as a result we have seen a marked increase in lazy developers who make a game purely based on the fact that they know it will sell well regardless of its quality. But that trend started long ago.

i believe there is a very real possibiliity there will not be an 8th generation game console

with the economy the way it is, and sony and ms losing money on their game divisions, it is difficult to envision either company investing the money needed in R&D to develop yet another gaming platform with even fewer returns as the jump from gen 6 to gen 7 (tangent: games presented in HD as a standard is probably the most significant addition this generation)

with downloadable content looming on the horizon, and wireless controllers the norm, i can see future televisions shipping with a game machine preinstalled. sony or microsoft may want to license their current platforms for such an endeavor rather than take any more risks with faulty or expensive hardware

i can also see MS or Sony selling or spinning off their game divisions into independant game companies

either way, i think the current 5 year cycles for video games are all but dead
(tangent 2, i do see a wii hd though)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MrMatthews

Well, the quick cash-grabs and shovelware was always there, but I think it's safe to say that the industry is more profitable now than ever, and as a result we have seen a marked increase in lazy developers who make a game purely based on the fact that they know it will sell well regardless of its quality. But that trend started long ago.

---

i would call that a pillar of the gaming industry

pac-man for the 2600 anyone?

The gaming industry has taken a nose dive. I wouldnt be surprised in this volatile economic setting if we see a new "Video Game Crash of 2009" because of the horrendous and mostly boring titles brought out. I mean I saw a video on the web (which I can't freakin remember what the hell its called and its bothing the hell out of me but anyway) where one of these analysts say that video games are getting so expensive to produce that you have to choose between if you want to spend your budget on graphics, storyline, or fun / replayable factor. I mean it seems like its more affected by the bottom line then ever before. I think that jerk Bernie Stolar said it the best in my quote above.

Quote:

---

I just don’t understand why people make product that’s not fun. That’s the only thing that anybody wants. Why build a store?

---

Edit: Also one of these guys said that PS3 / XBOX360 want to be more a multimedia platform then a gaming console. Meaning that they want their users to watch movies, surfing the web, and things of that effect on them. He said that this is a very bad idea that may blow up in the console developers faces. I mean why the hell do people want to do this if almost everyones house has 2-3 computers already with cable modems ready to go? Why would I want to surf the internet with my console if I have a computer sitting next to me?

Exactly, Chris.

The sad fact that many people need to face is that, regardless of how wholesome and pure your memories are of playing those older games, the ONLY reason for their existence was to MAKE MONEY.

I'm pretty sure that the underlining goal for just about every developer/producer is to spend only as much money as it will take to draw consumer attention. Obviously, licensed games already have the benefit of name-recognition, so developers don't need to work as hard as a atido creating something new.

Take Miyamoto. I doubt very seriously that he designs games with the profit in mind. But the folks writing his check most CERTAINLY do.

For every pure idea out there, every wide-eyed rookie that cares only about getting his/her game made without regard to the money spent or earned, there is a corporate entity that ultimately decides whether or not such a project is marketable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MrMatthews

Exactly, Chris.

The sad fact that many people need to face is that, regardless of how wholesome and pure your memories are of playing those older games, the ONLY reason for their existence was to MAKE MONEY.

I'm pretty sure that the underlining goal for just about every developer/producer is to spend only as much money as it will take to draw consumer attention. Obviously, licensed games already have the benefit of name-recognition, so developers don't need to work as hard as a atido creating something new.

Take Miyamoto. I doubt very seriously that he designs games with the profit in mind. But the folks writing his check most CERTAINLY do.

For every pure idea out there, every wide-eyed rookie that cares only about getting his/her game made without regard to the money spent or earned, there is a corporate entity that ultimately decides whether or not such a project is marketable.

---

I really don't think that it has anything to do with our "fond memories" what it has to do is with price, entertainment value, and quality. I chose not to buy any current gen' systems not because I am living in the past clutching my Dreamcast and Genesis. I didn't buy them because I could spend the money on something much better, which I did. Instead of running out and buying PS3 / Xbox360 / Wii I bought a new computer.

I am really starting to believe that many people that bought these systems are just rationalizing their purchase or should I say waste of money.