Gaming these days
 

is crap. In fact, it's partly not even gaming anymore. In my school, everyone says that the next-gen systems are cool. I am different. The original purpose of gaming consoles was to just play games. Now, they play movies, and even connect to the Internet. Gaming consoles never needed that. This is just dumb. I can't believe how gaming sank. I know everyone at school makes fun of PS1 games, but I think that they're better than today's games like Halo. Games are supposed to give you an adventurous feel. Does Halo give you that? No. Halo is just a big multiplayer party. I like single-player games. The original purpose of games was to let you get into a different world, where everything is different. Online multiplayer games spoil all of this. It's fun to go into different stores to look for a rare game, finally find it, and show it off to your friends. A big part of it was wiped out by Xbox Live Arcade, PlayStation Network, and Virtual Console. Downloading games is not nearly as fun. And look at the popular game franchises. Crash Bandicoot changed into Jack and Daxter. Yes, Daxter is a good game, but it doesn't live up to Crash Bandicoot. Spyro changed into Ratchet and Clank, which doesn't live up to the PS1 Spyro games. Shooters take over the gaming world, when they don't live up to the PS1 platformers I always like to play. 2D games are almost over, when they're just as fun as 3D games. It's the fun that matters, not the number of dimensions. Even the gaming magazines aren't really gaming anymore. GamePro and the Official PlayStation Magazine tell you about Blu-Ray movies which have nothing to do with games. Tips & Tricks has an "Online Gamer" section, which should be just called "Online" -- it tells you how to study diseases on your PS3! What does this have to do with gaming? I think that the gaming industry should understan that they are not a multimedia industry -- and retain the original purpose of video games.

Right.

First error, the original point of games consoles was to make money.
Really? I think the capacity to play against people all around the globe is very smart, also the idea of games consoles playing DVDs, I'll think you'll find was penned by Sony, presumably to appeal to people who didn't want to buy a DVD player as well.
Adventure games are meant to give you an adventurous feel, FPS's are supposed to give you a blood rush and strategy games are supposed to test your mind.
You rather missed the whole point then.
I wonder why.

Sorry, I'm not usually cruel but that was too good to miss.
Really? Then explain WW2 shooters.

Oh? Last time I looked Master Chief wasn't running around Asda shooting Elites.
It's not fun to spend £30 of your money on a rubbish game and thus not be able to play the new enjoyable one all your mates are playing.
These are old old retro games that would have no market on the high street.
No, Crash Bandicoot changed into 'Worse Crash Bandicoot'
The physics, storyline and dynamics are all conventionally improved.
Same as above, only I think you'll find that R&C is NOTHING like Spyro.
Then why not play the new platform games instead?
March of progress, if it can look better then why shouldn't it?
More dimensions equals more opportunity for creative expansion, Lorne recognised this and so did all the other developers.
The magazines are written for the console, not the games. If you have a problem with the decision of the editor I suggest you miss those pages out on your read through.
The gaming industry is there to make money. It will continue to expand on what people want from products to fill their needs. Gaming has evolved, maybe for better, maybe for worse. I think you should think a little before blaming game developers for looking to the demographic for their suggestions and start looking for adventurous games in this day and age that are still good. Contrary to popular opinion there are a lot.

Also that argument should have been broken up into separate paragraphs in at least four places.

Wings of Fire: Disecting your post, so I don't have to. =P (Plus he knows more than me about this anyway)

Ultimately, MeechShrykull1029, you sound like an old man who mumbles about the price of tea and "The good old days" (Even though there never have been "good old days". Ever. Seriously, what's up with that? I guess it's all in the perception.)

Retro gaming is fun, sure, but that's the point - You can play your retro games all you like while you wait for the gaming scene to change and move into a different direction. It changes direction pretty often, so if you don't like what's happening now, wait a couple of years, and it'll be going in a different direction. Easy. =P

2D games are still being produced in some fasion. Even if they're not the same as they were back in thier hay-day, you can still retro-game if you really love them that much. I'm sure there's many, many 2D games that you haven't played yet. And IMO, there's a lot more you can do with 3D games and environments, which gives better games that have the potential to be more fun. It's called progress (and for the record, I'm sure MO would've been a good sequal to AE and AO if OWI pulled it off correctly. I regard Stranger as definately being on-par with the original 2D games.).

And nobody's forcing you to play multiplayer games if you hate them that much. There are many good single-player games out now and many more on the horizon. You just need to get into the modern gaming scene a little more. Heck, I'm sat outside the gaming scene looking in at what's going on through the window, but even I can see great things going on.

Open your mind some more, find out what's good about the modern gaming scene (BioShock, Portal, COD:4, GTA:IV) and enjoy. :P

Yes, yes, I know all that. Now, platformers are not as good, because, instead of focusing on the story mode, the developers focus on the multiplayer mode. Also, by 2D games, I mean sidescrollers, so if you know a store that still sells sidescrollers, tell me.

http://www.steampowered.com/v/index.php

http://www.steampowered.com/v/index....pId=9180&cc=GB ;)

Oh, try E-Bay and Amazon.com too.

Five points to WoF.

I don't really game much, but Spyro kicks ass, so I don't wanna hear it. Certain people enjoy certain kinds of games. I'm glad we have such a variety to choose from. The more there are, the more likely people will be able to find one they enjoy. Just because you don't like the direction games are taking doesn't make the whole industry crap. The industry itself is still pretty young to say it's entering a dark age. I suggest you go out and look for some games that interest you like Dark Hood is encouraging you to do.

MeechShrykull1029: Buy Psychonauts. All your problems will be solved.

Meech, to sum it up: You don't know what you're talking about, you just don't. For example, Contra 4 came out earlier this year, and Contra is a classic series, so does that mean Contra was bad?
Because Contra is a side-scrolling game, and New Super Mario bros. came out recently enough, so you're not making sense-How is something like Donkey Kong Jungle beat fit in? It's a 2D platformer with 3D graphics, and it was amazing and had a neat story. You've got to be my least favorite member.

Are there any PSP sidescrollers?

Subject: Changed!

If games had not changed, they would have sunk without a trace. There is an inevitable design creep that increases complexity in titles and necessity drives production towards whatever gameplay model will sell the most to current audiences.

People get used to what game designers provide. They have to do new stuff. Old style games are left in the dust for gaming's very survival. Like evolution, you have to keep running just to stay in the same place.

They could have changed by becoming better, not worse.

Subjective standard.

Don't be so defensive. If you don't like the new games, its your opinion. And quite frankly nobody cares.

Agreed.

Your loss.

How many new games have you played, actually?

Of course there are, dumbfuck. Try looking up 'PSP platformers' on google.

Christ.

Oh, and just in case you DON'T do that, There's Exit, Megaman Mzverick Hunter X, Megaman Powered up, and Patapon just to name a few.

Oh, and I'm betting five bucks that Meech just read something like this on some pretentious 'classic gaems r art' website.

I'm not going to repeat some of the excellent points above but:
Seriously, games have advanced for a reason, people got tired of crappy graphics, dull stories and repeative gameplay.
Now we have games with dull stories and repeative gameplay, but now we have amazing graphics! :) We're getting there.
Seriously, if anything, games are advancing too slow, and not being iniutive enough, games that are inuitive soon repeat their ideas over and over again, untill they defeat the purpose of being original in the first place.
When I was young I heard virtual realality games were in development, and comming soon, but they still are, I mean, apparently they're out in some centers, but the ones I've seen in universities are pretty shitty.
And wait, you still go to school? How can you know what old games truley are, unless well, ok, I don't want to know.

Games are actually alot better than old games believe it or not, you just enjoy them better because you compare them to other games of their time.
Games are going more mainstream, just accept it. ;) I know some fans are going to be pissed and defensive about it, but let them, I love seeing fat people rant in videogame stores about games starring bright animals that nobody cares about, it's a whole new form of entertainment.

Oh, and to go even more off toppic, but I must as well say this while I'm ranting, videogaming is not an art form, and if bioware makes this analgy one more time, I will consider doing something before releasing how foolish and inneffective it is.

Sorry, but...what? Of course video games are art, you dolt.

Suggested rephrase: video games can be art but rarely are.

No. . .

Making computer games can be some weird form of art (Beyond Good and Evil was like walking around a painting, and Abe's Oddysee was amazing and impressionable and looked fantastic, just to name two), but playing games is definately NOT an artform. :p

I dunno... there is a certain "art" to it ;)

The word 'Art' does not infer good right? I'd say most video games are art to a given extent of art but very few rarely become good art.
It's odd to classify playing a video game as either one or the other, the best analogy I can come up with is either a colouring book or one of those books where your choices influence the ending. Call that art if you will.

MS, if you are looking for good platform games for the PSP you will love Loco Roco.

I strated gaming when I was 6. That's early enough to experience the PS1.

And the SNES and N64 and Gameboy.

Yet you only list the PS1. You're just a pretentious casual gamer who read this on a website, fuck off.

I'd make the comparison to film. You can get arthouse films, big-budget blockbusters, home videos or S&M porn. Some count as art and some don't.

Which do and which don't is probably an issue of personal definition.

It's funny, remove the interactivity, and most games would be considered art, be it the story, making it like any film, or surreality. Imagine: a yellow disc with a missing wedge navigates a neon-blue maze consuming white pills while pursued by four brightly coloured phantasms. An opener at the Tate Modern if I ever saw one.

I didn't play the other systems, because I thought they suck. I'm not lying, and stop trying to imitate OANST.

Then how on earth can you expect to come to a fully unbiased point of view about the different generations of gaming? Newsflash: You came into gaming at the end of the PS where it was already becoming known as the PSONE, retro was long dead by then.
Evidently, not even The Daily Mail can argue that badly.
Kastere has his own brand of aggressive posting, I seriously doubt he is trying to imitate OANST as he sounds nothing like him.

Now, I don't think the other systems suck, but I still usually play Oddworld, so I don't like how next-gen games make everyone forget about Oddworld.

WoF is right. It's like spouting critique about a movie you never saw entirely. Kastere isn't imitating oanst either. If he was, there would be five more pages of this thread of him just baiting you.

What makes you think that? There's an entire forum devoted to Oddworld.

Yes, but there's not alot people who joined it.

OHHHH, I get it.
He only likes the PS1 because he thinks that we'd agree with him becaue the Oddworld games are on it. OH WOW

Why thank you, Used as well.
No offense to OANST, but I'm not really sure he posts enough for Meech to know his unique blend of trolling. Did I miss something?

How would you know? You've been here maybe two and a half months. Get over yourself.

Seriously Meech. You give me the urge to just point out every single flaw in simply stating your opinion thus far, but that would be hypocritical. I will, at first, say that your beliefs about games are simply beliefs. There are plenty of games that focus on single player. (Mass Effect, Bioshock, Psychonaughts, Total War games, Spore, Half-Life, Portal...)

Plenty of platformers...

Plenty of "2D" games.

Plenty of "art" in games.

So...

Without delving too far into the subject, as previous posters have already made wonderful points without even affecting you...

I can simply state that you need to stop being so damn ignorant and start coming out of your reclusive, lonely, arrogant, and pretentious shell. For the future of your happiness.. please.

>Psychonaughts

Psychonauts. For reals.

Also, have I become an urban legend?

No, I think Snopes disproved your existence some time ago.