5 Ways to Tell You're Getting Too Old for Video Games

[Xellos]

Good read with many points I agree with. Just stumbled across another great one on the bottom of the page. Pure hilarity http://www.cracked.com/article_17206_the-10-most-perverted-old-school-video-games.html

 

[brfritos]

Good read with many points I agree with. Just stumbled across another great one on the bottom of the page. Pure hilarity http://www.cracked.com/article_17206_the-10-most-perverted-old-school-video-games.html

Excuse me, but an article about pervert games not having Bikini Karate Babes is not exactly what I call "good".

On the other hand, is interesting how game companies don't know how to make money.
Take Fallout or The Elder Scrolls universe. They are extremelly rich in stories, side stories, backgrounds and enviroment.
How manny books about them exist? Ok, books don't sell, I will give credit to this splendorous piece of crap BS statement and ask about comics! How manny about them are out there?
Or even an animated TV series but if you really want how about a movie?

Sure, you can criticize Bioware's Mass Effect for being streamelined on the second instalment and criticize the cleaness-ness of the enviroment - the future will certainly not have all walls clean and white - but they are doing right: expand the universe and characters of the game into new things.

Fallout not having a book expanding the universe baffles me even to this day.

 

[Hassknecht]

Fallout not having a book expanding the universe baffles me even to this day.

Well, before Fallout 3, the series wasn't exactly a very mainstream title. It sold well, but it was still a cRPG and not very everyone.
And Bethesda doesn't really like to go beyond their horizons.
I mean, since 1996 their cRPGs are first person sandbox games.

And I'm very happy that they don't contract random authors to write novels around the Fallout universe. Those books tend to be written by people not exactly familiar with the universe and end up being canon-raping piles of radioactive goo.

 

[Autoduel76]

It's much more about the games industry changing than older gamers changing. Back in the good old days computer games, like computers themselves, were hard to use and understand. Just look at their origin: the first computer games were designed by hardcore technology nerds -- not the pansy "I go to comic book conventions and think the new Doctor Who is awesome!" quasi-nerds of today, but mathematics and computer science graduate student nerds. Old computer games required inquisitiveness and a focused mind or you couldn't play them, which is why so many old games are considered "unplayable" by the new generation.

Everything today is easy as pie. You install the game and it runs. You put the game in your X-Box and it works (and if it doesn't you get all huffy and pissed off). Gaming is a bigger industry than it's ever been, because it's open to a larger audience than ever, and simply by virtue of the increased numbers, that audience is dumber than any audience that has ever played computer games before. It's been watered down as a consequence of its popularity. People don't want to play games they can't understand, so games have gotten dumber too. More flashy, to appeal to the "shiny object" fascination of a wider, more average audience, and more violent, for the same reason.

In short, I haven't left games -- games have left me. Most of them, anyway.

Well there were always console and arcade games for people to use. For another thing the early decades of computer games did not require being a hi-tech geek to be able to get started at all. Hell, we are talking about pre-hard drive days, it was as simple as inserting a disk and turning the computer on. Sure if a game was big enough for multiple floppies it could get annoying, but "insert disc 2" was simple enough to accomplish for my grandmother

There was also always a large number of causal, simplistic games. The idea that every game was Wasteland or Wizardry is crazy. There were plenty of tic-tac-toe games back then as well, or pac-man, or asteroids or pinball clones.

Now that there are thousands of times as many games as there were back then, you can find games that run the gambit from the most simple to much more complex than we had back then.

Games have become much more mainstream and if that bothers you, so be it, but its not because there aren't games like we had 30 years ago. Sure, a blockbuster like Mass Effect might not be for you, and it might sell 1 million copies.

But the reality is that the game you are pining for from 30 years ago wasn't a million copy seller. It sold numbers more like in the tens of thousands. And if you look at those games that sell in the tens of thousands today (or are downloaded in the tens of thousands), you find the indie game scene with many of the same types of game principles.

Avernum, Eschelon, Dwarf Fortress, Project Zomboid, Ultimate Newcomer, Legend of Grimrock, etc. There's really no shortage.

The difference is that the gaming industry is bigger, more popular and there are more games out than every before. But "your games" really never left. You still have the same type of small operation "computer geek" developers making those games.

 

[Threepwood]

It's much more about the games industry changing than older gamers changing. Back in the good old days computer games, like computers themselves, were hard to use and understand. Just look at their origin: the first computer games were designed by hardcore technology nerds -- not the pansy "I go to comic book conventions and think the new Doctor Who is awesome!" quasi-nerds of today, but mathematics and computer science graduate student nerds. Old computer games required inquisitiveness and a focused mind or you couldn't play them, which is why so many old games are considered "unplayable" by the new generation.

Everything today is easy as pie. You install the game and it runs. You put the game in your X-Box and it works (and if it doesn't you get all huffy and pissed off). Gaming is a bigger industry than it's ever been, because it's open to a larger audience than ever, and simply by virtue of the increased numbers, that audience is dumber than any audience that has ever played computer games before. It's been watered down as a consequence of its popularity. People don't want to play games they can't understand, so games have gotten dumber too. More flashy, to appeal to the "shiny object" fascination of a wider, more average audience, and more violent, for the same reason.

In short, I haven't left games -- games have left me. Most of them, anyway.

Well there were always console and arcade games for people to use. For another thing the early decades of computer games did not require being a hi-tech geek to be able to get started at all. Hell, we are talking about pre-hard drive days, it was as simple as inserting a disk and turning the computer on. Sure if a game was big enough for multiple floppies it could get annoying, but "insert disc 2" was simple enough to accomplish for my grandmother

There was also always a large number of causal, simplistic games. The idea that every game was Wasteland or Wizardry is crazy. There were plenty of tic-tac-toe games back then as well, or pac-man, or asteroids or pinball clones.

Now that there are thousands of times as many games as there were back then, you can find games that run the gambit from the most simple to much more complex than we had back then.

Games have become much more mainstream and if that bothers you, so be it, but its not because there aren't games like we had 30 years ago. Sure, a blockbuster like Mass Effect might not be for you, and it might sell 1 million copies.

But the reality is that the game you are pining for from 30 years ago wasn't a million copy seller. It sold numbers more like in the tens of thousands. And if you look at those games that sell in the tens of thousands today (or are downloaded in the tens of thousands), you find the indie game scene with many of the same types of game principles.

Avernum, Eschelon, Dwarf Fortress, Project Zomboid, Ultimate Newcomer, Legend of Grimrock, etc. There's really no shortage.

The difference is that the gaming industry is bigger, more popular and there are more games out than every before. But "your games" really never left. You still have the same type of small operation "computer geek" developers making those games.

Bravo sir.

 

[brfritos]

And I'm very happy that they don't contract random authors to write novels around the Fallout universe. Those books tend to be written by people not exactly familiar with the universe and end up being canon-raping piles of radioactive goo.

This is not always true. Yes, I'm aware that an author not familiar with the setting will probably screw things up, but take Lucas Arts for example, no material is published without the OK from George Lucas.
Harry Potter is the same thing, the scripts are controlled by Rowling, so you don't see too much deviation from the books (or that's what I heard, because I don't like "Trash Potter").

So you can extend or adapt the universe without screw up things.

Of course there's always Bryan Singer's Superman to contradict me.

 

[valcik]

But the reality is that the game you are pining for from 30 years ago wasn't a million copy seller. It sold numbers more like in the tens of thousands.

Hey, that's unfair! There was not any internet/online distribution 30 years ago and don't forget even the price of hardware and inflation of dollar:
[spoiler:165663614c]

[/spoiler:165663614c]
Computers were pretty rare items in that time.
(Otherwise, I agree with your arguments.)

 

[Korin]

Yeah, that article pretty much nailed it.

 

[Arr0nax]

Well I for one disagree with most of the points he's making. I hate the way he basically take back all the criticism he offered in the premisse, and embarass himself in the 'The truth is...' section basically offering the gaming industry a enthusiastic blowjob.

He's almost implying that Final Fantasy games weren't more intense naratively than what his children experience while free roaming an ambulance in GTA... on which I have to call bullshit.

I did an experiment last year. Like him I had been seriously wondering if Fallout 2 could still be my favourite game if I played it now that I'm older.
I seriously considered that one of the reason it's my favourite is because I played it around the age of 13, and that if I did at my current age I would just have this cold and shallow relationship to it.

Well I sort of confirmed this is bullshit by playing Planescape one year ago. I'm older, right. I'm almost an adult. I hardly ever play games anymore nowadays.

That didn't prevent me from enjoying the fuck out of Planescape which I never played before. I got immersed in the story like I could never have immersed myself in any of the more modern games..
And this guy right here is pretending the only reason one could be disappointed with the content of current games is because we're too old to simply appreciate a work of fiction ? Well screw him for that shameless hypocrite simplification.
He's just being the gaming industry's bitch is what he's doing.

To sum up, this article has some interesting points on why quality of games is degrading. That is if you only read the parts before 'The truth is' bullshit that follows. If you read it all in one piece it's just one gigantic apology of the current state of the gaming industry. I can't accept the 'games are not getting worse, you're just getting older' logic you can read between his lines.
What a piece of garbage...

 

[Autoduel76]

He's almost implying that Final Fantasy games weren't more intense naratively than what his children experience while free roaming an ambulance in GTA... on which I have to call bullshit.

Why would you be comparing Final Fantasy to GTA Free Roam in the first place? I'd have to call bullshit on your analysis.

If you want to go that route, a proper comparison would be, is Final Fantasy 13 have a more, or less, intensive narrative than Final Fantasy 3?

Age does play a factor in your ability to immerse yourself in a fantasy, whether its a game, a movie or book. Generally people require a more structured and cohesive narrative as they get older. Your ability to get into Torment at this age is not surprising for that reason.

That doesn't mean you can't enjoy games as much anymore, but it is and was clearly easier to get into them at a younger age. Your mind is much more open to accepting things at face value the younger you are.

The question of if games are getting worse or not is a bit of another issue, but again I think its a significantly overblown topic. Games are getting more numerous and mainstream games are less like games we played when games were less mainstream. But the type of games are still there in the less mainstream games in pretty much the same numbers they were before.

Its really not accurate to even compare a game like Mass Effect that is made to sell millions to games like Wizardry and Ultima which sold 24,000 and 20,000 respectively.

Compare it to niche games and indie games that sell in the thousands and you find the same type of small operation games.

 

[Per]

Some stuff I don't agree with, but I'm probably not representative of either of the two groups he's envisaging.

 

[UncannyGarlic]

#5. You Think Multiplayer is Bullshit
Their forgiveness for the industry seems to be based almost solely on playing console games as a lot of PC multiplayer isn't random.

#4. You Think Games Are Suddenly Too Long
True, the younger you are the more you can put up with grinding and certain people do like that shitty design in MMOs but it's there to milk money in them. It's not that most games are too long, it's that quest design is mostly shit, grinding has always been bullshit in single player games, and most side content is a combination of the two. Hell, they even points out that the games are full of bloat before defending them.

#3. You Miss Game Storylines That Were Actually Compelling
Shitty examples and bullshit conclusion. I never enjoyed games because I pretended to be in them while playing them, even if as a small child I did occasionally do so while I wasn't playing them. I enjoyed FFVI when I was younger and I still stand by it having a good plot structure even if the writing is bad with spots of hilarity but I would never use it as an example of a good story driven game.

I think that Chrono Trigger could probably make the list due to having excellent pacing and good writing for the target audience (teens and tweens). That said, if I were to give an example I'd go with something like Planescape Torment or Fallout.

#2. You Think Originality is Dead
True, there have always been trends in gaming but it was never cross-platform like it is now. The FPS genre is dominating the development scene like nothing has before and using examples from systems which were involved in the Video Game Crash is plain stupid.

#1. You Miss When Games Used to be "All About Fun"
This just shows off the authors' stupidity as he never makes any real point. That is unless his point is that the genres of games that they like are pretty much no longer made, which is fair enough and makes his defense nonsensical.

 

[Arr0nax]

Why would you be comparing Final Fantasy to GTA Free Roam in the first place? I'd have to call bullshit on your analysis.

Well did you read the article I'm talking about ?
I'm not the one juxtaposing these two things to make a point. He is.

His point is children don't even need a story to make up a compelling adventure in their head. So a mediocre story can be compelling to children.
And from this he extrapolate the notion that he's simply too old to appreciate a game storyline : good game storylines didn't vanish, they were always shitty and he just got older.
You know, this is basically the title of the chapter : You Miss Game Storylines That Were Actually Compelling
It doesn't take much knowledge of past videogames to debunk this. Game storylines haven't always been shitty.

 

[AskWazzup]

The problem for me in the games today, is that they are putting too much emphasis on realism and as said in the article - extend the gameplay by adding grinding material.... I really miss games with great artistic style and story. Now most games just feel too artificial for me, they're not vibrant. You step into a room that's realistic looking and then you're imagination goes off, but the next step you notice that there is an invisible wall and the whole atmosphere crumbles down.

Today i mostly play games like TFT2 or Day of Defeat, a half an hour and i'm satisfied. I also don't see a big problem with teenagers, since i often kick their ingame asses anyway . Other than that, i still ocasionally play a game or two, but try to keep the sessions short, so that it doesn't wear me out.

What i would like to see, is a game that concentrates on good writing, good concept art and sound. Still think there is a bunch of potential for creativity in games, but the industry must mature first...

 

[Ausdoerrt]

It doesn't take much knowledge of past videogames to debunk this. Game storylines haven't always been shitty.

Yup, the guy assumes too much. Then again, with FF series as his beacon of great storytelling...

On the multiplayer games though - I don't get annoyed by kids that can behave online (and they do exist, in significant numbers), and that's not really a problem. Unreal Tournament or Counter-Strike weren't CoD MW2.

 

[TorontoReign]

I agree with the article on a couple of points:



1) I am tired of Call of Duty Black-Op's and it's ilk. Battlefield 3 will be much better, but to my point which is I hate what online shooters have become. Multiplayer has become the sole focus on many franchises and the author was right in the fact that story has taking a backburner on many titles recently. Exceptions exist of course, but I want more original titles as opposed to Call of Duty 15.

2) Little kids are starting to piss me the fuck off. I don't remember being so disrespectful and ignorant at 10 years old, but some of these kids have issues. I want to play with mature gamers. For every 1 I see online I find 12 grieving,obnoxious, little brats.

Other than that I disagree with him on the games being too long bullshit, but he made a couple of decent points which have been brought up before.My favorite is how DLC is tacked on even though it could be free with the game ,a example is Capcom milking money from DLC fighters and outfits.

BTW to anyone who says kids aren't annoying well look at it from my perspective:

I make a world on Fortresscraft and armies of little kids try to destroy it. They are like little grieving, gremlins.

But with all the complaints gaming has never been more fun so screw it.

 

[thegaresexperience]

I use games more as an escape now. if I do play games like COD i have music on so don't hear the shit the kids are saying, but I usually play MW1 and the only people on there most of the time are people who actually play to have fun not to grief.

But I don't play much MP these day on consoles (I do on PC, I have servers for TF2 and CSS that i go to to play with people who don't take the game too seriously but aren't a bunch of griefers either).

 

[aenemic]

so what those of you who disagree with his points are saying is that you're at the same mental state and mindset that you were when you first started playing games? well, good for you.

I think it's pretty darn obvious that your view of video games changes with age and experience, just like anything else in the world. I didn't need this article to tell me that, I've realized it myself long ago. I simply don't enjoy games the same way as I did when I was younger. I might enjoy them just as much, but I enjoy different things than I used to. I'm mostly into the same genres, however. and playing games I loved 10 years ago still gives me plenty of satisfaction. but it's not the same as it was 10 years ago.

I think he has some very valid points that should be pretty obvious to anyone. that said, it's not a comment on the quality of games being released today. the game industry has obviously changed over the years, both for better and worse. and when it comes to crpg's, the genre most of us here are interested in, it's unfortunately mostly turned to worse. either way, the article was a fun read and I could definitely recognize myself in several parts of it.

 

[UncannyGarlic]

On the multiplayer games though - I don't get annoyed by kids that can behave online (and they do exist, in significant numbers), and that's not really a problem. Unreal Tournament or Counter-Strike weren't CoD MW2.

I'd argue that microphones are the main source of the complaint. It sucks but prepubescent children have annoyingly high voices and many don't know how to use the mic to communicate properly, they're too chatty. The reason that CS and UT used to be fine was that they didn't always have microphones so everything was in text. The same is still true for games without voice support.

I make a world on Fortresscraft and armies of little kids try to destroy it. They are like little grieving, gremlins.

Not all trolls are children; in fact my experience has been that most trolls are adults.

so what those of you who disagree with his points are saying is that you're at the same mental state and mindset that you were when you first started playing games?

I believe the point was that the article is poorly written, containing inane arguments and points.

 

[TorontoReign]

No all trolls are not children,but the act is childlike I think.