Thoughts on the current generation of gamers
- Thread starter Borov
- Start date
AskWazzup
Sonny, I Watched the Vault Bein' Built!
I dont have any problems with people playing mainstream. games to unwind and relax (heck, im guilty of playing tons of TBoI, tho even that had a somewhat disturbing story). But when that's the ONLY they play, well...
Even im starting to get why parents are so keen on getting us away from computers and phones.
Certainly not because of poor quality games
. If they'd be programming, 3d modelling or some such shit, no parent would give their kids any crap over spending most of their time on the computer.
Erich van Loon
Where'd That 6th Toe Come From?
I will sit down for an hour or so and play some video games, then go outside or do something else.
My brother once played DOOM for 9hrs strait, and because his computer is in his room, he sometimes never comes out.
Also I noticed some people are talking about graphics. Y'see, I don't get it, I agree with you all because getting a game for good graphics SHOULD NOT be a justifiable reason to get a game. Gameplay > Graphics.
Borov
Just yer average gopnik
Questw
Question for all:
What would games be like if the term graphics never existed? Also if graphics never reached past fallouts?
Question for all:
What would games be like if the term graphics never existed? Also if graphics never reached past fallouts?
Borov
Just yer average gopnik
Questw
Question for all:
What would games be like if the term graphics never existed? Also if graphics never reached past fallouts?
Question for all:
What would games be like if the term graphics never existed? Also if graphics never reached past fallouts?
Mr Fish
Slippy sloppy, The
Too big of a "what if..." to speculate on.
D
Deleted member 98605
Guest
It'll be a niche market for the latter, though graphics are related to a lot of computer things; if graphics never advanced past Fallout for some reason, that's a butterfly that results with no smartphones and even up to hindering AI tech and computing tech to an extent. I dunno how big, but a technological stop around '97 would be life-changing for us now.
For the former, without the latter, nothing would change. It'll just be called 'visuals', 'screen', or 'display' and still would be a race between companies, people, and groups to produce better 'visuals', 'screen', or 'display'; and AAA companies would take their tech and ship it out to sell.
Borov
Just yer average gopnik
Meant if graphics were never really a factor in weather games were good or not.
Einhanderc7
Vat dipped, grown and still oozing with perfection
Your nuking it man, (Over thinking it). The problem doesn't boil down to a simple concept like "graphics" but of the psychology of the players. Game developers need to understand their demographics or their main demographic to appeal to. while they can indeed produce a product that appeals to a niche' group like us, that doesn't really pay the bills.
Mind you I'm not condoning the business practices that force "art" to take a side seat. This is just the reality of how the system works in this case.
From BGS perspective they should have reviewed their fan base demographics before pre-production started that way they could have received the greatest returns from the product once released as long as it was suited to the idea demographic(s).
Mind you I'm not condoning the business practices that force "art" to take a side seat. This is just the reality of how the system works in this case.
From BGS perspective they should have reviewed their fan base demographics before pre-production started that way they could have received the greatest returns from the product once released as long as it was suited to the idea demographic(s).
daveyd
First time out of the vault
I played FO1 & 2 shortly after they were released, so I was probably 17 or 18 when I played them. I probably failed to appreciate just how awesome they were back then, but I really enjoyed them. I just naturally assumed there would be a FO3. Years later when it finally came out and I got around to playing "Fallout 3"... Ugh, I cannot describe the utter disappointment. I only saw a few vestiges of what I loved about the first two games.
Anyway, point is, computer games have changed a lot since then. It is now the norm for RPGs to have features like quest compasses and journal entries that tell you exactly where you need to go / what to do*. In the modern RPG character building is very forgiving... The skills & stats (if the "RPG" even has them) you choose to focus on, don't matter much... and with a bit of grinding you can probably make yourself a god at everything. And success in combat tends to come more from the player's reflexes and twitch skills than from tactical thinking and effectively building a character / party.
Modern mainstream RPG deisgns takes Hand-holding, dumbing down, streamlining- whatever you want to call it, as a given. AAA RPG developers seem to make their games idiot friendly. They keep requisite reading to a minimum. If there's dialogue choices, you'll have a Mass Effect-esque dialogue wheel, and the dialogue is all voice acted. Then the player just follows the arrow and gets to new action sequence. Lather, rinse, repeat.
I don't think the problem is necessarily with the age of the players... It isn't that kids these days are getting dumber as a whole (average IQ has been rising steadily since the 30's; see Flynn Effect). It has more to do with the way the industry has changed. Video games used to be a pretty niche hobby just for nerds, but now it's huge. Big PC exclusive video game releases are relatively rare; from a purely business perspective, why develop a game for just PC when you can make a multiplatform release and have a much bigger potential audience?
Many PC gamers believe the console audience tends to be more casual, thus preferring a streamlined action game with RPG elements to a hardcore CRPG that requires players to use their head. Right or wrong, unfortunately it does seem that the market for true CRPGs is relatively niche and probably always will be. An AAA budget CRPG would probably be a financial failure.... Even if it had the pretty graphics, there would still be casual "Action RPG" fans turned off by "boring, slow-paced" turn-based combat, all of the number crunching, and the possibility that you could make the game very hard with a bad build, i.e., trying to make a jack-of-all-trades character.
However, it's still (theoretically) possible to build a decent CRPG with a mid range budget. The first Fallout game reportedly had a budget of about $3 million (adjusted for inflation, that's closer to $4 milllion today). Incidentally ~$4 million so far seems to be the maximum that a CRPG has raised on Kickstarter (Torment: ToN). Crowdfunding and early access have helped CRPG developers make games that few, if any publishers would be willing to fund.
*None of this to say that all older RPGs are necessarily more fun to play then modern RPGs etc. While quest compasses insult the player's intelligence and detract from the fun of exploration / figuring out stuff on your own, wandering around aimlessly looking for an NPC, item, etc. that you need to complete a quest probably isn't much fun either. It needs to be done right; if you don't have a quest marker, then you should be able to ask NPCs for clues, etc. so you're not stumbling around in the dark.
TL;DR: No I don't think it has much to do with age, or the current generation. Lots of people are morons, but that's always been the case. Businesses who want to make lots of money are going to cater to the stupid people, because that's less risky. Smart people are probably more likely to put up with dumbed down content than a dumb person is to tolerate stuff that confuses or bores them.
And to be fair, if a gamer has only been exposed to mainstream mediocre RPGs like recent Bethesda and Bioware releases, then you can't entirely fault him / her for not looking for something deeper. Their frame of reference for what an RPG is is just sadly very limited. I would say keep on encouraging gamers to play the classics and recent "old school" CRPGs like AoD. Most of the time it will be in vain, but maybe you'll get lucky and they'll be eternally grateful that you introduced them to a real RPG.
Anyway, point is, computer games have changed a lot since then. It is now the norm for RPGs to have features like quest compasses and journal entries that tell you exactly where you need to go / what to do*. In the modern RPG character building is very forgiving... The skills & stats (if the "RPG" even has them) you choose to focus on, don't matter much... and with a bit of grinding you can probably make yourself a god at everything. And success in combat tends to come more from the player's reflexes and twitch skills than from tactical thinking and effectively building a character / party.
Modern mainstream RPG deisgns takes Hand-holding, dumbing down, streamlining- whatever you want to call it, as a given. AAA RPG developers seem to make their games idiot friendly. They keep requisite reading to a minimum. If there's dialogue choices, you'll have a Mass Effect-esque dialogue wheel, and the dialogue is all voice acted. Then the player just follows the arrow and gets to new action sequence. Lather, rinse, repeat.
I don't think the problem is necessarily with the age of the players... It isn't that kids these days are getting dumber as a whole (average IQ has been rising steadily since the 30's; see Flynn Effect). It has more to do with the way the industry has changed. Video games used to be a pretty niche hobby just for nerds, but now it's huge. Big PC exclusive video game releases are relatively rare; from a purely business perspective, why develop a game for just PC when you can make a multiplatform release and have a much bigger potential audience?
Many PC gamers believe the console audience tends to be more casual, thus preferring a streamlined action game with RPG elements to a hardcore CRPG that requires players to use their head. Right or wrong, unfortunately it does seem that the market for true CRPGs is relatively niche and probably always will be. An AAA budget CRPG would probably be a financial failure.... Even if it had the pretty graphics, there would still be casual "Action RPG" fans turned off by "boring, slow-paced" turn-based combat, all of the number crunching, and the possibility that you could make the game very hard with a bad build, i.e., trying to make a jack-of-all-trades character.
However, it's still (theoretically) possible to build a decent CRPG with a mid range budget. The first Fallout game reportedly had a budget of about $3 million (adjusted for inflation, that's closer to $4 milllion today). Incidentally ~$4 million so far seems to be the maximum that a CRPG has raised on Kickstarter (Torment: ToN). Crowdfunding and early access have helped CRPG developers make games that few, if any publishers would be willing to fund.
*None of this to say that all older RPGs are necessarily more fun to play then modern RPGs etc. While quest compasses insult the player's intelligence and detract from the fun of exploration / figuring out stuff on your own, wandering around aimlessly looking for an NPC, item, etc. that you need to complete a quest probably isn't much fun either. It needs to be done right; if you don't have a quest marker, then you should be able to ask NPCs for clues, etc. so you're not stumbling around in the dark.
TL;DR: No I don't think it has much to do with age, or the current generation. Lots of people are morons, but that's always been the case. Businesses who want to make lots of money are going to cater to the stupid people, because that's less risky. Smart people are probably more likely to put up with dumbed down content than a dumb person is to tolerate stuff that confuses or bores them.
And to be fair, if a gamer has only been exposed to mainstream mediocre RPGs like recent Bethesda and Bioware releases, then you can't entirely fault him / her for not looking for something deeper. Their frame of reference for what an RPG is is just sadly very limited. I would say keep on encouraging gamers to play the classics and recent "old school" CRPGs like AoD. Most of the time it will be in vain, but maybe you'll get lucky and they'll be eternally grateful that you introduced them to a real RPG.
Last edited:
R.Graves
Confirmed Retard
Awww you thought of Me. Anyways there's a Few reasons I feel at home at NMA. I don't jive with this "c'mon its just a game" attitude. Sure, one of the reasons I play video games is because games are fun but I don't look at games as "just games". A lot of my peers do. I view them more as (and this is cheesy and cliché As all hell) as art. And they should be criticised and viewed as such. The majority of gamers (especially newer gamers it seems) don't see it that way though. And that's fine an all but it ultimately results in the majority of games being shitty or mediocre. Actually no its not fine. Whatever I'm rambling.
It's probably a combination of generation and preference, since - I bet - many of us "oldies" know fellow "oldies" with a penchant for the simplistic
I myself have recurring discussions with my only irl gamer-friend, and whenever it comes to intensified argument, I always have to be the one to suggest "look, we just like different playing styles" and I have to stop myself before I elaborate "You like running around shooting stuff, I like using my brainz"
I myself have recurring discussions with my only irl gamer-friend, and whenever it comes to intensified argument, I always have to be the one to suggest "look, we just like different playing styles" and I have to stop myself before I elaborate "You like running around shooting stuff, I like using my brainz"