Jump to content

Getting out of touch with today's video games.


AJ_Radio

Recommended Posts

As I'm slowly working on my backlog I find myself becoming more and more out of touch with today's video games. AAA games in general to me have become a bunch of polished turds that once you get past the first few hours of gameplay, they're not as exciting in my opinion as they could be.

 

Case in point, I'm talking about games like Far Cry: New Dawn, Just Cause 4, Fallout 76, Darksiders 3 and Metro: Exodus. The way I look at them, I couldn't give two shits about them. Only Metro: Exodus and Darksiders 3 are games I have any interest towards getting.... at some point. By the time I purchase and get around to these games it's about six months to one year past their release date, and there are a bunch of new AAA games for people on this website to buy and share their thoughts with others.

 

I find myself going back to older PS3 games and the older PS4 library (roughly 2013 - 2015ish). It seems very standard these days for a AAA game to generate some sort of controversy, because that's what the media dickheads want and that's what people want to hear. It's been a recurring trend since the Dragon Age 2 and Mass Effect 3 controversies back in 2011 - 2012. Then comes out Dead Space 3 a year later and more controversy arises.

 

Today however, it has to be every few games. Fallout 76 is online only and people bitched about that, not staying true to what Bethesda did before. Battlefield V was released to a lot of controversy and that game hasn't been as successful as Battlefield 1 or Battlefield 4. Metro: Exodus is being bitched about for it's exclusivity.

 

Because the video game industry is so big now, there has to be a controversy to keep the wheels rolling. Big head companies like EA, Activision and Ubisoft are under constant scrutiny. Rockstar Games is no stranger to controversy, going back to Grand Theft Auto 3 in 2001. But even their latest game, Red Dead Redemption 2, generated a little controversy, just not as much as the other games I mentioned.

 

The Playstation 4 exclusives that are enhanced for the PS4 Pro and published by Sony Computer Entertainment are the only AAA games left I feel where they're not just a bunch of bullshit thrown at you. But even I have become a little disappointed in these games because they're offering the same selling point. Days Gone was a game I was looking forward to these past two years but seeing that it's yet another zombie apocalypse game with the same kinds of mechanics that we've seen in many other AAA games I have my doubts on buying it near release date.

 

Is this self entitlement? Do we expect too much from video games now? Maybe. But I find myself being a lot more engaged with old retro games and indie games that cost a mere fraction of what you have to pay for a new AAA game. Older AAA games on the PS3 and early PS4 era I find myself enjoying a lot more. Maybe I'm just weird that way.

 

Personally I couldn't give two shits about all the trending gaming articles out there, what Jim Sterling says, or what said dickhead on Twitter who is a head developer is tweeting about why said game is having problems. These new games just don't cut it for me like they used to. They're a fancy way of trying to make money.

 

Ubisoft did just that with the Ultimate Edition of Assassins Creed: Odyssey. Oh look, you have to pay over $100 for it but since you're buying through the Playstation Store you can't get a lot of the cool collectibles that you normally would if you bought a Collectors Edition. 2KGames put Lebron James face on the cover of NBA 2K19 on the Playstation Store, and they offered a deluxe version for over $90. Capitalism at it's finest.

 

What do you all think?

Edited by Spaz
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I definitely think that the golden era of gaming was the 90s to early 2000s. That being said, not everything about modern gaming is bad. Played some really good stuff. I will say I don't care how the industry's trying to bleed us dry and try to force this games as service BS on us.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Resident Evil 2 and For Honor (2016 game) on Plus and I can honestly say I don't think I'mma be doing any real gaming for the rest of the year, unless we get some surprise releases, I have no interest in playing anything unless it really interests me and these days that takes a LOT :dunno: 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, MidnightDragon said:

I definitely think that the golden era of gaming was the 90s to early 2000s. That being said, not everything about modern gaming is bad. Played some really good stuff. I will say I don't care how the industry's trying to bleed us dry and try to force this games as service BS on us.

 

Stretch that from 1985 to roughly 2005 - 2007 and I will agree with you.

 

Note that I mostly said AAA games. There are plenty of indies worth playing, and even a couple AAA games.

 

But frankly I am sick and tired of there having to be some sort of controversy, or this idea to have to sell Gold, Silver, Deluxe, Ultimate Editions of the same game. In the past it was the standard version, and the collectors version of a video game. That was it. There were no bullshit tactics, no fancy way of trying to take more of your money, none of that.

 

If the game sucked, it sucked. But this standard of releasing a Gold Edition like with Assassins Creed Odyssey where they allowed a few players to play the game a few days before it's official release date is bullshit. So is this desire to thrown in lootboxes and microtransactions, which mind you started with mobile games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, MidnightDragon said:

Fair enough. Just that era was the most memorable for me since I was real little in the 80s.

 

I said that because I feel that Super Mario Bros on the NES brought in the golden era of gaming.

 

I say the mid 2000s because MMOs of that time were new and innovative, and brought in a new way to play games and interact with people.

 

Today I feel most of the creativity lies with indie games and smaller based developers. If EA, Activision or even Ubisoft was in charge of developing The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt it would of been a giant colossal fucking mess. Rockstar Games, yeah maybe, they still probably wouldn't of done as good of a job as CD Projekt Red did with the game.

 

Most of the "new" games I am actually interested in are more niche titles like the Yakuza games. Supergiant Games is a good developer and I look forward to seeing what they have next.

 

But these AAA games, especially coming from western companies, have turned into a polished turd wanting to exploit you for more money. I speak with my wallet.

 

That's probably the reason why Activision made two of the three Spyro games digital only, because you can't trade digital games over to a video game store, have someone borrow it or resell the game on eBay or Amazon. Of course the Spyro games aren't technically full on AAA games because they are remakes of the old Spyro games of two decades ago, but you get my point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Think people are taking gaming too seriously lately. It's supposed to fun, so have fun and stop worrying about what gaming's doing wrong, and focus in on what gaming's doing right.

 

Here, cheer up and watch Sundowner from Metal Gear Rising play Dark Souls

 

 

Or laugh along with me at the metal version of the Chocobo riding theme from FF13-2, or at least have a chuckle at the expense of the few Final Fantasy fans that lost their sense of humor

 

 

Or chuckle along with me at the Doom E1M1/Megalovania Undertale mashup

 

 

Remember, Doom is a horror game, where you playing as the horror.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Far Cry: New Dawn, Just Cause 4, Fallout 76, Darksiders 3, and Metro: Exodus "

 

I honestly didn't get any of those because I thought they would be boring to me. Yeah the way I've been doing it is I've been really selective recently with what games I buy and play, only getting what I think I'll actually enjoy. Like you said, there are a lot of companies that think making polished turds (big empty sandboxes or online lootbox experiences) are what people want. Honestly I'm missing things that were popular last gen like linear single player story games... Along with multiplayer games that weren't trash lol

 

Edited by BlindMango
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, damon8r351 said:

Think people are taking gaming too seriously lately. It's supposed to fun, so have fun and stop worrying about what gaming's doing wrong, and focus in on what gaming's doing right.

 

Remember, Doom is a horror game, where you playing as the horror.

 

I'm sorry but your entire post is along the lines of 'hush hush'.

 

Because I'm a gamer and I'm very passionate about gaming, I can't speak my opinion on what I think about the video game industry?

 

We're closer to video game developers than we ever were before. Despite my issues I still regularly check Twitter posts and keep up to date on gaming news.

 

If this news bothers you that much, then delete your social media profiles, ignore the trophies/achievements in games, and play in your own time.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Spaz said:

 

I'm sorry but your entire post is along the lines of 'hush hush'.

 

Because I'm a gamer and I'm very passionate about gaming, I can't speak my opinion on what I think about the video game industry?

 

We're closer to video game developers than we ever were before. Despite my issues I still regularly check Twitter posts and keep up to date on gaming news.

 

If this news bothers you that much, then delete your social media profiles, ignore the trophies/achievements in games, and play in your own time.

 

If you think anything I said was meant to be "hush hush", then you're taking injury where none was intended.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, BlindMango said:

"Far Cry: New Dawn, Just Cause 4, Fallout 76, Darksiders 3, and Metro: Exodus "

 

I honestly didn't get any of those because I thought they would be boring to me. Yeah the way I've been doing it is I've been really selective recently with what games I buy and play, only getting what I think I'll actually enjoy. Like you said, there are a lot of companies that think making polished turds (big empty sandboxes or online lootbox experiences) are what people want. Honestly I'm missing things that were popular last gen like linear single player story games... Along with multiplayer games that weren't trash lol

 

 

To be frank I prefer to play games chronologically.

 

I played Far Cry 3 on the Xbox 360 but didn't play to get all the achievements. I plan to play, enjoy and earn the platinum in Far Cry 3.

 

Part of this problem is there's simply too many games coming out. Back in the day you had a few big release titles coming out but apart from that you couldn't just buy up game after game in a matter of seconds. Back in the Playstation 2 days I never had a problem with new games coming out because there was no giant system where you can buy up a whole bunch of games, you could easily catch up and keep up to date with website and gaming magazines.

 

Today with games like Far Cry: New Dawn I honestly couldn't care less. It does nothing new that Far Cry 5 or even Far Cry 4 already did. Fallout 76 could of been great but the multiplayer was poorly implemented.

 

Darksiders 3 and Metro: Exodus are the only "newer" games I give any care towards. But even then they have to be swamped in controversy. The big problem now is self-entitlement, I see it everywhere these days and the controversies that surrounds some of these AAA games is a cause of that in my opinion. I could be wrong, but that's the way I look at it.

 

There are gems. Bloodborne and The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt are two games I consider to be my favorites this console generation. There have always been turds, and that was no different in the old days. But these new games just don't excite me like they used to.

 

Yeah that was the same with me. Dante's Inferno, Enslaved: Odyssey to the West, Remember Me and Just Cause 2 are just a few of them that I sadly missed out on. The controversy then was DLC, today it's microtransactions/lootboxes, and bitching at the developers who have a Twitter account until they respond.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Indie games are still "todays" video games.  So no, I don't think you're out of touch with today's games.

 

I think simply chalking AAA's to "polished turds" is skirting around the issue a little bit.  I don't think it's a coincidence that the games you list like Far Cry: New Dawn, Just Cause 4, Fallout 76, Metro: Exodus, etc are all the same brand of open world time-wasters.  In particular, open world shooters... where the depth in character/world building and gameplay is usually pretty minimal, making the open world even more of a drag than it already is.  Few developers can really do open world right, as games like The Witcher 3 and Red Dead Redemption II do... but that doesn't stop everyone from wanting a piece of the pie.

 

You have to understand though, we did this to ourselves.  We demand 100+ hour games, we demand games with years of post-release support... and in return we're going to get a lot of games that pad playtimes with fluff because they know gamers are counting hours, and they plan DLC years in advance and don't give enough attention to the underwhelming base games.

 

If AAA developers could get back to making tight, interesting, creative experiences that are shorter but make good use of their time... and do it with production values warranting the price... your tone might change a little.  But good luck convincing the masses that any 10-20 hour game is worth $60.

Edited by Dreakon13
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally, I don't think Metro Exodus should be anywhere in that list. I don't even think it's considered a AAA game, nor is it exactly a "polished turd". There's plenty of ways you can play that game to keep yourself entertained, and you can challenge yourself in a variety of ways. The only controversy I've seen about this game wasn't even about the game itself but the fact that you couldn't buy it on Steam. That should really only be a problem for pcmasterrace people and I'm betting most don't even care. As usual "controversy" brings out the whiny vocal minority that makes it seem like a bigger deal in a community than it actually is.

 

The only other thing I'd say is that your first post makes it seem like you're not losing touch with modern games so much as you've lost interest in them due to modern media and the fact that gaming is much bigger than it used to be. Sorta backed up by you saying you're having more fun with older games or indie/retro games. They're in the past therefore aren't getting nearly as much attention, and came from a time where the hobby wasn't done by almost every person. It's sorta like a hipster losing interest in a band they liked because more people like them now. 

 

Regarding myself and expectations.

I know what I like. I know what I don't like. I seldom take chances. 

 

Practices of a company don't bother me. If they put something in a game like lootboxes then guess what? I don't buy them. People say vote with your wallet so I do in that regard. I'm not encouraging the micro transaction practice because I never buy them, but I'm damn sure not going to pass up on a game I'm going to enjoy to appease people that don't like one aspect that has no impact on a game, and call for a boycott on the whole product.

Edited by Avatar_Of_Battle
grammar
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Dreakon13 said:

Indie games are still "todays" video games.  So no, I don't think you're out of touch with today's games.

 

Basically I'm talking about today's mainstream games.

 

Most of them I don't give any care towards. Especially Anthem, which was a game I was going to steer clear of. It was bullshit to me the moment they talked and showed footage of it at E3 2018.

 

4 minutes ago, Dreakon13 said:

I think simply chalking AAA's to "polished turds" is skirting around the issue a little bit.  I don't think it's a coincidence that the games you list like Far Cry: New Dawn, Just Cause 4, Fallout 76, Metro: Exodus, etc are all the same brand of open world time-wasters.  In particular, open world shooters... where the depth in character/world building and gameplay is usually pretty minimal, making the open world even more of a drag than it already is.  Few developers can really do open world right, as games like The Witcher 3 and Red Dead Redemption II do... but doesn't stop everyone from wanting a piece of the pie.

 

Open world didn't come into fruition until the PS3/360 era. Games like Assassins Creed 2, inFamous, Just Cause 2 and the like were all open world. Some were padded to the point where you have to spend 10 - 20 hours past the main story just to get all the achievements/trophies.

 

Of course we had a lot of linear single-player hack and slash/shooters too. God of War 3 and the Uncharted games even though there is a multiplayer portion for them. EA tried to copy the God of War formula with Dante's Inferno, and there were underrated games like Enslaved: Odyssey to the West that took the same linear single player formula and applied it to itself.

 

Red Dead Redemption in 2010 did the open world right, Rockstar Games is one of the few companies that understands quality. However I just cannot get behind a lot of the controversy that surrounds such games as Red Dead Redemption 2. Wolfenstein 2: The New Colossus even generated a little controversy not on the Mein Leben achievement/trophy but for it's graphical nature involving German Nazis in a post WW2 alternate timeline.

 

Somebody else here made the point of saying AAA's are "polished turds", which I mostly agree with.

 

9 minutes ago, Dreakon13 said:

You have to understand though, we did this to ourselves.  We demand 100+ hour games, we demand games with years of post-release support... and in return we're going to get a lot of games that pad playtimes with fluff because they know gamers are counting hours, and they plan DLC years in advance and don't give enough attention to the underwhelming base games.

 

This started with MMOs. They started out new, exciting and innovative. I myself played World of Warcraft for a number of years and that game has certainly cemented it's place in history.

 

But as the years passed, so did our desire for self entitlement. We wanted more weapons, more gear, we wanted WoW to be around for years offering post-release support from Blizzard, and so forth. As a result you have such games that pad our playtimes with fluff. Look at how many expansions WoW has now. The game has changed so much it is virtually unrecognizable to what I once saw it as.

 

I feel it's a good thing that Vanilla servers will open, but then people are just going to go on there and act all self entitled.

 

They did just that with Old School Runescape, a game that was once one I absolutely loved playing over a decade ago. I just can't play that anymore.

 

13 minutes ago, Dreakon13 said:

If AAA developers could get back to making tight, interesting, creative experiences that are shorter but make good use of their time... and do it with production values warranting the price... your tone might change a little.  But good luck convincing the masses that any 10-20 hour game is worth $60.

 

CD Projekt Red follows these steps, despite their game The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt being a 100+ hour platinum. The thing is though, they're not a giant corporate behemoth like Ubisoft and EA.

 

We all know what happened to The Order: 1886. That pretty much explains your last sentence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i'm out of touch with modern gaming myself. i think because i don't have a social circle and a lot of what's hot just really doesn't interest me. i tried fortnite for a couple of minutes on my younger brother's ps4 and felt very meh about it, i died within seconds and don't have interest playing a battle royal again lol. never been too big on online gaming, and i'm honestly out of touch with a lot of what's popular for any given moment year after year, there's tons of obscure games that i'd find much more fun. people who have had and enjoyed their time with their vita will understand that sentiment, that system got me more obsessive and interested in more of those kinds of games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Avatar_Of_Battle said:

Personally, I don't think Metro Exodus should be anywhere in that list. I don't even think it's considered a AAA game, nor is it exactly a "polished turd". There's plenty of ways you can play that game to keep yourself entertained, and you can challenge yourself in a variety of ways. The only controversy I've seen about this game wasn't even about the game itself but the fact that you couldn't buy it on Steam. That should really only be a problem for pcmasterrace people and I'm betting most don't even care. As usual "controversy" brings out the whiny vocal minority that makes it seem like a bigger deal in a community than it actually is.

 

If you're thinking of Metro: Exodus as more of a Witcher 3 type of experience rather than a Destiny 1 - 2 ordeal, I might agree with you.

 

Personally I couldn't give a crap about the PC Master Race. I play on Steam every now and then, and I can understand why people would get upset over Metro: Exodus not being available on Steam.

 

Controversy implies that there are two sides that can't agree with each other and they debate over it. I don't see controversy to be a "whiny vocal minority", especially in something like politics. If that was the case then a lot of controversial issues out there would of died a lot sooner.

 

30 minutes ago, Avatar_Of_Battle said:

The only other thing I'd say is that your first post makes it seem like you're not losing touch with modern games so much as you've lost interest in them due to modern media and the fact that gaming is much bigger than it used to be. Sorta backed up by you saying you're having more fun with older games or indie/retro games. They're in the past therefore aren't getting nearly as much attention, and came from a time where the hobby wasn't done by almost every person. It's sorta like a hipster losing interest in a band they liked because more people like them now.

 

Tastes can change to appeal to a broader audience.

 

I lost interest in Kayne West because he went from a halfway decent rapper to a complete sellout who doesn't know what the fuck he's doing. There's been plenty of music artists I lost interest in because they decided to make more money and appeal to a mainstream audience in place of sticking to their roots and provide actual good music that is worth buying and livestreaming.

 

As far as video games go, this is quite different.

 

I will admit, I just can't get into the new stuff. Maybe it's just the way video games look now, or how they specifically designed to appeal to a general audience. But I just don't think it's just me being a hipster losing interest just because it just happened to get more popular. I was never a hipster to begin with.

 

If you're saying I should go out and try more "new" games, then you have a point. But right now I just couldn't care less about any of the new AAA games. Indie titles I care about. Some remasters of retro games I care about.

 

I don't know what else to say to you on this.

 

37 minutes ago, Avatar_Of_Battle said:

Practices of a company don't bother me. If they put something in a game like lootboxes then guess what? I don't buy them. People say vote with your wallet so I do in that regard. I'm not encouraging the micro transaction practice because I never buy them, but I'm damn sure not going to pass up on a game I'm going to enjoy to appease people that don't like one aspect that has no impact on a game, and call for a boycott on the whole product.

 

I'm a minority so regardless if I don't like something, a lot of people out there are going to buy a game even if it's chock full of lootboxes and microtransactions.

 

I've been voting with my wallet for several years. I can see Anthem to be nothing more than a giant cash grab and my mind was set the moment they revealed that shit during the E3 2018 conferences.

 

I don't play multiplayer free to play games and even multiplayer games you pay for like Destiny 2. I don't like them and they don't appeal to me, so I don't buy them either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is so much you can do with video games, video game dunkey made this video that makes so much sense in a fun comedy type of way

 

 

All of the older games have been recycled, which have inspired good games and bad games, were in the year 2019 gaming started back in 1947

 

Early games used interactive electronic devices with various display formats. The earliest example is from 1947—a "Cathode ray tube Amusement Device" was filed for a patent on 25 January 1947, by Thomas T. Goldsmith Jr. and Estle Ray Mann, and issued on 14 December 1948

 

Then this happened and we learned -  A flood of Pong clones eventually led to the video game crash of 1977

 

I play games from 8-bit to the latest and switch between to have a happy medium, I don't feel they're getting out of touch, since there are so many games to play.

 

That's how I feel   :)

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Spaz said:

If you're thinking of Metro: Exodus as more of a Witcher 3 type of experience rather than a Destiny 1 - 2 ordeal, I might agree with you.

 

Personally I couldn't give a crap about the PC Master Race. I play on Steam every now and then, and I can understand why people would get upset over Metro: Exodus not being available on Steam.

 

Controversy implies that there are two sides that can't agree with each other and they debate over it. I don't see controversy to be a "whiny vocal minority", especially in something like politics. If that was the case then a lot of controversial issues out there would of died a lot sooner.

 

Despite the obvious differences between Exodus and the prior 2 games...I'm confident you can see how the experience of Metro is nothing like Destiny having played the first 2. Probably not much like Witcher either except it's story driven.

 

Yeah I get being upset about it not being on the store you usually get it from, but that was such a small corner of gaming that if you let that impact how you see the game then I don't even know what to say. 

 

Controversy also implies things getting far more serious than they are. I don't consider our discussion some problematic ordeal where we're going to devolve into insults. If you do and that's how you see every little disagreement in life it points to a much larger problem. I won't get into politics here. Nope.

 

1 minute ago, Spaz said:

Tastes can change to appeal to a broader audience.

 

I lost interest in Kayne West because he went from a halfway decent rapper to a complete sellout who doesn't know what the fuck he's doing. There's been plenty of music artists I lost interest in because they decided to make more money and appeal to a mainstream audience in place of sticking to their roots and provide actual good music that is worth buying and livestreaming.

 

As far as video games go, this is quite different.

 

I will admit, I just can't get into the new stuff. Maybe it's just the way video games look now, or how they specifically designed to appeal to a general audience. But I just don't think it's just me being a hipster losing interest just because it just happened to get more popular. I was never a hipster to begin with.

 

If you're saying I should go out and try more "new" games, then you have a point. But right now I just couldn't care less about any of the new AAA games. Indie titles I care about. Some remasters of retro games I care about.

 

I don't know what else to say to you on this.

 

Tastes can change to appeal to a broader audience...but is constantly fought against because people don't want their favorites to do that. If a beloved indie company somehow blew up to the point of becoming a titan of AAA gaming how long would it be before they were complained about? If CD Projekt Red ended up becoming the new Ubisoft how long would it be before people started hating on them simply because they were big now? Should they pass up on making money to fund bigger projects so that they can stay small and beloved? 

 

The hipster comment was an example. Nothing more. However, reading your posts, it seems to boil down with how things appear in the media. Anyone can see that if you had zero media exposure the games you claim to see as bullshit wouldn't seem that way. You might actually enjoy most of the games you're downing. Maybe you're like me and you can tell from a gameplay vid whether or not you'd like something or you know a genre is of absolutely no interest to you despite liking the type of gameplay, but from your words here it seems more like "here's a game I am interested in. *media coverage* whelp there goes that.". 

 

I'm not saying go try new games, especially with your backlog, because generally if you don't like a certain type of anything chances are you're not forcing yourself into it. No matter how many times my friends pinched their nipples over Breaking Bad, Sopranos, Godfather movies, or anything like that kind of stuff, I won't watch it. Can't stand that type of stuff. I'm saying don't swear off what you like(d) because of how the media portrays it. You're doing nothing but hurt yourself for doing so. And saying you can't seem to get into something because it seems like it was made to appeal to more people is a classic hipster response man and I wasn't even calling you that. So what if a broad audience is interested in a game? Do you play games for yourself or other people? 

 

You say you care about indies...but for what reason other than "they aren't AAA"? It almost sounds like you'd defend a bad indie game over a good AAA game simply over the indie>AAA mentality. Stories aren't as original as people think. There's always someone that can come up with another skin to a story that's been done to death. There are tons of new games out that look different. I personally don't like the cutesy artsy shit I see people loving with most indie games, but I do like a variety of art/graphics styles.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dreakon13 said:

I see you using "controversy" quite a bit as a reason to not play games.  You're welcome to follow your own path obviously, but after a little while it seems like you're spending more time coming up with non-game related reasons to not play new games... than just playing games and judging them on their own merit.  Maybe taking a break from social media and the never-ending outrage that encapsulates the gaming community may help give some perspective on the whole thing.

 

I never said controversy is my sole reason to not play games. I may still buy Red Dead Redemption 2 depending on how many games I finish this year. I never said the game was bad either.

 

Obviously, there are going to be social justice warriors out there and other groups of people who are going to try to censor the games, like they're trying to do with Catherine: Full Body.

 

I don't think it's good to completely cut yourself off from social media. It's important to keep up to date on things especially if you're looking to purchase new games that might be enjoyable.

 

This is just me speaking my thoughts.

 

1 hour ago, Dreakon13 said:

Not every developer is going to be as savvy as CD Projekt Red at making long games that utilize their open world well.  That's just unrealistic, regardless of size.  Just like anything, different developers and creative minds will be better/worse than others at creating different kinds of games.  But big publishers/developers are still going to push towards where the money is anyways, which is games as service and repetitive open world grinds... because too many gamers care less about what they're playing and more about how long they can play it before hitting the credits.

 

You can take this and apply it to EA Sports.

 

I've played my share of Madden games in my time, but I feel the series hasn't gotten better because EA is the only company who can make NFL games. 2K Games made a NFL game but the last one they made was NFL 2K5 for the Playstation 2, which was a long time ago.

 

Likewise I think more companies could have and should get the option to develop more sports titles. NBA titles shouldn't be restricted to just EA and 2K Games. I haven't kept up to date on MLB titles, but I think for now The Show games that Sony San Diego makes are the only real option for baseball fans. And they're exclusive to Playstation, so you're out of luck if you're a Xbox One gamer or Steam gamer.

 

CD Projekt Red is made up of a lot of talented developers and creative minds and I appreciate what they did these past few years. AAA developers can do the same, but in the case of EA and Activision that talent and creativity is often shut down to appeal to the bottom line. To make money.

 

Visceral Games and their Dead Space franchise is a classic example of what happens when the games don't sell well enough to make up for what the publishers want.

 

I don't speak for the masses and frankly I don't care what a lot of them think. For them, it's buying a few AAA games every year, playing for 30, 40, 50 or however many hours it takes to finish those games, see the credits after the ending, and move on. That's how the majority of people play their video games.

 

I prefer to experience most if not all the content a game has to offer, but if I don't like the game that much I may just play for a couple hours and move on with my life.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Avatar_Of_Battle said:

Despite the obvious differences between Exodus and the prior 2 games...I'm confident you can see how the experience of Metro is nothing like Destiny having played the first 2. Probably not much like Witcher either except it's story driven.

 

The point I was trying to refer to was a more story driven experience. Both of the older Metro games focused heavily on the story as it was you playing as Artyom as he is navigating through a radiated infested wasteland and a group of Communists and Nazis that hate each other. Metro: Exodus picks up where Last Light left off, much of the game is still story driven.

 

The Witcher 3 has some of the best stories I've seen in a long time. That's the comparison I was trying to make. Destiny 1 & 2 I just see as more of a full grade multiplayer battleground deathmatch, where you're fighting against other players and you work together to take down bosses. Much like how World of Warcraft used to be with it's raids.

 

As far as game mechanics and how the games look, they are completely different.

 

1 hour ago, Avatar_Of_Battle said:

Yeah I get being upset about it not being on the store you usually get it from, but that was such a small corner of gaming that if you let that impact how you see the game then I don't even know what to say.

 

I don't buy my AAA games through Steam. Don't have a powerful enough computer to run them with the spec requirements they need.

 

But that was enough to get people to complain because it wasn't on their favorite platform. Which if I was exclusively a PC gamer who played on Steam, I wouldn't blame them for complaining about it.

 

1 hour ago, Avatar_Of_Battle said:

Controversy also implies things getting far more serious than they are. I don't consider our discussion some problematic ordeal where we're going to devolve into insults. If you do and that's how you see every little disagreement in life it points to a much larger problem. I won't get into politics here. Nope.

 

Heated debates are the same thing. Usually two groups of people arguing over things that may not matter too much. This discussion is too tame to be going that route.

 

There's a lot of people who think that way, trust me. If the Soviet Union was to come back to life and they moved over there they would be right at home.

 

1 hour ago, Avatar_Of_Battle said:

Tastes can change to appeal to a broader audience...but is constantly fought against because people don't want their favorites to do that. If a beloved indie company somehow blew up to the point of becoming a titan of AAA gaming how long would it be before they were complained about? If CD Projekt Red ended up becoming the new Ubisoft how long would it be before people started hating on them simply because they were big now? Should they pass up on making money to fund bigger projects so that they can stay small and beloved?

 

EA was once a small company made up of a group of talented, passionate people. So was Blizzard. They were once respected developers.

 

That was a long time ago obviously.

 

When your history is made up of buying out smaller companies like Westwood Studios, Maxis and Bullfrog Studios, taking over their flagship video game franchises, butchering them, and then leaving them to rot, I fully understand why so many people bitch at EA.

 

We may have a new Dead Space game had Visceral Games were able to continue with the franchise. That Dead Space 3 DLC left the series on a sort of cliffhanger, which sadly will probably never be resolved.

 

Maybe the fault isn't entirely on EA as Visceral Games was far from perfect and they had their own flaws. But if CD Projekt Red were to go down the road of EA and Activision I would treat them the same way as I treat EA. Refuse to buy their games at full price and speak my mind about them.

 

You can think the same way on music artists. Kayne West's material used to have more substance, but once he became really big and popular he decided to sell out and just produce crap because it makes the most money. I look at Eninem with the very same perspective.

 

Not every company that goes big follows this route. But there are a number that do. Not just because it's more profitable, but they lose focus of what the founders and the owners of the companies originally intended. That's another subject for another day however.

 

1 hour ago, Avatar_Of_Battle said:

The hipster comment was an example. Nothing more. However, reading your posts, it seems to boil down with how things appear in the media. Anyone can see that if you had zero media exposure the games you claim to see as bullshit wouldn't seem that way. You might actually enjoy most of the games you're downing. Maybe you're like me and you can tell from a gameplay vid whether or not you'd like something or you know a genre is of absolutely no interest to you despite liking the type of gameplay, but from your words here it seems more like "here's a game I am interested in. *media coverage* whelp there goes that.".

 

I have always gone by with "If a game looks appealing and looks like it would be a lot of fun, then you buy it". That's always how I looked at games.

 

That's with anything really. You might actually enjoy most of the movies you're criticizing. You might enjoy the TV shows on Netflix you're bashing down. But I don't like to buy a game completely blind.

 

I regularly watch AngryJoe on YouTube and other guys who are like him. Sometimes the games they review may convince me to buy a game, if not then I won't buy it. I knew with Anthem I wasn't going to buy it regardless if AngryJoe or others say it's good.

 

If a game goes "Here's a game I am interested in. *media coverage* Well there's a lot of microtransactions and lootboxes in this game.", maybe I'll have second opinions on it. I was hesitant on buying Middle Earth: Shadow of War but decided to get it anyway since I'm a fan of the JRR Tolkien universe and it's characters.

 

1 hour ago, Avatar_Of_Battle said:

I'm not saying go try new games, especially with your backlog, because generally if you don't like a certain type of anything chances are you're not forcing yourself into it. No matter how many times my friends pinched their nipples over Breaking Bad, Sopranos, Godfather movies, or anything like that kind of stuff, I won't watch it. Can't stand that type of stuff. I'm saying don't swear off what you like(d) because of how the media portrays it. You're doing nothing but hurt yourself for doing so. And saying you can't seem to get into something because it seems like it was made to appeal to more people is a classic hipster response man and I wasn't even calling you that. So what if a broad audience is interested in a game? Do you play games for yourself or other people?

 

I mean, yeah.

 

I don't like Ashton Kutcher. I don't like Adam Sandler movies. I don't like Game of Thrones. I don't like Rihanna. I don't like a majority of Anime and Hentai. I don't like Brock Lesnar. I don't like Ellen DeGeneres.

 

We all have our dislikes and our hates. But I'm not completely casting out today's AAA games, I'm just not interested in playing them and I feel they don't cater to me like the older stuff did.

 

It's the idea that a game needs to have some controversy for it to gain attention is what irritates me. If the game is getting a lot of attention because it's fantastic and phenomenal, then fine. More power to it.

 

I don't think most of the media plays video games anyway, they just want a story that will generate views on a website or get viewers to tune in a television station. That's basically what it is. Real journalism is dead and has been dead for a long time. It's all just opinionated hogwash and bullshit, which is probably no less different from what we're doing right now.

 

My point here is video games don't entice me like they used to. The new stuff isn't exactly making me go out and find the nearest Best Buy to buy those games. I'm not saying they're completely terrible, but some of these AAA games especially these western AAA games don't appeal to me at all. If I'm a hipster because I'm not interested in playing these games that millions of people across the world went out and bought, then you are free to think I am a hipster.

 

I play games for myself. Maybe I just care too much.

 

1 hour ago, Avatar_Of_Battle said:

You say you care about indies...but for what reason other than "they aren't AAA"? It almost sounds like you'd defend a bad indie game over a good AAA game simply over the indie>AAA mentality. Stories aren't as original as people think. There's always someone that can come up with another skin to a story that's been done to death. There are tons of new games out that look different. I personally don't like the cutesy artsy shit I see people loving with most indie games, but I do like a variety of art/graphics styles.

 

I have played bad indie games. Does Orc Slayer ring a bell? Doesn't mean I will defend it because I won't.

 

Cash in games like Jack 'n Jill DX and Fullblast are just crap to me, so I won't buy them.

 

Stories aren't as original in AAA games either. I notice you seem to enjoy Assassins Creed a lot, a franchise that was basically making one game every year until Ubisoft decided to stop that after Assassins Creed: Syndicate came out. I don't think the series is all too original, that basically stopped after they decided to kill off Desmond Miles and leave the present day storyline to be mostly an afterthought.

 

It's hard to be original. That's why it's much easier to come up with another skin to a story. Hollywood has done this for many decades, I find foreign films made by independent film companies to be a lot more stimulating and interesting.

 

Are there bad foreign films? Sure, there's plenty of them. Because something is different doesn't mean it's good. But even if I say that is good then somebody else will probably think it sucks.

Edited by Spaz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Spaz said:

But that was enough to get people to complain because it wasn't on their favorite platform. Which if I was exclusively a PC gamer who played on Steam, I wouldn't blame them for complaining about it.

 

I don't either. However, the people complaining are a minority. That was my point. I saw plenty of comments saying they didn't care either way, and my guess is that a majority of the people playing the game on PC got it through whatever means they could. 

 

8 minutes ago, Spaz said:

I have always gone by with "If a game looks appealing and looks like it would be a lot of fun, then you buy it". That's always how I looked at games.

 

My issues here are that your posts seem to indicate the opposite. The entirety of this thread seemed like you closed yourself off to a lot of things based off of media/controversial matter. I'm trying to see if I can help you move past that mindset because that's what you seem to be expressing. It's not a matter of like/dislike. It's a matter of losing interest in something you like for a very inconsequential reason. 

 

8 minutes ago, Spaz said:

That's with anything really. You might actually enjoy most of the movies you're criticizing. You might enjoy the TV shows on Netflix you're bashing down. But I don't like to buy a game completely blind.

 

Yeah that's the thing. I won't enjoy them. I despise anything mob/gang/thug related. (not in the post apocalyptic rag tag groups kind of "gangs") Doesn't matter the platform it's on. I find my brother playing GTA San Andreas on my account a stain but I wasn't going to have him make his own account just for one game. Not to mention just knowing the premise of a show is enough for me. It wasn't any sort of controversy or media attention. I got burned only a few times with blindly buying a game. One so annoyingly so I hid it lol.

 

8 minutes ago, Spaz said:

I regularly watch AngryJoe on YouTube and other guys who are like him. Sometimes the games they review may convince me to buy a game, if not then I won't buy it. I knew with Anthem I wasn't going to buy it regardless if AngryJoe or others say it's good.

 

If a game goes "Here's a game I am interested in. *media coverage* Well there's a lot of microtransactions and lootboxes in this game.", maybe I'll have second opinions on it. I was hesitant on buying Middle Earth: Shadow of War but decided to get it anyway since I'm a fan of the JRR Tolkien universe and it's characters.

 

There's a difference between knowing if you're not going to like a game because it's not your style, and knowing there's a game coming out you're interested in and then dropping it due to media/controversy which was seemingly the topic here. The only time microtransactions and lootboxes would/should affect a decision is if they are somehow necessary for the game. In every single game I've played where they're a thing they are not, but I believe some people have had to pay quite a bit in sports games to get certain things?

 

 

8 minutes ago, Spaz said:

We all have our dislikes and our hates. But I'm not completely casting out today's AAA games, I'm just not interested in playing them and I feel they don't cater to me like the older stuff did.

 

Again...your posts make it seem like you are and for reasons that, to me, seem unhealthy. The question is, why don't they feel catered to you? Not that any game should really need to feel like it was made just for you, but what is the difference between the games now, that at the core are the same, and the games from even 10 years ago?

 

8 minutes ago, Spaz said:

It's the idea that a game needs to have some controversy for it to gain attention is what irritates me. If the game is getting a lot of attention because it's fantastic and phenomenal, then fine. More power to it.

 

I don't think most of the media plays video games anyway, they just want a story that will generate views on a website or get viewers to tune in a television station. That's basically what it is. Real journalism is dead and has been dead for a long time. It's all just opinionated hogwash and bullshit, which is probably no less different from what we're doing right now.

 

The bold. That right there is what a couple of people here already picked up on. Your loss of interest in a hobby you like seems to be solely on this reason. You mentioned earlier about watching a review channel and making a decision. I think the first step in helping you get out of that funk is to put an end to that. Watch gameplay vids on mute if there's commentary. Imagine yourself playing it. Don't let some schmuck's words sway you one way or the other because you could like a game but because of someone's review you won't try it? That works heavily against your next statement of playing games for yourself.

 

8 minutes ago, Spaz said:

My point here is video games don't entice me like they used to. The new stuff isn't exactly making me go out and find the nearest Best Buy to buy those games. I'm not saying they're completely terrible, but some of these AAA games especially these western AAA games don't appeal to me at all. If I'm a hipster because I'm not interested in playing these games that millions of people across the world went out and bought, then you are free to think I am a hipster.

 

I play games for myself. Maybe I just care too much.

 

And my point, as well as others, is that you've seem to not lost interest in gaming itself. You've lost faith in its ability to be something that's yours that other people can't ruin for you. That's why retro games appeal to you. They bring you back to a time where you couldn't be bombarded by other people's opinions ruining something for you and why indies, which I see plenty of people say go back to older styled games, seem to be more appealing. There's less attention surrounding them. 

 

8 minutes ago, Spaz said:

Stories aren't as original in AAA games either. I notice you seem to enjoy Assassins Creed a lot, a franchise that was basically making one game every year until Ubisoft decided to stop that after Assassins Creed: Syndicate came out. I don't think the series is all too original, that basically stopped after they decided to kill off Desmond Miles and leave the present day storyline to be mostly an afterthought.

 

I do enjoy AC. I found the idea of living an ancestor's memory through a machine reading DNA to be interesting, but also I found the gameplay and stories fun. One game a year or one every few years makes no difference to me. People act like they play the same game every single day of the year and somehow act exhausted when the next title comes out. At best they play a month, or if a game has DLC like Odyssey once a week, and somehow 300+ days later filled with tons of other games they, all of a sudden, are tired? That's what happens when people turn a hobby into a chore. It doesn't become something you look forward to, it becomes something you do with a feeling of dread. 

 

I won't lie though, I found the latest AC game, albeit a fun play, to be the worst direction the company has taken and I think they realized that when the vocal whiny minority bitched about a trophy for having a fucking kid in the game and naming it "growing up". That's why on a channel I watch to stay updated it seems like a "story" setting will be implemented. Because they fucked up by adding choices instead of writing a story for us to play through and witness. The animus was never meant to give us choices. It doesn't take away from the overall fun I have of playing. I simply see it as people liked to see Black Flag. A game masquerading as an AC game. (although you could argue that they are objectively different. won't get into that.)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't have much of a problem with today's games. The last 4 AAA games I bought were fantastic (Spider-Man, AC Odyssey, RDR2 & Hitman 2) and have reminded me why I really got into games in the first place.

 

So yeah definitely think people take games far too seriously and need to just enjoy them for what they are, a great way to pass some time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...