No announcement yet.

This generation of gamers. My generation.

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • This generation of gamers. My generation.

    So, this being my first thread, I wanted it to be something positive, happy. FUN! Possibly filled with heavy metal and quake, but I'll only just touch on those directly.

    It's my generation.

    First and foremost, I wish to apologise on behalf of teenagers everywhere for being braindead and unable to comprehend the concept that their games may have been a derivative of older games, such as quake.

    So, this was the situation which caused me to want to rocket jump into an airborne grenade or lightning beam;

    I was casually talking to some friends IRL about games we enjoyed, we mentioned Call of Duty and Borderlands specifically. I pointed out that I wasn't a big fan of either, I prefer older games.

    So, the reasons behind my disliking of those games aren't simply "older is better and thus I'm right", like most self gratifying morons on the internet who don't truly know what they're on about and just wish to spout what they saw their internet hero say.

    Call of Duty ; Every iteration feels like they're trying to break the formula even more. CoD 4 was fairly okay, not amazing, but a fun little experience. CoD 5 had that cool horde mode with zombies.

    Borderlands is a repetitive, well made, Diablo clone with guns for me. It's not broken at the core, it just doesn't hold my interest.

    So, they start going mad. I do not jest, they literally go mad!

    "Call of Duty is revolutionary and each games adds brilliant new content!" was heard from one friend.

    Then I get waves of attacks from another 'friend' about how Borderlands is revolutionary also.

    Which brings me to my point, if this is what people see in my generation, I am truly sorry. Sorry we're arrogant, naive annoyances.

    Also, I think what makes this a beautiful sense of irony is that they all claim to be games designers, primarily focused on the FPS genre. None of them have played BLOOD, DOOM, Quake, Serious Sam, Daggerfall, Rise of the Triad or any other games of the pre 2004 era.

    So yeah, they want to work in a genre they've missed most of. Even modern gems get missed like Hard Reset and Deus Ex : HR (I know HR wasn't true to the original style, but I think it was still an awesome game).

    On a side note, this is so off track now I can't even believe it myself. But I saw the sub forum area "Venting Area" and part of me just wanted to say. "We're not all that bad, just know that the next generation of games designers is stupid as hell and unless the few like myself can help educate these fools, we'll have more mediocre games for a LONG time."

    Anyway, I'm off to play some Quake, so have a fragtastic day! Unless you're me and suck at Quake, it's hilarious how bad I am in multiplayer. xD
    wew lad

  • #2
    i joined this when i was like 16 (now 1, and i barley ever played cod.
    My Avatars!
    Quake Leagues
    Quake 1.5!!!
    Definitive HD Quake


    • #3
      That's because you're rad and have good taste in games.

      To put simply. :v

      (I don't care how subjective that is, I'm sticking by it! xD)
      wew lad


      • #4
        Dude, your post was rad!

        (I'm stealing your word that was my word a quarter of a century ago)


        • #5
          Originally posted by madgypsy View Post
          dude, your post was rad!
          wew lad


          • #6
            Great post.

            I personally enjoyed borderlands because of the successful Diablo FPS masshup and the brilliant script writing. The game-play people praise was entirely derivative and therefore not revolutionary, although fun.


            • #7
              I had a xbox was a okay dvd player..LOL
              I support:
     ..... of Course!
              Qrack - Thank You r00k
              Yayo Industries - Thank you frenzy
              Zero CTF - Thanks mono


              • #8
                No Serious Sam? Tell them to stop what ever they are going, go to gog dot com, buy and install a copy and play at least the first 4 levels!
                Contradiction is truth. Fear is freedom. Rights are privileges. Job is a commodity. Ignorance is strength.


                • #9
                  Zaric ~
                  It wasn't necessarily bad, but I feel it relied on multiplayer.

                  I don't really play multiplayer games all too often, and when I did, I found the game went from easy, to "why am I bothering to try". The bosses felt out of place, but I did love the weapons in 2. Just some of the quirky things you could do.

                  So, they're not bad, but I don't get much from them.

                  I often forget mine does that. xD But honestly, I do play on it from time to time, but I find myself drawn to older consoles, mostly the Genesis/Megadrive, Dreamcast and SNES. But I would rather play on my PC than any console these days.

                  I normally just say "there's an HD version" and their weird obsession with 1920x1080 resolutions kick in and they often try it, but complain with the lack of aiming down sights and sprinting, and other modern things.

                  Then if they didn't enjoy that, I tell them to play Serious Sam 3, I still have a 75% off code actually for steam.

                  So, on a side note, know anybody that really wants Serious Sam 3, for almost nothing? I won't use it, and it's a pretty fun game, albeit not amazing.
                  wew lad


                  • #10
                    I have a weird obsession with freedom so I do not buy stuff with DRM. So I don't buy stuff from Steam. I played an unauthorized copy of SS3 (that I find somewhat ironic... but still it is their fault) and I loved it. Even if it is actually too easy.

                    Instead the HD version of the classic FE and SE are really "modern" in the worst meaning. They do look good, but lost when it counts. The reverse gravity effect in Sacred Yard? Gone. The funny effects in Mesoamerica? Lost.

                    Back to the topic, I hardly believe sprinting and iron sight are such important features... incredible. And what other "modern" features are you thinking? Go figure I think modern games are boring as they lack: variety of enemies (most enemies are human, one shoot in th head or three in the body) or too easy. In some cases I feel the game is playing for me (I really dislike cover systems). Sure, I like sprinting and iron sight... but it is not the main point.
                    Last edited by ezzetabi; 06-01-2013, 08:41 AM.
                    Contradiction is truth. Fear is freedom. Rights are privileges. Job is a commodity. Ignorance is strength.


                    • #11
                      Haha, I can definitely appreciate that viewpoint, and all games I develop are going to have goofy, weird and fun copyright protection that would just ruin the vibe of a game, or just make it in some way comical.

                      Or, the more common approach would be to remove all thoughts of DRM. Although I don't like the mindset of "it's on pc, I'll pirate it", because that is saying "well, this may as well be free, because I'll just bypass everything and make it free, in no way securing sequels, expansions or further development on this game". I do however, agree that online services can be incredibly invasive, and GOG is the place I would go to get SS E1 and E2, I also have my copy of SS3 tied to my desura account for some odd reason, I think I got it in a bundle. But due to desura's infancy and terrible GUI, I tend to play on my steam copy.

                      But if I played it particularly often, I'd crack it for non steam use.

                      And since I've only played the HD versions for a short amount of time, my only complaint was that I thought it looked a bit shit. I don't like how the developers originally shoved noncreative lighting effects down my throat before, but those weren't so much a problem, just a bit annoying for me. Fortunately I remember being able to tone them down.

                      I don't think that XBOX360 owners can do this, and everything looking weird, like they took the engine, and just smeared grease on it.

                      But that's why for close friends, I just lend them a copy of E1 or make a portable copy for them to see what the game is like before getting it on GOG.

                      I'd say for modern features I've heard many complaints about older games lacking;

                      1. Iron Sight and Sprinting, this is something I actually like in some games. I don't really like all my games to feel like I'm trying to fly with a nuclear rocket on my back, but I would like some sense of speed whilst keeping some reality to the whole game. I think SS3, although not perfecting this, did a good enough job that I found it kind of neat. Never felt required, but was a cool addition. But I often hear complaints of this not being there. Not just in older games, but in modern games. Like the halo series, the ill fated Perfect Dark Zero and other more recent titles.

                      I like them, because unlike quake, I'm not exploiting the engine to do what I want. That is, to move faster. I'm using something the designer intended, and feel comfortable doing so.

                      Though a younger generation and the casual audience of my generation may be too accustomed to gaming via Call of Duty style, gray shooters. Which I can't blame them for, the market has many of them, and many of these games follow a very simple formula. AKA, the CoD4 design. Which works, in CoD4, but it hasn't been expanded, and in itself to me feels like an old and boring way to play a game. It's slow, clunky, but not for any benefits to the genre. It's not a realistic shooter, so why should it sell itself as one I guess.

                      2. Level Design. I think I can safely say, I really hate Halo.

                      Halo is possibly the reason we have ridiculously linear, psuedo realistic maps in first person shooters in the way we do. Halo is the worst offender, because in it's attempt to create a real environment, it just felt horrible and disjointed. Each small area felt like some 1980s 'board', not level. It was, go through some 'boards' via some really confusing paths. I didn't like it. But many gamers played Halo and sung it's praises.

                      Nowadays, that has escalated to a point where these people will complain about the lack of one, non vital, piece of on screen information.


                      I've actually responded to somebody who couldn't get through the map with
                      "Bitch please motherfucker, hit tab! You get a whole damned map of where you've been, if you picked up what look like a telly, you get the rest of the map on there as well. The maps are small as hell and if you look around for doors that you can now go through, you're going the right way."

                      Map? I think it was E1M2, the rooms and corridors which were really dark. Or that was E1M3, I can't remember too well right now.

                      But they complained about the lack of waypoints. I understand them being useful, but with horrible games like Fable 2 pretty much saying "hold on, go this way, go left, kill a mob, watch out for that green pit", it made me wonder if people play games anymore. Or do pointless, menial tasks just for the sake of clearing a tick box.

                      I'd love to see them struggle through Morrowind...

                      I bet they wouldn't get through E1M3 of Quake (I hope that's the one I'm thinking of, with the silver key on the wooden pier which you jump off back to the starting water are to go underwater and up through the door).

                      Either way, you should know the level I mean, if not then I'm terrible at remembering Quake maps. But this doesn't tell you to go underwater, the level shapes itself like you'd want to. But it's not apparently until you look.

                      Without a waypoint, I doubt they'd notice. But this is speculation, I haven't put this to the test yet.

                      So, the second thing is the lack of a 100% clear distinction of what to do. And I shall say now, I'll never make a game that allows freedom of thought in how you play, and just say "GO ON THIS PATH MY FRIEND, THERE'S NOTHING TO SEE BUT THIS PATH TO THE END OF THE GAME".

                      3. The third thing is really weird, I just can't get my head around it. I've heard gamers say that Quake was bad, because it had little to no story that made much sense and it wasn't inventive. Doom also, but Quake get's this target more.

                      So, all that cool storyline that basically said "yeah, we don't really have a story, but read between the lines and you'll have a freaking cool time, or so we hope". Which I see vastly superior to. "He's black, he's not a sergeant or policeman. Go shoot him in the face." I simply ask them to think on one question, which always has the same answer.

                      What's cooler. Cthulhu esque monsters tearing the flesh off your body? Or a badly written story about politics. Which is as far down as I can boil each story, they're both lame, but at least Quake was FUN. They see this too, this is the one thing they enjoy about serious sam. And would Call of Duty 5 sell without Zombies? Nope. If developers tried to make cool monsters (no not Jericho, that game was a mess, however cool) then place those monsters in a fun interesting terrain. They'd get sales. It's probably why Resident Evil can even be considered relevant. It's about you killing monsters, and not getting killed. That's fun, and unlike CoD or BF or even a lot of SS3, it's not like you're killing (what to me at least) seems like an empty rendering of a human who might go. "OI MATE, I'LL KILL YOU!"

                      Because, why does he want to kill me? Why does he do what he wants to do? What the hell is going on?

                      But with a demon.

                      "galragarlgbralgbarabrl" ~ roughly translated to "om nom nom, I'm going to eat you now"

                      You think

                      "WHOWHWOHWHOHSOHSOHOAWHOFHSAOP KILL ITT!!!!!!!" /desperation charge

                      The last thing I can think of that modern gamers don't like, is change.

                      Change is something I've often tried to introduce to gamers, because most casuals will play a game because a friend does. Or it was cheap. Not because they care about the game, more so that they just want something to do. Not expecting to go beyond that. If half life were shown to a battlefield fan, he might try and get into it. Probably will play Counter Strike before he touches HL, but it's a process. Show him Blood and he'll probably laugh at "how bad it looks, how slow it is, and how boring it is".

                      Not taking in the minor details at all, because modern games don't need you to, there isn't a lot to take in as it is with the new spangled action shooter thingy in outer space with aliens who are bad because they're aliens.

                      I know there are other things, such as jump mechanics, "what's a rocket jump" and "why does a lightning gun exist, how would a gun fire lightning". But as you can see, I type a lot. :v

                      Generally speaking, I think it's just a lack of what they know to be common. Because as a general thing, these gamers go for what's similar to what they have. With Doom, anything that was fun and had a similar engine could be considered similar. The modding community probably helped a LOT there, but there are going to be a lot of factors behind that.


                      I'm supposed to be planning some artwork for a Quake texture and model set whilst setting up my room, since I'm recording a show in the near future, and my room, having a sofa, 2 desks and LOTS of games, is actually the perfect environment for it. Really would love to get a quake poster in there for a backdrop. But perhaps that's for the inevitable Quake review, which I'll talk about on here in a few months. Since what's the best way to learn about a game, than to talk to people who have been playing it since it's launch. They know it better than me, so it gives me a good chance to give a plug, and talk about Qrack.

                      So, I'll stop typing now as I go fetch a cup of tea.

                      Edit :

                      I think it's called quick reply for a reason. Sorry about that.
                      wew lad


                      • #12
                        I think it's great that you've gone back to the roots of FPSs and can appreciate them I don't think you need to apologize that the majority of your generation cannot. Games typically don't hold up well for most people, Quake being one of them. Modern FPSs have built a new higher standard of what FPSs should be. Asking a modern FPS gamer to appreciate Quake knowing only games like Halo and CoD just isn't going to work. I love Quake, obviously, but I can't expect every CoD fan to do the same. A lot of that love is based out of nostalgia. If you weren't playing the laggiest Quake games of your life over and Kali in the mid 90's and loving every minute of it, I can't assume you'll view Quake the same way I do. Even though Quake will always hold special meaning to me I still enjoy the games coming out today and can recognize and appreciate how this genre has evolved. I suggest you do the same and don't hold older games to some glorified higher standard because while I can appreciate what Wolfenstein 3-D and Spear of Destiny did as far as starting an entire genre of gaming that I love I can happily say those games are fuckin' boring.


                        • #13
                          That's true, I generally don't, otherwise I'd probably think that Blood is the highest shooters can go, Skies of Arcadia beats all JRPGs and that heavy metal is relevant. ;D

                          "I think it's great that you've gone back to the roots of FPSs"

                          It's less going to, more that I played these games growing up ;D
                          wew lad


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by OMacKnight View Post

                            It's less going to, more that I played these games growing up ;D
                            I assumed that you were exposed to these games post childhood but it's even better that you grew up on them.


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by nosebleed View Post
                              I assumed that you were exposed to these games post childhood but it's even better that you grew up on them.
                              I never really played games on release, never had the money, right system or powerful enough computer to just pirate them.

                              So I often experience games much later than most.
                              wew lad