Is this the worse video game generation ever?

CiDeRmAn

With games like Super Mario 3D World, Super Mario Kart 8, Bloodborne, Dark Souls 3, Doom, Drive Club, Elite Dangerous and Bayonetta 2, I'm pretty made up this console generation.
And that's not including titles like Firewatch, Tempest 2k, Kirby: Planet Robobot, Soma and Resogun

corcaigh07

Gen 6 was probably the best as you had so much choice. Dreamcast, PS2, Xbox, GameCube were all great for different reasons and the PC had heavyweights of its own.

Now, it doesn't make a massive difference if you are on PS4, XB1 or PC, the choice is mostly the same. I know there is Wii U as well but that has been a disappointment and already effectively dead.

the groutch

the groutch wrote: »

the entire entertainment industry is like that, playing it safe and doing just enough to keep the cash flowing in.
there's no appetite anymore to think outside the box and take risks.

This is it exactly, we were only talking here the other night while my partner was picking a film off the shelf she hadn't seen the amount of dvds there if they hadn't already been made wouldn't stand a chance of making it passed the pitch to hollywood execs, same with games or in the case of games if they did get made now would have many of the negative elements that others mentioned in the thread.

It's partially an age thing with me too I suspect I'm a lot more cynical in my old age

deadybai

the groutch wrote:

the entire entertainment industry is like that, playing it safe and doing just enough to keep the cash flowing in. there's no appetite anymore to think outside the box and take risks.

No doubt about that but would annoy ya when you look at 2013 and what a great year for games that was .

Notorious

I've been very happy with the current generation of video games. I'm not focused on exclusives, in fact I consider them a hindrance to the development of the industry.

So far I've thoroughly enjoyed Metal Gear Solid 5, Destiny, Witcher 3, Bloodborne, Dark Souls 3, Batman AK, Uncharted 4, The Division (to an extent), Dragin Age 3, Bravery Default... I could keep going on.

Then I could add the smaller indie games to the list - Hotline Maimi stands out.
Remakes are another type I think we can take or leave; if it's a game you enjoyed, maybe you're happy to give it another go.

I'd love to see more new IPs, but I'm enjoying my gaming at the moment.

pablomakaveli

I have an Xbox1 and honestly buying that was a mistake. Its been really poor with games releases so far with practically no exclusives worth buying. I only really use the Xbox for multiplayer with friends who dont have PCs.

However it is a great time to be a PC gamer. Most console games that have been worth buying can be bought on PC as well and for cheaper, while theres been some great PC only games (Total War Warhammer for example). Then theres the booming indie scene, which is at its strongest on PC.

I think consoles days of dominance are numbered as PC is going from strength.

Akrasia

I'm still playing on the 360. I never upgrade until halfway through the life-cycle of a console generation because there are always tonnes of games on the previous gen that are well worth playing and for next to nothing, and the new generation takes years to find it's feet, and the good standout games will still be great games 5 years after they've been released when they can be picked up for a fraction of the price.

Maybe this is a relic of being too poor as kids to buy the new consoles, so always buying a second hand console of a richer friend for peanuts complete with their entire games collection.

I was going to pick up a new console to give BF1 a go, but looking at the beta it's not as mind blowing as I was hoping, so I'm happy to wait until after christmas and get one in the sales

I love technology, but I like to get other people to do all the expensive beta testing for me. I'll buy the finished product when it's tried and tested for half the price.

Its the same with VR gaming. The idea is amazing, but the implementation right now too early for me to jump on board. I'll let the early adopters pay to be beta testers and when they stop getting migraines and the developers have figured how to make games that are actually fun, then I'll be near the end of the queue to hand over a smaller amount of money for a superior product.

CiDeRmAn

The PS2/GC and Xbox software libraries were fantastic, and there just seemed to be so much worth playing.
What's more interesting is the lifespan of the formats, as the premium current gen formats, it was only around 5 years or so.
By the mid 2000's we had moved to the 360, PS3 and Wii, and they dominated for nearly a decade

Ol' Donie

Aw, this thread makes me all nostalgic for back when the PS3 generation was the worst ever.

Akrasia

Yeah, and this is why I'm so happy to wait before upgrading.

In the olden times of Atari and NES and Mega Drives, the game design was hugely limited by the power of the machines that they were programmed on. Each new generation unlocked enormous potential for new types of gaming experiences

Since the PS2/xbox , we have had essentially the core mechanics of modern games available to us in their essential nature. There might be fewer bells and whistles, but we had fully 3d open environments, full internet connectivity with online multiplayer games...

I was playing socom and battlefield 2 modern combat on ps2 for years while the ps3 and 360 were figuring out how to make consoles that didn't overheat or randomly melt down, and while there were still precious few games that tempted me to move to the new generation.

Since then, the improvements have been related to graphics and scope of games. The worlds have become larger, the graphics have become shinier but compare a game like Rayman legends. If you had never played the xbox one version, would you really have any less fun playing the 360 version?

Games like Battlefield 4 that are cross generation are just as enjoyable on the last generation as they are on the current gen.

Nintendo are of course the exception because their consoles are innovative rather than iterative. Wii games were an innovation in game control and design, wii u games are a further innovation that could not have been possible on wii

before I bought a 360 I had the wii and playing COD games using the wii-mote as the gun was actually a huge amount of fun. I'd still be playing it today except for the fact that nintendo basically shut down it's online services and killed that game

Ol' Donie

CiDeRmAn wrote: »

The PS2/GC and Xbox software libraries were fantastic, and there just seemed to be so much worth playing.
What's more interesting is the lifespan of the formats, as the premium current gen formats, it was only around 5 years or so.
By the mid 2000's we had moved to the 360, PS3 and Wii, and they dominated for nearly a decade

To be fair, the PS2 & Cube generation...

Well, that'd take some beating.

Akrasia

Ol' Donie wrote: »

To be fair, the PS2 & Cube generation...

Well, that'd take some beating.

If Sony make a decent wipeout game for the ps4 then count me in.

Actually. I'm not even sure..

Part of the magic of games back then was the idea that you could levitate and fly around at a gazillion miles an hour to awesome music...

The 'I can't believe we can do this' has been replaced by 'hmm, this is like that other game I already played'

Forget wipeout There are loads of high octane future racers out there. I want a decent remake of Bushido Blade, because that was a game that is absolutely crying out for a remake. One on one sword fight to the death where any strike can kill or severely wound your opponent.

YouSavedMyLife

Akrasia wrote: »

If Sony make a decent wipeout game for the ps4 then count me in.

Actually. I'm not even sure..

Part of the magic of games back then was the idea that you could levitate and fly around at a gazillion miles an hour to awesome music...

The 'I can't believe we can do this' has been replaced by 'hmm, this is like that other game I already played'

Forget wipeout There are loads of high octane future racers out there. I want a decent remake of Bushido Blade, because that was a game that is absolutely crying out for a remake. One on one sword fight to the death where any strike can kill or severely wound your opponent.

I remember playing the WipeOut demo disc that came with the PS1 and being absolutely blown away thinking we finally arrived in the sci-fi 21st century. Then i recently played the most recent game on PS3 and i was done with it after an hour.

I'd love to play a new Bushido Blade with an insanely in-depth fighting system but in today's market i feel a game like that just wouldn't sell. Unless it was released as a budget title. I would love a new/remastered Vagrant Story though!I think a game like that would still work nowadays

GottaGetGatt

Play Wolfenstein The new order followed by the Old Blood. All faith in gaming will be restored.

Gregk961

Notorious wrote: »

So far I've thoroughly enjoyed Metal Gear Solid 5, Destiny, Witcher 3, Bloodborne, Dark Souls 3, Batman AK, Uncharted 4, The Division (to an extent), Dragin Age 3, Bravery Default... I could keep going on.

Metal gear 5, Dragon Age Inquisition and Batman AK seem like poor choices to be used in an argument against the OP, all being low points in their respective series. I'm stunned to see a few people reference MGS5 as a standout game of this generation, Id use it to side with the OP if I didn't disagree on most fronts.

CiDeRmAn

Ol' Donie wrote: »

To be fair, the PS2 & Cube generation...

Well, that'd take some beating.

I know,
I didn't want to upset any Xbox fans out there.
And, in their defence, they had PGR as well as it's sequel, the excellent Amped titles, Strangers Wrath, Panzer Dragoon Orta, Republic Commando (feck off Retr0!), great ports of the GTA games of the day and some games franchise called "Halo" or something....
Oh, and they had a most awesome port of Outrun 2 from the arcades, as Sega were using the Xbox as the basis for their arcade machines at the time.

CiDeRmAn

Gregk961 wrote: »

Metal gear 5, Dragon Age Inquisition and Batman AK seem like poor choices to be used in an argument against the OP, all being low points in their respective series. I'm stunned to see a few people reference MGS5 as a standout game of this generation, Id use it to side with the OP if I didn't disagree on most fronts.

Arkham Knight?
A low point?
When was this consensus reached?
I played it and loved it, mostly, same weaknesses as previous titles but I enjoyed it a lot more than Arkham City.

K.O.Kiki

A "generation" with The Witcher 3 cannot be bad.

Also Overwatch.

Also also Guilt Gear Xrd (I'm still bad at it, but it looks & plays amazing).

Retr0gamer

CiDeRmAn wrote: »

I know,
I didn't want to upset any Xbox fans out there.
And, in their defence, they had PGR as well as it's sequel, the excellent Amped titles, Strangers Wrath, Panzer Dragoon Orta, Republic Commando (feck off Retr0!), great ports of the GTA games of the day and some games franchise called "Halo" or something....
Oh, and they had a most awesome port of Outrun 2 from the arcades, as Sega were using the Xbox as the basis for their arcade machines at the time.

The Xbox though is kind of like the current consoles, everything on it bar a few exceptions was available on PC or other systems. It did have some excellent games, Metal Wolf Chaos, Jet Set Radio Future, Panzer Dragoon Orta and Ninja Gaiden Black (best Xbox game ever, how could you forget this one!) made it worth owning... but only just. I'd still put it ahead of the PS4 and Xbox One.

johnny_ultimate

I think most comments about the weaknesses of modern gaming - whether that's lack of originality or iffy business practices - apply almost exclusively to AAA games, but it's never been easier to find alternatives. Like every single major digital store is now absolutely overloaded with bold, unique and cheap games, I don't know if anybody could reasonably dispute that. Sure, it's nice to have a big blockbuster every now and then - but CD Projekt, Rockstar, Naughty Dog, Blizzard etc still release games reasonably regularly There's definite concerns about the disappearance of the mid-budget game especially from Japan, but as indie games increase in complexity and ambition I think those concerns become more minor.

Other complaints can easily be explained by the fact that games are now bigger and more complex than ever before. Development time and cost have increased exponentially, and the sheer amount of variables helps explain the like of day one patches. Unfortunately the trade offs of increased graphical fidelity and technical complexity are fewer risks, more potential problems etc...

Also never quite sure why people complain about remasters so much. They're just completely ignorable IMO if you're not interested in a particular one, and not much different to something like a Blu-Ray re-release. They're inevitable given how protacted development times have become, and there's always going to be a decent-sized audience that actually benefits from their existence. Anyway, as the market and community has consistently and reliably shown (whether that's the constant calls for particular sequels, or the dominance of nostalgia projects in crowdfunding) many, many people want 'more of the same'.

Icyseanfitz

Retr0gamer wrote: »

The Xbox though is kind of like the current consoles, everything on it bar a few exceptions was available on PC or other systems. It did have some excellent games, Metal Wolf Chaos, Jet Set Radio Future, Panzer Dragoon Orta and Ninja Gaiden Black (best Xbox game ever, how could you forget this one!) made it worth owning... but only just. I'd still put it ahead of the PS4 and Xbox One.

what about kotor, my god that game alone made me love the xbox

Retr0gamer

Icyseanfitz wrote: »

what about kotor, my god that game alone made me love the xbox

Can't think of it as an exclusive since it was on PC and better (although it took a while to get there). Most of the Xbox library was on PC.

Icyseanfitz

Retr0gamer wrote: »

Can't think of it as an exclusive since it was on PC and better (although it took a while to get there). Most of the Xbox library was on PC.

True but it did come out on Xbox first, at the time I didn't have a PC and it was my first Xbox game so to me it will always be the game that sold Xbox to me

CiDeRmAn

Metal Wolf Chaos
The game that killed my Xbox!

But the PS2 was amazing, and still a good system now, worth buying one while the games are still cheap.

Notorious

Gregk961 wrote: »

Metal gear 5, Dragon Age Inquisition and Batman AK seem like poor choices to be used in an argument against the OP, all being low points in their respective series. I'm stunned to see a few people reference MGS5 as a standout game of this generation, Id use it to side with the OP if I didn't disagree on most fronts.

Please tell me more about how wrong my opinion is.

All three games were a step up in their respective series'. To summarise, Dragon Age 2 and Batman Arkham Origins were terrible games. I don't think I need to elaborate at all. MGS4 was a great game, when you got to play it. It was probably 50% cutscene, 50% gameplay. This was not a good thing.
I think MGS5 was an excellent game; the story I could take or leave, but the gameplay was outstanding. So far, it is definitely a stand out game of this generation.

johnny_ultimate wrote:

There's definite concerns about the disappearance of the mid-budget game especially from Japan, but as indie games increase in complexity and ambition I think those concerns become more minor.

I think both points above are a concern. I feel that there are so many indie games being released that the standard is falling. I have a strange love/hate affair with the indie "genre". As johnny pointed out, theres a lot of indie games being released. Some of them seem to be getting excellent coverage, and games critics are falling over them. I feel like its just me, but there are so many that I've played which I just cannot get into. I feel like some of them (Superbrothers: Sword & Sorcery, for eg), are games lifted from an older generation of gaming and to me they just don't live up to the standards of modern games. I find that they're great for an hour or two, but they never hold my attention for very long.

With Superbrothers, I really tried to like the game. The music was perfect and it looked visually stunning. But as I got into it I just felt that I could turn it off, never play it again, and I wouldn't be missing anything. I never had a feeling that I wanted to go back and learn more about the story, or this magical world. I only use S: S&S as an example, but it's a feeling I've gotten from many indie games.

For me, there are exceptions. Hotline Miami was outstanding. I'm really enjoying playing through Hyper Light Drifter at the moment. I sunk a lot of hours into FTL.

Also never quite sure why people complain about remasters so much. They're just completely ignorable IMO if you're not interested in a particular one...

Completely agree. We're getting remasters for some excellent titles. I wouldn't have played Shadow of the Colossus or Ico, if it wasn't for the HD remasters. If you don't like them, don't buy them.

Shougeki

Icyseanfitz wrote: »

what about kotor, my god that game alone made me love the xbox

For me it was Steel Battalion & the controller.....

CiDeRmAn

Shougeki wrote: »

For me it was Steel Battalion & the controller.....

I know, I have it!
Actually, it's my second time around, having foolishly sold it the first time, big eejit that I am.
Won't play on a modded Xbox though, you'll need a switched mod to run it.

johnny_ultimate

Notorious wrote: »

I think both points above are a concern. I feel that there are so many indie games being released that the standard is falling.

I think quite the opposite if anything Sure, Steam is now packed with junk, but I think the quality of worthwhile indie titles has come on in leaps and bounds. Like Inside is a significantly more mature and accomplished piece of work than Limbo was IMO. Same with The Witness vs Braid - I love both, but a game as substantive and massive as the latter is not something that would have been possible in the early days of the 'indie boom'. I listed a lot of 2016 games in my first post in this thread, and to me that's a selection of riches I don't ever recall having encountered in a single year before. And we're not done yet (hell, the final version of the excellent Wheels of Aurelia is out tomorrow, and I am very intrigued by Virginia which is out very soon)!

To me they just don't live up to the standards of modern games. I find that they're great for an hour or two, but they never hold my attention for very long.

Well, given the increasingly wide range of indie titles out there, I don't think it'd be too difficult for any given player to find a game that would divert them for a long, long time if they so wanted! But I also think the relative brevity of many titles is a major asset. What I love about many smaller titles is they don't overstay their welcome - the best ones often communicate their ideas with the sort of efficiency and grace one just doesn't find in AAA games all that often. Bloat is (one of) the great scourge of modern gaming, and that's why I have endless appreciation for ones that won't waste our time.

Let's be frank: most AAA games do waste our time in some way or another, and some like Destiny are entirely built around wasting our time. Oh for the days of the six hour campaign!

With Superbrothers, I really tried to like the game. The music was perfect and it looked visually stunning. But as I got into it I just felt that I could turn it off, never play it again, and I wouldn't be missing anything. I never had a feeling that I wanted to go back and learn more about the story, or this magical world.

I think Superbrothers is an interesting example because it's very much a short form piece (the EP in the title hints at that, and worth noting its mobile origins). Only the indie space really allows for a such a wide diversity of experiences - from short games to theoretically endless ones. Superbrothers heavy on atmosphere, and purposefully references retro games to recontextualise and subvert some of their tropes. Sure, I can see why people wouldn't like it, but I also believe it's an ambiguous and 'moody' game on purpose. Again, if one was looking for something with weightier gameplay you wouldn't have to look far IMO

Links234

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

Sure, Steam is now packed with junk, but I think the quality of worthwhile indie titles has come on in leaps and bounds.

I think that's the problem when talking about indie games, is that while fans of indie gaming in general can be quite magnanimous in what we consider indie, for others it often includes the plethora of cobbled together Unity asset "games" crowding Steam's Greenlight and Early Access sections. And as much as it opens up a huge can of worms in trying to define certain games as being "not-games", the Frankenstein's monsters of ill-fitting, stitched together assets are as close to non-games as we can get, or at least the argument can be made that they would never be in a genuinely saleable, finished state if not for Steam's opening of the floodgates, and in that sense they are not finished games.

Indie means different things to different people, and while I think of games like Darkest Dungeon, Gunpoint, Undertale or the like, to someone else it might conjure up images of the type of game that's been abandoned in Early Access and consists of a single map that's populated with unity store stock zombie assets.

Of course none of that is to say Indie games are not only in a great place, but going from strength to strength, because in my opinion they certainly are. But I definitely think it's going to depend greatly on your definitions.

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

Oh for the days of the six hour campaign!

Playing Call of Juarez: Gunslinger was just about perfect, finished it in about 6 hours and it felt long enough to tell it's story without any fluff or filler. On the other hand, I've still got Sleeping Dogs, Mad Max, Shadow of Mordor and Saints Row 3 here that I feel are a bit daunting tbh.

SeantheMan

Links234 wrote: »

Playing Call of Juarez: Gunslinger was just about perfect, finished it in about 6 hours and it felt long enough to tell it's story without any fluff or filler. On the other hand, I've still got Sleeping Dogs, Mad Max, Shadow of Mordor and Saints Row 3 here that I feel are a bit daunting tbh.

-Sleeping Dogs , I loved it and really liked the story. I've played through it twice....and although it's open world (and there are other things to do...not as much as GTA or SR)...I didn't really do anything outside of the main missions as I wanted to see the story progress.

-Shadow of Mordor - didn't care for the story at all, at all....ended up more focused on killing chiefs than anything else.

Mad Max - story didn't grip me either, put it down after about 3 hours.

SR3 - like Sleeping Dogs, completed it 2 or 3 times...great game...great story. Like sleeping dogs if you focus on the main missions and don't get distracted it's not as big as you're imagining.

I'd go Sleeping Dogs / Saints Row 3 first...and alternate between them