Is this true?

First of all, read this:
http://www.vgcats.com/comics/
Do you think this is ture? Has this really happened? Has videogaming as we know it degenerated?

I wouldn't say it's degenerated. There are just more idiots out there, now.

No, not really.

I want everyone to take a good, long, look at the games for Atari consoles. Now the NES. Now the Gameboy. Now any other system of your choice.

Done? Notice anything? Yeah, most of the games sucked. Horribly.

The number of good games is the same as it's always been. We're just old enough to recognize the bad ones now.

Originally Posted by John

No, not really.

I want everyone to take a good, long, look at the games for Atari consoles. Now the NES. Now the Gameboy. Now any other system of your choice.

Done? Notice anything? Yeah, most of the games sucked. Horribly.

The number of good games is the same as it's always been. We're just old enough to recognize the bad ones now.

Bravo sir, bravo. We have a winner. No, I don't find it true.

I think the wii is mainly degenerating. The 360 and PS3 still have great hardcore libraries.

Another Casualfag vs. Hardcorefag topic. Hooray. I see this as this: There still gonna be a influx of both damn things for both crowds.

Originally Posted by SheikahSage

I think the wii is mainly degenerating. The 360 and PS3 still have great hardcore libraries.

The list of fun-to-play games for the Wii is as long as (many would say longer than) the list for other consoles.

The Wii's chaff-to-quality ratio is worse, but that's just because so many more games, period, are are released for it, the number of good games is about the same.

Originally Posted by SheikahSage

I think the wii is mainly degenerating. The 360 and PS3 still have great hardcore libraries.

If anything the Wii is getting better in that regard. But really, all along the Wii hasn't been trying to cater to any specific person. In fact, it's an always-expanding system. Recently we got the 4.0 update which opened up the SD slot. The Wii's download service now supports arcade games. There's Wii MotionPlus around the corner, and, very importantly, there are promising third-party efforts on the way.

That may all be beside the point, though. I think the main problem here is actually the focus on "hardcore vs. casual." Why can't games just be games? What's fun is fun. Designation shouldn't matter at all.

Relegating casuals to those who play cell phone games, and relegating hardcores to those who sit in front of their TVs and play Gears of War all day is idiocy. But, such jaded perceptions such as these are still around, hence my previous post.

Originally Posted by John

The list of fun-to-play games for the Wii is as long as (many would say longer than) the list for other consoles.

The Wii's chaff-to-quality ratio is worse, but that's just because so many more games, period, are are released for it, the number of good games is about the same.

I couldn't agree more. People see too many of the Disney movie produced in 48 hours with a budget of $1000 games and assume that's all there is on Wii. They often over look SMG, TP, SSBB, NMH, Soul Calibur Legends, Mario Kart Wii, SSX Blur and many more.Likewise, there were games on the old consols that were horrible.

It's a funny comic (somewhat) but I wouldn't take it seriously. Trying to claim gaming as one's own property is nothing short of selfish, really. I don't mind new gamers, as long as I get my good games. Which I do. Happy face.

Nintendo in my opinion has much more fun games then PS3/360. I don't mean blood and guts aren't fun (well not really to me) and I don't mean PS3 and 360 don't have fun games but I just find Nintendo more fun.

And to answer the question, well, yes and no. Some games are bad, really bad. But I think consoles have had a lot of silly 3rd party games out since the beginning so the answer is more yes then no.~ ^^

Originally Posted by Snow_Storm

Another Casualfag vs. Hardcorefag topic. Hooray. I see this as this: There still gonna be a influx of both damn things for both crowds.

yeah...im tired of it too..damn tired of it..
so one cant stand in the middle ground and say "i like Mario but i dont like Final Fantasy!" or not buy games that all the hardcores like and not buy the games all the casuals like? Theres no middle ground? guess not...
i dont think games have degraded..i think peoples thoughts on it have changed..i wont say their thoughts on gaming are degraded but i do think people expect too much (or too little) sometimes...

Originally Posted by SheikahSage

I think the wii is mainly degenerating. The 360 and PS3 still have great hardcore libraries.

"great" is a matter of opinion. if you're a four year old kid or an aware parent, you're going to like wii bowling or zack and wiki or super mario galaxy over something like gears of war or bioshock. so congratulations for having an opinion, but don't try and shove it on others.

just because you like all of the desensitization of violence doesn't mean everyone has to

Also: Zack and Wiki is awesome puzzle-fun, and the most hardcore adventure/puzzle game in years.

Seriously, it's not as bad as the old ones that killed you in the last five minutes for not throwing a shoe at a cat in the first two screens, and it never becomes unwinable, but it's the closest to a throwback of those old ones that you'll see now.

I'm okay with Sony and Microsoft, as they still have some pretty damn good games, and I never really worried about them as Nintendo is closest to my heart. And what do I have to say about Nintendo? It's degenerating. Real bad.

One of my fondest childhood memories was playing he SNES when I was at a very young age. The SNES had tons of amazing games, and up to now, I could still remember all those very fond memories of me being frustrated yet having fun with all those games.

One of those games was Super Metroid. Honestly I was never able to beat it as a child, but I still had all the fun in the world with it. It was confusing, non-linear, challenging, and used to kick my ass every minute or so. And I loved it. I loved exploring that lonely, empty world all on my own as if all existence had vanished except for me and many cruel monsters. And whenever I solved a puzzle, I would feel very achieved. I got far in the game but was never able to beat it until recently, wherein I played and beat the game and still had fun with its non-linearity, isolation, etc. Metroid Prime gave me the same fun.

When I heard that Metroid Prime 3 was gonna come out for the Wii, I was extremely excited. I couldn't wait to see how it'd be like to play Metroid with innovative Wii controls, and overall just have a fresh dosage of the classic Metroid franchise. But did I get a fresh dosage of Metroid? No. I got a fresh dosage of Halo. I mean it was a great game alright. It was action-packed, full of surprises, and overall extremely fun. But it just wasn't what it was meant to be. What happened to the non-linearity, or the puzzles, or the isolation, or the fun of exploration, or any of those other stuff that made Metroid so good? They were all gone, and instead we got linear missions, easy enemies and boss battles, etc. It was fun, but it felt more like getting drunk in a party rather than having a very memorable experience that will stick to your mind for years to come. I mean you don't remember what happens when you get drunk, do you?

Next, we have Star Fox. I absolutely loved that game. I loved all the rail shooting action, the challenge of getting to the end of each level, etc. It was just so action-packed and kept me on the edge of my seat whenever I played it. I loved the feeling of just flying sky-high and shooting down all enemies in my way while dodging obstacles and the like.

After having so many fond memories from playing Star Fox on the SNES, I stopped playing the series for years and never even got the chance to play Star Fox 64. Then one day I decided to buy Start Fox: Command for the DS and, you guessed it, I was disappointed. I mean I had a lot of fun with the game, but it didn't feel as action-packed or anything as the original Star Fox, and it had many glaring flaws. Then I decided to play 64, and I thought, what has the series become?! Up to now I haven't even bothered to play Adventures or Assault.

Next we have Donkey Kong Country. The game that used to kick my ass every 10 seconds and make me cry and break things. And I had fun doing that. I felt very achieved finishing each level, and I just had way too damn many memories from the game to list down here. All I can say is, it was an amazing game.

But just look at where the series is now. I don't think I need any further explanation.

Even Smash Brothers was a great memory, despite me being older that time. The original was fun enough, but when Melee came I just thought it was the best multiplayer game ever. There was just so much to do in that game, from casual 4-player gimmicky fun to more competitve 2-player no-item matches. It had so much replay value compared to the first one, that even 6 years later I was still trying to refine my skills in the game.

Of course, naturally I got extremely hyped for Brawl. When it finally came out, and when I finally got to play it, I thought hey, this game lived up to the hype! But now, almost a year later, I fell disappointed. There's just nothing else to do in the game. The roster has gotten boring and there aren't any skills to refine. Overall it's an amazing game, but has 1/100 of Melee's Replay Value.

I don't think I need to rant about the rediculous difficulty of the new Zeldas compared to the old, do I?

Now, one may read my post and reply "Those games were just challenging at the time because your were much younger!". Yes, that may be partly true, but having replayed most of these games recently, there's no denying that old games are more difficult and more fun than their recent predecessors.

In a nutshell, I'm disappointed with the direction that Nintendo is taking. No, I'm not complaining about Wii Sports or Wii Music or anything like that, as those games are very good marketing strategies and give grandparents and little kids and the like the opportunity to play video games and have fun that they never had before. All I'm disappointed with is the fact that Nintendo is taking the series' that I loved so much as a kid for their challenge, and butchering them to make them much easier and accessible to the mainstream.



TL;DR version of this post:

Nintendo = The Metallica of Video Gaming

As I thought, the "old days are better than new days" rants have begun.

Originally Posted by man_with_thooo

I'm okay with Sony and Microsoft, as they still have some pretty damn good games, and I never really worried about them as Nintendo is closest to my heart. And what do I have to say about Nintendo? It's degenerating. Real bad.

One of my fondest childhood memories was playing he SNES when I was at a very young age. The SNES had tons of amazing games, and up to now, I could still remember all those very fond memories of me being frustrated yet having fun with all those games.

One of those games was Super Metroid. Honestly I was never able to beat it as a child, but I still had all the fun in the world with it. It was confusing, non-linear, challenging, and used to kick my ass every minute or so. And I loved it. I loved exploring that lonely, empty world all on my own as if all existence had vanished except for me and many cruel monsters. And whenever I solved a puzzle, I would feel very achieved. I got far in the game but was never able to beat it until recently, wherein I played and beat the game and still had fun with its non-linearity, isolation, etc. Metroid Prime gave me the same fun.

When I heard that Metroid Prime 3 was gonna come out for the Wii, I was extremely excited. I couldn't wait to see how it'd be like to play Metroid with innovative Wii controls, and overall just have a fresh dosage of the classic Metroid franchise. But did I get a fresh dosage of Metroid? No. I got a fresh dosage of Halo.

Having played both Halo and Metroid Prime 3, I politely opine that you don't know what you're talking about.

There are some similarities in the first part, yes, but after you leave the command ship it's all Metroid.

I mean it was a great game alright. It was action-packed, full of surprises, and overall extremely fun. But it just wasn't what it was meant to be. What happened to the non-linearity,

The Prime games have never had that, nor did Fusion. But this isn't new to the series, Super Metroid was far more Linear than Metroid II or I. There's just been a steady trend away from it, presumably because most consumers don't care for it.

or the puzzles,

Prime 3 had much better puzzles than Super Metroid. There were more of them and they were actually challenging.

or the isolation,

That's still there.

or the fun of exploration,

Also still there. Hell, half the point (for me, anyways) was just seeing all these gorgeous-looking and amazing places.

or any of those other stuff that made Metroid so good?

All still there.

What's happened is that you've grown up. It's like me and Pokemon. Pokemon was my first video game, and I loved it to pieces. It was challenging, complex, looked amazing, etc.

I play Pokemon Diamond now and, despite it being essentially the first games with better graphics and more Pokemon, (and a better stat system) it doesn't seem anywhere near as fun.

That's because I grew up. My tastes changed and I became far harder to impress.


Me? I loved Metroid Prime 3. One of the best Metroid games I've played. I don't doubt that if it was your first Metroid game and if you were playing it 10 years ago, you'd think it so much better than that silly Super Metroid game. That's just how the human brain works.

I was, somewhat, fortunate there in that I didn't play any Metroid games until a few years back, so my rose tinted glasses have very thin lenses.

They were all gone, and instead we got linear missions, easy enemies and boss battles, etc. It was fun, but it felt more like getting drunk in a party rather than having a very memorable experience that will stick to your mind for years to come. I mean you don't remember what happens when you get drunk, do you?

Try playing on a harder difficulty, then. On the hardest one the game becomes more of a nightmare than a casual stroll.

Next, we have Star Fox. I absolutely loved that game. I loved all the rail shooting action, the challenge of getting to the end of each level, etc. It was just so action-packed and kept me on the edge of my seat whenever I played it. I loved the feeling of just flying sky-high and shooting down all enemies in my way while dodging obstacles and the like.

After having so many fond memories from playing Star Fox on the SNES, I stopped playing the series for years and never even got the chance to play Star Fox 64. Then one day I decided to buy Start Fox: Command for the DS and, you guessed it, I was disappointed. I mean I had a lot of fun with the game, but it didn't feel as action-packed or anything as the original Star Fox, and it had many glaring flaws. Then I decided to play 64, and I thought, what has the series become?! Up to now I haven't even bothered to play Adventures or Assault.

Everyone agrees that there have only been two excellent Star Fox games, but that's just one studio.

Next we have Donkey Kong Country. The game that used to kick my ass every 10 seconds and make me cry and break things. And I had fun doing that. I felt very achieved finishing each level, and I just had way too damn many memories from the game to list down here. All I can say is, it was an amazing game.

But just look at where the series is now. I don't think I need any further explanation.

Since a mainstream DK game hasn't been released since 64 I don't really understand this.

Even Smash Brothers was a great memory, despite me being older that time. The original was fun enough, but when Melee came I just thought it was the best multiplayer game ever. There was just so much to do in that game, from casual 4-player gimmicky fun to more competitve 2-player no-item matches. It had so much replay value compared to the first one, that even 6 years later I was still trying to refine my skills in the game.

Of course, naturally I got extremely hyped for Brawl. When it finally came out, and when I finally got to play it, I thought hey, this game lived up to the hype! But now, almost a year later, I fell disappointed. There's just nothing else to do in the game. The roster has gotten boring and there aren't any skills to refine. Overall it's an amazing game, but has 1/100 of Melee's Replay Value.

Er, no.
Brawl has more depth than Melee (though, admittedly, is purposefully designed to make precision and glitching harder) and has far more in the way of unlockables.

I don't think I need to rant about the rediculous difficulty of the new Zeldas compared to the old, do I?

Please do.

Twilight Princess is an order of magnitude more difficult than Ocarina of Time and has the best plot of the entire series.

In addition, it has some of the best level design and is easily the most atmospheric and urgent-feeling, outdoing even Majora's Mask despite not having a timer.

Now, one may read my post and reply "Those games were just challenging at the time because your were much younger!". Yes, that may be partly true, but having replayed most of these games recently, there's no denying that old games are more difficult and more fun than their recent predecessors.

Tell me, you played Super Mario Galaxy? Twilight Princess? Prime 3 on anything but Easy?

Nintendo's core games are just as tough as they've always been, you really have just gotten older is all.

Seriously, most of your complaints aren't even true. They're objectively not true. Super Metroid didn't have a sense of isolation. It was, generally speaking, a platformer in the SNES era, none of which had any NPCs that weren't trying to kill you. The Contra games were as isolating as Super Metroid.

Yet here you insist that Prime 3 was nothing but a talk-fest with no isolation at all.

It's just not true. You're either mis-remembering Prime 3 or Super Metroid.

You remember things more fondly the younger you were when you liked them. That's all that's at play here.

Originally Posted by Abyss Master

As I thought, the "old days are better than new days" rants have begun.

I wish I could get into the rose-tinted glasses market, there's clearly a fortune to be made.

To answer all of your Metroid arguments, I said that I played Super Metroid again recently. By recently I mean around a couple of months before I played Prime 3, which means there wasn't too much of a time gap between when I played the games. And I must say, if if Super Metroid obviously wasn't as difficult or confusing as it was 10 years ago, it was still much harder than Prime 3 was at any point in the game. And yes, I did play it on the hardest difficulty thank you very much. And it's definitely not something that my grandmother can play through, but compared to Super Metroid, or Prime, or most especially Prime 2, it's really easy.

Since a mainstream DK game hasn't been released since 64 I don't really understand this.

Exactly what I'm saying. Nintendo isn't taking advantage of one of the best game series' there is ( or was, or whatever).

Er, no.
Brawl has more depth than Melee (though, admittedly, is purposefully designed to make precision and glitching harder) and has far more in the way of unlockables.

I must admit Brawl has more depth in terms of single-player modes and casual play overall, but its competitive gameplay has very little depth. Now, I don't wanna bring in here any of the casual vs. competitive crap they do on SmashBoards, but there's no denying that Melee's competitive gameplay has much more depth, even without those accidental glitches like wavedashing and the like. Now, I'm not a tourneyfag, as I enjoy playing both aspects of smash games. 64 and Melee had the perfect balance between both, while Brawl's just bluegh.

Please do.

Twilight Princess is an order of magnitude more difficult than Ocarina of Time and has the best plot of the entire series.

In addition, it has some of the best level design and is easily the most atmospheric and urgent-feeling, outdoing even Majora's Mask despite not having a timer.

I could write paragraphs arguing against what you just said, but I'd rather not because this is a Zelda fansite, and everybody argues in the Zelda section of the forum.

Tell me, you played Super Mario Galaxy? Twilight Princess? Prime 3 on anything but Easy?

Nintendo's core games are just as tough as they've always been, you really have just gotten older is all.

I agree with SMG, but c'mon, Twilight Princess? I just recently beat AoL and am playing ALttP and they're way harder than TP. But once again I don't wanna bring a Zelda argument to this board. And Prime 3? Not as hard as Super Metroid, despite me having played them at pretty much the same time span (or whatever you call it).

You remember things more fondly the younger you were when you liked them. That's all that's at play here

I agree, but only to a certain extent.

man_with_thooo, I put to you this: In general, old games were harder. But this is not because they were designed to be more difficult, it's because older systems, especialy NES, simply had worse controls and graphics. LoZ I don't think is by any means a bad, or particularily hard game in it's self, but I'm not a big fan of it because I just find the gameplay hard.

As for SSB, I don't see what there is to complain about. Aoart from the new character, items and unlockables, I didn't find a huge difference. I know they fixed some of the glitches, but that just makes the game slightly more challenging. Personaly I was never able to get the hang of most of them any ways. But anyways, I don't see what you're talking about saying there's no depth to competative play. It's basicaly the same, except now people can't move across the level without being hit. Unless you're complaining because it's opened you up to being attacked, I don't see a problem with it.

Originally Posted by Mattocks

man_with_thooo, I put to you this: In general, old games were harder. But this is not because they were designed to be more difficult, it's because older systems, especialy NES, simply had worse controls and graphics. LoZ I don't think is by any means a bad, or particularily hard game in it's self, but I'm not a big fan of it because I just find the gameplay hard.

I have to disagree. LoZ is harder than, say, TP because:

1. Enemies do more damage
2. MOAR enemies
3. Nobody tells you where to go, and the game doesn't hold your hand the whole way through.

It's not because of the controls nor the graphics.

As for SSB, I don't see what there is to complain about. Aoart from the new character, items and unlockables, I didn't find a huge difference. I know they fixed some of the glitches, but that just makes the game slightly more challenging. Personaly I was never able to get the hang of most of them any ways. But anyways, I don't see what you're talking about saying there's no depth to competative play. It's basicaly the same, except now people can't move across the level without being hit. Unless you're complaining because it's opened you up to being attacked, I don't see a problem with it.

This is why you don't see any difference. But just to SHOW you the difference, here are a couple of randomly chosen videos of competitive Melee and Brawl gameplay, respectively:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HuaQYZO73Hg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u_sKp...eature=related