Games: 2 things, Technos(developer), and modern gaming vs classics

[phaq]

they tie together. technos is a company im sad to find out had to go bankrupt. granted if they were still alive we'd only see maybe 10% of whatever they release, but maybe something would have caught on. see what these guys developed was a bunch of really fun as fuck games. even if you can't win half of em, they're still a blast. well, they also happened to've been the company that developed double dragon, so it's definitely sad to know they went bankrupt for that alone(happened back in '96 btw, not any time recently). the games they made the most of though all revolved around a character they created called kunio-kun or something, and his high school nekkestu(which i guess translates to hot blooded or something). there were 2 types of games they made, beat em ups, including what was released in the u.s. as river city ransom(street gangs for you europeans), and sports games. before you start thinking, you really don't care if you see another basketball game or whatever, these sports games all revolved around kicking the other teams asses in a physical manner. well you want to score, but you can do so while beating the hell out of the other teams. it's just simple mindless fun. what saddens me about the company dying is that it happens to a company that wanted to make fun games. what a concept, making a game to simply be fun. who'd have thunk it?

so what the fuck happened to the fun anyway? when did we get so caught up in specs, and purdy graphics? when did it stop becoming about having a good time and more about watching 3d animated sequences? i remember back in the day, i'd used to be able to beat a game, come back, play the game i've already beaten, beat it again and come back for more. now if i beat a game for a modern console, im sick of it for months before i can, if i can, come back to it. and it's not my tastes in games having changed. in not getting a gamecube my reasoning was nintendos obvious marketing towards children. but another reason is seeing ths bastardizations of "sequels" to the games i remember on the nes. take donkey kong for instance, this unforutnately started 1 generation later. instead of this badass gorilla tossing objects at our hero(i think i can assume we all know who he was), we get his grandson who looks like a complete tool wearing a tie, and hangs with children gorillas and runs around a jungle. i mean honestly they can't take what they've done for the gameboy/gba and make that oldschool style dk with puzzle elements in 3d? metroid...an fps? it takes less time to beat most fps's than it took you the first time to beat the first metroid. mario....i don't even wanna think about it, the commercial for that last one is gonna haunt me like a feminine person being in a cemetary at night. even ninja gaiden on the xbox was a disapointment to me simply because they changed what the challenge was. now it's nothing to get ryu through a stage, just a bitch to get him through the enemies. thats the exact oppostie of what made the series great in the first place. castlevania, while i'll admit the new style isn't so bad, i don't want to see the platforming style go away. castlevania 3 will probably always remain my favorite of the series. whats happening with games today anyway? every game has save features now. it's no fun anymore when you have to save after every 5 feet because you simply don't want to go through those last 5 feet again.

i'm not saying this generation isn't any fun at all, it's just not as much as previous generations were, dreamcast included even as some games on it were innovative as hell.

p.s. if anyone wonders about the technos thing, the former president now heads another company, milio or something, which seems to have given atlus the right to develop the dogeball games anyway, as it made one on the gba.

[One Classy Bloke]

I'd agree with you there. If i look to my left, i can see my Gamecube games. I would say i love 7 out of the 20(!) i own. 3 are Dreamcast ports. 1 is a GBA port. So only 3 orginal this-gen games do i love for my GC. The rest get dull.

I personally blame the rise of 3D graphics. But, that will soon be coming to an end. Eventually, gameplay will become important again once an accepted standard of graphics is met.

[phaq]

dont tell me, ocb and i are the only ones that played games back when they were 2d.

[Xhell]

Personally, I never truly got into video games until a few years ago (before I moved back into Britain from Singapore) when my brothers and I were given a N64 for christmas. I, personally, loved the games we got for it (i.e. Mario Karts), although these games demonstrated the beginnings of a rapidly increasing endeavour to achieve beautiful 3D graphics. The next big game which I obsessed over on the N64 was Zelda, which became my favourite game of all time for a good while.
Back then, I never really considered playing 2Ds, since I assumed they'd all be old fashioned and boring. However, I then began returning to 2D classics (i.e. Sonic games, Chrono Trigger, etc...), and really began to establish an admiration for just how enjoyable the overall gameplay was.

I too agree with phaq's post. Games these days should be less oriented around attaining good graphics, and more concerned with offering awesome gameplay.

[mrwiseman]

IRT Phaq(1): a company that wanted to make fun games

They forgot fanservice . Just kidding.


[Gaming] when did it stop becoming about having a good time and more about watching 3d animated sequences?

Well, some do have a good time watching some animated sequences between stage and stage, because they simply enjoy art. It's not to be art as opposed to gameplay; you can have both and Japanese RPGs have proven it over the past years. Of course, if what you like is action, you still have all kinds of shooters, although the Western marketing people and decision makers (who are usually the lowest IQed people of any company) thinks only 3D games sell, so even if you make a Columns game, it has to be 3D and do something 3D otherwise it won't be released. Shame on the West this time. Japan gets far more 2D games.


back in the day, i'd used to be able to beat a game, come back, play the game i've already beaten, beat it again and come back for more

That's because one expects modern games to last no less than 30 hours (especially story oriented games like RPGs and adventure games), while 90s games you liked could be beaten in 4 hours.


i don't want to see the platforming style go away

I've been missing more platform games since 2D. They were the most common genre in 2D, but they are pretty hard to do and to play in 3D.


every game has save features now. it's no fun anymore when you have to save after every 5 feet because you simply don't want to go through those last 5 feet again

Console games rarely offer the possibility to save your game that frequently, and even PC games like Halo or FarCry are limiting it now. Not wanting to replay part of a game that's 30 hours long is understandable; doing so in a 3 hour long game is silly.


IRT Phaq(2): dont tell me, ocb and i are the only ones that played games back when they were 2d.

Hey man. I've been playing games since back when they were about a '▐' hitting a '?'. My first console was similar to an old Atari. Then I got a PC and played these ancient GW-Basic games from MS-DOS 3.2, Roguelike games in SCO Unix, "high resolution" Hercules Graphics and 4 color CGA games for DOS. I also programmed and toyed with an Amstrad CPC6128.


Now I want equally fun games about going through a jungle with all sorts of animals, full interactivity with the scenery, and 3D sound. But I also enjoy 2D games. I beat Sonic 3 & Knuckles for my x-th time where x exceeds 50 a few weeks ago.

<font color="#345E81" size="1">[ April 08, 2005 09:10 AM: Message edited by: -Wiseman- ]</font>

[phaq]

it has to be 3D and do something 3D otherwise it won't be released.

theres fighting games, and the last 3 metal slugs, maybe they weren't released on ps2, but they definitely were on xbox. ps2 is seemingly the one that has an issue with 2d games at all. if it wasn't for fan support, the street fighter collection would have never been released on ps2. however if stuff has to be 3d, it doesn't mean it can't be a side view 3d, like the contra game my bro got a while back.

That's because one expects modern games to last no less than 30 hours (especially story oriented games like RPGs and adventure games), while 90s games you liked could be beaten in 4 hours.

which therein lies the problem. you can't even get an action game without complains of how they're shorter than 20 hours. chrono trigger is critically acclaimed, but someone knowing what they're doing with it can beat it in less than 15. the reason an rpg today is 50+ hours is because 30 of em are spent watching fmvs and dragged out cut scenes.

Console games rarely offer the possibility to save your game that frequently, and even PC games like Halo or FarCry are limiting it now. Not wanting to replay part of a game that's 30 hours long is understandable; doing so in a 3 hour long game is silly.

bit of an exaggeration on my part, i'll admit, but still. it makes sense in rgps since you've a hell of a long way to go, but it goes over to action games and you have to save between every level. it was a lot more fun when you had to go through each level to get to the end because it challenged you to do so. not having a save at the last stage because you don't feel like going through the other stages.

IRT Phaq(2):

this was in response to what appears to be lessened activity on this board. it had been quite a while since ocb's post was made.