This question has been driving most people crazy. Looking at all the games, from the 2D Super Mario Bros. and the 3D Marathon all the way to the Portable games and MW2. Wanted to make a discussion...
Computer Science Canada Old school v.s. modern (Gaming) |
| Author: | Turing_Gamer [ Mon Feb 08, 2010 12:51 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Old school v.s. modern (Gaming) |
This question has been driving most people crazy. Looking at all the games, from the 2D Super Mario Bros. and the 3D Marathon all the way to the Portable games and MW2. Wanted to make a discussion... |
|
| Author: | USEC_OFFICER [ Mon Feb 08, 2010 12:57 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Old school v.s. modern (Gaming) |
Really? A Marathon refence? Don't you think the kids are too young for that? *Pulls up pants* *Drops dentures* Dang it! |
|
| Author: | jbking [ Mon Feb 08, 2010 2:34 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Old school v.s. modern (Gaming) |
I'm more of an old school gamer that kind of misses those days where fewer buttons and sticks were on controllers. Back in my youth, we had 1 button on a joystick and that was it. I'm thinking of the Atari 2600 days though there were some C64 games where one used a stick with a button. I'm more of a PC gamer than console person now, but I think there is something to be said for how a game is played and what are the challenges to playing the game. Is it merely a test of how fast one's reflexes work or is there something to be worked out in terms of strategy in playing the game? How long does the game play and what kind of saving features does it have? For example, I could compare "Age of Empires" to "Diablo II" for where there are major differences in that in the latter there can be days of time spent powering up my character and advancing through a specific narrative that isn't necessarily the case in the other game where I can take a random map and go from start to finish in about 70 minutes. |
|
| Author: | SNIPERDUDE [ Mon Feb 08, 2010 4:55 pm ] |
| Post subject: | RE:Old school v.s. modern (Gaming) |
I think a moderation of both is good. You can never kill the classics, but I also find these new games (COD:MW comes to mind) a bit too much. To many buttons, controls, etc that make it slower to learns (although there is a sweet spot in there that whence you have the knowledge it becomes addicting). As more of the world turns to gaming, the difficulty increases with the demand for something better. But for someone like me who hasn't really played a FPS since Quake picking up on new games like COD:MW becomes a serious obstacle. Developers need to start (and it can already be found when you look at open-source games) finding that balance: a short learning curve and high playability (addictive). I think one of the major problems is most companies want to get the game out as fast as possible, not taking the time to make the game as good as the potential there. That's my opinion anyway. |
|
| Author: | Turing_Gamer [ Tue Feb 09, 2010 8:24 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Old school v.s. modern (Gaming) |
That is true. The old school games, due to their lower grade graphics and simplicity in controls, are complete. Some modern games on the other hand, grab the attention of people due to their high graphics, but they tend to have sloppy camara angles and bad controls, and even the storyline can be off. But there are the rare (MW2) that make it through and prove themselves better than the classics. I said a mix of both for this poll. |
|
| Author: | apomb [ Tue Feb 09, 2010 10:10 am ] |
| Post subject: | RE:Old school v.s. modern (Gaming) |
Oldschool, if I have a choice. But even then, I havent considered myself a "gamer" for a long time. Can you even be considered a gamer if you only prefer to play oldschool NES/SNES/N64 games? |
|
| Author: | SNIPERDUDE [ Tue Feb 09, 2010 10:50 am ] |
| Post subject: | RE:Old school v.s. modern (Gaming) |
I always have the same question. I'm not even sure if I should consider calling myself a gamer. Normally, No. But since I started working on a FPS as a side project I'd say kind of (though my playing games hasn't changed any, I'm just observing these games more). Side note: N64 Kicks ass. |
|
| Author: | qmanjr5 [ Tue Feb 09, 2010 11:41 am ] |
| Post subject: | RE:Old school v.s. modern (Gaming) |
I'm more into the [modern] FPS games, but I've also played my share of the old arcade games. I love the ones like, Mario, Donkey Kong, etc, etc, but I will always like the modern games. Maybe it's 'cause I'm still a kid that I'm more into these games, and yet I [and everyone else should] like the arcade classics. |
|
| Author: | apomb [ Tue Feb 09, 2010 12:05 pm ] |
| Post subject: | RE:Old school v.s. modern (Gaming) |
Here is a good description of old-school players trying to compete in the modern age of gaming: http://www.wired.com/gamelife/2010/02/no-country-for-old-men/ |
|
| Author: | SNIPERDUDE [ Tue Feb 09, 2010 12:31 pm ] |
| Post subject: | RE:Old school v.s. modern (Gaming) |
Haha, sounds about right. Also Wired is probably one of my favourite online subscriptions. Good stuff. |
|
| Author: | USEC_OFFICER [ Tue Feb 09, 2010 12:44 pm ] |
| Post subject: | RE:Old school v.s. modern (Gaming) |
I just realized, Marathon isn't 3D (Though some people were working on that) It uses raycasting, raycasting. Say it with me, raycasting. |
|
| Author: | SNIPERDUDE [ Tue Feb 09, 2010 1:39 pm ] |
| Post subject: | RE:Old school v.s. modern (Gaming) |
Didn't wolfenstien3D use raycasting? Not exactly new technology, and is also a great simple way to creat a pseudo-3D experience. |
|
| Author: | ecookman [ Tue Feb 09, 2010 6:38 pm ] |
| Post subject: | RE:Old school v.s. modern (Gaming) |
I personally wish I could play CODMWF2 with 8-bit sprites. so both for me |
|
| Author: | USEC_OFFICER [ Tue Feb 09, 2010 8:50 pm ] |
| Post subject: | RE:Old school v.s. modern (Gaming) |
Yah, wolfenstien3D used raycasting, it was the only way at that time (till 1998 or so) to show a 3D space. |
|
| Author: | SNIPERDUDE [ Tue Feb 09, 2010 10:20 pm ] |
| Post subject: | RE:Old school v.s. modern (Gaming) |
Them was good times... |
|
| Author: | USEC_OFFICER [ Wed Feb 10, 2010 12:45 pm ] |
| Post subject: | RE:Old school v.s. modern (Gaming) |
Yes they where... |
|
| Author: | Turing_Gamer [ Wed Feb 10, 2010 12:56 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Old school v.s. modern (Gaming) |
Hurray    !!!
This poll is becoming a success. And it reached page 2! |
|
| Author: | USEC_OFFICER [ Wed Feb 10, 2010 12:59 pm ] |
| Post subject: | RE:Old school v.s. modern (Gaming) |
Good for you. |
|
| Author: | SNIPERDUDE [ Wed Feb 10, 2010 2:11 pm ] |
| Post subject: | RE:Old school v.s. modern (Gaming) |
Wait... COD:MW in 8-bit sprites? |
|
| Author: | Turing_Gamer [ Wed Feb 10, 2010 5:30 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Old school v.s. modern (Gaming) |
That is impossible. How will you distinguish enemy from building and plane from cloud? |
|
| Author: | andrew. [ Wed Feb 10, 2010 5:43 pm ] |
| Post subject: | RE:Old school v.s. modern (Gaming) |
Someone should make a Modern Warfare 2 Doom WAD. |
|
| Author: | SNIPERDUDE [ Wed Feb 10, 2010 8:08 pm ] |
| Post subject: | RE:Old school v.s. modern (Gaming) |
A Modern Warfare MUD. |
|
| Author: | USEC_OFFICER [ Wed Feb 10, 2010 8:21 pm ] |
| Post subject: | RE:Old school v.s. modern (Gaming) |
Err, turing_gamer, he means regular sprites. I forget why they're 8-bit, somethin to do with colour? Anybody want to help? |
|
| Author: | SNIPERDUDE [ Wed Feb 10, 2010 8:23 pm ] |
| Post subject: | RE:Old school v.s. modern (Gaming) |
http://www.computerhope.com/jargon/num/8bit.htm |
|
| Author: | USEC_OFFICER [ Wed Feb 10, 2010 8:43 pm ] |
| Post subject: | RE:Old school v.s. modern (Gaming) |
Thank you. PS Now I know, and knowing is half the battle. |
|
| Author: | [Gandalf] [ Wed Feb 10, 2010 11:12 pm ] |
| Post subject: | RE:Old school v.s. modern (Gaming) |
Modern games generally suck. Band Hero? Give me a break... |
|
| Author: | SNIPERDUDE [ Wed Feb 10, 2010 11:20 pm ] |
| Post subject: | RE:Old school v.s. modern (Gaming) |
I'm not particularly a fan of any game with "band" or "hero" in their name. Or "Dance Dance". |
|
| Author: | DemonWasp [ Wed Feb 10, 2010 11:36 pm ] |
| Post subject: | RE:Old school v.s. modern (Gaming) |
Modern games have an unfortunate tendency to focus on graphics rather than gameplay, story, stability, or balance. There are obvious exceptions to this rule (Half Life 2, Unreal Tournament 2004, etc). Retro gaming never made any pretense of having a story, and often didn't have the stability aspect there (I still can't get Starcraft to run on my machine...), and focused on gameplay. I think memories of "old school gaming" are painted in the light of fondly-held memories. I've tried playing older games pretty often and they rarely stack up against newer versions of the same idea. Those of you who have played CoD4, go play CoD1 and see how you like it - you'll probably miss regenerating health, sprinting and wall penetration within 15 minutes. |
|
| Author: | SNIPERDUDE [ Wed Feb 10, 2010 11:38 pm ] |
| Post subject: | RE:Old school v.s. modern (Gaming) |
You can't miss what you haven't experienced!  |
|
| Author: | USEC_OFFICER [ Thu Feb 11, 2010 12:43 pm ] |
| Post subject: | RE:Old school v.s. modern (Gaming) |
Well DemonWasp, what old-school games have you played? I think the problem you have with starcraft is that it uses older programming code etc. |
|
| Author: | Turing_Gamer [ Thu Feb 11, 2010 12:47 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Old school v.s. modern (Gaming) |
Lol! If Starcraft can't work for you, it is a wonder how school comps can run it perfectly, along with CS 1.6 |
|
| Author: | DemonWasp [ Thu Feb 11, 2010 4:49 pm ] |
| Post subject: | RE:Old school v.s. modern (Gaming) |
I've played games since the Atari 1040ST in my basement was "new" (it's actually about a year older than I am). This includes games as old as Pong, Space Invaders and Pac-Man, lesser-known games like Time Adventurer (excellent but hard) and the first SimCity game (yes, the one that came with activation codes on a dark piece of paper to prevent not scanning, but photocopying). I still have all of those. I've played console games, mostly on the Sega Saturn (abysmal failure that it was), including such timeless classics as Virtual Fighter 2, VirtuaCop, Daytona USA, and Bug. I still have all of those too. I've played PC games since the first Thief game - hell, even the Quake series. I played Age of Empires when it came out. I've played UT2k3 (yeah, the forgotten child), the entire Half-Life series, the Baldur's Gate series, the Thief series, the UT series, the Battlefield series, most of the Age of XYZ series, the Call of Duty series, and an assortment of modern games (Bioshock, Crysis, others). I've even played DotA (a ludicrous amount of DotA - I'm a terrible player and I have 350+ kills logged over the past 4 months). I am a game addict. The reason StarCraft doesn't work on my computer probably has something to do with an odd combination of virus scanner, OS version, firewalls involved, and a shady crack because I can't stomach paying money for a game that won't run above 640x480. Why they haven't released the source code yet I don't know, but if they ever do I swear up-and-down I'll buy my copy, fix it so it can run at 1920x1200 and post the results here. |
|
| Author: | apomb [ Thu Feb 11, 2010 5:12 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: RE:Old school v.s. modern (Gaming) |
DemonWasp @ Thu Feb 11, 2010 4:49 pm wrote: The reason StarCraft doesn't work on my computer probably has something to do with an odd combination of virus scanner, OS version, firewalls involved, and a shady crack because I can't stomach paying money for a game that won't run above 640x480. Why they haven't released the source code yet I don't know, but if they ever do I swear up-and-down I'll buy my copy, fix it so it can run at 1920x1200 and post the results here. I definitely support this post. I really should have selected "old school" instead of "not a gamer"  |
|
| Author: | SNIPERDUDE [ Thu Feb 11, 2010 5:15 pm ] |
| Post subject: | RE:Old school v.s. modern (Gaming) |
Sounds like a plan, I'm looking forward to it. Lets mass email Blizzard to release it. |
|
| Author: | USEC_OFFICER [ Fri Feb 12, 2010 4:20 pm ] |
| Post subject: | RE:Old school v.s. modern (Gaming) |
Two things, first: Belated Marathon Refence Karma!!! (To Turing_Gamer) Second: DemonWasp, what Age of XYZ games have you played? I believe I probably played most of them as well (All three of the Empires, the Mythology, even the Star Wars one). I'm curious to what you think of them. |
|
| Author: | DemonWasp [ Fri Feb 12, 2010 6:56 pm ] |
| Post subject: | RE:Old school v.s. modern (Gaming) |
Age of Empires - good, made way way better by it's expansion (increased population cap from 50 to 200, improved pathfinding by an order of magnitude. Age of Kings - great game, with a decent expansion. Age of Mythology - sucked. Whichever game it was that had a "home city"...wouldn't even render correctly on my old computer, so I gave up on it. Didn't look very good. |
|
| Author: | SNIPERDUDE [ Fri Feb 12, 2010 7:51 pm ] |
| Post subject: | RE:Old school v.s. modern (Gaming) |
Age of Empires: I found this game quite good, but there was certainly room for improvement. The expansion really helped I think. Age of Empires 2: One of the most addicting games I've played. I really enjoyed the scenario editor tool as well. Age of Empires 3: Great leaps in graphics, and certainly added much more flexibility. I really didn't like the editor as much in this one, grids made things easier (refering to number 2) I think. It was this game that had "home cities" Demonwasp. I never really liked that feature (though it did render properly on my machine), I found it more annoying than helpful. Age of Mythology: Never really got into this game. Don't know why. |
|
| Author: | USEC_OFFICER [ Sat Feb 13, 2010 5:49 pm ] |
| Post subject: | RE:Old school v.s. modern (Gaming) |
I rather enjoyed age of mythology and age of kings. (They all are pretty good). Age of Empires: Not as good as the rest, but hey, it's the first one. Still good, though you need to micromanage a lot. (No queues for building!) Age of Empires 2: Better than the first, with a nice rock, paper sissors attitude to it (Spearmen beat horsemen, knights kill infantry etc.) However I'm play more like an empire builder, not very good at combat (Altough I don't like Simcity) Age of Empires 3: Good, though not as good as number 2. All you need are musketmen, cannons and whatever natives you can get your hands on. Crossbowmen and pikemen don't really seem all that great. Age of Mythology: The powers were very gimmicky, rarely used them at all. They should have had a way to reuse them or something. Other than that I found it a solid game. May I ask why you think it sucks? Maybe you were just disapointed. Also have any of you played the Star War verison? I believe I have it here somewhere... |
|
| Author: | SNIPERDUDE [ Sat Feb 13, 2010 7:49 pm ] |
| Post subject: | RE:Old school v.s. modern (Gaming) |
I wasn't aware of a Star Wars version. Not really interested either. In the same genre: Has anyone played The Moon Project? One of my favourites. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Moon_Project |
|
| Author: | ProgrammingFun [ Sun Feb 14, 2010 8:44 am ] |
| Post subject: | RE:Old school v.s. modern (Gaming) |
All I ever did in Age of Empires was gather troops and on to battle  (No matter how hopeless it was). |
|
| Author: | Turing_Gamer [ Sun Feb 14, 2010 4:35 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Old school v.s. modern (Gaming) |
I have AOM and it was awesome, but now I am moving towards 'C&C: Generals' for the PC or 'The Conduit' for the Wii |
|
| Author: | USEC_OFFICER [ Sun Feb 14, 2010 4:36 pm ] |
| Post subject: | RE:Old school v.s. modern (Gaming) |
Better than me, all I mostly did was spend 60-75 minutes creating a huge army which would then go around killing everybody. I mostly just boomed (Not all that fast though.) The Moon project sounds very interesting. |
|
| Author: | Turing_Gamer [ Sun Feb 14, 2010 4:47 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Old school v.s. modern (Gaming) |
Just in case people want to try out the Star Wars version of AOE (ex. USEC_OFFICER)... Oh damn can't post my rar. Well that sucks. It contains the entire Star Wars: Galactic Battlegrounds game, rip-off of AOE. Is there a way I can post it? EDIT: Well first I want to know how many people want the game. EDIT 2: Oh crap I lost the game. |
|
| Author: | USEC_OFFICER [ Sun Feb 14, 2010 5:14 pm ] |
| Post subject: | RE:Old school v.s. modern (Gaming) |
First, it is not a rip-off, they actually made it and it is fairly good. Second, I do have it. |
|
| Author: | Turing_Gamer [ Sun Feb 14, 2010 5:23 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Old school v.s. modern (Gaming) |
The Command Bar and game design is the same though, and AOE came out before SW: GB |
|
| Author: | tech82 [ Sun Feb 14, 2010 8:20 pm ] |
| Post subject: | RE:Old school v.s. modern (Gaming) |
i think both old school games and modern games are great! |
|
| Author: | SNIPERDUDE [ Sun Feb 14, 2010 10:33 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Old school v.s. modern (Gaming) |
Turing_Gamer wrote: Oh crap I lost the game
Geez, did you have to? I was going for a few good months there... |
|
| Author: | Turing_Gamer [ Sun Feb 14, 2010 10:47 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Old school v.s. modern (Gaming) |
BTW, poll ends tomorrow so get your votes in... |
|
| Author: | USEC_OFFICER [ Mon Feb 15, 2010 4:20 pm ] |
| Post subject: | RE:Old school v.s. modern (Gaming) |
Turing_Gamer, The star wars game is really just AOE 2 with different units, techs etc. (Just had to point that out) |
|
| Author: | Turing_Gamer [ Tue Feb 16, 2010 8:19 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Old school v.s. modern (Gaming) |
I know that is what I said. It is a rip-off. It has a similar logic and interface, and AOE came out before SW:GB EDIT: *Yelling at the top of his voice* THE GAME!!!   |
|
| Author: | USEC_OFFICER [ Tue Feb 16, 2010 12:40 pm ] |
| Post subject: | RE:Old school v.s. modern (Gaming) |
It's not a rip-off. AOE 2 was a very good game. (I assume you mean AOE 2) Having a Star Wars Version of it makes it seem new and refreshing. |
|
| Author: | sundscole12 [ Tue Feb 16, 2010 12:47 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Old school v.s. modern (Gaming) |
I like the modern-day gaming, but I sometimes miss the old school too. in terms of graphics and technological aspects of gaming, I'm very much liking the modern ones.. =) |
|
| Author: | USEC_OFFICER [ Tue Feb 16, 2010 12:50 pm ] |
| Post subject: | RE:Old school v.s. modern (Gaming) |
Graphics are not everything though. I actually don't really care about graphics. If it doesn't look to bland or annoying, it's good. Same with sounds/music. |
|
| Author: | SNIPERDUDE [ Tue Feb 16, 2010 1:55 pm ] |
| Post subject: | RE:Old school v.s. modern (Gaming) |
Exactly. There's no need to "pimp out" pacman. Graphics are hardly what makes a game. |
|
| Author: | USEC_OFFICER [ Wed Feb 17, 2010 12:38 pm ] |
| Post subject: | RE:Old school v.s. modern (Gaming) |
Exactly. Gameplay is what makes a game. You could have the best looking game ever, yet if the gameplay sucks, the game suck. One of the Star Wars games fell into this trap. It was probably the first 3D stragy game (Can't spell) But the camera was awful and the gameplay was clunky. It was good to look at, not to play. |
|
| Author: | Turing_Gamer [ Thu Feb 18, 2010 8:32 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Old school v.s. modern (Gaming) |
There are many things that come to mind in gaming... I will list the ones I think are the most important... 1) Gameplay/Storyline -> What is a game with out this? 2) Controls -> How the hell are you supposed to play if you can't even move your character? 3) Camara Angles -> If you can't see your character then what is the point in playing? 4) Glitching/Secret-finding -> Every decent game has it's secret. Collect or search whatever to finding them is a nice addition to the game. 5) Multiplayer -> Wow, I mean, what kind of mid-to-modern game doesn't have this? And It has to be decent for god's sake! I could go on and on... |
|
| Author: | SNIPERDUDE [ Thu Feb 18, 2010 9:04 am ] |
| Post subject: | RE:Old school v.s. modern (Gaming) |
I agree to a great extent, but would like to modify it a bit: 1) Bug-Free -> This includes bug free, idiot-proof, and crash-proof. There is nothing more aggrivating than a glitchy game. 2) Playability -> This essentially means smoothness (lack of loading screens, waiting times, camera angles, etc) 3) Addictiveness -> If I don't have fun the first time I play, it is not likely that I'm going to play again anytime soon, or fork over the cash to do so. 4) Clean UI -> I don't want to explore the menus for five minutes trying to figure out how to play/start. Just like laying out a website, you need to plan your menus and interfaces completely. 5) KISS Ideology -> Keep It Simple Stupid. Most users want as short of a learning-curve as possible despite being feature packed. Those being the basics, some that are nice to include but not essential are: 1) Multiplayer -> Not important for all games, and sometimes not even needed for a well-executed game. Although it is nice playing with friends, this can entirely change depending on the genre too. 2) Storyline -> Not needed in many cases, but can certainly add much more depth to a game, drawing the player in to the world you create. I wouldn't call this one essential either, many games if well made (or the nature of the game) can get away without one. 3) Easter Eggs -> Nowhere near important, but it is nice to find little things now and then to amuse the player. This list can certainly be expanded, and more depth added for each genre, but this seems fitting as a good general outline. |
|
| Author: | USEC_OFFICER [ Thu Feb 18, 2010 12:44 pm ] |
| Post subject: | RE:Old school v.s. modern (Gaming) |
As a general outline, it's probably the best (No one likes glitchy game.) I find that having achievements can really increase the addictiveness of a game. I'm going to try my third attempt in portal to get all the security cameras soon. (Curse you sv_cheats = 1!!!!) |
|
| Author: | SNIPERDUDE [ Thu Feb 18, 2010 1:10 pm ] |
| Post subject: | RE:Old school v.s. modern (Gaming) |
Maybe I should write a game Do's and Dont's tutorial. It's a shame so many people making their first games often lack in one or more (usually more) areas that keep it from reaching its potential. |
|
| Author: | USEC_OFFICER [ Thu Feb 18, 2010 4:59 pm ] |
| Post subject: | RE:Old school v.s. modern (Gaming) |
That would be a great idea. |
|
| Author: | SNIPERDUDE [ Thu Feb 18, 2010 9:17 pm ] |
| Post subject: | RE:Old school v.s. modern (Gaming) |
Alright, I'll do it sometime Sunday then, busy all weekend. |
|
| Author: | USEC_OFFICER [ Thu Feb 18, 2010 10:30 pm ] |
| Post subject: | RE:Old school v.s. modern (Gaming) |
I'm looking forward to unabashingly coping it. |
|