Steam 설치
로그인
|
언어
简体中文(중국어 간체)
繁體中文(중국어 번체)
日本語(일본어)
ไทย(태국어)
Български(불가리아어)
Čeština(체코어)
Dansk(덴마크어)
Deutsch(독일어)
English(영어)
Español - España(스페인어 - 스페인)
Español - Latinoamérica(스페인어 - 중남미)
Ελληνικά(그리스어)
Français(프랑스어)
Italiano(이탈리아어)
Bahasa Indonesia(인도네시아어)
Magyar(헝가리어)
Nederlands(네덜란드어)
Norsk(노르웨이어)
Polski(폴란드어)
Português(포르투갈어 - 포르투갈)
Português - Brasil(포르투갈어 - 브라질)
Română(루마니아어)
Русский(러시아어)
Suomi(핀란드어)
Svenska(스웨덴어)
Türkçe(튀르키예어)
Tiếng Việt(베트남어)
Українська(우크라이나어)
번역 관련 문제 보고
The answer here really depends on a persons age and what they see in a game. Mount n blade is a different experience to skyrim. Im getting the sense your the aesthetic type of gamer meaning your only seeing the surface of things. Fallout 4 is a prime example of bringing back what was lost from both the orignal 2 games and blended with 3 and placed into a new suit as so to speak.
Its not a case of old Vs new, its about how innovative they were at that moment, how had technology been different would they have manifested themselves at that particular time.
There is no cudos in todays developers due solely to todays technology, completing someone elses idea. This means what is innovative today is actually quite small when we remove limitations from the board. We tweak,tune and refine more than we create afresh these days as a result which is understandable in many cases. If we take RDR2 for example, whether good or bad in the eyes of others, it still owes its credit to the original largely which inturn owes itself to something else and so on. So we cant really separate old n new.
There is both good and bad no matter the age when we make the neccessary allowances like limitations.
Yes nostalgia is a thing but it bares no relevance when being critical of games and their development.
Nostalgia is certainly an influence, and there were far fewer comparisons to be dsrawn concerning videogames in earlier decades. Networked games were extremely different in the 90's, social interaction regarding videogames was incredibly limited. "Good graphics" have always been a difficulat comparison since the technology evolves so rapidly, but the argument as to how much visual aesthetic and graphics quality affects the gampelay experience is always a strong debate.
It's fair to say that technological restrictions used to mean that it was important to make a game fun to play since the graphics were always somewhat restricted. However, there were still extremely pretty-looking games (technological restrictions notwithstanding) and of these, some were horrible to play and some were a true delight.
The videogame market itself has changed dramatically. As such, many products are now specifically designed solely to facilitate the engagement for revenue, rather than a more traditional approach of hoping to entice unit sales which itself would drive the returns.
Both of these approaches can result in a lot of talent and quality evident in the product, but how much of this is geared to the entertainment of gameplay experience is less certain.
I honestly do not fnd many games since 2010 at all appealling. Tehre are a few, but these are not often those touted by the biased, bought-gaming media's recommedations, acting as a mouthpiece for the giants that flood to saturation the commercial environment with everything but a full, finished, polished working title.
You get two types of critics, those that look deeply and those that surf the surface. Its easy to distinguish the two by what they say.
Taking fauxtronics rendition we see,
1: Limitation
2: Limitation
3: Limitation
To assume a developer wouldnt imagine what they would like as would normally the gamer playing at the time is navive to say the least. Designers dont live in a era bubble, first they will try the extreme and then tailor back (ie andromeda). If anything a few to many developers rest on the applied practice and thought of others past much like if we go back, once hitting that boundary in say tombraider, we see little gain there after in further titles of the series till much later warranting a complete reinvention often via a new physics engine thats often tied to better innovated hardware.
The ideology always existed but time and the constraint of technology holds back the dream.
But but but but, some games are trash and we just remember them as being good. I played Batman Vengeance for the first time since I was 6 years old, and it was complete trash, maybe because I played it on PC, I'll have to get it for my PS2 and see how it runs on there. It all depends on the game though, old games aren't completely godly, or completely trash, you gotta find the good ones to play. The games you listed might be actual trash, but those are just a few games.
As did MOBA such as the original Defence of the Ancients (DOTA) mod for Warcraft 3.
As for the OP:
Mostly it is nostalgia. I've bought some older games I played as a kid and find I can barely play them these days. I loved them long ago, but something just isn't the same and that is most likely me.
One reason I stopped buying on GOG.com was due to buying gams then not touching them.
i only knew mobas originated in that game but didnt know the same was true for tower defemse
Great answer, makes sense.
I don't think it did.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tower_defense
Going by this, it was around since the 1980s.
WC3 may have popularized it though.
Out of interest what would you say is your cut off point on old games. Give us some games back then that correctly fit with your statement so we can get a sense along with the era you started gaming regardless of view now.
Don't really have a cut off point. Just found that I don't play most them as I thought I would.
I'll play adventure games with my son as he loves those, such as Space Quest 3. I got the Ultima collection, but haven't touched it. Some of the adventure ones I haven't touched either, such as Goblins trilogy. Games I always wanted to play, but never got a copy of back then, such as StarControl. A bunch of others as well.
I stared gaming in the early 80's with the Atari 1000 as a kid (around 5 years old I think) then a few computer games, when we got a computer (Tandy 1000). Not sure how old I was, but it was around the time that series first game out. Then a mix of consoles and other computers through out the years with mostly computers for the last... 10 years or so? I've owned consoles, but rarely play them these days. The PS4 is mainly a media player with my son playing games on it at time.
Its interesting you say games you always wanted to play, but never got a copy of back then as i admit when ive done this, all i have achieved is confirming my orignal hestitation/choice back in the day. The games i did love though back then and got i still play and enjoy.
Its maybe easier for me coming from the those times but the state of graphics back then which was more the case pre 2000s dont weigh on me at all. I completely get why younger gamers wouldnt like it as the games could be more best described as drawn in crayola when compared to modern games.
Never had a tandy 1000, im quite jealous of you even though i had the sinclairs,commdores,BBC,Acorn/lynx, etc. I know i could pick up one up probably on ebay but it just wouldnt be the same now time has past.
Thanks for the insight Spawn of Totoro, much appreciated not to mention ironically, positively Nostalgic.