The Lucasarts/Sierra games are old, but they still have some of the most beautiful 2D artwork and original storylines.
The Lucasarts/Sierra games are old, but they still have some of the most beautiful 2D artwork and original storylines.
Speaking of classic LA games, has anyone played the new Sam and Max yet? I'm really close to buying a Gametap subscription just so I can play that.
-Govtcheez
[email protected]
Well IMHO the games now lacked depth while the older games lacked graphics and sound qualities. So it depends whether you like good arts and sounds or good story and gameplay.Originally Posted by Govtcheez
Some games today are great but normally what we get is an awesome rendering engine with nothing behind it. Pretty renders are nice but they don't make anything worth playing.
> Well IMHO the games now lacked depth while the older games lacked graphics and sound qualities.
Oh? Both of the games he named are just standard RTSs. Neither one has much depth at all. Get resources, build up, expand. There's more to it with strategy and whatnot obviously, but that's the core of it.
Think about a lot of the old classic games, especialy on consoles. They're just shooters or platformers or something similar. Saying that lack of depth in games is a recent development is ignoring the entire history of gaming.
-Govtcheez
[email protected]
> Think about a lot of the old classic games, especialy on consoles. They're just shooters or platformers or something similar. Saying that lack of depth in games is a recent development is ignoring the entire history of gaming.
Really?
But so is saying they were just shooters or platformers. It seems you are lacking in that same knowledge.... or just trying to be funny.
Consider that today games build on the foundations of old games. Old games had no such foundations to build on. Most of what you saw then was new. They were no just shooters or platforms. They were THE shooters and platforms. Had you played games back then and you would know and remember the fun you had with them, instead of considering them stupid.
Shooting ducks on a TV screen with a pistol is definitely not our idea of a good time these days. The bar has got higher. But it was an heck lot of fun back then. Everyone wanted to play it. Everyone wanted also to play tanks. And in a few years to come you too will look down on people that will call stupid the games you used to play.
Originally Posted by brewbuck:
Reimplementing a large system in another language to get a 25% performance boost is nonsense. It would be cheaper to just get a computer which is 25% faster.
I remember those times. It really was fun.Shooting ducks on a TV screen with a pistol is definitely not our idea of a good time these days.
"The Internet treats censorship as damage and routes around it." - John Gilmore
I'm not talking about the action / strategy kind of game. I was just replying about what you've said about Sierra games. FYI I enjoyed the point and click adventure kind of game like those games. And obviously those games have far more depth than any games today. Even today's RPGs were lacking in the gameplay and storyline than the oldies RPGs.Originally Posted by Govtcheez
> Even today's RPGs were lacking in the gameplay and storyline than the oldies RPGs.
With a notable exception going to spiderweb games, which curiously enough mimic old-style RPGs.
Originally Posted by brewbuck:
Reimplementing a large system in another language to get a 25% performance boost is nonsense. It would be cheaper to just get a computer which is 25% faster.
I can think back to the early 90s when I was zooming around on a cool 8 MHz of Motorola 68000 power thanks to my Atari ST.
Flicking through the magazines of the day (which I still have some of), most games being touted were platformers, adventure games being the 2nd best selling genre (strategy sold well too but only Civ/SimCity was any good ). This was true of most formats of the time. Then id brought raycasting to the mainstream and... BOOM! We're condemmed to spending the rest of our lives swimming in FPSes.
Platformers were the FPSes of their time though. Perhaps some of you remember the way it was with film licences, always pumping out identikit games with different sprites. The fact that Teenage Mutant Hero Turtles was NOTHING LIKE the arcade version that everyone expected.
So, to get back to the point then, adventure games are great if you like adventure games. Most uncultured people these days are easily swayed by graphics. Modern marketing has picked up on this and drives the industry to come up with better graphics. They spend so much time on this that not much else is worked on.
End of.
OK, some of you guys seem to be totally lacking a sense of humor. I was joking when I said that all old games are stupid. I wouldn't have a gig and a half of old LA adventure games on my PC or several copies of multiple old games that I've worn out if I really believed that. I was making fun of maxorator, since he was implying that games pre-Win 95 were stupid.The fact that they had nothing or very little to build on doesn't make them "deep", which is what I was arguing. If you look at old games like Duck Hunt (or Zelda, or Metroid, or any other classic game from that era), there is very little depth there. Anyone trying to release a game like that nowadays would die poor.Consider that today games build on the foundations of old games. Old games had no such foundations to build on. Most of what you saw then was new. They were no just shooters or platforms. They were THE shooters and platforms. Had you played games back then and you would know and remember the fun you had with them, instead of considering them stupid.
I didn't say they weren't fun. I said they weren't deep.
PS I've been playing games since the early 80s, so don't think that I missed some golden age of gaming or something.OK there Captain Melodrama.And in a few years to come you too will look down on people that will call stupid the games you used to play.Oh? Name a few.Even today's RPGs were lacking in the gameplay and storyline than the oldies RPGs.God, yeah. For a while you couldn't swing a dead hooker without hitting a "adapted from this crappy ass action movie" game. I bet you could erase 75% of the games that came out for the SNES and Genesis and the world would be a better place.Perhaps some of you remember the way it was with film licences, always pumping out identikit games with different sprites.
-Govtcheez
[email protected]
>> I bet you could erase 75% of the games that came out for the SNES and Genesis and the world would be a better place.
None, and I repeat none of those games were were bad but why limit that to old games? I was getting worried earlier, Govtcheez, I got your sarcasm at the start, but started to doubt it for a while when you were 'making fun'.
I don't have the time (patience and skill really), to play new games, so I just replay old'uns ... or just play online'uns. They're normally rather straightforward. I do have some gameboy, genesis etc emulators on my laptop with a few brazillion games which I never play.
> None, and I repeat none of those games were were bad
I have but 2 games for you.
Timecop.
Home Alone 2.
-Govtcheez
[email protected]
>> OK, some of you guys seem to be totally lacking a sense of humor.
>> None, and I repeat none of those games were were bad
Come on. It even had a there to enhance the sarcasm. I'll not be unfairly judgmental though, I'll see if I have those games on my computer (or CD), and get back to you with a technical report and quantify their ... quality.
Oh no, I got it. I was just teasing.
Those games are both horrifically bad, though.
-Govtcheez
[email protected]