Tendo City

Full Version: Best [and Worst] of the Past Decade
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2
The Best

Half-Life Orange Box - One of the greatest deals in videogame history. $50, if we're talking about the superior PC version, got you a top-tier FPS and two parts of its sequel, one of the great multiplayer FPSs ever made, and an innovator puzzle game.

Mass Effect series - Bioware took a big risk with they decided to make a scifi shooter wrapped in an RPG system. The first was a flawed experience hampered by trying to be a shooter and an RPG, but never really succeeding at either. The sequel upped the ante with a much better shooter system and streamlined RPG system that cut out a lot of the elements that just didn't work. It is one of the great works of scifi in the videogame realm.

Super Mario Galaxy - Mario in space? The idea sounds bizarre, but in execution, it was Mario's greatest adventure since at least Super Mario 64 and set a high water mark for what the Wii was capable of.

Left 4 Dead - A co-op zombie shooter to trump all co-op zombie shooters. It's a slick experience with loads of visceral thrills, narrow escapes, and brutal ends. It's also got a versus mode as well, which rocks. The game, and its sequel, prove that Valve truly is the king of shooters.

Metroid Prime series - A first-person Metroid? Blasphemy! We all remember that feeling, but somehow the MP series WORKED. While a bit uneven from one game to the next, the series proved that just because a game is in first person, doesn't mean that it's a frenetic shooter that pushes you through long corridors filled with monsters. At times haunting, at times heart-pounding, Metroid Prime catapulted Retro Studios to the forefront of Nintendo's stable of developers.

European RPGs - There's some standouts here and there that are better than the average, but the genre as a whole has absolutely exploded in the past few years. The Witcher, Drakensang, Gothic series, Risen, King's Bounty, Sacred 2, Two Worlds, Spellforce and more prove that the PC RPG is far from dead.

F-Zero GX - Blinding speed, pulsing music, and heart-pounding tracks make this Gamecube update of a franchise that started the SNES a standout futuristic racing title. On top of all that, it just looks really, really great, even if you only rarely get the chance to check out the scenery on account of how fast you're going. The only real problem is that Nintendo still has yet to bring in the team from Sega to do another sequel for the Wii.

Mirror's Edge - A mixture of puzzle-based gameplay and first person shooting, Mirror's Edge is one of the most innovative FPSs since the genre came into being. While often frustrating when you have to do one jump over and over to get it just right, when you DO get it just right and everything clicks it is an absolute thrill ride. And did I mention that it looks amazing?

Fallout 3 - Despite the belief by some that F3 was a trainwreck waiting to happen, Bethesda's first scifi RPG/Shooter exceeded expectations and provided a sprawling post-apocalyptic world filled with all sorts of nuclear horrors. While still bearing some of the hallmark jankiness of past Bethesda titles, it attained surpassed their previous games in writing, dialogue, and world building and took a few steps back towards giving the player a real choice based on the character.

Dead Rising - Zombie hoards in my mall? It's more likely than you think. Taking cues from George Romero's Dawn of the Dead, Dead Rising offered players the chance to rampage through the undead with a wide variety of items that vary in their zombie-maiming ability, all the while escorting equally brainless NPCs through dangerous hotspots to safety.

Vampire: The Masquerade: Bloodlines - Despite coming out about eight months too soon, a combat system that's one of the worst in RPG history, and a final third that crumbles, Bloodlines remains one of the crowning achievements in writing, dialogue, world-building, and characters that the past decade. Certainly an experience not to be missed, just make sure to enable god-mode during the last four or five hours.

Grand Theft Auto PS2 - The epitome of sandbox gaming. These titles provided a wide range of thrills from flying helicopters to street racing through massive cities and so much more, while still giving the player a story and characters to care about.

Resident Evil 4 - Took a horror series with tank controls and lots of confined spaces and upped the ante with a faster pace and lots of action.

Boom Blox - One of the few Wii titles to take full advantage of the Wiimote and use them in such a way that the experience is both new and fun. A combination that few titles have been able to match, BB remains one of the top puzzle titles of this generation and largely on its own merits.

Gears of War - A scifi storyline, a decaying world, and loads and loads of aliens to splatter all over the screen. In one swoop, Epic proved not only that they can make really fun, action-packed shooters with massive bosses and visceral gameplay, but that they also know how to make really, totally awesome game engines. And who doesn't love The Cole Train?

Test Drive Unlimited - An open world racing game with pick-up-and-play multiplayer right from your singleplayer gameworld. The actual racing may perhaps have left a little to be desired, but the detail of the world and it's massive scope meant you could take a leisurely drive along the coast or go bare-knuckles against a group of real-life racers ready to burn rubber from one side of O'ahu to the other.

Burnout 3 - Big time races, big time crashes. Both go hand in hand in Burnout 3, the culmination of work done with the previous two titles to create a heart-pounding racing experience packed with narrow escapes and the sorts of crashes you rarely see outside of NASCAR. Aside from some amazing races, you could also play the Crash Mode where it was up to you to cause the most havoc possible in what was more of puzzle than a race.

Crackdown - This one put you in control of the city's toughest cop and, as you went along, you only got tougher. From climbing to the tops of the tallest building in the city and then leaping down on unsuspecting baddies to collecting orbs and dispensing your own brand of justice, it was the sort of open world game that set the bar just a little bit higher.

Super Smash Bros. Melee - It's over the top, it's kind of goofy, but it's some of the best mutliplayer fun that the Gamecube had to off. Also, it served as some great fanservice with loads of favorites to play as or check out as trophies. The remixes of classic tunes is a nice addition as well.

Baldur's Gate II - One of the greatest RPGs of all time. BG2 is a sprawling RPG packed with more quests and NPCs than you can shake a stick at. Featured some great writing that's among the best in the genre, lots of great characters, and an adventure that keeps you involved for hours and hours.

Metal Gear Solid 2 - Love it or hate it, MGS2 was certainly not what everyone expected after Snake's first outing on the PS1. In some ways, it set the bar for espionage titles to come and in other ways it proved that videogame stories can throw some pretty mean curveballs before they finally barrel through to one of the most confounding finales in videogame history.

Europa Universalis 3 - Ever wanted to rule your own country? Well, with EU3 you can! This grand strategy title puts you in control of whichever country you want from the fifteenth century all the way through to the nineteenth. You control taxes and war bonds, you control the armies, and you control the provinces. There's no winning or losing, it's all about setting your own goals and then accomplishing them.

STALKER: Shadow of Chernobyl - In development for nearly five years, Stalker had a great deal of hype to live up to. Thankfully, it did a good job of achieving them and, in some cases surpassing them. The gunplay is stark and steeped in a greater sense of realism than most and the underground passages you sometimes traverse are filled with all sorts of unimaginable horrors waiting to leap out at you. It absolutely oozed atmosphere from every pore.

Morrowind - Third entry in the Elder Scrolls series. It provided a massive world filled with strange places, strange people, and strange monsters. While also filled with wonky glitches that have come to define the Bethesda experience, it nevertheless provided an RPG adventure that could literally last more than a hundred hours for those hardy souls willing to plum the loneliest depths the world had to offer.

Titan Quest - A bit like Diablo 2, Titan Quest providing some of the best looting since Blizzard decided to take a rest from the genre. Your character traverses many locales from ancient Mediterranean civilizations, all of which are filled with monsters waiting to be killed and looting waiting to collected.

Neverwinter Nights 2 + Expansions - When it comes to traditional RPG adventures, NWN2 is some of the best around. It has a large world to explore, loads of quests to undertake, numerous cities, and writing that's some of the best in the genre post-Black Isle.

Dead Space - Mix scifi with Resident Evil and you've got Dead Space. It's a creepy, atmospheric horror title that drops you into a derelict space craft packed with all sorts of grisly horrors. While it often sends you on fetch quests, the journey to your various destinations are fraught with peril and unnerving visions of insanity and monstrous transformations.

Beyond Good and Evil - A mixture of adventure and action-platforming, BG&E is a fun game that provides a lot of great situations and puzzles to navigate through. The story's not half bad either and it's got a nice mixture of the lighthearted and serious.

Psychonauts - Oozing with Tim Schafer's brand of humor, Psychonauts is another action-platformer. This time around, the levels are often very twisted, as you must travel into various people's minds, and always visually stunning. Unfortunately, it sold like repackaged gum and quickly went into the bargain bin.

ICO/Shadow of the Colossus - Sony didn't get much respect during the days of the PS1, but when the PS2 came around they decided to show people what they made of. With two titles, loosely connected by certain shared similarities, ICO and SotC relied on minimalist storytelling to convey emotions in a way that very few games have managed. On top of that, they also pushed the console to the limits and featured an extraordinary art design.

Persona 3 - An RPG as much about connecting with the people around you as it is about fighting monsters. As the main character, you must go to school during the day, take tests, meet with your friends, and hang out at the mall. Then, at night, you must travel into a winding tower filled with strange monsters. It sounds a bit goofy, and maybe it is, but it does a nice job of balancing the two sides and making the experience an engaging one.

The Bad

Honestly I can't really remember any truly bad games I played this decade, which is sort of weird. Maybe Gothic 3, that wasn't very good.

The Disappointments

Spore - Hyped as a game that will follow your own personal civilization from microbe to space-fairer, Spore just couldn't deliver. Aside from the space level, much of the game felted paired down, boring, and simplistic. Like several games stitched together that couldn't match the complexity of their stand-alone counterparts. The space level was great fun, but that hardly made up for everything else.

GTAIV - An Oscar-caliber story couldn't save this fun-less sandbox title from feeling bland and boring compared to its PS2 predecessors. Much of what made those earlier titles so much fun is utterly gone here, everything is played seriously and the game seemed more like it wanted to be a critically acclaimed mob movie than a videogame. It wasn't all a waste, but the massive hype surrounding it and the gushing reviews guaranteed that a lot of people were going to be sorely disappointed.

Fable - Hyped as the most innovative RPG ever made, Fable's creator promised that it would allow an unprecedented level of freedom and player choice that would send ripples outward for years and decades [in-game] to come. Unfortunately, what we got was a generic action-RPG that let you play as a polygamist and grant you the ability to insult NPCs in realtime. And the huge world? A series of tiny locations linked by tubes.
Assuming that the decade began on Jan. 1, 2000 (and withholding all the pointless arguments over when a decade begins and ends) here is mine:

Chrono Cross
Paper Mario
Eternal Darkness
Resident Evil 4
Metroid Prime
Civilization IV
Zelda: Majora's Mask and Twilight Princess
That's about all I can think of off the top of my head right now, and the order is more-or-less presented in best-to-worst.
Quote:GTAIV - An Oscar-caliber story couldn't save this fun-less sandbox title from feeling bland and boring compared to its PS2 predecessors. Much of what made those earlier titles so much fun is utterly gone here, everything is played seriously and the game seemed more like it wanted to be a critically acclaimed mob movie than a videogame. It wasn't all a waste, but the massive hype surrounding it and the gushing reviews guaranteed that a lot of people were going to be sorely disappointed.

I have to disagree, Anywhere it fell short the The lost and damned and Ballad of Gay tony made up for.

The games I most enjoyed this past decade was Rome Total war and Warcraft III
I haven't played the expansions, but GTAIV Vanilla fell flat on its face in my opinion. It had this big, detailed world with carefully crafted characters, but it wasn't FUN.
Seven games from 2005-2009 and only three from 2000-2004, GR, in your top 10 there? 70% of the games worht mentioning in the past decade are from the second half of the decade?

Um, no way, can't agree with you one bit there.
First of all, that's not a top ten list.

Second of all, I got tired of writing lengthy write-ups after those first eleven entries but still had some games I wanted to list, that's why they're in the honorable mentions category.

Thirdly, this is MY list, I'll put whatever I want on it.

Fourth, if you want a list with more old games on it, then make your own list!
But see, some of the things you're talking about weren't even problems yet at the beginning of the decade, like the European RPGs thing... yeah, but PC RPGs only started really fading out in 2002-2003 or so...

I know it's not a top 10 list, but things like that did stand out to me.
Quote:But see, some of the things you're talking about weren't even problems yet at the beginning of the decade, like the European RPGs thing... yeah, but PC RPGs only started really fading out in 2002-2003 or so...

And you know how many of those amazingly awesome PC RPGs from 2000-2003 I played? Not very many! So it's kind of hard for me to talk about them.
True, but, so you've never played Baldur's Gate II? Poor you...
A Black Falcon Wrote:True, but, so you've never played Baldur's Gate II? Poor you...

Yeah I have, it's in my list.
Ah, new improved list, with comments for everything... nice. :)

... I could try to do something like that, but given how I always have such massive problems narrowing down any kind of list, I'd end up listing like half or more of the games I've played from the past ten years or something... which needless to say would be pretty useless... Lol
Best: Silent Hill 2

If there is any justice, people will look back in thirty years and see this game as the point where videogames truly became a serious art form to rival film and literature.

Most Disappointing: Xenosaga

At the very worst, I expected the spiritual successor to my favorite game ever to not quite reach the same lofty heights, and to be flawed in a few ways. Instead, the game was boring, the story nowhere near as compelling, and seven years after its release, I still haven't finished it or played its sequels.
...of the decade? Jesus...

The Best:

Hardware (console): Gamecube. Why? The hardware created for it was leaps and bounds above the XBox and PS2. When games like Smash Bros. hit or RE4, people were in awe, not even the mighty XBox could compete graphically, all in a cube roughly half the size. But that's not the real reason why it wins the decade imo, they made the hardware so nice, they used it twice and with the Wii while it's definitely underpowered compared to 360 and PS3 and can still manage realistic graphics and detail that can compete with the rest of the market. A beautiful upgrade to the N64 with the most comfortable controller to date. It was never taken advantage of except for a few games, in terms of that, the PS2 wins. Never again in the industry have we seen shitty hardware used to such magnificent feats as the PS2, maybe the Gameboy color can compete there.

Handheld: DS. Was there ever a question.

Other:

Microsoft's online features
Nintendo's disruption to cause cheaper/free online and motion controls
Vast improvements for western developers
The death of the cart and birth of the DVD rom

The Worst:

Shitty hardware from all three companies that break and/or overheat
Expensive 'Gold' accounts for 360
Expensive hardware standards
Game budgets in the tens of millions that have little to show for it
The mini-game flood
The music game flood
Decline of the 'masterpiece' game
Friend codes

Best games:
Resident Evil 4 (REmake for GC should officially win, but RE4 is so perfect, it makes RE's control scheme look like an outdated mess and it takes the level of immersion over the top)
Silent Hill 2 (This is Silent Hill, the epitome. Yes, others have better graphics, Shattered Memories has more gameplay and interaction, but 2 is hands down the best story, presentation and scare the shit out of you moments)
Super Smash Bros. Melee (haven't played Brawl)
Mother 3
Mario Galaxy (this is a toss up between Sunshine and Galaxy)
Beyond Good and Evil
Animal Crossing: Wild World (DS)
Perfect Dark
Elder scrolls 3: Morrowind
Civilization 3
Burnout 3
F-Zero X (fuck you GX! F-Zero X came out on VC and its better than GX!)
Star Wars: Rogue Squadron 2 (our first glimpse in to next gen gaming)
Cave Story
Ico
Shadow of the Colossus
FF IX
Zelda: MM
Zelda: WW (arguably better than Twilight Princess)
Pikmin 2 (it improves everything over 1)
Metroid Prime 1 (this is hard, but the second Prime introduced so many new things while still keeping in tune with the Metroid legacy, Prime 3 not so much. But if Prime 1 is the original Metroid, Prime 2 is Return of Samus. Prime 3 really felt like something all its own. So Prime 1 might be more correct here, but Prime 2's difficulty, originality and experimentation with the FPS genre brought everything from 1 and improved it. It should be noted, the bosses in Prime 3 were vastly superior to 2, the creatures and enemies in 3 were vastly superior to 2 but I swear to God that Prime 3 could have been called Turok: Future Wars and I wouldn't blink an eye. Questionable in my decision includes Quadraxis and other amazing bosses from 2 but for a fun factor 3 takes it, even if it doesnt feel like Metroid. Prime 1 gets the trophy of easiest bosses but also the most cinematic and epic of all 3 games, who can forget the opening Parasite Queen which was probably an experiment and creating a 3-D mother brain battle or the holy shit moments of the Sheegoth (an icy version of a Kraid-like creature) staring you down before it charges and of course Flaggrah's roar as it watched you strafe over to the mirrors, just amazing)
Okami (Wii, the port is better than the original)
Multiple RTS... when did FFT come out? Fire Emblem series, Advance Wars series, all of them are worth your money.
Hmm other's im sure I missed. I should put Prince of Persia: Sands of Time in there somewhere and I thought about Mirror's Edge but really, the game is lacking, but the premise is undeniably awesome. Timesplitters 2 or 3 deserves a space.

Worst games
Almost everything else. Its all rehashes or re-paints or 'free-roam' game engines based off the Mario 64 architecture. I cant stand most free-roam games which just combine a krappy 3rd person shooter with a crappy driving engine, GTA3 and Tony are great but overall what are you left with? A chase simulator. You chase someone or someone chases you. Its fun, but its not groundbreaking. Want ground breaking? Uncharted and Among Thieves. Take GTA's free roam and multiple gaming engines, mix with Tomb Raider's puzzle and adventure and RE4's control scheme, action and camera and you have something to get excited about. The problem? The game(s) lack a soul. You'll have people rant and rave about God of War 1 through 3 but they dont seem to understand its Double Dragon 3-D. Take prince of persia's already button mashing combat and cliff n'jump puzzles with QTE's borrowed right out of Shenmue and RE with the same gameplay found in fucking Gauntlet (with PoP's bullet time no less). I swear the only reason it gets people excited is because of the imagery or the extreme methods of killing, its not a bad series, but its not a great one either. You dont give a game GOTY because it has 'big statues' and beheading. 300 didn't get movie of the year for this very reason, unless you're MTV. This is what still pisses me off about the industry - you dont have to make a good game, just present it well enough and you get acclaim. I cant stand it, anything that doesnt fall in to "DUDE DID YOU SEE ALL THE BLOOD' or "ZOMG R/M RATED HNGGGGG BOOBIES" gets put in to sub-categories of cool while game's that invent genres, perfect game engines, etc get passed up because it didn't jive with people wanting extreme images thrown at them every two seconds (which has to relate to blood or tits). It's frustrating. God of War hit 2005 the same year as Shadow of the Colossus, guess which game got more attention? blah.
Others to note:

A lot of krap from Shiny entertainment is fucking unbelievable and worth a purchase, they think outside of the box a lot. Unfortunately all of their games get manhandled in to a fog of war so no one knows they exist, but good god.

I also forgot to mention Excitetrucks/bots. Go ahead and laugh, but the interactive terrain and insanity especially in the sequel is so badassnessity you'd be hard pressed to find an experience like it anywhere in the market.

Also, Battalion Wars which falls in to real-time RTS and action/adventure. What an amazing game series so far, whoever put that together deserves a damn medal. Its the only reason i'm interested in that lord of the rings whatever thing they're making which even uses some of the battalion wars art style. It's a new genre taking the real time elements of pikmin with the elements found in turn based RTS like advance wars. If you've never tried it give it a go.
Quote:Vast improvements for western developers

This is false. The better Western developers just moved from PC to consoles.
Great Rumbler Wrote:GTAIV - An Oscar-caliber story couldn't save this fun-less sandbox title from feeling bland and boring compared to its PS2 predecessors. Much of what made those earlier titles so much fun is utterly gone here, everything is played seriously and the game seemed more like it wanted to be a critically acclaimed mob movie than a videogame. It wasn't all a waste, but the massive hype surrounding it and the gushing reviews guaranteed that a lot of people were going to be sorely disappointed.

I gotta agree. Though I did enjoy the game and the character development was typical top-notch Rockstar, it really felt like there was a lot missing. I mean, coming from San Andreas, the return to Liberty City is closer to GTA3 than in locale alone, tons of great features were removed. The characters were good but I didn't quite "connect" with them the same way I did SA's. And the ending? A total disappointment.
A Black Falcon Wrote:This is false. The better Western developers just moved from PC to consoles.

A Black Falcon: Opinion Police Guns
A Black Falcon Wrote:This is false. The better Western developers just moved from PC to consoles.


Yeah Kuju, Climax, Retro Studios, Big Huge Games, Bungie Studios, Codemasters, Criterion Games, Crystal Dynamics, Eidos, Epic Games, Free Radical Design, Humongous, Insomniac. Irrational Games (2k Boston), Factor 5, Majesco, Naughty Dog, Neversoft (lol), Next Level Games, Oxygen Games/Studios, Papaya Studio, Popcap, Psygnosis (now SCE Europe), Quantic Dream (Heavy Rain), Radical Entertainment, Realtime Associates, Rockstar, Snowblind, SCEA, Stormfront, Sucker Punch, Take2, Telltale, THQ, Traveller's Tales, Working Designs, XSeed, and Zipper (i'm sure i'm missing a bunch) would all love to have you suck their dick.

From 1999 Western developers went from "Oh yeah the guys who make Doom and Rareware in Europe" to an explosion, some companies you can look at their time line and see they made three or four PC titles with a small team before getting on consoles and making dozens of successful games and increasing their development studios that all had nothing to do with 2004's World of Social Anxiety Craft or Tom Clancey's Combat Simulator with a Story series.

You wanna argue with me? Let's go, i'm fuckin ready.
Great Rumbler Wrote:A Black Falcon: Opinion Police Guns

It's not opinion though. It's fact. The best Western developers all used to make computer games. After about 2000, apart from Eastern Europe they almost all moved over to consoles. So suddenly console gamers think "oh wow, Western games have gotten so much better!" when no, they just got better developers, at the cost of the platform that those developers used to be supporting. :(

That is, whether you like PC-style or console-style games better is opinion (I like both kinds a lot myself), but the idea that western games are better once they went console than they were before is false, hands-down.

Quote:From 1999 Western developers went from "Oh yeah the guys who make Doom and Rareware in Europe" to an explosion, some companies you can look at their time line and see they made three or four PC titles with a small team before getting on consoles and making dozens of successful games and increasing their development studios that all had nothing to do with 2004's World of Social Anxiety Craft or Tom Clancey's Combat Simulator with a Story series.

100% console-only-gamer perspective. Not much to say if you didn't play or didn't like PC games... but what you're saying there is just crazy. It's obvious you never paid any attention to the PC gaming industry... what you say in that paragraph has no connection to reality, apart perhaps for sales; it is true that in general console games sell better.

Again the real break came in about 2001-2002. Early hints of the collapse of the PC gaming industry were seen several years before then, when it was still at its height, but the crash didn't really come until several years later, after the PS2 and Xbox came out and tempted all the PC developers to go console in order to make more money...

Oh yeah, and the Japanese have always been an afterthought in PC gaming. Very few decent PC games have ever come from Japan (apart from Japan-only releases from KOEI and Falcom, doujin shmups and fighting games, and dating sims, they've got about nothing). And in the '90s PC games were amazing.
Quote:Yeah Kuju,

First games published in 2001. Has published games on both PC and consoles.

Just because you know more about Battalion Wars than Microsoft Train Simulator doesn't mean that the latter game isn't any good...

Quote:Climax,

Which Climax? There are like three or four game developers with that name...

This one? http://www.gamefaqs.com/features/company/69913.html
Lots of bad games there... (Climax Entertainment is Japanese, so that one doesn't count.)

Quote:Retro Studios,

Founded in the early 2000s as a first-party Nintendo developer. Key top staff came from Acclaim, one of the few major Western console-focused developers. (some of Acclaim's N64 Turok game people, particularly, were behind Metroid Prime)

Quote:Big Huge Games,

PC game developer founded by ex-Firaxis (which was founded by ex-Microprose) staff, now going console because they're sellouts like everyone else except for Blizzard pretty much. On PC they made two of the best RTS games of the '00 decade; their upcoming games are an RPG and something else, both for PS360PC. We'll see if they're good.

Quote:Bungie Studios,

Mac/PC only in the '90s. Originally they were a Mac-only developer, which is why selling themselves to Microsoft made their older fans so unhappy... Of course they have reached greater success with Halo, but I think their older games, such as Myth I and II and Oni, are better than Halo overall. Not sure about Marathon, never really played those.

Quote:Codemasters,

Old European developer which has existed since the '80s and supported both PCs and consoles ever since. Perhaps best known (for me at least) for their Micro Machines series, but they make a bunch of other stuff too.

Quote:Criterion Games,

Decent to good developer, yeah. Started out as a PC game developer in the mid '90s. Went console also in '99 and console-only in 2001 -- exactly on par with the times I'm saying when that happened to many developers, so they can go on the list of examples of this.

If the PC/console situation of the '90s had continued beyond about 2001, I'm sure that Criterion would never have stopped making PC games. It's very sad that that did not happen.

Quote:Crystal Dynamics,

Yes, it's console-focused, and has been around since 1993. They've published PC versions of many of their games over the years, but yeah clearly console focus. Made some good stuff too.



Quote:Eidos,

Major publisher who, like most major Western publishers, used to be a lot more focused on PC games than they are now. Still, they do still publish PC games for sure.

Quote:Epic Games,

Started out as a PC shareware game developer of course. Along with Apogee, they were one of the two most popular and most successful PC shareware developers and publishers. They reached even greater success with Unreal and Unreal Tournament. Now they have gone console-focused, thanks to the fading of the PC -- Epic Games (ex-Epic MegaGames) is one of the major examples on my list of "companies which help me to prove the point that PC gaming used to be better", that's for sure.

I know Gears of War was successful, but Unreal was too.

Quote:Free Radical Design,

Studio formed in 2000 from ex-Rare people. Rare of course had been a big computer publisher in the '80s, only to go over to consoles in the early '90s, earlier than most major Western developers. They were for a long time among the better Western console developers.

I've never played any of their games (that is, the TimeSplitters series and the unpopular Haze).

Quote:Humongous,

Kids game developer, mostly focused on the PC during their life as you'd expect from a '90s adventure game developer. In 1994-1995 they made 3DO versions of a few of their games, but that was it for console games from them. Branched out into hardcore games in the later '90s with their Cavedog studio that made Total Annihilation in 1997. TA was very successful but Cavedog couldn't follow it up with enough (their second RTS, TA: Kingdoms, wasn't that good) and went under in 1999. Humongous followed in 2001.

Today's "Humongous Inc." is a successor company founded by just a couple of people from the original company, and owned by Atari/Infogrammes. This company focuses on multiplatform, PC-and-console sports games based on the old Humongous' Backyard Sports series. That it went from a PC kids' adventure and sports developer to a PC and console sports developer is, as with many companies, yet another example of how the PC gaming market has collapsed, even for childrens' games...

Quote:Insomniac.

Sony-exclusive third party developer. First game from 1997. Like with many '90s console developers, they were first successful with a cute animal platformer game...

Quote: Irrational Games (2k Boston),

Essentially a successor to the great '90s mostly-PC developer Looking Glass Studios, who was one of the best developers of the decade and made some of the most innovative first-person games ever -- Thief, Terra Nova, System Shock, etc.

Irrational spun off from them in the late '90s and then developed System Shock 2, though they did it inside the Looking Glass building I believe even though they were technically a separate company. They survived after Looking Glass's collapse. Of their games, most are PC titles -- System Shock 2, Freedom Force, Freedom Force Vs. The Third Reich, Tribes: Vengeance, SWAT 4. Only after that did they go console... and it followed the predictable pattern of '00s to the present console games -- Bioshock was successful, but brain-dead compared to just about any of their past games. Gameplay-wise Bioshock is a simplistic spinoff of System Shock 2, essentially, with most of the depth removed because console audiences don't really like that. Honestly it's a good thing that they couldn't get the System Shock name away from EA, Bioshock may be good, but doesn't deserve it.

Quote: Factor 5,

Started out as an Amiga developer. Only went console-only with Rogue Squadron II in 2001. Sounds about on par with what I'm saying, datewise. (Yes, there were PC versions of Rogue Squadron 1 and Battle for Naboo. I have Rogue Squadron 3D for the PC, great game.)

Quote:Majesco,

Another mostly-made-poor-licensed-console-games developer... they did re-release the Sega Genesis and Game Gear, which was interesting, and eventually started publishing some somewhat better games, but still, I wouldn't exactly call them great, that's for sure.

Quote:Naughty Dog,

Since Crash Bandicoot in 1996 they have been Sony-exclusive. Obviously they have a close relationship with Sony... it might be worth noting, though, that before Crash, the founders of Naughty Dog had made four Apple II games, one 3DO one, and one for PC and Genesis. But since 1996 they have been Sony-only, and in 2001 they were bought by Sony, so that pretty much ends that - Sony first parties do not make PC games. Or at least, after 2000 they didn't.

The Crash games probably were some of the more successful Western console games in the late '90s though, so I will give them that. Of course there were some successful Western console game developers in the '90s, I never said there weren't. I just said that more and better Western developers were on the PC. Look at the number of games published on PC vs. consoles by Western companies back then and I think the point is made...

Quote:Neversoft (lol),

Something of an exception - console-focused Western developer that has released games since 1996. Many of their games have had PC versions, but consoles have been their focus... but of course as you suggest, aside from the early Tony Hawk games they haven't made that much of note (mostly just sequels). :)

Quote:Next Level Games,

Only since 2003... console-only, and mostly make sports games evidently... haven't released anything I care about (sorry, I can't stand boxing so I don't care one bit about Punch-Out). Given that I was talking about the '90s vs. the '00s though, companies like this one do nothing other than help show how yes, in the last decade most Western devs did indeed go over to consoles.

Quote:Oxygen Games/Studios, Papaya Studio,

Don't know these two, so I looked them up (as I did with many of the others, but at least I'd heard of the names...).

Oxygen Games - only dates back to 2003. Seem to have gone more console-focused in 2008, but still have a few on PC. Haven't made anything really of note - it's mostly licensed junk.
http://www.gamefaqs.com/features/company/72256.html

Papaya - Dates to 2002. Another licensed-junk developer with nothing of note to their name.

Quote:Popcap,

They have a few console releases, but are mostly PC-focused. They have been extremely successful at making popular PC casual games.

Quote:Psygnosis (now SCE Europe),

Another European developer from the '80s who at first made PC games only. They have a huge back-library of great Amiga, etc. games. They only went console-only after selling themselves to Sony and being forced to drop PC development in the late '90s'; their last two PC games were released in 2000. If Sony hadn't forced them to be Playstation only they'd probably still be making PC games/versions too.

Quote:Quantic Dream (Heavy Rain),

Late '90s startup. Their first two games, Omikron and Indigo Prophecy, were PC-first games that only later got console ports. Heavy Rain is their first console-only game.

Quote: Radical Entertainment,

An okay, console-mostly studio. Never said that there weren't some of them, of course they were. I wouldn't call them "some of the best" though... they made some pretty bad games back in the '90s, and that was for consoles.
http://www.gamefaqs.com/features/company/8747.html

Quote: Realtime Associates,

See above... http://www.gamefaqs.com/features/company/1365.html

Quote:Rockstar,

Huh? All of their major titles have PC versions, pretty much...

Also, Rockstar is a wholly owned subsidiary of Take-Two. They're not independent, really.

Quote:Snowblind,

Good developer, console only. Only date back to 1999 though.

Quote:SCEA,

First-party console publisher makes only console games? The world is shocked!

Quote:Stormfront,

Not a great developer, and they've been making both PC and console games since their founding anyway.

Quote:Sucker Punch,

Another good Western console-only developer that only dates back to the late '90s.

Quote: Take2,

And here's another publisher which has been publishing both PC and console games since their founding in the early '90s. They still publish for both PCs and consoles.

Quote:Telltale,

All their games are on both PCs and consoles now, because of the "consoles took over' think I mentioned above'; those of their staff who were in the industry in the '90s mostly come from developers who, back then, made only PC games. They started out in 2005 PC-only, but got into console games in '07 because of the current atmosphere.

Quote:THQ,

Started out console-only in 1991, but they moved into PC games as well in 1997, and have stayed in the PC gaming business ever since. Though they always have had a focus on bad licensed games, they also have published some great PC games in the past 15 years. This is still true -- for instance in recent years they published Company of Heroes, Supreme Commander, Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War I and II, Red Faction: Guerilla, and more.

Quote: Traveller's Tales,

Yes, an example of a decent console-focused Western (British) developer. Who mostly makes licensed games. They have had a few PC releases here and there though, most notably in recent years where all of their Lego games have had PC versions. Also, again, almost exclusively a developer of licensed games.

Quote:Working Designs,

Not a publisher, just a developer. They did consider bringing over a PC game once, the PC version of Lunar I believe, but it was so buggy that they gave up on the idea.

If your business is bringing Japanese games out in the US, you do not want to be publishing on PC because, as I said above, there really are not great Japanese PC games.

Quote:XSeed.

See above, except this company didn't even exist in the '90s.

Quote:Zipper

Started out in the late '90s as a PC developer, and their only two games which were actually good in my opinion were their PC games. SOCOM is mind-numbingly boring and I don't care at all about any of those games! Recoil and MechWarrior 3, though, were fantastic games... Recoil is one of my favorite 3d vechicular action games, really. Great fun game with a fast-moving tank, good level designs, great multiplayer, great controls (move the tank with keyboard, look/aim/fire with mouse), lots of weapons... good stuff. MechWarrior 3 was the final true mech sim with the MechWarrior name on it; MechWarrior 4 was good, but simplified somewhat from Zipper's third game... it's really, really sad that they went from that to SOCOM and have never emerged. :(

Zipper is a good example of what happened as many developers moved from PC to console development in the early '00s.

Quote: (i'm sure i'm missing a bunch) would all love to have you suck their dick.

The list of '80s/'90s PC developers which went out of business or almost did so between the mid '90s and present day would be an even longer list, you know...

And that's what you're missing, that for every one of the companies you mentioned which actually did make more console than PC games in the '90s, there were many other companies back then that ONLY MADE PC GAMES but now don't exist because of what's happened to PCs gaming, mostly (that is, that MMOs, FPSes, and RTSes have almost entirely destroyed all other genres except for casual puzzle games and Facebook games).
I'm of the opinion that you'd be a much happier person if you accepted the fact that the gaming world you knew from 10+ years ago doesn't exist anymore, but that that doesn't necessarily mean that the gaming world of today doesn't have a lot to offer. In fact, it DOES have a lot to offer.
Quote:In fact, it DOES have a lot to offer.

That's true, sure. It could have been so much better, though... but yeah, it's not like things are terrible now or something.
Eastern Europe has filled a lot of the void left by American developers going multiplatform and/or making games more "accessible". You played King's Bounty, ABF?
Tried the demo, but passed on it during Steam's $5 sale because it basically just feels like Heroes of Might & Magic but without the deeper strategy elements (apart from combat), and so all it really does it makes me want to play HOMM.

I agree Eastern Europe is trying to fill the PC void, but they just can't usually match the US and Western Europe in budgets and production values...
King's Bounty is an awesome game and Armored Princess is even better. It makes no sense to me that you'd pass up KB for $5 and yet toss out that same amount of obscure SNES games you don't know anything about and might play for ten minutes tops.
That stupid Armored Princess demo was nearly impossible... didn't help me want to buy it.
It's not THAT hard, you just have to be careful about which enemies you try to fight.
Oh come on, as if it's okay to make a demo that hard? Demos are supposed to be playable by people who don't know how to play your game... and yet that demo was insanely hard. I didn't finish it, it was too difficult...I mean, if I'd replayed it several times I'm sure I could have, and I was starting to understand how the game played beyond the basic HOMM-style stuff (I know, King's Bounty predated HOMM, but still, same deal), but instead I stopped playing.

On another note, it's kind of amusing how sometimes demos don't have full tutorials like full games are, and while it can be frustrating you learn how it works eventually... who do they think that people are smart enough to figure out how to play the demo, but not the actual thing? :)

Demo levels also sometimes come from the middle of the game and so they are not exactly the easiest levels from the games, if they aren't all-new demo-only areas, which doesn't help either...

I don't know, it just strikes me as a little strange to challenge people and expect them to figure it out with something trying to convince them to buy it, but then be easier and hold their hands in the actual game. A little odd, that's all. :)
some companies you can look at their time line and see they made three or four PC titles with a small team before getting on consoles and making dozens of successful games and increasing their development studios that all had nothing to do with 2004's World of Social Anxiety Craft or Tom Clancey's Combat Simulator with a Story series.

i'll add Chess games, Mine Sweeper (the only successful PC game) and shitty PC adventure games that no one liked or played to that description as well.

Saying "Oh they developed a few PC titles, that means they were better back in the day!" or other ridiculous nonsensical krap is a completely moot point - they moved to console because they couldn't be successful on PC. NO ONE is successful on PC unless you're Blizzard or Bethesda. Take any of the companies I listed and look at the ones that did have PC releases, compare that to their console releases. HMM?
The PC had a lot of good RPGs and strategy games during the 90's. A lot of the more traditional RPGs are now coming from Eastern Europe and out of the indie community.

Shooters were still kind of in their infancy though, with games like games like Half-Life, Medal of Honor, Rainbow Six, System Shock 2, and Unreal Tournament not coming out until the last couple of years of the decade. The 00's had FPSs in full swing with the likes of Call of Duty, Red Faction, Deus Ex, Battlefield 1942, Halo, Metroid Prime, and Bioshock.
Quote:some companies you can look at their time line and see they made three or four PC titles with a small team before getting on consoles and making dozens of successful games and increasing their development studios that all had nothing to do with 2004's World of Social Anxiety Craft or Tom Clancey's Combat Simulator with a Story series.

Half of this makes absolutely no sense and is misinformed, and the other half is just wrong. Either explain yourself better or actually respond to some of my points.

If I can guess though, essentially you're saying that anyone who made games that console gamers didn't like was stupid or something? I don't know, I can't understand your point at all... if that's what you're saying it's almost too stupid to even deserve a reply, but I'm not really sure what you even mean.



Electronic gaming was invented in the US. From 1946 to the early 1980s, all of the major advances in electronic gaming happened here. Everyone else was playing catchup. The first PC game was American, from 1962. The first arcade game American, from 1972. The first videogame console American, from 1972. And then the first significantly successful console American, from 1977. But in the late '70s and early '80s, though there were many American companies making videogames, none of them thought of videogames alone as the answer. They all thought that the actual goal was a hybrid computer-console system, or perhaps just a computer alone, and that the consoles were just a transition or a hook to get people into their "real" business, the computers. Computers were serious pieces of equipment with real uses, after all, not just games machines. And so, before the crash we saw things like Coleco's Adam computer addon, the Intellivision computer addon, the Atari 5200 being a consolized Atari 400/800 computer essentially, etc.

Then, in 1983-84, the Western console industry crashed. It would be famously brought back by Nintendo in 1985-86, but in fact gaming never went away -- because those computers didn't crash. The IBM PC, Amiga, Atari ST, Commodore 64, and more, all had significant market shares and large games markets through the '80s and into the early '90s (Only the PC would get beyond that, in the early '90s all the competitors except for Mac died off). So the standard story, that Nintendo saved gaming, isn't precisely true... computer gaming never went away and never crashed. This is obviously important -- as a result of this Western development was focused on the PC, and this only very slowly changed until after the launch of the PS2.

As I said, there weren't many good NES games from Western developers... but there were LOTS of great PC games during that era. I'd list a lot, but you've probably never heard of them because you don't know PC games. Adventure games (text, graphical, and FMV-based), RPGs, platformers, strategy games, space sims, wargames, military vehicular sims, later on FPSes, and more... there were a huge variety of titles on the PC, and a lot of the games had big budgets for the time, certainly comparable and almost certainly above the budgets of your average probably junky Western-developed console game then! If you're bashing all of those games, it is only through ignorance.

So, the '80s were really good for PC gaming. In the '90s consoles continued to grow in popularity, but despite that, PC gaming stayed successful through the decade. Now, here's an important point -- PC games did not sell like console games. That is, console games are now and always have been heavily front-loaded -- the majority of sales happen in the first week. PC games just weren't like that. You would release a game wiht the expectation that it would be on the shelves for years and sell slowly over that period of time, and that is exactly what happened. Back in the early or mid '90s you could go into any Software ETC and see large numbers of games that came out years ago there on the shelves being sold new. People played PC games for longer on average than console games because they often had much more content thanks to things like level editors, online/modem multiplayer, etc., and they did not always buy them right when they came out.

However, by the late '90s computer game developers and publishers were getting bigger, but the market wasn't growing enough to satisfy them, so they started looking more seriously at other markets. Company after company started moving towards consoles, lured by the large number of gamers and the promise of more immediate dollars than they were getting on the PC.

As for genre diversity, it held up through the '90s. FPSes became more and more popular, but wargames, military sims, platformers, top-down action games, turnbased and realtime strategy games, graphic adventures, life sims, puzzle games, life/building sims (SimCity, etc), and more were all there to provide a massive amount of variety. Over time adventure games did fade and FPSes and RTSes become more prominent, but the other genres did not entirely disappear yet.

One of the crucial developments happened in the mid '90s when MMOs arrived on the scene in a big way after Ultima Online was released. The genre had always been around in the MUD form, but UO (and Meridian 59 before it, though that one was much less successful) was a new breed, a graphical, large-scale massively multiplayer online RPG. The game was a massive hit and is still operating today. EverQuest a few years later compounded that and the MMO craze was on. I do think that this had an important role in what happened to PC gaming -- because in terms of raw dollars, PC games never actually decreased in income. It's just that an increasingly large amount of that money, and gaming time, went into MMOs, with their monthly fees and massive timesinks. There was less and less room for other kinds of games to have much of a market.

Still, adventure games, space sims and wargames lasted past the early years of the MMORPG without entirely disappearing... but by 2001, all three were obviously on their last legs. Wargames and adventure games survived as low-budget titles developed by small, often Eastern European developers, but space sims, being a big budget only genre essentially, just died off, as did some others. Non-MMO RPGs of course did not die off, but became less common. I don't know how much of a connection there is between this stuff and the move towards a console-first focus, but as both things were happening at the same time I can't help but think there must be some connection...

And meanwhile, at the same time, the 6th generation of consoles (PS2, Xbox, GC, DC) simply simply was far too successful and popular to ignore... as I said above, the PC developers were lured in, I believe, by both the narrowing PC market (thanks to MMOs and the huge success of specific strategy and FPS games that pushed smaller developers out) and by increasing budgets, that made PC game development much more difficult on the scale it had previously existed on. You needed to sell a lot more units now in order to make money, and they didn't think they were doing that on just the PC... but I think greed had a big part of it too, they saw this big other market being more successful tha never and wanted in. And then after some moved over, more and more followed them and it snowballed into the situation we see today.

Also the console market is much more controlled, and as publishers got larger and wanted more power, that was definitely attractive. I mean, arguably computers are at their best when they are open and accessible. On consoles there are rules and restrictions. Anyone can make a computer game, but that isn't true on consoles. Back in the '80s these rules turned off Western developers, who went to great lengths to try to avoid paying Nintendo and Sega's licensing fees (look up Atari/Tengen v. Nintendo, Accolade v. Sega, and the EA/Sega deal that got them on the Genesis -- in all three cases the companies used their own technology to create carts that would work on those systems without a license. In EA's case they used that as leverage to get lower licensing fees out of Sega.). By the early '00s though, the corporate cultures of those companies had obviously changed dramatically and the console environment was much more inviting. Of course lower licensing fees and less hurdles played a part, but there were still some so that can't be the complete answer. Perhaps the dollar signs overwhelmed their caution, or the reductions in fees and such were enough for them... I'm not sure.

I don't really know the complete answer, there were obviously a lot of factors involved in why it happened... I'm just trying to think of things that were probably factors. The things I'm talking about were probably all involved, to some degree or another. I'd like to hear thoughts and opinions though, because all this is still very rough and incomplete, semi-stream-of-consciousness stuff.

Of course, now that budget problem has hit them again, and worse, because even PS360PC development doesn't always make their money back, and game development costs just keep skyrocketing upwards... what do they do now? :)
ABFPedia.org
:D
At the risk of offending, the ABFPedia is one of the reasons nobody wants to talk about games anymore.
I am a history major you know, what do you expect when somebody asks a question like that...
Holy fuck what are doing?? Why did you type out the history of PC games???

Here is my understanding:

I mention that over the past decade, western developers have gained more credibility and improved their craft. They are a force now that Japan recognizes. Multiple Japanese development studios give kudos to western devs, the creator of Metal Gear said 'Japan is failing where the west is succeeding' and specifically talking about the drama, writing, scope, cinematics, voice acting and all the things that Metal Gear strive for. Now, western devs actually create content that is on par or even superior to Japanese efforts. this was not the case in the 90's, well that's not true exactly, in fact it probably really started in the 90's with Turok the Dinosaur Hunter on Japan's Number 1, Donkey Kong Country though was when Nintendo found out that places other than Japan can do it right. Name one video game (other than Tetris) that sold anywhere near the numbers of Donkey Kong Country on any system (including PC) that was made by a European or American developer in or by 1994. That's the same year Doom 2 came out btw. And that's all western development was: First person shooters, shitty simulators, I think Wing Commander was out by then which no one liked save for extremely anal people. We had Warcraft from blizzard that created the first (very primal) WoW game minus the World. These weren't contenders, compared to Japanese software, these were garbage. Doom 2 excited people because of the 3-D. The same year, we were getting Super Metroid, Earthbound, Ridge Racer (for the psx, also released in 94 I think). Japanese developers had 3-D down to a science without the need of mode-7 like scaling, but actual polygons.

Then Rare released Killer Instinct, the first fighting game that competed with the likes of Street Fighter and unlike Mortal Kombat or 2, had an actual combo system so important to a fighting game. Was there another western company on PC that created content of that caliber in that genre? Not a chance. Video games on PC were archaic, shitty and dull. The best software was on consoles or in the arcade.

You say they didn't improve, they just went from PC to console. So prove that, show me the amazing software they did on PC before going to console. It's not there. You have development of 3-D tools, game engines, but nothing great was done with it until was sold out and distributed. It was ooh, ahh look at the effects but other than creating an engine there wasn't any CONTENT. It was just doom over and over again with better graphics or the same text based adventures with FMV's. They were great at creating engines, but they couldn't make games. Two companies broke that mold: Bethesda and Blizzard. Bethesda in 1994 made Doom 2 but with a twist, add RPG elements and it was genius. They expanded on the idea all the way to today where the same principal of first person shooter as an RPG is done to extreme levels. The gameplay, the story, the writing, all of it is beautiful and well done.

Blizzard, as I assume you know made shitty chess games until Rock and Roll Racing and Lost Vikings hit the consoles, these types of games brought them in money, they expanded, they really wanted to make Warcraft something big - they had the idea of massive online game from the start but couldn't implement it and needed to expand until it was feasible. Then we had Blackthorne on SNES and Genny, then they pulled out Diablo which never hit consoles that I know of and Starcraft, two amazing series. then Warcraft: Battle.net changed the game and Diablo 2 really put them on the map. Art, music, gameplay, it's amazing - they really know their shit. Blizzard blatantly lamented: We will never put it (warcraft) on a console. Are these the companies you're talking about? But that's 2 companies and neither of them became console oriented.

I understand that you dug the PC side of things but the rest of the world didnt, the variety that you found on PC was paltry compared to any console and the entire reason PC gaming was funneled and almost killed (saved by Bethesda and Blizzard) is because there just wasnt enough good content on the platform UNLESS you just wanted eye candy or online play.
Quote:Then Rare released Killer Instinct, the first fighting game that competed with the likes of Street Fighter and unlike Mortal Kombat or 2, had an actual combo system so important to a fighting game. Was there another western company on PC that created content of that caliber in that genre?

One Must Fall: 2097 by Epic Megagames. It predated Killer Instinct by a few months and featured one-on-one giant robot battles. You started out with a really junky robot and fought to get money to upgrade your bot or buy a better one.

Quote:And that's all western development was: First person shooters, shitty simulators

And RPGs, strategy war games, racing games, survival horror games in the RE mold [but predating RE by several years], and adventures games from Lucasarts and Sierra, city/empire/business simulators, vehicular combat, mech games, realtime strategy, flight simulators, action-adventure, first-person horror, and a few more than I can't recall offhand.
Quote:Holy fuck what are doing?? Why did you type out the history of PC games???

Because you obviously don't know it, it's important, and given what you just wrote there you obviously still don't get it.

Quote:Here is my understanding:

I mention that over the past decade, western developers have gained more credibility and improved their craft.

Again, that's just not true. Most of the better developers just moved over from PC to console.

Quote:They are a force now that Japan recognizes.

Because they're developing on a platform that Japanese gamers and developers actually play games on now. Once again, Japan just never 'got' PC gaming... it's basically used for doujin games (fanmade titles with minimal distribution), hentai games, and not a lot else. Because most of the better Western games were on PCs, they often flew under the radar of Japanese developers.

Before I continue however, how about I mention some exceptions. Here's one major one: RPGs.

The RPG of course was essentially created by the Dungeons & Dragons pen & paper game. Starting from the early 1970s at the latest, people at the few American colleges with computers started designing D&D-inspired games as best they could. The early ones were text-based. In the late 1970s came the first graphical RPG, Richard Garriot's Akalabeth (aka 'Ultima 0'). Ultima 1 and Wizardry followed in the next two years (by 1981). The Ultima and Wizardry series defined early RPGs. They were gruelingly hard dungeon crawlers with minimalist graphics, lots of required mapping, some humorous elements, and more. They did not immediately catch on in Japan, however. For one thing, the games were mostly on the Apple II, PC, etc, systems not popular there...

The first real RPG made in Japan was in fact actually made by an American, Henk Rogers. You may know him better as the guy who played the crucial role in Nintendo getting Tetris and the owner of The Tetris Company and Bullet-Proof Software before that, but before he got into that he made an RPG, The Black Onyx. He made it for a Japanese computer, the NEC PC-8801. He pushed hard to get Japanese gaming magazines to review it; they weren't interested at first, but he eventually convinced one to (using his connections or something I think, I read an article online describing the whole thing sometime last year), and they liked it.

It was the spark that first made the RPG popular in Japan. The Wizardry and Ultima games would then be released there to great success. A year or two later Dragon Quest was released, one of the first native Japanese RPGs, directly inspired by the Wizardry and Ultima games, and The Black Onyx.

... Oh yeah, and the Japanese mostly missed the humor in the PC RPGs, evidently. Take, for instance, Wizardry VI: Bane of the Cosmic Forge... the titular Cosmic Forge is none other than a pen. Lol Evidently translations missed that humor...


Most major genres originate in America. There are few exceptions of note. Now, many of those genres were based on older board games, sports, etc. that were often not American of origin (European miniature wargames, tennis, etc.), but the first games were. This makes sense, considering that the computers and technology were here.

Quote:Multiple Japanese development studios give kudos to western devs, the creator of Metal Gear said 'Japan is failing where the west is succeeding' and specifically talking about the drama, writing, scope, cinematics, voice acting and all the things that Metal Gear strive for. Now, western devs actually create content that is on par or even superior to Japanese efforts. this was not the case in the 90's, well that's not true exactly, in fact it probably really started in the 90's with Turok the Dinosaur Hunter on Japan's Number 1, Donkey Kong Country though was when Nintendo found out that places other than Japan can do it right. Name one video game (other than Tetris) that sold anywhere near the numbers of Donkey Kong Country on any system (including PC) that was made by a European or American developer in or by 1994. That's the same year Doom 2 came out btw. And that's all western development was: First person shooters, shitty simulators, I think Wing Commander was out by then which no one liked save for extremely anal people. We had Warcraft from blizzard that created the first (very primal) WoW game minus the World. These weren't contenders, compared to Japanese software, these were garbage. Doom 2 excited people because of the 3-D. The same year, we were getting Super Metroid, Earthbound, Ridge Racer (for the psx, also released in 94 I think). Japanese developers had 3-D down to a science without the need of mode-7 like scaling, but actual polygons.

Ah, so now we get to the point. You hate PC games, which is why you keep bashing them. Right. I won't expect you to change your mind one bit then.

I mean honestly, bashing PC game genres as if they're worse than console ones or something, just because they're different and generally more complex? That's really stupid, and doesn't even really deserve an answer. Saying "I hate that" is not an answer to the points I'm making, it's just a statement of opinion that has minimal bearing on the issue, except to explain why you are saying the kinds of things you are.

I mean, I like the SNES too. It has lots of great games, and I'm not questioning that. It's just that the PC does too... and it has the vast majority of the Western games worth mentioning from the crash to the Xbox.

Rare, Naughty Dog, and Western arcade game developers like Midway are exceptions, but they are just that: exceptions.

-Wing Commander is not a complicated game at all. As far as space combat sims go, in fact, it's decidedly on the simplistic side. That's why I always preferred Totally Games' X-Wing/TIE Fighter games, they have so much more depth... and are better games overall of course, that helps too. :)

-Warcraft I is an RTS, not an MMO. Absolutely no connection except for the world they're set in and you know it. Also, it was an amazing, groundbreaking game, and helped define the RTS -- it was only the second major title in the genre, after Westwood's Dune II. A true classic.

-Doom II ran on the Doom I engine. In 1993 when it came out Doom was a serious technical achievement, and consoles of the time struggled badly to do Doom justice -- there were SNES, 32X, 3DO, and Jaguar ports, but all were bad compared to the PC version. Even Saturn Doom was pretty bad... PSX Doom was okay, and Doom 64 good (though entirely different levels-wise), but those came years later. Console FPSes in 1994 had definitely not caught up to Doom I on the PC yet, much less Doom II.

-The PSX and Saturn came out in 1994, sure, and yeah, PC games couldn't match them graphically. So? It's not like most of those early 3d PSX and Saturn games were that great... and graphics don't make gameplay! Plus, early 3d looked quite ugly... 2d looked better. In 1994 the PC could certainly beat the SNES or Genesis graphically. As for 3d, it wouldn't be until late 1996 that the serious revolution came, with the 3DFX Voodoo card, but the first 3d accelerators came in 1995 and did make 3d graphics on a near-PSX level possible. The games looked just as bad as PSX games from the same era though, so they've aged just as badly.

Still, there were many first-person and 3d games in 1994 on the PC, and many of them look quite okay for the time -- Doom II, Descent, TES: Arena, the flight sims, etc, etc. See this for instance: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lgg2SI17Vpo


Anyway, 1994 PC games? One of the best years in the history of the industry. Here are some notable 1994 PC games. I listed genres, because I'm sure you've never heard of these games (I have heard of all of them and own some). These are all American or European games. Some were also on consoles, but the computer versions were usually first (this is only not true for a very few games on this list).

Freddy Pharkas: Frontier Pharmacist (graphic adventure)
Archon Ultra (strategy-boardgame update of a classic)
Aces of the Deep (military sub sim - WWII)
Alone in the Dark 2 (survival horror (action/adventure))
Boppin' (platform-puzzle shareware game)
Battlehawks 1942 (military flight sim - WWII)
Battle Isle 2200 (turn-based strategy)
Cannon Fodder (1 and 2) (top-down action with some strategy)
Cyberia (CG FMV action/adventure game)
Beneath a Steel Sky (graphic adventure)
Dungeon Master II: Skullkeep (dungeon crawling RPG)
Heimdall 2 (isometric RPG)
Daryl F. Gates Police Quest: Open Season (graphic adventure with a bit of action)
Descent (six-degrees-of-freedom first-person shooter)
Doom II (FPS)
Disney's Aladdin (port of the Genesis game, but with 256 colors)
Empire Deluxe Masters Edition (compilation of a newer version of one of the first ever PC strategy games)
Frontier: Elite II (space trading sim with a little bit of action)
The Elder Scrolls: Arena (huge scale first-person RPG)
The Legend of Kyrandia (2 and 3) (graphic adventure games)
Hardball 4 (sports - baseball)
Heirs to the Throne (strategy)
Inca II (adventure/puzzle)
In Search of Dr. Riptide (mediocre shareware shmup)
Jazz Jackrabbit (2d platformer)
Jagged Alliance (strategy/wargame with some RPG elements)
Great Naval Battles Vol. II: Guadalcanal 1942-43 (wargame)
Leisure Suit Larry 6: Shape Up or Slip Out! (graphic adventure)
Out of this World (cinematic platformer I guess?)
King's Quest VII: The Princeless Bride (graphic adventure)
Krypton Egg (shareware Arkanoid-style game)
King Arthur's K.O.R.T. (simple but fun little turn-based strategy game shareware game)
Lords of the Realm (turn-based strategy with real-time battles)
Lands of Lore: The Throne of Chaos (first-person RPG)
M1 Tank Platoon (military tank sim)
Metaltech: EarthSiege (mech sim)
Mystic Towers (action-platformer shareware game)
Pizza Tycoon (building/management sim (think SimCity)
Pacific Strike (military flight sim)
Microsoft Space Simulator (space sim/educational)
Transport Tycoon (building/management sim)
Master of Magic (turn-based 4X strategy, like fantasy Civilization. Fantastic game.)
Magic Carpet (very unique first-person strategy/action ish game, hard to explain)
Microsoft Flight Simulator 5.0 (flight sim)
NASCAR Racing (racing sim)
One Must Fall 2097 (fighting game)
Realms of Arkania II: Star Trail (RPG)
Serf City (strategy)
Superhero League of Hoboken (RPG)
The Incredible Toon Machine (puzzle)
The Incredible Machine 2 (puzzle)
The Lemmings Chronicles (puzzle/platformer)
Theme Park (building/management sim, great game!)
Tubular Worlds (shareware shmup, okay but not great, looks nice though)
Outpost (strategy)
Microcosm (rail shooter)
Novastorm (rail shooter)
Mortal Kombat II (fighting game)
Panzer General (wargame, but not hardcore -- this was a "casual" wargame. One of the most successful wargames ever.)
Perfect General II (wargame)
Raptor: Call of the Shadows (shmup shareware game, one of my favorite shmups of all time)
Quarantine (FPS)
Relentless: Twinsen's Adventure (1994 Germany, 1995 USA) (action-adventure)
Rise of the Triad (FPS)
Revenge of the Mutant Camels (shareware action game)
Star Wars: X-Wing Collector's CD-ROM (space sim)
Star Wars: TIE Fighter (Without any doubt the best game released in 1994 for any platform, and still one of the best games of all time.) (space sim)
System Shock (innovative and original FPS-RPG)
Sid Meier's Colonization (turn-based 4X strategy)
Super Solvers: Treasure Cove! (educational puzzle/adventure)
Super Solvers: Treasure Mountain! (educational puzzle/adventure)
Traffic Department 2192 (topdown vehicular combat with lots of story)
Ultima VIII: Pagan (isometric RPG, huge scale)
Warcraft: Orcs and Humans (RTS)
X-COM: UFO Defense (turn-based strategy)
Wacky Wheels (kart racing, really good Mario Kart style game)
Wing Commander III: Heart of the Tiger (space 'sim')
Wing Commander: Privateer: CD-ROM edition and Riteous Fire expansion pack (the original game is from 1993) (space trading sim game with some combat)
Under a Killing Moon (cinematic graphic adventure)
U.S. Navy Fighters (military flight sim)
World at War: Stalingrad (wargame)

... and more. That is not a complete list. Any of the better ones are easily comparable or better than anything on the 1994 SNES list. Saying otherwise is purely opinion and has no basis in fact. And of course everyone is entitled to their opinions, and plenty of people would prefer the simple action of console games over the much more complicated gameplay of many of those titles...

Oh yeah, notice that it's not exactly dominated by FPSes and RTSes, but has a wide variety of genres (with adventure games leading the way I think)? Yeah, both of those genres were in their infancy then. It wasn't until the mid '00s that the PC became the "FPS MMORPG and RTS Only Machine". Before then there were some of those games, but not too many, and there were lots of other kinds of games as well.

Quote:I understand that you dug the PC side of things but the rest of the world didnt, the variety that you found on PC was paltry compared to any console and the entire reason PC gaming was funneled and almost killed (saved by Bethesda and Blizzard) is because there just wasnt enough good content on the platform UNLESS you just wanted eye candy or online play.

Nine parts ignorant trolling, one part factually incorrect...

Europe was even more focused on PC games over console games than the US, actually. In the second half of the '80s and the early '90s, most people gaming in Europe did it on computers such as the Atari ST, Amiga, ZX Spectrum, and Amstrad CPC. While in Western Europe eventually consoles became quite popular, though PC games are still much more popular in Germany and some other Western European countries than they are in the US, in Eastern Europe most gaming is still done on PC. That is why so many PC games these days come from Eastern Europe.

It was only Japan where consoles dominated...

But wait, even in Japan there were PCs in the '80s, with a stronger gaming scene than they had in the '90s and beyond. The NEC PC-8801, NEC PC-9801, MSX I and II, FM Towns, and Sharp X68000 all had real markets back in the '80s and into the early '90s. The MSX particularly was very successful in Japan. It's too bad that the PC didn't keep that market going but instead almost everything went to consoles... but yes, for a while computer games did have some success in Japan. :)

Quote:You say they didn't improve, they just went from PC to console. So prove that, show me the amazing software they did on PC before going to console. It's not there. You have development of 3-D tools, game engines, but nothing great was done with it until was sold out and distributed. It was ooh, ahh look at the effects but other than creating an engine there wasn't any CONTENT. It was just doom over and over again with better graphics or the same text based adventures with FMV's. They were great at creating engines, but they couldn't make games. Two companies broke that mold: Bethesda and Blizzard. Bethesda in 1994 made Doom 2 but with a twist, add RPG elements and it was genius. They expanded on the idea all the way to today where the same principal of first person shooter as an RPG is done to extreme levels. The gameplay, the story, the writing, all of it is beautiful and well done.

Blizzard, as I assume you know made shitty chess games until Rock and Roll Racing and Lost Vikings hit the consoles, these types of games brought them in money, they expanded, they really wanted to make Warcraft something big - they had the idea of massive online game from the start but couldn't implement it and needed to expand until it was feasible. Then we had Blackthorne on SNES and Genny, then they pulled out Diablo which never hit consoles that I know of and Starcraft, two amazing series. then Warcraft: Battle.net changed the game and Diablo 2 really put them on the map. Art, music, gameplay, it's amazing - they really know their shit. Blizzard blatantly lamented: We will never put it (warcraft) on a console. Are these the companies you're talking about? But that's 2 companies and neither of them became console oriented.

I don't know if it would be possible to write two paragraphs that more fundamentally fail to understand early '90s PC gaming... Lol
I give ABF a hard time about living in the past and not appreciating the quality of current games, but even I'll admit that the 90's was a pretty good time for PC games. No, it didn't excel in some of the genres that consoles did [platformers, fighting games, and maybe one or two others], but it was hardly some barren wasteland with nothing but FPSs and hardcore sims.
Unbelievable, this is like those threads where crackhead fans try to show how amazingly groundbreaking the Sega CD was and drive you mad wit their disillusions.

I dont hate PC gaming, there are amazing games to be had, but the majority, in fact the vast majority is total shit.

This elitism is part of the problem, "Oh you dont like it because its more complicated." That, right there, is what a good portion of so-called PC gamer's mentality. The truth, PC games aren't more complicated, they're simpler because they were made by people who dont understand the fundamentals of game design, but are complicated because of the ugly interface and exaggerated subsystems that constitutes as gameplay in some bizarre off-world that only blue-blooded PC gamers think are good.

[i]It's garbage.[i/] I'm sorry you're a fan of it, there's a very particular reason PC gaming has never taken off while console gaming has flourished: The game's are shit.

Survival Horror before Resident Evil, do you even know what you're talking about? Capcom *invented the fucking term* and before that we had what, Alone in the Dark? Seriously? Did you actually play that pile of shit? I kept wondering why frogs were chasing me. The only thing that came out that resembled survival horror was Silent Hill, The Thing (2002), Fatal Frame (2000 I think, so-called best writing in a game to date, yeah that one), a fucked up game called OverBlood for PSX, and one i'm drawing a blank on that I played on the Saturn, all I remember is the dude with the hedge clippers and then Siren which I bought just because it was made by part of the silent hill team, that came out in like 2003 or so. There's the old fucking Amiga game where you lit matches to see, there's the Japan-only so-called '2-D RE' called Treasure House or something which plays almost identical to RE but on the Famicom. Other than that I remember Friday the 13th on NES having some survival horror elements.

Alone in the Dark not only had a horrible story and writing, it was also French. It was scary on the same level as a Mall Santa. The haunted house in Mario 64 was more of a survival horror game than Alone in the Dark. Remember the piano? How about the Dog Hallway? AotD had nothing like that, no scares, no oh shit moments. It was the same trial and error gameplay found in all text based adventure games from the time. And Alone in the Dark was created by the French, did I mention that?

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/15bvpznQP5M&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/15bvpznQP5M&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

You just compared Killer Instinct to this shit? Seriously? Is this even a real game or did you upload this as a joke? You think this is the caliber of Killer Instinct? What's it like to be dead, honestly. I dont mean to offend you but you obviously dont have ANY ABILITY TO THINK.

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/8UgdKBiGgoM&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/8UgdKBiGgoM&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

SERIOUSLY? Do I need to explain to you the difference between a bad video game and a good one?

This is insane, its like arguing religion against zealots. No ABF, western developers did not simply switch from PC to consoles, they actually improved. The writing improved, the cinematics improved, the understanding of gameplay improved. Color, contrast, lighting, set design and props, the art in general, everything improved because (i'll say it again just for fun) everything on the PC was shit and your rose colored glasses do not work on me you unimaginative faceless moron.

God damn.

[Image: omf4.png]

You think that's like, worth even mentioning in the same breath as Killer Instinct? Or Street Fighter? Are you gay? Jesus.... fucking God.
One Must Fall: 2097 was pretty awesome. I probably played the shareware demo for a good 20-30 hours. Always wanted to get the full version, but I never did. Man, that music brings back memories.

Quote:The writing improved, the cinematics improved, the understanding of gameplay improved.

The latter two, yes, but the same could be said for Japanese games as well. Prior to FF7, there wasn't much cinematic about Japanese RPGs.

Writing though, it's very hard to top the writing of Black Isle's 90's RPG stable of Fallout 1 and 2 and Planescape: Torment. Or Bioware's early work with the Baldur's Gate series.

The only RPG from the aughts that I'd really put on the same level is Vampire the Masquerade: Bloodlines, made by former Black Isle developers. Although there are some recent RPGs that would rate fairly high, like the Mass Effect series, Fallout 3 [to a lesser extent], and Neverwinter Nights 2.

Quote:Survival Horror before Resident Evil, do you even know what you're talking about? Capcom *invented the fucking term*

That's because when Alone in the Dark came out people had no idea what to the call the genre. It was a mixture of horror, action, and puzzle-solving adventure. Alone in the Dark was pretty awesome when it first came out back in 1992.

By the way, it's in the Guinness Book of World Records for "First 3D Survival Horror Game".
KI may look better, but it's such a horribly unfun game to play (sorry, I despise combo memorization and that is 100% of KI's gameplay pretty much, unless you just button mash and lose constantly as a result) that yes, I'd rather play OMF2097...

Overall though fighting games are a genre where I would say the Japanese are better, by a big margin. Mortal Kombat, KI, Mace: The Dark Age, OMF, or whatever versus Street Fighter or King of Fighters? It's not even remotely close.

Quote:Unbelievable, this is like those threads where crackhead fans try to show how amazingly groundbreaking the Sega CD was and drive you mad wit their disillusions.

Describing yourself in this thread there, I gather?

I'm not sure whether you're serious or just writing this for the sheer troll joy of it... it's so obviously so completely ludicrous that it's hard to take you seriously when you're saying such insane things...

Quote:This elitism is part of the problem, "Oh you dont like it because its more complicated." That, right there, is what a good portion of so-called PC gamer's mentality. The truth, PC games aren't more complicated, they're simpler because they were made by people who dont understand the fundamentals of game design, but are complicated because of the ugly interface and exaggerated subsystems that constitutes as gameplay in some bizarre off-world that only blue-blooded PC gamers think are good.

Have you ever actually played a PC game? It doesn't sound like you really have based on the stuff you say here... either that or you booted it up once, got scared off by "menus", and decided to hate them forever or something for that... Lol

Yes, in the '80s and early '90s PC games often had inscrutable, poorly designed interfaces. Buttons were often little drawings, and those drawings were usually not labelled with any kind of popup tooltip that told you what it did. Sometimes the "background art" image of a town for instance would actually be the menu screen, and without the help of any color-changing cursor you'd have to click on the various things to access different locations and features (and I am not just talking about adventure games here). Those things were true in the early '90s and earlier, and I'll agree that the interfaces often do come across as poorly designed.

However, by the mid '90s that had changed, and clearly labeled menu buttons, popup help, etc. had become the standard. That stuff wasn't there forever. Win95 games usually do not do those things.

Also, the poorly designed menus were not why the the games were complex, though. They were complex because the part of the game that actually matters -- the gameplay, not the interface -- was usually even deeper and even more complex than that interface. A great game is worth a mediocre interface if it's a great game. Who cares if it takes an hour to get used to the interface if you then get dozens or more hours of gameplay out of the game? And remember, PC games always gave the player lots of content, unlike most console games. :)

Also, the manuals were usually great, describing every detail of the game interface in depth. PC gamers read the manual first if they wanted to actually be able to play the game -- and that's how it should be. Having the manual be worthwhile. :)

I believe that the longest manual I have is SimEarth's... it's like 250 pages long, and describes every single menu and system in that very complicated, yet brilliant, game in great detail. Awesome, awesome stuff.

Quote:[i]It's garbage.[i/] I'm sorry you're a fan of it, there's a very particular reason PC gaming has never taken off while console gaming has flourished: The game's are shit.

... And here's one more example of why you're either not being serious or aren't reading a single word I'm saying. Or both. Go back and read what I've written, then come have an actual discussion. There's no point talking to someone ignoring every word you say.

I mean, I think I just posted a quite extensive amount of proof of how popular and successful PC gaming was for many years, how it was more popular than console gaming in all three main gaming regions at some point or another,and how it still is that popular in some places. If that's not enough for you, absolutely nothing ever will be.
I have played more PC games than you have ABF, I have played more video games than you have period. As i've stated many times, there are awesome PC games to be had. Alone in the Dark and OMF is not among them. You know I love the RTS and RPG games so no, menus do not scare me, but badly produced and cluttered menus annoy the fuck out of me. On consoles, they streamline it so its more palatable but still offering the amount of customization or depth. Good examples here are FFT, the console versions of Elder Scrolls, Phantasy Star Online, Fire Emblem series and so on. I am waiting for a Civilization on a console, I know what's good.

PC gaming is like the WiiWare channel or XBLA, its a lot of garage games. Back in the day, 90's, those games were just krap and regardless of your taste in games, you cannot deny that Killer Instinct is leaps and bounds a better overall game in every department of its production. OMF was a bad version of Mortal Kombat with uninspiring robots, the same shitty music track over and over. It's not a nostalgia-designed game like Cave Story Mega Man 9 where its supposed to look dated and oldskool, it's a throw-away fighting game.

Mortal Kombat was also produced by a couple of guys with a low budget but it's also a better game whether you play it on PC, consoles or the arcade.

I understand you have a soft spot for PC gaming, but you're not being reasonable. Then Grumbler announces to the world that RPG's didn't have cinematics before FF7 and my jaw literally dropped. I guess i'm the only one who thinks RPG's have always had cinematics, including FMV's or in-game graphics. It's ridiculous to think otherwise.

Your points that you're arguing sound asinine to me because they revolve around the idea that PC games are somehow more enlightened and better than anything else and this is simply not true. PC gaming is at the lower end of the spectrum in terms of gameplay and design, but at the highest end of the spectrum in terms of technology and graphics, especially now. There are PC games that cant even run on PS3 because they require more horsepower. That's undeniable, we always look to the PC world to what's next in terms of graphics and new engines, Unreal's engines have been used in so many video games it's pathetic so the entire industry stops to look at what the PC world is doing and what are video game consoles but gaming specific PC's with mild capability to upgrade?

But we're talking about software, I asked for someone to find a game in the same caliber as Killer Instinct on PC and no matter how much you loved that game, it doesn't compete. That's not opinion: The graphics a side, look at the backgrounds, the music, the sound effects, the presentation, the depth, all of these factors trump OMF to pieces. You dont like combo systems, but that's almost entirely the backbone of a fighting game and why fans like them in the first place.

The most fun I ever had on PC was with KOTOR and Civ 3 and 4 these were/are amazing and extremely well done, but look at the mess they're in and no, I wont take your 'PC has a large collection of genres' because the only thing on PC (exclusively) that warrants anything close to survival horror is a game that by the standards set by RE is a complete waste of time. Racing, we have what, Test Drive Unlimited or Flat Out? Compare that to what we can find on consoles. Puzzles, no contest here, the consoles and handhelds have this beaten, I dont just mean Bejeweled and Tetris, either. Fighting? We dont need to go over that again.

Simulators, FPS's, RTS and strat and of course social games like Wow. That is why you go to PC. *nothing* on the consoles compare to Starcraft, Civ and the like. PC FPS may not have the most fun designs, but definitely the prettiest in technical prowess and we're online deathmatching before consoles even had a modem port. The BEST content found in PC FPS comes from the PLAYERS who build their own levels, weapons and etc. The design team just wanted to make a beautiful engine.

Let's look at the highest ranked games on PC right now, these are the games that received the highest scores, the must-haves.

http://www.gamespot.com/games.html?page_...=top_rated

Look at that list. It's all ports of console games to PC. Why is that? It's because the games designed for consoles are more fun, less clunky, streamlined, playtested and built for fun. Most PC exclusive releases dont get that treatment because put quite simply, it wasn't important. What was important was getting the engine out the door to get other devs to buy it and use it and make that money back from the R&D.

Meanwhile, Borderlands is built from pre-existing engines to create a game that offers depth and flair, deeper artistic roots and writing from actual writers, levels designed by actual level designers who have years of experience. Not people who ingeniously make two filters look like realistic plate glass or figured out a ghetto way to make faux real time ray tracing. They're not storytellers or artists, not in the traditional sense. They're technical artists, wizards.

This last decade, we saw developers in America really wake up to storytelling, getting you in-tune with the character and their development. That didn't exist a decade ago, save for a few gems here and there. There is a technical side to telling a story that requires an imagination to power it. Big McLarge Huge has to destroy the aliens or a technical romp through the cockpit of a space ship had no soul, no reason to care and it almost always looked like the highschool drawings on the back of someone's notebook. It just wasn't there, it didn't have what it takes. Japan and to a lesser extent Europe, got it though. And gave us characters to FEEL, stories to get in to and explore, even raise discussion. The art of the PC game design is to use the virtually limitless resources, the art of designing a console game is to engage the player. It took western developers a long time to understand that and with the competition streaming out of Japan they had to evolve or die.

So they hired writers, they commissioned artists. They started getting really fancy, paying a Lockheed/Martin aircraft designer to design their robot enemies or getting a Nasa scientist to come up with realistic weapons that could plausibly exist, but dont. They hired composers and arrangers, they sat down with designers who have schooling in art to understand color coordination and contrasts, texturing and etc not just 'what looks cool'. And suddenly, within the last decade, we have American games that outperform Japanese games by a large margin. Look at Metroid Prime on Gamecube, its arguably better looking than Twilight Princess, Final Fantasy 13 or MGS3 and 50% of that is because of design, not graphics. We improved our craft and that was a direct result of the software created for consoles to push the envelope of entertainment, to bring the emotional tonalities of film in to the interactive stage. PC games STILL dont deliver in that arena.

Do you understand it now?
Quote:Then Grumbler announces to the world that RPG's didn't have cinematics before FF7 and my jaw literally dropped. I guess i'm the only one who thinks RPG's have always had cinematics, including FMV's or in-game graphics. It's ridiculous to think otherwise.

FF7 was the birth of the cinematic JRPG. Yes, JRPG before then had cutscenes, but those were almost exclusively created from the game engine and very limited, and nothing that western RPGs from the same time period didn't have. On the other hand, FF7 had an hour or two of CG cutscene scattered throughout the whole game and it certainly popularized that trend far more than any other JRPG at the time.

Quote:that warrants anything close to survival horror is a game that by the standards set by RE is a complete waste of time.

Alone in the Dark predates Resident Evil by four years, it would be pretty shocking if RE didn't advance that formula.

Quote:Racing, we have what, Test Drive Unlimited or Flat Out?

PC had Whiplash in 1995 and the Mega Race in 1993 and 1996. It's been ages since I played either of those games, but I remember putting a lot of time into them. There's also the TrackMania series, but that's much more recent.

Quote:The BEST content found in PC FPS comes from the PLAYERS who build their own levels, weapons and etc. The design team just wanted to make a beautiful engine.

The first part of that is the reason why FPSs on the PC are so great: a creative community that releases free updates. The second part is a bit out there, though. Unreal Tournament was way ahead of console FPSs when it first came out, and games like Half-Life, Deus Ex, and System Shock certainly disprove that PC developers only care about awesome engines.

Quote:Most PC exclusive releases dont get that treatment because put quite simply, it wasn't important. What was important was getting the engine out the door to get other devs to buy it and use it and make that money back from the R&D.

I...wow. Seriously? Okay, yeah, I think you could make that point for a few high profile games from Epic and even id, but that simply is not the case for most exclusive PC games then or now. It's patently absurd to argue otherwise!

Quote:Meanwhile, Borderlands is built from pre-existing engines to create a game that offers depth and flair, deeper artistic roots and writing from actual writers, levels designed by actual level designers who have years of experience. Not people who ingeniously make two filters look like realistic plate glass or figured out a ghetto way to make faux real time ray tracing. They're not storytellers or artists, not in the traditional sense. They're technical artists, wizards.

Of all the games you might pick, you pick Borderlands? Don't get me wrong, I like it and it's got a great loot system, but Borderlands? For one thing, it's got very little writing and what there is of it certainly didn't bowl me over by it's greatness. It got the job done, which was all it needed to do. The levels aren't anything special, a lot of open desert. I like the art style of the game more than the actual design of the levels. Borderlands is fun because it's got some good action and a metric ton of weapons to find.

I'd probably buy it if you'd said Half-Life 2, but BORDERLANDS? Dude.

Quote:his last decade, we saw developers in America really wake up to storytelling, getting you in-tune with the character and their development. That didn't exist a decade ago, save for a few gems here and there. There is a technical side to telling a story that requires an imagination to power it. Big McLarge Huge has to destroy the aliens or a technical romp through the cockpit of a space ship had no soul, no reason to care and it almost always looked like the highschool drawings on the back of someone's notebook. It just wasn't there, it didn't have what it takes. Japan and to a lesser extent Europe, got it though. And gave us characters to FEEL, stories to get in to and explore, even raise discussion. The art of the PC game design is to use the virtually limitless resources, the art of designing a console game is to engage the player. It took western developers a long time to understand that and with the competition streaming out of Japan they had to evolve or die.

Fallout 1 and 2
System Shock 1 and 2
Planescape: Torment
Half-Life
Icewind Dale
Baldur's Gate 1 and 2
Deus Ex
The Dig
Full Throttle
Space Quest series
King's Quest series
Sydicate
Realms of the Haunting
Duke Nukem 3D
Normality
Indiana Jones and the Fate of Atlantis
Gabriel Knight series
Sam and Max Hit the Road
Monkey Island series
Day of the Tentacle
Grimm Fandango
Wizardry series
Quest for Glory series
Ultima series
Dark Sun series
Krondor series

No, it wasn't some fluke that there were PC exclusives during the 90's that had good writing, characters, cutscenes, and stories.
lazyfatbum Wrote:I have played more PC games than you have ABF, I have played more video games than you have period. As i've stated many times, there are awesome PC games to be had. Alone in the Dark and OMF is not among them. You know I love the RTS and RPG games so no, menus do not scare me, but badly produced and cluttered menus annoy the fuck out of me. On consoles, they streamline it so its more palatable but still offering the amount of customization or depth. Good examples here are FFT, the console versions of Elder Scrolls, Phantasy Star Online, Fire Emblem series and so on. I am waiting for a Civilization on a console, I know what's good.

So you sort of actually admit it yourself this time? That's good...

That is, yes, console menus are streamlined. Simpler, less complicated, with many fewer options and features. They are simpler, and so are the games. Which you prefer will depend largely on whether you like depth or simplicity more; neither is inherently better than the other.

It's just opinion. For instance, I can't stand the look of PSX-style Square Final Fantasy menus... somehow they just look horribly ugly. Give my any one of those old confusing DOS menus instead, they're better looking. :)

What's not opinion, though, of course, is that the PC games have much more depth on average.

Quote:FFT, the console versions of Elder Scrolls, Phantasy Star Online, Fire Emblem series and so on.

FFT: Ah, Japan's favorite kind of depth, the hidden system! I hate that stuff so much... why can't you just TELL ME HOW THE GAME WORKS? Why do I need to use an FAQ if I want to just be able to properly play the game? Western games do not usually do things like that! That kind of "depth" is a kind of depth that I can live without, that's for sure.

Oh, the game's okay, but not great. I got it years ago and stopped playing a few missions in, it just didn't grab me.

Elder Scrolls: Simplified a lot in Morrowind and then even more in Oblivion. Even many Morrowind fans were annoyed by how simple Oblivion was... I don't really like the series in general, but Daggerfall probably is the most impressive one because it has the greatest, most impressive scale.

PSO: Very simple game really. Also, the best (and only complete) version is on the PC.

Fire Emblem: Fantastic series that I love, but they aren't THAT complex... for the most part the games avoid the 'hidden systems' thing, which is good (there are a few elements of it, but pretty much only in the character relationship systems, which aren't that important really). The square-based maps are not as complex as the hex-based maps of PC wargames. Certainly has nothing depth-wise on PC wargames, obviously... but it's a strategy game not a wargame so that's okay. Still, even something like X-Com probably has more depth than this... though I prefer Fire Emblem to X-Com. Having more depth doesn't always make something better. :)

Quote:I am waiting for a Civilization on a console,

You didn't like Civilization Revolution? Got some pretty good reviews... it's quite simple of course, as console versions of PC games always are, but if you want a simple little empire-building game it's good, I guess. I'd rather play the real thing myself, and have the actual depth of the PC games...

Civ 1 was also on the SNES of course, though I've never played that version.

Quote:PC gaming is like the WiiWare channel or XBLA, its a lot of garage games.

Because there is no licensing requirement for PC games, this is of course true. It is the great strength of the platform.

Quote: Back in the day, 90's, those games were just krap and regardless of your taste in games, you cannot deny that Killer Instinct is leaps and bounds a better overall game in every department of its production. OMF was a bad version of Mortal Kombat with uninspiring robots, the same shitty music track over and over. It's not a nostalgia-designed game like Cave Story Mega Man 9 where its supposed to look dated and oldskool, it's a throw-away fighting game.

You've never played OMF then, obviously. It plays nothing like MK. The only real similarity is that they're both fighting games.

I'm not a big fan of the game and never played it all that much, so I'm not sure how I'd compare it to MK... not that I love MK either; those games are entertaining, but as I said if I want an actual great fighting game, I got to Capcom or SNK.

There were indeed a million clones of Mortal Kombat released after that game was such a massive success, but OMF wasn't one of them.

As for the graphics, they were fine for the time on the PC, good solid VGA stuff. Remember that OMF was a shareware game, and shareware games usually had more outdated graphics than retail titles because of their much lower budgets -- 1994 retail PC fighting games looked better than that visually. They weren't better games, though.

Really, you cannot directly compare retail and shareware games, they really were different markets. For instance the first ever PC shareware game with soundblaster music was released in 1990, while retail games had them years earlier. Similarly EGA was common in shareware games until '93 or '94, while retail games had abandoned it years earlier for the superior VGA. Lots of those games were great games anyway, but the graphics and sound were not as sophisticated because of the low budgets and tiny teams.

Quote:Mortal Kombat was also produced by a couple of guys with a low budget but it's also a better game whether you play it on PC, consoles or the arcade.

... Um no, MK was not a low budget game for its time... it did have a small team, but so did all games back then.

Quote:I understand you have a soft spot for PC gaming, but you're not being reasonable. Then Grumbler announces to the world that RPG's didn't have cinematics before FF7 and my jaw literally dropped. I guess i'm the only one who thinks RPG's have always had cinematics, including FMV's or in-game graphics. It's ridiculous to think otherwise.

Um, yes, FFVII most definitely did redefine the RPG...

As I said last time, the JRPG spun off of early '80s American PC RPGs like Ultima and Wizardry. The thing is, while PC RPGs changed, for instance with Pool of Radiance in the mid '80s and then Fallout and Baldur's Gate in the late '90s, Japanese RPGs took a completely different direction. The combat of most JRPGs has much more in common with Wizardry 1 than any '90s PC RPG. I consider that a bad thing, I like the changes Pool of Radiance and Baldur's Gate made to the genre... but that just never happened in Japan. Wizardry forever it is, there. :(

(I mean, the Wizardry games are amazing, but I prefer Baldur's Gate's style of RPG myself... BG is so deep, complicated, and fascinating, the much simpler and yet insanely difficult style of Wizardry is not as much fun in my opinion.)

Instead, though, of course, JRPGs went in the direction of adding plot and linearity. Final Fantasy IV (II US) and VII are the two most important points in this -- IV in adding set characters instead of ones the player creates themselves, and having a story as you go along, and VII in making everything cinematic.

Did other RPGs exist before then with cutscenes? Yes, of course. But they did not have FFIV and VII's influence and importance.

Quote:Your points that you're arguing sound asinine to me because they revolve around the idea that PC games are somehow more enlightened and better than anything else and this is simply not true. PC gaming is at the lower end of the spectrum in terms of gameplay and design,

In your opinion perhaps, though certainly not in reality.

Quote: but at the highest end of the spectrum in terms of technology and graphics, especially now.

This has been true since the early '90s, yes. PCs change, while consoles don't. If we go back to the '80s we'd have to expand it from "PC only" to "all computers" to maintain that computer lead over consoles, but if we do so it'd come right back -- the Amiga was first released in 1985 and blew away any console from that time by a vast margin, for example.

Quote:There are PC games that cant even run on PS3 because they require more horsepower.

Yes, because technology changes and improves, and PCs do along with it, while consoles stay static until the next machine comes out. It makes programming for consoles much, much easier, but certainly limits what they can do compared to computers.

Quote:That's undeniable, we always look to the PC world to what's next in terms of graphics and new engines, Unreal's engines have been used in so many video games it's pathetic so the entire industry stops to look at what the PC world is doing and what are video game consoles but gaming specific PC's with mild capability to upgrade?

True.

Quote:But we're talking about software, I asked for someone to find a game in the same caliber as Killer Instinct on PC and no matter how much you loved that game, it doesn't compete. That's not opinion: The graphics a side, look at the backgrounds, the music, the sound effects, the presentation, the depth, all of these factors trump OMF to pieces. You dont like combo systems, but that's almost entirely the backbone of a fighting game and why fans like them in the first place.

KI was an arcade game though... arcade games had better graphics than any home console or computer game back then. Only when the arcade market collapsed in the late '90s did that stop being true... but from the '70s until the late '90s, arcade games were not possible at home for years afterwards, the tech in them was so much higher-end and more expensive.

Also, fighting games are not a strength of the PC and never were. The number of retail PC fighting games has always been extremely small. Choosing a genre that you know PCs are bad at and then using that as an example of how they're worse is clever, but won't work because I know that it's not a fair comparison.

I mean, if I said "look for a flight sim on consoles in 1994 with graphics and gameplay as good as that U.S. Navy Fighters video I linked several posts ago", I know you wouldn't be able to find anything, because flight sims on consoles looked worse than that and were simple action games in comparison, detail-wise. You don't care about that and repeatedly bash sim games, but that just helps prove how your entire "case" is based on bias and ignorance, and not on any actual facts. Sim games aren't worse than action games just because they're in a different genre, obviously. :shake: That you keep insulting MMOs and sim games as stupidly as you do just proves again and again how you actually have no case.

I mean, dislike them if you want. Not everyone is going to like every kind of game. But acting like they're somehow bad games for being complex and very time-consuming is just incredibly stupid.

Quote:The most fun I ever had on PC was with KOTOR and Civ 3 and 4 these were/are amazing and extremely well done, but look at the mess they're in and no, I wont take your 'PC has a large collection of genres' because the only thing on PC (exclusively) that warrants anything close to survival horror is a game that by the standards set by RE is a complete waste of time. Racing, we have what, Test Drive Unlimited or Flat Out? Compare that to what we can find on consoles. Puzzles, no contest here, the consoles and handhelds have this beaten, I dont just mean Bejeweled and Tetris, either. Fighting? We dont need to go over that again.

Fighting games have always been very weak on the PC, as I said. I think it's the keyboard thing, fighting games are just terrible on keyboard...

I will say though that the PC does have Street Fighter IV now, and it's a pretty good version. :)

As for racing games go though, that's another one where your anti-sim bias and ignorance of PC gaming history show very strongly. Yes, in recent years the racing genre hasn't been strong on the PC. There are some here and there, but most are just console ports. However, there used to be many racing games on the PC. Sim racers particularly, of course, dominate on PC; the console ones are simplistic and arcadey compared to the PC ones. I mean, I do not like sim racing games at all, but... Gran Turismo is the great sim racer, while it doesn't even have damage modeling? Hah!

I mean, I may not like sim racers myself, but looking at them as they are, it's easy to see the vast gulf between console sim racers and PC sim racers. Console sim racing games have done some catching up in these last few years, but they're still far from equal to PC sims. And there are still some current PC racing sims, even if fewer than there used to be.

As for other kinds of racing games, like the kinds I love myself, there are a lot of great ones on the PC... but as I said, they're mostly older. There were lots of fantastic racing games on the PC back in the '90s. That genres like racing games are dying out on the PC despite how great the genre used to be on the platform really is one of the many signs of how the PC has been retreating back into three or four genres, as I said, and has abandoned so many of the genres that were what made PC gaming great in the first place.

Here are some examples of PC racing games I have loved. Some have console ports, but the PC versions are better in every case, and usually are far better.

Unless noted all of these games were released between 1995 and 2001 or so. That was when the genre was at its best on the PC.

Moto Racer (also on PSX)
Moto Racer 2 (also on PSX) (exceptional game...)
The Need for Speed (also on 3DO, PSX, Saturn)
Need for Speed 2 (also on PSX)
Need for Speed: High Stakes (also on PSX)
Wipeout XL (also on PSX, Saturn (JP/EU only))
Extreme-G 2 (also on N64)
MegaRace 2
MegaRace 3 (also on PS2)
Carmageddon
Pod (one of my favorite racing games of all time)
Motorhead (also on PSX)
Death Rally
Micro Machines 2: Turbo Tournament (also on GB, GG (EU only), Genesis (EU only), GBC)
Screamer
Screamer 2
Whiplash
DethKarz
Wacky Wheels (1994 release)
Powerslide
Drome Racers (also on GC, PS2, Xbox)
Rollcage (also on PSX)
Rollcage Stage II (aka Death Track Racing) (also on PSX)


Puzzle games -- actually, PCs dominate the puzzle game genre today, perhaps even more so than they used to. I'm not sure if that's what you meant, but it's the truth. PopCap games has been wildly successful with things such as Peggle; there are console versions of the games, but the PC versions are the focus, and they are incredibly popular. Online and retail puzzle games have a huge audience, including many women who don't play other kinds of games. No console puzzle games remotely compare in popularity, and PCs win a dominating victory in terms of variety and number of titles as well. The puzzle genre is one of the strongest on the PC today, thanks to how popular casual-focused puzzle games are. This is true for pretty much any kind of puzzle game.

Quote:Simulators, FPS's, RTS and strat and of course social games like Wow. That is why you go to PC.

Now true, but as that list of good to great 1994 games proves, it certainly did not used to be -- all of those genres were indeed big back then too (though FPSes were just in their infancy), but there were many other genres as well which were every bit as important.

Quote: *nothing* on the consoles compare to Starcraft, Civ and the like. PC FPS may not have the most fun designs, but definitely the prettiest in technical prowess and we're online deathmatching before consoles even had a modem port. The BEST content found in PC FPS comes from the PLAYERS who build their own levels, weapons and etc. The design team just wanted to make a beautiful engine.

Commented on below.

Quote:Let's look at the highest ranked games on PC right now, these are the games that received the highest scores, the must-haves.

http://www.gamespot.com/games.html?page_...=top_rated

Look at that list. It's all ports of console games to PC. Why is that? It's because the games designed for consoles are more fun, less clunky, streamlined, playtested and built for fun. Most PC exclusive releases dont get that treatment because put quite simply, it wasn't important. What was important was getting the engine out the door to get other devs to buy it and use it and make that money back from the R&D.

First, that list there is just for games from the past six months by default. Of course most are also on consoles! That's my whole POINT, that PC games aren't often exclusives anymore, and are designed for consoles first now, while they didn't used to be!

Even just in that LAST SIX MONTHS ONLY list though, what do we find... many games that are indeed on both PC and consoles, and some that are exclusives.

If you didn't know, from the first page of that list these games are PC only:
Napoleon: Total War
The Sims 3: World Adventures
Football Manager 2010
Europa Universalis III: Heir to the Throne

Also Dragon Age, while also on consoles, was designed for the PC first and foremost, and is far better on PC than consoles by all reviews.

The rest of the titles are also on consoles, I believe.


If we look at a more useful list there though and look at Gamespot's all-time list though, we see a more accurate picture...

9.6: Diablo (PC first)
9.5: Grand Prix II (PC only), Unreal Tournament (PC first), Command & Conquer: Red Alert (PC first), World of Warcraft (PC only), World in Conflict (PC only), The Orange Box (PC first), Crysis (PC only), Dragon Age: Origins (designed primarily for PC).
9.4 (the ones listed at least): Civilization IV (PC only), Unreal Tournament 2004 (PC only), FreeSpace 2 (PC only), NASCAR Racing 3 (PC only), Half-Life (PC first), Battlezone (1998 PC game) (PC only)

Kind of an odd selection, I guess Gamestop doesn't like adventure games that much or something... oh well. It mostly makes my point, at least. Because, not one game in that list is a port of a console game. Only one game even had a console version that came out on the same day, and that is the newest game in the list, Dragon Age: Origins... and even there the console version is a simplified, somewhat neutered version of the PC original.

Quote:Meanwhile, Borderlands is built from pre-existing engines to create a game that offers depth and flair, deeper artistic roots and writing from actual writers, levels designed by actual level designers who have years of experience. Not people who ingeniously make two filters look like realistic plate glass or figured out a ghetto way to make faux real time ray tracing. They're not storytellers or artists, not in the traditional sense. They're technical artists, wizards.

... PC games have bad writing? Seirously? ANd I return to me "you CAN'T be serious" point from my last post... PC games... worse writing...

Rofl Rofl Rofl Rofl Rofl Rofl Rofl Rofl Rofl Rofl Rofl

It's the exact other way around! But GR said that already, so I don't need to repeat him.

Quote:This last decade, we saw developers in America really wake up to storytelling,

This last decade, we had the good Western game writers all move over from the PC to consoles. That is what you're seeing. Play the games on GR's list of PC games with good stories if you need any proof.

Quote: getting you in-tune with the character and their development. That didn't exist a decade ago, save for a few gems here and there.

Certainly did. You obviously weren't playing the right games. Which is odd, considering how many had that.

Quote:There is a technical side to telling a story that requires an imagination to power it. Big McLarge Huge has to destroy the aliens or a technical romp through the cockpit of a space ship had no soul, no reason to care and it almost always looked like the highschool drawings on the back of someone's notebook.

You're describing the plot of your average American console game there, right? Because that's what it sounds like to me... some PC games too, sure, but more console.

Quote:It just wasn't there, it didn't have what it takes. Japan and to a lesser extent Europe, got it though. And gave us characters to FEEL, stories to get in to and explore, even raise discussion.[quote]

Europe has indeed done a good job of this in the past decade, with the rise of the European adventure game. Of course almost all of those are on PC, aside from Quantic Dream's stuff, but there are a lot of them now, and adventure games as a genre have generally had more focus on story and characters than any other genre. They better, given that story, characters, and puzzles are the entire game; there is no running around shooting people scenes in most of them to distract people away from the lame plot and characters.

America used to do good adventure games too, though, back in the '80s and '90s... it's just this last decade where the genre pretty much entirely died here.

[quote]The art of the PC game design is to use the virtually limitless resources, the art of designing a console game is to engage the player. It took western developers a long time to understand that and with the competition streaming out of Japan they had to evolve or die.

Rofl

... Sorry, I can't think of anything serious to say to such an absurd statement that I haven't said already severla times...

No games will be successful if they don't engage the player. That is just as true for PC games as console. And they did that.

Quote:So they hired writers, they commissioned artists. They started getting really fancy, paying a Lockheed/Martin aircraft designer to design their robot enemies or getting a Nasa scientist to come up with realistic weapons that could plausibly exist, but dont. They hired composers and arrangers, they sat down with designers who have schooling in art to understand color coordination and contrasts, texturing and etc not just 'what looks cool'. And suddenly, within the last decade, we have American games that outperform Japanese games by a large margin.

Here's what confuses me though, above everything else really: Here you are saying that last decade, Western games on consoles got better. Okay, we all agree on that point. I am saying that at the same time, Western PC games, and American PC games in particular, almost entirely vanished, replaced with multiplatform titles also on consoles. That the reason for that improvement in their console games was because of the move over from the PC. IT explains everything you're describing here pretty much perfectly... and yet you deny it with crazy claims about PC games that have not even the slightest connection to the reality of how computer gaems were in the '80s and '90s, which is the period I'm actually talking about! It's kind of bizarre really... we both agree on the end result, pretty much. Why do you deny the cause?

Quote:Look at Metroid Prime on Gamecube, its arguably better looking than Twilight Princess, Final Fantasy 13 or MGS3 and 50% of that is because of design, not graphics.

As I said before, the key people behind Metroid Prime had also made the Turok games on the N64 -- games I would definitely say had amazingly well designed worlds. Of course Metroid Prime went even beyond that, thanks to the greater capabilities of the system they were now on and Nintendo's influence which seems to improve the work of any developer they work with (versus games made by those same people without Nintendo's help), but the core of it was already there in their older works.

Quote:We improved our craft and that was a direct result of the software created for consoles to push the envelope of entertainment, to bring the emotional tonalities of film in to the interactive stage. PC games STILL dont deliver in that arena.

Interesting point here, but a lot of that is just because technology now made it possible, not because of anything else. Games by everyone changed, not just American ones.

Quote:Do you understand it now?

Not when you're still so deep in denial, no. :)

Great Rumbler Wrote:I...wow. Seriously? Okay, yeah, I think you could make that point for a few high profile games from Epic and even id, but that simply is not the case for most exclusive PC games then or now. It's patently absurd to argue otherwise!

id is the only company anyone could say this about without lying through their teeth.

Quote:I'd probably buy it if you'd said Half-Life 2, but BORDERLANDS? Dude.

But Half-Life 2 is a PC game, so it disproves his case. :p

Quote:No, it wasn't some fluke that there were PC exclusives during the 90's that had good writing, characters, cutscenes, and stories.

Yes, the much higher average writing quality of PC games definitely is one of the best things they have over console games. That some of those great writers or companies with histories of making games with actual good plots moved over to consoles is one of the elements of the 'move to consoles' that I was referring to when I said that. Western console games have much better writing now than the used to because of that influence. Before the early '00s, they were far, far behind that.

As for Japanese games, it's partially the fact that they have to be translated I'm sure, but they don't often hit that level of quality of writing either, that's for sure! The great PC RPGs and adventure games really stood out for how great their writing and plot design so often were. That list of yours there sure proves that, for anyone who's played some of the games. :)

(I must admit I never really played Realms of the Haunting, I remember seeing screenshots of it and thinking "oh, just another FPS" and then ignoring it because I didn't like those games much... only later did I learn that I was wrong of course, but as I'm not a horror fan either, generally...)

Quote:Alone in the Dark predates Resident Evil by four years, it would be pretty shocking if RE didn't advance that formula.

Not liking horror probably is part of why I've never cared that much for survival horror games in general, really. I mean, I have a few -- RE2 for N64, RE0 for GC, AitD1 for PC, several for Dreamcast, etc -- but there's not one game on that list that I've played for more than a few hours, or wanted to play much more of... I don't know, I do enjoy adventure games, but somehow though I kind of think that I should like them or something, they just never hold my interest.

Eternal Darkness would be the obvious exception, except it's not really survival horror. :)

Quote:The first part of that is the reason why FPSs on the PC are so great: a creative community that releases free updates. The second part is a bit out there, though. Unreal Tournament was way ahead of console FPSs when it first came out, and games like Half-Life, Deus Ex, and System Shock certainly disprove that PC developers only care about awesome engines.

Absolutely right -- community features are a very important part of PC gaming, and something that makes it stand out and above console gaming in many ways. I mean, console games can be great, but when you're done that's it. On the PC, the great games have editors and fan communities, as well as good online multiplayer of some kind, and they can last for years. Console games have somewhat closed this gap in recent years, but still editing and modding features particularly are very limited or nonexistent in most console games, making multiplatform games with them decidedly better on the PC as a result.

As you say though that doesn't mean that the actual games don't matter. Some people TREAT them that way, like people who never play the single player campaign of a game, but the stuff made by the developers is usually not just throwaway stuff made as spacers until the community makes better stuff... if you do that, how can you be guaranteed that a community develops at all? I mean, as I said above id can get away with that (some would say that Quake III was exactly that, though it was popular and succesful as it was), but just about anyone else... no. Epic perhaps could, but put in great single player modes anyway... you didn't need any mods to make Unreal Tournament a truly exceptional game. (I usually don't like FPSes that much, but UT is a great game...)
Quote:(I must admit I never really played Realms of the Haunting, I remember seeing screenshots of it and thinking "oh, just another FPS" and then ignoring it because I didn't like those games much... only later did I learn that I was wrong of course, but as I'm not a horror fan either, generally...)

It's one of those games that stuck with me over the years, even though I never actually played it myself [I watched my brother play it]. I remember that it had a lot of FMV cutscenes, but also it was a pretty cool FPS/survival-horror/adventure game hybrid on FIVE DISCS!

Quote:id is the only company anyone could say this about without lying through their teeth.

Yeah, id's pretty big on technology, although I've still enjoyed their games. Rage looks like it's going to be pretty awesome.

Quote:You didn't like Civilization Revolution? Got some pretty good reviews... it's quite simple of course, as console versions of PC games always are, but if you want a simple little empire-building game it's good, I guess. I'd rather play the real thing myself, and have the actual depth of the PC games...

I played Civ Rev. It was fun for a few rounds, but it just doesn't have much depth to it to keep my coming back unlike Civ 3 and 4. Civ 5 looks like it takes a few cues from Civ Rev while still retaining the depth of the other games in the series.

Quote:Puzzle games -- actually, PCs dominate the puzzle game genre today, perhaps even more so than they used to.

There's also a lot of indie puzzle games on Steam, including stuff like PopCap's games, Peggle, Crayon Physics, Cogs, Everyday Genius, Windosill, Quantz, Osmos, Zenerchi, Brainpipe, Droplitz, Raycatcher, And Yet It Moves, Magnetis, I-Fluid, and more.
Quote:Eternal Darkness would be the obvious exception, except it's not really survival horror.

Eternal Darkness is a horror-themed game in which survival is a primary gameplay element. wtf are you on about?
I made a thread on GAF inspired by this argument... http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=390128

Quote:There's also a lot of indie puzzle games on Steam, including stuff like PopCap's games, Peggle, Crayon Physics, Cogs, Everyday Genius, Windosill, Quantz, Osmos, Zenerchi, Brainpipe, Droplitz, Raycatcher, And Yet It Moves, Magnetis, I-Fluid, and more.

Casual games (many of them puzzle games) are the one section of PC games still selling lots of units at retail... I wonder whether PopCap make more sales online or in stores, I'd bet on stores for that kind of thing. Other even smaller titles though probably are online-only, though with stuff like that their predecessors probably would be shareware games. The really small team stuff never did get retail distribution.

Quote:Yeah, id's pretty big on technology, although I've still enjoyed their games. Rage looks like it's going to be pretty awesome.

Yeah, it'll probably be good... I did like Doom. The Quake games never interested me that much though, though they certainly are good games. Quake III particularly I think of as tech-first. Sure the game was okay, but that engine would be used in so, so many games for years afterwards...

Quote:I played Civ Rev. It was fun for a few rounds, but it just doesn't have much depth to it to keep my coming back unlike Civ 3 and 4. Civ 5 looks like it takes a few cues from Civ Rev while still retaining the depth of the other games in the series.

Ah. Sounds about right for a console game really... too complex and they lose too much of the audience.

Quote:It's one of those games that stuck with me over the years, even though I never actually played it myself [I watched my brother play it]. I remember that it had a lot of FMV cutscenes, but also it was a pretty cool FPS/survival-horror/adventure game hybrid on FIVE DISCS!

Oooh... :)

Seriously though, adventure games used more discs than any other genre in the mid '90s, that's for sure. They were the most cinematic games with the most live-action video, digitized actors, cutscenes, et al. I'd bet that a large percentage of games from that era that used more than one disc were adventure games, so that's not really a surprise I guess, though I didn't know that before. Must have lots of video, huh?

Weltall Wrote:Eternal Darkness is a horror-themed game in which survival is a primary gameplay element. wtf are you on about?

That it doesn't play anything like Resident Evil, but like its own thing... perhaps it is survival horror but its own kind of survival horror, but it plays so different from RE and its many clones that I think of it as being its own subgenre of action-adventure games, somewhat like the RE/AitD-style games in style but not in substance.
"Survival Horror" is an awful genre name. Almost all horror games regard the protagonist's survival as a main focus.

Yet, they'll call a game like Silent Hill: Shattered Memories "Survival Horror" even though it's not really about survival or horror.

Hell, Silent Hill in general is more about psychology and mythology than survival, even though the first several games play very similarly to Resident Evil.
Yeah, "horror action-adventure" or something like that might be a better genre name, as it more accurately describes the actual gameplay of the games... I hadn't really thought about it, but 'survival horror' is kind of a lacking description isn't it.
Pages: 1 2