Current Events > Was gaming better in 2002 or today?

(+) Yeah! (+)

Foppe posted...

Back then, you kept playing the game you rented over the weekend, no matter if it was good or bad.
But hey, if you cant stay alive for 4 hours in Donkey Kong, then you probably cant get the killscreen in Duck Hunt as well.
https://youtu.be/tQ168Wsui_U

You're missing the point. Games like Donkey Kong are arcade games from the 1980s. They were fun to play for about 15-20 minutes, not for hours at a time. For they were incredibly repetitive.

And they had no method to save your game, either.

So with the only way to trigger that glitch being to play, non-stop, for 4 hours and 8 minutes... it's not going to be seen by anyone except the most psychotically obsessed people.

A handful of people.

So a game that works, bug-free, for 99.9999% of the players... is a game that works.

Punished_Blinx posted...

There's always been crappy bugfest games.

2000-2003 had;
The Simpsons Wrestling (which I was given as a present!)
Batman: Dark Tomorrow
State of Emergency
Tomb Raider: Angel of Darkness
Drake of the 99 Dragons
Big Rigs: Over the Road Racing

Some of those games are barely even playable period and never were.

oh yes, all those heavy hitters on the level of cyberpunk and pokemon

Kloe_Rinz posted...

oh yes, all those heavy hitters on the level of cyberpunk and pokemon

Tomb Raider was one of the most iconic PlayStation franchises.

You never played games to see how far you could get?
To see if anything special happen at level 100?
To see what strange symbols they would use in level names?
Heck, my own father and a friend played Atari 2600 Pacman a whole night just to see what happened when when you got maximum score, and he was no gamer.

Foppe posted...

You never played games to see how far you could get?
To see if anything special happen at level 100?
To see what strange symbols they would use in level names?
Heck, my own father and a friend played Atari 2600 Pacman a whole night just to see what happened when when you got maximum score, and he was no gamer.

No, that's a form of gaming thar became popular when trophies became a thing. Which only came into existence when consoles went online.

Before that, people mostly played a game until they got bored with it.

Some fans did try to do everything and get everything, but that was almost exclusively with RPGs.

The first time it even came up is a big way was with Gran Turismo for the PS1, because of a bug that wouldn't allow the player to see "100% (for cars owned)" if you collected every car in the game.

Wow, imaginate believing that nobody did that before achievements in games...

I definitely enjoyed gaming a lot more in 2002, but I don't think it was "better." I have access to so much more now, including most of those old titles. The problem is, I'm old and cynical now, so I hate everything.

Now by far.

Dorfmann_ posted...

I definitely enjoyed gaming a lot more in 2002, but I don't think it was "better." I have access to so much more now, including most of those old titles. The problem is, I'm old and cynical now, so I hate everything.

Let's rephrase that shall we: you're wise, experienced, have specific tastes.

Also the older you get the less it makes sense to follow this industry.

Game devs feel lazier (or maybe more exploited) than they were in 2002, but no gaming in general is much better nowadays imo

The only thing I don't like is how with DLC and patches, if a game service goes down permanently then you're kinda shit out of luck. Doesn't really feel like any game is timeless anymore where 20+ years down the line you can load it up and play with no problems, especially with more things moving to digital