Your opinions on the state of modern AAA games?

[JR98]

Basically what are your thoughts about how modern AAA games are being released with DLC, Season Passes, Pre Order Bonuses and all the bugs and glitches and and delays? Because, even 10 years ago, you used to be able to pay a small amount of money for a game and got the whole game. No DLC, no missing content, the full game. THEN in 2007 the PS3 and X360 were released and then it started. First off it was content updates, then some DLC and now games are getting released with less and less content and they are getting buggier and glitchier. Belowis a video of NERDCUBED ranting on the subject.

Warning:Strong Language

 

[mister dog]

I think the corporate vultures took hold of said AAA games in the past 10 years, as games have surpassed the money made by the movie industry since the rise of Playstation. And when those vultures get hold of things through merges and other buyouts, they care more about squeezing every last potential dollar out of everyone than upping the quality of what they acquired.

It's a bit what happens with every product nowadays, starts of romantic but once it becomes popular and profitable on a global scale, the product get's bought out by the big companies and loses it's soul in some way.

On the other hand, there's major competition for the market now and that forces games to become grand and more complex, so it's not all bad.

 

[somebody]

While I find the bugs and glitches annoying, I do understand that modern games are generally much bigger than older games. More code equals greater chance for errors to creep in. However, bug reporting systems and hot-fix patches are easier and quicker to do nowadays so this can offset the additional trouble to some degree.

I fully support pre-order bonuses. People buying early are taking a risk that what they get is not exactly what they thought it would be. I think rewarding this risk taking is fair and reasonable.

DLC is a tricky one. The game itself should be shipped complete. DLC should be additional/bonus material for those who enjoy the game enough that they are willing to pay for more content, or as free content to expand the game universe for all players. I do not believe DLC should change the game mechanics so much that the player base is divided in to those with and those without.

Seasonal passes are a pain in the backside. I understand that the online infrastructure costs real money to run but in some cases you just don't get enough bang for your buck. If, for some uncontrollable reason you are unable to play for a period of time then your money is wasted. If seasonal passes are here to stay I would prefer a cost model based on game time not real time, ie: pay $XYZ for ABC hours of online game time.

There are many things going on in the games industry, both from game developers/publishers and from the hardware manufacturers, that I am not happy with at the moment. With additional costs and online passes creeping in for even basic access I have already changed how I am approaching my future purchases.

When my PS3 dies I will not be replacing it. I was going to upgrade my PC this year but I will now wait until the PS3 dies and do it then. All the money I have saved for the PC is now going towards buying a car. That's right - I find a $40,000 sports car plus fuel, insurance, and ongoing costs a financially better buy than a new PC and PS4 plus $15-$30 a month for games access.

 

[Carlos]

With car games I usually have the idea you get ripped off with expensive dlc for a few cars. Like Forza.. With Bf4 it's a bit different. I really enjoy the dlc they give us and premium was about the same price as the game it self, about 100 euros.. Could be worse, I own about everything in iRacing. Pretty sure that's 5 times that. No complaints at all, because I only have to pay once for it. I don't have to be afraid for a new version of iRacing where I have to pay for everything again (Forza). With Battlefield 4, you'd have to pay for Bf3 maps...

 

[Luminis]

AAA gaming has a whole slew of issues, imho. The biggest of which are over-zealous publishers, much like Square Enix. Creating games with absurd budget, expecting every title to sell some double-digit millions of copies, half of those are expected to pre-orders and every last player ought to buy DLC. Making money has always been the name of the game, but the scope has become utterly ridiculous in the case of AAA games. The budgets have crept up to the point that anything that's not a million seller turns out to be a financial loss - which is why AAA gaming doesn't take risks, too. Scale the budgets back and games become profitable while selling less copies (like Dark Souls, for example), but the only thing publishers like EA or Square Enix or whatever seem to know is to throw more money at their products and try to milk them as hard as possible.

So, yeah, AAA gaming... Pretty weird state. But then again, do I care? Not a lot. There are but a few titles I care about that qualify as AAA. I can deal with those being a little messed up and expensive. Once you turn away from the biggest guns in the business, you'll notice that gaming in general is actually quite healthy. Sure, games like Darkest Dungeon or Besieged (two of the more recent games that made my jaw drop for a bunch of reasons) might not have the same hype surrounding them as a new Call of Duty does, but there's so much more to them than the budget... As long as there are games like these around, with the occasional high profile AAA title like GTA V to spice things up, I'll be quite content.

So, yeah, I'm treating AAA gaming like I treat the console market: Don't like it, don't buy it. There's alternatives out there; the AAA industry needs my money, but I don't need their games. And thanks to the big publishers playing it safe, the games aren't even interesting enough to make me feel like I'm missing out

 

[JR98]

With car games I usually have the idea you get ripped off with expensive dlc for a few cars. Like Forza.. With Bf4 it's a bit different. I really enjoy the dlc they give us and premium was about the same price as the game it self, about 100 euros.. Could be worse, I own about everything in iRacing. Pretty sure that's 5 times that. No complaints at all, because I only have to pay once for it. I don't have to be afraid for a new version of iRacing where I have to pay for everything again (Forza). With Battlefield 4, you'd have to pay for Bf3 maps...

That's why I hated FM5. FM4 had over 300-400 cars at launch and FM5 only had 100 and most DLC was just the old cars put into the new game.

AAA gaming has a whole slew of issues, imho. The biggest of which are over-zealous publishers, much like Square Enix. Creating games with absurd budget, expecting every title to sell some double-digit millions of copies, half of those are expected to pre-orders and every last player ought to buy DLC. Making money has always been the name of the game, but the scope has become utterly ridiculous in the case of AAA games. The budgets have crept up to the point that anything that's not a million seller turns out to be a financial loss - which is why AAA gaming doesn't take risks, too. Scale the budgets back and games become profitable while selling less copies (like Dark Souls, for example), but the only thing publishers like EA or Square Enix or whatever seem to know is to throw more money at their products and try to milk them as hard as possible.

So, yeah, AAA gaming... Pretty weird state. But then again, do I care? Not a lot. There are but a few titles I care about that qualify as AAA. I can deal with those being a little messed up and expensive. Once you turn away from the biggest guns in the business, you'll notice that gaming in general is actually quite healthy. Sure, games like Darkest Dungeon or Besieged (two of the more recent games that made my jaw drop for a bunch of reasons) might not have the same hype surrounding them as a new Call of Duty does, but there's so much more to them than the budget... As long as there are games like these around, with the occasional high profile AAA title like GTA V to spice things up, I'll be quite content.

So, yeah, I'm treating AAA gaming like I treat the console market: Don't like it, don't buy it. There's alternatives out there; the AAA industry needs my money, but I don't need their games. And thanks to the big publishers playing it safe, the games aren't even interesting enough to make me feel like I'm missing out

That's why I buy very little AAA games.

 

[Wolfe]

My opinion: modern AAA games have trended toward shallow and flashy ("Hollywood") junk with piss-poor game design and dull gameplay. Budgets have ballooned way out of control, with a disproportionate amount of those funds being pumped into visuals, cinematics, actors, and marketing, rather than things like gameplay, physics/mechanics, and quality control. I don't think DLC is inherently bad, but there are certainly games that seem half-empty without the whole DLC package, and access codes for on-disc content are the worst.

There's not a whole lot for me to add on top of what @Luminis posted. Like he said, it's not all bad -- with the options at our disposal, new sub-genres finding their niches, and gameplay innovations enabled by new technology/hardware, I think gaming has never been better than it is now! The games I've enjoyed the most over the past year include brilliant indie games like Shovel Knight and Starbound, and I couldn't be happier with my Wii U.

 

[VXR]

Forza 5 shipped with 200-odd cars and whilst some DLC were just returning cars, they added all new cars free of charge to some owners.

 

[TypeRDC5]

Modern gaming in general is in a bad way theses days.

Back on my ps2 days when i used to spend £40 on a game it was flawless, there were not game breaking glitches that required an update to fix next time i fired the game up and i most certainly didn't have to pay to get a piece of DLC to complete the story.

The worse of all is micro transactions, i totally understand these suit free to play games on iPhones etc but if i have paid full price for a game i don't want to have to be force to pay to compete with other people. Unfortunately so many people jump on the bandwagon of micro transactions that these won't be going away any time soon.

I rarely buy a AAA game when it's first released, usually wait 7/8 months and there will be a game of the year/complete edition with all the DLC that;s half the price, that's the way modern gaming has made me approach how i buy games.

 

[mister dog]

Check this:



Aahh, the good old days...

 

[CAMAROBOY69]

Oh this is a very sore subject for me and has been getting worse over the last few years. So sick and tired of games being released unfinished. A few perfect examples are Gran Turismo 5 with the standard car situation. Forza 5 lack of cars and content along with no weather or night cycle. GTA5 launching without online heists. (didn't come out until about 530 days later) And The master Chief Collection disaster. Holy crap where to begin with this POS multiplayer. Basically the multiplayer was released in late alpha stage. About 3 months after launch its now reaching maybe beta stage. Was promised to have ranked trueskill matchmaking like 10 years ago and is NO where near being that experience.

Those are just a few examples. I really could just go on and on. I am at the point where it is rare I buy new games anymore. I used to buy about 20 new games a year. Now I only buy a few a year. The only recent game I have played over the last couple years that seems to work very well is Far Cry 4. Other than that, most of the games that launch now, are nowhere near finished and loaded with bugs. I hate the mind set of "release now, patch later". I HATE that and its becoming way too common now.

I miss the days when games launched and worked. Without having to ever rely on a patch or update. I also refuse to support micro-transactions. Never have, never will.

 

[ULTRAVIOLENZZ]

Maybe we need another Video Game Crash to reset the industry.

 

[TrevorPhilips]

GTA5 launching without online heists. (didn't come out until about 530 days later)

GTA 5 was always known to launch without online heists..

 

[CAMAROBOY69]

GTA 5 was always known to launch without online heists..

They were supposed to release shortly after launch. Don't even try to argue that. Took them around 530 days before they released. In fact even though they are released, they are still having problems with the heists.

 

[ImaRobot]

I miss the days when games launched and worked. Without having to ever rely on a patch or update. I also refuse to support micro-transactions. Never have, never will.

The thing that I find bad about the old days is that if there was a problem with a game, then there was nothing you can do about it. You're stuck with a broken game. No online support, no patches, and no updates. Games back then where riddled with as many glitches as there are now, thing is, now things can be patched with out us having to go buy something else. I do not miss the old days.

 

[TrevorPhilips]

...

Edited because I can't be bothered

 

[CAMAROBOY69]

GTA 5 was always known to launch without online heists..

...

Edited because I can't be bothered

I see that you have edited your post that used to say "heists were not announced until December 2013, do your research".

Very incorrect. Rockstars site including many sites and videos stated that when "GTA Online" releases 2 weeks after launch. It will have heists. Even he Katalu site had information and a video before the game released talking about online heists.
http://kotaku.com/this-is-grand-theft-auto-online-1148134265


At around 1:15 in the original GTA online video released in 8/15/13 it clearly showed online heist gameplay.

Regardless, it was still almost 530 days before heists released. Next time you try to call me out, make sure you have at least a source to try to prove me wrong.

 

[Zuku]

As someone stated too lazy to look it up most AAA titles are made like Hollywood in mind wanna be overly flashy having the effects of say newest Transformers etc.

Just recently I've thought about giving up gaming(for while at least) because honestly these over-realistic games just aren't doing it for me any longer.

I've gotten to the point I can't stand GTA V because of this, and the newer games on PS4 like the Order are a movie disguised as a video game at this point to me.

The only thing that's made me second guess giving up gaming is playing Ratchet and Clank(Future Tools of Destruction) it reminded me of the silly/quirky fun nature of video games like when I was a kid. Where it wasn't about leveling up my characters just take this guy beat some levels BOOM! that's it. I miss the SNES/PS1/N64/PS2 days of gaming because as many have already said the game was there no patches/no updates/DLC nothing it just was what it was, and I see people saying the games are bigger my question is in what way?

Perfect Example Midnight Club LA vs say Midnight Club 3 or even 2. Although LA has the unreal jumps it's not like it was back in the PS2 days when you could jump sometimes clear across the map, but also the cities in 2 and 3 even 1 were far larger than LA by itself.

 

[Luminis]

The thing that I find bad about the old days is that if there was a problem with a game, then there was nothing you can do about it. You're stuck with a broken game. No online support, no patches, and no updates. Games back then where riddled with as many glitches as there are now, thing is, now things can be patched with out us having to go buy something else. I do not miss the old days.

Absolutely! Thing is, people are likely to remember the excellent games from the olden days. Not the bugged, glitched crap that was around. For every PS1 Final Fantasy people are holding dear, there's a stupid 360, Barbie somethingsomething or Tonguska - it's just that those have long been forgotten.

Also, just watching the video above, it becomes clear that a lot of the hype about 90's gaming is nostalgia. Who cares what colour the disk of a game is? What's so special about having a memory card? Is smelling a manual really that important to the quality of a game? And why can't I go over to someone for a round of Tekken or whatever? It's not like having the option of online gaming is stopping me from seeing friends to game with; it's just that we've grown up and tend to do other stuff. Print media is still around, too, so if someone is of the opinion that being behind on news is improving their gaming experience, why not just not visit the associated websites?

And to get back to the point I made before, here's a perfect example of why I don't mind the AAA part of the gaming industry being in a wonky state. SimCity 2013 was a horrible failure for EA and Maxis. Utterly ill received (Metacritic shows critics rating of 64 and a user rating of 2.2). And along come Paradox Entertainment and Colossal Order, delivering Cities: Skylines (Metacritic's critic rating is at 88 at the moment, the user rating at 9.6). They went and made the game that EA and Maxis, their AAA counterpart, should've made. So, am I upset about EA and Maxis cocking up because, as a part of the AAA gaming industry, they've basically got their heads stuck up their own arses? Nope, because someone who isn't part of that detached, delusional part of the gaming industry is bound to pick up where they left off.

Don't get me wrong, I've never been a huge fan of SimCity, so it's not like I ever cared much, but this is a perfect example of how little one actually needs the AAA part of the gaming industry.

 

[Pseudopod]

My opinion? They're getting too expensive to make, so the risk involved in taking, well, risks, is too great. That leads to everyone playing everything safe and everything becomes lowest common denominator bull****.

There are still lots of games coming out that I enjoy, but fewer and fewer of them would be classified as triple-A games.

Also, pre-order bonuses is basically blackmail.

If you want "everything" we made, you have to give us money before you know if we've made a good game.

Don't even get me started on the bull* that is store-exclusive preorder bonuses.

 

[Zuku]

Absolutely! Thing is, people are likely to remember the excellent games from the olden days. Not the bugged, glitched crap that was around. For every PS1 Final Fantasy people are holding dear, there's a stupid 360, Barbie somethingsomething or Tonguska - it's just that those have long been forgotten.

Also, just watching the video above, it becomes clear that a lot of the hype about 90's gaming is nostalgia. Who cares what colour the disk of a game is? What's so special about having a memory card? Is smelling a manual really that important to the quality of a game? And why can't I go over to someone for a round of Tekken or whatever? It's not like having the option of online gaming is stopping me from seeing friends to game with; it's just that we've grown up and tend to do other stuff. Print media is still around, too, so if someone is of the opinion that being behind on news is improving their gaming experience, why not just not visit the associated websites?

And to get back to the point I made before, here's a perfect example of why I don't mind the AAA part of the gaming industry being in a wonky state. SimCity 2013 was a horrible failure for EA and Maxis. Utterly ill received (Metacritic shows critics rating of 64 and a user rating of 2.2). And along come Paradox Entertainment and Colossal Order, delivering Cities: Skylines (Metacritic's critic rating is at 88 at the moment, the user rating at 9.6). They went and made the game that EA and Maxis, their AAA counterpart, should've made. So, am I upset about EA and Maxis cocking up because, as a part of the AAA gaming industry, they've basically got their heads stuck up their own arses? Nope, because someone who isn't part of that detached, delusional part of the gaming industry is bound to pick up where they left off.

Don't get me wrong, I've never been a huge fan of SimCity, so it's not like I ever cared much, but this is a perfect example of how little one actually needs the AAA part of the gaming industry.

I hate when people use the nostalgia trip yes there are bad games back then, but thing is they aren't over-hyped beyond repair. That's the problem with the PS3-present-to future generations there have been a lot of games thought to be great turned out mediocre or just plain bad that's been over-hyped to oblivion.

Also what do you say when someone who's never played say Sonic the Hedgehog 2(Not saying me) say the game is great talking about older or younger like example a 7 year old and a 50 year old? Is that still nostalgia? What about something like older movies is that still nostalgia?

I don't believe anyone wants to go back to memory cards either, but I do miss the manual's personally as sometimes they gave you back-stories of characters/worlds you'd play in that would mostly be forgotten.

As for the next part you're correct, but problem is we've all be sucked into certain games forever that no matter how bad they might become you still don't bolt for that other title.

This applies to me with only playing NFS Series, Midnight Club series, and GT up until now I knew what TOCA, Colin Mcrae Rally, F1 series, and even the DiRT series were and even those other games like Asseto Corsa(don't feel like looking up how to spell it), but no matter how many times you've told me to go looking I wasn't moving an inch it wasn't until GT6 came that I had had it.

People deal with it in Final Fantasy right now to most people it hasn't been good since FFX(even though people understandably don't like that somewhat either), but it's hard to bolt from the experience like that to find new RPG's it's like buying something new or upgrading your phone you don't want to be left wasting money on something or staying on a 2-year contract.

 

[Luminis]

I hate when people use the nostalgia trip yes there are bad games back then, but thing is they aren't over-hyped beyond repair. That's the problem with the PS3-present-to future generations there have been a lot of games thought to be great turned out mediocre or just plain bad that's been over-hyped to oblivion.

Yeah, the games getting a lot of media coverage these days. Much more so than in the 90's when gaming was a a lot smaller than it is today. It's big business these days, but as soon as you start to look at stuff besides the AAA titles, you'll find that smaller companies just can't afford to blow a huge budget on (false) advertisement. Plus, half of the whole hype issue stems from the people. I'm sorry, but a lot of players are awfully quick to decide that an unreleased game is going to be the best thing since sliced bread.

Also what do you say when someone who's never played say Sonic the Hedgehog 2(Not saying me) say the game is great talking about older or younger like example a 7 year old and a 50 year old? Is that still nostalgia? What about something like older movies is that still nostalgia?

I'm not saying that old games are bad (if that's you're implying), I'm saying that people are likely to forget that there's been a lot of garbage back in the days as well.

I don't believe anyone wants to go back to memory cards either, but I do miss the manual's personally as sometimes they gave you back-stories of characters/worlds you'd play in that would mostly be forgotten.

Which was necessary because the game itself didn't...

As for the next part you're correct, but problem is we've all be sucked into certain games forever that no matter how bad they might become you still don't bolt for that other title.

This applies to me with only playing NFS Series, Midnight Club series, and GT up until now I knew what TOCA, Colin Mcrae Rally, F1 series, and even the DiRT series were and even those other games like Asseto Corsa(don't feel like looking up how to spell it), but no matter how many times you've told me to go looking I wasn't moving an inch it wasn't until GT6 came that I had had it.

People deal with it in Final Fantasy right now to most people it hasn't been good since FFX(even though people understandably don't like that somewhat either), but it's hard to bolt from the experience like that to find new RPG's it's like buying something new or upgrading your phone you don't want to be left wasting money on something or staying on a 2-year contract.

Not that I want to insult anyone, but if someone's not able to move on to a better experience, that's not something I have much sympathy for. Swearing allegiance to a franchise, developer, publisher or hardware manufacturer has never been a smart move, in my opinion. Might be that that's the reason why some people seem to think that gaming went down the drain in recent years, because they've never bothered to check games aside from the franchises they know all too well (and there's plenty fish in the sea, all easy enough to find thanks to the internet). In that case, those folks have nobody to blame but themselves, I'd say.

 

[Zuku]

Yeah, the games getting a lot of media coverage these days. Much more so than in the 90's when gaming was a a lot smaller than it is today. It's big business these days, but as soon as you start to look at stuff besides the AAA titles, you'll find that smaller companies just can't afford to blow a huge budget on (false) advertisement. Plus, half of the whole hype issue stems from the people. I'm sorry, but a lot of players are awfully quick to decide that an unreleased game is going to be the best thing since sliced bread.


I'm not saying that old games are bad (if that's you're implying), I'm saying that people are likely to forget that there's been a lot of garbage back in the days as well.


Which was necessary because the game itself didn't...


Not that I want to insult anyone, but if someone's not able to move on to a better experience, that's not something I have much sympathy for. Swearing allegiance to a franchise, developer, publisher or hardware manufacturer has never been a smart move, in my opinion. Might be that that's the reason why some people seem to think that gaming went down the drain in recent years, because they've never bothered to check games aside from the franchises they know all too well (and there's plenty fish in the sea, all easy enough to find thanks to the internet). In that case, those folks have nobody to blame but themselves, I'd say.

Sometimes they didn't at least back in the PS1 days I believe Tekken 2 when I first played it around 6-9 years old in that area there wasn't really a lot of text to read on screen that let me knew who Jun was or Lei heck at the time I didn't even know Heihachi and Kazuya were father/son. There are some other games that didn't give you a back-story either I've forgotten which ones.

You may not have much sympathy, but I do I can at least understand to a degree. People don't want to blow their money on the newer things cause it could come back to bite them like I had a phone about 4 years ago this is back when I had no choice and had to do 2-year contract, and trying to venture outside the norm at that time(flip phones) I got burned. I'll always tell friends of mine to try certain games before getting them because they're not like me or you. These days now I'm doing hella research to find out what certain games are about sometimes I take the plunge at random and go with the hit-miss like Shantae for me was a hit, but Dead or Alive 5(base game no other editions) were misses for me.

Also to adding into the fact there isn't really another game like GT out there yes there are racing games out there, but one that takes average everyday cars etc. Although I'm one that complains to high heaven about how GT has been with 5 and 6 there really is no disputing the fact that it's not really another one out there like it.

I tried to put friends of mine into Codemasters series of racing games they were intrigued by DiRT just because it seemed like there was more to do, but when I showed them F1 they weren't as enthused.

Me personally I don't have much of a fight into this argument as I'm retiring(or hiatus from gaming(maybe about 6 months to a year), but it's funny that this topic does come up all of sudden after The Order 1886 I just found that strange cause this has been on other forums not just this one. PSU.com is one place I saw it.

 

[Luminis]

You may not have much sympathy, but I do I can at least understand to a degree.

It's not that I don't understand. People will always tend to cling to their comfort zones, at least to a certain degree. Thing is, in the case of gaming, there's not much harm coming from venturing outside of said comfort zone, especially if you're looking at stuff aside from the AAA stuff. At worst, you'll waste twenty bucks or something. What I don't understand is this: There are gamers who only know the cover of the gaming industry, the AAA games. And they go on to judge the whole book, all of the gaming industry, by what the cover, the AAA stuff, is like.

Never judge a book by its cover, never judge gaming by the AAA industry. Yes, AAA is in a weird state, but that's not all there is to gaming in the 2010's. Which is why the whole "90's gaming is awesome" shtick is beyond me. There's been plenty of bad stuff then and people only talk about the what was good; nowadays, people talk about the current garbage a lot and ignore the good stuff. my impression, at least.

 

[Wolfe]

Things have changed, though. In the 1990s, the SNES and Playstation were supported by a rich library of games produced by third party Japanese companies like Capcom, Namco, Konami, and Square. Today, development teams under those publishers are either struggling, have been eliminated, have slowed their output with the complexities of this HD age, or just can't seem to crack out an entry for a longstanding IP the way they used to. It's said the unfortunate series of natural disasters in Japan in the 2000s may have affected the pool of talent in the Japanese gaming industry.

Between that and how the gaming industry has grown globally, games development has shifted toward the west. In my humble opinion, western developers have always been a bit crap at producing a polished game. Not that they don't make good games, but they do things differently. Hell, as far as DLC and season passes go, some Japanese companies have seemed reluctant to jump on the bandwagon, while western companies like EA, Activision, and Ubisoft led the way.

If you have a Playstation or Xbox today, chances are you're playing more western-published games than you would have been playing in the 1990s. Again, that doesn't mean they're "bad" games, but I think it helps to explain why things are different.

 

[Zuku]

It's not that I don't understand. People will always tend to cling to their comfort zones, at least to a certain degree. Thing is, in the case of gaming, there's not much harm coming from venturing outside of said comfort zone, especially if you're looking at stuff aside from the AAA stuff. At worst, you'll waste twenty bucks or something. What I don't understand is this: There are gamers who only know the cover of the gaming industry, the AAA games. And they go on to judge the whole book, all of the gaming industry, by what the cover, the AAA stuff, is like.

Never judge a book by its cover, never judge gaming by the AAA industry. Yes, AAA is in a weird state, but that's not all there is to gaming in the 2010's. Which is why the whole "90's gaming is awesome" shtick is beyond me. There's been plenty of bad stuff then and people only talk about the what was good; nowadays, people talk about the current garbage a lot and ignore the good stuff. my impression, at least.

Well technically speaking I don't even know if I agree with the last part.

It's tough to say cause I remember some games being deeper than what is there today. You talk about people looking back saying what they do about the 90's, but the case can be made to say people are trapped in the moment in the present day.

 

[Luminis]

Things have changed, though. In the 1990s, the SNES and Playstation were supported by a rich library of games produced by third party Japanese companies like Capcom, Namco, Konami, and Square. Today, development teams under those publishers are either struggling, have been eliminated, have slowed their output with the complexities of this HD age, or just can't seem to crack out an entry for a longstanding IP the way they used to. It's said the unfortunate series of natural disasters in Japan in the 2000s may have affected the pool of talent in the Japanese gaming industry.

Had western development teams and publishers focused on the Japan-made consoles more in the 90's, I'd say that we might have had a different impression. Still, there's been many great games made by western developers in those days. Those were largely PC titles, though. StarCraft, Diablo, Civilization, WarCraft I and II, Monkey Island, Day of the Tentacle... I could go on, but you get the idea.

Those games weren't unpolished, either.

Well technically speaking I don't even know if I agree with the last part.

It's tough to say cause I remember some games being deeper than what is there today. You talk about people looking back saying what they do about the 90's, but the case can be made to say people are trapped in the moment in the present day.

What do you mean by deep? In terms of story, gameplay, maybe the morals or the atmosphere? Either way, I'm willing to say I can find good, recent examples for all of those. Honestly, how can you say that games were 'deeper' in the 90s when you've barely looked past the few mainstream franchises that are around at the moment, as you said yourself?

 

[Zuku]

Had western development teams and publishers focused on the Japan-made consoles more in the 90's, I'd say that we might have had a different impression. Still, there's been many great games made by western developers in those days. Those were largely PC titles, though. StarCraft, Diablo, Civilization, WarCraft I and II, Monkey Island, Day of the Tentacle... I could go on, but you get the idea.

Those games weren't unpolished, either.

What do you mean by deep? In terms of story, gameplay, maybe the morals or the atmosphere? Either way, I'm willing to say I can find good, recent examples for all of those. Honestly, how can you say that games were 'deeper' in the 90s when you've barely looked past the few mainstream franchises that are around at the moment, as you said yourself?

Okay you'll have to give me recent examples, and when I say deeper I don't only mean story, but just everything like GTA SA vs V(Only because they both take place in San Andreas) Vibe of SA beats the crap out of 2013 GTA V. Star Ocean III(definitely not mainstream) is better than some of RPG's I've played recently for PS3.

Looking back more Rayman 2 on N64 was one of my favorite games and even Rocket Robot on Wheels those type of games are non-existent on PS4 and moving forward maybe even PS3(to an extent).

Now story wise some of these games I've just named are simple in that respect, but the sense of there is a lot to do for these games is way more than even some of the newer games.

That's not to say I'm just going to dump on Next-gen, but a lot of these newer games I've put down and never want to come back to again even though I've been on record at least among friends and throughout the internet on other forums praising the heck out of them. Like Red Dead Redemption and Batman Arkham Asylum I have yet to truly play them again like that, and couldn't be bothered to complete even all the side-quests where as a game like Persona 3 or 4 I'd gladly do so.

 

[Luminis]

Okay you'll have to give me recent examples, and when I say deeper I don't only mean story, but just everything like GTA SA vs V(Only because they both take place in San Andreas) Vibe of SA beats the crap out of 2013 GTA V. Star Ocean III(definitely not mainstream) is better than some of RPG's I've played recently for PS3.

Very hard to give you an example if by 'deeper' you mean 'just about everything'. Granted, I actually disagree with you in terms of GTA SA and V, the story was considerably more intricate in V, more complex, well told despite that and the gameplay was by no means a step back, either. Anyway, examples of games that are somewhat recent and compare well to games from the 90's. Off the top of my head:

• StarCraft II: Very streamlined, minimalistic in parts, sticks to the formula that made the original incredibly well received. The gameplay's been polished further while the original feel has been preserved. The story was expanded in a decent manner as well.
• Cities: Skylines: Very recent game; city builders and economic managing games were available by the dozen in the mid to late nineties and early twothousands and the genre died down ever since. Cities Skylines offers a very polished approach while keeping the gameplay mechanically similar and every bit as complex as the games of old, while cranking up the scale, too.
• Demon Souls, Dark Souls, Dark Souls II: Need prove that there are challenging yet fair games around these days? Look no further. Very unique (among today's games) in terms of story telling, very focused on what the game wants to be. Little excess fluff aside the very smooth and accurate gameplay and by no means a high-fidelity title that relies on impressive visuals or stuff like that.
• Forza Motorsport (well, up to 4, don't know 5): Picks the same formula as GT but goes in a different direction, to a certain degree. Emphasis a few things differently, like modifying cars visually or community integration.
• Divinity: Original Sin: Isometric party RPGs are the bread and butter of western publishers when it comes to roleplaying and games like Baldur's Gate have long been untouched, but DS doesn't have to shy away from that sort of comparison. Very detailed character creation and development, highly sophisticated, turn-based combat with lots and lots of thinking needed to progress. Comes with the same attention to detail to side-quests and stuff as the classic WRPGs did, too.
• Tales of Vesperia: I'm not into JRPGs, so I can't give you any more recent examples, but ToV was the perfect game to prove to me that there's more to JRPGs than Final Fantasy. The world building is surprisingly good, the character far more authentic and likeable and less over-styled than what you get in the more recent FF games. Huge amounts of content and a properly involving combat system.
• Rayman Origins: One of the best platformers I've played in recent years. Fast paced, properly difficult, incredibly nice art style, soundtrack and even a decent sense of humour. Got the tight controls down, too.
• Metal Gear Solid V: Ground Zeroes: Bit of a strange one to add it to this list, but a game that actually goes and drags the focus of a cinematic franchise like MGS back to the gameplay, that's no small feat. Bonus points for being a promise of what's to come.

Some more games to consider: Bastion, Transistor, BioShock Infinite, Dota 2, Skyrim, The Witcher 1 + 2 (and soon 3), Red Dead Redemption, Super Mario Galaxy, Borderlands II, Besiege, World of Goo, ArmA 2/3 and mods like DayZ, Crysis 1 - 3 (very personal pick...), the Total War games, Diablo III if we're counting the Reaper of Souls add-on and World of WarCraft simply destroys every MMO that came before it. Some games I've heard a lot about but have had no hands-on experience with myself include the Mass Effect series, Shovel Knight, The Binding of Isaac (Rebirth), the Walking Dead, Journey, The Last of Us, the Dragon Age games and the Uncharted franchise.

And I bet that there's a whole slew of games I've completely missed.

Edit:
Forgot Ori and the Blind Forrest. Simply enchanting, that one.

 

[Zuku]

Very hard to give you an example if by 'deeper' you mean 'just about everything'. Granted, I actually disagree with you in terms of GTA SA and V, the story was considerably more intricate in V, more complex, well told despite that and the gameplay was by no means a step back, either. Anyway, examples of games that are somewhat recent and compare well to games from the 90's. Off the top of my head:

• StarCraft II: Very streamlined, minimalistic in parts, sticks to the formula that made the original incredibly well received. The gameplay's been polished further while the original feel has been preserved. The story was expanded in a decent manner as well.
• Cities: Skylines: Very recent game; city builders and economic managing games were available by the dozen in the mid to late nineties and early twothousands and the genre died down ever since. Cities Skylines offers a very polished approach while keeping the gameplay mechanically similar and every bit as complex as the games of old, while cranking up the scale, too.
• Demon Souls, Dark Souls, Dark Souls II: Need prove that there are challenging yet fair games around these days? Look no further. Very unique (among today's games) in terms of story telling, very focused on what the game wants to be. Little excess fluff aside the very smooth and accurate gameplay and by no means a high-fidelity title that relies on impressive visuals or stuff like that.
• Forza Motorsport (well, up to 4, don't know 5): Picks the same formula as GT but goes in a different direction, to a certain degree. Emphasis a few things differently, like modifying cars visually or community integration.
• Divinity: Original Sin: Isometric party RPGs are the bread and butter of western publishers when it comes to roleplaying and games like Baldur's Gate have long been untouched, but DS doesn't have to shy away from that sort of comparison. Very detailed character creation and development, highly sophisticated, turn-based combat with lots and lots of thinking needed to progress. Comes with the same attention to detail to side-quests and stuff as the classic WRPGs did, too.
• Tales of Vesperia: I'm not into JRPGs, so I can't give you any more recent examples, but ToV was the perfect game to prove to me that there's more to JRPGs than Final Fantasy. The world building is surprisingly good, the character far more authentic and likeable and less over-styled than what you get in the more recent FF games. Huge amounts of content and a properly involving combat system.
• Rayman Origins: One of the best platformers I've played in recent years. Fast paced, properly difficult, incredibly nice art style, soundtrack and even a decent sense of humour. Got the tight controls down, too.
• Metal Gear Solid V: Ground Zeroes: Bit of a strange one to add it to this list, but a game that actually goes and drags the focus of a cinematic franchise like MGS back to the gameplay, that's no small feat. Bonus points for being a promise of what's to come.

Some more games to consider: Bastion, Transistor, BioShock Infinite, Dota 2, Skyrim, The Witcher 1 + 2 (and soon 3), Red Dead Redemption, Super Mario Galaxy, Borderlands II, Besiege, World of Goo, ArmA 2/3 and mods like DayZ, Crysis 1 - 3 (very personal pick...), the Total War games, Diablo III if we're counting the Reaper of Souls add-on and World of WarCraft simply destroys every MMO that came before it. Some games I've heard a lot about but have had no hands-on experience with myself include the Mass Effect series, Shovel Knight, The Binding of Isaac (Rebirth), the Walking Dead, Journey, The Last of Us, the Dragon Age games and the Uncharted franchise.

And I bet that there's a whole slew of games I've completely missed.

I don't even know if I'd say GTA V was even that complex. It was a good story, but GTA SA and even VC easily overcome that department, and it's still missing a lot of things that SA has not only that SA carried 5 different environments within vs GTA V with the "city and desert" Personally speaking they've under utilized that to an extreme the desert is pretty much vast empty space that never gets a lot of attention for how big it is, and the size and scope of the map technically from a different standpoint GTA SA, and even to some degree VC(even though I know it's small) could be said to be larger than GTA V's map honestly speaking they could have shrunk the desert a lot of people probably wouldn't realize it because it's vast and empty.

Still in the grand scheme of it GTA V is missing a lot for example like:
1. Driving Schools (added back flight school)
2. Monster truck/Destruction derby/Stunt arenas.
3. Freight Trains(actual control and side-quests)
4. Local Co-op best thing about SA was that.
5. Casinos
6. Owning multiple houses
7. Girlfriends
8. Gym
9. Fast Food/Eating
10. Gang Wars(although completely understand why it isn't there)

That's just off the top of my head.


As for the list okay, but only problem with MGS:GZ it's an over-glorified demo, and honestly MGS V could be good, but I think the best was already done with MGS 3, and even to a degree MGS1. I played and beat MGS 4 while it was good it didn't get to me like MGS 3 could. MGS 3 to this day gives me chills for the way they built that story, and the way it ended in fact I'm almost certain there isn't another game I've played that's been close to that.

Play Crysis 1 and while it's okay it's not something I'm personally fond of in fact still haven't played it again since like 2010.

Forza Motorsport is a good series, but even with all it's advancements I don't even think it touches NFS Porsche on PC, and even then.....

As for the rest of your games some I've played some I do own(Bastion(owned), Super Mario Galaxy(played))

But for games like Borderlands that game got reptitive at first when I played it was entertaining, but then it started to feel like a game that was as shell of an MMO to me.

Two of the best games I've had most fun with on PS3 generation and I'd gladly go back to again Catherine and Valkyria Chronicles I have no problem going back to either.