The Video Game Critic

[QUOTE=Segatarious]I would agree. To say that the old guard of mainstream gaming is in a rut would be an understatement. They publicly say that their business strategy is to release the same games from the same franchises, year after year after year.

And worse than that, it is more or less the same few genres of games, and they all look and play the same, with that same antisocial vibe.

[/QUOTE]

Happy 1000th post, Segatarious!

I'm just gonna weigh in and say that you should probably get out of your bubble and play some of those genres you never touch. Who is this "they" we're referring to, anyway? Doesn't Nintendo do the exact same thing with their annualized franchises? Ever since Ocarina of Time, Zelda has been an annual or biennial franchise. Mario does the same thing: despite the evolutions in gameplay, the games are still, at heart, about running around and jumping on bad guys. 

I think today's magazines reflect the uninspired state of video games.

When you leaf through old magazines (try it sometime) the reviews are splashed with color.  Not only are the screenshots interesting, but they are usually accompanied with a lot of nice illustrations that spark your imagination.

Newer games on the other hand look a heck of a lot like real life.  The screen shots tend to be drab, with a lot of grays and browns.  And since so many games are first-person, you can't even tell what's happening on the screen.

I think the whole point of this thread may elude people who haven't read the classic EGM and GamePros from the 90's in a long time (if ever).  As one of the few people who can compare the new to the old, side-by-side, the difference is startling.  The games in the old magazines look so much more fun.

After reading one of the old mags you have at least a dozen games in your head that you want to pick up.  When I read a new Game Informer, there might be one game that catches my interest.

[QUOTE=videogamecritic]I think today's magazines reflect the uninspired state of video games.

When you leaf through old magazines (try it sometime) the reviews are splashed with color.  Not only are the screenshots interesting, but they are usually accompanied with a lot of nice illustrations that spark your imagination.

Newer games on the other hand look a heck of a lot like real life.  The screen shots tend to be drab, with a lot of grays and browns.  And since so many games are first-person, you can't even tell what's happening on the screen.

I think the whole point of this thread may elude people who haven't read the classic EGM and GamePros from the 90's in a long time (if ever).  As one of the few people who can compare the new to the old, side-by-side, the difference is startling.  The games in the old magazines look so much more fun.

After reading one of the old mags you have at least a dozen games in your head that you want to pick up.  When I read a new Game Informer, there might be one game that catches my interest.[/QUOTE]

I hate to say it Critic, but perhaps you're losing interest in current gen gaming??  I know you love the Wii U, which has games that are fun, colourful, cartoony, just like the games of yesteryear. 

I don't know, but I think games on the XBone and PS4 aren't grabbing you anymore

@bluenote

Games are changing a lot. I'm not sure I even like where things are going, and I'm an avid supporter of online services and all they have to offer.

I agree too. I used to love magazines like Gamepro in the mid 90s. Back then there were so many systems out, like the 3do, Jaguar, and the Neo Geo and it just seemed like there were a lot of companies that cared about putting out great games. And the future seemed so bright too, it was a great time, from like 93-95. Now to me, it basically feels like Sony and Microsoft is the industry, it's weird. 

[QUOTE=ptdebate][QUOTE=Segatarious]I would agree. To say that the old guard of mainstream gaming is in a rut would be an understatement. They publicly say that their business strategy is to release the same games from the same franchises, year after year after year.

And worse than that, it is more or less the same few genres of games, and they all look and play the same, with that same antisocial vibe.

[/QUOTE]

Happy 1000th post, Segatarious!

I'm just gonna weigh in and say that you should probably get out of your bubble and play some of those genres you never touch. Who is this "they" we're referring to, anyway? Doesn't Nintendo do the exact same thing with their annualized franchises? Ever since Ocarina of Time, Zelda has been an annual or biennial franchise. Mario does the same thing: despite the evolutions in gameplay, the games are still, at heart, about running around and jumping on bad guys. [/QUOTE]


Well, I do get out of my bubble - and I do not enjoy it. I absolutely despise this game culture and their terrible cinema-games, with blah gameplay. Like I said earlier, even Cabela's Dangerous Hunts has a terrible story mode, you cannot escape it. And once again, a third party game that cannot use the wiimote correctly, even though Nintendo games always have fantastic, responsive pointer controls. Blah Humbug

As far as Nintendo, they are continually pushing out new and different, and always quality =- that is why I do not get bored with hose games. They are well made, and have great gameplay as the foundation, not some dumb fanboy gory story.

• Captain Toad: Treasure Tracker -  /New IP
  
• Splatoon  New IP, fresh shooter
  
•  
• end of Zelda game - NOT another Ass. Creed milk fest
  
• 
  Code Name: S.T.E.A.M. - new IP from the kings of turn based strategy
  

[QUOTE=ptdebate] Happy 1000th post, Segatarious!

Doesn't Nintendo do the exact same thing with their annualized franchises? [/QUOTE]

Happy 1000th post Segatarious.  

Its reasonable that modern gaming would be dominated by franchises that are hardly distinguishable from other installments.  As much as it might irk our friend Segatarious, what other industry does that remind you of?  Movies.   Video games and movies are big business, and cost big money, so who wants to take a risk?  Movies have actors or directors as well as franchise characters, but all video games have are the franchise characters.  So our Mario Kart 8 has 16 default characters, and 4 of them are baby versions of the other 4.  Wow - that is just playing it safe to the Nth degree (pun intended).

After awhile, who wants to see Friday the 13th episode 13, or Rocky, the Golden Years.   Who wants Assassins Creed...whatever it is.  Its a big deal in Madden to have the rosters up to date, at least that's change. And video game companies are even more susceptible then movies or sports, as like other fictional characters their characters don't age.  Bart Simpson is how old?  Mario made his big break in video games in the early 80s, like action heroes Schwarzenegger or Willis or Lundgren.  If he was real, he would be lucky to be selling us reverse mortgages and be cast in the video game version of The Expendables.  
 

As for magazines, you could always look at Retro Gamer.  Looks like issue #134 highlights the Atari 7800, something our friend Atarifever might enjoy.  "30 years on - a cult console celebrated".  

[QUOTE=scotland17][QUOTE=ptdebate] Happy 1000th post, Segatarious!

Doesn't Nintendo do the exact same thing with their annualized franchises? [/QUOTE]

Happy 1000th post Segatarious.  

Its reasonable that modern gaming would be dominated by franchises that are hardly distinguishable from other installments.  As much as it might irk our friend Segatarious, what other industry does that remind you of?  Movies.   Video games and movies are big business, and cost big money, so who wants to take a risk?  Movies have actors or directors as well as franchise characters, but all video games have are the franchise characters.  So our Mario Kart 8 has 16 default characters, and 4 of them are baby versions of the other 4.  Wow - that is just playing it safe to the Nth degree (pun intended).

After awhile, who wants to see Friday the 13th episode 13, or Rocky, the Golden Years.   Who wants Assassins Creed...whatever it is.  Its a big deal in Madden to have the rosters up to date, at least that's change. And video game companies are even more susceptible then movies or sports, as like other fictional characters their characters don't age.  Bart Simpson is how old?  Mario made his big break in video games in the early 80s, like action heroes Schwarzenegger or Willis or Lundgren.  If he was real, he would be lucky to be selling us reverse mortgages and be cast in the video game version of The Expendables.  

/QUOTE]
 
OK, but here is the difference with Nintendo.

The Simpsons has been on autopilot for years and years now - not so with Mario. 80's action heroes are coasting off of whatever is left of other old fame and nostalgia - not so with Mario.

Mario Kart 8 is the best kart racer in the history of the industry. Best mechanics, best controls, best tracks, best racing.

Mari World Wii U is one of the finest Mario games and plat formers ever made.

So what is the connection here? Age does not equal quality.

You cannot tell me there is NO DIFFERENCE between how Nintendo 'pumps out' (read crafts) Masrio games and Ubisoft pumps out Ass. Creed. Because there is a profound difference in quality and originality. Ubisoft simply adds to their already ridiculous sci-fi script.

Critic, I suggest you read Retro Gamer. It's a UK magazine. It is a little costly due to shipping costs, but it's about all the old games, and it's amazing. They go in depth about the making of those classics we all know and love, they have a great, colorful layout, tons of screenshots, and most importantly, quality journalism. If it's too expensive for you, I hear the American RETRO Magazine is really good.