Have you ever noticed the difference between games that came out 15+ years ago and now? And I don’t mean graphically, or the addition of online play…or the format used for the games itself. Something in the gameplay has changed and makes games feel more random or cheap than anything and less strategically challenging unless you play against another person.
Developers seem to be more focused on how many enemies you see on the screen, or the quality of the graphics, or what the online features are rather than making the gameplay the strength and everything else a bonus.
The aspect of old games that is missing and is almost a lost art is the fact that you had to study the pattern that the Boss or the level you played was using before you could move or attack, and on top of that you weren’t told specifically how to approach the game other than the hints that were given sporadically throughout your journey to help you figure out how to beat the boss rather than telling you exactly what to aim for as I‘ve seen time and time again. (“AIM FOR THE TANKS ON HIS BACK!” – guess what game?)
I’ve noticed a nasty trend of games being “dumbed down” by sacrificing unique gameplay for a quick game of Simon called quick-time events that prompt an epic cut-scene with scripted eye-candy. I pretty much call this a cheap way out of making the AI tougher and still satisfying gamers with a cheap thrill that usually gets old after a couple of days.
Developers have become lazy by throwing a bunch of fancy features together and calling it a game. I call it an interactive movie…which is great if done well, but I’m seeing this being pretty much the main focal point rather than an added bonus to the game.
Few games really offer a unique way to fight a Boss anymore. Some of the Boss fights in Metal Gear Solid 4 are the only example that comes to mind when I think of having to beat the boss strategically rather than just awaiting for a time to attack,…and then run around attacking the boss. Having said that, Metal Gear Solid 4 is still a victim in some ways of what I’ve stated thus far and seems to focus itself more towards being a movie rather than a game.
The problem could very well be the advancement in games now featuring a 3D environment which makes it harder to develop games with the same mindset that made older games in a 2D environment so great.
The older games were more timing based rather than just random enemies attacking you while you just try to handle pressure. This definitely makes it more realistic, because of the fact that realistic situations are more random than strategic unless you’re at war, but I am playing a game and want to think more.
I have really noticed this while playing LittleBigPlanet levels of Contra along with the DLC of Megaman 9, Bionic Commando: Re-Armed and Sonic’s Sega Genesis Collection. These games are much more harder than I recall them being when I was a kid and I blame the newer generation of games for this due to the fact that my approach has been dumbed down. I used to beat games like Sonic the hedgehog and cruise through it with no problem, now I find myself throwing a bitch-fit while playing these games.
While I am not saying change is bad, I’m an advocate of change because it helps the evolution of gaming. This generation wouldn’t be where it is without 3D levels, online capabilities and the realistic graphics. I just wonder why we seemed to have left behind one of the most important aspects of gaming altogether. Challenging gameplay.
The only analogy I could think of to explain this is how man once knew the Earth was round and over time somehow convinced himself that it was flat, but we are resilient by nature and we will make games round again by mixing some of the old with the new.
To take it even a step further, us gamers are just as much to blame because we seem more focused on supporting a game to help it sell well and shove it in another “fanboy’s” face. Since when did gamers become so concerned with a company’s marketing strategy and revenue stream? Are you playing games to have fun or are you trying to make a lazy developer rich?
Hopefully we can see gameplay more of a focal point as this generation moves on and we then evolve into the next generation of gaming, and while it still exists in games, it’s just not as prominent as it used to be. I think Metal Gear Solid 4 has somewhat exposed the blueprint (to an extent, anyways) for how to combine the missing ingredient in games of recent times that games once had and the new, “realistic“ generation of gaming.
But as I said before, Online play should be a bonus to the game and not the strength because there are quite a few gamers who do not log onto the internet with their gaming system (SHOCKING, I know!) but there still exists people who play games for the game itself and want a challenge rather than blanking out for X-number of hours and then finishing the game without remembering what they have played.
Popularity: 14% [?]
Related posts:
The Don has spokeneth, it's a celebration bitches! 
Loading ...
interesting perspective… for me the game that really was well focused on gameplay with puzzles.. and wanting you to figure it all out for your self without even the slightest hint… was half life 2 …. speaking of puzzles and gameplay how could you forget portal
Games are dumbed down, but I don’t think developers are to blame. In fact there is more stress on developers today than ever before. They have to deliver a product that suits the capacity of the smallest mind in the audience in order to deliver teh Haloz to the masses.
I love this article, I truly love it (I don’t think I’ve ever said that).
But this is something I’ve taken to mind, I remember talking to friends saying that one of the last games I’ve truly had fun playing was Super Mario Galaxy.
It just gave me this nostalgic feeling of that challenging gameplay we used to see back then. Though it seems Nintendo played somewhat of a balance in order to support the new gamers that the Wii has brought in by simplifying alot of the moves seen in Mario Sunshine and Mario 64 and by making the initial stages simple whilst making the extra stages (for collecting all of the stars, etc) difficult.
I’ve also felt this way playing Super Mario Bros 3 on the Virtual Console.
lol, I really don’t mean to mention Nintendo so much, but I guess it’s their goals versus most companies of today. Alot of companies aim for sales now a days, and they just aim for fun.
First off great article, i can see you put a lot of time into it. The thing about the old to new game comparison and some of the newer games being harder than games of the past in my opinion comes down to sales. Back in the old Nintendo/Sega times games were cheaper and most were longer and harder (no homo) then some on the games of today. If you got stuck at a part you couldnt get past you probably stopped playing all together…or took the game out and threw it off the wall..watched it shatter into 100 pieces and moved on to your next game. Nowadays the typical game is around 8 to 12 hours and cost 60 bucks. My guess is they make these newer games easier and shorter so youll beat the game…youll go online (if it has it) youll buy dlc for online or campaign and then be craving another game from the company…which equals out to more money out of your pocket.
I have to agree 100%. Games are not nearly as hard now as they used to be. However, they are also not a frustrating (overall).
I would also propose that today’s games capture the re-playability factor through gimmicks (100% completion, find all the packages/stars etc) rather than perfect score or just getting to the end of the game. I have to admit, replayability now is more fun than the old school games and requires much more inventiveness and originality of the developers. Overall, I would say games and more of a piece of art now than before.
Don does write a swell article, unlike some of you jerkoffs.
I found some of the puzzles in the earlier tomb raiders and adventure games really dumb…even smart people don’t think alike and i always got annoyed that they expect me to use some defined logic to solve a problem…
Games are about escape, about playing a role and hence the more cinematic approach to games….It also makes sense that a game needs to have a foundation in terms of gameplay and that usually results in a lack of variation as you play through…even bioshock did have much variation in the latter stages…
But i have been hugely impressed by the games of the last 3 or 4 years, there are awesome games in every genre, even when compared to titles of yester-year…
LBP, Mario Galaxy and Rachet and Clank are such different platformers on every level, but all great in their own right…and all were perfectly balanced in terms of difficulty…and there’s nothing “random or cheap” about these experiences…similarly, there’s puzzle quest, dead space, bioshock, world in conflict, CoD-modern warfare, Crysis, Warhammer, left for dead, spore…etc
If you pick a genre, you can find tons of great games…I think hype and expectations sometimes kills games…
Games have been dumbed down and that that is becuause th demographic has changed from the once small group of hardcore gamers. To nowa days where they are viewed in the respect of movies. They have been made super mainstream. And for mass appeal they have been made easier. Maybe dumber isnt the correct word I would go with easier because AI has become much smarter and human especially since this gen of games has been around.
I can’t agree any more, at least their are some people who see the same changes that I’ve noticed.Especially among the newer generation where all we see are gamers who care about graphics.These genre of fanboys totally disregard any of the greatness that old- school games had to offer. Seriously I feel that the dumbing down of game is like freaking punch to the gut to some gamers, but it pisses me off. Goals change, qualities change, shouldn’t even have thought that the gaming industry was oblivious to what I’ve seen times before when money is involved.
exemplary work. You have gained a new fan. I hope you keep up the good work and I look forward to more of the same interesting posts.