What will we remember about games 10 years from now?

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#1 Edited by drekula2 (1666 posts) -

Look at games 10 years ago. Many of the games that got 9's and AAA status back then aren't the ones of the 6th gen we're currently talking about now. I think the standards we have of what makes a superb good now are TOTALLY DIFFERENT than what makes a game that we will still think is superb 10 year from now.

Things that matter now (but not so much 10 years from now):
How much the game costs
How long the game is
How realistic or technically proficient the graphics look

Also, I think it's mostly extrinsic. For example, if Gears of War (1) were the only GeoW game in existence, it would go down in history as a classic. But now with 3 more Gears games that borrow the same exact mechanics and do little to innovate, it can't really be a classic.

#2 Posted by treedoor (7478 posts) -

I'll personally remember this as a dark time when companies strove to deliver cutscene and set-piece-driven "games" with terrible stories, and boring gameplay.

I just hope the big companies move away from that model, and actually choose to tell stories utilizing gaming's strengths. It's not very fun to play through a string of cutscenes tied together by cover-based whack-a-mole murder sequences.

#3 Posted by jsmoke03 (12036 posts) -

i would have fond memories with a lot of games that i played. gaming in general gives me good memories even the gen before ps2 when i wasnt really into gaming much.

#4 Posted by millerlight89 (18330 posts) -

I'll remember this as one of the best times for gaming. Absolutely brilliant games. Amazing consoles, amazing story driven games, amazing mp games. So much win. I'll also sadly remember this as when I stepped away from my mouse and keyboard and embraced the finer things in gaming.

#5 Posted by GrenadeLauncher (2218 posts) -

When they were good.

When Microsoft hadn't murdered the industry with its malignant presence.

When they weren't mostly mobile games.

Take your pick.

#6 Posted by millerlight89 (18330 posts) -

When they were good.

When Microsoft hadn't murdered the industry with its malignant presence.

When they weren't mostly mobile games.

Take your pick.

10 years from now mobile games will not be of the same quality we have today. They will probably be around console games of today.

#7 Posted by cainetao11 (14394 posts) -

@drekula2 said:

Look at games 10 years ago. Many of the games that got 9's and AAA status back then aren't the ones of the 6th gen we're currently talking about now. I think the standards we have of what makes a superb good now are TOTALLY DIFFERENT than what makes a game that we will still think is superb 10 year from now.

Things that matter now (but not so much 10 years from now):

How much the game costs

How long the game is

How realistic or technically proficient the graphics look

Also, I think it's mostly extrinsic. For example, if Gears of War (1) were the only GeoW game in existence, it would go down in history as a classic. But now with 3 more Gears games that borrow the same exact mechanics and do little to innovate, it can't really be a classic.

I disagree. Some will say film has different rules, but I am from a different philosophy, there are only the rules YOU yourself imply. Take the film the Godfather. Nominated for best pic, screenplay and actor. Godfather 2, nominated for best pic, screenplay and actor. If you are a student of film you will see all 3 Godfather films (3 isn't as good as 1&2, but nowhere near as bad as made out to be) follow the same formula. It happens and works. Gears got better with each imo. Gears 3 is better than 1, but judgment fell off, though not as bad as made out to be imo.

#8 Posted by millerlight89 (18330 posts) -

@drekula2 said:

Look at games 10 years ago. Many of the games that got 9's and AAA status back then aren't the ones of the 6th gen we're currently talking about now. I think the standards we have of what makes a superb good now are TOTALLY DIFFERENT than what makes a game that we will still think is superb 10 year from now.

Things that matter now (but not so much 10 years from now):

How much the game costs

How long the game is

How realistic or technically proficient the graphics look

Also, I think it's mostly extrinsic. For example, if Gears of War (1) were the only GeoW game in existence, it would go down in history as a classic. But now with 3 more Gears games that borrow the same exact mechanics and do little to innovate, it can't really be a classic.

I disagree. Some will say film has different rules, but I am from a different philosophy, there are only the rules YOU yourself imply. Take the film the Godfather. Nominated for best pic, screenplay and actor. Godfather 2, nominated for best pic, screenplay and actor. If you are a student of film you will see all 3 Godfather films (3 isn't as good as 1&2, but nowhere near as bad as made out to be) follow the same formula. It happens and works. Gears got better with each imo. Gears 3 is better than 1, but judgment fell off, though not as bad as made out to be imo.

That's because people hold each sequel up to the franchise games that came before it. Now, whether that is how it should go is up to the individual. It's like people holding Deus Ex IW up to the first. The first was a "masterpiece," but people act like IW is the worst game ever. I think it is a great game, but then again I feel it is the better of the two period.

#9 Posted by BattleSpectre (4822 posts) -

Killing noobs and being killed by noobs.

#10 Posted by cainetao11 (14394 posts) -

@cainetao11 said:

@drekula2 said:

Look at games 10 years ago. Many of the games that got 9's and AAA status back then aren't the ones of the 6th gen we're currently talking about now. I think the standards we have of what makes a superb good now are TOTALLY DIFFERENT than what makes a game that we will still think is superb 10 year from now.

Things that matter now (but not so much 10 years from now):

How much the game costs

How long the game is

How realistic or technically proficient the graphics look

Also, I think it's mostly extrinsic. For example, if Gears of War (1) were the only GeoW game in existence, it would go down in history as a classic. But now with 3 more Gears games that borrow the same exact mechanics and do little to innovate, it can't really be a classic.

I disagree. Some will say film has different rules, but I am from a different philosophy, there are only the rules YOU yourself imply. Take the film the Godfather. Nominated for best pic, screenplay and actor. Godfather 2, nominated for best pic, screenplay and actor. If you are a student of film you will see all 3 Godfather films (3 isn't as good as 1&2, but nowhere near as bad as made out to be) follow the same formula. It happens and works. Gears got better with each imo. Gears 3 is better than 1, but judgment fell off, though not as bad as made out to be imo.

That's because people hold each sequel up to the franchise games that came before it. Now, whether that is how it should go is up to the individual. It's like people holding Deus Ex IW up to the first. The first was a "masterpiece," but people act like IW is the worst game ever. I think it is a great game, but then again I feel it is the better of the two period.

Right there with ya. Judge each as their own. DE IW was great, score shows it. HR is also great and it was received as such. Its a cop out to bring in previous installations to the review. I am not playing those games as I review THIS ONE.

#11 Edited by emgesp (1926 posts) -

We will look at the Wii U like we look at the Virtual Boy now.

#12 Edited by cainetao11 (14394 posts) -

Something along these lines

#13 Posted by killerfist (19788 posts) -

Kids going from cursing in private to the TV to cursing online at random strangers somewhere at the other side of the planet

Also, companies trying to deliver Hollywood blockbusters.

#14 Posted by drekula2 (1666 posts) -

@drekula2 said:

Look at games 10 years ago. Many of the games that got 9's and AAA status back then aren't the ones of the 6th gen we're currently talking about now. I think the standards we have of what makes a superb good now are TOTALLY DIFFERENT than what makes a game that we will still think is superb 10 year from now.

Things that matter now (but not so much 10 years from now):

How much the game costs

How long the game is

How realistic or technically proficient the graphics look

Also, I think it's mostly extrinsic. For example, if Gears of War (1) were the only GeoW game in existence, it would go down in history as a classic. But now with 3 more Gears games that borrow the same exact mechanics and do little to innovate, it can't really be a classic.

I disagree. Some will say film has different rules, but I am from a different philosophy, there are only the rules YOU yourself imply. Take the film the Godfather. Nominated for best pic, screenplay and actor. Godfather 2, nominated for best pic, screenplay and actor. If you are a student of film you will see all 3 Godfather films (3 isn't as good as 1&2, but nowhere near as bad as made out to be) follow the same formula. It happens and works. Gears got better with each imo. Gears 3 is better than 1, but judgment fell off, though not as bad as made out to be imo.

The Godfather 2 has often been seen as a superior sequel to the extremely acclaimed first entry. But Godfather is in invalid example for two reasons.

1. It's anomaly. You picked it because it was a rarity. The reality is that most sequels aren't as successful

2. Godfather =/= Gears. Godfather 2 was successful because it offers a fresh perspective on a narrative. Gears wasn't as well known for it's narrative as it was it's mechanics. When Gears 3 refined the mechanics, it made 1 obsolete. Why would I play Gears 1 online if I already had Gears 3? Gf2 did not make Gf1 obsolte

#15 Posted by cainetao11 (14394 posts) -

@drekula2 said:

@cainetao11 said:

@drekula2 said:

Look at games 10 years ago. Many of the games that got 9's and AAA status back then aren't the ones of the 6th gen we're currently talking about now. I think the standards we have of what makes a superb good now are TOTALLY DIFFERENT than what makes a game that we will still think is superb 10 year from now.

Things that matter now (but not so much 10 years from now):

How much the game costs

How long the game is

How realistic or technically proficient the graphics look

Also, I think it's mostly extrinsic. For example, if Gears of War (1) were the only GeoW game in existence, it would go down in history as a classic. But now with 3 more Gears games that borrow the same exact mechanics and do little to innovate, it can't really be a classic.

I disagree. Some will say film has different rules, but I am from a different philosophy, there are only the rules YOU yourself imply. Take the film the Godfather. Nominated for best pic, screenplay and actor. Godfather 2, nominated for best pic, screenplay and actor. If you are a student of film you will see all 3 Godfather films (3 isn't as good as 1&2, but nowhere near as bad as made out to be) follow the same formula. It happens and works. Gears got better with each imo. Gears 3 is better than 1, but judgment fell off, though not as bad as made out to be imo.

The Godfather 2 has often been seen as a superior sequel to the extremely acclaimed first entry. But Godfather is in invalid example for two reasons.

1. It's anomaly. You picked it because it was a rarity. The reality is that most sequels aren't as successful

2. Godfather =/= Gears. Godfather 2 was successful because it offers a fresh perspective on a narrative. Gears wasn't as well known for it's narrative as it was it's mechanics. When Gears 3 refined the mechanics, it made 1 obsolete. Why would I play Gears 1 online if I already had Gears 3? Gf2 did not make Gf1 obsolte

Ok, then explain Lord of the rings 2 towers, The Empire strikes back, the Dark Knight, Spiderman 2, X men 2? I, look at games differently then you. I enjoy the story of the games SP campaign FIRST. Gears 2 doesn't exist without one's narrative, nor three. Godfather 2, a third of the narrative is from the novel "the Godfather" purposely left out for a sequel. I like the narrative that many chide in gaming because I see its youth but love it without comparing it to other forms of story telling. Godfather in this sense DOES = Gears

#16 Posted by Netret0120 (1539 posts) -

DLC

Worst thing to happen to gaming!!!!!

Day 1 DLC, like wtf?!

#17 Edited by drekula2 (1666 posts) -

DLC

Worst thing to happen to gaming!!!!!

Day 1 DLC, like wtf?!

DLC is the best thing to happen to gaming if you play games from Valve.

#18 Posted by foxhound_fox (85326 posts) -

A lot of Nintendo games.

#19 Edited by TREAL_Since (11945 posts) -

A general list of what I'm likely to remember the most.

  • Experiencing 1080p, 60 FPS, and 32X AA on PC for the first time (personal thing).
  • Naughty Dog turning the fuck up.
  • Microsoft almost being able to murder Sony's arrogant behind with 360, but failed in the last few years before XBO.
  • Wii to Wii U appeal difference.
  • Sony's humble turn around with cooler management.
  • Call of Duty's reign: the hate, the impact, the good, and the bad. Everyone will remember this.
  • Games where you take cover.
  • Not enough Japanese console classics.
  • The best Japanese games were better, and more memorable than most western developed games (Dark Souls, Demon's Souls, Ni No Kuni, MGS 4, Valkyria Chronicles, Super Mario Galaxy, Xenoblade Chronicles, Skyward Sword, Street Fighter, and a crap load of DS games lol)
  • Shooter standards changing dramatically.
  • Social features in games taking over, namely in shooters.
  • Mediocre iOS games getting high reviews.
  • RROD
  • PSN hacked
  • Indies making an exciting rise in appeal.
  • Valve's amazing expansion.
  • Minecraft's awesome takeover with young gamers, inspiring creativity and co-operation.