1992-2003 Golden Age, 2004-2009 Depression

I think you are just trying to troll. Also, Counter Strike: Source, by far, has the absolute best players on it I have ever seen. I played Call of Duty: World at War on 360 at my friend's house for a few minutes, and completely owned. I've been playing Counter Strike: Source for awhile now, and it's still hard for me to get more kills than deaths.

People always make out the past to be better than it actually was.

It's so true, ask anyone over 20 years old. 2004 is when games got waaaaay too easy, especially with WoW and HL2 Any true gamer knows when HL2 came out, that was the end. They ruined Counterstrike with CS: Source, and Doom 3 was HORRIBLE. Quake 4 was a disaster in 2005, and Mortal Kombat Deception topped off the 40 year old virgin horrid movie sundae that year. Just admit it. Goldeneye/Counterstrike 1.3 were the daysgoldenagex

Source ruined Counterstrike, it became waaay too easygoldenagex

I think you are just trying to troll. Also, Counter Strike: Source, by far, has the absolute best players on it I have ever seen. I played Call of Duty: World at War on 360 at my friend's house for a few minutes, and completely owned. I've been playing Counter Strike: Source for awhile now, and it's still hard for me to get more kills than deaths.

People always make out the past to be better than it actually was.

DeathScape666

From the start of Nintendo till th end of Ps2 era was golden age. It's still good now, but no where what it used to be.

[QUOTE="clubsammich91"]

[QUOTE="goldenagex"]It's so true, ask anyone over 20 years old. 2004 is when games got waaaaay too easy, especially with WoW and HL2 Any true gamer knows when HL2 came out, that was the end. They ruined Counterstrike with CS: Source, and Doom 3 was HORRIBLE. Quake 4 was a disaster in 2005, and Mortal Kombat Deception topped off the 40 year old virgin horrid movie sundae that year. Just admit it. Goldeneye/Counterstrike 1.3 were the daysgoldenagex

I think you are just trying to troll. Also, Counter Strike: Source, by far, has the absolute best players on it I have ever seen. I played Call of Duty: World at War on 360 at my friend's house for a few minutes, and completely owned. I've been playing Counter Strike: Source for awhile now, and it's still hard for me to get more kills than deaths.

People always make out the past to be better than it actually was.

DeathScape666

CS 1.6 is actually much better than Source, player skill wise and gameplay wise. You shoulddefinetly try it out if you enjoy source.

It's so true, ask anyone over 20 years old. 2004 is when games got waaaaay too easy, especially with WoW and HL2 Any true gamer knows when HL2 came out, that was the end. They ruined Counterstrike with CS: Source, and Doom 3 was HORRIBLE. Quake 4 was a disaster in 2005, and Mortal Kombat Deception topped off the 40 year old virgin horrid movie sundae that year. Just admit it. Goldeneye/Counterstrike 1.3 were the daysgoldenagex

You are 100% wrong. Goldeneye was great, but its not online so who gives a crap about it. Counterstrike 1.3 was great 100 years ago but now its stale. Source was terrible because it was 1.3 with a facelift. Can't go prone, same terrible animations, same stupid imbalanced weapons, same imbalanced maps, no vehicles, etc. Doom 3 was horrible for the same reason. It tries to much to be the old Doom, but nobody wants to play that nonsense anymore. It's done.

World of Warcraft is the most successful MMO and one of the best selling computer games of all time, so your opinion that it is somehow a reason that gaming now stinks is a minority opinion to say the least. MK Deception was just a poor game from a poor developing company. SF4 on the other hand is better than SF:3rd strike which was better than SF2. I'm sure you don't agree, but that brings me to my explanation of that:

Sounds like you are just getting old. Problem sometimes when you get old is you see everything from your own youth as somehow superior to modern stuff. It's why when your grandma plays music, its terrible old music you would never listen to, and the movies she probably likes are all terribly acted and black and white. It's just the way it is. You get stuck in your time period and can't move on.

From the start of Nintendo till th end of Ps2 era was golden age. It's still good now, but no where what it used to be.

Chutebox

Everquest was the most successful MMORPG imo. As for Source being a facelift for Original CS, that's completley false. It was a totally different game. goldenagex

I'm not even going to look at the numbers, so this is just a claim that I'm sure is 100% true.

Everquest never....ever....EVER had anywhere near the number of subscribers WoW currently does.....period.

Source is not a completely different game at all. Same guns, same maps, same mechanics. Essentially it is irrelevent in an era of COD4, which is why it sucks.

[QUOTE="goldenagex"]Everquest was the most successful MMORPG imo. As for Source being a facelift for Original CS, that's completley false. It was a totally different game. Catpee

I'm not even going to look at the numbers, so this is just a claim that I'm sure is 100% true.

Everquest never....ever....EVER had anywhere near the number of subscribers WoW currently does.....period.

Source is not a completely different game at all. Same guns, same maps, same mechanics. Essentially it is irrelevent in an era of COD4, which is why it sucks.

Everquest was the most successful MMORPG imo. As for Source being a facelift for Original CS, that's completley false. It was a totally different game. goldenagex

[QUOTE="goldenagex"]Everquest was the most successful MMORPG imo. As for Source being a facelift for Original CS, that's completley false. It was a totally different game. death919

I say you're right. Games are being dumbed down nowadays, *sigh* loved the old days 8)

[QUOTE="death919"][QUOTE="goldenagex"]Everquest was the most successful MMORPG imo. As for Source being a facelift for Original CS, that's completley false. It was a totally different game. goldenagex

[QUOTE="Catpee"]

[QUOTE="goldenagex"]Everquest was the most successful MMORPG imo. As for Source being a facelift for Original CS, that's completley false. It was a totally different game. goldenagex

I'm not even going to look at the numbers, so this is just a claim that I'm sure is 100% true.

Everquest never....ever....EVER had anywhere near the number of subscribers WoW currently does.....period.

Source is not a completely different game at all. Same guns, same maps, same mechanics. Essentially it is irrelevent in an era of COD4, which is why it sucks.

[QUOTE="Catpee"]

[QUOTE="goldenagex"]Everquest was the most successful MMORPG imo. As for Source being a facelift for Original CS, that's completley false. It was a totally different game. goldenagex

I'm not even going to look at the numbers, so this is just a claim that I'm sure is 100% true.

Everquest never....ever....EVER had anywhere near the number of subscribers WoW currently does.....period.

Source is not a completely different game at all. Same guns, same maps, same mechanics. Essentially it is irrelevent in an era of COD4, which is why it sucks.

Millions of subscribers disagree with you, and millions of gamers disagree with pretty much everything you have said in this thread. It's one thing to come out with an opinion backed with a strong argument, but you are coming out with nothing. Everquest is better because WoW wouldn't exist without Everquest?

Cool, so Laser Disk is superior to DVD, hubs are better than switches, and the Model T is superior to the Escalade....

I say you're right. Games are being dumbed down nowadays, *sigh* loved the old days 8)

kunggustaf

Yes because Pitfall was an incredibly deep game.

Games are not being dumbed down, but singleplayer is becoming irrelevent. Games are becoming only as difficult as your real life opponent makes them, and that is fine by me. This is the age of connectivity. Maybe you like playing games that were made artificially difficult because of poor design mechanics or cheesy AI, but I'll pass on the nostalgia.

I like gaming more now than I did before....I'm 22, if that matters.

[QUOTE="DeathScape666"]

I think you are just trying to troll. Also, Counter Strike: Source, by far, has the absolute best players on it I have ever seen. I played Call of Duty: World at War on 360 at my friend's house for a few minutes, and completely owned. I've been playing Counter Strike: Source for awhile now, and it's still hard for me to get more kills than deaths.

People always make out the past to be better than it actually was.

videogamesrdead

only things i really agree with are that WoW has become too easy...

I agree TC but give it up, you can't change the minds of people in huge denial. I'll tell you why you've been depressed all those years, it's because standards have dropped greatly aswell as society degraded. The majority don't have them normal standards anymore. Thus game quality plummets. It will continue. The need for creativity and challenge is somewhat dead right now. It's all about flash and no substance.

I agree TC but give it up, you can't change the minds of people in huge denial. I'll tell you why you've been depressed all those years, it's because standards have dropped greatly aswell as society degraded. The majority don't have them normal standards anymore. Thus game quality plummets. It will continue. The need for creativity and challenge is somewhat dead right now. It's all about flash and no substance.

FloWeN-UK

My favourite generation was the 16bit one. Sonic2, Streets of Rage2, Street Fighter 2, Super Mario World, Mario All Stars, Castlevania4, etc are still some of the best games ever!

This gen is going great aswell. Easly as good as last 2 gens :)

Has gaming declined since the earlier days? probably not. Has gaming improved as much as I had expected? once again, probably not.

For me, the SNES days were the best.

[QUOTE="FloWeN-UK"]

I agree TC but give it up, you can't change the minds of people in huge denial. I'll tell you why you've been depressed all those years, it's because standards have dropped greatly aswell as society degraded. The majority don't have them normal standards anymore. Thus game quality plummets. It will continue. The need for creativity and challenge is somewhat dead right now. It's all about flash and no substance.

death919

How have standards risen for him if he's the one liking the older games over the new. If standards had risen games wouldn't be as dumbed down and easy like they are to this very day. Newer games are supposed to improve over the old not get worse. An innovation and creativity are just as easy now as they where back in the days. Developers are just focusing on people who like teh flash aka people with lower standards. Easily pleasing people.

People need to get back to their normal standards so we can have games with depth and quality in them again. Not ripped apart for the sake of easily pleased. They shouldn't matter, it hinders quality, it hinders art, it hinders everything. It's sad, it's not the developers that hold this industry back, it's the gamers. The easily pleased lower standard gamer. This is a shambles of a game generation and I've liked everyone before it.

I agree. From 1995 gaming just seemed to be getting more progressively creative. And then suddenly it stopped. I can't help but think of Xenosaga, which was so promising, but the latter two titles faltered and were cut short with major plot changes.

TC, I actually agree with you, contrary to what everyone here is saying.

I think gaming is better than it ever was. Stop being nostalgic, and hypocritical.

The reason why everything was so much "better" was because everything was so simple. Now, people want innovation and revolution and when they don't get it, the game fails.

Gaming isn't failing, you are. You lost sight of what was important and would rather have some new feature like "play dead" in Haze (people actually hyped that s*** up) instead of just doing what has been done already, but refining it.

You want Crysis 2.0 instead of a good game. It's a tragedy that a game like Shadowrun was shunned when all you guys get on here and when people mention Halo or COD you say (ZOMGZ THOSE GAEMZ TAYKE NO SK1LL!!!) but then when a game does take skill, only it doesn't look as great as other games, it's ignored.

Or any other game that's fun but gets ignored because it's not Crysis Jr or Gears of War 2 Jr. (Piece of s*** game that is beyond flawed but has a fanbase because it's pretty)

Stop crying. You guys are the ones destroying the industry. Most of you probably didn't even buy a GameCube so you weren't supporting Nintendo in the first place yet you're the same people crying about how they sold out. What else did you expect them to do? Try to cater to a crowd that wasn't acknowledging them? They saw what happened to Sega.

Now you complain games are too easy. Gee, I wonder why. Maybe because you want all this other unnecessary s*** so devs don't have the time to do what actually matters.

MMM maybe but more in the sense of the way nintendo has gone... think of nintendo before 03 wind waker, pikmin, super mario 64, ocorina of time, rare was with them..... the list goes on. after 03 really what STELLAR games has nintendo produced

I agree TC but give it up, you can't change the minds of people in huge denial. I'll tell you why you've been depressed all those years, it's because standards have dropped greatly aswell as society degraded. The majority don't have them normal standards anymore. Thus game quality plummets. It will continue. The need for creativity and challenge is somewhat dead right now. It's all about flash and no substance.

FloWeN-UK

Yeah, we are all in denial. I mean:

Verses

Who would EVER want to play that second game when the first one is obviously so much more immersive and deep....[/sarcasm]

You nostalgic people kill me. Talk about denial.....