Is modern gaming shit?

I wouldn't say it's "shit", but it's definitely not for me. old man (25 y/o) having trouble keeping up with the times, but a lot of popular games seem very generic/cookie-cutter to me.

Primarily why I stick to retro gaming, arcade gaming, and smaller budget titles aimed at my niche(s). My favorite game last gen was probably Sin & Punishment: Star Succesor. My favorite upcoming game is probably Armikrog.

Rummaging among my favorites........

On the PC:

I have my fill of.....

My favorite genre: flight sims (FSX, X-Plane, DCS series, Aerofly FS, the IL-2 series).

FPS games (Far Cry 3, STALKER, the Crysis games, Metro Last Light, ARMA 2, Bioshock)

Strategy games (World In Conflict, The Total War games, Civ V, Sins of a Solar Empire)

3rd-person games (Mass Effect trilogy, the Lara Croft games, Alan Wake)

Plus whatever games from previous gens that I refuse to give up. They come along too.

On the PS3:

The odd exclusive here and there, including my favorite on the platform: the Uncharted series. I don't consider them as TPS. Rather to me, they're more like adventure games with shooting elements.

Then there's the sports games which I play exclusively on consoles for a while now.

Plenty of nice games to me.

If you look at big budget AAA full-price games I can see how you might think gaming is not in a great place, however the massive indie/independent scene is producing enough interesting and unique titles to fill in the gaps left by the major ones.

Many modern games are dumbed down, so yes.

Examples are the latest Hitman and Splinter Cell. Where is the stealth, man? Old Splinter Cell games punishes you for using the gun as it is for your last resort. It's totally the opposite for modern Splinter Cell - I didn't buy Blacklist for an obvious reason here.

All of modern gaming isn't, but as far as the 0.1% of yearly game releases that are classified as "AAA blockbuster titles" most of them do absolutely nothing for me anymore.

After 38 years of gaming, I can safely say 'No'

It's funny because kickstarted games are the answer towards this problem - yet the seem people who want change in their games are afraid of them...

Ironic.

If anything there are too many good games

It's much worse than it was a decade ago, but not shit. You just have to have taste and be smart with your money and it's pretty much as fun as it ever was.

no. just wary of funding unproven projects, which are not gaurenteed to be good, but I'm not having this conversation again. even crappy phrases like "they thought PC gaming was dead, donate to star citizen to prove them wrong" marketing nonsense worked like a charm.

gaming is better now than it has ever been.

if i had seen almost any game from 2013 when i was a little kid my head would have exploded.

Honestly my friend, good modern examples of "cinematic" games are very limited. Even the once great Hitman series has taken a dive with Absolution. Or "shit" as it's commonly called.

This is an example of a very good cinematic game (inspired by a movie) without directly copying it or turning it into a shitty CGI movie.

My young friend, not only is this cinematic without sacrificing gameplay, it does it on a grand scale unlike any other game (as opposed to a bare bones incredibly linear third person Tomb Raidery clone).

Akira Kurosawa (a master and superior director to Steven Spielberg) would be proud. Sadly, he's dead and most young people on this forums exposure of Japan culture is the latest bad anime. Again, a sign of the times. It's dire my friend, dire.

They should be perfect for you, then, William.

Yes, because there is a lot of garbage like a lot lot of garbage.

No, because despite the fact that there are few good ones, the good ones are really good, they are pure gold.

The fact that Bioshock Infinite got mass critical acclaim would definitely have to make me say yes when it comes to many of the AAA budget games out there.

Whaaa? 2014 is going to be amazing for games. Gaming is better than ever when you consider how much variety is available across all platforms.

The one thing I miss from games many years ago is the difficulty. Back in the nes days you REALLY had to earn it if you were to beat a game. There weren't "unlimited" lives like there are today.

Use a game like Tyson's punch out for example. If you're good enough to make it to Tyson you're prob gonna get beat the first time. Then it will take you back to the fighter before. You have to beat him again to get the rematch with Tyson. Lose again and it's OVER. Done. Start over from the beginning. It meant something to beat a game back then.

I love the uncharted games, but I remember spending an hour on one part while playing on "crushing" difficulty. I must have died 50 times. But it was no big deal cause I knew I could start right from that same spot over and over again.

The sense of accomplishment isn't the same. But other than that I really enjoy the games of today. And I'm in my early 30's so I've been at this a while

Hell no. It's better than the Atari, Nes, N64, PS2 eras.

That's because of bad design.

@millerlight89: sure for some games I agree. But other games, like the before mentioned Tyson's punch out, they wanted to make that hard as hell. Nobody could beat him in real life back then, they were gonna make him nearly impossible to beat in the game as well. And they certainly weren't gonna just let you rematch him over and over again (unless you use the code. That's a whole diff issue).

Yes, for many reasons but the main one is the downfall of the most important aspect of a game: gameplay. Nowadays, all critics, most gamers, and developers care about is storytelling, it does not matter if a game has only 4 hours of gameplay while having 16 hours of cutscenes (Metal Gear Solid 4), awful combat and level design (Mass Effect 2), mundane activities (Heavy Rain) or if is doing obvious cash grabbing (Metal Gear Solid 4 + Metal Gear Online), if the game has a great story, the game gets away with all issues like that, but if a game is gameplay focused and has a the smallest flaw, grab your torches and pitchforks because that game is the worst thing that ever hit the earth.

Aside from the downfall of gameplay, there are the other issues with modern gaming; DRM, games that lack singleplayer, milking franchises for money, unnecessary motion controls and and changing genres in franchises.

The best game of all time (in my opinion), GTA V game out in the 7th generation, but I still consider the 7th generation to be the worst gaming generation.

In some ways, yes. Other ways, no.

The current trend for FPSes has me convinced that we need an HD doom clone, complete with maze-like environments and twitch-based singleplayer action. I think that's the only genre worth complaining about, however.

Sure if all you pay attention to is the heavily advertised stuff.

I think modern gaming is great. My only problem with modern gaming is a bigger lack of jrpgs. I like classic and modern gaming.

No. The people who think modern gaming shit are in 2 groups.

1) Cynical asshole douchebag hipsters who want to dislike modern games just because they think its cool to dislike them and talk about how awesome the ps2 and dreamcast were.

2) Gamers that are 35+ and pull the same shit every generation does. Like how your grandparents said your parents music was loud noise, and your parents didn't like what you listen to, and you probably sit and complain about what "kids today" listen to.

NES-PS2 era>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 360/PS3 era.

I'm willing to say PS4/Xbone won't be better either. Hell it probably won't beat 360/PS3

Well to be fair, you were kid in the NES days so that was a reason why it may seem difficult.

Which system?

Reliability, software support, controls, etc all play important roles.

If were only talking third party games which are generally the same on 66.7% of consoles, then it becomes more of an hardware issue.

I mean, games evolve year after year, but at the same time, ten years ago, a game under 10 hours releasing at full price would be completely unacceptable.

Yeah today's games suck. Overly scripted overly cinematic with stupid cheesy stories. Multiplayer is a joke some ding dong's take it serious and think it's a sport. I purchased close to 150 games on 360 and PS3 and only liked 10 of them. Not to mention DLC being shoved down our throats. I haven't purchased a next gen system yet I don't know if I ever will. I'm at the point now I have 30 years of gaming to look back on.

I'd say popular modern mainstream gaming is.

Sometimes. It has definitely gotten more mainstream, probably due to the graphical advancements (among other things). This can lead to games which are too focused on cinematics. But I wouldn't call it shit. Only some games are, just like some games were shit back in the day too.

So I voted no.

Of course not

Is modern gaming stupid/bad? No, in fact hell no

Are your topics stupid and bad? Yes

Oh my GAWD, "modern" gaming with its online multiplayer and shit is invading the world, Let's all go in a corner and cry about the "good old times".

It's rather simple really, The gaming era when you were 12-17 years old, will stay in your mind as "the best" one.

Its good. Just that its been the same since the Ps2 days. Before then with each new console that came out, the gameplay got better. Now the gameplay stays pretty much the same. I still have hope that games will get better in gameplay.

I dunno I think gaming is better than ever. Awesome AAA games combined with a booming indie game industry. Play both and you'll never run out of games with varied gameplay experiences.

I can put up with some negative trends such as cutscenes and QTE. The only real dislike I have for modern games, especially FPS games, are the proliferation of HUDs. A lot of these HUDs have more info than the one in say, a fighter jet which I find ridiculous. I think developers should include an option to turn off screen info totally. Some PC games have a command line console that could do just that. But, it'd be nice to have a clean screen as part of difficulty settings. Of course, having a HUD removed can reduce framerates by 1-3 fps because more of the actual 3D game screen can be seen....

Doom 3 is an example of a game that can have the HUD totally off. No crosshairs/reticle. No ammo counter unless it's built-into the weapon. No minimap. No threat indicators, etc:

Nope

There are way more games being made than ever, which more than makes up for the fact that there's a bit more shooters now than there were in the past.

Gaming is better than ever. The Legend of Zelda: A Link Between Worlds is better than any other 2D The Legend of Zelda game before it. Fire Emblem: Awakening is better than any other Fire Emblem game before it. Super Mario Galaxy 2 is better than any other game before it (nearly four years old, but still pretty modern I'd say), and Pokemon X and Y or Black (2) and White (2) are better than any other game before it (it's a tough choice between them all). And Kid Icarus: Uprising is far, far better than the other two games released in the late 1980s-early 1990s.

But console gaming is dying. All 3 are going KAPUT.

@jun_aka_pekto said:

I can put up with some negative trends such as cutscenes and QTE. The only real dislike I have for modern games, especially FPS games, are the proliferation of HUDs. A lot of these HUDs have more info than the one in say, a fighter jet which I find ridiculous. I think developers should include an option to turn off screen info totally. Some PC games have a command line console that could do just that. But, it'd be nice to have a clean screen as part of difficulty settings. Of course, having a HUD removed can reduce framerates by 1-3 fps because more of the actual 3D game screen can be seen....

Doom 3 is an example of a game that can have the HUD totally off. No crosshairs/reticle. No ammo counter unless it's built-into the weapon. No minimap. No threat indicators, etc:

My friend, it's funny. Hu-warous. At the time of it's release, people bashed doom 3. Felt it was simple, slow and nothing like the original title. However, compared to todays shooters, doom 3 is a complicated challenging game. This dip in quality can easily be attributed to Halo and Call Of Duty. The two console gaming bad games that ruined everyone.

I think someone is just very old..

I'm 32 and have been gaming since the 80's...and I couldn't disagree more. Personally I think the problem is you are a shit person. If you don't like games like CoD and Uncharted play something else? I do most of my gaming on the PC and there is no lack of awesome/complicated/deep/etc games to play. Right now finishing up Blackguards, after which I'll be playing MMX, then might jump on the new Warriors of the North DLC, and beyond that I am waiting on:

Divinity: Original Sin

Dark Souls 2

Dead State

Grimrock 2

Pillars of Eternity

Witcher 3

Grim Dawn

Age of Wonders 3

Galactic Civilizations 3

Warlock II

Legends of Eisenwald

New Planescape game (forgot name)

Eschalon: Book 3

Hellraid

Clockwork Empires

Elite: Dangerous

Star Citizen

Dying Light

Damn lol...looking at the list (that doesn't even include bad-ass indie games) I have no idea how the heck I'm going to find time to play all these games. A good resource to see a lot of what's upcoming this year is this:

http://www.pcgamer.com/2014/01/04/the-best-pc-games-of-2014/

If you can't find a bunch of games to look forward to there I dunno what to say...maybe it's time to find a new hobby.

I agree. Although, In some aspects, it is getting worse. Console gaming is clearly for people that don't want a challenge, so those games are just holding your hand through some lame, movie game that typically has more cliches than your average action movie.

Pc, though, is getting better and better. Genres are being combined -- like real open world rpgs. Crowd funding is allowing us to choose which games we want to see released, and support, letting us play through development. I'm pretty excited about the oculus rift as well.