Slashdot Mirror
Games All Downhill Since Pong?
In a recent article Nolan Bushnell laments the current state of gaming, stating that modern games are nothing more than a "race to the bottom" resulting in complete and utter trash. In order to combat what he sees as the downward spiral in game quality he continues to work on his new dining experience uWink that features tabletop games and a "reasonably priced meal". RPS weighs in on the subject arguing that, while the unhealthy obsession with Halo 3 might be a bit misplaced, there are plenty of gems to be found amidst the flotsam and jetsam.
It had great team play. It had balanced objects. It had just the right amount of speed.
It had suspension of disbelief.
I so miss it.
i don't think referencing a fad (a tech gimmick-based game) really helps your argument. it's by Valve, and it has fun with physics and portal puzzles--but brand and tech doesn't make a great game. it may be nice, but it isn't anywhere near good enough for you to troll a thread with one word responses.
Coming from the guy who was part of Atari AND founded Chuck E. Cheeses, it seems Bushnell is stating HIS personal goal/philosophy of gaming.
Has Mr. Bushnell played Wii? The article is pretty vague on what exactly his beef is with modern video games, but Nintendo seems to be aiming to do the same thing he is with his interactive restaurant games (minus the food of course).
"Her idea of wit is nothing more than an incisive observation humorously phrased and delivered with impeccable timing."
is games that have lived on because they have infinite ways of being played....
ping pong
chess
tennis
sudoko, ect
Maybe generational but there is an aspect of what kind of games do you like.
I watch my son playing Final Fantasy on his PS2 and the ridiculous complexity of weapons, healing potions, tactics, characters and maps just takes away any possibility of me just enjoying the game or environment.
The only thing I'll play on the kids consoles are the driving games.
For me there would still be great pleasure in Xevious or Tempest.
If you don't want to repeat the past, stop living in it.
he forgot tetris... BLASPHEMY what other game do you know is able to etch its self directly into your brain? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetris_effect though he is somewhat correct, a lot of the games have been utter garbage lately, although most of the bad games of the past died a quiet death to be forgotten as it should be.
Sigs are too short to say anything truly profound so read the above post instead.
I realize that TFA is mainly referring to console games, but the statement is still kid of dumb. (not the Pong parent)
Civilization. XCOM. MOO1&2. Wing Commander. Railroad Tycoon. Harpoon. Steel Panthers. Master of Magic.
I just find it endlessly frustrating that The Powers That Be are trying so hard to kill PC gaming; the only things being released these days are Real Time Strategy (RTS games are NOT strategy games, developers; I love strategy games) & FPS; I like FPS's but consoles will always be better for "twitch" games, except flight sims.
Hopefully when Spore comes out next year (with any luck) the developers will remember that there are a hell of a lot more people with PC's than there are with consoles; I would love a modern interpretation of Wing Commander (with joystick support, Mr. Roberts) or, of course, Master of Magic (Age of Wonders: Shadowmagic is close, but not close enough).
PS: get off my lawn.
Why, yes, I AM a Pagan Libertarian.
I think it's important to note that early generation consoles (i.e Atari 2600) cost nearly the same as those made thirty years later - about $300 MSRP (usually discounted). So in 1982 little Jimmy's mom and dad could easily be asked to spend half their mortgage payment on a new console system, plus games. In 2002 a new Xbox/PS2/GameCube was what? Less than five day's pay at minimum wage.
The relatively high price of the 2600 kept the user base pretty small. We all played them, but I bet most of us went to neighbor kids house to do it. Of course, with the video game crash 1983, a massive console glut was created....so maybe everybody's parents bought them after the crash.
I judt got a nre Kinesis keybiartf so please excusr ant egregiou typos.
"Pong" is a little before my time, I've only got about 23 years of experience as an avid gamer. And, in my opinion, this is just bunk.
Back in the good old days? There were fantastic, innovative, fun games, and there was also immense quantities of absolute garbage.
And now? There are fantastic, innovative, fun games, and there is also immense quantities of absolute garbage.
Any claim that games were "better" in the old days is just so much nostalgia and selective memory. Think a bit harder, you'll remember those games you pirated on the C64 that were so bad that you'd spend 2 minutes waiting for the game to load and then only 30 seconds playing it before you tossed the tape back in the case.
The original pong did not have a CPU; it was made out of discrete logic circuits soldered together on a logic board.
You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
So, great, he's a father of the industry.
Ever been to uWink, his latest idea? It's godawful. Imagine the most tired, re-tread, uninspired, and dull fare you could get from the unholy collision of an Applebees, California Pizza Kitchen, and PF Chang's. The hook? You get to use a touch screen to order your food! Wow, touch screens! You know, like you use at the airport, your ATM, the occasional gas station, and about 500,000 other places. Plus they've got incredibly dull table games... Oh, and for kicks, the touch sensors on the screen are so comically inaccurate -- so make sure to double check that you're getting what you've ordered.
The decor is kind of like chromey mid-90s meets that bar in Star Trek 3, only people look like they're having a lot less fun. Basically, imagine any "futuristic" concept hacked out by any of a dozen subpar ad agencies or architecture firms around 1997. The Century City food court is 10x more self-consciously "futuristic" in its design and seems less ridiculous.
And the last bit of fun: Anything that's actually edible on the menu will be sold out. Ditto for any beers worth drinking. So enjoy that exotic pepperoni pizza and bud light...
Nope, sorry, give me Mario Kart, Guitar Hero, GTA, Final Fantasy 4, Katamari Damacy, Civilization, X-Com, Star Control, or any other of about six dozen games that are brilliant or brilliantly fun. If I wanted to go someplace and be bored while surrounded by awful overpriced food and where touch screens pass as a killer app, I'd hang out at the airport.
I am not Herbert.
Portal has nothing on Pong.
Portal is fun for the two hours it takes to complete it. Then it's over.
Pong remains fun years later, even if it is a bit simple. Maybe not for two hours at a time, but definitely for more than two hours total.
And, yes, I'm aware that Portal artificially increases gameplay length with the Advanced and Challenge maps, but those are repeats of sections of the original game and, having completed the Advanced maps, not so much fun as "vein-popping frustrating."
A recent study showed that if people have to wait for more than 4 s for a website to load they get bored. I had to watch a stupid advertisement for 15 s, or press a link I discovered after 4.5 s. Sorry mates, I won't see your website. This was an even more stupid and offensive way to force advertisements down my throat than those stupid popup advertisemnts you see on some websites.
-- Cheers!
I've been enjoying and playing games since Atari 2400. I've enjoyed my share of Pac-Man, Joust, Missile Command, Super Mario Bros, Contra (one of my favorites), Wolfenstein 3d, Mech Warrior 2, Warcraft 2, (never did get into Starcraft or Red Alert), Quake (Team Fortress), Half-Life (TFC, Counterstrike), Diablo, Diablo 2 (favorite) , Half-Life 2 (Eps1-2, Portal, TF2) (favorite), Quake 3, Unreal Tournament, Runescape, Tony Hawk Pro Skater 3 (sadly, a failed port... could have been MUCH better. Yet, it was still really decent), Need for Speed: Underground 2 (not enough replayability, stupid EA for not supporting the mod community), Civilization 2, 3, 4, Bejewelled, Zuma, Bookworm, Text Twist (favorite), Peggle, Morrowind, Oblivion (favorite), Never-Winter Nights, Everquest, Zelda 1, 2 (favorite), Tetris, Metroid, Netcraft, kMoria (on the Palm), the Sims, Sim City 2000, Tiger Woods Golf and Wii sports. (not a complete list of the games I've enjoyed.)
... well, he may have a point, but there is just as much gameplay in Civilization 3 or 4 (multiplayer) as there is in pong.
// Your welcome for the trip down memory lane ;)
You'll notice I have a wide variety of interest in games, I think I've covered: casual gaming, first person shooters, role playing games (massively multiplayer, multiplayer and single player), strategy (real time and turn based), side scrollers, sports titles, sims and god games.
I've mentioned quite a few cream of the crop and a number of first person shooters (I nearly went professional in Quake3 and UT.) I have enjoyed all of these games and it really is a preference to the individual player. My wife: a definite casual gamer. Me? can't you tell... addicted gamer. I can easily go back and enjoy the classics as well as enjoy the new shiny. I've learned I'm no good at real-time strategy... not that good at turn-based either, but I have fun with it. Also, give Valve credit, they're doing their best at putting a decent story into first person shooters. I highly recommend an Orange Box purchase.
My point to this post is that each person has their favorite. There is no right answer to the "Best" game. To say Pong was the only decent game
Just finished playing: Oblivion, Half-Life 2 eps 1-2 (twice), Portal (this will be awesome in multiplayer)
Currently playing: Civilization 3 (with a friend), Civilization 4 (learning the game, getting ready for multiplay), kMoria (I'm finally figuring out this game), Text Twist (great on the laptop), Team Fortress 2, Never-Winter Nights (multiplay)
Will/Want to play: Need a good flight sim, a better Need for Speed game (why can't we crunch cars real good, GPUs are good enough), a good strategy game and first person shooter that utilizes dual monitors.
/ Ah! How could I have forgotten Oregon Trail and another Apple IIe classic: Montezuma's Revenge. Or, even the classic Blue Disks for the IBM PC (and compatibles).
Up until a few days ago, I probably would have agreed with TFA. I played my share of console and arcade games as a kid, and a computer game here and there (I even gave WoW a shot, and it admittedly keep me going for a few months), but I just don't generally find games all that engaging. Either they're too simple and I get bored, or they're too frustrating, and I get annoyed and bored. It just feels artificial -- if I want a challenge, there are enough projects on my to-do list to keep me busy for several lifetimes, and if I want escapism, there are a lot of books. I'm not denigrating people who do like games (we all have our hobbies), I just didn't really get the draw.
But that was before a few weekends ago, when the S.O. and I were at a friend's house and saw Wii Sports in person for the first time. I'd heard of it, of course, but had never really played it. Overall, I'm not sure it'll go down in the annals of videogames as more significant than Super Mario Brothers, but maybe it should: I saw more non-gamers pick up and have a good time with that game than I've ever seen before, on any system. Lots of people who normally would have just tuned it out as annoying background noise ended up taking a turn. And perhaps more significantly, we weren't the only couple leaving that night and saying "wow, we have got to get one of those" to each other. It's a video game system that doesn't feel like a 'video game' system -- it felt like poor-man's virtual reality. And a week later, despite living with one of the most anti-video-game people I know (and at their insistence, no less), I found myself rearranging the living room furniture so that there's more room to play Wii Tennis.
As far as I'm concerned, Nintendo should let Sony and Microsoft fight over the established market: they're creating a whole new one, or at least bringing a lot of people whose last console system was an NES back into it. The major question for them is whether they're going to be able to continue to produce games that maintain the very high bar for playability and group fun that Wii Sports does (so far, most of the third-party titles we've picked up from Blockbuster have been a bit disappointing). The question of whether the Wiimote is revolutionary or just a novelty will ultimately depend on whether they can get more games that use it effectively and intuitively, instead of just using it to emulate traditional controls or as an addon, rather than the platform's core and distinguishing feature. At least in my opinion, if you play it sitting down, somebody missed the point.
I've played Halo 3, and yes, the graphics are pretty amazing (it's probably the first game I've played where the flamethrower looked borderline convincing). I suspect, based on the hardware, that the Playstation's are even more impressive. But there's nothing there that makes we want to run out and drop half a grand. (When they're selling for $100, I'll buy an XBox3 so I can play through Halo for the plot.)
Wii Sports (and the ensuing sore arm) was pretty much worth $250, just for the sake of watching people whose knee-jerk response to any console system is "I don't do video games" change their minds and start to enjoy themselves within a few seconds of handling the controller.
Games are not dead. I think that the game publishers and the hardware developers just went though a very risk-averse phase where nobody wanted to take chances, and so they ground out basically the same product, to the same audience, over and over. If you liked that product and its evolutionary improvements, it was great. But if you didn't, there could be pretty long dry spells. I'm not sure whether the Wii is the beginning of something different, or just a temporary oasis, but you'd have to be an idiot not to enjoy it either way.
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
IMHO, that's the reason why games today for the most part suck.
Games these days are multimillion dollar affairs. And that's even before the movie is released. There is so much money at stake that no sane person would ever risk making a game without a market study and focus groups. Large projects demand it.
And that's the problem - innovation gets lost in that process. Put another way, innovation isn't safe.
Back In The Day(tm), it was just a couple of guys sitting around thinking up wacky ideas. Sometimes they stuck, and sometimes they didn't. If it failed, who cares? It's just a half a dozen guys that are already on the payroll. But if it worked, you could get innovation - and that made the difference. That's why guys my age sit around playing MAME and not giving a crap about Madden 07. How different could is possibly be from Madden 06?
Nolan is a product of the Golden Age. That's why he's disappointed with today's games. Innovation was the thing back then. A half a dozen mad mavericks could easily turn the world upside down with a really great idea.
Sadly, not possible today. That's why despite all the beautifully rendered cut scenes, bazillions of vertexes per second and obscene piles of money thrown at new titles these days the games are just simply missing that magic spark. And just plain fall flat for guys from our time.
Indie != Good. Innovative != good. Small != Good. Generally it's nostalgia clouding your judgment. You look back and remember xcom, pacman, supermario, rygar, etc.. and forgot all the dreck. There was always derivative dreck, innovation usually sucked, and golden ages are more about you then what ever you are reminiscing about. Nolan was part of the original video game collapse. It was partly his fault for letting the really dumb people run Atari.
A good idea getting to a good organization can still make a good game. KOTOR, BioShock, FFXII, Halo, Warcraft 3, Disgea, etc.. were all non too original games that achieved success by doing it right and fun. Even now small developers can still make games. IF you criteria is that a good idea ought to be enough then the newest gen of consoles will fit your bill. Wii is intrinsically cheaper to develop for and the PS3 and 360 all have smaller scale downloadable games. Try Flow, theres just an idea, one guy, and a ton of oddly addictive fun. Try any of the XNA titles, try Most DS game. This is the true golden age.
"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
And I certainly think Nolan misses the point when calling all games these days crap.
Nolan compares himself to Disney. He created Chuck E. Cheese. He bemoans the way people don't socialize the way they used to, and how men don't buy board games anymore.
Clearly, to someone like Nolan, a game like Portal is a bad game, because the better it is at being what it tries to be, the more it disinclines you to connect to other human beings.
Those who disagree with him point out all the social aspects of online gaming, which is missing his point. Reminds me of my buddy Tom. When he's not out in the field on military exercise, he's playing video games online, and if you go visit him, he won't even look up to talk to you. He might grunt and point at one of the other game systems that are scattered around the room, but that's about it.
At the end of the day, the purpose modern video games serve was once served by a campfire. It's something to stare at when you've got nothing useful to do and nothing to talk about.
-1 Uncomfortable Truth
I married into a previously-dysfunctional family, where the males played video games, watched TV or movies all the time.
Video games don't make you dysfunctional. Did I mention my wife and I don't watch TV? Aside from our favorite football team (go packers!) and 30 Rock on Thursday nights, I don't turn on our tiny 19" TV but 2 nights a week. We play outside with our kids for an hour after dinner - I go biking with my oldest son, then we come home and go for a walk as a family. We play all sorts of outside and inside sports on the weekends. Its all about balance. I can point you to families too wrapped up in playing physical sports that their families have become dysfunctional.
There is a time and a place where video games can connect people, where other activities can not. Another example, I moved 900 miles from home to go to college, leaving behind a number of friends. We kept up to speed by playing the same MMORPG - not hardcore, but in the same guild, a lot of fun and a good way to connect.