It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
avatar
keeveek: btw. CD enhanced edition of system shock had higher resolutions and mouselook, etc ;-)
Really, mouse look? I remember playing that version (but I didn't use mouselook until after Quake I). I thought that was added in the "portable version" that you can find nowadays.


avatar
jefequeso: In some cases, yes. The early Ultima games, some of the old text-based IF games, etc. But in many cases, the mechanics and design choices people label as "outdated" are simply "different." They aren't the same as they're used to in modern games, so they assume that they're worse. The lack of shiny new technology certainly doesn't help. The entire reason I enjoy old games as much as modern games is because a lot of them provide experiences that cannot be found in modern titles.

But fuck knows we don't see eye-to-eye on anything, so whatever.
Please explain to me how the control scheme of Dune II and Warcraft I is not outdated?

Or the old FPS where you had to constantly press a button to enable mouse-look (Quake I)? Or how complex strategy games without any tooltips are not outdated?
Post edited September 03, 2012 by SimonG
avatar
orcishgamer: Despite your discomfort with the idea, this is true and you can read about the trouble gaming history professors are having due to this. They typically include games like Ultima III in their syllabus but those games are obtuse as fuck for gamers that didn't grow up with them. I understand you're younger and despite that have taking to liking these games, but that's rare and for understandable reasons. Some old games do hold up, but most are so fucking bad mechanically when held up to modern releases it's kind of sad.

As much as I like playing many of these games myself I very much recognize that some of the mechanics are pretty clunky or even difficult (and needlessly so, but only due to modern hindsight).
avatar
jefequeso: In some cases, yes. The early Ultima games, some of the old text-based IF games, etc. But in many cases, the mechanics and design choices people label as "outdated" are simply "different." They aren't the same as they're used to in modern games, so they assume that they're worse. The lack of shiny new technology certainly doesn't help. The entire reason I enjoy old games as much as modern games is because a lot of them provide experiences that cannot be found in modern titles.

But fuck knows we don't see eye-to-eye on anything, so whatever.
The reason I tend to label things as outdated is:
1) It is not intuitive, especially to new players
2) It is somehow "hard" to do (e.g. requires more button presses or some other more complex mode of interaction)

I don't typically count resource constraints, since few developers are silly enough to keep following mechanics that are used solely to address these after the actual constraint no longer exists.

There are old mechanics that are simply different as you say, and I don't qualify those as outdated, but a lot of mechanics that have not persisted into modern gameplay certainly do fit the bill for actually being outdated.

Finally there's the whole argument of "design space" which actual game designers, such as Jeff Vogel, worry about as a function of mechanics, but I'm not a game developer and have a hard time explaining it to other non-game developers as it's only an abstract concept to me. An example of a game with small design space is our well known GOG The Legend of Grimrock.
avatar
orcishgamer: The reason I tend to label things as outdated is:
1) It is not intuitive, especially to new players
2) It is somehow "hard" to do (e.g. requires more button presses or some other more complex mode of interaction)
Are you a fan of "one button does everything" solution...?

And I don't know if new games are more intuitive or they just display "Press E to open the door" every god damn time I look at a door.
Post edited September 03, 2012 by keeveek
avatar
keeveek: btw. CD enhanced edition of system shock had higher resolutions and mouselook, etc ;-)
avatar
SimonG: Really, mouse look? I remember playing that version (but I didn't use mouselook until after Quake I). I thought that was added in the "portable version" that you can find nowadays.


avatar
jefequeso: In some cases, yes. The early Ultima games, some of the old text-based IF games, etc. But in many cases, the mechanics and design choices people label as "outdated" are simply "different." They aren't the same as they're used to in modern games, so they assume that they're worse. The lack of shiny new technology certainly doesn't help. The entire reason I enjoy old games as much as modern games is because a lot of them provide experiences that cannot be found in modern titles.

But fuck knows we don't see eye-to-eye on anything, so whatever.
avatar
SimonG: Please explain to me how the control scheme of Dune II and Warcraft I is not outdated?

Or the old FPS where you had to constantly press a button to enable mouse-look (Quake I)? Or how complex strategy games without any tooltips are not outdated?
Erm... you didn't have to constantly press a button to mouselook in Quake 1.

But yes... those particular elements are indeed outdated.
avatar
orcishgamer: The reason I tend to label things as outdated is:
1) It is not intuitive, especially to new players
2) It is somehow "hard" to do (e.g. requires more button presses or some other more complex mode of interaction)
avatar
keeveek: Are you a fan of "one button does everything" solution...?

And I don't know if new games are more intuitive or they just display "Press E to open the door" every god damn time I look at a door.
No, one button does everything can be just as confusing as the keymap for Ultima III. Good design means good design, intuitive means intuitive, it doesn't automatically mean "OMG DUMBED DOWN!"

If a contextual, single button turns out to be the most intuitive design decision possible, THEN AND ONLY THEN is it a good idea and do I become a "fan". Otherwise it's shitty design.

Mechanics like the contextual on-screen tips are very definition of intuitive design, so yes, that is an example of how games today are more intuitive. However they can be misused or used badly, they are far more clever ways to use them than what you describe in your example.
Post edited September 03, 2012 by orcishgamer
avatar
orcishgamer: The reason I tend to label things as outdated is:
1) It is not intuitive, especially to new players
2) It is somehow "hard" to do (e.g. requires more button presses or some other more complex mode of interaction)
avatar
keeveek: Are you a fan of "one button does everything" solution...?

And I don't know if new games are more intuitive or they just display "Press E to open the door" every god damn time I look at a door.
In general they're more intuitive, which is usually a plus, but can sometimes shoot them in the foot. I don't think "intuitiveness" is some sort of golden standard. There are too many fantastic games with a steep learning curve.
Post edited September 03, 2012 by jefequeso
avatar
jefequeso: In general they're more intuitive, which is usually a plus, but can sometimes shoot them in the foot. I don't think "intuitiveness" is some sort of golden standard. There are too many fantastic games with a steep learning curve.
True. For example, Europa Universalis titles. Yes, there are tooltips, but some interface buttons are so small, you won't even notice them normally playing, so you need a manual or something like that (interface of EU games gets pretty messy when they release 4 expansion and each one adds something more, like 20 map modes, or something). Or like in EU2, you have an option to "Promote Bailiff" and you just don't know what the fuck is it needed for, until you do it, and you notice that your income from that province grows.

But these games are so fun to play once you learn how to play them, it would be a shame to pass on them just because they're not intuitive.
Post edited September 03, 2012 by keeveek
avatar
jefequeso: Erm... you didn't have to constantly press a button to mouselook in Quake 1.
You did when it came out. Because it was deemed outdated, it was fixed ;-).
I played Quake 2 on PSX... That was outdated controls :D you used buttons to look up and down, not the analog....
avatar
keeveek: I played Quake 2 on PSX... That was outdated controls :D you used buttons to look up and down, not the analog....
That is the most terrible thing I have heard today...
I love him...
avatar
jefequeso: Erm... you didn't have to constantly press a button to mouselook in Quake 1.
avatar
SimonG: You did when it came out. Because it was deemed outdated, it was fixed ;-).
Last I knew there was a console command to enable "always mouse look." Something like "mouse+" or something like that? I don't remember. It was in the original version, thought.

I would agree that really arcane control schemes (like the one in the otherwise incredible SS1) are outdated.
Post edited September 03, 2012 by jefequeso
avatar
jefequeso: last I knew there was a console command to enable "always mouse look." Something like "mouse+" or something like that? I don't remember. It was in the original version.
Nah, we didn't use console commands back then. I think Quake was actually the first game with proper console commands ... Damn, already 15 years ago.
avatar
orcishgamer: As much as Wasteland is one of my favorite games of all time, it actually had a bunch of problems, due to their lack of good tools, mostly.
avatar
SimonG: While we're at it, why not go all in an kill God.

System Shock is also not so good by todays standards. Sure, it is a brilliant game, story, gameplay, atmosphere can still compete with todays games.

But the controls? NO mouse look, no proper hotkeys, and those atrocious cyberspace sections. All that can be resolved by todays technology and make a better game out of it.
Yeah, SS1's controls are one of the biggest roadblocks to appreciating the game (which is why SS1 Portable is so great). However, in nearly every other way it still provides a one-of-a-kind experience. So in that case, I'd say that the controls have aged really horribly, but the gameplay concepts and overall execution has aged very well.



avatar
jefequeso: last I knew there was a console command to enable "always mouse look." Something like "mouse+" or something like that? I don't remember. It was in the original version.
avatar
SimonG: Nah, we didn't use console commands back then. I think Quake was actually the first game with proper console commands ... Damn, already 15 years ago.
Well it was certainly the first Id game with proper console commands.
avatar
SimonG: Except for "And Yet It Moves". That game is pretentious hipster bullshit and burn in hell.
avatar
orcishgamer: I would like to also nominate Dear Esther for this awards category.
Don't forget Braid
Post edited September 03, 2012 by jefequeso
avatar
Elmofongo: 1) Indie Games Industry
It's booming now because of mechanical (and now visual) variety.
avatar
SimonG: Yes, because indie games are in no way to 95% always the same five game concepts with new graphics ...

The indie scene is no there where AA games where 15 years ago. In an unimaginative cycle of repeating the five successful ideas in hoping to cash out before the bubble bursts.

You have 1 good game for 99 shitty and forgettable games.
To a certain extent, yes. But a lot of the most interesting ideas come from the indie scene as well. There's a lot of pretentious "me too!" crap, but a lot of really original titles as well. The most unique and interesting indie games are often waaaay out there, and try a lot of "make it or break it" stuff. The most unique and interesting AAA titles innovate within acceptable boundaries, or go after the sort of new ideas that require a big budget.