SR Ate.

It's not nostalgia as much as getting worn out from the same formula.  This is especially true in shooters, which I'm pretty much sick of even if they introduce new things, and even GTA4 I found pretty boring despite the fact that it's much more polished than the older ones.  There are exceptions, like Katamari Damacy and Shadow of the Colossus, but I'll probably just buy consoles when they're dated and the games cheap - if I even buy them at all.

It might be just a side of effect of the technology. Today, the console generation leaps are just more subtle than they were. Compare 360 and Xbox to NES and SNES. It's just that much harder to make something new, although the other side of it is that we get more story telling innovations.

The main things I tend to look for in a game is: 1) If I'll enjoy it (obviously) 2) If it has good replay value and 3) if it has a good story. If it has those three things then I'll probably go ahead and get it.

Mikerinos wrote: SNES, N64, and PS seemed like the golden age, but of course it varies from person/generation to the next. Games seem a lot longer now. (Well, after N64/PS1 games, besides RPGs, which are always long)  It's a good thing and a bad thing, I think.

They are actually shorter. I think the average is about 15-20 hours for a game. Development costs have increased exponentially, and come on, do you really want to play a game that is more than 30 hours long?
Plus, the good thing about this generation of consoles is the move to digital distribution. Games like Braid, are giving a chance to small time developers and retro-style gaming a new life.


Edited by KoS - January 08 2009 at 22:53

Leningrad wrote: How To Repulse Women: Progarchives.com

Fixed.


Edited by KoS - January 08 2009 at 22:55

KoS wrote: Mikerinos wrote: SNES, N64, and PS seemed like the golden age, but of course it varies from person/generation to the next. Games seem a lot longer now. (Well, after N64/PS1 games, besides RPGs, which are always long)  It's a good thing and a bad thing, I think. They are actually shorter. I think the average is about 15-20 hours for a game. Development costs have increased exponentially, and come on, do you really want to play a game that is more than 30 hours long?

Aren't most N64/PS1 games and earlier only like 5-15 hours on average?  If not then it sure seems that way.

A great game that is 30 hours long is usually better (quality and quantity) than one that is 15, but there is the whole perseverance and cost factor which makes that more difficult to achieve.  That's one reason I like RPGs a lot, plus usually good stories and sometimes an innovative battle system, but a lot of RPGs don't hold my attention really.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/01/07/nude-protesters-from-spai_n_156024.html
The first girl is cute.
Um, oh crap I'm turning into Laplace!

KoS wrote: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/01/07/nude-protesters-from-spai_n_156024.html The first girl is cute. Um, oh crap I'm turning into Laplace!

KoS wrote: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/01/07/nude-protesters-from-spai_n_156024.html The first girl is cute. Um, oh crap I'm turning into Laplace!

Edited by Leningrad - January 08 2009 at 23:12