This is exactly what people who are eight to twelve years old will be saying when they're 25, except they'll be talking about how awesome and thought filled and artsy PS3 and 360 are and how underwhelming and ruined by casuals the PS6 and XBOX1080 gen is.Originally Posted by I Don't Need A Name
Xenogears > All
I think three key things about the difference between now and then is:
1. Originality (as Shiny mentioned). Not just the 'Milking' of Everything, but just that 'Everything Has Already Been Done'. Which may or may not be true, but it is difficult to come up with something that is entirely new and actually get it made.
2. Japan. It would be difficult for even Final Fantasy Forum-goers to argue that Japan hasn't lost its place as the bulk of console video gaming market share. Not talking about quality at this point, but just the percentage of visible games. The bulk of the games we grew up loving were Japanese, and now they are being forced down by big budget, mass market games. Japan is where we would expect to see things that are original, but the ones that really get the most attention here are the ones that play it safe.
3. Perspective. What you see, or what you choose to see. Just like the folks that caused Bolivar to make this thread, they just didn't see/play the good games from '94. I also think that a lot of people today don't see the great, but smaller gems that get produced today. These mass market games are trying to take up your entire field of vision, and they will if you let them. Unfortunately it's not really possible a lot of the time for these small games to 'get your attention', you might have to go looking for them if you really care.
Another issue is that games are just plain harder to make these days. Tied with the Perspective issue, developers feel like if their game isn't the best and brightest thing out there it doesn't stand a chance. So they spend years and millions of dollars making games, where that time/cost factor wasn't nearly as huge back in the days before 3D.
So sure, you can name off 30 top quality games from 1994 and maybe not half that much for 2009, but comparing them year-over-year is not exactly fair because 'top quality' games take longer to make. And a lot of game companies from 1994 don't even exist now because they can't handle the cost of making new games.
This is a weak point because today's video game music is based on generic emulations of hollywood music. Whereas if you look back at the 16-bit RPG's we played, some of them have incredible compositions with a lot of complexity and thought put into them. I said this in the Shining Force thread, but if you look at games like that and Final Fantasy, you can actually recognize parts which are the chorus, the verses, and the bridges. I assume if you looked at Uematsu's sheet of the notes, it would probably be insane and something music students could study.
It's not just one button does one thing and another button does another thing anymore. You can now program buttons to do several different things for certain games.[/QUOTE]
But that's just a different way of doing something, it could easily be implemented poorly. It's a subjective decision that has nothing to do with objective quality, a game that doesn't do this could be infinitely better for an array of reasons.
[QUOT=Omecle]I disagree. When you look at movies, they've made many years of developing techniques and theory behind framing, composition, lighting, etc. whereas video games have not. In fact, the video game industry had a huge crash before Nintendo came out.[/QUOTE]
I'm pretty sure you're referring to something else, but films brought up a great point. When you look at those Noir movies from the 70's, there's a certain kind of eeriness to the ambience of the way they were done and constrained by technology that produces a surrounding feeling unpalpable to today's films, which look generic with their standardized usages.
I think the same holds true for games. FFVII, utilizing 3d models over 2d graphic art, interspersed with cutscenes and 3d battles, evokes a crazy feeling that today's game completely rendered in real time could not emit. This isn't nostalgia for the feelings it evoked at the time - playing it the other night made me amazed at the color pallette, the certain darkness of the battle environments, and the way the slowed down framerate works to enhance that feeling.
I'm not saying games are worse today. IMO, Metal Gear Solid 4 is (maybe) the best game I've ever played and it could not have been achieved without Blu Ray and the Cell Processor of the PS3. I think some things are only possible with technology.
But there will always be games from other years that outshine most from recent ones. I just have a problem with someone saying that games are definitively better in every way now than they were before.
I can't agree on the music front. There was some gorgeous stuff back then, but there's some gorgeous stuff these days as well. What I will say though is that they did incredibly impressive things given the technical limitations of the day.
Though the contention you make in your final line is agreed with completely by me. There are good games from all years.
Can you think of any examples, though? I was honestly trying to think and the only game in recent memory that surpassed, instead of poorly emulated, Hollywood action movie-music is Metal Gear Solid 4, but that's not fair because Harry Gregson-Williams scored the game!
Everything else is licenses. My gf is playing Bioshock now and the music really sets the creepy atmosphere, but it's all licensed.
edit: okay, there's guys like Hitoshi Sakimoto (just noticed Valkyria Chronicles) and obviously Uematsu is still active. but that also goes back to JKTrix's analysis of the decline in Japanese importance, which leads to less risk taking, or the other way around (chicken or the egg)
Oblivion had a great soundtrack that wasn't really emulating Hollywood soundtracks. It was a few years ago now, but Shadow of the Colossus had an absolutely jaw dropping soundtrack as well. I've always liked the Half-Life soundtracks too and they're something different. I'll toss in Portal, Mirror's Edge, and any Silent Hill game as well. All depends on how far back you want to go. And to be perfectly honest, as much as a lot of games may go the big Hollywood soundtrack route these days, it generally suits the titles that do it, and it's hard to do a soundtrack like that that's utterly terrible. In fact, some like Uncharted 2 are utterly amazing, and really suit the type of game.
There were easily just as many unmemorable or outright awful soundtracks back in the day though. Just because we don't have a recent equivalent to Uematsu or Mitsuda doesn't mean that all, or even most soundtracks today are generic or bad.
I definitely agree, and your point certainly holds true. But I don't really take it as games aren't as good anymore, and that they have got better (and yes there are great games from every generation).
Also about the music. There are still quite a lot of very talented composers out there that are in the game's industry. Look up Jack Wall, he did an incredible job with some of the Myst soundtracks, and recently the Mass Effect soundtracks.
"... and so I close, realizing that perhaps the ending has not yet been written."
I just got done with Uncharted II: Among Thieves and Uncharted: Drake's Fortune and I'd both games had fine musical scores. I also loved Mass Effect's soundtrack, with the exception of the annoying noise they blare at you when you get a game over. (CRITICAL MISSION FAILURE)
I guess I'd like to add...
It's mainly because publishers don't want to take the risk on a new IP. It's a much safer route to just go with sequels. Unfortunately it's the case.
Japan is definitely strong in the industry. The western side just can't tap into it.
"... and so I close, realizing that perhaps the ending has not yet been written."
Well, it's subjective. You say "poorly emulated" whereas I think some games which go for Hollywood style music do it damned well; Mass Effect was at least in part tribute to '80s sci-fi, which you will realize the second you listen to the main menu music. But it's really really good music despite, perhaps even because of, that.Can you think of any examples, though? I was honestly trying to think and the only game in recent memory that surpassed, instead of poorly emulated, Hollywood action movie-music is Metal Gear Solid 4, but that's not fair because Harry Gregson-Williams scored the game!
Everything else is licenses. My gf is playing Bioshock now and the music really sets the creepy atmosphere, but it's all licensed.
edit: okay, there's guys like Hitoshi Sakimoto (just noticed Valkyria Chronicles) and obviously Uematsu is still active. but that also goes back to JKTrix's analysis of the decline in Japanese importance, which leads to less risk taking, or the other way around (chicken or the egg)
Some other examples have already been mentioned so I won't go into them really.
we have better technology now, so it is possible to do more. but the history of everything is a story of people transcending their technological limits. few creations remain great once they are taken out of their technological context. Those that do become classics. I would guess the rate at which classics are made remains roughly constant over generations.
it is also worth considering, in the specific context of video games, that the audience used to be almost solely children and teenagers. You can pump out a lot of mediocre crap and still get 8 year olds to beg their parents for it. Now the market for video games is so much wider, so producers can't get away with as much.
Every generation has it's crap, and plenty of old games both stand the test of time and get surpassed. For me Mario Kart and Mario Kart 64 are not nearly as good as Mario Kart Double Dash!!, but Super Mario World is much better than (single player) New Super Mario Bros. Wii. I think FFIV is still possibly the best Final Fantasy, yet find Mass Effect 2 and Fallout 3 better than most RPG's I've played (granted, my experience in CRPG's is limited at best). Overall I would put this generation up there as one of the bests though.
Or they genuinely think that. Oh wait, no human being could do that, I forgot.
Also, most everyone people would consider a "game journalist" are "enthusiast press". Regardless, a lack of experience with the past of a medium =/= an inability to effectively talk about the current state of said medium, at least IMHO.
Boy am I an unfunny ass.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
