How come old games used to release with far less time yet with more gameplay innovations?

How come old games used to release with far less time yet with more gameplay innovations?

A Conspiracy Theorist Is Talking Shirt $21.68

Shopping Cart Returner Shirt $21.68

A Conspiracy Theorist Is Talking Shirt $21.68

  1. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    the salarymen were threatened with violence until they complied

  2. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It is kind of a mystery. On the one hand it's a lot easier to do things when it's a small team and you don't have to cooperate with too many people or get a committee to approve every decision. On the other hand, programming was a lot harder back then.

    I think people were generally more competent in the past though. They grew up with discipline and regiment in a way most people today haven't.

  3. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Because people used to make games that they wanted to play. Now they make games for a paycheck, and the games they make are what market trends say are most profitable.

  4. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Shareholders anon.

  5. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I think japs care more about the quality of what they make, as opposed to just pumping out slop wrapped in manipulative marketing for the plebs to consume like what happens in the US

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Meanwhile modern Namco exists.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Have you seen what Konami has been doing for the last 10 years? Please anon, the level of Japan fanboying on here is out of control.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >I think japs care more about the quality of what they make, as opposed to just pumping out slop wrapped in manipulative marketing for the plebs to consume like what happens in the US
      LMAO
      Both nips and burgers have always pumped out slop, you're just cherry picking. The majority of the Famicom library is slop, people just remember the good games

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        I think you're looking at US slop through a veil of rose-tinted slop. All platforms were japanese (except xbox) and all the big mascots were designed by japanese (or other asians), a lot of the game genres were built of japanese games. Yeah there's famicom slop, but US slop is sloppier

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >Yeah there's famicom slop, but US slop is sloppier
          I think you're looking at JP slop through a veil of rose-tinted slop

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        I believe even the slop had more soul back then

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      There is something about “the artistry” in Gen 3 and 4 games that seems to just perfectly match Japanese aesthetics. It’s not lost on me that as the industry became more cinematic, the development all moved to California.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      "They" definitely didn't give a shit about quality. It's just that you remember and engage with the good stuff only. You go outside that safe area and it's consoleslop to consoletrash and japtops are a whole other kettle of Fukushima wastewater tainted fish.

  6. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

  7. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >far less time
    You really can't imagine why a 2D game made in the 80s would be faster to make than the full 3D games developers make nowadays?
    >more gameplay innovations
    Because at the time they were innovations, they were new. But even in the 90s there felt like less new ideas coming out because all the basic stuff had already been established by the pioneers. Occasionally you'll get something that tries something that feels new that other games hadn't, like Harvest Moon, Ace Attorney, etc. but after 30 years of mainstream gaming, how do you expect there to be that many brand new ideas nobody has ever seen before?

  8. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    because they didn't cost $1.2 billion USD and take 8 years to develop?

  9. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Dev turnaround in the old days was very quick and simple, and new ideas came about as those working on them basically threw shit at the wall and hoped it stuck. You could shit out a good game in under a year easily with a small dedicated team. With something like Megaman you didn't even really need to reinvent the wheel either, just take what you already had and build on top of it.

    Making a game nowadays is a much larger commitment. The handheld space has almost completely vanished even with the Switch out there as people expect console level games on it anyways. That was the last holdout for simpler, cheaper to make games that a lot of developers stuck to. Now every project has to be something huge and complex with dev teams of hundreds of people. A single game with that much riding on it failing to perform could potentially sink the company, so they're only allowed to make what's proven to sell.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Now every project has to be something huge and complex with dev teams of hundreds of people.
      You still have things like Suika Game become a huge hit from time to time though.
      >inb4 it got popular only because vtubers played it
      But vtubers only played it because the gameplay is simple, addictive and fun to watch with elements of seemingly random chance that can both save your ass and screw you over. Rare to see a game with such good arcade design nowadays.

  10. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It's easier to innovate within a new medium, because fewer innovations have already been made

  11. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >yet with more gameplay innovations
    pic completly unrelated i presume

  12. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It's hard to think of a worse example to use than Mega Man.

  13. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Smaller teams
    Huge increases in computing power
    Competent programmers weren't being vacuumed away with absurd tech salaries
    No "death by committee" that modern games (and tech in general gets crippled by.

  14. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    This reminds me how insane the drop in Megaman's relevance has been, a whopping *nineteen* games released in 2003 alone and now it's a dead franchise.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Pokeman isn't Megaman, that's why.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Capcom has a ton of successful franchises. Street Fighter, Resident Evil, Monster Hunter, Devil May Cry.

      What should Mega Man brand be used for these days anyway? Once you get past the "beat boss to get his weapon" gimmick and an 8-way stage select, it's just a basic run&shoot platforming franchise so you're competing with probably a frickzillion indie clones. Mega Man himself is an iconic mascot and they've developed some decent preteen anime characters over the years but he's never really been a serious competitor to Mario for kid games.

  15. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Plenty of low hanging fruit.
    >Developers were experimenting with hardware not software.
    >Developers had more life experience and were not filtered by developer school.
    >Games were 1MB in size
    >Jews

  16. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    games were way smaller and simpler, and playtesting was a much smaller part of the dev cycle if it was there at all.

  17. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    look up the credits for a AAA game and then look at a sprite sheet for an 2D platformer. All the graphics for the whole game can fit on a single sheet. A photo of it would be larger than the whole game ROM.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *