95 thoughts on “What was the exact point in time when video games lost their magic?”

  1. [log in to view media]

    Introduction of PBR texture workflow which killed distinct look from every studio and homogenized creation of textures to match the realistic rendering. This is also main culprit behind the plastic look of every poorly made asset

    Reply
  2. Being a wagecuck. I always have this feeling that if I spend my free time doing something I enjoy instead of making money to escape wagecuckery, I am wasting my life.

    Reply
  3. Genre homogenization. Growing up, so many games thoroughly embraced their genre and you’d get so many different playstyles. Nowadays most of the big budget games are bloated composites made up of:

    >RPG
    >Hack & Slash (dodge roll, parry etc)
    >Shooter
    >Adventure
    >Platformer
    >Stealth

    But it never feels like they particularly excel. I’ll pick on Horizon Zero Dawn as an example. It’s a decent game but it’s just trying to do too much.

    Reply
    • this is right on the money. so many execs looking at charts and going "well our game needs a bit of this, and a bit of that, and a bit of this, this game did well so let’s copy that"

      also obvious shit like mtx, intentional scarcity of beloved classics (Nintendo), using flashy visuals to compensate for shallow/hollow mechanics, etc

      Reply
    • With craftingvania and roguebound elements.

      IMO its basically what happened to anime, people who grew up watching anime and playing games get make the game/anime and the whole field enters into a rehash spiral due to lack of original concepts(which come from IRL experience in stuff other than vidya or anime)

      Reply
  4. Indie games tend to vary in quality obviously but due to their inherently unfiltered nature there’s still some soul / ‘magic’ intact. There tends to be an imbalance with different facets of their production (art / gameplay / story / music) as they can’t cover all the bases as well, but I’d still recommend those games over the AAA shit and overpriced Nintendo rehashes.

    Also, time consuming games such as RPGs are bound to lose their magic as you get older. They’re full of management / checklist aspects that aren’t fun to engage with after a day of work.

    Reply
  5. I feel games coming out of Japan have not really changed besides looking "prettier"
    It’s the Western industry that’s lost it’s soul by appealing to the lowest common denominator who wants to watch a movie rather than play a game

    Reply
  6. If the "magic" is marketing as truthful as that image, then video games never lost it. "Project Reality" my ass. Fuck Nintendo, Fuck SGI, and fuck NURBS

    Reply
    • Outside of some pretty cool indie stuff, I genuinelly have no idea what’s produced in the West that gets people hyped nowadays

      Reply
  7. It wasn’t an instant loss, but a draining over time and from multiple factors. A lot of issues are rooted in gen 7.
    >the Wii and explosion of DS edutainment (and then the Move/Kinect leeches) were what got companies to want absolutely everyone possible to be their audience, meaning gameplay depth had to start being noticeably gutted and introduce handholding mechanics to coddle their new audience
    >360 popularizing turn and burn yearly dudebro dutyshooties/sportsballs
    >PS3 cultivating and validating oscarbait-wannabe games with heavily cinematic design/flow and tryhard stories
    >the cheap smartphoning revolution that began in the early 2010s gave rise to disgusting new/deeper avenues of monetization
    >the Mannconomy update for TF2
    Point I’m getting at, all the major players’ hands were fucking dirty in terms of who ruined the industry in gen 7.

    Reply
  8. [log in to view media]

    >far cry, call of duty, battlefield, fallout, etc.
    >series which were still niche
    >their individual 2010s entries comes out
    >all suddenly mainstream
    was it social media and garden gnometube that gave them the push?

    Reply
  9. Sometime between 2011-2013. The 7th gen, despite its frequent generic-ness, still produced plenty of SOULFUL games pretty reliably for most of tis run, but around the tail end of the generation you started having a falling off of varied games from different genres and the collapse of the middleware AA game, everything being overbudgeted copycats. And right before the new console generation, you had a number of stupendously disappointing hype-bomb releases like Bioshock Infinite, Aliens Colonial Marines, and others. It was the point at which game developers as a class stopped caring.

    These days we’re lucky to find one good AAA or AA game a year. I don’t mean to say that the SOVL has been completely eradicated from the industry, but it’s extraordinarily rare. In the PS1/n64 and PS2/Xbox/Gamecube generations, you could pick out practically any game from the shelf and be entertained, even if the game was crap. In the PS3/360/Wii gen, you still had a better than even chance at doing the same thing. By the time the PS4/XBO gen, I’ve played maybe 10 different console games worth keeping, and scarcely more PC games of the same class (by which I mean games that are not mods or retro indie stuff like Black Mesa or Undertale)

    Reply
  10. For me it happened gradually as the realization dawned on me that video games were no longer improving from year to year.
    Now it seems that a game developed 10 years ago could easily be released today and we would be none the wiser.

    Reply
  11. I think when you play enough of them. Every new game I played as a child was a great experience because it was usually something new and interesting. Then I play more and more things, and they’re offering me experiences I’ve seen and done before, as games borrow and take from each other in terms of gameplay and mechanics a lot.

    Reply
    • >I think when you play enough of them. Every new game I played as a child was a great experience because it was usually something new and interesting.
      I think this is true too. Because then it’s always well X did it better, Y copied this wtf it’s the same thing or some other inane criticism.
      > as games borrow and take from each other
      And this, it makes games feel so similar and not like they’re unique and trying to be/do their own thing. Certain elements prevail because they’re good and fun but it sucks when it’s in all of them.

      Reply
  12. I wouldn’t say "lost their magic" because there are still plenty of good games that get things right. But the worst thing to happen to games was the paid online services. Original Halo for Xbox played over the internet just fine. You could connect your Xbox to a hub and select a lan game then using a PC with gamespy you could select and connect to anyone. Microsoft later created XBL to simplify this process. Then they started adding in paid DLC. And companies figured out that paid DLC is a great way to combat the sale of used games. You can sell the base game for $60 and $20 in DLC that they need for the full experience. And every time the used game is sold at half price the new buyer needs to buy the DLC at full price. The value you added to your physical purchase is non-transferrable. And slowly what used to be free services became paid services. Console gaming is a race to find innovative ways to fuck the customer. I avoid it whenever I can.

    Reply
  13. [log in to view media]

    When you left highschool and the burdens of financial and adult responsibilities began taking their toll. Take the NEETpill and enjoy vidya again.

    Reply
  14. >old good new bad
    It is kind of true the past couple of years.
    But there have been dozens and dozens of fantastic games that have come out the past decade. I feel like a lot of you are clinging so hard to your childhood that you can’t accept that vidya isn’t the same for you now.

    Reply
    • >>old good new bad
      >It is kind of true the past couple of years.
      This just confirm that people spewing this meme are zoomers that are not old enough to appreciate games that aren’t current gen.

      Reply
  15. [log in to view media]

    When you became the one paying for them. I still love video games, and based on what I read around here I’m pretty sure it’s because I have a job where I can comfortably afford them

    Reply
    • Paying for them isn’t the problem for me, it’s just I don’t have the time anymore. There is a steady stream of games coming out that I’m interested in, but I don’t even buy half of them because I will not have the time to play them, so why bother?

      Reply
  16. [log in to view media]

    With this piece of shit. It killed all mobile games that had soul by popularizing the act of monetizing games past a single purchase, and then video games followed suit.

    Reply
  17. [log in to view media]

    PS360 era.

    It was the point where hardware and graphics were sufficiently strong that you could sell a game only on looks and detail. PS2 era was the last gen where devs kind of had to have somewhat interesting gameplay still. Because you couldn’t "hide" the gameplay mechanics with visuals. With the PS3 era and games like Uncharted it had been officially established that the gameplay mechanics didn’t need to be interesting if the visuals and spectacle was of a certain level.

    Reply
    • moron, Silent Hill 2 barely has gameplay mechanics and is one of the best games ever made
      ps360 era give us guitar hero 3, halo 3, bioshock, call of duty and so many more, the problem started to exhaust at ONE/PS4 era.

      Reply
      • >Games that were mostly considered good because they brought things to arcade and pc standards.
        Guitar Hero was straight up normie DDR, ignoring Guitar Freaks since you’d only see that in high end arcades.

        Reply
        • guitar hero 3 was based because they get a lot of great licensed music and the campaign was excellent, the moment all went to shit was with Rock Band, a overglorified karaoke.

          Reply
    • Yea that actually makes alot of simple sense. When games started being sold almost exclusively on their looks and nothing else, gaming was doomed.

      Now we have garbage "games" sold exclusively on their stories too when movies and books exist as a better form to tell a story.

      Reply
    • >It was the point where hardware and graphics were sufficiently strong that you could sell a game only on looks and detail.
      Recidivist cope. Games have always used graphics as a major selling point.

      Reply
      • >Games have always used graphics as a major selling point.
        Yes, but at a certain point they began to use graphics as their only selling point.

        Reply
      • >Recidivist cope. Games have always used graphics as a major selling point.

        The difference is that it wasn’t until the PS360 era that games truly started blending cinematic elements into gameplay. Its when you got stuff like cinematic takedowns and other mid-gameplay cutscenes. This was present to a smaller extent on the PS2 in games like God of War QTEs, but they were still mostly gameplay focused. PS3 generation is when games became "interactive experiences" where they were supposed to feel like being inside a movie.

        Reply
    • Atta boy. Completely agree. Also the 360/PS3 could BARELY play some of those games. Outdated graphics with bad gameplay, and on top of it, you get a smooth, consistent, cinematic 7-19 frames per second.

      Reply

Add to the conversation