>> ^jonny:

dead


Ugh. I will have to find them (many posts) later. I wished there was ONE video. No time now.

>> ^EvilDeathBee:

@coolhund
Ah, so you're a PC elitest. They're the worst at being opinionated douche bags, stuck in the past moaning about every game that comes out these days. I prefer my gaming on PC, especially shooters and despise poor ports, but I'm not a total dick about it. Next you'll be saying something like "STFU fag noob!".
I also think you do not understand my comments and instead of actually thinking about what i mean by evolution, like the definition being survival of the fittest, fittest being the games that actually sell, you just attack and start spewing your demented hate. Game design has evolved, many aspects for the better, many IMO for the worse, but denying that it is evolution is retarded.
The current industry works like this. Game development can cost 10s to sometimes 100s of millions of dollars, not including marketing, which again costs millions of dollars and is vital. These days it doesn't matter how good a game is, if it doesn't have branding or good marketing behind it, it wont sell. In some cases not even then because launch window is important too. Very rarely a game comes out of no where and surprises people and becomes a hit, but as I said, rarely. Investors/Publishers are rarely willing to release something totally different or release in a genre they know doesn't sell, and frankly who would be? Would you seriously be willing to risk losing that much money on such a risky investment? It's a business!
You'll be surprised to know I actually agree with you partly, the cause for this is the size of the industry now and the size of it's userbase. However what do you expect to happen to it? Do you expect the industry to stagnate, stay as it was 15 years ago and not grow yet still stay alive just to create your space flight sims? And yes, indie development is where all the ingenuity comes from, low risk and also low reward.
We only recall those nostalgic games we hold dear. Sometimes they live up to modern scrutiny, often they don't (a friend of mine who'd never played System Shock 2 or Deus Ex gave both ago. Loved SS2, couldn't get into Deus Ex). You never recall all the games that were shit. I can barely recall them, but i do remember there being a lot more shit games than good games.
These old classic games will always hold a place in my heart and many of them, especially the phenomenal Quake, I could always fire up (assuming I can get them running) and have a fun time, but that is nostalgia. Indie devs will be the ones to turn to, to experience old school game design. If that's enough for you, wtf are you so angry about? If you seriously expect AAA publishers to release games like that, you're in for a seriously long wait.
Now, I've had enough squabbling with a 30 year old child. Go back to your mother's basement, continue to replay your old games and by all means, don't stop complaining on the internet about how modern gaming has ruined your "life". I'll be here in the present, looking to the future and thinking fondly of the past


Why should I call you something like that? Dont put your standards on others. Well, you still havent grasped what I am trying to say. No wonder.
Yes, I know very well how the market looks right now. I know how it developed and I know whats to blame. That doesnt mean I deal with it. Dealing with it would mean I would have given in, and I never give in when things I like get destroyed. That may be futile in this case, with so many idiots like yourself who have given in and went back to mindless consume, but I dont care.

Games have not evolved. Since 2007 the graphics have not become much better, all in all they have actually gotten worse. The controls and gameplay have become much worse since 2006 or so and the genre variety and diversity has declined a lot.

You really think I grasp too much for classics? I dont care for classics, except for their memories and maybe one or two I still play from time to time. Why would I think a game (yes, a PC game) released in 2009 is the best game Ive ever played then? You know nothing about me and your assumptions are dead wrong. Each and every one. Funnily, my assumption of you being an ignorant prick just got confirmed again.

Yes I know how much marketing costs... or rather how much they make it cost. EA for example spends 2 times as much on marketing than on the game itself (prolly 3 or 4 times in case of BF3). Thats how games get so expensive. Get a clue.

Yeah, I have also wasted enough time on your ignorance and I wont be wasting more time trying to explain anything to you, not even a novel-sized text would help anyway.

@coolhund

Ah, so you're a PC elitest. They're the worst at being opinionated douche bags, stuck in the past moaning about every game that comes out these days. I prefer my gaming on PC, especially shooters and despise poor ports, but I'm not a total dick about it. Next you'll be saying something like "STFU fag noob!".
I also think you do not understand my comments and instead of actually thinking about what i mean by evolution, like the definition being survival of the fittest, fittest being the games that actually sell, you just attack and start spewing your demented hate. Game design has evolved, many aspects for the better, many IMO for the worse, but denying that it is evolution is retarded.

The current industry works like this. Game development can cost 10s to sometimes 100s of millions of dollars, not including marketing, which again costs millions of dollars and is vital. These days it doesn't matter how good a game is, if it doesn't have branding or good marketing behind it, it wont sell. In some cases not even then because launch window is important too. Very rarely a game comes out of no where and surprises people and becomes a hit, but as I said, rarely. Investors/Publishers are rarely willing to release something totally different or release in a genre they know doesn't sell, and frankly who would be? Would you seriously be willing to risk losing that much money on such a risky investment? It's a business!

You'll be surprised to know I actually agree with you partly, the cause for this is the size of the industry now and the size of it's userbase. However what do you expect to happen to it? Do you expect the industry to stagnate, stay as it was 15 years ago and not grow yet still stay alive just to create your space flight sims? And yes, indie development is where all the ingenuity comes from, low risk and also low reward.

We only recall those nostalgic games we hold dear. Sometimes they live up to modern scrutiny, often they don't (a friend of mine who'd never played System Shock 2 or Deus Ex gave both ago. Loved SS2, couldn't get into Deus Ex). You never recall all the games that were shit. I can barely recall them, but i do remember there being a lot more shit games than good games.

These old classic games will always hold a place in my heart and many of them, especially the phenomenal Quake, I could always fire up (assuming I can get them running) and have a fun time, but that is nostalgia. Indie devs will be the ones to turn to, to experience old school game design. If that's enough for you, wtf are you so angry about? If you seriously expect AAA publishers to release games like that, you're in for a seriously long wait.

Now, I've had enough squabbling with a 30 year old child. Go back to your mother's basement, continue to replay your old games and by all means, don't stop complaining on the internet about how modern gaming has ruined your "life". I'll be here in the present, looking to the future and thinking fondly of the past

> ^mentality:Well, everyone is entitled to their favorite game. But really my point is that you can't call it novel or exceptional because everything it tried to do has be done earlier and better in other games. It's a jack of all trades game, master of none.



I suppose bits and pieces of anything are from things which came before, but the sum of its parts made Deus Ex stellar. Although I had played System Shock 2 before, Deus Ex felt like a very novel experience to me. But it was also the atmosphere, story, music, environments, gameplay mechanics, etc.

>> ^Xax:

>> ^mentality:
Best PC game of all time? You gotta be joking.
I played it when the game came out, and while I agree that it is a good game, it did not provide you with any experience that was truly novel or exceptional.

No, I'm not, and yes, it did. Novel and exceptional are two great adjectives for what I thought/think of Deus Ex. System Shock 2 is right behind it, but Deus Ex remains my favorite game to this day.


Well, everyone is entitled to their favorite game. But really my point is that you can't call it novel or exceptional because everything it tried to do has be done earlier and better in other games. It's a jack of all trades game, master of none.

>> ^mentality:

Best PC game of all time? You gotta be joking.
I played it when the game came out, and while I agree that it is a good game, it did not provide you with any experience that was truly novel or exceptional.


No, I'm not, and yes, it did. Novel and exceptional are two great adjectives for what I thought/think of Deus Ex. System Shock 2 is right behind it, but Deus Ex remains my favorite game to this day.

Oh and if you liked SS2, you will LOVE the original Deus Ex.

>> ^moodonia:

Thats interesting, not long ago I finished System Shock 2 (impossible? no its not) and enjoyed it so much I was planning to play Deus Ex with a few mods to update the graphics a bit, maybe I shouldnt bother.
>> ^mentality:
Best PC game of all time? You gotta be joking.
I played it when the game came out, and while I agree that it is a good game, it did not provide you with any experience that was truly novel or exceptional.
The story was forgettable - whatever choices you made storywise were inconsequential, with the entire game boiling down to picking one of 3 different endings during the last mission.
The shooter elements were not as fun/polished/balanced as contemporary games like Half-Life. The stealth elements were not as well executed as games like Thief. The RPG elements lacked the depth of other cRPGs like Fallout. The atmosphere and immersion was limited by the technology - the setting of a cyberpunk metropolis just wasn't believable.
And finally, the idea of a shooter-RPG hybrid and different gameplay approaches to the same problem was already done before by System Shock 2, which with its excellent atmosphere and survival horror elements, is a much better game IMO.
And with Diablo 2, Baldur's Gate 2, Thief 2, and The Sims all coming out in 2000, I wouldn't even call Deus Ex game of the year material.

I never got to finish Deus Ex: there was some glitch that prevented me from proceeding. I'll get around to it again one day.

I agree about System Shock 2: it is superlative in just about every way. Plus it's got co-op which was unheard of in 2000. There's a vid of me playing SS2 co-op with my sister on the YouTubes if anyone's interested.

The new Deus Ex game was a lot of fun too. Probably not like SS2 but very solid gaming nonetheless.

Thats interesting, not long ago I finished System Shock 2 (impossible? no its not) and enjoyed it so much I was planning to play Deus Ex with a few mods to update the graphics a bit, maybe I shouldnt bother.

>> ^mentality:

Best PC game of all time? You gotta be joking.
I played it when the game came out, and while I agree that it is a good game, it did not provide you with any experience that was truly novel or exceptional.
The story was forgettable - whatever choices you made storywise were inconsequential, with the entire game boiling down to picking one of 3 different endings during the last mission.
The shooter elements were not as fun/polished/balanced as contemporary games like Half-Life. The stealth elements were not as well executed as games like Thief. The RPG elements lacked the depth of other cRPGs like Fallout. The atmosphere and immersion was limited by the technology - the setting of a cyberpunk metropolis just wasn't believable.
And finally, the idea of a shooter-RPG hybrid and different gameplay approaches to the same problem was already done before by System Shock 2, which with its excellent atmosphere and survival horror elements, is a much better game IMO.
And with Diablo 2, Baldur's Gate 2, Thief 2, and The Sims all coming out in 2000, I wouldn't even call Deus Ex game of the year material.

Best PC game of all time? You gotta be joking.

I played it when the game came out, and while I agree that it is a good game, it did not provide you with any experience that was truly novel or exceptional.

The story was forgettable - whatever choices you made storywise were inconsequential, with the entire game boiling down to picking one of 3 different endings during the last mission.

The shooter elements were not as fun/polished/balanced as contemporary games like Half-Life. The stealth elements were not as well executed as games like Thief. The RPG elements lacked the depth of other cRPGs like Fallout. The atmosphere and immersion was limited by the technology - the setting of a cyberpunk metropolis just wasn't believable.

And finally, the idea of a shooter-RPG hybrid and different gameplay approaches to the same problem was already done before by System Shock 2, which with its excellent atmosphere and survival horror elements, is a much better game IMO.

And with Diablo 2, Baldur's Gate 2, Thief 2, and The Sims all coming out in 2000, I wouldn't even call Deus Ex game of the year material.

The following were released in 1999:

Starsiege:Tribes('98)
Descent 3
Freespace 2
Quake 3
Unreal Tournament
Star Wars: X-Wing Alliance
and the amazing
System Shock 2

Halo compared to them, released or not, meh. I'm thinking that the only reason Halo is popular is because it was one of the first decent FPS games on a console.

Awesome sift! I never knew this took place... looks a bit like Marathon.

>> ^sillma:

>> ^BoneRemake:
Give me another Sam and Max, Kings quest, Space quest or flippin Grim Fandango over this regurgitated shit. its always the same story line with these games.
Not to detract from the graphics and advancement, but its just so bland this crud they make these days.
Thief, now there was a good game. Hitman was good as well.

Thief was one of the best games ever, up till the point the zombies came in. After that it turned into pretty much every other hack'n'slash out there
Hitman was the same thing, the end was stupid.
But games like the battlefield series ain't really about the singleplayer experience, it's the team deathmatch und stuff action which is honed better and better over time. Of course for players who don't see that as a thing they like, it's pointless to see money put into these kinds of games, I for sure would like to see my share of both types, but meh, for some reason the adventure type games and such aren't popular enough on a wide scale...ah well. R.I.P Looking Glass Studios, the maker of many of my most favourite games of all time.


System Shock 2 was rad.

Some games that probably deserve mention in any list of important FPS games (that aren't included in this video) for either technical or gameplay reasons:

Ultima Underworld
The Elder Scrolls: Arena
Rise of the Triad
Heretic/Hexen
Marathon
Descent
Rainbox Six
Tribes
Thief
System Shock
NOLF
Far Cry
L4D

System Shock 1 & 2!

My top 5 favorite games, in no particular order:
Portal
Final Fantasy 3
System Shock 2
Thief 2
Morrowind

Maybe, I'd have to think about it more actually. But that's a pretty damn good list anyways. All of those games except for Portal gave me a strong feeling of being immersed in an actual alternate world. Playing them felt less like playing a game and more like traveling to some far away land.