Anybody else done with video gaming?

[Paelos]

Nothing like coming to a gamer site to hear a bunch of nerdy dudes delve into the psychology of women.

[Ironwood]

 

[ghost]

You guys are a bunch of sexist jerks, or really unlucky.

These aren't really mutually exclusive, you know.

[pxib]

Might even say they tend to reinforce one another.

[Yegolev]

Not a lot of chicks do. 

[Margalis]

I don't think the sentence I am about to write is sexist, just true.  Women aspire for the perfect much more actively and for longer than men do.  This is not a bad thing or a good thing.  It just is.  Men generally will accept the best of what is in front of them at the time, while women will keep looking past what is in front of them, hoping for better and better to come along.

I dunno, the whole "sharp knees" thing kind of belies this. As well as men dumping women for younger women, many more couples where the man is less attractive rather than the reverse, etc.

Generalizations this large are probably not good to make, and if anything this one seems backwards.

[Azazel]

Sharp knees is just guys being hyper-picky when presented with endless pictures of attractive women on the internet, when if a fraction of those girls said "hello" in real life, they'd be quite happy for a week.

[UnSub]

Nothing like coming to a gamer site to hear a bunch of nerdy dudes delve into the psychology of women.

We'd talk about games, but apparently they all suck.

Personally, this is the golden age of gaming, we're spoiled for choice and if you can't find something that you enjoy playing, you aren't looking hard enough.

[Ironwood]

Really ?

Well, that blows.

[tgr]

Personally, this is the golden age of gaming, we're spoiled for choice and if you can't find something that you enjoy playing, you aren't looking hard enough.

You say that, but show me a recent rally simulator which doesn't suck, or a recent FPS game which isn't full of console-y control mechanisms.

[schild]

Disagree.

1999:
    January 31 - Silent Hill (PS1)
    January 31 - Sim City 3000 [PC]
    February 11 - Final Fantasy VIII - (PS1)
    February 12 - Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri (Win)
    February 28 - Heroes of Might and Magic III (PC)
    February 28 - Star Wars: X-Wing Alliance (PC)
    March 16 - EverQuest (PC)
    March 31 - RollerCoaster Tycoon (PC) (2003 for XBox)
    April 7 - Team Fortress Classic (PC)
    April 10 - Warzone 2100 (PC)
    April 30 - Baldur's Gate: Tales of the Sword Coast (PC)
    May 12 - Street Fighter III: 3rd Strike (Arcade) (2000 for DC, 2004 for PS2/Xbox)
    May 31 - Ape Escape (PS1)
    June 11 - Descent³ (PC)
    June 12 - Counter-Strike (PC)
    June 24 - Persona 2 (PS1)
    July 14 - Ogre Battle 64: Person of Lordly Caliber (N64)
    July 31 - Outcast (PC)
    August 11 - System Shock 2 (PC)
    August 12 - Syphon Filter (PS1)
    August 16 - Legacy of Kain: Soul Reaver (PS1)
    August 27 - Command & Conquer: Tiberian Sun (PC)
    August 31 - Tony Hawk's Pro Skater (PS1) (2000 for N64/DC)
    September 28 - Homeworld (PC)
    September 30 - Age of Empires II: The Age of Kings (PC)
    October 11 - Jet Force Gemini (N64)
    November 10 - Half-Life: Opposing Force (PC)
    November 11 - Medal of Honor (PS1)
    November 19 - The Longest Journey (PC)
    November 30 - Unreal Tournament (PC)
    December 2 - Quake III Arena (PC)
    December 2 - The Legend of Dragoon (PS1)
    December 12 - Planescape: Torment (PC)
    December 29 - Shenmue (DC)

That single year represents the golden age of gaming. Yes, I copied that list from Wikipedia and removed a total of like six pieces of crap. The ratio is still outstanding and I went straight to look at 1999, I didn't even need to look at another year. Because that's the year. I almost looked at 2000 also, but I remember it being VERY close to, but not quite as good as 1999.

[Nebu]

I guess that I always thought of 'golden age' differently than the rest of you.  I think of 'golden age' in terms of innovation and creation as well as prosperity.  Perhaps that comes from a background in comic book collecting.  The Golden Age of comics was more one of innovation and development than of artistic creativity.  

I consider the golden age of gaming to be in the late 70's through the 80's.    The period Schild highlights I'd consider the silver age, much like the late 60's in comics.  It's no shock that we disagree... we like (and grew up with) very different games.

[Thrawn]

I've only really played 4 maybe 5 of the games in that 1999 list.   (FF VIII (not to completion), Counter Strike, Ogrebattle, Homeworld (not to completion), and I think I played Sim City 3000)

But back on the OP a bit, I'm really trying and failing to make an effort to play less games.  I'm a very, very bad sufferer of the typical student problem "I have a major paper due in 4 hours, well that means I can game for at least 3 more hours before I start on it."  It feels like ADD combined with a gaming addiction sometimes when I'm stuck up until 1 AM pissed at myself for not just getting the work done first.  I can find stuff I want to play almost always, but I have so much real life crap right now that I should be putting more effort into.  On top of that I'm working a part time job and work study at a place and area that I'm actually enjoying.  So I need to be devoting some time to learning more about what they have me doing to work at turning it into a full time position. I'm actually going to try to just play no games at all this week (baby steps).  If I can make it to Wednesday I will be impressed with myself.

[Paelos]

My silver age of gaming was 1996. Civ 2, Diablo, Warcraft 2, Daggerfall, Heroes of M&M 2, Lords of the Realm 2, Mario Kart 64, Quake, Resident Evil, Super Dodge Ball, Super Mario 64, and Tomb Raider.

[schild]

1993-2000 was the period of gaming that shaped modern gaming. It was both highly profitable, highly creative, and the birth of what we now know. It's the Golden Age of gaming. While old farts who like lawns and other dumb shit would argue the Atari 2600 perhaps through the end of the NES era was the golden age, you'd have to look back and realize that there was VERY little innovation happening post say, Space Invaders, SMB, and Dragon Quest/Final Fantasy. While we got some weird experimentation (Toejam and Earl and Klax come to mind), innovation was not the order of the day. The industry was not yet self-aware of what it was doing.

~1980-1992 represents gaming appearing and trying to figure out what it was. 1993-2002 represents the vast majority of what we know now, with it peaking in the above year. The Silver Age of Gaming would be trying to recapture the Golden Age, but ain't nobody going to come close to Age of Empires II (1999), Final Fantasy VI (1994), Deus Ex (2000 - though, they'll never stop trying), Planescape (1999 - they need to stop trying), etc.

In addition, it wasn't until the 90s/early 2000s that games reached the threshold that comics reached becoming an acceptable form of art (still up for dispute by idiots) and a massive part of mainstream culture, which comics achieved during its golden age.

EDIT: TO ADD - I would argue that the golden Age of ARCADE gaming - was late 70s through late 1985/early 1986. This is part of the reason the golden age of video gaming (that which was sent by video at home to your TV) could not have been its golden age - because we were all still playing that shit including SMB at the arcade, where it was better and even more communal.

Edit 2: Also fixed a MASSIVE typo in my first paragraph, that being the year 1993. 

[Nebu]

I assumed that the term 'video game' include arcade, pc, and console. 

When I look back on my Golden age, I tend to focus on games like Elite, M.U.L.E, Zork, Star Raiders, Archon, Race for the Stars, Pac Man, Asteroids, Defender, Joust, and others.  They were a huge jump from the Avalon Hill and Milton Bradley board games I was playing concurrently and a hell of a lot more interesting than PONG or pinball.

Then again, I remember how excited I was when we got our first color tv, my first transistor radio, my first calculator, and my first digital watch too.

[01101010]

1993-2000 was the period of gaming that shaped modern gaming. It was both highly profitable, highly creative, and the birth of what we now know. It's the Golden Age of gaming. While old farts who like lawns and other dumb shit would argue the Atari 2600 perhaps through the end of the NES era was the golden age, you'd have to look back and realize that there was VERY little innovation happening post say, Space Invaders, SMB, and Dragon Quest/Final Fantasy. While we got some weird experimentation (Toejam and Earl and Klax come to mind), innovation was not the order of the day. The industry was not yet self-aware of what it was doing.

~1980-1992 represents gaming appearing and trying to figure out what it was. 1993-2002 represents the vast majority of what we know now, with it peaking in the above year. The Silver Age of Gaming would be trying to recapture the Golden Age, but ain't nobody going to come close to Age of Empires II (1999), Final Fantasy VI (1994), Deus Ex (2000 - though, they'll never stop trying), Planescape (1999 - they need to stop trying), etc.

In addition, it wasn't until the 90s/early 2000s that games reached the threshold that comics reached becoming an acceptable form of art (still up for dispute by idiots) and a massive part of mainstream culture, which comics achieved during its golden age.

EDIT: TO ADD - I would argue that the golden Age of ARCADE gaming - was late 70s through late 1985/early 1986. This is part of the reason the golden age of video gaming (that which was sent by video at home to your TV) could not have been its golden age - because we were all still playing that shit including SMB at the arcade, where it was better and even more communal.

Edit 2: Also fixed a MASSIVE typo in my first paragraph, that being the year 1993. 

I am fine with this conclusion. Seems we are in some limbo at the moment - much like the 80-92 years sited above... not much going on but repetition and clones.

And fuck I miss mall arcades... but just for the nostalgia. I still hit up a Dave and Busters once every 6 months to find the retro machines sequestered in the back of the room and play Galaga or Centipede just for old-time's sake.

[schild]

I remember how excited I was as a child also, because kids and teenagers are easily excited. Unfortunately, it wasn't until the SNES/PS1 period that home/video gaming broke into the mainstream in a massive way. Comics achieved that quickly, console gaming did not - possibly due to it being relatively cost prohibitive when compared to arcade gaming.

But then, I also separate PC gaming and console gaming and arcades when I talk about gaming because they were all very different things until very recently (in terms of the overall life of these markets). For a short period of time, arcades and home gaming converged with Pac-Man, Super Mario, etc - and then it diverged again. It didn't align until the Dreamcast, which most PC gamers ignored despite the fact it was a perfect clone of the NAOMI arcade platform. At that time people like us were mostly enamored with PC Gaming anyway, which is probably one of the many factors that nearly killed Sega and did kill the Dreamcast (though, the 32X and Saturn paved the way for that).

Anyway, getting back to the point, there was no bronze/stone age for comics, but I would argue there certainly was a time like that for home gaming.

Edit: 01101010, I bought a Taito Egret II (along with the appropriate NAOMI, Neo-Geo, CPS II, and Kaneko Super Nova systems) about 6 years ago for a good reason - all of which included missing arcades, so owning what is arguably the best cabinet ever built filled that gap right quickly.

Edit 2: Apparently there was a bronze age for comic books, but most of us refer to it as the shitty, mcshitshit age that occurred when video games appeared on the scene (70s-early 80s). It's also an informal name and not nearly defining enough for the period. Which was AWFUL in comic books.

[Salamok]

So are we awaiting the golden age of online gaming?  Or did I sleep through that?

[schild]

So are we awaiting the golden age of online gaming?  Or did I sleep through that?

Online gaming doesn't deserve ages.

But if we wanted to separate it, I suppose, MUDS -> Unreal Tournament 1 - and nothing has changed since, other than natural progression of technology (fiber optics vs number of telephone lines you can legally have in your house, for example) (and servers, number of players on any given box).

Online gaming is depressing, so fuckit, let's not go down that road.

Edit: World of Warcraft, on it's own a sort of special Golden Age for MMOGs simply due to penetration, but if anyone wants to argue that, I'm going to bring Farmville into the conversation and send this entire thread to fucking politics. So, admin veto on the topic being applied here.

[Ironwood]

 

[shiznitz]

MMOGs are like drinking.  You think you are having fun while you do it and then you wake up, look at the pictures your friends' took of you, read your text messages that you sent at 1AM and realize it really wasn't all that.

Then you forget those realizations and go do it all again at the next opportunity.

edit: changed "online gaming" to "MMOGs" since online gaming covers a lot more gaming that is still fun.

[Salamok]

I was kind of thinking that the golden age would begin when they add multiplayer to DCSS webtiles.

[Sky]

I thought minecraft was the dawn of the online golden age.

[Kail]

1999:
[snip...]

That single year represents the golden age of gaming. Yes, I copied that list from Wikipedia and removed a total of like six pieces of crap.

I liked some of that crap!

Specifically, 1999 was the last big push for Mech sims, a genre I really miss nowadays.  Mechwarrior 3, Starsiege, and Heavy Gear 2 all came out that year.

Plus, it was the Dreamcast's launch year. 

[Ironwood]

Disagree.


That single year represents the golden age of gaming. Yes, I copied that list from Wikipedia and removed a total of like six pieces of crap. The ratio is still outstanding and I went straight to look at 1999, I didn't even need to look at another year. Because that's the year. I almost looked at 2000 also, but I remember it being VERY close to, but not quite as good as 1999.

Good List.

[Jeff Kelly]

Well I don't want to bring the stupid debate into this thread and I know that it will sound very silly but Mass Effect 3 is the straw that broke the camel's back for me.

The more the debate about the game rages on the more clearly you can see that there is a fundamental disconnect between the people who buy and play games and the ones who make them or write about them.

The majority of the press is either apathetic about the issue (which is understandable) or outright condescending to the gamers. Look at the New Yorker piece about the issue if you want condescending with an extra helping of patronizing and the "The Verge" piece is issue 199 in the book of "I don't get what all the fuss is about, with the amount of hype no ending would be perfect" and the popular "well people just don't get it"

The ones that don't fall into category A or B insinuate that players just "want a happy end" and that they are angry because they haven't gotten one. They see that as wish fulfillment and ultimately as a sign of immaturity or entitlement. If the reviewer is extremely daring he might even compare it to people wanting to change the end of for example Romeo and Juliet.

I'm not of the opinion that Bioware should change the game but that no article delves into the real problems of the end, its glaring plot holes, the sudden change of theme that negates three games worth of experience and that they all seem to gloss it over as "while the game might have some issues" or "the end to such an epic can't please all fans" is rather disappointing. That nobody get's on Bioware's nerves for a day 0 DLC that is very clearly content that was in the game and is an integral part of the story. That nobody seems to check all of the bullshit the producer said to the press that turned out to be not true.

That nobody in the industry seems to get why people are upset is startling. The tone in most of the writing is "it's not the game that is broken it's you the player for not enjoying it like you're supposed to"

I just realized that I don't want to spend money on a hobby where even the people inside the business patronize and belittle me. I was burned out before ME 3. I simply don't like the direction games take with even more violence and sexism, with games that are now considered to be long if they take you 6 hours to finish and professionals who'll simply applaud anything while sneering at the people that they create those games or texts for.

It's just that ME 3 and the debate about it has shown me the ugly truth. That video gaming as a hobby is not even in the same ballpark as other things because in the end the people who develop games or write about them seem to hate gamers even more than people outside the business do.

Yeah I know that this is overly dramatic but it's something I felt for a long time and the latest debate just reinforced that feeling.

So I'll probably spend my time on other things in the near future, not that there is any shortage of entertainment to choose from.

[Rasix]

Ok.

[UnSub]

Disagree.

1999:
  

Meh, all I see are sequels, franchise titles and licences. 

Slightly more serious reply coming when I've got more time to post.

[Velorath]

I think it's kinda pointless trying to come up with a best year in video games, partially because it forces you to try to factor in games that are popular but that you personally might not care for.  The '99 list contains a lot of stuff I just don't give a shit about, or stuff that I downright hated (Shenmue being a prime example due to the actual game sucking horribly, despite a lot of cool side stuff).  For me personally '97, 2000, '05, and '07 among others were better years, but I'm not really going to try arguing that any of them were the best year of gaming.

[Salamok]

I'll 2nd 97 just for Diablo (yeah it was out for all of a day in 96 but all of the gameplay was 97).

[Velorath]

1993-2000 was the period of gaming that shaped modern gaming. It was both highly profitable, highly creative, and the birth of what we now know. It's the Golden Age of gaming. While old farts who like lawns and other dumb shit would argue the Atari 2600 perhaps through the end of the NES era was the golden age, you'd have to look back and realize that there was VERY little innovation happening post say, Space Invaders, SMB, and Dragon Quest/Final Fantasy. While we got some weird experimentation (Toejam and Earl and Klax come to mind), innovation was not the order of the day. The industry was not yet self-aware of what it was doing.

What?  So much of what games are today was established prior to 1993, that it seems like a very arbitrary place to draw a line.  Street Fighter 2 for instance established back in 1991 is still the basis for most modern fighting games.  Likewise in 1992, Dune II established the RTS genre.  Final Fantasy IV was released in 1991.  Wolfenstien in 1992.  Long running franchises were established that were on their 3rd or 4th installment by the time 1993 rolled around (SMB, Castlevania, Mega Man, Phantasy Star, Zelda, the entirety of the Gold Box series including the original Neverwinter Nights on AOL, 7 or so Ultima games etc...).  You make it sound like developers were just stumbling around in the dark and then 1993 comes around and... what happened exactly that made the next few years noteworthy?  I'm not really seeing a lot in the release lists that wasn't directly building off games that had come before.

[Fabricated]

   February 11 - Final Fantasy VIII - (PS1)

FF8 was awful. The rest of that list though, yeah, I agree.

I don't think we're in the dark ages yet, but considering the amount of money spent making games right now and the amount of genuinely interesting stuff coming from big studios per year being countable on one hand I think we may be getting there. Jillions of dollars from major publishers and maybe 3-5 games a year come out that're just great.

Note if you want to mention the indie scene: I treat all good indie games as complete flukes generally, because as of yet I don't really know an indie developer that has been able to bottle lightning twice; unless someone can remind me. I fully admit I may be forgetting something.

Maybe Frictional Games? The Penumbra series was really fucking rough around the edges so I dunno if I'd count it.

[pxib]

1999 was also a pretty spectacular year for film. I have a feeling both relate to the final glorious throes of the venture capital boom: There was a lot of money floating around for experimental projects, and a lot of creative people in the entertainment business were given the reigns to make exactly what they wanted to make without producers breathing down their necks. The tightening of the money supply since then has led to the drop in risk-taking that we lament in almost every field.

[ghost]

Huh.  Maybe the world really did end in 1999.  We just haven't figured it out yet.