Yuku free message boards

noted. thanks. if you quite like the system shocks, i would strongly suggest you check out deus ex. some might say deus ex is the natural evolution of system shock but with no horror aspects... unless for some reason you think monkeys genetically modified into radioactive gray aliens, or crocodile dogs are scary.

you would probably have some video card problems with deus ex, unless you actually use an old VooDoo 3D card.

http://www.it-he.org/sshock.htm
you might want to check out the link above if you get stuck with the SSs or you just want to be an asshole. some weird FAQs/walkthroughs there.

old games are inherently worse than new ones.

i don't want to fault him too much on this. yes, the game industry is acting more retarded and sequel -friendly than it used to but... we only remember and appreciate the old games which survived obscurity. we do not remember all the bad games in the PAST which could have well made us feel as jaded about game development as the crappy modern games we're being told to love NOW.

he's a sometimes game developer too. he desires innovation and substance, and hates the same boring cliches probably more than we do. that's why he gave mirror's edge a somewhat neutral review.

all of them? crawl and flo couldn't find the time to play all the games they have acquired. i'm not calling you or all of you, idiots... but aren't you just a wee bit doubtful that your knowledge of all old games is definitely not complete? that Yahtzee might have been more of a masochist and played more bad games.

i would guess that anyone who doesn't play games for a living or obsessed every bit of gaming news... call me a cynical hillary supporter but they wouldn't give a damn about most of them games released... unless it's another sequel of some other big name game/company. i'm pretty sure most of them should have a full brain and never required a lobotomy.

i for one, seriously do not have the time to examine every single game released, to say for certain that they mostly suck... or suck worse than games which fall in the "retro" catalogue which could range from early 80's to even early 2002(according to some magazines). 80's , i was mostly poor, played whatever my uncles were playing and stuff on a second-hand famicom. 90's, still mostly poor, famicom died/disappeared, used uncle's 2nd hand notebook, limited to games which can run on a pentium 486.

2000s till now, read about companies which created game i loved get swallowed up and destroyed by EA and such, more bugs, more expensive hype, more sequels. games get somewhat more expensive, i stick to mostly old games... actually i've been doing older games for long time. the "new" games... i don't it's fair to throw them all into this convienent(sp?) little category which i've never really had the money to mess around with much. this category, which ten years ago, would contains game considered retro now... games i have big nostalgic bias for.

what really irks me theseadays is not old or new, it's the generator of the games. in the past, it's smaller companies or just individuals from all over the place. the only asshole big company was atari. now, it's big ass empires hogging all the limelight, controlling the prices, and buying up and spitting out the smaller players. it's a much more uneven playing ground, for the small guy for the newbies in the game. it's just not indie enough anymore. there's still potential in the new games, but the big players will always hog the limelight and piss you off.

on 2nd thought i should emphasize that. all the big names(with all their spending power,and sequel milking machines) are taking away most of the attention of the gamers, that includes you, unless you deaf and blind, or refuse to take in any mainstream media all. you're seeing more of what you don't like. more easily than ever.

and you can't expect old games to reproduce anything that would surprise you with any kinda innovation, if you really know the old catalogue that well.