this post was submitted on 02 Sep 2025
328 points (100.0% liked)
90s Memes
174 readers
389 users here now
founded 5 days ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Yeah, because games were much smaller and less complicated then.
You say that like it's a problem.
Numbers don't lie.
Sounds like capitalism to me.
People buy what they like.
People often believe they like something because of peer pressure to do so. Call of duty used to be a good game that was balanced to different play styles. Yeah, it sells more than ever now, but hasn't been a good game in at least 12 years. Some people like for optics, some for quality and some for personal beliefs. But selling well hasnt been a metric of quality in my lifetime other than Japanese automaker's sales exploding while American vehicle sales crash. I can't really think of many other situations where quality mattered in the equation in my lifetime.
Seriously, it's usually marketing and budget, or simply buying the company, and fitting it into the capitalist hellhole of the bigger company.
I love fallout 4, it's my favorite fallout game but it failed in so many respects. It sold really well. But it was far too guided to be a real fallout game. I won't go into the love/hate relationship I have with it, but it didn't feel right, but was a great game outside of that. Basically, it went mainstream for money, but if it didn't have the fallout humor and universe backing that? I doubt I'd have finished.
My point is that a good game is decided by the player who is biased. Anybody who played the original call of duty games would hate what it's turned into. Originally you could RP as a specialist and pick weapons, perks and side arms and make it a game on strategy. There's no strategy left in the game, it's run and gun, no matter what you choose to use, because that's whats popular. Again, popular doesn't make it a good game. And having snoop dogg, a tree, Nicki Minaj, and Santa clause running around a battlefield feels stupid.
Sales =/= quality.
Need for speed used to sell like gran Turismo. Madden sells at high levels every year despite rarely changing anything significant. Hershey's sells gangbusters despite being as expensive as much better chocolates. Bitcoin continues going up based on literally nothing. The biggest pizza and burger places in the country are of the worst examples in their perspective fields in any given town in America. Everything is consumerism which is capitalism.
Occasionally, that can work out well, like the revolt against live service games. But enough of them fall through the cracks to be popular, that they keep making more, in the hopes of being the next fortnite, or destiny 2 or GTA online. But it really brings down the whole industry because games that lose money have to be made up for on the successful games, meaning they get monetized even heavier.
I went on a rant that may have gone a little off the rails, but I'm not about to go back and read your original point and put the train back on the track after all that.
Sales do not equal quality, and that's capitalism for you.
That's, like, your opinion, man.
In all fairness, I first scrolled alllll the way down the wall to:
So, I'm putting this note here while I go back up to walk the mile you cobbled. Now. If I'm not back in twenty minutes^?^, just wait longer.
Absolutely fair lol
It was ~4am, so not entirely your fault I fell asleep. 🤣
People buy what is for sale.
People also buy what they're pressured to buy whether or not they enjoy it.
Based on the amount of complaining online, people also buy what they don't like.
They think they're voting with their dollar, but less than half of 'em can barely reckon what they semi-read, so gold star for them, all around.
I too can ignore the livestock noises while the machine lumbers on. C'est la guerre.
Games have become dramatically more beautiful in the last 10 years. A lot of minor changes, but ones that make a big difference. That doesn't happen without taking up more space for bigger textures, less compressed audio, and a whole lot more assets.
Can't please everyone, I guess.
Id argue that games made very little progress in the last ten years compared to even the 5 years before that. Compare a game from 2010 to a game from 2015 and theres a massive difference. From 2015 to now games barely look better and usually run like shit.
That sounds like nostalgia speaking. Don't get me wrong, I think games between 2015-2020 are still visually pleasing, but textures and lighting have made some big strides recently. It's a subjective matter, obviously.
The visual eye candy doesn't come without a cost though, games are much harder to run with hardware made the same year they're released, but computationally expensive particles and lighting are no joke. Like you said, they can feel like they run like shit if you can't afford to drop a couple thousand on new parts.