63 réponses à ce sujet

[Dermain]

My nostalgia glasses are horribly broken, it seems.

I bought BG1 en BG2 enhanced editions during the summer sale. I haven't even gotten to Nashkel before I quit. Can't deal with the graphics (never in my life did I think I'd say this...), can't handle the framerate, the general slowness of the game, I can't handle it in general.

I wish I hadn't bought them to be honest, the BG trilogy was always firmly in my top 5 games ever. Now it's not anymore.

 

I know right?

 

It makes me sad.

 

*snip*

I don't know how you even get into a guild these days without randomly joining (which has always been **** in my experience in GW2) or filling out a psuedo job application after making an account on their website. I used to meet friends by actually playing the game and running dungeons. Now the game has raidfinder, "streamlined" talent trees and glyphs, etc. as well.

*snip*

 

Ya, I pity anyone that has to join a new guild in GW2 now. For sPvP/PvE the server doesn't really matter, but the moment you go into WvW it does. If a guild requires you to fill out an application (or photos if you're female) then they are definitely not worth joining though. I still manage to make friends with people in Map chat in PvE however, so there's still that.

 

The streamlined talent trees/specilizations are actually far better than the old system since now you're not bogged down by ~30 traits to choose from (some of which were quite pointless). 

[SlottsMachine]

Because the combat is terrible. You need to blast process past ME1

 

Nah I just blast process the combat. Way more exciting!

 

Here is an example of what blast processing can do, without it tho I can see why someone wouldn't like ME1's combat. 

 

[o Ventus]

In your OP, you call people liking old games over the new, and I quote, "unrelentingly retarded."

No, what I actually said was this (boldened so it's easier to read, since that seems to be a common issue):

 

The older games are still quite good and will always have their mark left on the history of gaming, but pretending that the newer ones are *bad* games, solely because they are different, is unrelentingly retarded.

 

But I guess if you ignore the other 4/5 of that comment, you might be accurate. I say "might" because you have to be some kind of wizard to glean any kind of context from 2 words.

[o Ventus]

http://tvtropes.org/...gedItNowItSucks

Pretty much.

[Seraphim24]

I was reading the WoW forums earlier when the idea for this thread came to me. Some people there are ragging on the newest expansion and essentially crying wolf about how Blizzard has lost their way and how vanilla WoW was so much better or how TBC (the first expansion) was the best or whatever and how WoW is dying (despite still having the most active subscriptions for any subscription-based game). I enjoy the current expansion myself, but I won't delude myself by saying that it is free of issues. It has plenty of them. However, all things considered objectively, WoW in the past few years (2012 to now) has been the best it's ever been in the game's 10 year long life span.

 

Admittedly, the older expansions did do some things better (I personally think WotLK was the pinnacle of WoW's storytelling and that Cataclysm was the best in terms of gear acquisition and stat itemization), but as a whole package, I would take today's WoW over 2004-2007 WoW.

 

I've seen the same issue with other games too, especially in games that have a legacy. Legacy of Zelda, Mortal Kombat, Super Mario, and Fallout have been the worst, in my experience. 

 

"Twilight Princess is garbage, just remake Ocarina!"

"MKX is a terrible game, do MK9 again!"

"New Super Mario Bros. is dumbed down for the kiddie peasants, we want Super Mario World again!"

"Fallout 3 is in first-person? Bethesda ruined the franchise and is advertising to the Call of Duty players! Bring back Fallout 1/2!"

 

The older games are still quite good and will always have their mark left on the history of gaming, but pretending that the newer ones are *bad* games, solely because they are different, is unrelentingly retarded. 

 

To use the WoW example from before, a good number of people want to claim that vanilla was the best experience Taken in a vacuum, this is a perfectly valid stance to have. People have preferences, after all. My issue is more with how they present it. What they forget is that vanilla was also unbelievably tedious and boring, with hilariously severe class imbalance. Leveling was a chore, classes were loaded with useless abilities that served little to no purpose, raid bosses were incredibly dull and had only 1 or 2 mechanics, if any at all (most of them prior to Naxxramas consisted of "hit the boss until it dies" with no other thought or strategy necessary"). Classes all had 3 specializations that could go into for higher levels of play, and most classes had only 1 valid spec to "choose" from (2 if they were lucky), with talent builds for that spec being very rigid in terms of what was useful, with a lot of useless filler and clutter. Hell, anyone who played a tank character and WASN'T a Warrior was essentially doing it wrong, since it was so far ahead of the other tanks in terms of output. Other classes would be relegated to handing out buffs for the entirety of boss fights instead of actually contributing to the kill. One faction had a huge advantage over the other because of Paladins (who could both tank and heal in addition to DPS) being exclusive to them, while the other faction was stuck with Shamans (who could only DPS and heal).

 

It's simple nostalgia, when the nostalgia goggles are taken off, we can see just how bad vanilla was *as a game* compared to, say, WotLK or Mists. And since it's nostalgia, everyone's memories are based on appealing to their emotions and what made them feel good. Hitting level 60 in vanilla *felt* like an accomplishment to them. Raiding *felt* epic due to the 40 player count. PvP battles *felt* huge and engaging. Regardless of however they *felt*, they are not any of these things. The game as it was back then was a broken mess that would score heinously low marks if it was released today.

 

TLDR: people are too quick to write a game off just because it's different than the one that came before it. People are idiots and can't think for themselves when it comes to evaluating something, they rely on their feelings and don't use their heads. The quality of games, as a whole, has improved greatly form the days of the NES/SNES/Sega Genesis/etc, even if you want to plug your ears and say that games suck nowadays.

 

It's not always simple nostalgia. Honestly, Warcraft 2 is the best WC game still in 2015, it's extremely well balanced and the campaign is polished, the level design is extremely intuitive, and the lore is better balanced between the factions making for stronger and resonant characters. Warcraft 3 after that, and then possibly Vanilla WoW. That said, Pandaria is probably the best expansion I've played, so it's not like the newer is always worse either.

 

All the improvements that have been made to WoW were mostly in the vein of reducing complexity where it existed legitimately or adding needless bloat.  It's still an absorbing game and all that, but they made it a lot less so in various expansions.

 

Anyway, this nostalgia thing is yet another attempt to create a simple rule where none exists, in the case of gaming, frequently the older game is the better game, although not always, it depends entirely on the game in question.

[Fast Jimmy]

No, what I actually said was this (boldened so it's easier to read, since that seems to be a common issue):


But I guess if you ignore the other 4/5 of that comment, you might be accurate. I say "might" because you have to be some kind of wizard to glean any kind of context from 2 words.

Some newer games include features I don't like. Features that are different from older games. Features that makes them bad games, in my view.

You are saying it is impossible for me to not like a new game, else I am retarded.

[Commander Rpg]

Some newer games include features I don't like. Features that are different from older games. Features that makes them bad games, in my view.

Some old games have aged very well, some others became outdated after 2 years from release.

The damnation of the modern games is that they are more focused (generally) on superficial things, even if they manage to satisfy our eyes or intellect, and these superficiality results in mediocre originality and the magnification of not so important aspects (i.e. dull romances), while the older games suffer from having (sometimes) dared too much: it's clear when you say an older game trying to convey a gameplay it can't reproduce, but it merely emulates.

[o Ventus]

You are saying it is impossible for me to not like a new game, else I am retarded.

 

If you want to invent context and claim I'm saying things when it is demonstrable that I am not, then by all means, I cannot and will not stop you.

[Isichar]

The thing is that we didn't have the tools to tank, and any time we got creative about it they nerfed it so we couldn't. It wasn't until BC that Paladins started getting proper tanking tools.


The community I had and the pugs I got on my server back in Vanilla were a lot better. People who did dickish things like that got blacklisted from the rest of the community.

It died when they implemented cross server, and it never solved those issues anyway. People still go around stealing loot and being jerks, even more so than they did before cross server was a thing.

PvP is the only thing that has had a consistently bad community in my experience. Even then, it was pretty fun having a rivalry with a Troll Mage from my server and having a duel every time we kept running into each other or running into the local High Warlord in a BG and besting him in a 1v1.

Those are things you just don't get with cross realm.

Oh God yes. I had a few rivalry's going in my old server with players that died in BC when they started doing cross server, although there was a Horde rogue I sort of kept running into in game and on the forums that we had one going in BC. Funny thing is we trashed each other so much on the forums and were assholes to each other in game whenever we could be at first but eventually we became pretty good buddies

As crazy as they were I miss the old AVs in all their glory. A full match could be like 8-10 hours. You could start in one, go to work and come home to the same match which was pretty wild. Now AVs last like 15 minutes average in my experience lol

[Cyonan]

The crux of my of thread is that blind nostalgia is bad, and that these older games that people mindlessly praise still have flaws -- flaws that would be fatal if they were released today. So yes, I would expect people who aren't idiots to understand that I am going to be pointing out flaws in their sacred cows. When I acknowledge that these games have their positives, it's to prevent people from coming in and saying "yeah, but X did Y and Y was really cool, you didn't mention that at all!", except I forgot that the IQ of the average internet dweller is in the negative, so they are somehow missing all of that. It's almost like critical thinking and the ability to comprehend what is read are useful skills.

 

I don't need to have an account, or even to have played the game back then to understand how the mechanics worked when I have A]. the internet, and B]. first-hand reports from people who did play. Likewise, I can give you a detailed rundown on the rules and regulations of the NFL, despite not playing gridiron football myself. It's fascinating what one can learn when they have access to the internet. It's like they don't need first hand experience.

 

But if you want to keep missing the point and misunderstanding, by all means.

 

I get what your point is. Mine was that what you think is blind nostalgia isn't always blind, which you seemed to keep missing in favour of telling me how terrible WoW used to be. I know the community wasn't perfect, but I think it was a hell of a lot better before cross realm features showed up.

 

I actually disagree that WoW is better in the last few years. I think that it was at its best before Cataclysm. I would gladly take TBC, WotLK pre-cross realm, or even Vanilla as a whole package over Warlords of Draenor.
 

You can give me a detailed rundown of the rules and regulations of the NFL but if it comes down to what it's like to be a quarterback in a proper NFL game then you would not be as knowledgeable as say, Brett Favre.

 

but hey, I'm sure if you insult people's intelligence just a few more times that means you win.

[o Ventus]

I get what your point is.

 

Evidently you don't since you seem to still think I'm just trashing vanilla WoW.

 

Mine was that what you think is blind nostalgia isn't always blind, which you seemed to keep missing in favour of telling me how terrible WoW used to be.

 

Case in point.

 

 

You can give me a detailed rundown of the rules and regulations of the NFL but if it comes down to what it's like to be a quarterback in a proper NFL game then you would not be as knowledgeable as say, Brett Favre.

 

I guess it's a good thing I never posited my original point by claiming to be a quarterback then, isn't it? Likewise, I never claimed to have played vanilla. Except this doesn't invalidate a single thing I've said.

 

And again, you don't have to be Brett Favre to know what Brett Favre does in a game, you can see it with your eyes by watching the game or by watching a show like SportsCenter and researching his plays. Likewise, you don't need to have been a player in vanilla to know what vanilla was like, you can see it with your eyes by seeing YouTube videos or reading old wiki entries.

 

 

but hey, I'm sure if you insult people's intelligence just a few more times that means you win.

 

And if you get just a little more defensive, you'll take second place.

[Cyonan]

 

Evidently you don't since you seem to still think I'm just trashing vanilla WoW.

 

 

Case in point.

 

 

 

I guess it's a good thing I never posited my original point by claiming to be a quarterback then, isn't it? Likewise, I never claimed to have played vanilla. Except this doesn't invalidate a single thing I've said.

 

And again, you don't have to be Brett Favre to know what Brett Favre does in a game, you can see it with your eyes by watching the game or by watching a show like SportsCenter and researching his plays. Likewise, you don't need to have been a player in vanilla to know what vanilla was like, you can see it with your eyes by seeing YouTube videos or reading old wiki entries.

 

You really have only said bad things about Vanilla, or about how things are so much better today. Saying "older games had lots of merit" doesn't mean much in the thread where you say that once we set nostalgia aside we can see just how bad vanilla is compared to newer expansions.

 

I could also claim that I'm not discrediting your examples of how vanilla WoW was because you didn't actually play during it, but that doesn't change the fact that that is still exactly what I'm doing.

 

Your original point involves you knowing what it was like during vanilla WoW which using your football analogy is the same as you making statments about what it's like to be a quarterback. You're not directly saying you've played vanilla, but your argument relies on the information that is not as correct as you think it is.

 

In either case I'm not here to dispute if Vanilla was better than post-Cata, but rather to point out that it's not blind nostalgia to think that it was better even though your first paragraph in this thread claims that if you look at it objectively, current WoW is better.

[o Ventus]

You really have only said bad things about Vanilla, or about how things are so much better today. Saying "older games had lots of merit" doesn't mean much in the thread where you say that once we set nostalgia aside we can see just how bad vanilla is compared to newer expansions.

 

Because I guess I wasn't clear enough the last time I said that the crux of this thread is to highlight things that people like that may not be so great.

 

 

 

 

I could also claim that I'm not discrediting your examples of how vanilla WoW was because you didn't actually play during it, but that doesn't change the fact that that is still exactly what I'm doing.

 

Okay, good for you. Except I'm actually not just trashing vanilla. If this thread were about the positives to vanilla and not the flaws (you know, the running theme I've been trying to get across), I'd be talking about the positives and not so much about the negatives.

 

 

 

Your original point involves you knowing what it was like during vanilla WoW which using your football analogy is the same as you making statments about what it's like to be a quarterback. You're not directly saying you've played vanilla, but your argument relies on the information that is not as correct as you think it is.

 

I've gotten 1 piece of information wrong. Everything else is pulled from a YouTube video or a wiki page.

 

 

 

In either case I'm not here to dispute if Vanilla was better than post-Cata, but rather to point out that it's not blind nostalgia to think that it was better even though your first paragraph in this thread claims that if you look at it objectively, current WoW is better.

 

Look, you're obviously capable of using your eyes since you can read, but I recommend using the rest of your head to try and think. 

 

 

Admittedly, the older expansions did do some things better (I personally think WotLK was the pinnacle of WoW's storytelling and that Cataclysm was the best in terms of gear acquisition and stat itemization), but as a whole package, I would take today's WoW over 2004-2007 WoW.

 

 

 

 

Taken in a vacuum, this is a perfectly valid stance to have. People have preferences, after all. My issue is more with how they present it.

 

 

 

TLDR: people are too quick to write a game off just because it's different than the one that came before it.

 

How you can read any of the above 3 bits and come to "you think people who like the older version are dumb" is beyond me. When I explicitly say that it's a valid stance to like something and that my favorite point of the game was 7 years ago (e.g. not in the 2012-2015 time frame I gave earlier), you would have to either be an idiot (which I'm sure you're not) to misconstrue this or buttmad that someone is saying that your sacred cow isn't quite as good as people like to claim it is.

 

You know, you can like things that don't hold up to today's standards. It's not illegal to like things that aren't good.

 

And yes, if you look at it objectively--

 

OBJECTIVELY

 

OBJECTIVELY

 

Repeated for emphasis -- if you look at it objectively, it IS better now. The gameplay is smoother, the visuals are better, the storytelling is tighter and involves the player more than it ever has, there's more variety in the kinds of quests available, bosses are more engaging to fight, etc. I don't care what you like about vanilla, that's not the point of the thread.