Old Game Buying Binge

[Veloxi]

I don't know exactly why, but I've been on a buying binge of old games. Some of these I've re-purchased since selling them to make money after bing laid off back in 2003, but some are new. In the past several months, I've purchased:

iF-22
iF/A-18
Interstate '76
Mechwarrior 2
Star Rangers
Millennia: Altered Destinies
Die By The Sword
Warzone 2100
Age of Rifles
Submarine Titans
Swat 2
War Wind and War Wind 2
Outpost 2
Star General
Hind
Crusader: No Remorse
Max Payne
Every Jane's Flight Sim
M.A.X.
Conquest of the New World

And many more. I think this is because few new games these days (except Fate) excite me like older titles.

Maybe I'm just being nostalgic, but it seems as if many of these games are from the mid-late 1990's, which is when some of the best computer games ever were released, IMO.

Do you get like this? Do you get on an old-game buying binge sometimes?

[Turtle]

Almost all these games were made just before the big transition over to full 3D acceleration or the game tech boom happened.

You saw a lot of innovation in gameplay and quality as the graphics landscape evened out.

Right now, that's just starting to happen post tech boom, as even though these next gen engines are great graphically, they're also including a lot of new gameplay enhancing features, and people are being a bit more picky.

[DArtagnan]

I’m amazed by this list.

I’d say 75% of the games listed were at best mediocre upon release. There’s still no accounting for taste, I guess.

[Zarathud]

Die by the Sword -- I loved that sword-swinging interface. There were some really fun things you could do to your enemies with the numberpad.

And there's the great line: "You hit like a Kobold!"

[yossar]

Maybe I'm just being nostalgic, but it seems as if many of these games are from the mid-late 1990's, which is when some of the best computer games ever were released, IMO.

Depends on the genre. Adventure games, flight sims, and mech sims, probably (although maybe adventure games peaked even earlier depending on your love/hate for text-based input). RPGs and TBS, maybe. Everything else, not really. There were a bunch of innovative games, but most of that innovation has been cloned and evolved since then.

[Jeff V]

Maybe I'm just being nostalgic, but it seems as if many of these games are from the mid-late 1990's, which is when some of the best computer games ever were released, IMO.

Huh. And yet Star General, one of the most disappointingly-horrible games of all times is on this list.

I disagree with your claim that the mid-late 90's, or any such period actually, can be considered the time when the "best computer games ever were released." The appearance of quality titles has been pretty much constant over the past 20 years.

Now, your particular high point in gaming might have been the mid-late 90's. For me it was probably the early 90's. Ask some 20-yr old kid and he might claim 2002 was da bomb. Many of us get jaded over time, and no matter how good the newest games are, the old fire and passion will never be rekindled. This isn't the fault of the developers or publishers - they aren't suddenly making nothing but games that suck. The same game that might have led to weeks of addictive playing a few years earlier might not even grasp your interest today.

Personally, I don't care much for nostalgia trips. I'd much prefer finding something new and exciting to spend my time with than try to relive interests of bygone days. Life is too short to stay stuck in neutral.

[Kraken]

Now, your particular high point in gaming might have been the mid-late 90's. For me it was probably the early 90's.

I heart Jeff V; the giants of my "golden age" were SSI, Microprose, and early EA (before it became an evil empire). PC gaming died with the 5.25" floppy. But as Jeff said, it's all a matter of perspective. I do enjoy playing older games, but there are still 2-3 great titles published every year, along with countless mediocre and bad ones, same as it ever was. We just tend not to remember the klunkers of the past.

[D.A.Lewis]

We had a similar thread regarding this issue a few months ago. I think the questions went something like when was the best gaming era? My vote went for the time when X-com was released.

[Daehawk]

I think the early to mid 90's were the best years..after that its just abysmal.

[Defiant]

Maybe I'm just being nostalgic, but it seems as if many of these games are from the mid-late 1990's, which is when some of the best computer games ever were released, IMO.

To me (as a mostly adventure and strategy gamer), it was the preceding era, from the late 80s to the mid 90s. At that poimt, you had, IMO, quality games coming from many companies rather than a few, you also had a lot of creativity in game design (some of which wored, some of which didn't) and engine and graphics that had achieved a good level (for 2-D, late 80s for Text)- and you didn't have so much endless clones of myst/FMV/RTS games.

[Kasey Chang]

I sorta agree with the mid-90's being the golden era of PC gaming.

I think it's due to two things: mature but limiting hardware, and influx of innovators.

In the early 90's, most games are limited to 640K, maybe 2 megs or 4 megs if the game can use XMS/EMS. There is no 3D except the pioneers like 3DFX / Rendition / etc. and those cost a fortune. The PC ain't powerful enough, thus limited to primitive polygonal 3D, with limited polygons on screen (hundreds at most). Sounds are limited to Soundblaster Stereo. So the innovation went into interface, gameplay, and so on. A LOT of the innovations in RTS and FPS and thus are introduced right around this period. Night and day cycles, combining / morphing units, simplified supply lines, and so on.

You could almost argue that except for certain titles and certain immersion tricks like physics-based gaming, there really haven't been much innovation except multiplayer / massive multiplayer / internet, and 3D accelrators.

Or to be even MORE cynical: 3D accelerator has always been about eye candy, not gameplay. 5.1 surround has not really be used properly in games except certain stealth games like Thief 3 and so on. So where really is the innovation?

When hardware is limiting, programmers simply do more with less. Chris Roberts would NOT have used bitmaps to do Wing Commander if he had 3D accelerators or fast enough CPUs, for example. Nowadays programmers (and publishers) simply ramp up the requirements. Heck, 1 GHz machines are OBSOLETE, and 2 GHz machines are entry-level now! Back in Wing Commander days, we have what? 40 MHz 386's, and those are SCREAMING fast! Most people use 25 MHz 386's or 33 MHz 386's, or even 286's and 386 SX's. Nowadays one of those can't even power our HD controller!

Hardware is moving TOO FAST, and programmers can't catch up.

[Caine]

golden age for me is definately the early-mid nineties, because that's when i started to get involved in pc gaming. before that, it was always genesis. reading about wing commander 1 for example, was my first big hype experience. i remember being so excited when we bought a pc strong enough to handle it. everything clicked for me with that game.

after that game, came its sequels, doom, privateer, tex murphy, xwing/tie fighter, dott, fate of atlantis, ultima 7, xcom, dune 2, etc.

hell, half of the reason i play so many now is to get the same sense of excitement that i had while playing those ones. i do like the new games, but i don't love them the way i did those early games. it's the difference between dating a dull but hot blonde or an intellectually plain brunette. after the honeymoon period is over and you see through the pretty graphics, what lies beneath to keep your attention?

i would add that later generations games had their hits too. freespace 2 for one

[Eightball]

I heart Jeff V; the giants of my "golden age" were SSI, Microprose, and early EA (before it became an evil empire). PC gaming died with the 5.25" floppy. But as Jeff said, it's all a matter of perspective. I do enjoy playing older games, but there are still 2-3 great titles published every year, along with countless mediocre and bad ones, same as it ever was. We just tend not to remember the klunkers of the past.

And Origin. Can't forget some of the stuff Origin put out in the 80's and early 90's (from the Ultimas, Autoduel, Wing Commanders, etc). Classic stuff.

[knob]

I think the early to mid 90's were the best years..after that its just abysmal.

Yeah, but you don't like anything.

[yossar]

Am I the only one who thinks games actually keep getting better?

[knob]

I have more of a mindset that gaming isn't getting worse or better. There will always be incredible games (HL2 now, Doom then).


Granted, companies like EA are determined to prove me wrong.

[Jeff V]

Am I the only one who thinks games actually keep getting better?

Nope, I agree, they do keep getting better. However, my enjoyment of them slips at twice the rate of improvement, so I actually enjoy gaming a lot less now than when I had to wrestle with buggy crashy crap on old DOS rigs. Back then, I also couldn't afford to buy evey game that piqued my interest, unlike now. So when I did buy a game, I usually stuck with it and milked it for what it was worth.

Games today are like movies or books - if they don't grab me in the first 5 minutes, I lose interest and cast them aside.

[Freezer-TPF-]

There were great games back in "the old days." And there are great games now. /shrug

[Buatha]

What scares me about nostalgic gaming, which I tend to do with my massive backlog, is my patience.

Back when I had hour and hours to play, it didn't seem to matter that games required a lot of time to complete. I think it took me months to finish Ultima IV playing quite regularly and I enjoyed every evening with it. Now that I have maybe two hours an evening, I find that I get miffed when I don't make "progress" in a game. I'm sure this a symptom of my shortened playtime, but older games (especially RPGs) almost felt like an MMORPG treadmill. If you remember playing Might & Magic I, you know what I mean.

[Giles Habibula]

As far as gaming goes, I live for nostalgia.
At least half the games I'm currently playing are more than 5 years old, and Crusader is like 10.

But some current games are really good too, and will in 5 or 10 years qualify for nostalgia gaming for me.

Recent games I'll still play in 10 years include (off the top of my head):
FarCry
Half-Life 2 (hopefully)
Riddick
Pirates!
Painkiller
The Suffering
Silent Hunter 3
...among many others

[Kev199]

I still play Warzone 2100, awesome RTS and one of the best 3d camera controls in the genre.

[Eduardo X]

People keep saying Far Cry was horrible, and I just don't get it. I can't get enough of that game! For once, the cool graphics weren't just eye candy.

Also, the limited graphics of the PS2 seem to be producing some really good games, like Katamari Damacy. Wow, that thing plays well.

[El-Producto]

I used to be very into Adventure games, but there are a few years that I didn't really buy any. So I've been picking up some oldies at Value Village and such.


Black Dahlia
Broken Sword
Shivers 2
Longest Journey

[Kraken]

Am I the only one who thinks games actually keep getting better?

They certainly LOOK better. As a strategy gamer, I see very little gameplay improvement in the past 10 years...in fact, the rise of multiplayer RTS arguably set back the genre by taking the pressure off AI development. In RPGs, I haven't seen anything exceed the Baldurs Gate games (but I don't play many RPGs). I have no opinion about FPS or sports games.

[Two Sheds]

People keep saying Far Cry was horrible, and I just don't get it. I can't get enough of that game! For once, the cool graphics weren't just eye candy.

Who said that? I loved Far Cry. I actually wish I hadn't been so quick to trade it away when I was finished because I'd really like to play it again about now.

[Eduardo X]

People keep saying Far Cry was horrible, and I just don't get it. I can't get enough of that game! For once, the cool graphics weren't just eye candy.

Who said that? I loved Far Cry. I actually wish I hadn't been so quick to trade it away when I was finished because I'd really like to play it again about now.

I say I can't get enough, but I too traded it away. So stupid!

[yossar]

Am I the only one who thinks games actually keep getting better?

They certainly LOOK better. As a strategy gamer, I see very little gameplay improvement in the past 10 years...in fact, the rise of multiplayer RTS arguably set back the genre by taking the pressure off AI development. In RPGs, I haven't seen anything exceed the Baldurs Gate games (but I don't play many RPGs). I have no opinion about FPS or sports games.

Did strategy games have much better AI back in the good old days? I don't remember it ever being very good. Even games people love like Masters of Magic supposedly had atrocious AI (I never played it). Also, I don't know if some sections of strategy gaming leave a lot of room for improvement in any areas besides graphics and interface. I think Panzer General was pretty close to perfection and all the sequels that added features and content never did much to grab me.

So aside from graphics, AI is really the only place strategy games should be getting better, and for whatever reason, the AI doesn't seem to be improving for most games (see Warlords 4). But I defintely don't see TBS games getting any worse. Dominions 2 is possibly my favorite of all time (and really popular with some people around here, too) and that came out a year or two ago. But again, the AI is pretty bad and I generally do PBEM.

[Zarathud]

Some games have much better AI. The AI in Europa Universalis II, Space Empires IV Gold, and Galactic Civilizations is very competitive. Civ 3 can get pretty hectic, too. I don't need actual intelligence, but enough to keep up the illusion and give me a challenge.

[Kraken]

Did strategy games have much better AI back in the good old days?

No, it hasn't gotten worse, and like Zarathud said a few games have done it better. I was pretty impressed the first time I saw the AI use combined arms in Civ3, and I loved GalCiv's approach of updating their AI to mimic actual player strategies in uploaded games. Those are exceptions, though. Developers used to blame the lack of RAM and CPU cycles for poor AI. That excuse doesn't cut it anymore. The frantic action of continuous-time play, and the increased emphasis on multiplayer, took the emphasis away from needing a clever computer opponent. Strategy game AI today is written pretty much the same way it was 10+ years ago.

AI programming is a sideline specialty in the game industry. No developer employs a fulltime dedicated AI programmer -- those guys are making big bucks elsewhere. I certainly don't expect cutting-edge AI in a strategy game. It would be nice if there was at least some innovation there, though, beyond the same old logic trees.

[Kobra]

Why buy more than you can physically play in any reasonable timeframe? Buy 1-2, play em, then resell them.

Nice thing about this hobby, you can recover 75-90% of your money if you buy - play - sell. Collecting them seems rather odd, as they are just going to go down in value, and at some point, not even work on new OS's.

[Kobra]

AI programming is a sideline specialty in the game industry. No developer employs a fulltime dedicated AI programmer -- those guys are making big bucks elsewhere. I certainly don't expect cutting-edge AI in a strategy game. It would be nice if there was at least some innovation there, though, beyond the same old logic trees.

That isn't exactly true, most dev houses I worked for had AI programmers inhouse. Stardock for example, Brad Wardell himself programs AI, and single handidly did the AI in GalCiv. (Couldn't stand the game, but the AI was nice).

For real AI, I recommend picking up the original Kohan or Kohan Ahrimans Gift. Both have AI that will just blow you away. Since then I haven't seen much in AI that impresses me.

[nan desu]

Nope, I agree, they do keep getting better. However, my enjoyment of them slips at twice the rate of improvement, so I actually enjoy gaming a lot less now than when I had to wrestle with buggy crashy crap on old DOS rigs.

Therein lies the problem I think. At heart, we're all still masochistic geeks who can't accept the notion of pure entertainment and a good time. We NEED the old DOS systems... please bring them back.

Edit: becauz of ze spelleeng... verdammte ze englisch.