Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

They just don't make good pc games anymore

Last response: in Video Games
Share
September 4, 2008 4:08:57 AM

I have bought alot of new rpg's and have finished them in a day or so the quality seems very poor and does not even use a quarter of my system resources while running, seem they all copy off each other, nothing original.

Most are diablo clones too easy i breeze through them in no time, others a mix, its not just rpgs every game i have bought i finished in 3 days max with out even trying, nothing seems cutting edge no dx10, no innovative ideas and people wonder why the pc gaming market is suffering too many fps guys my age hate them and would rather play a good rpg or rts.

September 4, 2008 4:57:01 AM

hardware and game engines may be getting more advance at a rapid rate, but the developers are human and brain upgrades don't exist yet

so in order to push the next gen graphics that everyone loves so much, the games become so hard to program that they cant give you good gameplay anymore as there just too hard to code and there very time consuming

so instead of 50 hours of gameplay like some of the more enjoyable ones, your down to 3-4 hours


game developers are constantly trying to outdo each other in terms of graphics and physics and other crap to make the games look as real as possible. it doesn't matter how good the hardware gets, the games still need to be programmed and the more complex the game is, the harder it is to code and the longer it takes to code so to save time, they make the game very short
September 4, 2008 8:23:56 AM

techguy911 said:
would rather play a good rpg or rts.

Why not buy one of those then? There's plenty of good ones.
Related resources
September 4, 2008 11:15:36 AM

You played Titan Quest and the expansion? Decent amount of gameplay there especially completing it on all difficulties.
September 4, 2008 11:28:27 AM

Good RTSs? There are tons.

Dawn of War and its 3! expansions come to mind.

Company of Heroes is a spectacular RTS. A lot of good things have been said about World in Conflict, Starcraft 2 is on the horizon, as are Dawn of War 2 and Red Alert 3.

If you don't consider any of these games to be good then I would be left to wonder if you just don't want to enjoy playing them anymore.

On the RPG side of things, most PC RPG development seems to go toward MMOs, there are still some good ones, but they are a bit rarer than in the past. Mostly if you are looking for a good RPG platform, get a 360. Disgaea 3 has kept me addicted the past few days and will probably keep me addicted until Warhammer Online comes out.
September 4, 2008 12:34:52 PM

On the Dawn Of War note; i'm of the opinion that it was overrated. It was good, but the tactical squad nature could've been improved, as well as the camera.

I don't know really, maybe i'm just bitter that it wasn't another Homeworld.
September 4, 2008 9:19:39 PM

There are aspects of Dawn of war that could have been better, but that is true of every game ever made. It doesn't change the fact that it was a top notch RTS.

But to be fair I always felt that homeworld was overrated. My first exposure to that game was multiplayer which right and truly sucked. Maybe there was more nuanced combat that could be done but the strategy that was immediately apparent was to slowly move your mothership towards their mothership and try to build the bigger fleet before you got there. Not much room for strategy there. I was so dissapointed with the multiplayer that I never tried the singleplayer which I have heard is the part of the game everyone loved.
September 4, 2008 9:27:24 PM

Heya,

Personally I find that most games, not just now, are not that great. But that's just how it is. You have very few games that will ever top some others for a long time. Game developers also have to keep an eye on the market. The PC game market is much more focused on the MMO. Online gaming. Endless game play, online, with others. That's where the money is. The tons of FPS's that exploded into the market pretty much made it hard for anyone to release anything around them. Consoles have these games more often. And frankly, very few FPS's are actually even good. Only the online ones end up lasting longer than a day's worth of actual game-play. But there are other games of course. You want an RPG or RTS. Well, they just don't produce these nearly as fast as an FPS.

A new FPS comes out near daily it seems. But huge content RPG's and RTS's? They're years apart. They take a long time to develop and work out. It takes a lot longer to work the kinks out. Especially awesome games that are not completely linear. FPS games are completely simpled. You take an engine already made. You make a "whatever" story to make your game a little different from the next, you texture it and go. They're all linear. They're all the same. Because they're built the same. Once in a while, someone takes some time to make something more out of the FPS genre. Halflife came out long ago with a modified Quake2 engine and completely changed people's minds about the FPS being more than a mindless shooting game. Something you definitely are not into, the mindless stuff that takes no time to play.

I too check out "new" games, games that are new and I expect them to be different looking, more exciting, taking advantage of new technologies to present new ways to do things. But in the end, they're not. The tech is there, but actually using it all is ridiculously time consuming and would require a massive staff. Most game designing staff groups are not that large. They're small because they just don't have a budget to make the game in a time frame with too many people, as the budget goes too high and no one will pay it (especially with how sales are).

So when is the new Baldur's Gate II going to come out that shocks us all and takes the title as the ultimate in RPG, long time to play, huge content, replayable, etc? Where is it? It's been a very long time. Yet nothing has done it. Some things have come out that are similar, but they're still in BG2's shadow. Some game making groups simply got the right combination of people together. Other groups just don't have it. It takes talent. It takes skill. It takes experience. And it really does take a lot of money. Especially now, because marketing a game that has no multiplayer on the PC platform is like shooting yourself in the foot these days. They just don't see sales worth the development budget. A lot of great games probably just didn't get made because they just didn't get the financial backing to actually do it.

Thing is, when a team gets together to make a game, they had to get funding first. That's how it works. They do a write up, a proposal for money, and they literally have to convince someone to give them a budget and then when they have it, they can actually assemble a team (because they have to be able to afford to pay these guys AND cover costs of material that they'll need). Lots of people are involved in the beginning, but in the end, it gets refined. If your proposal gets shot down, or simply doesn't get you the budget to get enough people, your game doesn't happen. It ends up sitting on a shelf, unfinished.

So all I can really say is that if you want a "GOOD GAME," you need to just go to the classic games that were good, and always will be good. Just wait to see if a new really great game finally comes out. It may be an MMO and you didn't play it because you don't like MMO's. It may be a game that simply never got any hype or buzz or air time and so it just rots on the shelf as a one-copy wonder that you never notice. I look for game reviews and previews. It's hard to find the next good game to play.

For me, it was Morrowind. What a great game. That's about the best "long" game I've played since Baldur's Gate II. Speaking of which, the entire Baldur's Gate 1, 2 (and expansions) and the entire Icewind Dale series were completely awesome. You can play those games for over a year. Then you can play Neverwinter Nights 1 and 2 and the expansions. Fallout 1 & 2 are another series that'll take you a long time to play through and they're amazing. And now, Oblivion has been out a while, so that's another great game you can dive into and play quite a long time. It's made so that you can play Oblivion and be done in a day, or play it for months and never be done. Next up, check out Guild Wars. A very good series and it's online, so you can play with others for free. Great graphics, great game play, and the series is huge now and you can play for months and still not have done it all. Seriously. Check it out if you have not already.

If you want RTS's, the Dawn of War series actually was impressive. Probably the best RTS that I have played that I actually didn't think was going to be that good untill I tried it since Starcraft I. I'm very picky about them. I don't like tyipcal war stuff and never got into Command & Conquer or any spin on similar games where you just little tanks and shooty things. I like stuff with real interesting concepts. Dawn of War has some really interesting different ways to do the RTS and the stories and background of the 40k universe is huge and really interesting.

FPS wise, I'm just not a fan really. BioShock was really cool and it was new. But I finished it in two days just casually playing it on some time off. I only played it to see the story and explore Rapture though. That was more interesting than fighting Doll face people. The action wasn't good to me. I played it literally just for the graphics, environment, story and how it was interesting enough for me to actually want to see the end. HalfLife2, the whole series, is pretty good and can take a while to play through with all the episodes now.

In the end, I still play Diablo2 Lord of Destruction online. A game with replayability and online play simply does it for me. And this game has always been the the top game for online because I like this kind, free online, and not the typical MMO that you pay per month for.

Very best,
September 5, 2008 1:33:34 AM

since games are so hard to program now, they cant do any cool stuff like complex movements, they save them for cut scenes where the animation department can just make with out worrying about coding them for gameplay)


almost all games are shorter than games from the past.


while they may look better, the overall quality of the games have gone down

developers are given much more work and they have to complete the work is the same or less time than they had for older games

so you wind up with a short and buggy game with crappy gameplay because it would be too much work to program in more complex moves or more complex aspects of gameplay due to the graphics battle going on between game companies
September 6, 2008 8:46:44 PM

This is exactly why all of valves games, excluding the Half-Life series, are doing so well.

They made multiplayer games that hook you and make you want to play over and over again. All it takes is a good multiplayer mode, good maps, and clan/guild support and the game will succeed.

The reason i play multiplayer spo much is because i just enjoy play with or against people i know. Its just so much more fun than singleplayer in almost every way.

This is also why crysis is just a benchie, and not an amazing game. They just slapped together multiplayer, and focused completely on singleplayer.
September 8, 2008 12:43:22 AM

Yeah, I love playing multiplayer Portal... no wait....

I do not believe nor have ever believed that multiplayer is the most important part of a good game. It is usually the most important part of a mediocre game, but a truly great game is often, but not always, truly great because of the single player story and gameplay.
September 8, 2008 1:20:27 PM

i agree with Infornography, an amazing game should be amazing because of its Single Player, you should want to play it over and over....

Portal is brilliant and the challenges keep you playing once the single player stuff is over.

i have always loved the Command and Conquer series, and if you play it against another player its not always who has the most of what, recently ive gone back to play Generals and play it over the network with flatmates.

F.E.A.R although a short game has brilliant atmosphere and story, same with Bioshock although i haven't revisited the game since i completed it, its well worth the time and effort.

Dawn of War i loved for a short period but quickly got bored, but i do believe that to be down to the limited resolution, i dont like playing with black bars on my 1680*1080 resolution, if they put in widescreen support i would give it another go(theres a hack for generals, b4 anyone points that out).

HL and HL2 are brilliantly storyline based games and some parts can be really creepy, and full of atmosphere.

crysis is a rubbish game, i think it would be ok if they just fixed the artificial intelligence which is lacking in just about every area..

one game which i constantly go back to though is Counter Strike Source, sure its got no single player campaign but if you get some good friends together and play it properly it can be amazing.

September 9, 2008 6:07:50 PM

Hardly any good PC Games? Interesting point ... if you listed out what you thought was flawed (game wise) we could have a good discussion. However

For me,

Dawn of War and its expansions were quite enjoyable and quite different from prior RTS games. DoW, lent itself into the good Company of Heroes RTS. I am eagerly looking forwards towards DoW and the 'nids.

Team Fortress 2, was amazing game. I played it for two months solid. It was so good that I completely ignored my CoD IV copy that all my clanmates play. Better yet Valve does not sit on its fat arse collecting checks, they keep updating the game.

Now I used the word was often when I spoke glowingly of TF2 ... at some point in late December I finally installed CoD IV. I hated it at first blush, that is until I realized my first game play ever was on a Hard Core Server. Once I had the game mechanics down I only played on HC servers and I have since logged in about 10 days worth of game time. I keep wanting to go back to TF2 and investigate all the cool new extras added ... but the crack that is COD IV is a hard little monkey to kick.

Last summer I started/finished Oblivion. Oblivion was my first ever first person RPG experience. NICE, very good. It makes me shake in my boots the thought of playing Fall Out 3!!!! Bethesda Rocks!.

I even revisited a few times my former crack addiction CiV IV. Haha I just finished a game last night. Great fantastic game. I will admit I enjoy the early to mid game much more then and end game but CIV IV continued the tradition of good CIV games.

This is not too new but I play Stock Dock's Galactic Civilizations which will help those of you forget the farce which was MOO 3.

A few games that I own but have not quite gotten to yet,

Sins of a Solar Empire

Never winter Nights 2 (now that I hear its fully patched)

Half Life 2 (yeah yeah I know its old now but I am primarily a multi play/strategy gamer not so much FPS single play guy).



Games that I think are completely crap for a variety of reasons

Rainbow 6 Vegas (if only the server side files worked this game had so much potential).

Rainbow 6 Lock down (I was still looking for my RVS Ravenshield replacement)

September 9, 2008 8:49:36 PM

There are some good games coming up soon. One I'm really looking forward to is Fallout 3. With FPS and RPG elements it should be quite fun. With the sandbox gameplay style main and side quests it should be a long game too. I've also heard that there are a ton of different endings for repalyability. 2nd game on my list is FarCry 2. Form the videos i've seen looks like its going to be the new bar for graphics in FPS. The AI is also super cool and the fire animations!! the openended sandbox style and the "moral questions" or whatever they called it should make for great game play. RTS you have Demi God, Red Alert 3, and Starcarft 2 in the future. RPGs have Diablo 3 to lock forward to. I know these games are not out yet but if they even get close to living up to the hype they should be quite fun and intrest holding.
September 10, 2008 7:57:24 PM

Ive often been of the same opinion, but every once and a while something comes along that breaks me out of my slump. for the last year or so I resigned myself to playing old games, (Star control 2, Xcom, Civ) then I played Sins of a solar empire, Brilliant game, finally something new I loved.

As for RPGs, never been a big RPG player, although I do have to agree that they are getting worse. A lot more effort seems to be going into MMO's And I cannot stand MMO's (so far.)
September 10, 2008 8:39:04 PM

i thought i posted this already... if you keep buying and finishing games you should try WoW! when it first came out i didn't try it because i thought paying per month was stupid.... but if you get 20x's more hours of game play out of that game it sure beats buying 10 crappy games and barely playing them.

take crysis for example... i paid about $45 for that game because of all the hype on the internet... i played it for about 6-7 hours and it was mediocre at best. sold it to somebody here on the forums for around $20 so i lost $25 for 6-7 hours of gameplay.

i started wow w\ 10 day free trial then paid $20 for "activation" + free month of game play and just renewed a week ago... so i've paid about $35 now to play WoW and have got probably 80 hours or more of gameplay out of that; for $35 so far.

I even paid $60... well, it was a gift card ;)  that came w\ the ps3 i sold... for soul caliber 4 and played it for 10 minutes on normal difficulty in arcade mode and "beat that" with darth vader- then went back to WoW.
September 10, 2008 9:12:54 PM

"This is not too new but I play Stock Dock's Galactic Civilizations which will help those of you forget the farce which was MOO 3. "
You should try then the latest expansion. It is VERY good. Overall I felt that this is my post, so close are your descriptions. With one exception, I had never finished Oblivion - it become too boring after a while.
September 11, 2008 2:18:57 AM

1. The Dawn of War expansions have widescreen support.
2. Dawn of War's Strategic Point system pretty much beats the **** out of Starcraft and C&C's ore-field-in-the-backyard system
3. Squads are great.
4. Warcraft sucks as an RTS because of how the heroes can become one man armies. DoW remains a true RTS.
5. Nine races is crazy
6. Online sucks for the new Soulstorm expansion because they haven't released a single patch to fix the 3 or 4 game breaking bugs with online.

That about sums up Dawn of War.
September 11, 2008 7:03:45 AM

Master Exon said:
1. The Dawn of War expansions have widescreen support.


erm so why cant i get mine higher than 1280x1024.... it just wont go to 1680x1050... unless im missing a patch?

its DOW and DOW winter assault, that i have... and i havnt bought the other games because of the non widescreen support...
September 11, 2008 7:46:26 AM

Flakes said:
erm so why cant i get mine higher than 1280x1024.... it just wont go to 1680x1050... unless im missing a patch?

its DOW and DOW winter assault, that i have... and i havnt bought the other games because of the non widescreen support...


I have to say I havent tried just dawn of war on a widescreen monitor, I got the soulstorm box set before I got the widescreen monitor. But Ive got all the expansions packs and I can definetely run at 1680x1050
September 11, 2008 3:43:35 PM

for me I think the developers should focus less on who ever can add the most eye candy and focus on gameplay

this will improve the quality of games because developers wont have to spend all year programming how the characters hair should move.

pc games will also sell better because it wont be seen as the system where you have to spend $500-800 every 3-4 months to run the latest games



computer hardware is getting better and faster but the developers still had the same brain they had a few years ago

so to compensate for that bottle neck of the developers brains not being upgraded as the same pace as computer hardware, the games just become bland and short with great visuals

September 12, 2008 6:07:33 PM

infornography42 said:

I do not believe nor have ever believed that multiplayer is the most important part of a good game. It is usually the most important part of a mediocre game, but a truly great game is often, but not always, truly great because of the single player story and gameplay.


Wow. Exactly how I feel. I was beginning to think I was the only one.
September 12, 2008 6:36:23 PM

It always saddens me a little when a review says things like 'the single player is little more than training for the multiplayer' To me, the single player should always stand on it's own merits and if it does not then it was a failure. There are games where the entire point is multiplayer and to me, those work just fine as multiplayer games. But if it has a significant single player mode, they should at least put enough effort into it to make it fun.
September 14, 2008 5:01:14 AM

What's this crap about story lines? Are you here to play games or are you here for an interactive DVD?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n7VAhzPcZ-s

^ watch that. NSFW?

Flakes said:
erm so why cant i get mine higher than 1280x1024.... it just wont go to 1680x1050... unless im missing a patch?

its DOW and DOW winter assault, that i have... and i havnt bought the other games because of the non widescreen support...


That's sad, because all the ones you don't have do have widescreen support.
!