The Evolution of Gaming from a disheartened middle-aged veteran gamer. Discuss.
2001
Full game.
Complete release version.
Demo available.
No online activation or requirement.
Maybe 1 or 2 patches.
No refunds.
Spyware hated and treated as virus.
2004
Full game.
Complete release version.
Demo available.
Some online activation.
1 or more patches.
No refunds.
Spyware hated and treated as virus.
2008
Full game.
Complete release version. Incomplete versions are rare and cause community outcry.
Demo available.
Online activation and some requirement to have online access to play.
Several patches required.
Often game is 'fixed' by fan community.
No refunds.
Spyware starts transforming into legitimate things like STEAM and sites like Facebook and Google services.
2010
Full game.
Slightly incomplete release version. Incomplete versions cause community dissatisfaction. Complete versions are infrequent.
Demo mostly available.
Online activation and requirement to have online access to play.
Many patches required.
Often game is 'fixed' by fan community.
No refunds, even though online activation/deactivation allows 100% enforceable disabling of game from the vendor.
Spyware becomes legitimate as vendors use it in their game clients.
2013
Reduced game with sections of play previously available by default now sold as DLC.
Incomplete release version treated as matter of course. Complete versions are rare to non-existent.
No demo available.
Online activation and requirement to have online access to play.
Many patches required.
Often game is 'fixed' by fan community.
No refunds, even though online activation/deactivation allows 100% enforceable disabling of game from the vendor.
Spyware? What's that?
Quote from: Waldorf on October 29, 2013, 10:13:38 AM
The Evolution of Gaming from a disheartened middle-aged veteran gamer. Discuss.
2013
Reduced game with sections of play previously available by default now sold as DLC.
Incomplete release version treated as matter of course. Complete versions are rare to non-existent.
No demo available.
Online activation and requirement to have online access to play.
Many patches required.
Often game is 'fixed' by fan community.
No refunds, even though online activation/deactivation allows 100% enforceable disabling of game from the vendor.
Spyware? What's that?
Ranting as required as an elderly enthusiast: PC Games are becoming more colaborative and open-ended. I'm not so sure about games in other electronic forms -- they may be just as limited and pre-scripted as PC games used to be. I don't see the problem with patches. Games are more complicated, teams change, systems remain a diverse lot etc. so patches are to be expected.
So -- for example -- Battle of Stalingrad will eventually be available on Steam (as is RoF now). I guess if I have to do some obligatory complaining about Steam (well just fill that in blah blah blah). Anyway, I could buy into the top of the line version of the alpha pathway as a "Demo" right now, but
I've already seen RoF so I have some idea of the game system. So do I need a demo? Not so much. But fill in the complaint (b.b.b.) if that is needed.
And then (fill in complaints as needed)...even after the game is available on steam (complain as needed) I'm sure there will be patches and spyware and online connections (complaints as needed) AND there will be DLC to pay for.
I can't see anything bad about all this. I get a game based on a system (RoF) I've seen. there are various editors available and a certain number of planes and I get to get it all on Steam which has run perfectly on my last 3 systems and which takes care of all sorts of gamey stuff in a systematic way. On top of all that, I get the benefit of patches and control over when to install them on Steam AND the option to expand the game via DLC if I want to. All of this is a huge series of vast improvements in how PC games work.
I P500'd (pre-ordered) GMT Games' "The Supreme Commander". Soon after it arrived, people began to notice errors in the printing. Almost immediately, GMT Games announced that they would be sending out new maps, countersheets, charts and an updated rules book to everyone that P500'd the game at no cost to the customer. I've had countersheets that were misaligned during printing. MMP replaced them at no cost with no questions asked. There are a LOT of boardgames that I could "Pirate" by playing them fully, for free by using VASSAL and downloading the rules that are freely offered by the manufacturer yet most of those companies now encourage electronic versions of their games be developed. Unfortunately for PC game companies, piracy has taken a huge toll on their profits and now there is deep paranoia by many (most) software developers that makes purchasing, licensing, updating, uninstalling/reinstalling a chore (to be polite). I applaud Matrix for keeping a DRM-less scheme. Register your game and they will keep a record of the license number (for most of the games, they seem to of lost track of a couple of S/N's for games purchased years ago but I can't really fault them for that).
As a PC Gamer, I am happy I don't have to go through the pains console gamers do when a popular new title comes out. The release of Rome 2 was an example. I got 20% off for pre-ordering, Steam downloaded the game to my computer, and the morning of release, they automatically patched it to activate the game. The morning of Sept. 3rd, I was sitting playing the game all without leaving my comfortable chair. No lines to stand in, no crowds to fight, no driving, no looking for one of those mini-parking spaces close to the store, and no dealing with those smirky, puberity-driven know-it-alls. This is a big selling point for me as I get older, easy access.
From a long term gamer, on the edge of being elderly, I see no reason to argue with you Waldorf. You hit the nail on the head with that post.
Quote from: MengJiao on October 29, 2013, 10:42:15 AM
All of this is a huge series of vast improvements in how PC games work.
Note to self: or at least potentially. Remember to read Rock, Paper, Shotgun as much as possible. At least the comments and reviews
even of horrible games are funny as in:
CrazyPaladin says:
So instead of Zomibes mode we get aliens mode? I'm fine with that, so long as I don't buy this game
*Note to self: don't buy another CoD game*
Which is from the comments on a review of a trailer for a COD game or mode called "Extinction" with Alien Ghosts in it, part of which went:
I really hate writing this cynically. I honestly hope Extinction is incredible, a revolution, and something that brings gushing geysers of sparkling joy to millions of people. Or maybe it'll make them think or something. I don't know. I just want games to be great and to see sincerity rule the world. No matter how silly, angry, or ranty my posts get, that, I guess, is where they're coming from.
See! Even the reviews of crap are better than they used to be!
Great post , somewhere along the way we lost physical copies of manuals too.
Some offer a complete manual but you may need a second mortgage.
Quote from: GJK on October 29, 2013, 10:49:02 AM
Unfortunately for PC game companies, piracy has taken a huge toll on their profits and now there is deep paranoia by many (most) software developers that makes purchasing, licensing, updating, uninstalling/reinstalling a chore (to be polite).
This is a common misconception perpetuated by DRM software companies and some of the more nefarious game publishers. There is no "huge toll on their profits", although some of them would
like everyone to believe it.
In truth, they didn't lose any sales. This whole accusation is based on the expectation that all the people who pirated a specific title, and didn't later purchase it after playing such an unsupported and multiplayer-less (?) black copy, were all going to purchase it one way or another. That's a few steps beyond wishful thinking on their part, and is often used a public excuse accompanied by vastly inflated estimates of how much money they would have made if it wasn't for that quite relatively small portion of consumers.
It's all about cutting after-market resale and leasing licenses to prevent such ownership rights of the copy you purchased.
Quote from: Nefaro on October 29, 2013, 02:39:56 PM
Quote from: GJK on October 29, 2013, 10:49:02 AM
Unfortunately for PC game companies, piracy has taken a huge toll on their profits and now there is deep paranoia by many (most) software developers that makes purchasing, licensing, updating, uninstalling/reinstalling a chore (to be polite).
This is a common misconception perpetuated by DRM software companies and some of the more nefarious game publishers. There is no "huge toll on their profits", although some of them would like everyone to believe it.
In truth, they didn't lose any sales. This whole accusation is based on the expectation that all the people who pirated a specific title, and didn't later purchase it after playing such an unsupported and multiplayer-less (?) black copy, were all going to purchase it one way or another. That's a few steps beyond wishful thinking on their part, and is often used a public excuse accompanied by vastly inflated estimates of how much money they would have made if it wasn't for that quite relatively small portion of consumers.
It's all about cutting after-market resale and leasing licenses to prevent such ownership rights of the copy you purchased.
You nailed it Nefaro! I'd argue that software outfits as a whole have made more than ever because of more and more peeps having access to computers these days.
I'm seeing a whole lot of rose coloured glasses there.
There were just as many horrible or broken games 'back in the day'. We just tend to remember the good stuff, and ignore disastrous crap we played back then like Maabus. Many games were released that didn't work, and they were never fixes because there was no convenient model for distribution of patches and updates. Games are actually easier to patch now than they were before, hence more patches appearing. How patches and improvements showing up is a bad thing is beyond me.
'Spyware! Oh noes!' just comes off as very Chicken Little, particularly with no context offered. The only tracking I see tends to be voluntary. Don't want Steam submitting your system info to their surveys? Opt out of it.
This whole 'They took stuffs out to be DLC!' screed is also a claim with absolutely no evidence or proof. As for DLC itself, the branding of an entire business model as if every example of it is all exactly the same is simplistic at best.
As for the loss of physical media, I'm fairly ambivalent. Reduced costs thanks to a lost need for producing and shipping and stocking physical copies (and yes, companies do have to pay stores to stock them) is a positive. As well, the explosion of smaller indie developers would not have happened period if it weren't for digital distro.
As a very, very long time gamer (can 42 be considered an old gamer?) I guess I take the complete opposite tack on the evolution of games.
I PREFER games on Steam. I have no use for physical disks or manuals anymore. I like having all of my games conveniently organized into a single digital library, automatically patched up, easy access to mods and online play. I prefer the ease of one-click buying, of opting to add the pieces to the game I want via DLC.
I hate having to hunt through my 500-CD case to find the disk of the game I want to play. I hated having to hunt through a paper manual for word 6 on page 22 as a DRM.
When Steam goes TU I'm going to be hating life, but until then...nope, not seeing the problem here.
Quote from: Toonces on October 29, 2013, 05:51:23 PM
As a very, very long time gamer (can 42 be considered an old gamer?)
Mmm...no.
Well, gee...I've been gaming since Atari 2600, TI-99A and TRS-80 days. Just how far back to I have to have game to be considered an old gamer? ::) ;D
Quote from: Toonces on October 29, 2013, 08:38:01 PM
Well, gee...I've been gaming since Atari 2600, TI-99A and TRS-80 days. Just how far back to I have to have game to be considered an old gamer? ::) ;D
Yeah, but were you in your very late 20s when the Atari 2600 first came out? There is more than one way to define an "old gamer"..........................................................
interesting topic - i think it is all okay if games continue to be made by gamers for gamers - and provided our ingenuity, creativity and intelligence are not stifled or just funneled into soulless profiteering and genre band wagons.
I am 32 and miss the fun of going to a pc computer games store and looking over all the nice box art. -its appalling the pc section in stores like EB Games now, they have given up trying to compete with steam. I like steam and gg and gog though for differnt reasons- sales, cheaper prices, access. i still though hunt down all the old dos games on ebay and enjoy them greatly with dosbox.
i am now also pleased to see some genuine wargames on ipad like John Tillers Panzer campaigns.
there were many badly done games in the past, perhaps people did not such benchmarks for them back then though there are many game hundreds of games that were also quite good back then and still impressive now - ie battles of napoleon, east front 2, carriers at war, battlefront, USS Ticonderoga, red baron, m1 tank platoon 1 and 2,
small companies managed some amazing games - some surely were just made by one or two people like the ssg games. I am sure thats still possible today, but maybe the pressure to get something out post haste means all the early access stuff
early access is all good provided that this is stated and it is know the game is still being refined and the devs and community have good communication.
At the end of the day what are we all looking for? what are we finding enjoyable? who are games being made for? and who were they made for back 10 to 20 years ago?
The debate about whether a game is unfinished and you need DLC to get some additional features, or whether the game is as the designers intended and you get additional content is a difficult one because there is often no objective way of determining whether the game can truly be called unfinished in the sense that the developers force you to buy the DLC. There are exceptions, such as games where content is already on the disc, or the popular unlockable content model for console games (or their PC ports). The expansions we could buy for our games prior to when they were called DLC were in the vast majority of cases just updated versions of the original game. From a technical perspective, those could have been shipped with the original product after a longer development time in many cases as they didn't include significant engine overhauls.
DRM is a bigger problem than it was in the 1990's, when all you needed was a serial key. It's difficult to argue against that.
As noted earlier in the thread, games that were released prior to the widespread availability of the internet could be pretty rough at the edges, and you had no way of fixing things. Also keep in mind that graphics, and even most gameplay elements (for example: the lack of realistic physics) were simpler, which reduced the chances of something not working. There was also a more limited variety of hardware, reducing compatibility issues.
In recent years, there do seem to be fewer exclusive triple A PC titles in genres where you don't really need a mouse, as many of the good games are also available on consoles or were available on consoles first and were ported. That also resulted in simplification and streamlining of genres, a development I regret.
I hate limited licenses, and also feel some games are released at a high price considering their state at release, but I still feel there are many polished products available. As stated above, I do have the feeling there are fewer exclusive PC games than before aside from wargames.
Quote from: GJK on October 29, 2013, 10:49:02 AM
I P500'd (pre-ordered) GMT Games' "The Supreme Commander". Soon after it arrived, people began to notice errors in the printing. Almost immediately, GMT Games announced that they would be sending out new maps, countersheets, charts and an updated rules book to everyone that P500'd the game at no cost to the customer. I've had countersheets that were misaligned during printing. MMP replaced them at no cost with no questions asked. ..
They aren't all like that. Lock n Loads game I purchased had mis-aligned counters on print. I contacted them but although they replied it wasn't positive. Basiclaly, they had none spare - so I was stuck with them. I posted pics here too - they were quite badly mis-aligned.
I didn't mind really - they were usable. Just pointing out that good customer care isn't necessarily widespread across the boardgaming community either.
I like Steam. Like Toonces, if it goes belly up - I'll cry for a bit - but I'm happy with a library of games which I can download quickly and easily. I feel for people who do not have fast internet capability though.
However - I did use to love popping into town and looking at what was out or what was on offer. I also like to get my arse down there on release day for a big game.
The "piracy" bollox is just that. As Nefaro says, the problem has been perpetuated by the DRM businesses and embellished by them to feed their own mouths. Sure it happens. But I do not believe for a second that it's as big as they suggest. I absolutely do not believe for one second that they're "solutions" stop piracy and I certainly don't believe that punishing your paying public is they way to go.
I'm not a huge fan of online activation and I'm certainly not wanting to go back to "page 5, paragraph 2 word 4" when the manual was misprinted!
All in all - I'm neither a huge fan of where it's going nor am I a huge fan of where it's been. I'm indifferent. I don't recall any "glory" years and I don't think what it holds now is bad either. Sure - they are finding ways to squeeze more money out of their products - welcome to the world of capitalism. As long as the game I buy has the playability and a decent gaming experience for the money they charge, I'm cool.
Don't forget - whilst this is all going on - one HUGE plus we have at our fingertips that we never used to have is the internet. When a game was released back in the day, you used to either go out and buy it and find out how shite it was or you waited a month for the review magazine to come out. Now - you have a plethora of sites and forums giving you instant feedback. Now you can "hurry up and wait" for the release.
I tend to think, at the moment, it's more good than bad in the gaming world...though I see some things that may be round the corner I'm not too happy about - but for now, I'm a happy gamer I think. ;D
1980 - 1990
Full game
No internet
Shipped with a bug. No way to deliver a fix. Just buy the next iteration of the game.
Software is now a service and not a commodity and a lot of people are still stuck with the commodity perspective.
To me, the biggest difference from back then compared to now is the internet and the amount of information made available to the gamer. When a game was released in the old days it likely had just as much issues as games now, but the issues weren't obvious because I could not always see them myself. However with all the forums nowadays a million people point out the problems, even if I would have never seen them myself. In many cases I read the forums and get overwhelmed with the reported issues which dampers my excitement in even playing the game. Some times I try and stay away from the forums and reviews, but the information is so widely available, it is hard to do.
^ That's a good point - I've read of errors before and they diminish my enthusiasm for the game.
Mind you - there is the other side where you buy a game and are sorely disappointed - often reading about the short comings is more beneficial than not.
Quote from: Nefaro on October 29, 2013, 02:39:56 PM
Quote from: GJK on October 29, 2013, 10:49:02 AM
Unfortunately for PC game companies, piracy has taken a huge toll on their profits and now there is deep paranoia by many (most) software developers that makes purchasing, licensing, updating, uninstalling/reinstalling a chore (to be polite).
This is a common misconception perpetuated by DRM software companies and some of the more nefarious game publishers. There is no "huge toll on their profits", although some of them would like everyone to believe it.
In truth, they didn't lose any sales.
Interesting to know. I guess I've removed myself from computer gaming more than I thought! :)
Someone mentioned STEAM, I like it and have had no problems with it. As mentioned, I think Matrix has a very fair process. I wish that was the standard. I don't care for the online registration and the "phone home" stuff. I don't feel like being a suspect just because I dare opt to purchase a game and want to install it on my computer. I'll just have
gameleaper write all of my future PC games. :)
Quote from: Toonces on October 29, 2013, 08:38:01 PM
Well, gee...I've been gaming since Atari 2600, TI-99A and TRS-80 days. Just how far back to I have to have game to be considered an old gamer? ::) ;D
I started gaming on my first computer, ZX-81. Then moved up to and Atari 800XL.
Quote from: OJsDad on October 30, 2013, 08:05:47 AM
Quote from: Toonces on October 29, 2013, 08:38:01 PM
Well, gee...I've been gaming since Atari 2600, TI-99A and TRS-80 days. Just how far back to I have to have game to be considered an old gamer? ::) ;D
I started gaming on my first computer, ZX-81. Then moved up to and Atari 800XL.
I started gaming before there were personal computers. :D
I joined up to play war games ;D
42 gotta be close to an old-time gamer. I'm only a few years older than that, and I can remember loading Wampus up on University computer that a friend of my parents had access to. Sure, the punch cards took a while to load, but that anticipation was half the fun.
I think games have always had their challenges. The first PC title I ever bought for myself, Temple of Apshai, wouldn't boot up on my Commodore 64 except about one try in four. I was pissed, too, because I'd splurged and gone for the fancy new 5 1/4" diskette rather than the crappy, unreliable tape drives. Of course, my friend's copy of Hellfire Warrior had the same problem on the TRS-80 (both copies did).
Old games that didn't work simply didn't work. Not that their game play didn't work. The file load process didn't work. I'm sure it was dust on my floppy drive, but of course, the expensive floppy drive cleaner kits didn't seem to make much difference either...
I do think that the flow of information now is so much faster. Prior to 1995, there just wasn't much public information out there on games even after they came out. You relied on word-of-mouth, for better or for worse. Now, you find out more about games 6 months before release than you knew about most games after they came out.
That can be a good thing or a bad thing, but it definitely affects perceptions. I'm not sure it's better or worse, just different.
Quote from: ComradeP on October 30, 2013, 01:40:45 AM
In recent years, there do seem to be fewer exclusive triple A PC titles in genres where you don't really need a mouse, as many of the good games are also available on consoles or were available on consoles first and were ported. That also resulted in simplification and streamlining of genres, a development I regret.
I don't want to rain on anyone's regrets, but I think a lot of recent developments are very promising for people like me who like games that do what they can to get at real historical processes -- that's not even a niche, it's a vague expectation that someday there will be such a niche. For example, Crusader Kings II, while being simplistic in some ways, does try to situate itself in some kind of historical world -- which has included the dreaded patches and steam and DLC and mods.
For me the growing possibilities of fluid game systems of increasing sophistication that allow for collaborative mods completely outweighs all the other seemingly unfortunate changes in the dynamics of PC gaming. I'm interested in the possibility that the day will come when one can say build a gamey-simulation of a Russian Army in 1943 from the POV of its commander as a role to be played. I'm interested in the possibility that the day will come when one can construct gamey simulations of Levantine Kingdoms of the Bronze age -- complete with seasonal changes and deforestation and exploding volcanos as needed.
Some interesting perspectives and opinions.
I agree that through the internet we can read more reviews and Metacritic is my go-to site for a general indication of how well-received a game is.
I see that games have changed from a commodity into a service, as Jomni points out and that is a fair point. I do accept that, but I don't like it.
I like to own and play my games the way I want, not how someone else wants.
What has happened is that the sales & marketing of games has been integrated into the game itself and to some degree, puts a bit of a barrier between the experience. If I click an icon to play a game, I kind of expect it to go straight into the game.
What pissed me was buying Grand Theft Auto 4, then having to sign into STEAM, then Rockstar Social Club, then Register and sign into Windows Games Live. That's 3 hoops I had to jump through before I could even play. By that time I felt like I wanted to do something else.
Then when I had to do a reinstall, I found out my game saves were not even being saved on Windows Live, so what benefits do I get from my gaming experience through all of this?
I'm 47 now and my first war games were Avalon Hill's Third Reich, Axis & Allies and then I got into SPI series games, GDW Third World War and so on.
My first computer wargame was Universal Military Simulator II on the Amiga and then Civilization on the PC so maybe I am stuck in the old days.
The upside of current gaming for me is that graphical quality has gone through the roof. When its combined with a great storyline and great gameplay it's a winner. Skyrim and XCOM Enemy Unknown are superb games and I got that 'classic' game feel and enjoyment with them right out the box.
I'm looking to be pleasantly surprised in the coming years by better and more enjoyable games and I'm still looking for a better WW2 Grand Strategy experience!
^ I had the same issues but with Max Payne in that I signed in with Windows Live (I think it used Windows Live) and then had to sign into Rockstar - but I coouldn't remember my password - and I couldn't see anyway of getting it sent to me.
In the end, I gave up, uninstalled it and swore I would not buy another game that required Windows Live, Rockstar Social Club or any other game that required some community login. It's just not worth the aggro.
I will continue to whittle down my PC game purchases based on DRM that gets in the way of me playing the game...there's really no need for me to dance their tune when I've bought their game.
If push comes to shove, and it may well do if games continue to be obtuse with their DRM, I'll give up and go to boardgaming...which I LOVE anyway.
I would like to say I'd just keep buying from Matrix - but their prices get higher and higher for the kind of games I like (to think I like)...and if I'm going to spend that kind of money on a game, I'd prefer it, more often than not and if it's available, to be a boardgame.
Quote from: jomni on October 30, 2013, 04:54:36 AM
1980 - 1990
Full game
No internet
Shipped with a bug. No way to deliver a fix. Just buy the next iteration of the game.
Software is now a service and not a commodity and a lot of people are still stuck with the commodity perspective.
What is that supposed to mean? Sign adoption papers then give the developers an allowance for the rest of their lives?
Quote from: Waldorf on October 30, 2013, 10:04:36 AM
I'm still looking for a better WW2 Grand Strategy experience!
Me too. And one that has an AI. Oh no I just didn't!
QuoteI don't want to rain on anyone's regrets, but I think a lot of recent developments are very promising for people like me who like games that do what they can to get at real historical processes -- that's not even a niche, it's a vague expectation that someday there will be such a niche. For example, Crusader Kings II, while being simplistic in some ways, does try to situate itself in some kind of historical world -- which has included the dreaded patches and steam and DLC and mods.
For me the growing possibilities of fluid game systems of increasing sophistication that allow for collaborative mods completely outweighs all the other seemingly unfortunate changes in the dynamics of PC gaming. I'm interested in the possibility that the day will come when one can say build a gamey-simulation of a Russian Army in 1943 from the POV of its commander as a role to be played. I'm interested in the possibility that the day will come when one can construct gamey simulations of Levantine Kingdoms of the Bronze age -- complete with seasonal changes and deforestation and exploding volcanos as needed.
I agree that mods are also becoming more elaborate than they were a few years ago, at least for complex games. I have no problem with games being simplified or streamlined as long as it helps gameplay without damaging immersion or the core of the system. My main pet peeve is sequels being more "streamlined" than their originals, a development that has been quite the rage for a few years now in some genres. With every new game in a series, you get new features but they also take some of the difficulty away, or make the game less interesting by giving the gamer fewer options to choose from.
I'd say there are some promising developments in terms of the tools required to create games now being mastered by more members of the community, resulting in more mods and more indie games, but the indie avalanche also has its downsides in my opinion as I mentioned in another thread.
Overall, I don't mind games simplifying some part of the experience if that's how a developer wants to shape the game to what the team had in mind when they started. The UI obviously becomes better when it's easier to understand and use as well. I do mind arbitrary changes or simplification/streamlining as a euphemism for dumbing down.
Quote from: ComradeP on October 30, 2013, 12:26:25 PM
QuoteI don't want to rain on anyone's regrets, but I think a lot of recent developments are very promising for people like me who like games that do what they can to get at real historical processes -- that's not even a niche, it's a vague expectation that someday there will be such a niche. For example, Crusader Kings II, while being simplistic in some ways, does try to situate itself in some kind of historical world -- which has included the dreaded patches and steam and DLC and mods.
For me the growing possibilities of fluid game systems of increasing sophistication that allow for collaborative mods completely outweighs all the other seemingly unfortunate changes in the dynamics of PC gaming. I'm interested in the possibility that the day will come when one can say build a gamey-simulation of a Russian Army in 1943 from the POV of its commander as a role to be played. I'm interested in the possibility that the day will come when one can construct gamey simulations of Levantine Kingdoms of the Bronze age -- complete with seasonal changes and deforestation and exploding volcanos as needed.
I agree that mods are also becoming more elaborate than they were a few years ago, at least for complex games. I have no problem with games being simplified or streamlined as long as it helps gameplay without damaging immersion or the core of the system. My main pet peeve is sequels being more "streamlined" than their originals, a development that has been quite the rage for a few years now in some genres. With every new game in a series, you get new features but they also take some of the difficulty away, or make the game less interesting by giving the gamer fewer options to choose from.
I'd say there are some promising developments in terms of the tools required to create games now being mastered by more members of the community, resulting in more mods and more indie games, but the indie avalanche also has its downsides in my opinion as I mentioned in another thread.
Overall, I don't mind games simplifying some part of the experience if that's how a developer wants to shape the game to what the team had in mind when they started. The UI obviously becomes better when it's easier to understand and use as well. I do mind arbitrary changes or simplification/streamlining as a euphemism for dumbing down.
I can see what worries you, but I think the problem of maintaining interesting complexities is always a problem and it doesn't necessarily have much to do with the medium (in this case PC-games). People in this thread have complained about the assumed social side of gaming, but in fact the social side is where the medium gets its best chances for moving into new areas of complexity. For example, you would assume a good tutorial and a printed manual would be crucial to help me understand what is supposedly going on in a game like Battle of Stalingrad, whereas really my understanding (such as it is for an-as-yet-unreleased game) is based on playing RoF with lots of help from reading SimHQ and playing CLOD with lots of helg from the ATAG forums. The social world propells the understanding of the game far more than manuals or official tutorials. It's true there is a kind of growing gap between dumb games and the games that take some work to play, but that is more of a symptom of good developments than a reason to despair.