We are living in a computer gaming golden age

[DoctorQuest]

Agree on the flight sim front. Thirdwire sims are fun and DCS is hardcore but neither of them match up with Falcon or F-22 TAW for campaign play. If DCS wants my money they need to do an F-22 or an EF2000. The F-86 is tempting but I just don't have that much interest in the other aircraft and I don't like their DRM.

I have no issue flying older sim titles that provide me with the gameplay I am looking for.

[WallysWorld]

Completely agree that it is a great time to be a PC gamer.

I just reinstalled IL2 1946 again and with the HSFX mod, that older sim is still a lot of fun to play and with so many user made missions and campaigns to download. I also just got CMRT, CMFI and the 3.0 upgrade for CMBN and I'm having a ball PBEM with those games.

If I don't buy another game for the next two or three years, I would still be plenty busy with the ones I have. Of course, not buying any more games is not option with the temptation.

[W8taminute]

And hardware requirements has stagnated a bit. No need to be always using the latest and greatest.

This is key.  Remember when back in the day you had to shell out 3 grand for a new computer every time a new game came out.  Today I can get away with doing the majority of my gaming on my 6+ year old desktop.

[JudgeDredd]

Agree on the flight sim front. Thirdwire sims are fun and DCS is hardcore but neither of them match up with Falcon or F-22 TAW for campaign play. If DCS wants my money they need to do an F-22 or an EF2000. The F-86 is tempting but I just don't have that much interest in the other aircraft and I don't like their DRM.

I have no issue flying older sim titles that provide me with the gameplay I am looking for.

I really missed F22 TAW - it was a superb campaign.

Why are we getting these superb games that are actually a shadow of their predecessors?

But I agree in general - there are some great games on my disk at the moment!

[sandman2575]

Why are we getting these superb games that are actually a shadow of their predecessors?

Raises an interesting point.  I agree that this is a great time to be a gamer, and that games overall have never been better.  But there are a couple of trends that, to my mind, take a bit of the luster off this Golden Age.  The deceptively named "Free to Play" model being one -- I essentially just avoid all these games to begin with.  The other being a general shift favoring multi-player over single-player experiences.  I'm not much of an MP player at all, and I really value games that put a premium on single-player experience and decent AI.  Flight sims seem to be moving in this direction pretty aggressively -- witness what's happening with Il-2 Battle of Stalingrad, as Silent Disapproval Robot has commented on --

EDIT -- should've read Toonces' post more carefully, since I now see he singled out BoS and Flight sims as well --

[MengJiao]

Why are we getting these superb games that are actually a shadow of their predecessors?

Raises an interesting point.  I agree that this is a great time to be a gamer, and that games overall have never been better.  But there are a couple of trends that, to my mind, take a bit of the luster off this Golden Age.  The deceptively named "Free to Play" model being one -- I essentially just avoid all these games to begin with.  The other being a general shift favoring multi-player over single-player experiences.  I'm not much of an MP player at all, and I really value games that put a premium on single-player experience and decent AI.  Flight sims seem to be moving in this direction pretty aggressively -- witness what's happening with Il-2 Battle of Stalingrad, as Silent Disapproval Robot has commented on --

EDIT -- should've read Toonces' post more carefully, since I now see he singled out BoS and Flight sims as well --

  Not having much time to play, I find some trends (the Free-to-play being one of them) just too time consuming to pursue.  On the other hand flight sims like DCS, RoF and BoS are pretty perfect for me even with all their problems.  With the old IL-2 and Third Wire, I was spending most of my time messing with Mods.  With the current ever-expandable (but not very "immersive" in the classic sense) worlds like DCS or what BoS might turn out to be -- I get to fiddle with stuff and mess with the editor (definitely non-immersive, but still fun) and get all the fun of the old heavily modded games but without a lot of the fuss.  I'm looking forward to seeing more planes in DCS and all sorts of stuff in BoS (if it survives) and I don't really have time for worrying about immersion.

[Nefaro]

I've mentioned being in the middle of a golden age of so-called "Indie" PC gaming before.  I think those are a sizable part of why we're awash in great stuff.

Digital distribution (DD) has made software companies which were previously considered niche indies much more widely distributed and accessible, increasing the sales of innovative games along the way.  Paradox is probably one good example of this.  If I had been told years ago, after the original Crusader Kings and the earliest EUs had been released, that they'd be selling over a million copies of CK2 (for example) to a wide audience, I would've been surprised. 

DD has also given us a huge amount of creative indie games created by someone in their pasttime.  Some of them even driving the larger developers to emulate their innovations.  This is very healthy for the industry's creativeness, as we've all seen the hordes of cloned titles that the large publishers keep churning out year after year.  This influx of smaller developers with new ideas and little overhead costs has been a huge boon and the biggest benefit to the hobby.  Even if you have to sift through lots of chaff at times.  ;D

[Martok]

Generally, I agree with Toonces as well.  I do sometimes wonder if in the current times we're seeing an example of quantity trumping quality, but overall I'd say he's correct. 

About 6 years ago I was probably averaging 3 hours a week-day night and 6 hours on the week-ends.  That's far too much. 

That's crazy talk!!  :o 

[RooksBailey]

Wow, I didn't expect such a positive response to the state of the industry.  For me, the post 2008 period is actually something of a gaming dark age.  That is not to say we haven't seen some great games come out, or that there aren't any potentially new classics on the horizon, but that overall the quality of gaming is starting to slip.  I guess you could quote Charles Dickens:  "It was the best of times, it was the worst of times."  :) The best of times because we live in an era where technology can really deliver on the promise of gaming: high speed internet, powerful CPUs and GPUs, digital distribution (with deep sales!), and even free-2-play games (something that has saved me a banana boatload of cash these last few years while also delivering some excellent entertainment value).

But it is also the worst of times for some reasons such as:

Unfinished games becoming the accepted norm: Devs/publishers knowingly selling products that are nowhere near complete, nor functioning as designed. The sad truth is that game devs and publishers are just shoveling this stuff out there regardless of condition with the idea of taking the money now and delivering the finished product later. This has clearly become an accepted industry practice, one made worse by the even more loathsome practice of "pre-order" traps set for the consumer (why even wait for a release date to start raking in the ill-gotten gains from a product you know isn't ready for prine time?). This is inexcusable, frankly, especially in this day and age where gamers have demonstrated their willingness to tolerate missed launch dates for more polish, not to mention the availability of the somewhat more ethical trend of paid "early access" where gamers are warned about the buggy state of a game prior to their purchase. Simply, what is going on with game development is bordering on the criminal as far as I am concerned.

"Iteration not Innovation": You know all those unwanted sequels that are being churned out year after year? This is why. Don't take a risk and make something fresh, rather just take your previous title and incorporate a few new bells and whistles, and sell what is basically the same product for full price again (I'm looking at your BF4, Wargame: DR, and others).

Mediocre Kickstarters:  there have been lots of great ideas funded via Kickstarter and other crowd-sourced funding methods, but so far what we have received out the other end has been merely "okay" at best (Strike Suit Zero & Endless Space come to mind), and downright forgettable at worst. Equally concerning to me is the fact that many of these indie projects have adopted the practice of the bigger studios by papering over lackluster launches with the promise of more content and patches post-release - in other words, "we'll fix it later!" but admittedly with better intentions. And as for the mega-funded indie projects like Star Citizen, well I am truly hoping for the best with games that are blessed with such a rabid and charitable fan-base, but I have to ask: what makes you think you can make a great game just by throwing money at it? Isn't that exactly how the federal government conducts business? I think we know the end result of such a financial strategy: mediocre results and lots of wasted cash. Why would gaming be different? Prove me wrong, Star Citizen....

Poisonous Multiplayer Communities: I am finding it increasingly difficult to enjoy my time in MP communities. I once told a newbie to MP shooters that the only way to enjoy a MP game is to 1) close the chat window and, 2) shut off VOIP/Teamspeak (unless playing with friends in a closed match). Why? We all know why. Poisonous, racist, foul-mouthed, trash-talking "l337" idiots dominate MP games. It is really disgusting. And embarrassing. And the forums dedicated to such games are just as bad. Don't get me wrong: I have wracked up lots and lots of hours in various MP games, and have met some nice people at that...but I am finding it increasingly hard to keep doing so seeing how the vast majority of MP gamers are little better than juvenile delinquents (and, sadly, I suspect most aren't juveniles....).

The Pathetic State of AI: I have to laugh when I think of all the articles I have read over the years promising "This is the year of super-smart AI!" Yeah, right. More lies and broken promises. Instead, we have witnessed a regression in the state of the art of AI design. With the exception of Chris Park's superlative AI design in his AI War: Fleet Command, and the commendable efforts of Stardock's Brad Wardell, I think most devs just design an elaborate random number generator and call it "AI". This is the REAL REASON why game devs don't want to make single player games: any SP game is doomed that requires real AI! With that in mind, why "waste" the resources when you can just dump gamers into a MP moshpit? Hence, all these MMOs and MP shooters....

In some ways, I believe we have reached the point where the technology of gaming has now outpaced the ability to make games. Originality has been replaced by the safe same ol' same ol', and innovation has been replaced by graphics. And now we are slathering left-wing politics on top in a desperate attempt to seem "edgy". In other words, we have adopted the worst habits of Hollywood. And like with Hollywood...this will not end well.

Be that as it may, I don't want to seem too down on gaming.     Gaming will saunter on, and we will see some innovative classics emerge, but I suspect that great titles will be fewer and farther between.  I can see this with my own gaming habits.  I find myself investing few and fewer hours into gaming, and I am purchasing fewer and fewer games every year. 

But I still game on.   ;)

It was the best of times, it was the worst of times....

[airboy]

Today I have more games that I'm interested in playing, and own, than ever before.  Two big reasons.
First - gog and dosbox.  A lot of great older games are now playable again on most any machine.

Second - With internet distribution niche games can find a profitable market better than before.  This works for me in all types of RPGs and strategy games.

Some of the negatives discussed above are easily avoidable.  I don't buy "beta games" nor do I ever pre-order anything.  Big chunk of problems are now gone.

I don't play shooters or online multiplayer so the nastiness is never there for me.  This is a time coordination problem.
Yet, there are email games all the time for strategy and wargames that many readers here enjoy all of the time.  I'll join them once I retire and my schedule becomes more predictable.

[Huw the Poo]

Rooks, you bring up some absolutely valid points.  I agree with pretty much all of them.  However I don't think they're enough to invalidate what Toonces said (not that I'm saying that's what you were trying to do ).

There are tons of games coming out all the time, and not all of them fall into those bad categories.  The scope of modern games are such that nobody really "needs" to buy any more than 10 games a year - not even that, depending on the games in question - and have more than enough to play all year around.  I think the biggest reason we continue to buy games at all is to be collectors as well as players.  Plus it's very pleasurable to be part of a new game's release and to explore it and discuss it with other people doing the same.

[Ian C]

But it is also the worst of times for some reasons such as:

Unfinished games becoming the accepted norm: Devs/publishers knowingly selling products that are nowhere near complete, nor functioning as designed. The sad truth is that game devs and publishers are just shoveling this stuff out there regardless of condition with the idea of taking the money now and delivering the finished product later. This has clearly become an accepted industry practice, one made worse by the even more loathsome practice of "pre-order" traps set for the consumer (why even wait for a release date to start raking in the ill-gotten gains from a product you know isn't ready for prine time?). This is inexcusable, frankly, especially in this day and age where gamers have demonstrated their willingness to tolerate missed launch dates for more polish, not to mention the availability of the somewhat more ethical trend of paid "early access" where gamers are warned about the buggy state of a game prior to their purchase. Simply, what is going on with game development is bordering on the criminal as far as I am concerned.

Rooks, you are absolutely right, and it's odd how Demos have all but become extinct too, isn't it? Or perhaps not odd but intentional. So we have no way to try before we buy and see what a piece of crap they released.

An unfinished demo of a game wouldn't be fit for purpose would it? So why should anyone accept an unfinished game?. Bah.

[RooksBailey]

Rooks, you bring up some absolutely valid points.  I agree with pretty much all of them.  However I don't think they're enough to invalidate what Toonces said (not that I'm saying that's what you were trying to do ).

There are tons of games coming out all the time, and not all of them fall into those bad categories.

Oh, don't misunderstand.  I agree - there are lots of games coming out, and more than a few are classics in the making.  But I think percentage-wise, good to bad these days is like 25%-75%.  Just look at Steam: it's front page used to be a showcase of gems, now it reminds me of the "3 games for a $1" bargain bin from CompUSA.   ;D  And of the good games, most look like they were made seven or more years ago (this was why I said I believed the art of game design is being outstripped by the hardware - it is just too costly for anyone but the mega-studios to really utilize modern hardware to the max.  Of the games on my PC, only BF4 really taxes my system!). 

The scope of modern games are such that nobody really "needs" to buy any more than 10 games a year - not even that, depending on the games in question - and have more than enough to play all year around.  I think the biggest reason we continue to buy games at all is to be collectors as well as players.  Plus it's very pleasurable to be part of a new game's release and to explore it and discuss it with other people doing the same.

Those are interesting observations!  I think you are right.  But my problem is that I am increasingly finding myself to be in the position of having some money set aside to buy a game but not being able to actually find anything to buy!  I think this is why a lot of us have been talking about rediscovering old games, or just sticking with games in our library.  I would say we are being forced to do that by a general paucity of quality titles.

Rooks, you are absolutely right, and it's odd how Demos have all but become extinct too, isn't it? Or perhaps not odd but intentional. So we have no way to try before we buy and see what a piece of crap they released.

An unfinished demo of a game wouldn't be fit for purpose would it? So why should anyone accept an unfinished game?. Bah.

That is something I have noticed lately, too.  The big devs have abandoned demos a long time ago, but now I am seeing a lot of indies suddenly stop offering demos.  Even the reputable Alan Park of Arcen has yet to produce a demo for The Last Federation..even though he promised a demo "soon" after release.  Now there is no mention of a demo for that game (which is why I haven't purchased it yet). 

[LongBlade]

Yet, there are email games all the time for strategy and wargames that many readers here enjoy all of the time.  I'll join them once I retire and my schedule becomes more predictable.

PBEM (play by email) games are wonderful because you don't have to have a predictable schedule. All you need is an opponent who understands and agrees to whatever turnaround time you have :)

[Huw the Poo]

Even the reputable Alan Park of Arcen has yet to produce a demo for The Last Federation.

Sorry, but...Chris Park. :)

I can't believe there's no demo though!  I wonder what the reason for that is - normally Arcen's games always have demos.