|
Post by Ex on May 29, 2020 14:49:54 GMT -5
I know you guys are modern gamers, so I feel for your pain, but I do count myself lucky to be above the shitstorm here. Well I wouldn't chalk all of us up as "modern" gamers per se. I think that Sarge and Xeogred are the most consistent insofar as playing AAA Switch and PS4 titles. Though I believe a few other HRG members do own Switch units. My own personal newest video game device is a New 2DS XL. My consoles only go as high as Wii/360/PS3, I don't own a Switch/One/PS4. I plan to buy a PS4 Pro at the end of the year though, because there are exclusives I want to play on that system. But I am seriously considering ending my video game collecting with the PS4 for at least a decade after. There are a lot reasons why I'm saying that, but for brevity's sake I'll just say it's about diminishing returns on the investment. Also I spend my time equally these days between analog and digital gaming. I've spent a helluva lot more money on analog games in the past three years than I have digital.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 29, 2020 14:54:54 GMT -5
I know you guys are modern gamers, so I feel for your pain, but I do count myself lucky to be above the shitstorm here. Well I wouldn't chalk all of us up as "modern" gamers per se. I think that Sarge and Xeogred are the most consistent insofar as playing AAA Switch and PS4 titles. Though I believe a few other HRG members do own Switch units. My own personal newest video game device is a New 2DS XL. My consoles only go as high as Wii/360/PS3, I don't own a Switch/One/PS4. I plan to buy a PS4 Pro at the end of the year though, because there are exclusives I want to play on that system. But I am seriously considering ending my video game collecting with the PS4 for at least a decade after. There are a lot reasons why I'm saying that, but for brevity's sake I'll just say it's about diminishing returns on the investment. Also I spend my time equally these days between analog and digital gaming. I've spent a helluva lot more money on analog games in the past three years than I have digital. What is keeping you from ending it now instead of getting the PS4? (Legit question, not rhetorical.)
|
|
|
Post by Ex on May 29, 2020 15:04:18 GMT -5
What is keeping you from ending it now instead of getting the PS4? I have to play The Last Guardian, whether it's good or not.
|
|
|
Post by Sarge on May 29, 2020 15:10:28 GMT -5
I wouldn't really consider myself a "modern" gamer, either, although I probably play more modern games than most. I think my splits have typically been 50/50 retro/modern most years, but this year is probably going to tilt heavily toward retro - I've barely played anything modern, and even the modern stuff I have played could be considered more retro-styled.
Ha, yeah, looking at my list, it looks like the most time I put into a modern game was Control at 20 hours. The two Switch games I've beaten this year were Ninja Warriors and Blazing Chrome.
|
|
|
Post by Ex on May 29, 2020 15:18:22 GMT -5
Ha, yeah, looking at my list, it looks like the most time I put into a modern game was Control at 20 hours. The two Switch games I've beaten this year were Ninja Warriors and Blazing Chrome. I agree this year you've been more retro-tilted than previous years, by a noticeable margin. But I've seen you beat plenty of modern PS4 and Switch heavy hitters in recent years. Which is understandable of course, considering you own a PS4 and Switch. If I owned those systems, I too might have beaten Uncharted 4, God of War remake, Horizon Zero Dawn, Super Mario Odyssey, Xenoblade Chronicles 2, Octopath Traveler, and such. But overall I think you swing towards retro gaming in general.
|
|
|
Post by Sarge on May 29, 2020 15:19:32 GMT -5
Definitely. If we go by raw number of beats, it's definitely retro, it's just that many modern games are huge time sinks.
|
|
|
Post by Ex on May 29, 2020 15:25:03 GMT -5
it's just that many modern games are huge time sinks Yep. Another complaint I have against modern games. An 8-bit 2D action-platfomer might take 1-2 hours to beat. A modern 3D action-platformer will take 8-12 hours. As one simple example.
|
|
|
Post by Xeogred on May 29, 2020 18:40:36 GMT -5
I don't really see how that's "bad", but I can see how one would certainly have a preference one way or the other. If I paid $60 for a modern game and beat it in 2 hours I'd be freaking pissed.
What I've beaten this year:
Modern: 8 Retro: 22
But yeah pretty sure the modern side wins out in hour count by a landslide. Like I was joking in some other thread, I 100%'d several games lately.
Final Fantasy VII Remake - 79h 08m (first playthrough on Normal was 39h, then that 79 is the combined total) Nioh 2 - 92h 41m
Resident Evil 3 (2020) - 17h 52m
As long as videogames still use normal controllers I'll keep playing them forever.
|
|
|
Post by Ex on May 31, 2020 21:03:12 GMT -5
I don't really see how that's "bad", but I can see how one would certainly have a preference one way or the other. I'm okay with game length if it's continuously fresh and solid content, and not repetitive contrived bloat. That's as true for action-adventure games as RPGs in my taste. There were multiple times while I was playing Uncharted: Drake's Fortune and Uncharted: Golden Abyss, where battles would just drag on and on and on, while I played whack-a-mole with ever spawning baddie fodder. Or in Tomb Raider (2013) negotiated simplistic ledges up and down for twenty minutes, with no actual challenge present... over and over. It's not so much the length of a game, as it is it's ability to remain interesting throughout its entirety. Shorter 8/16-bit action-adventure games had the benefit of being short, so they didn't wear out their welcome as often.
|
|
|
Post by anayo on May 31, 2020 21:32:21 GMT -5
I don't really see how that's "bad", but I can see how one would certainly have a preference one way or the other. I'm okay with game length if it's continuously fresh and solid content, and not repetitive contrived bloat. That's as true for action-adventure games as RPGs in my taste. There were multiple times while I was playing Uncharted: Drake's Fortune and Uncharted: Golden Abyss, where battles would just drag on and on and on, while I played whack-a-mole with ever spawning baddie fodder. Or in Tomb Raider (2013) negotiated simplistic ledges up and down for twenty minutes, with no actual challenge present... over and over. It's not so much the length of a game, as it is it's ability to remain interesting throughout its entirety. Shorter 8/16-bit action-adventure games had the benefit of being short, so they didn't wear out their welcome as often. I have this friend who LOVES the 2010's Tomb Raider games. Once, I mentioned to him that I picked up Rise of the Tomb Raider in a Steam sale. He got excited and made overtures about gifting the 2013 Tomb Raider to me. I told him not to. He did it anyway. I said thanks. I played Tomb Raider 2013 for 30 minutes before deciding I thoroughly dislike that game. The best I can explain it is by comparing it to Mechwarrior 2. MW2 doesn't have high tech graphics in 2020. But there's so much danger in that game. There was this one MW2 mission where I had to go with two buddy mechs to destroy an enemy fusion reactor. I got caught in several gunfights then both my arms got blown off, costing me all my weapons systems. I couldn't shoot or inflict damage at all. But I took a deep breath, calmed down, and remembered that I could issue orders to my two buddy mechs. They still had their weapons systems. So I guided them along to do my bidding, blew up the reactor, then limped to the finish line with barely any hull integrity left. It was such a close shave! When Lara Croft trips and falls off a cliff in Tomb Raider 2013, it isn't because of a butterfly effect of in-game variables bouncing off each other to create an unexpected outcome. It's because a writer wrote "Lara falls here" in the script and a programmer hard coded her fall into that point of the game. Tomb Raider 2013's graphics are so much more detailed than MW2. But in MW2, that predicament I barely survived wasn't predestined to happen that way. Independent variables were interacting with each other to create a uniquely tense situation. No matter how breathless and visceral Lara's "oh no I'm falling" animations are, I just never felt anything was at stake. Anyway it's awkward because my friend keeps asking me how far along I am in Tomb Raider and I'm running out of excuses. :/
|
|