Why is the "everything was better in the 90s, it's all shit now" sentiment so common on Sup Forums...

Why is the "everything was better in the 90s, it's all shit now" sentiment so common on Sup Forums? How come other art boards can accept new and challenging ideas, while Sup Forums dismisses everything as "flavor of the month" or "commercialized" or some other pretentious criticism?

>new and challenging ideas

Bcus nostalgiafags

I was born in 96. The only thing I remember about the 90s was Baby Looney Toons came on way too much on Cartoon Network, and there was never anything else to watch.

90's didn't have microtransactions.
It already wins by default.

>90s
>people make games because they like games
>now
>people make games because they like money

Whats wrong with liking money? Also im pretty sure in the 90s games were made with money in mind anyway, they just didnt know how to maximize profits yet

>90s
>making a fun game came first, money came second
>now
>fun isnt even a part of the equation anymore

Fucking this. Games back then had soul. Does anyone else feel like they were born in the wrong generation.

Cool interesting games are getting dumped for games that will sell to the masses because they work and they "know" the masses will buy it

I can't believe people actually believe this.

Money was the only reason they made games in the 90s too. The difference was actually that you were a child and you either didn't know or care.

True i guess since EA said something very similar when they cancelled starwars 1313 bcus "no mass appeal"

Other boards haven't accepted that absolutely everything has gone to shit yet. Happiness can only come from ignorance at this point.

Yeah fuck that, a bounty hunter game in the star wars universe that we don't get to see a whole lot of thrown in the garbage because "lol we won't make a billion dollars"

there is nothing wrong with liking money, but theres a lot of wrong with ruining a game its fun because you're greedy

>implying corporate greed didn't exist back then as well
There's no way most companies were just making things for fun or because they felt like it.

Just because you're used to kike corporations running things the way they are now, doesn't mean that's how it's always been.

Nostalgia. Plenty of great games are being released every month; people just don't want to look for them or they think that the AAA sector should cater to them (and not the masses). They don't know that in the 90s, they WERE the masses. That's all that changed.

This is some pretty good bait actually

nostalgia, being an over-nostalgic faggot is as worse as being a feminist

Or maybe it's that Sup Forums are fucking plebs that don't make an effort to dog beyond the surface.
Like this user said Sup Forums thinks that AAA games are supposed to cater to them, and that's all they pay attention to. It's like if Sup Forums complained that all music is shit now because the top 40 hits aren't good.

>other art boards
Vidya is entertainment, not art, but I digress.
Sup Forums has it lucky because people are making more weird music to suit their tastes, not less. Things are getting better for them.
Sup Forums has fairly shit taste, but there are some good modern cartoons that they'll discussion - the Jack final season was probably the best example of this.
I don't know what the fuck Sup Forums and /m/ do these days.
Sup Forums is kind of in the same boat as Sup Forums, with the most popular modern films being pleb garbage, but unlike video games, one movie does not affect a different movie at all.
With Sup Forums, anti-consumer bullshit is spreading through the industry at an alarming rate. If one game implements an awful idea and makes money, then other games will too, and since multiplayer games require a playerbase to even use, that limits your options. You can't go back and replay a multiplayer-only game with dead servers.

>90s
>the key to making money was making good games
>now
>the key to making money is marketing

considering garriot was known for bitching about EA's kike approach to making video games in the 90s i'd say you're wrong
just because lootboxes weren't absurdly prevalent 20 years ago didn't mean kikery didn't exist

This is pure delusion. Marketing always has been the key to making money for literally LITERALLY everything.

Because game design already peaked in the 90s.

Go on my underage friend, can you name even one new genre made in the past 20 years?

A key though, not THE key.

you just stated that it is the key, are you a moron?

Cuhrazy

Seriously. People here are so used to sucking nintendo's cock that they probably don't consider splitting available pokemon between Red and Blue version to be a greedy move back then.

Soulsbornelike

No, THE key. Plenty of shit movies made money based on marketing, and I dare you to tell me that quality has EVER been a selling point in the music industry.

ITT: underagers attempt to argue with people who know more than them

Found the millenial. Splitting the games was to make it so you'd have to play with friends, not so you'd have to buy and play the same game twice. Are you gonna bring up the link cable next?

Define game design.

>90s
>People were allowed to be out of the box with some of their games because it was a new medium and they didn't know what stuck yet except Mario platformers
>now
>Those people are forced to Kickstarter

You think any mainstream gaming company would ever have a puzzle as obtuse as "chicken with a pulley" unless it was a homage? They'd simplify that shit instantly to just be "pulley that is perfect to use on a wire" because gamers would complain they can't figure it out.

Nowadays yes, and there was marketing back then but it was much less relied-upon

Too bad we're talking about a less-established medium like video games

In Pokémon's case its because trading was a way of making kids socialize, it promotes the games and spreads it to other kids who will see and buy the games to get into battles or trade with each other, I doubt Pokémon would have been as successful as it is if you could get all your Pokémon ingame.

ITT
>uh no it was better back then because it was

Oh please. Anyone who was serious about filling their Pokedex would still buy both games.

>I doubt Pokémon would have been as successful as it is if you could get all your Pokémon ingame.
Except now you can and have been able to for about a decade now thanks to wireless trading. You never need to socialize with your friends to play Pokemon. Or go through the inane solution of getting a second gameboy and trading with yourself, which is what a lot of kids did anyway.

>and have been able to for about a decade now thanks to wireless trading
Zekrom Level 10 and under :^)

Don't forget about the third versions and sequels that have been made. Reminder that Gen 1 had a third and fourth version in Japan.

I am talking about back in gen 1 when Pokémon didn't printed money on the brand's name alone

>Nowadays yes, and there was marketing back then but it was much less relied-upon
Pic related had a $100 million dollar marketing budget.

I wasn't, but that's a good point. Now you need to own a link cable to finish certain aspects of the game. Let's not forget that they would release a more complete version of every Pokemon generation afterwards, but I'm sure that was out of the goodness of their heart right?

Let's also not forget their DLC prototype, the e-reader, where you had to buy cards to unlock menial bullshit that was already on the device.

>gen 1
>when Pokémon didn't printed money on the brand's name alone
I think you have no idea what you're talking about.

I'm pretty sure the brand they printed on then was Nintendo and Gameboy and the fact that it took off as its own entity was just a bonus for them.

Buy our NINTENDO GAME for your NINTENDO GAMEBOY where it's hours of fun and you can buy our GAME LINK CABLE to play with your friends (necessary to finish the pokedex)!

GOTTA CATCH EM ALL GOTTA CATCH EM ALL (only possible with both copies and attending our secret mew event)

>they were born in the wrong generation.
Top fucking kek. Little younguns wishing they grew up in the 90's. I feel old.

I grew up playing DOS and Win95/98 games. We had T1 internet at home in 1995 before most people knew what the internet was. You kids will never understand the importance of the internet because you've been around it your entire life. I watched it grow up like an older brother.

Moba

>Now you need to own a link cable to finish certain aspects of the game.
Maybe because that's literally the only way to do multiplayer on a handheld from 1989. Do you think they had free multiplayer all along and were just hiding it so they could sell a link cable? Alternatively, you can just play with someone else who has it.
>Let's not forget that they would release a more complete version of every Pokemon generation afterwards,
No third version ever has a full dex, so you still have to play with others to catch everything.

It was also one of the very first examples of aggressive marketing yielding obscene returns.

Akuji had a hard marketing push and it flopped.
Persona 3 and 4 had practically no marketing and were huge boons for Atlus.
The Jaguar had an extensive marketing campaign, Caatlevania didn't.

It was a key, not THE key.

I wonder why OP?

how come children never have arguments?

>Like this user said Sup Forums thinks that AAA games are supposed to cater to them, and that's all they pay attention to. It's like if Sup Forums complained that all music is shit now because the top 40 hits aren't good.
That's all there is anymore for the most part, aside from indies. AA games are far less of a thing they they use to be in the past.

ITT
>uh no gaming is as good or better now because it is

If you said that a few years ago youd be right. We're in the middle of an AA and A resurgence. Games marked at 40, 30, even 20 are getting physical releases and we're seeing way more of them.

You're not wrong, but it's still way less than in the past.

Game devs went from a "We wanted this to be a game we would have fun with" mentality to a "We wanted this to be a game consumers enjoyed"

Because people today are too retarded to see how Thief is a better stealth game than Dishonored. People only care about mechanical polish, and flashy shit, and are too stupid to see the rest of the game's design.

In terms of budget games we're coming back up on ps2 levels. We'll NEVER reach late PS1 again, but it's about as good as it's ever been in that regard.

What we're lacking are full priced games that aren't a trillion dollars to develop and weirdo experiment games, but those have largely been co-opted by Indies and budget titles. It seems like we may see the resurgence of completely experimental releases again within the next year or two.

TL;DR, AAA is worse than ever, but niche and art pieces are finally climbing out of their decade long obliteration.

>notice that things are not only different nowadays, but different for the worse
>"WAAAH ITS JUST NOSTALGIA DUDE"

Gaming was better back then and I find it hilarious to see ADHD kids and poor people who have been transferred to middle class just recently being buttblasted over having missed that glorious time. Feels good to know you have been a part of it and not a part of a commercialized anti-consumer casino policy ran by jews and served by pseudo science and woman studies graduates.

Because gaming was better. I don't see how that's a point of contention. Even as far as RPGs go, Octopath Traveler released a demo and Blue Reflection came out. Both of them are mechanically more simple than games released on the SNES of all things.

>i literally wasnt alive in the 90's

I'll agree that not everyone was like YEAH MAN AWESOME RADICAL but alot of companies, gaming or otherwise, genuinely had some sort of enthusiasm for the future and their consumerbase etc etc.

Gaming was actually better back then,4th and 5th gen shit on the current one,6th was also very strong.

Showed a lot in gaming magazines back then. Imagine my surprise when the person reviewing Star Ocean 2 had extensive exposure to Star Ocean 1 despite never being localized and talked about it when he made comparisons.

Where the fuck did that go?

>other art boards

Vidya confirmed for art

>Baby Looney Toons
That was 2000s

I stopped caring about gaming industry once arcades died.

90s
>People make games
Now
>People make games to try to be like movies or tumblr simulators

let's be like Sup Forumsmblr praising SU. We should choose a nu-male game then

>Normalfags ruined gaming
Yes we know

This is actually bullshit since video game marketing is a joke now compared to what it was in the 90s.
Remember back in the day when vidya companies would take jabs at each-other on National TV? Good times.

I'm sure the primary motivation for these goofballs was money.

King's Field

Vidya games used to have funny marketing, now it's just bullshit showing how all different colors and genders of hipsters like to play games

Video game budgets rising killed variety and killed excitement.
Now people are excited about playing the same 3 games over and over again with fancier graphics.

The political and economic situation is light and day compared to the current year. Things were looking up in the 90s and people had extra money to do creative work. Nowadays the wallet is tighten in up and the bottom line becomes top priority. This doesn't just apply to media creators. This applies to the general population.

Good goy, controlling more than 1 character is for nerds anyway. Buy more lootboxes.

>90’s
>parents get you Super Mario All Stars & Super Mario World for like $50
>5 amazing and complete games with tons of gameplay, replayability and content
>no microtransactions, dlc, politics or other money grubbing schemes, just you and your vidya

Then you can invite your friends over to play co-op or Mario Bros. (The battle game). How is that not better than what kids have today?

The indisputable best era for video games was from ~1995 to ~2005.
Games were being made with 21st century technology but with 20th century ethics.

We made the leap to 7th gen way way too early. The 360 spearheaded this push to graphics that still to this day has ended up having a profound impact on the industry.

its not that the 90s were better, its that the video game market took off in a big way and huge companies got set up. This brought in experts from other industries and with it exploitative, manipulative and anti-consumer practices. There were a lot of crap games back in the day but the good stuff stands out not just in memory but because they were often brand new concepts, new genres.

A lot of old games had a lot more depth to them, and occasionally a deep game still pops up. But they're vastly outnumbered on an over-saturated market.
There's no need to be superb when mediocre or slightly above mediocrity is good enough to move copies. When there's a smaller team involved people get more emotionally invested and it being a work of art people were more set on it being the best it could be.
Experimentation brings risk, and we're seeing fewer innovations and more and more gameplay mechanics or aspects removed for the sake of "streamlining".

The gaming industry has never been in a particularly good place, given the sheer amount of shit games on the market at any time. But the old days did experience a lot more experimentation and innovation.

The movie industry is in a pretty shit position atm too. I can't wait to see another 45 star wars films, one a year, cant you?

Gaming was better on CRT's
As soon as the LCD/HD Console era came it started going to shit

I was born in 92 but FUCK this was annoying
>be sick, at home
>HEY THERE EVERYBODY IT'S A LOONIFUL DAY
>repeat for 6 hours

a MOBA is a neutered RTS, it literally began as an RTS mod.

I'd say the battle royale style of game but those all play like First Person Shooters, so only kinda?

"Wolf2" is a 6-hour game (including 4 hours of cutscenes) and no multiplayer for 60$

>shitty uncharted clone with star wars paint job
Oh yeah, we really missed out on a boundary pushing fresh IP there.

>no more cheat codes
>no more unlockable costumes (all DLC)
>hollow cinematic gameplay gets old after a week
>major part of game development goes into online multiplayer which takes away from single player campaigns
>Muh realism infecting the industry
>bland shooters and open world games dominate
>platformers are dead
>every game's story takes itself too seriously and tries to be deep
>never-ending interruptions during gameplay

I play SNES-PS1 era games to avoid some of the pitfalls of modern gaming.

It was going to happen sooner or later. The video game industry's obsession with reaching the status of the film industry damaged the fuck out of it.

Just look at how long the credits for the Batman Arkham Games are. It's fucking insane.

You could get tons of collection of old games and/or recent games nowadays too.
Really not the best example you could come up with.

Because games from the 90s weren't sucked into a magic wormhole, people can still play them and many are doing so for the first time, and we're living in an age of remasters where games from the 90s get sold back to you at $60 because today's devs are creatively bankrupt.

But 1994 was better

I for one Do not like modern game world's and npc at all. They feel too artificial and clones of other npc. There is hardly any charm anymore and most games feel like they had a checklist game design and development to keep it safe. Too many games these days are either "third person action adventure rpg" or "online multiplayer competitive fps".

The difference is there weren't micro transactions so you had to keep focus on making a fun game rather than an addictive one.
Also there was limited capacity for cinematics so less compulsion to make vidya that was more movie than game

everything is shit now, new games are shit, new hollywood is shit, new music is shit

Not all games and music are shit.

I wish publishers would consider double AA or B grade games again. Not every game needs too ambitious for a mass audience.