4 ms·

Same. My reasons: 1. I understand software better and can see that my in-game actions are mostly changing variables, or values in a database. 2. Games are 'ba

Same. My reasons: 1. I understand software better and can see that my in-game actions are mostly changing variables, or values in a database. 2. Games are 'balanced' and therefore limit the upside for a potential great strategy I might come up with. 3. Nothing new under the sun: How many more pseudo-scifi research trees or weapon mechanisms or unit capabilities am I supposed to learn in my lifetime? 4. They don't make them like they used to. Older games had a hardcore element to them, were often quite difficult and unforgiving (a result of less market pressure and less polish). Instead of online guides and pro streamers showing how they are played, the games had a mystery about them; we often didn't even have a manual for a game we copied. 4. Less need to prove myself in competition with my peers through games and play (which is aparently a fundamental thing for children) 5. Less magic: The first game that had real voice actors, the first real 3D game seem to have had a greater impact than today's incremental improvements. 6. Limited time and energy. I find it tough to spend the prime energy of a day for a game. 7. Computer work makes me want to get away from computers eventually. I do watch streamers and youtube videos of the games of the 90ies occasionally and find entertainment and closure (through experiencing games I never got to play).

johnchristopher 7y ago
> 4. They don't make them like they used to. Older games had a hardcore element to them, were often quite difficult and unforgiving (a result of less market pressure and less polish). Instead of online guides and pro streamers showing how they are played, the games had a mystery about them; we often didn't even have a manual for a game we copied. Right. Pick up a copy of Dead Cells and come back here in 100 hours.
schwap 7y ago
> 2. Games are 'balanced' and therefore limit the upside for a potential great strategy I might come up with. Wouldn't a 'balanced' game make the impact of strategy even greater? Many of the most strategic games in the world like chess or go are balanced. > 4. Less need to prove myself in competition with my peers through games and play (which is aparently a fundamental thing for children) It's never been easier to find and compete against the best in the world at games. If you're good enough at an online game you can find yourself essentially playing pick-up basketball against LeBron James. > 7. Computer work makes me want to get away from computers eventually. Yeah agreed on this one for sure.
- UweSchmidt 7y ago
  #2 Well chess isn't quite balanced, with white having a big advantage. If it was a modern game, people would complain in the forums and the developers would try to help out black, maybe with an extra pawn. Even if that was a good idea, it would take something away from the game. #4 Just as we get older, it's no longer about computer games, the playground, or sports where we need to prove ourselves? Don't mind me if that's not actually a thing, psychologically.
- sfink 7y ago
  The complaint was less need, not less opportunity.
deckard1 7y ago
All of that rings true to me. Some will take issue with difficulty (From Software games are still difficult, for example), or balance or whatever. But generally all these rules apply. The last bit of "magic" I felt was World of Warcraft. Stepping into a world that actually felt like world was an entirely new experience. The game felt alive in a way that no other game has since felt. Years later Blizzard would largely destroy this magic by turning that sense of awe into a grind, and allowing players to fast travel wherever they wanted. The magic of possibility and random encounters disappeared. Every game since then has paled in comparison. After WoW, you also feel that every moment spent in a game is largely a waste of time. I'm incapable of playing these massive 30-90 hour games that seem to dominate the industry today. Sometimes I pick up Quake for a few quick rounds. But 30+ hours is a solid investment of my incredibly limited time.

johnchristopher 7y ago

> 4. They don't make them like they used to. Older games had a hardcore element to them, were often quite difficult and unforgiving (a result of less market pressure and less polish). Instead of online guides and pro streamers showing how they are played, the games had a mystery about them; we often didn't even have a manual for a game we copied. Right. Pick up a copy of Dead Cells and come back here in 100 hours.

schwap 7y ago

> 2. Games are 'balanced' and therefore limit the upside for a potential great strategy I might come up with. Wouldn't a 'balanced' game make the impact of strategy even greater? Many of the most strategic games in the world like chess or go are balanced. > 4. Less need to prove myself in competition with my peers through games and play (which is aparently a fundamental thing for children) It's never been easier to find and compete against the best in the world at games. If you're good enough at an online game you can find yourself essentially playing pick-up basketball against LeBron James. > 7. Computer work makes me want to get away from computers eventually. Yeah agreed on this one for sure.

UweSchmidt 7y ago
#2 Well chess isn't quite balanced, with white having a big advantage. If it was a modern game, people would complain in the forums and the developers would try to help out black, maybe with an extra pawn. Even if that was a good idea, it would take something away from the game. #4 Just as we get older, it's no longer about computer games, the playground, or sports where we need to prove ourselves? Don't mind me if that's not actually a thing, psychologically.
sfink 7y ago
The complaint was less need, not less opportunity.

deckard1 7y ago

All of that rings true to me. Some will take issue with difficulty (From Software games are still difficult, for example), or balance or whatever. But generally all these rules apply. The last bit of "magic" I felt was World of Warcraft. Stepping into a world that actually felt like world was an entirely new experience. The game felt alive in a way that no other game has since felt. Years later Blizzard would largely destroy this magic by turning that sense of awe into a grind, and allowing players to fast travel wherever they wanted. The magic of possibility and random encounters disappeared. Every game since then has paled in comparison. After WoW, you also feel that every moment spent in a game is largely a waste of time. I'm incapable of playing these massive 30-90 hour games that seem to dominate the industry today. Sometimes I pick up Quake for a few quick rounds. But 30+ hours is a solid investment of my incredibly limited time.