90°

Remembering Console Gaming Before The Internet

SheAttack: Erica discusses console gaming in the 80s and 90s, before the internet innovated it. She lists 5 features and capabilities consoles have now, that we didn't before and how we got by without them.

Read Full Story >>
sheattack.com
DEEBO3678d ago

Yeah it's better now and i'm from the 80's timeline.

Free games,demos,multiplayer games with chat,download games on release and patches to fix games all because of the internet.

MRMagoo1233677d ago (Edited 3677d ago )

"Free games,demos"

I used to get free games and demos back when my games ran on cassette tapes. I got free games and demos on the ps1 as well as the ps2. So no internet needed for that.

"multiplayer games with chat"

I dont game online cos most people are d!cks or trolls, If I wanted to play multiplayer before internet consoles I had my friends come round get out an extra controller and a multitap if needed.

"patches to fix games all because of the internet"

if there were no internet on consoles the majority of games wouldn't need patches on day one because they get released when they are ready not rushed out.

AudioEppa3677d ago

Yes it is better now, anyone disagreeing with that is delusional lol

What's next, People want VCRs back?

Smh

s45gr323677d ago

Ha ha ha when PC gaming is getting better, able to play online for free, pay less for games, etc. You see consoles becoming less accessible, no map editors, no free unlockables, etc. Then you will understand why console gaming is worse

hiredhelp3677d ago (Edited 3677d ago )

I find hard believe you gamed back n the 8bit days by that comment DEEBO.
Games back then were Harder more fun magazines with free demos some odd free game.
Magazines full game content not half full of advert crap.
We didnt need patches we didnt need online we aprechiated Games more than we do now as they churn them out far too quickly.
Its all DAY 1 patches Rushed games DLC Season passes Locked content..Price hikes membership subscription.
Wheres the fun gone ppl where the reward fir completing games like unlocked cheats or hidden levels.
If there was a option to go back I would.

rainslacker3677d ago (Edited 3677d ago )

Free games, got these aplenty from friends or bday/xmas presents.:)

Multiplayer games with chat: we had these. The chat was real time, and rarely devolved into kids that recently discovered puberty throwing hateful insults at each other, although the occasional antagonistic remark was often made between friends.

download games: true, but not like downloading a game makes it any different than what's on the discs/carts.

patches to fix games: most games didn't have game breaking bugs and were released as a complete finished product. There were certainly bugs present, but it was extremely rare for a game to release in the state that many games do now on a regular basis.

From the article:

no hard drives or on console saves: true, but carts could accomadate saves in some cases. later, memory cards were used when CD's were introduced. Not as convienant, but served the same purpose, and in some ways were more convienant.

No social media, message boards, or comment sections:

BS. The internet is older than that. AOL and Compuserve say hi. AOL had a pretty vibrant gaming channel. I personally ran BBS boards before I hit my teens that discussed gaming on a regular basis. The information was more scattered than it is today, but it was there.

No online MP: Yeah, but we had real life MP(see comment at beginning of topic)

No DLC: yep, and it was glorious. We could get all those extras in our initial game purchase. Not that DLC isn't sometimes good, but too many examples of DLC abuse by publishers have taken a good thing and made it into something cringeworthy.

No YT or online Strat guides: I'll give the article this one. Without a purchased strat guide some game you would never be able to complete all the extras that devs put into it...particularly JRPG's. That to me was more a matter of poor game design that managed to obfuscate the fact that content existed elsewhere in games, but that's really another topic.

I think things are mostly better now, but the 80's were simpler, and less annoying.

GearsOfWar3677d ago (Edited 3677d ago )

I agree with all of your points, but I think it's also fair to say that games in the 80s/90s were not as complicated to make. We can do more and more every year, but at the same time, it requires us to use more advanced methods of implementation, which can often break easily.

On the flip side, DLC and patches have fundamentally changed the whole game development process. Developers have become far too comfy in these two things and a balance has yet to be found. Games are releasing in states they should not be.

I miss the days when games had great physical presentations. By that, I mean the actual packaging. The physical version of Witcher 3 is as close to games in those days as I've seen in quite some time.

rainslacker3676d ago

True, games back in the 80's were simpler in design. mid to late 90's they started getting more complicated.

On the other hand, it's actually easier to program games nowadays given the numerous engines and tools available to developers, but many things still have to be implemented on a individual level.

The overall game design is usually more complex just due to animation and collision detection more than anything.

3-4-53677d ago

* In the 90's you found out about a game from going to a friends house and playing their games, or maybe you saw a commercial two weeks before release.

* Also a lot of us found our games from game rental stories.

You could walk in and spend 30-40 minutes trying to decide what game or games you wanted.

* It was the best way to experience a game.

* You literally found out about it while searching the aisles....or at a friends, and you got to play it right then and there.

* There wasn't months and months of hype to ruing the experience for you.

* It was instant awesome gaming, and it helped a lot of us appreciate games that now a days probably would only get 4/10,5/10, or 6/10 ratings.

I know a played a ton of "bad" games, but we all found a way to have fun with them.

* Also in the 90's you had to rely on imagination and creativity a bit more so me and my friends a lot of the time would create our own games within the games.

We would just create rules on the fly and try it out and sometimes it was better than the actual game.

* I don't remember any of the hate there is now. Even the SNES vs Sega wars were pretty tame and mostly all in good fun.

SNES games still played Sega and Sega gamers still played SNES games and it was all good and we mostly all got along.

* The internet is amazing, but it allows the worst people in existence to have influence over those who aren't smart enough to know better.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 3676d ago
TheVideoGamHer3677d ago

Gaming was dope back in the day, but I like the advancements too. I just wish the zeal to make great games was still a thing though lol. Don't get me wrong, people are still making good games, but some others focus too much on the financial side and overlook what makes a really great product.

Spotie3677d ago

Unfortunately, that's what happens when any thing done mostly for passion gets to be too big, and people realize they can make money from it.

rainslacker3677d ago

I think most devs set out to make the best game they can. Publishers tend to make everything financial. not that devs don't want to make money, but most of them aren't sitting there trying to monetize everything they make. Mobile game developers often thing along these lines, but even then, outside of the publisher induced vomit that gets popular, the devs want to make something worthwhile.

DragoonsScaleLegends3677d ago

SNES days all the way to the PS2 days were awesome. But PS2 online was awesome too.

Whitey2k3677d ago (Edited 3677d ago )

I liked the snes n mega drive expecially the likes of street fighter streets of rage u have Mario to Mario kart n street racer. I also like the ps1 era aswell the games were incredible and I enjoyed link up n play doom or f1 and command & Conquer

Retroman3677d ago (Edited 3677d ago )

Good old days of gaming . to bad open world games ruin it.

Show all comments (28)
290°

The Real Enemy of Gaming Isn’t DEI. It’s the CEO

From Horse Armor to Mass Layoffs: The Price of Greed in Gaming. Inside the decades-long war on game workers and the players who defend them.

Read Full Story >>
rushdownradio.net
jambola14d ago

maybe a real enemy is people who use terms like "the real enemy"
there can be more than 1 bad thing, t's not like a kids show with 1 big bad

senorfartcushion13d ago

This is very much a “dummy who volunteers themselves to the middle” comment.

The real enemy is a common phrase, people use it all the time.

Calm down.

jambola12d ago

i'm very calm
you seem very upset however

Notellin12d ago

You don't seem calm at all. Don't take this so seriously, you seem desperate responding to others defending your opinion that lacks any value or critical thought.

jambola12d ago

stop projecting
i'm not desperately dong anything, i'm tapping at keys on my keyboard bud

PapaBop12d ago

It's not like kids show with one bad guy? I present to you.. Bobby Kotick

ABizzel112d ago (Edited 12d ago )

DEI was never the problem and it was an ignorant take to begin with.

DEI is why games like Kena Bridge of Spirits, South of Midnight, and Ghost of Tsushima exist.

DEI is why we have a huge resurgence in Japanese, Chineses, and Korean developers producing games like Stellar Blade, Black Myth, and why Nintendo & Sony exist.

DEI is why more and more games have HUGE accessibility options with both Sony and MS fully behind this.

DEI was never a bad thing, the entire purpose of DEI is representation of all people, genders, disabilities, etc…

The problem was people used DEI as a default derogatory term to describe what they believed was forced representation, which allowed colorist, racist, sexist, misogynist, homophobic, and xenophobic fools to run away with the negative DEI narrative.

jambola11d ago

you don't get to decide other people's motivations
sorry to break it to you

ABizzel111d ago (Edited 10d ago )

To each their own, however, nothing you said invalidates why some people take offense to DEI incorrectly.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 11d ago
Sciurus_vulgaris14d ago

Executives seem to often have an obsession with perpetual revenue growth. There is always a finite amount of consumers for a product regardless of growth. Additionally, over investment is another serious issue in gaming.

Killer2020UK12d ago

The fact that they also rarely have any real expertise in game development compounds things. They'll look at what's been successful elsewhere, lack the knowledge to properly understand why they have been successful and then force a team to 'reproduce' their badly interpreted idea of that success.

We see it so often with sequels to games that were successful too. The team are left well alone, they have a break through hit and all of sudden the money men descend on the IP and completely railroad the dev team's ideas. Usually winds up being 'make the same game but MORE'

LoveSpuds12d ago

This is true throughout all of the corporate and public sector organisations to be honest. CEO's generally move amongst the corporate world without any need to have experience of a particular industry, they simply need to rely on their senior leadership credentials. A CEO of a retail giant will just as easily transition to a CEO role in the energy sector for example.

Not defending CEOs here to be clear, I think it's a huge part of the reason the western world is so fucked up. CEOs don't need to care about the sector they work in, in fact it's better if they don't care if they want to screw everyone to make profits.

GhostScholar12d ago

Companies don’t hire executives to break even. If the goal is breaking even then why start the company in the first place.

Soy12d ago

That's understood; it's getting record profits and expecting to always beat those record profits, and seeing anything less as a total failure. Then they lay people off and raise prices to reach those record profit levels again, just to sate shareholders. It's setting expectations way too high just to spike share prices, then inevitably falling short. It's feeling entitled to being more successful than everyone else. It's the CEOs doing all this to boost their own bonuses.

ABizzel112d ago

Growth benefits the company’s profits and therefore the company’s stock if publicly traded, which pleases the shareholders making them more and more rich, which is why Growth is always at the forefront of the vast majority of any publicly traded company.

More growth = More Money and the people at the top want all the money they can get. I can’t really blame them anyone would love to see their profits go from tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands, to multi-millions it’s almost like a gambling addiction.

But it also goes to show someone how morals can go out the window for a lot of these people, and how amazing some CEOs are when they catch this early and provide a balance solution that takes complete care of their employees across the board while keeping the business sustainable IE: Insomniac Games ALWAYS on the best places to work list. The rest of the industry could learn.

jambola14d ago

honestly, the "real" enemy of gaming, is ourselves
if nobody bought horse armor, shitty dlc would have died almost overnight
if we stood firm and nobody bought games from companies that were bad with layoffs, it would be solved
we're the idiots supporting awful business practices, we are the ones enouraging it

TiredGamer13d ago

I think the reality that we don't want to convince ourselves of is that without the rise of "horse armor" and DLC, game budgets would have essentially stagnated (smaller teams/smaller games), or game prices would have risen much more dramatically than they have. There was an incessant drive for bigger worlds, infinite detail, and hundreds of hours of "gameplay" over the last two decades, that while perhaps a natural evolution of things, needed a suitable funding stream to accomplish.

HyperMoused12d ago

What...CEOs make tens of millions and that doesnt include SLT etc etc...we now have multiple editions of games, in game currency, MT's, battle passes.....and what do we get..worse game than what was coming out 20 years ago....dont drink the cool aid, its this nickel and dime crap that is absolutely leading us to gaming destruction.

senorfartcushion13d ago

This is the worst possible answer to this conundrum. Blaming the masses is blaming the only people who are constantly “told” to buy.

Consumers are the only ones not to blame here. People make their own choices all the time. Disney movies are bombing and DEInis being blamed. Has that been enough to put Disney out of business? No and it never will.

Christopher13d ago

Disagree. Businesses are able to do what they do because people are bad consumers and don't think critically about purchases. Disney got away with doing shit stuff for years and it's just the last year where people got tired of it. It's not like it didn't work for 5 years or so for Disney to do the things they've done. They'll just move onto another way to get people to see movies and it will be just as bad but more profitable until people wake up and realize it.

TiredGamer12d ago

Consumerism drives business behavior. It's not so much "blaming" as it is observing behavior. The point I'm making is that the direction that games have gone are driven by the spending. Consumers are spending on DLC and they are driving the expectation of more glitz and padded out (lengthier) games. If they continue to pay, they will continue to drive that direction until a threshold is reached that forces a change in behavior.

senorfartcushion12d ago

Corporate advertising is the most powerful force on the planet.

This is N4G for god sake, every day there are arguments between people who are Team Xbox and Team PlayStation because they’ve been convinced that having an identity built on paying money to Sony and Microsoft matters more than having one as individual gamers who can play whatever they want.

And THEN we get to the corporate advertising part: to play whatever you want is to sink MORE into the advertising pits, making it so that you can more than one specific product.

jambola12d ago

ah you're right
they were told to buy it, it's clearly impossible to avoid that
if enough people stopped supporting, it would stop
disney not stopping would only be because enough people didn't stop

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 12d ago
victorMaje13d ago

Agreed. I’ve been saying for years, announce you won’t be buying the upcoming game because of the practices of the previous game, then you only have to stick to your guns once, see how quickly things change for the better.

We have to unite in what we shouldn’t purchase.

jambola12d ago

just imagine a world, fifa came out worse, nobody buys the next one until they see proof it's better and stick to it
or games being forced online for single player and nobody buys it
things would change so fast

HyperMoused12d ago

Just like scooby doo, you have shown us the real monsters are us

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 12d ago
Inverno13d ago

Greed and greedy people have and always will be the main issue for everything wrong in the world. Everything is a product to be exploited for monetary gain. Even when there are things that could help progress us along for the sake of making our lives easier that thing must be exploited for monetary gains. Anything that tells you otherwise is propaganda to make you complicit.

coolfool13d ago

I've never thought "DEI" (although the way most people use it doesn't match it's real definition) is the problem with games. Good games have continued to be good when they have a diverse cast, and likewise, bad games have continued to be bad. There isn't a credible example I've seen where a diverse cast has been the direct cause of a game being bad.

Show all comments (51)
90°

The Drifter: Murder, Mystery, and Second Chances • VGMM

The Drifter puts you in the boots of a man who dies before the opening credits roll, then gets a second chance to uncover why someone wanted him dead. With gritty pixel art and practical detective puzzles, it's less about inventory management and more about staying one step ahead of the people trying to kill you again

Read Full Story >>
videogamesmademe.com
jznrpg17d ago

Bleh Switch. I prefer my 3rd party games on PS. I’ll wait and see.

70°

Why We Partnered With St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital

Matt Miller: "Every subscription to Game Informer now raises funds for St. Jude. We want you to know what that means."

Read Full Story >>
gameinformer.com
thorstein17d ago

I subscribed to this not knowing about how some of the proceeds go to St. Judes.

Really cool that some of the money goes there.

Even if people don't subscribe to the mag, it might bring people to the charity.

jznrpg16d ago

One of the main charities my wife and I donate to. They help a lot of children and being a parent of 5 children I can’t imagine what those parents go through. I’ll probably get a sub to GI because of St Jude and of course because I love video games.