Are more powerful computers actually better?

JDR13 said:

I refuse to believe that lackblogger is actually as stupid as he's pretending to be. It's useless to respond to someone who's obviously just trolling at this point.

Click to expand...

Yup, it's all face-saving horseshit…

JDR13 said:

I refuse to believe that lackblogger is actually as stupid as he's pretending to be. It's useless to respond to someone who's obviously just trolling at this point.

Click to expand...

I came here thinking I would want to add something ... but still have no clue what the purpose of the thread actually IS - I know that the outcome of it is lackablogger posting a rather vague question and subsequently derisively attacking everyone who posted something that didn't perfectly align with his opinion. Oh well ...

I look at it this way - the system that runs the games I want to play adequately for me to enjoy them is good enough. If I want to dedicate a system to gaming, as I have for many years, then I can focus on that.

But there is also the side of comparing a smartphone to a DSLR in terms of camera ... one is clearly 'better' in terms of all sorts of objective specs ... but ultimately it is the one that is with you and easy to grab an acceptable image in the shortest time that is your 'best' camera ... or at least most used.

Tying back ... that means I do most of my gaming on my iPad and Macbook Air ... while my gaming PC sits on a desk and occasionally gets used.

txa1265 said:

I came here thinking I would want to add something … but still have no clue what the purpose of the thread actually IS - I know that the outcome of it is lackablogger posting a rather vague question and subsequently derisively attacking everyone who posted something that didn't perfectly align with his opinion. Oh well …

Click to expand...

Are you attacking me?

lackblogger said:

Are you attacking me?

Click to expand...

No - I was making an observation about the way the first page of the thread played out.

But look at it this way - rather than engaging me on 75% of what I posted, you sought confrontation on 25% and ignored the rest.

txa1265 said:

No - I was making an observation about the way the first page of the thread played out.

But look at it this way - rather than engaging me on 75% of what I posted, you sought confrontation on 25% and ignored the rest.

Click to expand...

A bit like how after 4 pages you still claim to have no idea what the thread is about... ie: ignoring 95% of everything I've written in favour of confrontation and ignoring the rest...

Having read a few more posts in this thread, I really like some of the points lackblogger is bringing up. However, you could do well to ignore some things, lackblogger. At least for the sake of the thread, if nothing else.

But again, I have to go back to the point I made earlier. People have a, perhaps 'unhealthy', obsession with new things, and the older things are discarded as trash. Until human beings try to evolve their mindset on this, we're going to keep seeing examples of this happening, especially in a format like gaming where old games are discarded for the new ones. Heck, even games a few years old are considered trash by many people because they don't look 'cutting edge' anymore. It's a shame, really, but that's just the reality of it.

But you do make some good points lackblogger. My advice would be to just ignore anything that takes away from the thread and starts a war, as it were.

P.S. I wish they still made floppy drives and floppy drive games! I also wish they still experimented with vintage consoles. I'm sure a team of game developers who were familiar with the SNES can still make quality RPGs on that system, much like all the gems that came from that era back in the day!

I think the problem is that people view a criticism of the new as a form of jealousy against wealthy progress, as if it's some kind of attack on status - ie: you're just saying that because you can't afford XYZ technology, which is so far from the truth and from anything I've said as to suggest to me that you are correct in that there's something very unhealthy about the whole trashing of the old culture.

From the ZX80 onwards we have become not only accustomed, but expectant on continuous power advancement. At first, this was a good thing. While Space Invaders was a cool game, it was somewhat limited in its scope, and could well be considered "trashable", afterall, it would be so easy to replicate it anytime anyone wanted to, it would take a modern dev a day or two?

But there was a turning point, IMO. And the more time progresses and the wider history becomes evident, it does seem like 1995-2005 represented some kind of gameplay peak. The point at which the advancement of technology converged at the same apex where experienced PC gamers were experienced enough to implement thoroughly complex, but also beautiful PC games.

From 2005, it's all been about adapting to 3D and the technology impetus is waaay outstripping gameplay that can adequately put all this new power to use. Which likely the main reason why FPSs are now the primary gaming market, because Duck Hunt is the best format for the technology. Scrolling through inventories and right-clicking sub-menus has nothing to do with distance texture.

From the examples I gave earlier of the games which failed to adapt to the new Operating Systems, three of them have newer versions I could be playing instead:

Medieval II Total War or Rome Total War - but these don't feel better to me, they feel worse. They just look better.

Civ 4, 5 and BE - same again, they don't feel better to me, they just feel worse. They just look better.

Divinity II - same again…

In each case, any flaws in the gameplay or rampant bugs are almost always blamed squarely at the game's "engine", because someone's made a new engine to match the new power and Operating Systems (the perma-cycle).

And, by no surprise, in the RPG market, we see Elder Scrolls booming to the front and Obsidian and Bioware drifting backwards - why is this? Because the technology of prioritising distant texture fits the Elder Scrolls to a tee, but it's of little relevance to cartoonish sprites hacking up goblins in en-mass, it actually makes hacking up goblins worse, because the devs feel the need to bombard you with particle effects from any action you take. A half-second white swish now becomes a brightly coloured dramatic event - because looking cool is more important than the stats required in the background needed to make the swish actually connect with its target.

In terms of gameplay, the swish has become eyecandy, a step back from, well, gameplay. Dark Souls comes to terms with this by introducing player-reactivity to replace lost gameplay, but this moves us towards simulation rather than gameplay, another thing that advancing technology is great at. One day you will be able to stand in the arena and wear your helmet and slash your lightsaber, that's great, but that's not games, people will still want "inactive" gaming.

Which is where we're at now. An industry where retro Minecraft sells more than all the hyper-power simulators put together, because people don't necessarily want sims, or, people want both. Skyrim for sims, Minecraft for gaming.

And people are getting nostalgic because the people who played games as kids in the late 80s, early 90s are now the big fat wealthy white males verging on the kids leaving home, lower sex drive, looking for a hobby stage of life, to which, what was their hobby that life interrupted? Gaming.

And now, from this perpective, they say, where's that game I used to play? They find it, it doesn't work any more *sadface* - GoG, emulators and the nostalgia industry suddenly booms, remakes, updates and remasters, kickstarters suddenly flood the market.

On top of this, some gamers, who always kept themselves gaming even if life refused them time, have consistently bought all the upgrades and consoles along the line, from the ZX80 to Windows 8 and from the NES to the PS4, and, like all repetitive things, it's getting tiresome, it's wearing people down, because the modern consoles don't last very long, annoying those of a collectors mindset, and because the build-up of lost games (some irreplaceable for some people) keeps on stacking up.

The people who make all the new hardware need to find some way to sell us something new every 3 or 4 years, that's how they function as a business. This is what drives the constant trashing of the old. They currently use the power-upgrade as the primary selling point. And it's the knock-on effect of this which is what is assisting in causing the rather bizzare but delightfully diverse current market climate of 2014/5 where retro and AAA are competing for the same $$$ for the first time in 10 years, maybe longer.

If there's a gap in the market, it will make itself known. The reason for that gap (and any lost market to that gap) is entirely the responsibility of those who used to dominate that space, but lost sight of it by a combination of blind repetition and arrogant carelessness.

Pladio, correctly, states that Backward Compatibility is a darn complex beast, and possibly more trouble than it's worth, financially. I, possibly correctly, stated that sometimes the unseen benefits of brand management via Backward Compatibility could provide a lot more future income than just the current annual balance sheet might suggest, because, if you cut-off all your old customers, they might not be coming your way the next time they replace their ever shorter lifespan widget.

To which the reason for my interest in the topic is that I bought Windows to play Medieval Total War. I do not like the current iterations of Total War, so I am upset with Windows, so I attack Windows. Whether that's the right thing to do or not, that's the reaction that this process has caused. What will I do for my next Operating System? Maybe Windows again, but maybe not, however you look at it, it's generated bad feeling…

inb4 complaints about walls of text to contrast with old posts stating people didn't know what I was on about...

Thanks so much for that post - I honestly wasn't trying to confront before ... what you just said has the clarity and vision I just wasn't getting before.

I think advancement for its own sake is a vanity project, just as clinging to the past because of some form of misplaced nostalgia is also bizarre.

These pieces of hardware are simply tools - and while as a laptop guy I might love certain design elements of different HP, IBM, Toshiba, Sony or Apple products ... it is all about usability and functional performance for me.

And honestly that is one reason I have my iPad as my '80% computer'. It is thin and light and I have a small Bluetooth keyboard and it does the vast majority of day-to-day tasks for me.

At the same time I have classic hardware like the HP Omnibook 300 laptop and HP 200LX 'palmtop' and Newton MessagePad that are all awesome products, but just lacking too much modern functionality (e.g. WiFi) to allow them to still be usable.

'Chasing Technology' can easily become an obsession - and since technology continues moving, it is an unsatisfying pursuit. Better to find a tool that works and stick with it throughout the useful life.

As for games, I tend to agree with you on the timeframe of optimal gameplay ... but that might be more about commonality of age and gaming experience. Personally I am not concerned about getting the new & shiny experience. I love playing my favorites and picking up a few new games every year, some I will like and some not so much.

I guess my overall feeling is that neither old nor new holds any 'absolute truth' in terms of what is best. Ignoring what once was can be detrimental, but so can ignoring what is new.

Oh I quite agree, the new optimal games do have their benefits, you should never exclude progress, that's what I was trying to stress, it's not the deficiencies of the new that are problematic, rather the obsoletion of the old.

txa1265 said:

Thanks so much for that post - I honestly wasn't trying to confront before … what you just said has the clarity and vision I just wasn't getting before.

I think advancement for its own sake is a vanity project, just as clinging to the past because of some form of misplaced nostalgia is also bizarre.

These pieces of hardware are simply tools - and while as a laptop guy I might love certain design elements of different HP, IBM, Toshiba, Sony or Apple products … it is all about usability and functional performance for me.

And honestly that is one reason I have my iPad as my '80% computer'. It is thin and light and I have a small Bluetooth keyboard and it does the vast majority of day-to-day tasks for me.

At the same time I have classic hardware like the HP Omnibook 300 laptop and HP 200LX 'palmtop' and Newton MessagePad that are all awesome products, but just lacking too much modern functionality (e.g. WiFi) to allow them to still be usable.

'Chasing Technology' can easily become an obsession - and since technology continues moving, it is an unsatisfying pursuit. Better to find a tool that works and stick with it throughout the useful life.

As for games, I tend to agree with you on the timeframe of optimal gameplay … but that might be more about commonality of age and gaming experience. Personally I am not concerned about getting the new & shiny experience. I love playing my favorites and picking up a few new games every year, some I will like and some not so much.

I guess my overall feeling is that neither old nor new holds any 'absolute truth' in terms of what is best. Ignoring what once was can be detrimental, but so can ignoring what is new.

Click to expand...

I pretty much agree with what you're saying here, and I'm not getting the whole "old is crap" vibe from a lot of people - and certainly not on the Watch, where I think there's the opposite tendency to overestimate the old games. I guess I can't agree with Fluent that it's some kind of trend, though obviously "young people" will naturally have a harder time appreciating stuff they don't even know exists. That sort of appreciation usually comes later, when you're ready to care about the history of something.

Personally, I have no emotional connection to any kind of machinery - and the only reason I play more new games than old games, is because I love the discovery process and I'm so hungry for evolution. New things are more interesting to experience than old things are to "re-experience" - and I've played the vast majority of old RPGs that could potentially be of interest to me. That has nothing to do with discounting the value of old games, though. I'm just not a huge repetition buff, just like I'd rather watch a new episode of a show each week than I'd want to watch the same one over and over and over.

But, for instance, I'm a huge movie buff and I've seen thousands of movies - including a huge amount of both mainstream and obscure stuff from the 30s, 40s and 50s. I would never discount something because it's old - only because it's not interesting. I think movies like Sunset Boulevard and 12 Angry Men can match anything made in the last 20 years - and possibly exceed it. So, it's not so clear-cut as all that.

Often, I look at age as completely irrelevant, except when it's not (Space Invaders was brilliant, but it just can't hold my interest as an adult hungry gamer) - but I don't like to confuse my own nostalgic attachment with superiority of whatever entertainment article. That would be counterproductive to my pursuit of truth and understanding how things work.