It's complicated. Has quality of RPGs declined? Or do gamers just get more picky / jaded as we get older? Or is it just that people are more inclined online to voice their complaints / criticisms than praise a game?
I recently played Fallout 1 for the first time in over 15 years. It still had many qualities I like but also things I strongly disliked (like the fairly frequent random encounters w/ trash mobs). And combat moves so slowly. I'd still say it's a good CRPG and it's still playable, but probably wouldn't tolerate some of the shortcomings if they were released in a modern game.
I think many older gamers view the classics with rose-colored glasses 'cause we first played them when we were younger / less experienced gamers. So yes nostalgia is a huge factor. And it isn't really "fair" to compare a game made a couple decades ago with a recent one.
That said, there is something about classic CRPGs that seems to be absent from most recent "old school" CRPGs. Many of the classics tended to be more challenging (both in combat and lack of handholding), but there were other interesting touches. For ex: Will we ever see another CRPG where having a low intelligence actually completely alters your character's dialogue as in FO, Arcanum, or NWN? It seems like no dev. would be crazy enough to devote that much extra work to something only a handful of players may even see / appreciate.
There's also the effect of those of us who played classics as a kid / teen are now older. We have full-time jobs, bills, responsibilities which means much less free time. If I'm going to put tens of hours into one game it damn well better be enjoyable. I can't put up with filler content anymore, though I was probably a lot more willing to overlook it then.
Perhaps developers have also changed their approach due to more player feedback, including feedback on the pre-release. Some of my favorite recent CRPGs are Shadowrun and Expeditions: Viking but even on the highest difficulty they're way too easy. Perhaps they received a lot of complaints that it was too hard in the beta and they overcompensated. Or maybe this is because more people (in the general gaming population) are likely to avoid a game if the general consensus is that it's hard. I sometimes see comments about Age of Decadence that "I haven't played it yet because I heard it was extremely difficult".
I recently played Fallout 1 for the first time in over 15 years. It still had many qualities I like but also things I strongly disliked (like the fairly frequent random encounters w/ trash mobs). And combat moves so slowly. I'd still say it's a good CRPG and it's still playable, but probably wouldn't tolerate some of the shortcomings if they were released in a modern game.
I think many older gamers view the classics with rose-colored glasses 'cause we first played them when we were younger / less experienced gamers. So yes nostalgia is a huge factor. And it isn't really "fair" to compare a game made a couple decades ago with a recent one.
That said, there is something about classic CRPGs that seems to be absent from most recent "old school" CRPGs. Many of the classics tended to be more challenging (both in combat and lack of handholding), but there were other interesting touches. For ex: Will we ever see another CRPG where having a low intelligence actually completely alters your character's dialogue as in FO, Arcanum, or NWN? It seems like no dev. would be crazy enough to devote that much extra work to something only a handful of players may even see / appreciate.
There's also the effect of those of us who played classics as a kid / teen are now older. We have full-time jobs, bills, responsibilities which means much less free time. If I'm going to put tens of hours into one game it damn well better be enjoyable. I can't put up with filler content anymore, though I was probably a lot more willing to overlook it then.
Perhaps developers have also changed their approach due to more player feedback, including feedback on the pre-release. Some of my favorite recent CRPGs are Shadowrun and Expeditions: Viking but even on the highest difficulty they're way too easy. Perhaps they received a lot of complaints that it was too hard in the beta and they overcompensated. Or maybe this is because more people (in the general gaming population) are likely to avoid a game if the general consensus is that it's hard. I sometimes see comments about Age of Decadence that "I haven't played it yet because I heard it was extremely difficult".