[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/vr/ - Retro Games

View post   
File: 240 KB, 1531x1295, hint.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4184393 No.4184393 [Reply] [Original]

Do you think game designers of old were overall more clever than modern game devs, or do you think a lot of classics just stumbled their way into good design decisions by chance?

>> No.4184402

>>4184393
I think those computer panels mean nothing. and you're really supposed to x-ray that shit or waste some super bombs.

>> No.4184404

I think the third one is a total coincidence. You enter the room, can tell it's clearly not a full room and then bomb around to see where you can go.

>> No.4184490

>>4184393
>do you think a lot of classics just stumbled their way into good design decisions by chance?
This. Game design consist in trying things and see if they work.
Modern game designers build over the work of others.

>> No.4184592

>>4184402
Lol, whomever made OPs image either misunderstood what deductive reasoning means, or pushed the "super metroid design gods" meme too far.

Since this isn't a SM thread I won't go more into how you don't necessarily need visual cues to know a room contains an item. That picture is mildly triggering though

But yeah, I think older game devs made the maximum possible use of the tools at their disposal, deliberately doing a really good job in a lot of games. I guess you could say the developmental process starts with stumbling, though.

>> No.4184597

you're supposed to just bomb all the surfaces

Metroid 2 is basically "bomb all the surfa--OH SHIT METROIDS" the game

>> No.4185074

>>4184393
>>4184597
>not charging your beam and then going into morphball so you spurt bombs everywhere

>> No.4185145

>>4184393
Tough call. I was really fucking clever when I was making games in the 80's but now I'm even more fucking clever. A few guys with 80's sized brains vs 3 departments of millennials? Not even a fair fight. But the babies have more money/time/roucource options so let's call it a draw.

>> No.4185190

Modern games are 100x more complex than your beloved Super Metriod.

>> No.4185205

>>4185190
No way fag

>> No.4185219

>>4184393
back in the before time, there was no such thing as DLC, meaning devs couldn't half-ass what they sold. there is still good design in some modern games, but it is rarer for sure.

>> No.4185223

>>4185074
that's like, spaghetti falling out /vr/-style

>> No.4185339
File: 167 KB, 266x155, kofoS9LAF8.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4185339

>>4184393
Neither. There were some amazing old game devs and some amazing new game devs. Stumbling is a rare and tiny part of the equation for greatness.

>> No.4185991

>>4185190
They're only more complicated multimedia-wise.

>> No.4186058
File: 993 KB, 240x144, monh062bb2b7.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4186058

>>4185991
Not him, but depends on the game. Some games now totally simple others are way more complex.

>> No.4186182

>>4185190
Maybe they are more complex, but complexity has nothing to do with good design.

>>4184592
Good designers have always worked within their limitations. Older games just had more limitations. The shitty games were real shitty, but the excellent games turned out to be near timeless.

>> No.4186404

>>4186182
>Maybe they are more complex, but complexity has nothing to do with good design.

Of course, there's always been good and bad game design.

>> No.4187320

>>4184393
best game!

>> No.4188121

>>4187320
Good, not best.

>> No.4189814

>>4184393
>do you think a lot of classics just stumbled their way into good design decisions by chance?

i think when it came to adding in secrets alot of it was stumbling since the secrets seem pretty arbitrary or out of the way but i guess they wouldn't be secrets if they had a rhyme or reason to them

>> No.4189821

>>4188121
hehe it not the best
i'm so clever

>> No.4189823

>>4185145

Why do retro game designers keep making shit games nowadays though?

>> No.4190252

>>4189823
Because most of the people who designed retro games and are still doing it today always made shit. Also no one wants good old fashion games. They want phone shit so you make what people will buy.

>> No.4190374

I think that if modern devs weren't controlled by focus groups we might see a lot more fantastic game design but I can't think of any popular games besides darks souls that naturally lead players through areas with environmental cues instead flashing arrows and dots on the minimap

>> No.4190410

>>4189814
>that first dev trying to sell his team on putting a chest or cave behind a waterfall.

>> No.4191437

>>4184393
Of course they were more clever. They invented things. They were pioneers, and they had to be. Game devs today add on to and change things, but if you want to see something new that is also good, you'll have to look to indie devs.

>> No.4192987

>>4184393
So in the first screenshot, what do mean the two terminals conveniently hidden behind Samus?
And in the second, what do mean the middle and bottom terminals?

Maybe you're just an idiot full of shit.

>> No.4193475

>>4184393
Both. There were more clever developers who stumbled their way into shit.

Now it's more shit for brains who don't understand what the game they're making is or don't care are doing it solely for the stupid amounts of money to be made.

>> No.4195442

>>4184393
Neither. Games back then were made by smaller teams, so brilliance of an individual designer shined brightly, and incompetence of a single designer was enough to tank entire title.
In comparison, games are now so fucking complex, that a single brilliant person will simply get lost in team of fifty decent people. That's why so many modern games are okay - you don't see so many amazing games, but you also don't see so many shitshows.

The truth is that most modern "worst games" are just mediocre - Sonic Boom or Sonic 06 are WAY more playable than ET, Bubsy 3D or Superman 64.