____/ waterskidoo on Thursday 19 July 2007 17:58 : \____
> On 2007-07-19, [H]omer <spam@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Verily I say unto thee, that Roy Schestowitz spake thusly:
>>
>>> Don't forget that old discussion about "what makes games /fun/".
>>> There are some games that boast many polygons, a lot of artwork and
>>> whatever, but the gameplay simply does not work. Sometimes the old
>>> and tired games from the 90s beat today's games in terms of fun.
>>
>> "90's"?
>>
>> Frankly, I haven't really enjoyed the game-play in most video games
>> since Atari Centipede in 1980.
>
> I agree with you guys, but I always thought I was in the minority.
> Last decent, fun arcade game I remember was Space Invaders followed
> by Asteroids and of course Centipede.
> I did like Duke Nuke'em 3D though.
> Some people just like a game they can sit down and play without
> having to learn a zillion key strokes, strategy and so forth.
> Some of the simplest games are the most fun.
> Tetris for example.
> However, I would still say most of the kids are into the complex
> games like Quake, Call of Duty and so forth.
I still have Warcraft 1+2 on my hard-drive. These were fun. I finished both as
a young teenager and the modem tournament seem like an absolutely amazing at
the time. So little has happened since the older days of gaming. Just more
polygons... same engines, different artwork/storyline.
--
~~ Best of wishes
"Fat operating systems spend most of their energy supporting their own fat."
--Nicholas Negroponte, MIT Media Lab, rediff.com, Apr 2006
|
|
