Is computer evolution slower then ever?

[Foebane]

Originally Posted by roondar

I think the real disconnect here is that you assume that Amiga gamers haven't played these games in multiplayer mode. I certainly did. And I still find 1990's 2D games to be excellent fun, often way more than those early 3D games.

Let's start with Doom and Quake (and I did one of the first Quake ports for the Amiga, before the source was open). Do you really have fun playing them today? More than Turrican, Cannon Fodder, Monkey Island, Chaos Engine, Kick Off, etc.?

Turrican seems to me to be a simple platform shooter, one which can be quite aggravating as enemies come out of the edge of the screen and zap your health in no time at all. Is this one of those games where you're meant to memorise enemy positions and movements throughout? I hate those.

Cannon Fodder was improved vastly with Command & Conquer, and my all time favourite C&C game was Red Alert 2. How I WISH I could play that again.

Monkey Island, a game from a genre that thankfully died out on PC. I tried it a few years ago, got bored very quickly, quirky humour does not do it for me, and I hate pirates.

Kick Off? I can't stand football games, none of them are any good. I'd rather watch the sport on TV with REAL people.

That said, I'd never argue that someone who has the opposite opinion is therefore 'wrong' or that those old 3D games are 'crap'. After all, what games people like is just their opinion. No wrong or right about it.

Honestly, I don't get why we're not just all accepting that people have different tastes. There's nothing wrong with liking or disliking something

I'm just citing examples as to why I don't like the Amiga games described above. There are others I DO like, however: Carrier/Battle Command, Damocles, E-Motion, Stunt Car Racer. Note how most of those are 3D...! (hint, hint)

[fxgogo]

In a way, I think the computer revolution should slow down, or at least be re-invented.

There is a huge amount of waste with upgrading needlessly. Quite often we are forced by hardware or software manufacturers to do so if we want to carry on using a certain set of applications.

We also rush ahead so quickly, we don't often consider what we have currently before discarding it for the new shiny object.

Just because we can, doesn't mean we should.

[phx]

Originally Posted by Foebane

Phx, no-one who plays those games plays the single-player more than once, unless it's beating it on all difficulties.

So true.
Which is different with the above mentioned 2D games, BTW.

No, what I and others did on those games was to play MULTIPLAYER DEATHMATCH with REAL PEOPLE ONLINE, which is a helluvalot more exciting

Absolutely! It was exciting. And I played a lot of Team Fortress in the late 90s on my CSPPC Amiga.
But that's 20 years ago! Nobody is playing it, since many many years. And even if I would find a group of players, the game looks pretty ugly by todays standards. There are much more exciting multiplayer games today. I wouldn't waste my time with it any longer.

My point is that this is different with the 2D games from the 90s, which still have titles worth playing and which still look nice.

Also, Phx, unlike the Amiga games you mentioned, there were THOUSANDS of ADD-ON MAPS for the Doom and Quake series

Yes. I played most of them. But the game mechanics stay the same.

[d4rk3lf]

@Foebane
I don't think Cannon Fodder is an RTS, so it's not comparable to Command & Conquer.... Cannon Fodder is pretty unique, and doesn't easily fit any genre.
If you must compare C&C with something, then it's predecessor Dune 2.
Or, maybe AGA Exodus - The Last War RTS will be even closer, because it's more modern (I haven't played it, but I guess is somewhat clone to Red Alert).

As for 2D VS 3D Games.
IMHO, if I was on abandoned Island, and have to choose games to play, before Doom, I'd always pick following Amiga 2D games:
Civilization, K240, Settlers, Reunion, Dune 1 and 2, Castles, Lotus 2, Wing Commander (it's debatable is this a 3D or 2D game), Arcade Pool, Mortal Kombat 1 and 2, Ruff'n'Tumble, Simon the sorcerer... and many more...
The replay value of some strategies above (K240, Civ.. ), is way better then replay value of Doom.

[Bruce Abbott]

Originally Posted by Mrs Beanbag

now i am only curious what it is like inside your house..

I spend a large proportion of it glued to a computer monitor or TV screen. Have to get out every so often to experience the real world!

Originally Posted by Foebane

no-one who plays those games plays the single-player more than once, unless it's beating it on all difficulties. No, what I and others did on those games was to play MULTIPLAYER DEATHMATCH with REAL PEOPLE ONLINE, which is a helluvalot more exciting, I think,

You may think 'deathmatch' is the most exciting thing you can do in a computer game, some of us don't. I prefer solving puzzles and exploring to killing people.

In fact, that's what I think the problem is: Amiga gaming is solitary, unlike PC gaming.

This reminds me of one of Isaac Asimov's stories where he predicted people in the future would eschew physical contact and only interact via holograms - which he thought was kind of sad. That fiction is now becoming a reality!

Back when the Internet didn't exist and home computers were the latest thing we often used to gather at someone's house and play games together. No need for multiplayer, just pass the joystick to the next person when you die. Adventure games could be played by all, with everybody thinking of ideas and one person typing in commands. Sometimes it was more relaxing to just watch someone else play, perhaps occasionally giving some advice or encouragement. Then PCs and online gaming happened and people became solitary. I miss those times.

[Lord Aga]

Originally Posted by d4rk3lf

As for 2D VS 3D Games.
IMHO, if I was on abandoned Island, and have to choose games to play, before Doom, I'd always pick following Amiga 2D games:
Civilization, K240, Settlers, Reunion, Dune 1 and 2, Castles, Lotus 2, Wing Commander (it's debatable is this a 3D or 2D game), Arcade Pool, Mortal Kombat 1 and 2, Ruff'n'Tumble, Simon the sorcerer... and many more...
The replay value of some strategies above (K240, Civ.. ), is way better then replay value of Doom.

I second that

On topic... there is a matter of diminishing returns with technology and its power. Like so:



Of course, it's not quite that simple. There is a matter of talent, creativity, and know-how. But we are at that point that just throwing more polygons at the engine is not that satisfying. It's more the question of art style, and above all gameplay.

[freehand]

Originally Posted by d4rk3lf

@Foebane
I don't think Cannon Fodder is an RTS, so it's not comparable to Command & Conquer.... Cannon Fodder is pretty unique, and doesn't easily fit any genre.
If you must compare C&C with something, then it's predecessor Dune 2.
Or, maybe AGA Exodus - The Last War RTS will be even closer, because it's more modern (I haven't played it, but I guess is somewhat clone to Red Alert).

As for 2D VS 3D Games.
IMHO, if I was on abandoned Island, and have to choose games to play, before Doom, I'd always pick following Amiga 2D games:
Civilization, K240, Settlers, Reunion, Dune 1 and 2, Castles, Lotus 2, Wing Commander (it's debatable is this a 3D or 2D game), Arcade Pool, Mortal Kombat 1 and 2, Ruff'n'Tumble, Simon the sorcerer... and many more...
The replay value of some strategies above (K240, Civ.. ), is way better then replay value of Doom.

So your whole reason you prefer 2d games is based on Doom lol

[d4rk3lf]

Originally Posted by freehand

So your whole reason you prefer 2d games is based on Doom lol

What?
I don't get the question.

My whole reason for loving some game is game itself. It has nothing to do with Doom.
Besides, I like many (Amiga and PC) 3D games like Frontier, Elite, Zeewolf, Stunt racer, Legends of Valor, FA18 interceptor, Birds of Prey... etc

And, for example, at abandoned island, I'd always pick Frontier, or Elite, before Doom.

[freehand]

Originally Posted by d4rk3lf

What?
I don't get the question.

.

And I do not know why you compared all the 2d games above to one 3d game doom it's irrelevant.

[d4rk3lf]

Because, Foebane is comparing it all the time, and I wanted to give my point of view.

[gimbal]

Originally Posted by d4rk3lf

And, for example, at abandoned island, I'd always pick Frontier, or Elite, before Doom.

You do you, I'm playing Raft instead for educational purposes.

[Foebane]

Originally Posted by phx

Absolutely! It was exciting. And I played a lot of Team Fortress in the late 90s on my CSPPC Amiga.
But that's 20 years ago! Nobody is playing it, since many many years. And even if I would find a group of players, the game looks pretty ugly by todays standards. There are much more exciting multiplayer games today. I wouldn't waste my time with it any longer.

I can't really play Team Fortress Classic anymore because either I suck at it against younger human players on the FEW servers that still exist, or the AI bots are so boring and predictable. Same for Quake 3 Arena: on that game, the servers with humans dried up a long time ago and it's just bots on those, or the bots when I play on skirmish mode. It's all so predictable.

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

You may think 'deathmatch' is the most exciting thing you can do in a computer game, some of us don't. I prefer solving puzzles and exploring to killing people.

That's why I have Scrabble and Super Twintris (Tetris) on Amiga. I would've gone after Scrabble on Steam, but it was taken off there a long time ago in favour of some horrible mobile game called Scrabble Go! which is filled with microtransactions and other annoyances.

In any case, I'm outgrowing shooters in general, and am considering more cerebral games as suggested on this thread.

Originally Posted by d4rk3lf

Because, Foebane is comparing it all the time, and I wanted to give my point of view.

Because I was under the impression that Amiga gamers ONLY knew Doom, and not other games. I was under the impression that Amiga gamers were OBSESSED ONLY with Amiga games and nothing else. I was wrong.

[fxgogo]

Of course we all know the best game in the world is pinball....right....!!

[Foebane]

Originally Posted by fxgogo

Of course we all know the best game in the world is pinball....right....!!

Who said that?

In any case, REAL pinball is a strange one for me: I for one could never see the point in it, as most of the skill translates to where the ball hits the paddles and when the right time is to flick the ball up to the devices that score points. That may be fun to many, but it's rather limiting, and it relates to physics and ensuring the "tilt" for cheating doesn't happen.

Which leads me to COMPUTER pinball and how realistic (or lacking) the physics simulation is. I've never ever played real pinball so I've never known what to expect from a simulation, but I sure as hell know that NO computer simulation of physics will EVER match real-world physics. No way, nada, zip.

[Tsak]

Originally Posted by phx

Let's start with Doom and Quake (and I did one of the first Quake ports for the Amiga, before the source was open). Do you really have fun playing them today? More than Turrican, Cannon Fodder, Monkey Island, Chaos Engine, Kick Off, etc.?

It's just my observation that most existing 3D games, especially the older ones, have not much depth, and are mostly very simple, boring shooters.

Well, this is not true imho. From a game design and gameplay point of view Doom is far more complex as a shooter vs Turrican f.e. In Doom the player needs to make informed, strategic decisions every step of the way in regards to what gun to use, what enemy to prioritise and how to move around, based on the level/room layout and enemies faced. And this is driven also by the more complex AI and enemy attributes which cover a large possibility space. And on top of that there are a ton of additional details that enrich and expand the experience further while adding an extra angle of emergent gameplay (like f.e. enemies infighting).

In that regard, Turrican is a LOT more simple and straight forward. F.e. with most enemies here the AI is next to non existant, just an object with HP and linear/specific movement pattern. Plus there isn't much room to maneuver around, so most enemy encounters sum up to keep firing and pre-emtively kill them before they come near you. I think what Turrican does well on the other hand is the different attack abilities (normal, 360 and rotating star). In that regard it does resemble Doom and it's weapons and it's one of the major factors (besides the excellent technical aspect) that elevates the game from mediocracy.

Don't get me wrong, I really love Turrican all the same, however I need to point that there's much more under the hood with games like Doom, people don't always realise. And it's these aspects that make it a timeless classic, perhaps much more than the fact that it's regarded as the grandfather of the fps genre.

[gimbal]

Doom yes, I replay the original two games at least once a year but probably several times both single player and coop. There is something really satisfying about zooming through those levels on a high difficulty and mowing down the enemies; single save per level only of course, no save scumming allowed. There are few games with enemies as iconic as the ones in Doom.

Quake - nah. That is inherently tied to the fact that it was "the first" full 3D FPS... hardware limitations forced the level designers to not go wild with the enemies and that really hurts the game for replayability purposes. Besides that, Quake has only two memorable and worthwhile enemies to fight, the rest are either annoying or uninspired. And it's so, so brown...

[rothers]

Originally Posted by gimbal

Doom yes, I replay the original two games at least once a year but probably several times both single player and coop. There is something really satisfying about zooming through those levels on a high difficulty and mowing down the enemies; single save per level only of course, no save scumming allowed. There are few games with enemies as iconic as the ones in Doom.

You're so right about Doom, it was so ahead of its time it's almost magical.

I also still enjoy to play through it on the highest difficulty. I remember when I was a kid thinking those difficulty levels were absurd, but now I can do them and it's very rewarding and also still a challenge.

I know if you watch the docs you can understand how ID came to make the game, but at the time it really was amazing. It made so many people buy a PC. There was NOTHING on the Amiga like it.

Gloom in 1995 was still a wolf3d engine which was nothing like Doom. People just knew no better.

PS origial quake CAN be good if you find the right set up for a modern system. I agree some of the monsters are just unfair tho. The balance isn't there.

[Bruce Abbott]

Originally Posted by rothers

Gloom in 1995 was still a wolf3d engine which was nothing like Doom. People just knew no better.

The problem with Gloom wasn't the engine - it was the unimaginative levels and boring gameplay.

PS origial quake CAN be good if you find the right set up for a modern system. I agree some of the monsters are just unfair tho. The balance isn't there.

I ran it on my A3000 with 66MHz 060 and it was a big letdown. The graphics were not really any better than Doom, the gameplay was worse and it was less imaginative. In short - boring and a waste of money.

And that has been the pattern for 3D games ever since. Higher resolutions, faster frame rates and more detailed objects all wasted on boring games that haven't 'evolved' at all since then.

[Foebane]

As I've said, Doom was a massive revelation to me when I saw it demonstrated on a friend's PC, with a big monitor and booming speakers. I thought the Amiga could never realistically compete against that.

And when I got my first PC, I played many hours of Doom, with add-on maps and mods that were great fun.

I anticipated Quake back in the day but I was dismayed how literally dark it was, in the much-distributed Shareware version. But they brightened up the colours a bit in the final release, and I had a good time, but everyone's right about the game being more like a tech demo, as while the maps demonstrate full 3D potential (floors above floors, etc), the monsters are too varied.

I mean, of the Quake monsters, most of them are Doom fodder, but the ones that I thought were unique were the zombies that just persisted at throwing body parts to you until you destroyed them with explosives, and my personal favourite terror, the Fiend, that sort of giant lion-sized FLEA that leaps around and tries to disembowel you! Other monsters were just mixed though, and the blue squelchy blobs were the worst. At least you could gib every one of the monsters.

But Quake 2 showed how id Software have no ideas of their own: before Doom was born, the idsters wanted to licence the Alien franchise to make a game based on those movies, but they couldn't get the rights, and so they were forced to come up with the concept of "demons in space". In Quake 2, however, it was ridiculously dull and predictable, with the Strogg basically being Star Trek's Borg in everything but name. How boring.

Quake 4 was more of the same Strogg crap, and I hated it.

Quake 3 Arena, to me, is the only decent Quake game of the lot. Multiplayer, and built on id Tech 3, Id Software's most popular engine ever, it really looks great for the end of the 1990s, when ten years previously, there was stuff like Shadow of the Beast on Amiga doing the innovation and eye candy.

What a year for innovation the 1990s was. Seriously.

[d4rk3lf]

Originally Posted by Bruce Abbott

And that has been the pattern for 3D games ever since. Higher resolutions, faster frame rates and more detailed objects all wasted on boring games that haven't 'evolved' at all since then.

Try playing campaign of first Call of Duty (2003), and you will see that it doesn't borrow any "patterns" from Quake and Doom. Vastly different, yet much better, modern, much more realistic experience, imho.
It's in WW2 setting, and it can be considered as a retro game today.

Originally Posted by Foebane

Quake 3 Arena, to me, is the only decent Quake game of the lot.

I also loved Quake 3 Arena a lot.
Then I discovered Unreal Tournament 2004, and I think it outshines it in pretty much every aspect.