>>340032829
yes
Games are just as good now as they were then.
You just don't remember siphoning through all the shit but that still happened back then.
Don't let nostalgiafaggotry blind you.
>>340032829
zelda was better back then, that's for sure. not all games though. shooters were clunky, RPGs were grindy, and the GOAT genre WRPG only existed on PC.
i dunno you tell me
>>340032829
After 2006 vidya started to go down hill with only a few good games here and there
>>340032829
Definitely but it's people's fault. If people didn't ask for more shit like Majora, Fifa, CoD and shit, the quality wouldn't have sunk.
>>340032829
Back on the 3DS in 2011? No, I felt pretty sick of them by then.
There is no way you can say "no" without outing yourself as being 15 years old
>>340032829
Yes.
>>340032829
No, you were just younger
Yes. The games industry is creatively bankrupt.
Case in point
>>340033212
All of these games are remakes and rehashes.
>>340035476
What's the VN on the left?
>>340035848
VIPER M3-3.2
Not really, we only remember good games.
>>340035476
there is Days series if you want recent animated vn
>>340035958
Thanks
>>340036231
It's hard to find a download for it but you can get it from sanic hegehod if you ask nicely.
>>340033151
>shooters were clunky
Wat?
No.
Example: The Witcher 3 is better than any game from the 80s-90s.
Yes because they were mostly controlled by the creator and made for whoever happened to like it. Today games are all watered down mediocre mass-appeal shit feast gambling simulators.
>>340036275
I found a torrent but it's pretty low on seeders
>>340036275
I'm sorry but I don't know if that is a website or a username.
>>340036427
t. person has never played a game released before the PS4.
>>340036382
the controls for shooters are much more fluid and responsive now.
>>340036657
Yeah? You got a problem with that? Sorry some of us have lives gramps.
>>340036275
Is he a tripfag on /t/ or something?
>>340032829
I would actually say they were worse then and it was harder to actually know if a game was shit. At least we have the internet that can relay info and show gameplay.
Back then all you had was word of mouth and if you had some kind of subscription that reviewed games you were forced to trust take their word for it.
>>340036734
I don't have a problem with that. I just don't care about your opinion because it is worthless.
>>340032829
No. The Witcher 3 and Bloodborne stand as proof.
Partially yes, but I think it's because back then games were such a new medium that we had our Cambrian Explosion and just tried everything.
Of course you're gonna get a lot of good ideas when all the ideas are new.
>>340036712
Give me examples for comparison.
>>340032829
Only Japanese games.
No.
Games are way better then they were in the past and have way more content. Even as late as 6th gen a ton of titles were very janky with little polish and quality control. Bad cameras were the majority, for example.
It's just that since games are pretty much consistently good to great now, and people have forgetten how janky earlier games were, people's standards are really high, combined with the fact that there's less innovation and more just slight tweaking and rehashing from most publishers means that it seems like games are worse.
There's also the obvious fact that graphics, detail, amount of content, and so on have all gotten better.
>>340035397
On the contrary, I can't see how anybody older then 15 would say yes. Do you not fucking remember all the god damn shovelware that used to exist and how often actually shitty games with low quality control came out?
>>340033212
That's gotta be one of the dumbest comparison charts I've ever seen.
