Well, in my opinion you cant compare games like that. Everyone has different graphics engine and different taste of enviroments. Its just how it is ...

Even a very detailed cartoon can be realistlic.

Quote from trebor901 :

Game quality is decreasing because game companies tend to use a lot of HDR now to cover up their bad quality 3d modelling. Also game companies are going for graphics over gameplay which is stupid

Actually, most games have very well done 3d meshes. However, detailwork is mostly done with normal mapping since let's you fake all the little detail that you just can't implement as actual geometry without killing the performance.

Quote from Shadowww :

Compare the first and second line. Does 2006 game looks better than 2008 game to you too?

look the differing content, then the amount = /thread.

Quote from JJ72 :

THAT.

With "photorealistic" graphic abilities nowadays, most developers have forgotten there are alternatives to nitty gritty "real world" graphics.

Gaming should be imaginative, how many different versions of space marine does we really need?

depends on how different the space marine is..

you have the fishbowl space marine (MC), and cool bad ass Star-Trek/Star Wars kind of space marine (Cmd. Shepard)

Quote from Shadowww :

Compare the first and second line. Does 2006 game looks better than 2008 game to you too?

no!

Quote from Shotglass :

you read the title and youd expect a valid argument on how the gameplay of current releases just a big bag of repetitive rubbish compared to the old days but obviously this is all about the most irrelevant thing in making a good game
kind of explains why game quality really is lacking these days

I expected it to be about LFS bust i must admit i did not look at the forum it was posted in. Came here by the new posts button

A lot of talk here (and in other threads about new games) seems to be how games that involve a well-used genre are 'bad'. Most old, much loved, groundbreaking games are only deemed 'better' because they were so original and groundbreaking. If taken seperately then games these days are great. If you play (for example) Doom these days it's rubbish - I would much rather play Half Life 2, and much rather play HL2 than HL1.

Doom is a *fantastic* when there are no other FPS games, but flawed when you compare it to other games.

Another example I like to use is Pac-Man, one of the best loved and successful games ever. I defy anyone to play Pac Man these days for two hours and still be enjoying it at the end of those two hours.

I beg to differ...

I bought Doom on xbox live and really enjoyed playing it again (for hours). I also bought games like Golden Axe, Bomberman, 1942 (top down plane shooter), etc. Many old games i've played again these days, and most of them didn't loose their appeal.

On the other hand. There certainly are old games that are best kept as a good memory and if you ever dare to play them again, you shall be left wondering why you once thought they were so great, i give you that. It's just that Doom isn't one of those IMO.

It's good to have new and better looking games. Bad games were made years ago already, and they still make bad games today (maybe more than in the past). A good game does not equal good graphics, and good graphics do not make a bad game any better. However, good graphics certainly make a good game a lot more enjoyable.

Quote :

Most old, much loved, groundbreaking games are only deemed 'better' because they were so original and groundbreaking...

...Another example I like to use is Pac-Man, one of the best loved and successful games ever. I defy anyone to play Pac Man these days for two hours and still be enjoying it at the end of those two hours.

Gameplay aside, you could use Pacman as an example of how games have always spawned unoriginal sequels. Check out the list below...

Quote :

Arcade

• Ms. Pac-Man (1981)
  
• Super Pac-Man (1982)
  
• Pac-Man Plus (1982) - unauthorized title created by Bally Midway
  
• Jr. Pac-Man (1983) - unauthorized title created by Bally Midway
  
• Pac & Pal (1983)
  
• Pac-Man & Chomp Chomp (1983)
  
• Professor Pac-Man (1983) - unauthorized title created by Bally Midway
  
• Pac-Land (1984) - a side-scrolling action/platform game with Pac-Man characters
  
• Pac-Mania (1987) - an isometric version of Pac-Man with up-to-date sound and graphics
  
• Pac-Man VR (1996) created by Virtuality
  
• Pac-Man Arrangement (1996) - released as part of Namco Classics Collection Volume 2
  
• Ms. Pac-Man/Galaga Class of 1981 (2000)
  
• Pac'n Party (2000)
  
• Ms. Pac-Man/Galaga/Frogger Classic Combo (2000)
  
• Pac-Man: 25th Anniversary (2005)
  

[edit] Pinball

• Mr. & Mrs. Pac-Man (1982) - unauthorized title created by Bally Midway
  
• Baby Pac-Man (1982) - video game/pinball hybrid; unauthorized title created by Bally Midway
  

[edit] Console

• Pac-Attack (based on the Cosmo Gang the Puzzle engine) (1993)
  
• Pac-Man 2: The New Adventures (1994)
  
• Pac-In-Time (1995)
  
• Pac-Man World (1999)
  
• Ms. Pac-Man Maze Madness (2000)
  
• Pac-Man: Adventures in Time (2000)
  
• Ms. Pac-Man: Quest for the Golden Maze (2001)
  
• Pac-Man All Stars (2002)
  
• Pac-Man World 2 (2002)
  
• Pac-Man Fever (2002)
  
• Pac-Man Vs. (2003)
  
• Pac-Man Pinball Advance (2005)
  
• Pac-Pix (2005)
  
• Pac 'n Roll (2005)
  
• Pac-Man World 3 (2005)
  
• Pac-Man World Rally (2006)
  
• Pac-Man Championship Edition (2007)
  
• Pac-Man Carnival (2009)
  

[edit] Mobile phone

• Pac-Man Crisis (2002)
  
• Ms. Pac-Man for Prizes (2004)
  
• Pac-Man Casino Card Games Pack (2004)
  
• Pac-Man Casino Slots Pack (2004)
  
• Pac-Match! (2004)
  
• Pac-Man Puzzle (2004)
  
• Pac-Man Pinball (2004)
  
• Pac-Man Bowling (2004)
  
• Pac-Man's Arcade Corner (2005)
  
• Pac-Man Pinball 2 (2008)
  
• Pac-Man Hold'em Poker (2008)
  

This has been going on as long as I've been playing games, so it always strikes me as odd when people bring up sequels as a reason why modern games are so bad. Have they forgotten?

Quote from Electrik Kar :

This has been going on as long as I've been playing games, so it always strikes me as odd when people bring up sequels as a reason why modern games are so bad. Have they forgotten?

no one says that the pacman sequels were any good though do they? similarly ive yet to hear anyone really complain about tomb raider 1 or resident evil 1 or need for speed 1
version 259043 of all these titles however...

also what you always have to keep in mind with pacman is that it was ground breaking and if were honest the stealth genre hasnt really moved on at all since pacman
metal gear solid is essentially pacman with less dots more power pills better graphics and a real ending

Quote from Shotglass :

metal gear solid is essentially pacman with less dots more power pills better graphics and a real ending

Great game until you take it online to be honest. You think LFS laggers are bad? Play Metal Gear Online. You'll want to kill yourself.
Don't really see how Pac-Man is related to the stealth genre though..?

Quote from brandons48 :

Don't really see how Pac-Man is related to the stealth genre though..?

hide from ghosts collect weapons kill ghosts

The main difference is that in MGS the 'ghosts' don't neceesarily know you're there, which is stealth, whereas with Pacman the ghosts know where you are to start with and actively hunt you down at all times, unless you eat that magic thing that scares them.

actually they dont really
they follow precoded paths and theres a whole science based around developing patterns to avoid their deterministic behaviour
in a way you could say its more avanced that way since in mgs oppponents rarely do much more than go back and forth

May not actually be the way they work, but thaths the effect that its trying to created, that the ghosts are chasing after you.

Exceot the yellow one, which runs away.

so youre saying that if mgs had remotely realistically behaving guards that dont just dumbly stroll back and forth on the exact same blindigly obvious path hour after hour it wouldnt be a stealth game anymore?

Quote from Shotglass :

so youre saying that if mgs had remotely realistically behaving guards that dont just dumbly stroll back and forth on the exact same blindigly obvious path hour after hour it wouldnt be a stealth game anymore?

Isn't the whole point of stealth making sure people don't know you're there? The aim of MGS is to infiltrate without being seen, I agree that tha AI is a joke, but it would defeat the object if they knew you were there to begin with.

It's a gameplay mechanic. They don't do that because the designers were too lazy or incompetent to write better AI, they do that because that's the game. Not everything has to be a simulation.

Quote from 5haz :

Isn't the whole point of stealth making sure people don't know you're there? The aim of MGS is to infiltrate without being seen, I agree that tha AI is a joke, but it would defeat the object if they knew you were there to begin with.

youre missing my point
from what i know about ghost behaviour in pacman (mind you im no expert and dont plan on becomming one in the foreseeable future either) the ghosts move in entirely predictable patterns
similarly the enemies in mgs also move in entirely predictable patterns

the only real differnce seems to be that the patterns in mgs are obvious to your average 5 year old / drunk college frat boy aka the target audience whereas in pacman it takes a devoted adult and some knowledge of the source code to work out their patterns

Quote from 5haz :

Isn't the whole point of stealth making sure people don't know you're there? The aim of MGS is to infiltrate without being seen, I agree that tha AI is a joke, but it would defeat the object if they knew you were there to begin with.

Well, that's the thing - they do know you are there but they are told to forget until certain conditions are met. They're just dormant ghosts.

also its worth pointing out that the ghosts dont actually follow you (not unless they see you anway)
in pacman levels theres apparently a spot where you can sit and relax indefinitely

The game quality isn't decreasing the quality of the screenie's you have is the problem lol

Quote from Jacko1 :

The game quality isn't decreasing the quality of the screenie's you have is the problem lol

Or in other words, your system is considered weaker and weaker as times go by

In 2006 the Xbox and PS3 were still called next-gen. Developers experienced a lot with all the effect they could do. I don't think the games were better, they just had more bloom.