Topic: Does anyone else feel like this gaming generation isn't as good?

agreed, and not because of nintendo loyalty. i had the original playstation and as i recall i liked it quite a bit, but i've never liked that controller. the sticks just feel cheap and flimsy to me.

the sticks on the classic controller are exactly the same as the stick used in the nunchuck, and you don't hear many complaints about that one. these current nintendo sticks are my favorites since they have the durable rubber material that made the gamecube stick an improvement over the n64, but without all those grip rings which ironically enough kept your thumb from resting flat on the top. i don't think they're loose at all; in fact they're the stiffest i can think of.

alexsays, i think the game itself often has more impact on the sensitivity than the controller. it's up to the designers of the game to decide how the reticule responds to your movements, and if the sensitivity options in modern shooters prove anything, it's that there's an awful lot of power on the developer side of things to control the feel of the sticks.

nintendo doesn't have a lot of highly evolved shooters and the few it does have are head first in IR controls, so in all honesty it's probably hard to find a game with really good stick controls compared to the other systems.

Senior I have to agree with you kind of there. I feel kind of alienated by today's idea of the trendy hardcore gamer. It seems if you're not neck deep up the ... well you know if the FPS, sports, 3D fighting, or racing genre it's like you're some form of a gaming equal of a leper and it sucks. I grew up with a launch year ('85) NES and forward, and experienced most the major players (Nintendo, Sony, Sega, NEC, Philips, SNK) home or handheld units and have plowed through a ton of stuff. Some stuff I used to love I can't tolerate so much anymore (future racers and kart, 3D platformers outside of Mario more or less, non-licensed sports(never liked licensed), rts got pretty worn out too, and I don't like modern bullet hell memory match shooters while I love me some Gradius style play. That said though I do find some stuff I couldn't tolerate like Gran Turismo and MGs(thank you peacewalker) I can get into now, but over all far less I can deal with due to reasons from being burnt out to being a former game maker and overly adhd and touchy over bad design issues and stupid crud in a lot of stuff.

All that said it never does seem to matter so much when I go back, back at the least to the GBA but realistically the cartridge system days of stuff as I can grab much of those and find some pleasure in a game and feel a bit of peace there between the challenge of the style and simplicity of the controls (not that I can't wield a dual stick well, it just is what it is.) I get what you're saying about 1997-99 having a lot going for it, but really I think that real 'golden age' of gaming really fell into that decade of 1985-1995 with a nice platinum age revival there in the latter half of the 90s through the mid00s devolving over from the home to the handheld(GBA) that kept a lot of good principles in gaming alive.

[quote=J.K.]Senior I have to agree with you kind of there. I feel kind of alienated by today's idea of the trendy hardcore gamer[...] 1985-1995 with a nice platinum age revival there in the latter half of the 90s through the mid00s devolving over from the home to the handheld(GBA) that kept a lot of good principles in gaming alive.

[/quote]

Hey

Yeah, 1985-1995 might be the true golden age of gaming, but to be a little bit nitpicky, this timespan covers 8-bit, 16-bit and the first 3D games. Of course, this enables and endless list of agree able awesome games. My point was, that gaming seemed to "peak" around 1997-1999 for me. I could never imagine an other awesome year for gaming like 1998 again, but 2003 and 2007 came close.

However, 1995 is a good breaking point: For me, the gaming culture changed forever since the arrival of the Playstation. And with it came a different kind of gamer. Before it, a game like Yoshis Island or Aladdin where reconized by everyone as great games. After, they simply got dismissed for beeing "kiddy"....

Yeah I wouldn't expect any other response

Unfortunately the comparison was drawn between other systems and the classic controller. Also anyone that uses analog sticks on a regular basis prefers having two.

There's no point however, as you and other users have made up your mind that the Wii remote is undoubtedly the best controller ever, and the classic controller is the best dual analog controller ever, so it's not something I care to push.

Besides, I still let people believe the Gamecube controller was God's gift to gaming...

well... you are on nintendo turf here. people wouldn't come here unless they really liked nintendo systems, so maybe you shouldn't be disillusioned when people favor nintendo's things. i wouldn't go on a 360 forum expecting to anyone to champion the wiimote...

i myself never said the pro is the best, i said i'd put it even with the 360. the 360 might be better if it weren't (like the 60%--failure--rate console itself) so cheaply built; the D pad gets the wrong direction half the time and the buttons under the joysticks wear out fast (can't stab nazi zombies anymore). it still has rumble and wireless and it's clearly a heavy duty controller otherwise, so don't say i never said anything nice about it.

and i'm willing to say the wiimote has major flaws. the lack of buttons isn't it's problem so much as poor placement of the buttons it does have; there has to be a better spot for + and -. still, in my opinion the games that require you to use more buttons are needlessly complicated; the best wii games get by swimmingly with the few accessible buttons the wiimote has. it's games like the conduit that stuff too many unnecessary functions in (like switching between 3 grenade types) that get clumsy.

button issues aside, the IR controls are amazing, the nunchuck and stick feel great, and being able to hold your hands in any position you like is extremely comfortable, which is why i put it above a normal controller even if there is still a lot of room for improvement.

As a teenager who grew up on the Gamecube and has had a Wii since 2007 (July 2007, actually) I think that past generations were better. I have more fun playing my VC collection than my Wii games most of the time. I also don't like the whole "Hardcore" idiocy that's going around stronger than ever before ("Blood and gore makes it hardcore!") along with the lack of creativity that comes with it (This is different! OH NO! HARCOREZ MUST REVOLT!). But on the same token, I don't like people dumbing down games for the casual audience when they probably won't be buying the game. I think that past games were actually more fun because they were made to just be games. Not be a repetitive cash cow like Activision's games, for teh hardcorez like a lot of games on PS360, or for casuals like the shovelware flow on Wii and soon to be Kinect and Move. As a kid, I could get on my cousin's Dreamcast, N64, PSOne, or Genesis and I'd have just as much fun on each. (And I still do) Now, that really isn't there for me. I don't know what happened, but I just can't get into the games on Wii and PS360 as much as I can on the older systems.

Personally, I think this generation spawned some of the best games.

Sometimes when I'm playing a really good retro game, I get this same feeling. I haven't played a game that has matched the excitement and wonder of Paper Mario. It looks bleak, but originality is out there... somewhere. I wish it weren't all about graphics, but I guess you have to live with the times.

I must be the only one who isn't that bothered about how the controllers feel and play. I mean analogue sticks to me feel the same on each...although I do worry about the CC sticks for being pretty small (for those with big hands).

Anyways, I couldn't really pick a gen I liked...as they all have a good and bad point to them....

Being young in the 32-Bit era, I did love the Playstation games (although many look fugly now) and I think that was because of some sense of originality in that era...but then again, I kind of appreciate that each company attempted 3D (even if it was pretty early to get it spot on).

Just my two cents.

on the subject of bias, here's a good read: http://www.gamepro.com/article/features/216012/the-psychology...

a question not really addressed there is why it's so bad this particular generation.

No and yes. While the Wii is making some great games, some are even contenders for the greatest game of all time, I don't see anything wrong with this generation. However there were a lot of gems on the GCN and they were more abundent and easier to come by (Wind Waker, Pikmin, Sunshine, etc.) I feel for the begining of the Wii's launch it was all about making money and making it fast. Even Nintendo was making some half-assed titles (DK barrel Blast, Pokemon Battle Rev) Great games came out really only once or twice a year at the Wii's beging, but now (by now I'm refering to 2009) that things finally slowed down for the Wii it appears it wasn't a mad rush for making money off clueless housewives but publishers seemed to put more effort into their games. And now this year it only is getting better. My point is that this generation isn't over yet. Right now for some it may seem the quality in Wii titles doesn't match that of the Cube the Wii is probably at its half-way point right now and after this year's E3 I'm thinking the games can only get better.

Yes

If it wasn't for the Wii I wouldn't bought another console because I agree with your POV about what they do for gaming. The Gamcube was very much on that way and they decided to hold back. And that's great for gaming (gaming=/=game industry, btw)

I think that this generation is great but not of the traditional way but because have finally start to change after 2 generations of dumbness and elitism crap.

This generation I realized how stupid and childish aregame journalists, how spoiled and unrealistic did game developers (3d parties) have became. How many damage had done Microsoft and sony to gaming and most of all, how gaming was becoming more and more niche and closed. I am glad this generation made me realize that because that just means that at the end of this one, things will start to change once and for all. And that's grate.

I feel that many of the sequels this generation were let downs.

Each generation is a little bit better, but games just aren't the same when you get old.

I think it's a great generation. The 360 hasn't offered a whole lot, but the Wii and PS3 have given us some truly classic and unique gaming experiences. Over all I'd say it's better than last gen.

This gen has been better than the N64 era, but worse than the PS2 era.

I feel like it's been pretty good actually. I probably haven't been this interested in gaming since the Super Nintendo era, to be honest.

DS, enough said

Agreed. And really, that's all there is to say. There's plenty enough good on every console, but I still wouldn't say things are as good as last gen.