It's not "just nostalgia", modern games really are shit and here's proof: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WOQbEBcQ0bo

>>715782520 (OP)
/v/cels don't want to accept the truth

>>715782520 (OP)
good video but i already agree with you. it's all the zoomers, corpo shills, jeets and normie retards that need convincing (they won't, they're dumb)

>>715782520 (OP)
Using Skyrim as a example of good NPC pathfinding is hilarious because back in the day Skyrim's pathfinding was consider extremely janky (and it still is, but the industry caught up and even passed Skyrim level of jank).

>>715782520 (OP)
im in the old good new bad camp but so much dishonesty in this video kek
picking crysis as an example of good optimization, no one could run it back then
and so many examples of "lost tech" when the tech for the old game shown was their main marketing gimmick or what games were designed around, eg destruction in red faction or shooting lights in splinter cell or fire in fc2, those were always exceptions but not the norm in old games either
meanwhile author also dishonestly ignores that newer alternatives for such tech still exist, eg teardown for destruction but instead of showing that he'll show a random game
also shit like showing broken path finding for rats in stalker 2, this shit was just as buggy in 1 and it's still incredibly beloved

Does the author imply this level of destruction is bad? Because this partial destruction seems pretty good. And if the developers were able to implement that level of destruction surely they could make buildings completely destructible. So it's probably a gameplay choice (like providing reliable cover or something) rather than lost tech.

>>715786221
/thread

>>715782520 (OP)
>modern games really are shit
we know

>>715786221
This. It would be trivially easy to show clips of broken stealth etc. in old games and go "SEE! THEY WERE RETARDS BACK THEN!"

>>715786616
I mean there is an example of retarded AI right in the very video:
https://youtu.be/WOQbEBcQ0bo?t=455
>Skyrim as a good example of interactivity with objects
>fusrodah at the dinner table
>plate and food fly in different directions
Looks impressive, but also;
>NPCs just just continue sitting there like retards

>>715786221
>marketing gimmick
how is destructible terrain or interactivity a marketing gimmick?

This shit is like
>OMG LOOK FIRE SPREADS IN OLD FARCRY
and now surely he will compare it to the newest farcry or no nvm he compares it to some random shit like world of warcraft

>>715786221
good post

>>715787154
if you were around back then you'd remember how red faction over hyped itself based on freedom of destruction etc but its still just a generic shooter, the destruction is just tacked on
by comparison a newer game like teardown is actually designed around destruction as your main way of problem solving

>>715787154
Because the game still plays like ass but people buy it because you showed some building fall in E3 while talking how it's actually super duper hyper complex crazy thing.

>>715786012
well it's being compared to fucking palworld lmao, anything will look good there

>>715787154
Those are the things that were used to market games. I.e. destructibility of Red Faction was it's unique "killer feature" that makes the game stand out. Calling it a "marketing gimmick" might be a bad wording, but the point is — it was never an industry standard, it was always an outlier.

>>715787448
i was "there" and remember all of those games and only one you could claim was a gimmick was red faction super destructible terrain which never caught on, rest was standard stuff games of that time had, light and shadow mechanics in stealth games existed since thief 1. Friendly fire and enemy in-fighting was a thing even in doom 1993, AI in HL1 being vastly superior to modern fps is not a gimmick its just incompetence of modern game devs who do nothing but absolute minimum.

>>715786221
>picking crysis as an example of good optimization, no one could run it back then
But at least it looked sufficiently impressive, so it's hardware requirements were somewhat justifiable.
Meanwhile compare it with something like MH Wilds that looks barely better than World while running like complete garbage.

>>715787870
>light and shadow mechanics in stealth games existed since thief 1
you could also just lean against a wall and a guard passing by 3 inches from you wouldn't see you

>>715786221
No one could run Crysis on the ultra gigamax settings specifically designed to be played by PC multiple years in the future yes. The actual game on low and normal worked fine and looked as good as everything else for the same performance hit.
And as of now they've "remastered" Crysis and it now look worse, run worse AND they even cut content from the original.

>>715782520 (OP)
Where's the proof though?

while i agree games have gotten worse, some of those examples were compairing apples to oranges

Crysis didn't look good to me. Too many people who've been watching modded Crysis cicrlejerk pictures.

>>715786221
I fully agree, lots of apples and oranges comparisons here.

How is helldivers 2 in any way supposed to be like far cry 3 or red faction? At least the battlefield comparisons were excellent eye-openers for how far DICE has fallen

>cherrypick a game known for X thing
>show a random modern game not having the X thing
>"DA MODERN GAMING!"
sodomize crowbcat and his crowbycats

>google search for old video game which does X good
>google search for new video game which does X bad
>announce all old games did X good and new games do X bad

>>715782520 (OP)
>Hair comparison
I half-expected him to bring up Hitman as an example.

Modern games are purely optimized to look good in screenshots and videos, where compression hides all the temporal shit and the lack of interaction hides everything else that is missing. Everything else is ignored.

>>715788683
kek

>>715786221
Those were still mainstream games but okay, where are the "gimmick" games now? It should be easier then ever to have features like this in AAA games even if it was uncommon before. Where's the improvement?
And a blocky indie sandbox is not the same as implementing it in a major shooter franchise.

>>715789094
They're called gimmicks for a reason.

>>715786368
Anon, the entire premise of the video is flawed and is rage bait for eleventeen year old that think because one game does this one way, that's how all games should do it.
Saying games are worse because enemies in every FPS don't take cover when damaged is like saying all games are worse because they don't have donkey kong bonanza style environment damage.
Having primitive enemies, non-destruction environments, and dumb enemies for stealth is a design decision.

>modern anti-aliasing is so shit that upscaling from lower resolution looks better
only a subhuman faggots are defending modern devs

>>715787921
and it still was more superior to to whatever garbage outsourced jeets are adding in ue5 games nowadays

>>715789123
So instead it's okay for all games to have the bare minimum of gameplay features with nothing setting it apart from another live service slop?
I want "gimmicks", the game needs a reason to exist.

Wanna see lost yet superior tech both in terms of backend but also ui

All so they can focus on making cinematic wokeslop. Blame Sony.

>>715789319
>the reason for me to play this game is because the horse cock shrinks in cold
amazing

>>715789482
wait that's not Tixati

>>715787154
>destructible terrain marketing gimmick
it kind of was for flatout. the destructible environment, vehicle damage and physics (and ragdolling) was the part that make it stand out from the rest and the only thing that always got mentioned about the game

>>715787921
Now you just crouch in a knee-high grass for total invisibility.

>>715789823
2 identical games, one where horsecock shrinks and one where it doesn't the first is strictly superior

OLD GOOD

NEW BAD

>>715790437
Thi but ironically

>>715790437
This but ironically

>>715786221
>this shit was just as buggy in 1 and it's still incredibly beloved
The difference is that the first game came out twenty years ago. They didn't have the technical knowhow still don't nor did they have what we have in current year. There's zero excuse for any game to still contain bugs that can be solved with the resources that people have available to them. Especially if you playtest.

Are you capable of understanding nuance?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cf-oVQJn12g

You can take just about any game from the 2000's, compare it to its modern equivalent, and it's basically guaranteed that the older game will have more attention to detail

>>715782520 (OP)
eh, while i do generally agree with the sentiment that modern devs are dogshit compared to even like 10-15 years ago, i have to say that some of the examples here are a bit poor

helldivers/palworld are more or less indie games
skyrim is not an example of a good game
gt not having car damage is a choice by pd
shooting out light sources in a stealth game makes more sense than in some other games since its part of the gameplay
red factions whole gimmick is destruction
hydrophobias whole gimmick is water
not having bc is a licensing issue
silent hill 2 demake in the hope section when it's worse in every regard, including the mirrors

a better comparison is by the same developers of old and new titles like with bethesda/ubisoft/rockstar

>>715782520 (OP)
Old devs built scenarios
New devs just run simulations

>>715786221
>no one could run crysis
ah yeah, good that you talk about hearsay because this was never true.
That game run on most systems on mid settings and still looked fantastic. In fact its one of the best looking Switch1 games. Despite not being designed for S1.

Yes the video makes dishonest comparisons, but its not like you can make honest comparisons. There is no justifications for mirrors or Far Cry and BF downgrading their physics engine. Or a literal remaster like RE4 downgrading its intractability.

Physics and intractability completely gets sacrificed for things that exclusively good in photo mode and on trailers. Just make everything pre-rendered and scripted. Surely the dumb cattle won't notice the difference.
When was the last time you were astonished by any new tech in the last 5 years. (unfortunately Red Dead 2 is from 2019)

>>715786221
rare good post

>>715788667
>>715788672
So true sisters!! Who cares about problematic things such as attention to detail. How'd you enjoy Avowed?

>>715792904
>gt not having car damage
Yeah, it's probably the dumbest example of the bunch. Just look at Wreckfest if you wanted car damage. And if it's too old for the timeline then Wreckfest 2 is currently in EA.

>>715793254
>aggro npcs
>have to reload a save or fail 20 different quests after killing the entire town
what a great feature

>>715786221
>, no one could run it back then
Retarded and disingenuous lies
I could run Crysis on a 1.6 GHz processor with 768 MB ram and 64 MB vram on my 2001 pc
The game ran at sub 10 fps on the lowest settings, but it ran

>>715786221
Technically Crysis 1 still is poorly optimized, perhaps even more so now. it banked and future proofed itself for a CPU future than never came since multicore became the norm instead of one jacked up super core.
We can just brute force it on pretty much everything now.

>>715792904
Palworld is around A and Helldivers AA production value.
speaking in terms of team sizes those might be close to DS2 and Skyrim respectively. Still pretty silly to use Palworld as an example for pathfinding, the game isn't even out yet.
>not an example of a good game
not the point
>GT not having car damage is a choice
the choice gay because, muh car licenses contracts. Pkm company might tell you it was a choice to make their game ugly
>red factions whole gimick
so was Crackdown 3 and it sucked. Could also use examples like Crysis, Mercenaries, HL2, Bad Company 2
>a better comparison is by the same devs
we already have videos like this

remember how hard people cum their pants over TOTK when most of these physics is literally just gmod tier. Horizon looks great but the environment is completely static. Fake loading screens in games like FF or Monster Hunter. Everyone was making their own engine back in the day, modern games, esp. UE5 games are more like elaborate modding.

>>715786221
Most of these details weren't marketed at all, retard. They're things you'd come across naturally while playing the game. Far Cry 2 didn't have to make a big deal about the fire mechanics, it just came as expected that games would be getting more and more detailed as technology progressed, because devs were passionate. Sometime around the mid to late 2010's this stopped being the case

Fuck off with this apologist shite, you and every retard that replied ''wow so le true!!''

>>715793628
>it's a good thing they removed any kind of physics interaction, AI reactions, or dynamic aspects whatsoever because the old game was less stable
>the modern equivalent like starfield is still buggy shit anyway while lacking all that
Man, people defending the current state of games is pretty grim

>>715793747
Based poorfag

>>715782520 (OP)
>different studios
>different engines
>different devs

In the end its up to the devs to decide what to focus on.
Some studios like to focus on details like Rockstar since the have a long dev cycle and devs can fuck around doing stuff.

Other are like Bethesda, a barebone core dev team with nepotims management and some of the worst design in the industry.

But there real problem is that there is no passing of knowlage, one studio dosnt share information with another, and one dev dosnt with the next.
When a game dev in a studio who made a feature quits ... thats it, the knowlage how to do it is lost for ever, and the next guy will have to figure it out form scratch.
So a lot of this is in fact "lost technology", but thats just the nature of the industry.

>>715795798
MGS V was actually full of little technical details related to the open world stealth that were cool and not done in other games, like all of the MGS games have their share of,it would have been harder to pull off what is happening in your picture properly in an open world environment than in a linear game. Just like how MGS 2 has the extremely interactive indoor environments and MGS 3 does not, but it replaces it with all of the details in it's outdoor jungle setting.

>>715786221
The rare 3 digit IQ post

>2013 is now 'the good ol' days'

>>715782520 (OP)
remove this right now bloody benchod bitch!!

>>715786221
/thread
video is just cherry picked shit and very low hanging fruits like nu stalker and shitiana jones. no different than your average crowbat slop.

>>715794537
>minimum settings 6800 GT (gpu from 2004)
>recommended settings was a core 2 duo cpu
multi threading was bugged and fixed with a patch

you zoomer trannies really need to do your homework properly

>people losing their minds at how Sam can get covered in sand and then in washes off in water
>Dark Souls III had this with blood
>Bloodeborne had clothing specific shading so that getting splashed in blood and then taking your mask off revealed a clean face anywhere the mask was covering

>>715782520 (OP)
Now post a video you made. You can't, because you're a phoneposter who doesn't play games.

>>715794560
>the choice gay because, muh car licenses contracts
As you've said yourself above — not the point. The point is — the implication that "muh car damage model is a lost tech" is wrong.

>>715782520 (OP)
is this the new crowbcat?

>>715787154
>how is destructible terrain or interactivity a marketing gimmick?

Interactivity has been once since at least Duke Nukem 3d (1996).

>>715803204
Interactivity? In my videogames? I only want linear movie-games where everything is hardcoded.

>>715787870
>light and shadow mechanics in stealth games existed since thief 1.

Ranger X on Genesis had light and shadow mechanics. On stage 2 light beams defended you against the flying sperms (which otherwise took an unearthly amount of damage and you could spawn dozens), and stage 5 had literal stealth mechanics (running into arc lights created a city wide alarm and you got swarmed by guard bots).

That was in... 1992 or 1993.

>>715788158
Crysis ran like shit cause the devs expected CPUs to hit 10GHz and insane single core IPC and made the game around that spec. This did not happen and the industry gravitated towards multiple cores instead, so nothing could run the game maxed out. I wonder if current day 9800x3d would be up to the task though, it runs at 5GHz and has at least twice the IPC of cuo 2 duos.

>>715788351
Crysis looked good because of insane foliage and interactive damage to them, the water effects, and the crazy physics engine that tied everything together. Not because of the textures on a single rooster.

You could do shit like cut a path in the jungle with a machinegun and have crazy light beams.
Though I remember the E3 tech demonstration looking better than the final game, since they made the lightning duller.

>>715782520 (OP)
Right looks objectively better
Not watching your talking head slop
Get a fucking life and some real friends

>>715789482
>>715789923
lmao, I thought that was WinMX at first (Tixati has a UI pretty close to WinMX).

>>715782520 (OP)
the attention to detail in perfect dark is shocking for a 32MB game on a system with 8MBs or RAM

>>715804007
No its not, it runs at 320x240, plenty of space to utilize textures

>the proof is some nobody using one of the shit template memes nu4chan uses because creating OC is dead making a clickbait video
>the nobody is OP
>yet another advertisement thread

>>715786221
You are now aware that "optimized" means "my budget system built between 2013 and 2016 can run it well".

>>715802180
I don't think anyone actually believes old engine tricks are actually lost tech.
Most people just don't bother with engine development anymore and use what's available and engine designers aren't gamedevs anymore so generic solutions and optimizations that work for everything are preferred (eg. rtx, upscaling).
It's both impressive what a single developer now can do, just firing up UE5, using some premade blueprints and assets, but those are just very generic solutions.
This is exactly were those games lack soul. It's like paint by numbers.

>>715790226
Oh you like 'em knee-highs...

>>715804716
I feel compelled to play the nintendo gamecube due to the implications of this image

>>715805062
Over the knee are even better but this is fine too.

>>715782520 (OP)
Idiotic cherry-picking. As one example, he compares F.E.A.R. to modern call of duty, but modern call of duty is as bad as the first call of duty games. This is same for every example from his video. He takes the best from the past and compares with the worst of today, ignoring that the worst franchises of today started years ago and were always shit

>>715787921
If you sneak around irl, sometimes that's the case indeed.

>>715789094
>but okay, where are the "gimmick" games now
>blocky indie sandbox doesn't count
The Finals came out as a big new game touting the destruction gimmick, pushing it farther than it's ever gone before, while not sticking to the same old tired gamemodes that every other shooter have had nor falling into the other trends the genre has currently been steeped in

And basically everyone dropped it in the first few months, because it turns out, making a fancy new innovative game that breaks the mould means that it'll feel alien and frustrating to most players.

>>715793101
>In fact its one of the best looking Switch1 games. Despite not being designed for S1.
The Switch 1 version is the trimmed down and shitty looking 360 port, you absolute dolt

>>715782520 (OP)
>left
>gun is made out of metal
>right
>gun is made out of plastic

This is a game from 2025. Do people not see how much worse games look now?

>>715792541
>Then
>Team knocks out a finalized model in a couple weeks since it's only like 6000 triangles
>a lot of time to add a bunch of extra shit for the sake of world interactivity for fun, with low performance cost
>Now
>Team has five daily meetings, seven quality checks, nonstop tweaking for years just to make the overly complex 1,000,000 triangle model with ninety shaders and eight middleware gimmicks look good in a neutral pose
>no time to add fun shit, all processing power goes to just rendering the models and not having whatever new Nvidia gimmick not crash

>>715782520 (OP)
This video is incredibly disingenuous so I disliked it and closed it after two minutes.

>>715786221
>picking crysis as an example of good optimization, no one could run it back then
Most people could run Crysis when it came out what the fuck are you talking about? The thing people couldn't do with Crysis is run it on ultra with everything maxed out. It IS an extremely optimized game.

>>715786221
>picking crysis as an example of good optimization, no one could run it back then
why lie? I've played it on 2005 GPUs and it was playable at low settings

AAA back then
>devs were allowed to experiment
>had to make something new and original to sell copies
>games limited to discs, optimization was a priority

AAA now
>original ideas not allowed, keep the gameplay simple
>put all points into grafix
>all games are +100 gig and has zero optimization
>because of unlimited downloads and you can always patch it later

>>715786221
>picking crysis as an example of good optimization, no one could run it back then
back then crysis was far ahead of the other games in terms of interactivity and physics combined with the graphix and openess package
these days you just get games that run like shit without actually evolving any of the gameplay, just superficial graphics that arguably look worse
teardown is good destruction but it doesnt run at absolute dogshit levels like new games
> this shit was just as buggy in 1 and it's still incredibly beloved
it was infinitely more rational and less retarded looking by a mile
it looked nice and natural for some degree. In stalker 2 you have a bunch of mutants going towards you in a straight line that INSTANTLY all pivot into the same direction running away if you jump on top of a slightly tall obstacle. Enemies dont even run away in fear if you kill their friends, fleshes wont only attack you if youre fucked up and surrounded, everything just walks forward at you

>>715808038
>low settings
Why even play a game?

I "got scammed" into buying a Retrotink recently, and I love it. Been playing a lot of PS2. I love how these games look. Focused. Clean. Just beautiful.

>>715807089

>>715789130
You don't understand, this shmup is bad the enemies have no concept of preservation. They just fly right at you and shoot. It's 2025. We should expect more.

>You can steal cars in GTA you can't steal cars in Mindseye. Mindseye bad. For this reason.

Gamers always hyperfocus on the most pointless fucking shit and seem to ironically have no concept of game design despite playing them all the fucking time.

>>715796859
They didn't remove shit, they didn't bother with such useless crap in the first place. Avowed doesn't run on Gamebryo.
And I couldn't care less about friendly NPCs in a major hub not reacting to me trying to kill them, that's genuinely thousands times better than accidentally hitting them and having to reload a save like in Oblivion or Skyrim and about the same as not being able to equip or use a weapon at all.

>>715807089
I fucking hate engines with renderers like Unreal's

>>715809289
Which model? I'm tempted to get the 5x for my PS2

>>715809956
>Gamers always hyperfocus on the most pointless fucking shit

Driving random cars in a open world game marketing was relating to gta 6?

Lol, thats a basic feature

>>715782520 (OP)
Cherrypicking: The video

>>715810379
>seriously responding to my hyperbolic 144p shot
This is the action of a poorfag.

>>715812046
5 Epic Games Store Shillings have been deposited to your account