A weird thing about video game gratification
None of this has anything to do with Baldur's Gate, or necessarily any D&D game. It's just something odd that I've noticed and cannot quite put to words: for a reason or another, in spite of their graphics getting closer to reality and them managing to bring in better music and effects, playing and finishing the modern video games, dealing with their challenges, doesn't feel all that... great. I mean, it didn't always did even with the older ones, it's just... okay, let me put up an example, the thing that brought up this discussion in the first place.
Consider Skyrim, a game all about murdering dragons. The final climactic battle with the dragon-boss Alduin is one of truly epic scale: you are fighting in the literal Valhalla, in company of some of the mightiest heroes who ever lived in the history of that setting, while mighty storms rage in the background and he's flying around and being this huge jerk. He has been feasting on the souls of the dead, caused a lot of mayhem in the world of the living, and generally raised the stakes pretty high and made it quite a personal deal to finally take care of him. And when you do, it causes one final end speech, some more special effects, and the rest of the living dragons circling around you and declaring you Awesome. And yet, it was all sort of "Meh" for me... just really couldn't get into it.
Now, let's compare this to a game no less than a whole quarter of a century older, called Dungeon Master. It was a game I picked up only about a week ago (so there's no nostalgia goggles involved) and finished earlier today - and it too had a dragon. The battle was rather clumsy, clunky, everything moving in perfect squares and turning in ninety degrees, with very simple sound effects and no music at all. The dragon had very little in terms of attack animations, and you couldn't even see your own characters attacking, just seeing the results in damage numbers. Plot-wise he was of absolutely no consequence, with even a zero mention or build-up of him being there at all until you actually meet him. Once he dies, there are no fanfares or declarations or anything at all really: he just disappears unceremoniously in a brief puff of smoke. But in spite of all this, the battle felt thousand times more epic than the one in Skyrim, I was incredibly tense the entire time, and cheered out loud when I finally brought him down.
There are other examples, but this is obviously the one that brought up on top of it all. I can't name a single game from this side of the millennium that would have given me such vibes as the dragon battle above - really, not too many older ones either, but regardless.
The question stands: how can an ancient game with poor graphics, little sound, zero music, no context, no speeches, no special effects, no build-up, no nothing at all, make its combat so much more intense than a present-day game that's got all of those things pretty well down?
Consider Skyrim, a game all about murdering dragons. The final climactic battle with the dragon-boss Alduin is one of truly epic scale: you are fighting in the literal Valhalla, in company of some of the mightiest heroes who ever lived in the history of that setting, while mighty storms rage in the background and he's flying around and being this huge jerk. He has been feasting on the souls of the dead, caused a lot of mayhem in the world of the living, and generally raised the stakes pretty high and made it quite a personal deal to finally take care of him. And when you do, it causes one final end speech, some more special effects, and the rest of the living dragons circling around you and declaring you Awesome. And yet, it was all sort of "Meh" for me... just really couldn't get into it.
Now, let's compare this to a game no less than a whole quarter of a century older, called Dungeon Master. It was a game I picked up only about a week ago (so there's no nostalgia goggles involved) and finished earlier today - and it too had a dragon. The battle was rather clumsy, clunky, everything moving in perfect squares and turning in ninety degrees, with very simple sound effects and no music at all. The dragon had very little in terms of attack animations, and you couldn't even see your own characters attacking, just seeing the results in damage numbers. Plot-wise he was of absolutely no consequence, with even a zero mention or build-up of him being there at all until you actually meet him. Once he dies, there are no fanfares or declarations or anything at all really: he just disappears unceremoniously in a brief puff of smoke. But in spite of all this, the battle felt thousand times more epic than the one in Skyrim, I was incredibly tense the entire time, and cheered out loud when I finally brought him down.
There are other examples, but this is obviously the one that brought up on top of it all. I can't name a single game from this side of the millennium that would have given me such vibes as the dragon battle above - really, not too many older ones either, but regardless.
The question stands: how can an ancient game with poor graphics, little sound, zero music, no context, no speeches, no special effects, no build-up, no nothing at all, make its combat so much more intense than a present-day game that's got all of those things pretty well down?
6
Comments
But then again I do not think the old game you refer is outdated since at that time they used best available graphic and sound and so on.
In conclusion what I meant to say is I agree with you @Chow and what makes a good game is not what it looks but content itself.
Good to see I am not the only one feel that way about some of recent games
Imagination.
The fact is nowadays the characters seem to lack any development. You don't meet Mr. Smith the tavern keeper, you meet tavern keeper #321, same personality, different face.
This lack of development is actually what put me off Skyrim. I just couldn't care enough about my character or any of the NPCs to go on playing. In a way Skyrim is too huge for its own good.
Also there is a severe dumbing down of games. You no longer get puzzles like we had in Eye of the Beholder, for instance, that made you stop and think and sometimes made you realize you'd have to go back several dungeon levels to solve. All you get are silly puzzles you can solve by trial and error in 2 seconds...
What really put me off was the obvious attempt to appeal to trends and neglecting logic. Sure, the weeaboo-ish katana-swinging new faction was probably a big hit, but it just made no sense to introduce them instead of the title-giving faction. Or changing creatures for fanservice reasons - i.e. necromancers used to have a scythe wielding grim reaper; then it was a D cup drider in a bra, what the hell?
Or as a different example, without the prequel-sequel thing - Star Trek Online... Now, Star Trek has always been a very optimistic scifi vision; it was about cooperation, peaceful co exsistance and exploration. I simply didn't understand why a game about that would not have ANY diplomacy or exploration, and really every single mission was about blowing stuff up. Sure, it looks "cool", but it makes no sense for this franchise. It was "Star Trek is cool because new movie" + "blowing stuff up is cool because it always was", so let's put it together and it has to be double-cool. Except not.
I notice that in many newer games - it's all about what is currently the big popular thing, and who cares if it makes sense. In older games, there was more logic, more immersion and generally more believable universes/lore. Today, many games just slap together all the "cool" things, but the outcome isn't a "cool" universe, it's a flea market of randomness.
"Back in the day" (I feel old typing that), you were a hero who had to kill a dragon to save the kingdom, that simple. Today, you are a badass, brooding, dark past, snark-machine anti-hero who has to kill a dragon who is also your twin brother, a lich god, king of the moon and holds the secrets to the universe. It's too much "cool" with no reason behind it.
I have been struggling with the exact same thoughts myself.
Id like to make a comparison on Blizzard games: I just finished Heart of the swarm and was really underwhelmed, and the story meant really little to me. It was faily entertaining, but also immediatly forgettable.
Now SC1 had an epic singleplayer campaign and I really started to care about the characters, I was really looking forward to Hots. Increased emphasis on multiplayer nonwithstanding they have 10000x more money to spend on the game, so its hard to find out why I feel like that. Similar things can be said about Diablo 1/2 and 3; epic story and real feeling of achievment is translated to "meh", and easily forgetable plot.
And it is so weird, because they have more money, I think that the argument about story being more important in older games becasue they hadnt good graphics is good, but maybe too simple. They have far more money to use on creative writers and all that. And it is a trend (skyrim, heroes of might and magic, blizzard etc).
So differences between old and new games:
-Simpler (everyone can complete it)
-Better graphics
-Easier to learn
-Forgettable story
Dunno, maybe what sells in the capitalistic economy? X)
I might also point out that music goes a long way to encouraging an emotive response, but that's getting into really subjective territory. Suffice it to say that the improvement of music technology in games is another area where it could make for a better experience but does not necessarily do so.
It is what I meant with imagination. When playing baldur's gate, you can imagine what your character is sounding like or doing with every choice on the screen. You as the player fill in that depth as though you are reading a book, where as with fully voiced games, the game takes that away from you and are left with what was budgeted for face rendering and voice acting.
Compare now to Baldur's Gate 2. Encountering a dragon is a unique and rare experience and you quickly understand that they are fearful creatures far above your standing in terms of power, intelligence and cunning. Certain conversations with NPCs before those dragons even discourage you from fighting them because they assume you will not defeat them! After all, killing a dragon for a very first time in Baldur's Gate 2 requires a great degree of trial and error, preparation and execution (unless you followed some game guide to the letter). Defeating a particular red dragon after so many attempts overflowed me with a great sense of accomplishment that I haven't experienced in years.
Let me elaborate. I played Dragon Age:Origins all the way through exactly one time. I thought the character interaction and development was just as good as in BG. I restarted several times to get my PC just right, and to try several different party combos, getting to know all the NPC's rather intimately. I was in awe of the characterization, the story resolutions on the different maps (one that sticks out to me is the elf map with Tim Russ/Tuvok vs. the werewolves and the spirit of nature), and the choices at the end. (I chose to let Morrigan and Alistair go at it and make a dragon baby, in order to save all our lives.)
But - the combat. After learning a few tricks, it was all, well... easy. Even with the difficulty slider on nightmare. Every battle, from groups of Darkspawn grunts, to the final battles of the game with the supposedly most powerful creatures, traitors, and Darkspawn bosses, were, ... well, easy. Mana Clash against the mages, Crushing Prison, Crushing Prison, Sleep, Nightmare, Horror - battle basically over.
I tried to replay DA:O a while back. I got through about the first one third of the game, and then, just, well,... lost interest. I went right back to playing BG and NWN, along with some ARPG's that I like for just the mindless hack-n-slash and exploration of them.
I never could finish Skyrim - I restarted it two or three times with different character builds, and always lost interest after the first dungeon or two, (all the same - there's another factor for you - variety of challenges), and the first dragon fight or two (easy to beat, and totally underwhelming opponents, even on "hard" difficulty.)
But, oh, Lord, in BG, and in Might and Magic (both the rpg's and the strategy HOMMs)! Every battle is different. Every battle has different conditions and different obstacles. The possibility of death at every turn makes you feel FEAR, as though you're watching a horror movie, although one in which you are not powerless to defend yourself. You need TACTICS. You need KNOWLEDGE of the kinds of threats you will face.
I remember the very first time I played BG and encountered Tarnesh, back in 1998 or whatever year that was. I thought I was just following the linear, suggested path to head straight to the FAI. Mirror Image, Horror, Magic Missiles, Imoen and I were dead. I remember being angry at it - wtf? How are you supposed to deal with this? This isn't fair! I think I had to reload a dozen times, until I got lucky dicerolls. But when that bastard finally fell, I was whooping and yelling in jubilation, there, alone in my room with my computer.
And, ooooo, my first dragon battle. Dozens of reloads. More anger at how unfair it was. Sometimes, I had to just take a break from playing the game, and play something else, or just do something besides play computer games. But when that first dragon finally fell - what a feeling of triumph! Those who have never beat a tough game scenario just can't comprehend it.
The same goes for all the HommI and HommII scenarios I thought I was just NEVER going to beat, no matter what I tried. I worked on the HommI campaign for MONTHS. I just *could* not get past the barbarian's map! I *finally* beat it by playing a warlock, getting black dragons coming (which was a miracle to accomplish), and using Armageddon spells. I've only beat that map one time in my entire life. I've only beat the HommII campaign one time in my entire life, after which I also felt like I had worked a miracle.
Ah, Might and Magic VI! I will replay it at least once a year from now 'til my life ends. I still remember the first time I went into the old temple in New Sorpigal, and to the caves underneath, filled with spiders and snakes and bats... and I got lost there! The mini-map was no help, as the place was VAST, and completely three dimensional, with winding passage after winding passage curving over and under each other. I remember vividly the feeling of hopelessness when I tried to retreat out of there, poisoned and diseased, no magic left, all four of us about to die; and I took a wrong turn and ran straight into a MOB of dozens of spiders, bats, and snakes! DEATH. I had to go outside and go jogging to get my courage back up to go back inside and reload to try again.
Oooo, and the Temple of Baa in the Castle Ironfist area - fight until you're almost ready to drop, finally win your way to the altar after killing the priests, being blasted with lightning and fire all the way... claim the altar in triumph... and watch as 200 (that is NOT an exxageration) skeletons spawn out of thin air, surrounding you, blocking your retreat..! Now THAT is an rpg game!
To this day, I have trouble beating ToB. I've only ever beaten it once. I get into trouble starting with the Reaver in the Pocket Plane battles, and the final dragon fights still scare me to think about.
All that mystery, all that great art, all those branching possibilities - I'm *still* learning things about BG that I've never seen before.
They truly just do not make games like that anymore. If you can point me to one, I will buy it!
At the same time, I really enjoy games with strong characterization, because they draw characters I never would have imagined on my own. I suppose you could make a similar observation about graphics. The spectacles you imagine in your head are all well and good, but a game like Shadow of the Colossus can show you something you wouldn't have imagined on your own.
I mean, in BG, you can go 1 tank, 3 tanks, 2 tanks. Heavy rogue, not so heavy rogue. Pretty much whatever. DA is far narrower, while ME is essentially Soldier, Biotic, Tech - one each (or a hybrid halfsie). That is what I mean by 'same, all the way to the end'. Not that the game isn't different (heck, the whole BG thing is the same every time you play it). The experience is essentially the same and changes little as you go in the more modern games I've played. High level of quality/production, but also high level of redundancy.
I hope that explains what I meant a little better. The 6 story thing was more a compliment for the origins part of DA than an expectation for other games to follow suit.