• IsThisAnAI@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    60
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    8 months ago

    Rose tinted glasses. Games were buggy as hell. Many times unbeatable in certain conditions.

    • Sylvartas@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      8 months ago

      They were way less complex though. Which does help with QA coverage and generally gives less chances for things to break. But yeah, I still agree, rose tinted glasses and all that

    • Instigate@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      What percentage of all games released before download updating became the norm had game-breaking bugs? I really don’t remember that many, certainly not so many that it was considered to be a widespread issue.

      Yeah, unpatchable games tended to be buggier in general, but there’s also a sense of charm and intrigue that comes with discovering a bug or exploit and utilising it to your advantage. I still remember playing the fuck out of Morrowind and discovering that you could exploit the Corprus disease to get essentially infinite Strength and Endurance which was awesome.

      I think stating that “many” games were unbeatable is hyperbolic, but I guess that depends on your definition of “many”. If you define it as being more than five, then sure. If you define it as being a statistically significant percentage? Maybe not.

      • I Cast Fist@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        8 months ago

        I think the main problem is that people think about the “good old games” and forget the sheer amount of shovelware and shit games that existed.

        It can also be hard sometimes to know whether something was shoddy code or just bad design.