Was movement in old games faster?

Or is it merely that those games run faster on today's computers but had average movement speeds in those days?

It goes without saying that Doom is faster than Far Cry, which is faster than the latest pseudo-movie cinematic shooters. But how much of that speed difference comes from playing these games on a faster computer today and how much of it comes from the more arcade-y style of those games?

Other than that, were most or all games from the 1990s much faster paced? Or were there equally slow games back then as late 2000s and 2010s game? Today we have games with sequences where running is disabled, or features involving fatigue setting in if you are running, or other means to slow down the player. But were there games in the 1980s or early 1990s which also had the same features?

 

Yeah, I'm pretty sure all old shooters used timers, making their speed independent of the machine you're running it on.

Then again old shooters had almost no detail and the engine limitations resulted in a geometry that was often fucked in head. I wouldn't want to go back there.

 

Older shooters are definitely "faster". The new shooters tend to lean more towards "realism", and therefore, are less prominent in tactlcs like "bunny-hopping" and people who run fast enough to set world records while carrying full gear.

This can be objectively determined simply by measuring the movement rate of characters in terms of character lengths per second.

 

They were faster paced. For full cinematic effect modern "realistic" shooters require you to walk at the pace of a disabled 80 year old who can't sprint more than 20 meters without getting a heart attack.

 

Technology, back then, didn't allow you to program realistic movement (among other things) so everything was unrealistically better.

 

Oh look! Another pointless Wyrmlord thread.

 

A lot of other games (not necessarily FPSes) were much slower though, especially when it comes to battle speed, menus, movement and the like.

 

Yeah I played WC1 a few months ago. That game is slow as hell. Not to mention you could only control 4 units at once. I died on the third level. I can't believe I beat it when it was new.

 

They've gotten all cinematic & shit and it obviously requires about 2 seconds to aim with one of them console sticks and about 10 to be able to turn around, so they introduced chest-high walls and quicktime-events and stuff like that to give them that epic/awesome feeling of something happening while they're turning and aiming.

 

Are you a fucking idiot (Wyrmlord)

And why the fuck are the rest of you replying to this idiotic shit

Actually everyone in this thread is a fucking moron and I'm the worst since I should know better than to bump this sort of garbage

 

Actually no on second thoughs HHR is the worst, as he always is, sorry me

 

It seems that Wyrmlord is going through all those RPG/action games tropes and posting a thread about every one of them (collecting shit, slower speed, crafting shit, etc). The thread invariably starts with an inane question. I don't know why he's doing that. Problably for upping his posting ratio in non-GD forums.

I can just picture him having a gigantic checklist with all those tropes and marking the ones that he post about.

I find this pattern pretty annoying, but sometimes there's a good thread among the inaneness.

 

I would like to add that this reminds me a lot of the "This vs That, Which one is better and why? Discuss!" threads that Andharia loved to make.

 

It really depends. I'd say certain genres (racing, platforming, action, RPGs) have gotten faster both in gameplay and interface, while shooters and, arguably, strategy games have slowed down. Shooters in particular have had to become slower both to appeal to mainstream gamers and to work properly with analogue sticks. I certainly don't buy that you can't have a fun and engaging console shooter (the original Halo is well designed and works very well within its limitations, for instance), but there is simply no way you can do Doom or Quake on the Xbox at full speed and have it be truly playable.

 

Quake was ADHD fast. I'm glad that trope changed.

 

Why are you guys concerned more with the personality behind posts rather than the posts themselves? Isn't this a place for discussing stuff, rather than discussing people who discuss stuff?

It's so meta. If we keep up this cycle, then first we talk about people who discuss stuff, then we talk about discussions on people who discus stuff, and then we talk about how much we talk about how we talk about discussions on people who discus stuff. THAT is the truly inane circle.

 

hey guys what's the deal with explosives barrels always being red why can't they be another color

 

Weren't they green in doom

 

Wyrmlord do you have a random topic generator?

The 'fastest' games I can remember were arcade games like Centipede, Pac-Man, and later games like Street Fighter, etc. At the higher levels the classic old arcade games required uber muscle memory and reaction time.

Some Nintendo games like Gradius were very twitch at high levels also.

HL1 Counter-Strike < 1.5 (NOT Source) didn't impose any kind of jump or turn lag, so in a low-ping match you had to be extremely fast to survive against good players. In some scenarios the same was true of TFC, nade jumping for cap required speed and timing.

 

Well basically Wyrmlord you post shit threads and so people give you shit for it. See for example the premise of this thread is something you could have found out in roughly five minutes if you'd bothered to look.


Oh fuck I'm doing it again

 

I remember One Must Fall 2097 went so fast as the difficulty and pilot skill increased, that I had to set the game speed to minimum to actually see anything.

 

Games today are actually at the same speed as they used to be, Wyrmie. It's just that you drink so much coke now that your heightened blood sugar levels makes time seem slower to you.