Historical Revisionism in Video Game and it's consequences have been a disaster for the human race.

[Inec0rn]

Well, you are preaching to the choir. I've always thought that. But go back a page or so, and a couple of people were holding the Amiga port of UFO: Enemy Unknown up as an example of "a console running X-Com".

I think the point was it was a non-IBM PC compatible running X-Com.

Anyway let's do a good exercise in historical clarity.

When would you (or anyone else here) say that games for IBM PC compatibles reached rough technical parity in audio-visual output with games for the "16-bit" consoles?

Of the top of my head, I would guess 1993.

I can't think of anything on IBM PC compatibles that could match Thunderforce 4 or Axelay in 1992

1993 is probably a bit late, i would say at least 91. Eye of the beholder 1 2 and 3, Alone in the Dark, Hillsfar, Battle Isle. There were some decent games on the platform at that point.

All these games had better versions on Amiga though, and there are some interesting games on Amiga that show how capable it was. I find this game "Hunter" an interesting one, given its 3d, has an openworld, allows you to ride bikes, fly helicopters, boats, cars, get and RPG launcher etc. all that shit on the Amiga in 1991.

 

[Nutmeg]

Late 1992 (or just 1993) is also when I would say IBM PC compatible games overtook Amiga games (again, roughly, on a purely audio visual basis of the games themselves, not the capabilities of the hardware).

 

[Grauken]

But this isn't so for tactics games during the same time period, where for example the Battle Isle games for PC were downstream of Nectaris, and there was nothing on PC quite like Fire Emblem or Super Robot Wars (along with many lesser known titles like Jyutei Senki). If we extend it to Japan vs America, rather than PC vs console, then we can also add that Panzer General was downstream of Daisenryaku.

A very fine example of revisionism or is it favouritism? Both Nectaris and Daisenryaku were utterly inconsequential to PC gaming, had zero impact and are mostly forgotten

 

[Falksi]

What are the consequences of revisionism in video games, as covered in this thread?

My friends and I talk a lot about "revisionism", but always in relation to culture. Transgirl video essayists trying to change and rewrite the truths of how people felt about and interpreted things, what people were doing and cared about that produced certain cultural moments. THAT is dangerous historical revisionism. Psychotic trannies being allowed to rewrite moments in cultural history and attribute things to false sources, give credit where it doesn't belong, puff up bad fake forces while burying real ones. I don't see how bald gen-x guys arguing over whether the amiga or commodore had more gigaflops matters by comparison.

And apparently there's a whole world of youtube I've never noticed of anemic looking oomerwoomerjoomers lying about consoles and games they've never played saying blatantly wrong shit like that everyone was a massive 'Croc' fan in 1999. I don't really see how that substantially matters in any way connected to anything else.

And it's so far behind us now but OP can't seem to decide if he's mad at revisionism or re-appraisal.

Consequences are we get more shit games instead of good ones, as devs copy paste game ideas from games which weren't all that, but which the popular, mainstream, drongo buck tells them were.

I mean, look at the garbage open-world craze of the past 10-15 years. Some early Bethesda games were way better to explore, and games like Escape From The Pit and Gothic 2 were structured superbly. But what's on that list instead? Assassins Creed and Skyrim. So now devs look to the latter 2 games to draw inspiration from, and we just get more slop with open worlds not worth bothering with.

Another more modern example are games like Nioh 1 & 2 which have great 3D combat, but which far fewer devs and studios are paying attention to or learning lessons from because they're all focused on Elden Ring. ER's a great game. but Nioh's actual combat is flat out better. But what's gonna get a spot in IGNs "greatest games ever!" in 5-10 years time? Elden Ring of course, and that's what devs will copy the combat from instead of Nioh in future years.

 

[Nutmeg]

But this isn't so for tactics games during the same time period, where for example the Battle Isle games for PC were downstream of Nectaris, and there was nothing on PC quite like Fire Emblem or Super Robot Wars (along with many lesser known titles like Jyutei Senki). If we extend it to Japan vs America, rather than PC vs console, then we can also add that Panzer General was downstream of Daisenryaku.

A very fine example of revisionism or is it favouritism? Both Nectaris and Daisenryaku were utterly inconsequential to PC gaming, had zero impact and are mostly forgotten

Are you saying Battle Isle isn't a Nectaris clone?

 

[GamerCat_]

Consequences are we get more shit games instead of good ones, as devs copy paste game ideas from games which weren't all that, but which the popular, mainstream, drongo buck tells them were.

I mean, look at the garbage open-world craze of the past 10-15 years. Some early Bethesda games were way better to explore, and games like Escape From The Pit and Gothic 2 were structured superbly. But what's on that list instead? Assassins Creed and Skyrim. So now devs look to the latter 2 games to draw inspiration from, and we just get more slop with open worlds not worth bothering with.

Another more modern example are games like Nioh 1 & 2 which have great 3D combat, but which far fewer devs and studios are paying attention to or learning lessons from because they're all focused on Elden Ring. ER's a great game. but Nioh's actual combat is flat out better. But what's gonna get a spot in IGNs "greatest games ever!" in 5-10 years time? Elden Ring of course, and that's what devs will copy the combat from instead of Nioh in future years.

Are you describing a consequence of historical narratives, or of shit taste and ignorance?

I can't imagine a case in which someone sets out to and completely develops an entire game, based on the reputation of something in the past that they haven't played or tried to appreciate themselves. What's happening? Someone wants to make a 3D platformer in abstract, they google "history of 3D platformers", and Scott the Woz tells them Croc was the most beloved N64 platformer so they look up that game on youtube and spend years of their life making a Crocbornevanialike?

Is this how historical revisionism hurts the industry?

I know that sounds silly, so why don't you give me an actual case so I can see what's really happening.

 

[Grauken]

But this isn't so for tactics games during the same time period, where for example the Battle Isle games for PC were downstream of Nectaris, and there was nothing on PC quite like Fire Emblem or Super Robot Wars (along with many lesser known titles like Jyutei Senki). If we extend it to Japan vs America, rather than PC vs console, then we can also add that Panzer General was downstream of Daisenryaku.

A very fine example of revisionism or is it favouritism? Both Nectaris and Daisenryaku were utterly inconsequential to PC gaming, had zero impact and are mostly forgotten

Are you saying Battle Isle isn't a Nectaris clone?

That like asking wasn't Resident Evil an Alone in the Dark clone?

 

[Nutmeg]

That like asking wasn't Resident Evil an Alone in the Dark clone?

And what would be wrong in asking that? Resident Evil is considered to be the product of Sweet Home and Alone in the Dark and that seems plausible enough to me.

In the same way, Panzer General is definitely influenced by Daisenryaku, and Battle Isle is almost a straight up clone of Nectaris.

And Panzer General was not "inconsequntial" for PC gaming, and besides Daisenryaku itself is a PC game (re-read my original post to see why I am mentioning it at all).

More consequential early console to PC direction of influence? Herzog Zwei influencing Dune 2 and Z. You can add Rambo 3 as an influence to Command and Conquer.

More consequential Japanese PC game to American PC game direction of influence? A-Train 3 influencing Sim City 2000 (allegedly sharing code).

 

[Louis_Cypher]

In terms of why history of gaming matters, this is what I said earlier in the thread:

"If I'm not mistaken, many here for example are legitimately offended that certain systems or games don't get their due. So a sense of justice motivates some. That's a good and natural human impulse. For me, I have an element of wanting to set the record straight too, but I think my main concern is 1). about posterity and games preservation, as well as 2). ensuring people build the next games on solid foundations. I don't like triumphs, or negative lessons born of failure, to be forgotton; I want games, as in all things, to actually improve generation-on-generation. They can only do that with clean information. That requires honesty, and a good analysis of the facts. If nothing else, even if new games fail, the humanitarian in me, would like future folks to know what was good, so that they can experience what I did."​

Idealistic perhaps, but I do care about posterity. Sometimes people do find older classics on their own initiative, although I agree a personal reccomendation from a grog, that you know personally, is more likely to evangelise a game.

 

[Grauken]

In the same way, Panzer General is definitely influenced by Daisenryaku, and Battle Isle is almost a straight up clone of Nectaris.

Panzer General was influenced by old SSI war games

Resident Evil is considered to be the product of Sweet Home and Alone in the Dark and that seems plausible enough to me.

RE is a wholesale copy of AitD, Sweet Home and RE share almost nothing except a haunted house

 

[Nutmeg]

Panzer General was influenced by old SSI war games

Yet it plays nothing like them and plays exactly like Daisenryaku. How very odd.

 

[Grauken]

Panzer General was influenced by old SSI war games

Yet it plays nothing like them and plays exactly like Daisenryaku. How very odd.

Like I said, you think the Japanese invented all the important games and see their influence everywhere, you're a great example of a revisionist

If you can't cite a dev owning up to having played an obscure PC game from Japan (at the time very unlikely), I consider it convergent evolution of the genre and go with the more likely explanation in that a SSI war game was mostly likely influenced by earlier SSI war games

 

[Nutmeg]

Like I said, you think the Japanese invented all the important games and see their influence everywhere, you're a great example of an revisionist

If you can't cite a dev owning up to having played an obscure PC game from Japan (at the time very unlikely), I consider it convergent evolution of the genre and go with the more likely explanation in that a SSI war game was mostly likely influenced by earlier SSI war games

What are you talking about? I literally listed 4 influences from Japan to the West in that era. Just 4. That's hardly "invented all the important games".

You're just butthurt I'm not "admitting" complete Western "PC master race" supremacy in every genre, which just isn't true.

 

[GamerCat_]

In terms of why history of gaming matters, this is what I said earlier in the thread:

"If I'm not mistaken, many here for example are legitimately offended that certain systems or games don't get their due. So a sense of justice motivates some. That's a good and natural human impulse. For me, I have an element of wanting to set the record straight too, but I think my main concern is 1). about posterity and games preservation, as well as 2). ensuring people build the next games on solid foundations. I don't like triumphs, or negative lessons born of failure, to be forgotton; I want games, as in all things, to actually improve generation-on-generation. They can only do that with clean information. That requires honesty, and a good analysis of the facts. If nothing else, even if new games fail, the humanitarian in me, would like future folks to know what was good, so that they can experience what I did."​

Idealistic perhaps, but I do care about posterity. Sometimes people do find older classics on their own initiative, although I agree a personal reccomendation from a grog, that you know personally, is more likely to evangelise a game.

Sure. Genuinely important. That's why I write big posts telling people that Halo was made by building on Myth rather than subtracting from Quake. Most of the people here shit with rage when I explain that. Few care about real history.

Most of what passes for "game theory" consists of false creative genealogies. Neat and catchy sounding made up rules for making a good game applied retroactively, obscuring the real creative processes that actually produced the things we like. A failure to appreciate Halo as a game built on a real time strategy game's engine and fundamentals is why nobody has successfully cloned it. But lots of idiots like talking about its "weapon sandbox" like that's a real thing that was on anybody's mind at the time.

 

[Mountain]

You are married to the past. Depth does not excuse poor gameplay. The reason why you put some of these games over newer ones is because you grew up with them.

It's like the opposite of zoomers who only play Madden and Fortnite, their concept of the past doesn't exist just as your concept of the current state of gaming doesn't exist. So you have to call people idiots to defend your view, just as the zoomers do.

No I'm not. I play modern games too and recognize the great ones there. It's just older ones often did it better.

A lot of these games I'd not even played before, so "you just grew up with them" is bollocks. I spoke to plenty of posters on here stating I was going to dig into the past libraries and play a lot for the first time. You're just doing that cope thing of having to make stuff up to find a way to fit your limited view.

Some examples of games which I played for the first time after 2017 which I now class as some of my favorites ever include...

• Hellfire
• DoDonPachi
• Alien Soldier (and I hated this at first. But, unlike you, I took people's advice and pushed through initial skill hurdles, rather than dismiss them in full without any real effort)
• Blackthorne
• Contra Hard Corps
• Langrisser 2
• Exile: Escape From The Pit
• Blades of Vengeance

...and there are plenty more too.

That doesn't mean I don't love modern games like Dark Souls series, Nioh, SMTV Vengence though. Unlike yourself and those games journos, I've a balanced appreciation of games, old & new.

I never said that playing older games today is bad or somehow wrong. I play older games as well. But we have biases towards the games we grow up playing. You seem to have developed tastes around older PC games, which is cool, but that means playing and discovering older games is fun for you. And that is perfectly fine, but you should be able to discern between what you like and what is good.

I fucking love Blast Corps on the N64, but it's not even within the top 1000 of all-time greats. It's not even top 30 on the N64. I know this because I don't let my bias take over my every opinion, like you do.

Saying Star Control 2 is better than Mass Effect is categorical madness. If you enjoy the game better than Mass Effect, cool, good for you, but you should be able to tell that Star Control 2 isn't better than Mass Effect, no matter its historical importance.

What are your top 3 new games from last year?

 

[Nutmeg]

That's why I write big posts telling people that Halo was made by building on Myth rather than subtracting from Quake

Excellent post.

 

[Nutmeg]

If you can't cite a dev owning up to having played an obscure PC game from Japan (at the time very unlikely), I consider it convergent evolution of the genre and go with the more likely explanation in that a SSI war game was mostly likely influenced by earlier SSI war games

According to SSI designer Chuck Kroegel, the Japanese strategy series Daisenryaku was the primary inspiration for the non-traditional wargame design of Panzer General. Says Kroegel: "I can honestly say that if we hadn't played Daisen Raiku (sic), Panzer General would never have happened, period."

Grauken apologize to Japan

 

[Nutmeg]

Apologize right now you smug little turd.

 

[Lucumo]

Like I said, it's very questionable that you say that OPL3 is better than OPN2.

Sure, OK. You're saying that because OPN2 gave some more direct linear control over the shape of the waveform that somehow makes up for the the missing 6 2-op channels. You can't say that. That's retarded. At most you can say it is an apples to oranges comparison.

Again, why are you so hung up on this? It's like the 3rd time you've asked me to put all the necessary caveats to the comparison here but why?

Do you understand what this means exactly? I certainly don't. It's clear which line is better but in what way do the results differ from each other.

It's referring to knobs and levers the chips provided over the exact shape of the shape of the waveforms which were being modulated -- mainly to square off or linearize parts of the otherwise smooth perfect sinusoidal wave forms. It gives the resulting sound a different flavor, but you need to understand this functionality is not fundamental to the way FM synth operates or from where it derives its general power -- which is modulating a carrier signal (one operator) with a modulating signal (another operator) and then feeding that in further down the chain (if possible), and importantly, superimposition through different channels. Mathematically speaking, any signal can be described by simply superimposing enough sinusoidal functions:

so you don't strictly need enveloping (though it is a very important shortcut, but less important than FM itself, which too is a shortcut I suppose). Now if you knew the first thing about signal theory, you would know that, but I don't seem to be talking to someone who does, but someone who is just pulling random info from the internet and doesn't understand how things fit together.

I don't know what "algorithm" refers to in what you quoted as it is an incredibly broad term, but frankly I don't really care, because it seems like another lame attempt at a "gotcha" to achieve what exactly? I still don't understand the point you are trying to make.

Then you would be contradicting yourself.

I also don't understand how you don't understand a thing, despite a clear line of quotes and me explicitly stating the issue. Do you really want me to re-quote what you wrote and what I wrote as a response? Well, I won't, too much work (please, just re-read it). I will just point out the absolute core.

In terms of capabilities, OPM > OPN2, OPL3 > OPN2, OPNA > OPN2, while it's hard to place the OPL2 (in the right hands it could sound amazing).

*bolded for emphasis. I then said that it's very questionable that you say OPL3 is more capable, pointing to the fact that OPN2 could output PCM samples (which you first denied, then ignored (which I took as acknowledgement)) as an example.

The OPL3 could do 18 2-op channels, or in 4-op mode, 6 4-op and 6 2-op channels. OPN2 could do just 6 4-op channels. OPN2 didn't have a PCM channel (not sure why you think it does, maybe it's something I just don't know), just 6 4-op channels. So OPL3 is strictly more capable.

To which I replied that you seem to reduce everything to channels and operators. Then I posted the overviews of the more intricate details and comparisons between the two chips (and others).

Also, you seem to reduce everything to channels and operators

Not really, I only talked about operators and channels with regards to (Yamaha) FM synth, where we can compare across different chip families. Ofc. you can't compare the same way across completely different synths and I never did. In fact I explicitly wrote (repeatedly) that it is even difficult to compare the 2-op only OPL2 with the rest.

You say "not really" which makes no sense, considering me quoting your OPL3 argument (and I guess by extension the OPL2 part but that's less of an issue because it's obviously, as pointed out by me, the least capable sound chip of the ones you listed).

In the end it boils down to you saying that quantity alone matters (see your quote) and strictly saying OPL3 > OPN2 while I say that that's very questionable due to what I pointed out over several posts (PCM sample capability and the technical stuff aka more control over the wave) which would boil down to quality/capability of the chip.

If you would say (or acknowledge) that's an apples vs oranges comparison, then your statement of "OPL3 > OPN2" and "strictly more capable" would be wrong.

I said from the very beginning that I'm a casual music enjoyer and said I have limited technical understanding when it became relevant. Obviously, English not being my native language is problematic when it comes to technical discussions. So I don't exactly know what some technical terms mean and I don't understand how it directly ties to the audio production (see numbers) but I do understand Maths and the resulting audio.

But this isn't so for tactics games during the same time period, where for example the Battle Isle games for PC were downstream of Nectaris, and there was nothing on PC quite like Fire Emblem or Super Robot Wars (along with many lesser known titles like Jyutei Senki). If we extend it to Japan vs America, rather than PC vs console, then we can also add that Panzer General was downstream of Daisenryaku.

A very fine example of revisionism or is it favouritism? Both Nectaris and Daisenryaku were utterly inconsequential to PC gaming, had zero impact and are mostly forgotten

Absolutely not. Daisenryaku was hugely influential. Like how 3D fighting game developers talked about Virtua Fighter, so did strategy (and not just them) about Daisenryaku. Without it, the ...Wars series would have likely never been, for instance.

As for mostly forgotten:

 

[Grauken]

If you can't cite a dev owning up to having played an obscure PC game from Japan (at the time very unlikely), I consider it convergent evolution of the genre and go with the more likely explanation in that a SSI war game was mostly likely influenced by earlier SSI war games

According to SSI designer Chuck Kroegel, the Japanese strategy series Daisenryaku was the primary inspiration for the non-traditional wargame design of Panzer General. Says Kroegel: "I can honestly say that if we hadn't played Daisen Raiku (sic), Panzer General would never have happened, period."

Grauken apologize to Japan

Okay, you did find a citation. I accept that SSI managed to massively improve on the Japanese formula to the extend that nobody remembers the inspiration anymore

 

[Machocruz]

lots of idiots like talking about its "weapon sandbox" like that's a real thing that was on anybody's mind at the time.

Well it sure wasn't on my mind. What do they even mean? Sounds like just another BS made up piece of conventional gaming wisdom parroted by know nothings who saw it in some gaming rag.

 

[Nutmeg]

You say "not really" which makes no sense

I mean I don't use number of ops and channels to compare FM synths to other kinds of synths (e.g. LA synths), as that would make no sense, but I still maintain that ops and channels are fundamental when comparing between two different FM synth chips. Hope this clarifies things for you.

 

[Nutmeg]

If you would say (or acknowledge) that's an apples vs oranges comparison, then your statement of "OPL3 > OPN2" and "strictly more capable" would be wrong.

I will acknowledge it may not be strictly more capable and that the word "strictly" may be hyperbole.

Instead I will say "generally more capable". Better?

I emphasize the word may because in the meantime I was looking at some oscilloscope visualized recordings of OPL3 tracks and I saw some very square and sawtooth wave forms so obviously there is a way to achieve these things with the chip (though there is a non 0 chance I am hallucinating this entirely).

 

[Nutmeg]

Obviously, English not being my native language is problematic when it comes to technical discussions

You're doing fine btw don't sweat it.

 

[Falksi]

You are married to the past. Depth does not excuse poor gameplay. The reason why you put some of these games over newer ones is because you grew up with them.

It's like the opposite of zoomers who only play Madden and Fortnite, their concept of the past doesn't exist just as your concept of the current state of gaming doesn't exist. So you have to call people idiots to defend your view, just as the zoomers do.

No I'm not. I play modern games too and recognize the great ones there. It's just older ones often did it better.

A lot of these games I'd not even played before, so "you just grew up with them" is bollocks. I spoke to plenty of posters on here stating I was going to dig into the past libraries and play a lot for the first time. You're just doing that cope thing of having to make stuff up to find a way to fit your limited view.

Some examples of games which I played for the first time after 2017 which I now class as some of my favorites ever include...

• Hellfire
• DoDonPachi
• Alien Soldier (and I hated this at first. But, unlike you, I took people's advice and pushed through initial skill hurdles, rather than dismiss them in full without any real effort)
• Blackthorne
• Contra Hard Corps
• Langrisser 2
• Exile: Escape From The Pit
• Blades of Vengeance

...and there are plenty more too.

That doesn't mean I don't love modern games like Dark Souls series, Nioh, SMTV Vengence though. Unlike yourself and those games journos, I've a balanced appreciation of games, old & new.

I never said that playing older games today is bad or somehow wrong. I play older games as well. But we have biases towards the games we grow up playing. You seem to have developed tastes around older PC games, which is cool, but that means playing and discovering older games is fun for you. And that is perfectly fine, but you should be able to discern between what you like and what is good.

I fucking love Blast Corps on the N64, but it's not even within the top 1000 of all-time greats. It's not even top 30 on the N64. I know this because I don't let my bias take over my every opinion, like you do.

Saying Star Control 2 is better than Mass Effect is categorical madness. If you enjoy the game better than Mass Effect, cool, good for you, but you should be able to tell that Star Control 2 isn't better than Mass Effect, no matter its historical importance.

What are your top 3 new games from last year?

Like I said before, Star Control has almost endless 2-player replayability. It's up there with Chess, Tetris, Street Fighter 2 etc. The game's lasted me, my family and friends over 30 years worth of play. It's space-chess with action thrown in to boot. Mass Effect can't offer that, nowhere near. It's a play through once every 5-6 years game for one week a year.

By your logic Chess shouldn't be considered one of man's greatest entertainment inventions because it's old and Pokemon has flashier graphics.

Last year, Skald, Like A Dragon: Infinite Wealth and then a toss up between Black Myth Wukong & Metaphor.