Quest for the Packard Bell - Chapter XI (Post No. 26)

 The Quest For The Packard Bell

Chapter No. 11

Why Did I Even Decide That Looking For A Computer That Prehistoric By Today's Turbo-Processed Standards Was A Good Idea?

(Yes, I'm aware that 'puters back in the day also had a turbo mode switch which I thought it would make them go faster... But, that was likely due to the fact I was a kid and not very bright.) 

     (OK, that picture actually has nothing to do with what I was planning on writing. But, I also believe that I would be taking it in a direction somewhere.) 

     Now, some may think that I'm just being an old man for real yelling at clouds, resisting progress every step of the way and dragging my feet in the ground and absolutely being an asshole and shitting on games from the modern era which if I just so much stopped looking at the past for a minute, I would realize that a lot of modern games were just as good, in case, probably even better than a lot of the games I played as a lad - whether I was taking a trip down Memory Lane, or discovering a previously undiscovered classic from what I truly view to be the "Golden Era" as far as I'm concerned as games go.

    Maybe a good idea for a moment is to stop arguing that I shouldn't want to be doing much of my work on an OS such as Windows 3.11/95 for even a little while, and then look again as to why I want to be going back to the past - in terms of technology in the first place.

1. Modern Games in Steam (a lot of times) - have DLC Or, why 2010 and later lil shitz' are impatient about things which back in my day would've just been unlocked after a certain condition was met - now instead of simply unlocking for free in the software, you have to download it off the Internet. Some games probably have enhancements that you can download off the Internet, that after buying them off of their digital store, you can opt to download all the DLC immediately anyway, to make a game which was supposed to be considered a real "full" game more somewhat complete anyway. 

2. Even Console Games 2010 and Later have DLC - This is probably because a lot of cases that games released for systems 2010 and later have DLC anyway. Although, some games after 2000 locked some of their cars behind "Download Walls." 

(I'm looking at you Porsche Unleashed!)     >:(

 (No image available of what I was complaining about specifically. So have this Gen Z Ohio meme.)

3. Ultimately, Many of the 1990s games generally had a sense of more "hopefulness" than a lot of the games released now:  Well, it's true. I mean, sure, there may have been some exceptions, like DOOM, particularly the OG DOOM, which probably would be set in somewhat more modern times like now, or when we're actually supposedly going to leave Earth and go to Mars, anyway. But games like Chrono Trigger, or Secret of Mana, or Illusion of Gaia on the other hand, have more hopeful themes than games released in the modern era and likely will continue to have released into the foreseeable future, provided the apocalypse doesn't happen on January 1, 2023.

And I'm serious too. It wasn't until FOX released Family Guy originally in 1999, that apocalyptic humor was on the TV, and it would probably be not until 2009 or later that apocalyptic plots would really take off in games. Like, apocalyptic plots such as simply trying to survive a nuclear holocaust in Fallout, and I already know that there are probably very many games that are released in the modern day which I already know if I tried to name them here on this blog page, I'd feel my head start to spin. 

I've said it before in the past, and I will probably continue to say it again, and again, and again until I turn blue in the face and I sound like an absolute fucking broken record. I was only interested in the games released from 1977-2006, but only smaller numbers of titles as we get closer & closer to 2006, I was only interested in the games released from 1977-2006, but only smaller numbers of titles as we get closer & closer to 2006.

But, I never will say no to playing Minecraft, and Overwatch is a little stupid hard - even though I figured out the controls. Now if only I could figure out how to git gud enough to go faster in the actual gameplay. 

My point is, having a computer that just goes a singular ding after a series of three or four shorter dings is nice and all, but most of the games with the exception of Minecraft don't really do much to hold my interest. Also, modern Need For Speed games with cop game-over mechanics, I will not be registering my own personal tag (I probably may have addressed this in an older blog post - probably saying why I don't want to pick up games like Need For Speed Undercover/Most Wanted, or even Carbon again.) Oh wait. I did. If you want to read my old blog post again, then -
If you want to look at the list of "Games I probably won't be picking up again for the foreseeable future," which literally has games that I won't be picking up again until maybe after the next blue moon, but even then I ain't sure... ...click on the prior sentence. 

If you want to know why I chose to shit on modern games a lot of times in favor of more retro titles, just follow this link. 

I mean, despite my negative attitudes about a lot of more "modern" titles, I personally don't believe I have much of a reason to perhaps take an anal evacuation all over games that are more contemporary in release, that is, without being absolutely convinced that I would be needing to. Which I am convinced. I mean, some of the games for consoles from the generation of the PlayStation 3/Xbox 360 forward, I've noticed that they are a lot of the times shovelware. Some games from PlayStation 2/OG Xbox era are also a little guilty of this, but personally, I've pretty much been hard pressed to find a game from the older era that would be guilty of being shovelware as opposed to a game that would actually have some replay value, than I would've from the "newer" era.