[yareally]

Thankfully EA, Activision or one of the other more cookie cutter publishers did not get ahold of Saints Row and Metro. If they did, each series might as well have died with THQ. I think I would be sick to see Metro or Saints Row turned into a Call of Duty or Medal of Honor knockoff.

EA just is not what it used to be and all my favorite classic franchises (Command and Conquer, C&C Red Alert, Sim City, Syndicate, etc) are just a shadow of what they once were.

[cageface]

You might find it amusing that I considered all those to be from a much less interesting iteration of EA than the one I grew up with, which really did make some classic games:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M.U.L.E.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archon:_The_Light_and_the_Dark

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mail_Order_Monsters

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Seven_Cities_of_Gold_(video...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adventure_Construction_Set

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racing_Destruction_Set

[yareally]

I played 7 cities (the remake) in the late 90s, but the rest are long before my time or I'm sure I would agree with you on a personal level. 7 cities was fun though and I know M.U.L.E. was a pioneer in the strategy game area.

I didn't have a real PC until I was 11 or so and that was around 1996 (had an NES, Sega Genesis and SNES before that). I did play many of the classic games of the early 90s (original sim city, red baron, panzer general, doom, wing commander, x-wing/tie fighter), but ones from the 80s are kind of beyond my scope, even for an avid PC gamer like me. I could play them now, but not sure if I would be able to appreciate them on quite the same level with the same magic they had when they came out.

I do have one question though for the sake of curiousity. Did you ever lament or rage at the state of pc games in the 90s compared to those in the 80s? Your reply kind of hints at it, but was not sure what your actual point was for sure. I always second guess everything repeating itself, even something like this.

[cageface]

It's hard to completely remove nostalgia from the picture but yes, I do think the best games from the 80s were more creative than what followed. I'm not sure why. Maybe because more limited resources forced developers to focus more on concepts? Maybe because game publishing wasn't yet the risk-averse, well-oiled money making machine it came to be.

I hold out some hope for the new generation of indie game makers but mostly what I see coming from that crowd is platformers of various stripes. Maybe kids today just don't have the attention span for a game like M.U.L.E.?

[yareally]

Yeah, I would agree that it's kind of been diminishing returns for many games out there. I think the strategy games put out by Paradox Interactive are still pretty decent for the most part (Hearts of Iron III and Victoria II especially).

I wouldn't mind seeing a remake of M.U.L.E. if it's done right. Though that would probably be somewhat complicated with the original creator dead and EA probably has all the rights to it still. Have to be independantly developed. I would hate to see what EA would come up with if they tried to put it out.

[stock_toaster]

Archon, along with Montezuma's Revenge[1], was one of my favorite games as a kid! A friend had it on c64 and we played it ceaselessly.

[1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montezumas_Revenge_(video_game)

[ekianjo]

> EA just is not what it used to be and all my favorite classic franchises (Command and Conquer, C&C Red Alert, Sim City, Syndicate, etc) are just a shadow of what they once were.

The games you quoted were not FROM EA per se, they were mostly from studios acquired by EA which were dissolved soon after they released something worthy of publishing. Sim City was from Maxix, SYndicate from Bullfrog, CC from Westwood. Do not assume developer=publisher.

[yareally]

I'm aware of who developed/published them :). EA is also a developer and not just a publisher. I'd guess as they acquired each one, they became more prominent in the decisions for each franchise as well as hirings of future developers. Westwood and Maxis as far as I can see, ceased to exist when they were acquired and the games they put out shortly after were running on the inertia they had before acquisition.

I played on Westwood's multiplayer servers back in the 90s. EA carried on letting Command and Conquer series be pretty good up until Red Alert 3 (bad) and Command & Conquer 4 (horrible), which were made long after Westwood was absorbed[1]. Even Sim City 4 was pretty good and that was published long after Maxis had been swallowed.

My point was, EA is where good games go to die, regardless of who develops them. It wasn't always that way, but something shifted in the company over the past 10 years. Their current mode of operation is treat PC as a second class platform, recycle instead of create, appeal to the lowest common denominator for marketing[2] and stuff as much social/online interaction as they can with no way to opt out[3].

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westwood_Studios

[2] https://encrypted.google.com/search?q=red+alert+3+women&...

[3] http://www.simcity.com/en_US/blog/article/The-Benefits-of-Li...

Edit: some clarifications and citations.

[phaus]

Don't forget the Ultima series and Crusader: No Remorse.

Also, they killed off PC sports games by re releasing the same PS2 ports for like 6 years in a row.

[joverholt]

And don't forget "Hard Hat Mack", "Mail Order Monsters", and Archon. Long live the 8-bit generation!