MigRib, all AAA-RPG's are already targeted toward partly a younger, but more importantly a broader market. It has to be accessable and streamlined to sell alot of copies.
Yes, I've noticed that
I must admit that although I am an old timer, inasmuch as computer games are related (my first "computer" was a ZX Spectrum, back in '83, and after that a Commodore Amiga), during maybe 15 years I didn't play a lot, so much has passed me by. As those 15 years I mentioned include the late 90s and early 2000s, most of what is today considered "old school PC RPG" was unknown to me untill a couple of years ago, when my pen & paper RPG group dismissed and I strarted looking at cRPG as a possible substitute to quench my thirst for interactive storytelling.
I guess this gave me what I think of as an advantage: I can look at the old games without the "nostalgia glasses", and play them as they realy are, without emotional attachment. It may be also a disadvantage, because having seen newer games most of the times I can't really connect to those old classics, like I would connect to, let's say Sid Meier's Pirates or The Secret of Monkey Island (those two were before my "divorce" with PC playing, and I thoroughly enjoyed them. And missed them afterwards).
And although I have to admit there have been some good RPG's released the last decade, I can't honestly say any of them holds a place among my top ten gaming experinces. Skyrim was ok, and I put around 100 hours into it, but I can hardly remember any of it. To me, Morrowind was a better game.
I'll have to agree to disagree, my favorite games are all from the last decade. Oblivion was the first fantasy game I played in a long time (I got a bit tired of the genre after some years of Dungeons & Dragons). But it was Skyrim that made me appreciate fantasy again (even though as an RPG it has a lot of defects). The only thing I find in Morrowind that could be fun is that it is very original in it's concept. But giant mushrooms don't appeal to me that much. This one I really tried to like, even tried the Morroblivion Mod, but it wasn't only the visual aspect that was annoying me. The lack of voice acting alone bored me to sleep...
I've played through Fallout 3 two times, once without expansions and once with them all in. It is a really good game. But to me, nowhere near the fantastic games that are Fallout 1&2. I do have high hopes for New Vegas though, but haven't gotten around to it yet.
I have to say the opposite. I love Fallout 3, the story and characters are great, and I couldn't find any of that in the first two. I might be biased because I really don't like turn-based games and I do appreciate too much voice acting. Reading is something I like to do - from books, not computer screens… Anyway, some people say the newer incarnations of Fallout aren't faithful to the Fallout universe, and having browsed the Fallout Bible and many contents from sites about that particular universe, I really must conclude that in this case the biased ones are the classic Fallout devotees. It's kinda of a religious thing, I guess! From what I've heard, most of the people who criticize the choice of Washington DC for Fallout 3 prefer Fallout New Vegas. As for me, Fallout New Vegas is my favourite computer game ever. EVER. Period.
DA:O was a decent game, and I played it through start to finish. But I've never even considered replaying it, and it wasn't a hard choice to ignore the second installment entirely. Dragon Age is abolutely nothing compared to Baldurs Gate 1&2.
I kinda liked Dragon Age, but I'm not a fan of either the original or the sequel. Can't compare to Baldur's Gate or Planescape Torment, for those were some of the classics I tried (not long ago. A few months ago, really) but couldn't pass the first screen. Without wanting to be malicious, it looked like old Zx Spectrum adventure games but with colours and better sounds (anything's better than "BLIP").
I'm playing Deus Ex:HR right now and have to say I like it, but since I never played the original I can't make a comparison there. Still a good game though, maybe because I didn't have any expectations.
Great ambiance, pretty graphics, nice dialogues, not much choices, too much fire fights (or stealth, for those who go for that option), crappy boss fights. All in all, it reminds too much of Blade Runner for me to ignore it. I loved the game, though I could find it's flaws. As for the original, I can't understand all the devotion around it. I played a few missions, the graphics are horrible, the voice acting is atrocious, the combats perhaps too difficult (or perhaps it's just the bad graphics getting on my nerves) and the soundtrack isn't good past the menu (the menu score is remarkable). The only thing comparable is the story, after all, and I find them pretty much on the same level.
Expectations. There in lies one opf the reasons for a lot of "Old-Time RPG'ers" complaining about new games. I was really really happy when they announced Fallout 3. But got dissapointed by the end product. A good game, but not a "real" Fallout. I was deliriously happy when Dragon Age was announced. But it came up short.
Well, again, if you don't find it a real Fallout, maybe you'll like New Vegas. Or not.
Thank God for Kickstarter. I would probably have given up on RPG's by now if I werent looking forward to Shadowrun returns, Wasteland 2 and Project Eternity so much. I just hope they won't let me down too…
Let's see what those old school kickstarters will look like. But I'm afraid if they turn into the "new school", and the big budget ones start getting too "childish" (as it looks like it will happen) it will be me to give up on cRPGs. Well, my bad luck…