Agreed, so I am very selective in the games I choose.
Almost all my games are old-school, and all of the others I am convinced that the time was worth my while.
I am concerned with many of my Ubisoft titles, I simply don't buy EA or Activision anymore - I would love to play Wolfenstein (2009) or Dark Reign again but the games industry has been changed for the worse. More control means less passion.
 
Choose your products carefully, or you'll end up just buying stuff you'll never use. :)

It's a time of change and it's showing. One thing  the internet does well is level the playing field for distribution. That is a double edged sword though. It empowers anyone to put something out and main thing the internet is known for is noise. Publishers are struggling with the status quo and indies are all over the place. Things will settle down a bit more in the next 5-10 years. Right now, don't expect things to be so clear cut though. Empowering people and change is not always a stabilizing thing. People say they want choices and new options, but do they really? Just because something is new or different doesn't mean it's an improvement.

People keep buying them so developers think its ok to keep pushing them out every year. Specifically EA, Activision, Ubisoft, and Microsoft. 2014 was pretty meh but I think 2015 will be better with titles like The Witcher 3 and Just Cause 3 coming out. Fingers crossed.

I don't have a lot of hope right now on steam I have viewed like 2259 games and not interested in a total of 2088 of them... the amount of indy junk and just bad games I am having to sift though is ugh....

It's just you, and others who can't see or appreciate what goes into games (and can't see what's missing in others).  Or perhaps you actually just missed the great games this year; the ones created with a sense of pride, the ones that really follow the creators' vision, the ones that are both innovative and creative.  2014 was a hell of a lot better than 2013.  
 
Dragon Age: Inquisition is easily the most ambitious game ever made, like it or not.  That is an objective statement.  It raises the bar just because of what it set out to do: what other games have attempted to bring together a massive, highly detailed, and highly interactive and divergent multi-regional open world design (that changes based on the player's interaction and choice) with strong story/character focus, a branching plot based on player choice, really dynamic character development based on the player's actions and dialogue choices, tactical party-based gameplay with at least some diversity (4 playstyles, all of which are balanced quite well), and micromanaging for even more gameplay diversity?  It has perhaps more dialogue than any other game, and despite being story-driven it can easily last over 100 hours.  Nothing else comes close.  This is one of few examples of an AAA studio actually using its budget to improve and expand upon the game, opposed to just spending it on voice actors and marketing (so EA did a surprisingly good job budgeting).  It's not flawless or anything, but if other studios had the same scope then gaming would be in a much better place.
 
In terms of indie games, we got Wasteland 2, Divinity: Original Sin, The Walking Dead: Season Two, The Wolf Among Us, Game of Thrones, The Vanishing of Ethan Carter.  All of these show innovation, creativity, while Wasteland 2 and Divinity: Original Sin demonstrate a scale/scope that we rarely ever see in indie games (both are 60+ hour RPGs, Wasteland 2 in particular can play out in so many different ways).  I could go into detail about how each of these titles are innovative and well executed if you want.  
 

rjohnson11
I like first person shooters and there is really not enough of those.

 
Sarcasm?  FPS is the most polluted genre. 
 

blacksapphire08
2014 was pretty meh but I think 2015 will be better with titles like The Witcher 3 and Just Cause 3 coming out. Fingers crossed.

I think those are two games responsible for donta's criticism (mostly the latter).  Just Cause 3 will just be another big open world game about destruction and meaningless violence, no?  Where is the innovation in that?  What's the purpose? 
 
The Witcher games have always been responsible for killing the RPG genre by taking away RPG elements and making the existing RPG elements extremely shallow.  They have shrunken scopes, little to no ambition, and no innovation, whether you like them or not.  Please point out ways in which the first two Witcher games are innovative.
 
The Witcher 2 just has the most basic hack and slash button mashing combat with only one playstyle, and although the writing is good, it doesn't demonstrate the kind of interactive plot and character development that story-driven RPGs are supposed to have (like Bioware, Obsidian, InXile, and Interplay/Black Isle RPGs).  Let's not forget how linear and generic the environments of the first two Witcher games are.  They're full of invisible walls, and just seem to be quickly thrown together by one person, not being carefully crafted with the attention to detail seen in other games.  The side quests of these games are the most basic, pointless fetch quests, so really the only thing to do is advance from point A to point B through the plot, and The Witcher 2 only branches out into two main paths really.
 
The Witcher 3 will at least be open world instead of extremely linear like its predecessors, but that just makes it another open world action game.  I do expect that the open world will at least be better than the likes of Just Cause 2, Just Cause 3, Far Cry 3, and Far Cry 4, since those games are just about playing in a sandbox, driving vehicles off of cliffs, and blowing things up.
 
All eyes should instead focus on Torment: Tides of Numenera, SOMA, and maybe Pillars of Eternity for 2015.  There isn't any innovation in Pillars of Eternity though, since it looks identical to a late 90s cRPG, but it should at least be competent, well-written, and diverse. 

ARMYguy
I wish there was more good RTS games, that's a genre that is always dying. I also want WW2 games, so i'm really just screwed when it comes to what i can play these days, basically company of heroes and men of war.
 
I recently got into Sins of a Solar Empire, and wow i really like it. Wonder why i ignored it before?

I would love a new Red Alert or Total Annihilation :)
Shame is that Blizzard are the only ones really pushing that genre and they've got nothing new...

No gaming is not in a decline its just you.

Dedicated servers will always be around, it's only a worry in all of the awful worthless mainstream PvP games coming out these days.

candle_86
yes the quality for PC games has gone down quite a bit, the old fun just isn't their anymore, and I'd argue its more the gamer market is much larger than it once was. But we still have 1997-2004 to remember. Lets reflect on what we got during that time shall we.
 
Red Alert 2, No One Lives Forever, Generals, Half Life, Counter Strike, Day of Defeat, Far Cry, Half Life 2, Doom 3, Call of Duty, Medal of Honor Allied Assault, Never Winter Nights, Knights of the Old Republic, Star Trek Bridge Commander, Alpha Centuri, Alien vs Predator, Dues Ex, Serious Sam, Quake III, Splinter Cell, Prince of Pesia the Sands of Time, Mafia, Combat Flight Simulator 2, Flight Simulator 2004, Battlefield 2, Quake IV, Jedi Knight Series, Age of Empires, SimCity 4, The Sims, Fallout, and many more. 

Fast-paced arcade FPS still exists, especially in the indie scene.  I find Insurgency to be a better, more advanced version of Counter-Strike.  
 
There are still games like Neverwinter Nights and KOTOR, albeit with slightly dumbed down gameplay in comparison, but instead they're larger in scale, have more detailed/interactive environments, and best of all much greater story/dialogue focus (Dragon Age: Origins and Dragon Age: Inquisition).  Don't forget to check out Pillars of Eternity next year, which looks just like a late 90s cRPG (even in the sense that it shows zero advancement).  Torment: Tides of Numenera is another classic-style RPG that at least doesn't look like it was pulled straight from 1999 like PoE.
 
Serious Sam is still an ongoing franchise, though the HD remake of the first two games is still the best.  
 
The Red Orchestra franchise shows many mechanical advancements over the classic Battlefield games (leading to more tactical gameplay), with the only drawback being the lack of aircraft.  You forgot to mention Operation Flashpoint which is one of the most innovative games from that time period, and the ArmA games are better in pretty much every way.  
 
If you like the classic Fallout games, you should like Wasteland 2 which also has a much bigger scale.  
 
Some other games you didn't mention: Thief series (the first two anyway, which are way more advanced stealth games than any Splinter Cell game), Planescape: Torment, Baldur's Gate series, The Elder Scrolls III: Morrowind, Rainbow Six 3.
 
I'd say there is probably a greater amount of good games during that time, but let's reflect on the great games that we have now.
 

• Dragon Age: Inquisition, which is objectively the most ambitious single player game.
• Dragon Age: Origins and the Mass Effect trilogy, which along with Inquisition demonstrate a level of interactive storytelling that was never seen before.
• The Walking Dead, The Wolf Among Us, which like the aforementioned games take interactive storytelling and character development to a higher level.
• Natural Selection 2 which unlike the classic PvP shooters tests more than just reflexes: it's a hybrid RTS and tactical shooter, demanding a level of teamwork and strategy that no other PvP shooter approaches.
• Rising Storm, Insurgency, which show serious mechanical advancements over classic shooters.
• The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim and Fallout 3, which showcase a much higher level of open world detail and expansiveness than ever before.
• Fallout: New Vegas, one of the most expansive and ambitious games of all time, one of few that seeks to combine strong storytelling and character development with a detailed open world design (the only other games that tried to do this are Dragon Age: Inquisition and S.T.A.L.K.E.R. Shadow of Chernobyl, both are from a later time period than the one you describe).
• Penumbra, Amnesia: The Dark Descent and their mastery of both survival horror and psychological horror (horror barely existed on PC during that time, and these PC games brought it back to life).
• Deus Ex: Human Revolution (Director's Cut) which is a stronger stealth game and RPG than the original, and is more dialogue heavy.
• S.T.A.L.K.E.R. series, a distinct trilogy of very large scale shooters with some hardcore survival mechanics (especially with mods) and an intriguing story in the first game.
• Metro 2033 and Last Light, which take storytelling in shooters to much higher levels than games from your time period, in addition to having less linearity/more exploration, far more detail, and innovative survival mechanics (shooters from 1997-2004 were more about running around at 100 MPH, shooting everything in sight, and finding some hidden power-ups, there is far more to the likes of Metro and S.T.A.L.K.E.R. like them or not).
• Dishonored, which is more open and diverse than any of the classic stealth games (and perhaps any other stealth game in existence).

 
It goes both ways.  I'll take today's story-driven, larger scale, more interactive, and more complex games than yesterday's arcade shooters.  On the other hand, I do miss the added gameplay complexity and diversity of the classic RPGs that you mentioned (NWN series and KOTOR series), I miss Rainbow Six 3 and want a modern counterpart with no sacrifices (but with many improvements please), Planescape: Torment still has by far the best writing of any game, but I'm not simply tripping on nostalgia here.  Today there are great games, awful games, and everything in between, and the same applies to 1997-2004, but don't pretend that there haven't been advances beyond graphics and animations (although on that note I really miss hardware accelerated sound LOL).

boredgunner

candle_86
yes the quality for PC games has gone down quite a bit, the old fun just isn't their anymore, and I'd argue its more the gamer market is much larger than it once was. But we still have 1997-2004 to remember. Lets reflect on what we got during that time shall we.
 
Red Alert 2, No One Lives Forever, Generals, Half Life, Counter Strike, Day of Defeat, Far Cry, Half Life 2, Doom 3, Call of Duty, Medal of Honor Allied Assault, Never Winter Nights, Knights of the Old Republic, Star Trek Bridge Commander, Alpha Centuri, Alien vs Predator, Dues Ex, Serious Sam, Quake III, Splinter Cell, Prince of Pesia the Sands of Time, Mafia, Combat Flight Simulator 2, Flight Simulator 2004, Battlefield 2, Quake IV, Jedi Knight Series, Age of Empires, SimCity 4, The Sims, Fallout, and many more. 

Fast-paced arcade FPS still exists, especially in the indie scene.  I find Insurgency to be a better, more advanced version of Counter-Strike.  
 
There are still games like Neverwinter Nights and KOTOR, albeit with slightly dumbed down gameplay in comparison, but instead they're larger in scale, have more detailed/interactive environments, and best of all much greater story/dialogue focus (Dragon Age: Origins and Dragon Age: Inquisition).  Don't forget to check out Pillars of Eternity next year, which looks just like a late 90s cRPG (even in the sense that it shows zero advancement).  Torment: Tides of Numenera is another classic-style RPG that at least doesn't look like it was pulled straight from 1999 like PoE.
 
Serious Sam is still an ongoing franchise, though the HD remake of the first two games is still the best.  
 
The Red Orchestra franchise shows many mechanical advancements over the classic Battlefield games (leading to more tactical gameplay), with the only drawback being the lack of aircraft.  You forgot to mention Operation Flashpoint which is one of the most innovative games from that time period, and the ArmA games are better in pretty much every way.  
 
If you like the classic Fallout games, you should like Wasteland 2 which also has a much bigger scale.  
 
Some other games you didn't mention: Thief series (the first two anyway, which are way more advanced stealth games than any Splinter Cell game), Planescape: Torment, Baldur's Gate series, The Elder Scrolls III: Morrowind, Rainbow Six 3.
 
I'd say there is probably a greater amount of good games during that time, but let's reflect on the great games that we have now.
 

• Dragon Age: Inquisition, which is objectively the most ambitious single player game.
• Dragon Age: Origins and the Mass Effect trilogy, which along with Inquisition demonstrate a level of interactive storytelling that was never seen before.
• The Walking Dead, The Wolf Among Us, which like the aforementioned games take interactive storytelling and character development to a higher level.
• Natural Selection 2 which unlike the classic PvP shooters tests more than just reflexes: it's a hybrid RTS and tactical shooter, demanding a level of teamwork and strategy that no other PvP shooter approaches.
• Rising Storm, Insurgency, which show serious mechanical advancements over classic shooters.
• The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim and Fallout 3, which showcase a much higher level of open world detail and expansiveness than ever before.
• Fallout: New Vegas, one of the most expansive and ambitious games of all time, one of few that seeks to combine strong storytelling and character development with a detailed open world design (the only other games that tried to do this are Dragon Age: Inquisition and S.T.A.L.K.E.R. Shadow of Chernobyl, both are from a later time period than the one you describe).
• Penumbra, Amnesia: The Dark Descent and their mastery of both survival horror and psychological horror (horror barely existed on PC during that time, and these PC games brought it back to life).
• Deus Ex: Human Revolution (Director's Cut) which is a stronger stealth game and RPG than the original, and is more dialogue heavy.
• S.T.A.L.K.E.R. series, a distinct trilogy of very large scale shooters with some hardcore survival mechanics (especially with mods) and an intriguing story in the first game.
• Metro 2033 and Last Light, which take storytelling in shooters to much higher levels than games from your time period, in addition to having less linearity/more exploration, far more detail, and innovative survival mechanics (shooters from 1997-2004 were more about running around at 100 MPH, shooting everything in sight, and finding some hidden power-ups, there is far more to the likes of Metro and S.T.A.L.K.E.R. like them or not).
• Dishonored, which is more open and diverse than any of the classic stealth games (and perhaps any other stealth game in existence).

 
It goes both ways.  I'll take today's story-driven, larger scale, more interactive, and more complex games than yesterday's arcade shooters.  On the other hand, I do miss the added gameplay complexity and diversity of the classic RPGs that you mentioned (NWN series and KOTOR series), I miss Rainbow Six 3 and want a modern counterpart with no sacrifices (but with many improvements please), Planescape: Torment still has by far the best writing of any game, but I'm not simply tripping on nostalgia here.  Today there are great games, awful games, and everything in between, and the same applies to 1997-2004, but don't pretend that there haven't been advances beyond graphics and animations (although on that note I really miss hardware accelerated sound LOL).

im not saying we don't get some good games, and yea i forgot quite a few, but what I'm saying today you can't walk into any store and spend 3 hours deciding on which game gets your money, its no longer a hard choice as it once was. When you get 2-3 good games a year compared to 20 a year worth playing, it becomes alot easier to purchase, and thats how I look at it today. Yes we still have good games, but the golden age is long gone, and most of it is crap.

 I can name quite a few that are good. As of lately, we have Alien Isolation, Banished came out this year, Shadow of Mordor has been good for me, The Long Dark, The Talos Principle... Sadly, you are correct though, the majority of games are really not that good anymore. Mainly the games being pumped out of Capcom, EA, Activision, Ubisoft, Atari... All the big name companies. 

so far this year I have gotten and played DAI, Wasteland 2, Titanfall, South Park the Stick of Truth.

The only Indy game that screams quality is Wasteland 2. The others I have seen I see many pre configured lighting, shading networks, for me they stick out like a sore thumb. The game of Thorns game... Really look at the reviews, I don't even care for the show.... Then look at many of the Indy game textures it looks like they got them straight off of cg textures ran them though crazy bump or Xnormals used presets then hit export:/

Then look at games from 5-10 years ago possibly as far back as 02-03 then look at many games today especially on the Indy side of things, notice much of a difference in model quality and textures? Nope.... Not a big difference... Only a change in lighting and that's partly thanks to gpu's today.

Also visuals of any Indy companies are giving us games with only 8bit to 16bit graphics from the 80's and 90's by the truck load if I wanted to play something that old I would pull out my 386/486 pc or a pentium 133mhz gateway, or my Nintendo, or sega genesis and play old games I know are good. Or repurchase a classic game that has had its code tweaked for today's hardware and os's.
I highly suggest you go through the new steam discovery you will be filled by mass disappointment. I am at over 2k games of not interested.

I would not say this year is a good year for games better than last year? Yes...

donta1979
so far this year I have gotten and played DAI, Wasteland 2, Titanfall, South Park the Stick of Truth.

The only Indy game that screams quality is Wasteland 2. The others I have seen I see many pre configured lighting, shading networks, for me they stick out like a sore thumb. The game of Thorns game... Really look at the reviews, I don't even care for the show.... Then look at many of the Indy game textures it looks like they got them straight off of cg textures ran them though crazy bump or Xnormals used presets then hit export:/

Then look at games from 5-10 years ago possibly as far back as 02-03 then look at many games today especially on the Indy side of things, notice much of a difference in model quality and textures? Nope.... Not a big difference... Only a change in lighting and that's partly thanks to gpu's today.

Also visuals of any Indy companies are giving us games with only 8bit to 16bit graphics from the 80's and 90's by the truck load if I wanted to play something that old I would pull out my 386/486 pc or a pentium 133mhz gateway, or my Nintendo, or sega genesis and play old games I know are good. Or repurchase a classic game that has had its code tweaked for today's hardware and os's.
I highly suggest you go through the new steam discovery you will be filled by mass disappointment. I am at over 2k games of not interested.

I would not say this year is a good year for games better than last year? Yes...

the graphics arnt what makes a game good, its all of it, story, replayability, enjoyment, and grahpics. If 3 are awesome you can prop up a weak 4th unless its enjoyment.

True but it helps, but look what happened to gaming during the Atari time frame, when you had all of these little Indy studios copy and pasting copying other games... The game industry was pretty much destroyed, that is what is happening now, copy and paste of pre configured engine code, preset assets from models, lights, triggers, rigs, animations the entire production pipeline on 99.99% of the Indy studios... Then the majority of triple AAA companies not innovating, and more and more going down the drain every year. Fact on all accounts...

candle_86
 
 
well honestly side scrollers where better in the 90's and late 80's

You'd know better than me, since I don't play sidescrollers.  I had RPGs in mind when I wrote that post: a number of people think that all RPGs should be isometric 2.5D only, not realizing 2.5D was only used due to technological limitation in the 90s.  Some even go as far as wanting the extremely old clunky UI's and unvoiced NPCs.  I don't think there should be anymore 2D/2.5D RPGs in the 21st century.