Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

Old games: Are they shit?

1356

Posts

  • apotheosapotheos Super Moderator, Moderator, ClubPA mod
    edited September 2008
    This is slightly off topic, but relevant.

    I tried out Double D Dogeball on XBL last night. It is not retro, but uses retro visuals and sound to create what must be the stupidest game I've played in ages.



    猿も木から落ちる
  • SeolSeol Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Stupid as in good?

  • apotheosapotheos Super Moderator, Moderator, ClubPA mod
    edited September 2008
    No. Sorry. It is incredibly bad. The people involved should be very embarrassed.



    猿も木から落ちる
  • PeregrineFalconPeregrineFalcon Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    20030702h.gif

    Looking for a DX:HR OnLive code for my kid brother.
    Can trade TF2 items or whatever else you're interested in. PM me.
  • BubbaTBubbaT Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    It's true that people always stop playing old games.

    That's why no one plays poker these days, that game's for geezers from the cowboy days. Everyone plays Scene It! and other games that make use of new technology.

  • MundaneSoulMundaneSoul Registered User
    edited September 2008
    I definitely find that the graphics and mechanics of some older games turn me off to replaying them, but then there are some that are just so good that I can't NOT replay them.

    Fallout definitely falls into this category for me, as do a lot of older PC and even SNES games. The thing I have the hardest time with is trying to go back and play PS1 games, because damn are those primitive polygons ugly as hell.

    Reginald wrote: »
    Heavy Rain is what Martin Scorsese would see if he played Katamari Damacy.

    Score: 8 out of a possible bacon.
  • RainbowDespairRainbowDespair Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    I'm going to have to come down on the side of new games. I've scarcely touched my PS2 in the past year, because I've been having too much fun on my 360, PC, and Wii. I can count the number of games on the NES that I'd actually play through to completion today on maybe 1 hand. After the gameplay innovations in RE4 and the Siren series, I find it difficult to play the older survival horror games that I used to love. I tried to play Fallout 1 for the first time a couple weeks ago and I couldn't get past the first hour or two: the concept intrigued me, but the visuals & user interface were too annoying.

    But enough bagging on older games. Let's talk about what makes a game timeless. I'd say there are 3 major categories.

    1 - Simple, perfected fun. Games like Pac-Man: Championship Edition & Lumines would fall under this category. Sure, these games aren't much more complex than your average Flash game, but every aspect of the game has been fine-tuned to the point where there's not much you could do to improve them in a major way.

    2 - Great games that haven't been obsoleted yet. These are games that could easily be improved upon if a skilled development team actually set out to do so, but nobody's bothered so far. Something like Master of Magic would fall under this category: the graphics & interface are ancient, but nobody's bothered to make a better Fantasy/Civilization hybrid since then. I'd also put most the JRPG genre in general under this category: the reason why so many 16-bit JRPGs are considered highly playable even today has less to do with the quality of those games and more to do with the fact that the genre hasn't evolved much since then.

    3 - Games as art. These are games that have an artistic vision. Even if the gameplay in similar games advances to the point of rendering them mostly obsolete as games (see Silent Hill 2), they're still worth playing for their artistic vision. Games like Rez, Shadow of the Colossus, Portal, and Breath of Fire: Dragon Quarter would fall under this category.

  • Mr_GrinchMr_Grinch Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    I'm definitely back on with my xbox at the mo. I'm impressed the not-so-little thing can crank out High-def visuals. Hulk: Ultimate Destruction in 720p is lovely :)

    This post is by and large off topic, but is about H:UD so should be allowed.

    Steam: Sir_Grinch
    PSN: SirGrinchX
    Xbox Live: SirGrinch X
  • MHYoshimitzuMHYoshimitzu Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    I've been in the habit of collecting these retro collections that are becoming more and more common.

    I picked up Art of Fighting and Fatal Fury at TRU for like, $4 each. Those collections have about three or four games in it that would cost hundreds of dollars if you purchased them on their original console.

    Then we have the Mega Man collections (Classic and X), Street Fighter Anniversary, Sega collections, Capcom collections, Devil May Cry, Metal Gear Solid, and so on. It's easy to see that's where "retro" gaming is going.

    Five or ten years down the road, I wouldn't be surprised to see some of our newest games packaged into one pack for a low price (Bioware RPG collection, anyone?).

    Spoiler:
  • slash000slash000 Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    I don't get why some people "hate" others that still enjoy some of the old, classic games. Why are you an "idiot that needs to grow up" because you occasionally like to revisit classic games like Super Mario Bros 3, Sonic the Hedghog 2, Mega Man 2, Bionic Commando, Contra, PacMan, Galaga, or even not-as-old games like Street Fighter II or Last Blade, or games like Mega Man X, or Super Metroid?


    There is this little bunch of people that think people who enjoy these old games are complete idiots.


    I think that's ridiculous. Look, most old games are shit. But guess what? Most new games are shit too.


    The fact is, if a game has a great, well-executed gameplay mechanic, then it is going to stand the test of time. Yes, the graphics may age, but it can still be fun to play. Heck, if graphics are well executed, even those can stand the test of time.

    Just because most old games are shit doesn't mean that all old games are shit, and it doesn't mean that you're an idiot because you like to play the good ones.

  • slash000slash000 Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Just as another great example: I would also like to add that Street Fighter 3 is a game that is still considered one of the best fighting games ever created, and not only does it still hold up gameplay-wise, and control-wise, but graphically as well.

  • SilvoculousSilvoculous Registered User
    edited September 2008
    slash000 wrote: »
    Heck, if graphics are well executed, even those can stand the test of time.

    Read: Wind Waker.

  • InquisitorInquisitor Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    slash000 wrote: »
    Just as another great example: I would also like to add that Street Fighter 3 is a game that is still considered one of the best fighting games ever created, and not only does it still hold up gameplay-wise, and control-wise, but graphically as well.

    Yup.

    One of my classes got canceled so I had like 4 hours of straight downtime between classes yesterday. There was never less then five people standing around the Street Fighter III machine and for those 4 solid hours there was never a moment when there weren't two people playing against each other.

    To throw further fuel on the old games are good fire, there are people that still swear by Street Fighter II and play it to this very day.

    B7ozVfx.png
  • darleysamdarleysam Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Inquisitor wrote: »
    slash000 wrote: »
    Just as another great example: I would also like to add that Street Fighter 3 is a game that is still considered one of the best fighting games ever created, and not only does it still hold up gameplay-wise, and control-wise, but graphically as well.

    Yup.

    One of my classes got canceled so I had like 4 hours of straight downtime between classes yesterday. There was never less then five people standing around the Street Fighter III machine and for those 4 solid hours there was never a moment when there weren't two people playing against each other.

    To throw further fuel on the old games are good fire, there are people that still swear by Street Fighter II and play it to this very day.

    And that's what I was going for. Street Fighter II or III are good because they are well-crafted games, not because they are old games. There are plenty of games from the same era, even other fighting games, that are utter arse. They might've sold well or been popular at the time, but are rubbish now. Then you get one or two, as you will today, that will still stand out in years to come.

  • bloodatonementbloodatonement Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    I think there is a difference between "still play" and will "start playing." There are plenty of old games that I used to play that I'll go back and play. There are far fewer that I haven't played before that I've gone back and actually enjoyed enough to play through.

    wpf91qjuczat.jpg
    Steam ID: Good Life
  • InquisitorInquisitor Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    I think there is a difference between "still play" and will "start playing." There are plenty of old games that I used to play that I'll go back and play. There are far fewer that I haven't played before that I've gone back and actually enjoyed enough to play through.

    I picked up Street Fighter III for the first time about a year and a half ago, and it's much older then that. (not sure how old, exactly).

    But yeah, it can be very tough to go back to an older game without that extra push from nostalgia.

    B7ozVfx.png
  • DarmakDarmak Godking of the Snerkywizards Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    darleysam wrote: »
    Inquisitor wrote: »
    slash000 wrote: »
    Just as another great example: I would also like to add that Street Fighter 3 is a game that is still considered one of the best fighting games ever created, and not only does it still hold up gameplay-wise, and control-wise, but graphically as well.

    Yup.

    One of my classes got canceled so I had like 4 hours of straight downtime between classes yesterday. There was never less then five people standing around the Street Fighter III machine and for those 4 solid hours there was never a moment when there weren't two people playing against each other.

    To throw further fuel on the old games are good fire, there are people that still swear by Street Fighter II and play it to this very day.

    And that's what I was going for. Street Fighter II or III are good because they are well-crafted games, not because they are old games. There are plenty of games from the same era, even other fighting games, that are utter arse. They might've sold well or been popular at the time, but are rubbish now. Then you get one or two, as you will today, that will still stand out in years to come.

    I don't think anybody here is arguing that certain games are good because they're old, they're good because they're well-made and just happen to be old.

    PIZTDhW.jpg
  • Shoegaze99Shoegaze99 Registered User
    edited September 2008
    I think there is a difference between "still play" and will "start playing." There are plenty of old games that I used to play that I'll go back and play. There are far fewer that I haven't played before that I've gone back and actually enjoyed enough to play through.
    We see it pretty much any time there is a sequel to an old classic. Check the Fallout thread for many, many people going back to play the original for the first time - and enjoying it! Happens with lots of other franchises, too. The new game sparks an interest in the older games. Those older games that stand the test of time will be played and loved by those new players.

  • MundaneSoulMundaneSoul Registered User
    edited September 2008
    I pretty much agree with slash on all fronts.

    Reginald wrote: »
    Heavy Rain is what Martin Scorsese would see if he played Katamari Damacy.

    Score: 8 out of a possible bacon.
  • RainbowDespairRainbowDespair Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Shoegaze99 wrote: »
    I think there is a difference between "still play" and will "start playing." There are plenty of old games that I used to play that I'll go back and play. There are far fewer that I haven't played before that I've gone back and actually enjoyed enough to play through.
    We see it pretty much any time there is a sequel to an old classic. Check the Fallout thread for many, many people going back to play the original for the first time - and enjoying it! Happens with lots of other franchises, too. The new game sparks an interest in the older games. Those older games that stand the test of time will be played and loved by those new players.

    But the opposite also exists. Like me, I was like "Ooh, this new Fallout game looks pretty cool and GameTap just got the first one, let's give it a try!" and then giving up after a couple hours because I just wasn't having much fun. The clunky interface and old graphics ruined the game for me.

    EDIT: I don't hate old games, but I have enough trouble finding enough time to try to keep up with all of the worthwhile new games. An old game has to be truly exceptional (or have major nostalgia value for me) for it to find its way in my schedule.

  • maximumzeromaximumzero I...wait, what? New Orleans, LARegistered User regular
    edited September 2008
    What is the criteria for Retro Gaming?

    Because if you say, for example, Jet Grind Radio is shit you're full of said shit.

    Same goes for Kirby's Adventure.

    oIi9lub.png
    Favicon.ico maximumzero / KrSaEN3.png 0860-3352-3335 / a80250598aa8cc2ffb8563e971973b3d5324b5c2185533c7337134de.ico?ad13179b567f3ff7b14378a5232870d1 eBay Shop / twitter-bird-16x16.png Twitter
  • Shoegaze99Shoegaze99 Registered User
    edited September 2008
    Shoegaze99 wrote: »
    I think there is a difference between "still play" and will "start playing." There are plenty of old games that I used to play that I'll go back and play. There are far fewer that I haven't played before that I've gone back and actually enjoyed enough to play through.
    We see it pretty much any time there is a sequel to an old classic. Check the Fallout thread for many, many people going back to play the original for the first time - and enjoying it! Happens with lots of other franchises, too. The new game sparks an interest in the older games. Those older games that stand the test of time will be played and loved by those new players.

    But the opposite also exists.

    Of course. Not everyone is going to like something just because it's considered a classic. I'd certainly not argue otherwise.

  • Hexmage-PAHexmage-PA Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Good games never stop being good.

    For the most part, I prefer retro games and newer games that adhere to concepts gleaned from the classics. I also prefer 2D games to 3D games, and I think most games should have bosses. Whenever I hear people say things like "There's no reason to produce 2D games for the current generation of hardware" or "Bosses are an outdated concept", I get highly ticked off.

    Friend Code: 1590-5696-7916
    Friend Safari Type: Rock
  • EriosErios Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    ITT: Sturgeon's law (revelation).

    Steam: erios23, Live: Coconut Flavor, Origin: erios2386.
  • PeregrineFalconPeregrineFalcon Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Hexmage-PA wrote: »
    Good games never stop being good.

    For the most part, I prefer retro games and newer games that adhere to concepts gleaned from the classics. I also prefer 2D games to 3D games, and I think most games should have bosses. Whenever I hear people say things like "There's no reason to produce 2D games for the current generation of hardware" or "Bosses are an outdated concept", I get highly ticked off.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xIUk_Z93-Ms

    Looking for a DX:HR OnLive code for my kid brother.
    Can trade TF2 items or whatever else you're interested in. PM me.
  • brandotheninjamasterbrandotheninjamaster Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Inquisitor wrote: »

    To throw further fuel on the old games are good fire, there are people that still swear by Street Fighter II and play it to this very day.

    Yes, a great deal in fact. I just happened to be watching some interviews last night on G4 On Demand on Street Fighter 4 and the main focus the people behind it have is to keep it like SF2. I can remember the guy's name but he said that if someone says that this game plays like SF2, then he considers it a great compliment.

  • GoodOmensGoodOmens Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    The real question is not whether retro games are shit, because that's ludicrous. The real question is whether the shit/quality ratio has changed significantly through the years.

    steam_sig.png
    IOS Game Center ID: Isotope-X
  • FiarynFiaryn Omnicidal Madman Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Inquisitor wrote: »

    To throw further fuel on the old games are good fire, there are people that still swear by Street Fighter II and play it to this very day.

    Yes, a great deal in fact. I just happened to be watching some interviews last night on G4 On Demand on Street Fighter 4 and the main focus the people behind it have is to keep it like SF2. I can remember the guy's name but he said that if someone says that this game plays like SF2, then he considers it a great compliment.

    I just can't comprehend this mind set. Even the best, most enjoyable game becomes tiresome for me after so long spent playing it. At that point it's only good for the very occasional replay.

    Soul Silver FC: 1935 3141 6240
    White FC: 0819 3350 1787
  • InquisitorInquisitor Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Fiaryn wrote: »
    I just can't comprehend this mind set. Even the best, most enjoyable game becomes tiresome for me after so long spent playing it. At that point it's only good for the very occasional replay.
    chess_blue_setup.jpg

    If a game is deep and nuanced enough it's replayability approaches infinity. For some, at least.

    B7ozVfx.png
  • The_ScarabThe_Scarab Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    GoodOmens wrote: »
    The real question is not whether retro games are shit, because that's ludicrous. The real question is whether the shit/quality ratio has changed significantly through the years.

    It has definitely increased.

    Some games can mask over poor design choices with incredible (for the launch period) graphics and effect.

    Clearly, these games become redundant years later.

    I'd imagine a lot of games right now will fall into that trap so easily when their visuals are nothing more than the 8 bit pixels of yore.

    scarab you have mental problems
  • Shoegaze99Shoegaze99 Registered User
    edited September 2008
    I don't think the ratio has changed in the slightest. I think we have about the same amount of gold to shit as we always have.

  • InquisitorInquisitor Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    I think the ratio has changed, if only because gamers are a larger market now which means more shovelware crap titles like barbie horse adventures.

    If we are just talking about games aimed at "gamers" then I'd say the ratio is the same.

    B7ozVfx.png
  • THEPAIN73THEPAIN73 Oathbreaker KingslayerRegistered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Old game =/= Jet Grind Radio

    Old game does = Pitfall

    Facebook | Amazon | Twitter | Youtube | PSN: ThePain73 | Steam: ThePain73
    3DS FC: 5343-7720-0490
  • shyguyshyguy Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Oh my god this thread makes me feel about a hundred years old. Final Fantasy 7, Metal Gear Solid, and Street Fighter 3 are what we're calling "old games" now?!

    At any rate, I agree that this is all very silly.

    Two weeks ago, my best friend and I sat down in front of the TV and had an absolute blast playing King of Fighters '94 on the Virtual Console, and that's not even a particularly good older game!

    It's true that people who seek out older games won't be as numerous as people who want the latest and shiniest, but that's true of all media, so who cares?

  • ilmmadilmmad Registered User
    edited September 2008
    Uh, Spiderman 2 is old but I still love it because it has amazing web controls tat have yet to be duplicated.

    Ilmmad.gif
  • XtarathXtarath Registered User
    edited September 2008
  • urahonkyurahonky Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Shoegaze99 wrote: »
    I don't think the ratio has changed in the slightest. I think we have about the same amount of gold to shit as we always have.

    I agree. I think that now that we have the Internet it's much easier to see what games are shit than we did when we were kids. I know when I was a kid, the only selling point for a game was the cover (or if I knew who was in the game: TMNT, Mario, etc). Unfortunately that made for a LOT of terrible games.

    Saturday Oct 4th @ 3pm EST I will be hosting a Game Night with a bunch of friends. We plan to stream everything to the following twitch account, so please join us!
    Twitch.tv account: GameNightGoesll
    Direct Link
  • MrMonroeMrMonroe Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    Inquisitor wrote: »
    Fiaryn wrote: »
    I just can't comprehend this mind set. Even the best, most enjoyable game becomes tiresome for me after so long spent playing it. At that point it's only good for the very occasional replay.
    chess_blue_setup.jpg

    If a game is deep and nuanced enough it's replayability approaches infinity. For some, at least.

    I think you were looking for

    Edit: sorry, was way hueger than I thought.
    Spoiler:

    Also, NBA Jam Tournament Edition. Timeless.

    And no, I will not play with turbo on. Or with the hotspots, you heathen.

  • The_ScarabThe_Scarab Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    shyguy wrote: »
    Oh my god this thread makes me feel about a hundred years old. Final Fantasy 7, Metal Gear Solid, and Street Fighter 3 are what we're calling "old games" now?!

    At any rate, I agree that this is all very silly.

    Two weeks ago, my best friend and I sat down in front of the TV and had an absolute blast playing King of Fighters '94 on the Virtual Console, and that's not even a particularly good older game!

    It's true that people who seek out older games won't be as numerous as people who want the latest and shiniest, but that's true of all media, so who cares?

    I know what you mean.

    N64 is not 'old nintendo'. the fucking megadrive/genesis is not 'classic sega'.

    Final Fantasy 7 is not old final fantasy. heck, ill bet 90% of the FF fanbase have not played any of the games 1 thru 6 or even heard of them outside of the logical assumption that 7 was the 7th one in the series.

    scarab you have mental problems
  • DusT_HounDDusT_HounD Registered User regular
    edited September 2008
    I know it's not what some of the crusties on here are calling 'old' (1996), but Guardian Heroes anyone?

    God damn, i love that game.

Sign In or Register to comment.