Do old/retro games hold up well over time?

[Dud]

My question is, are old games equally enjoyable now compared to when they were originally released x years ago?

I'm sure the answers will be different based on what kind of gaming you still do. For instance if you don't play current generation games, you'll probably answer yes, but for those of us that have bought every new form of hardware that has come out, our enthusiasm for classic Sega consoles and what not is based on fond memories of past games. I've noticed that some of these old games, particularly the ones I missed back in the day aren't satisfying, yet the ones that I remember loving, I still enjoy. Then there is the third group of games that include games I missed when they came out, but even today I fully enjoy like Panzer Dragoon Saga, Phantasy Star IV etc... So I am on the fence on this issue, but please like two or three people come here and discuss, it's deader than... dead here lately.

 

[Malakai]

Some games seem to get better with time (Combat, Yars Revenge - atari 2600. Others seem to fade away (Crystalis - NES,) and a few will have a special place for gamers always (Street fighter 2 -genesis/3do/snes/arcade/saturn/psx, Lunar series - sega cd, saturn, psx, gba)

 

[it290]

Y'know, to some extent, I probably appreciate classic games more now than I did in the past, because with hindsight it's easier to see how good some of those games really are. The reverse is true as well, of course. There was a time in my life when I thought Bad Dudes was a really, really good game.

 

[it290]

Actually, come to think of it, it can't really be labelled 'classic' if it doesn't hold up over time, can it?

 

[Dud]

Originally posted by it290@Mon, 2005-06-27 @ 05:31 PM

Actually, come to think of it, it can't really be labelled 'classic' if it doesn't hold up over time, can it?

[post=135875]Quoted post[/post]​

Good point, I should change that.

EDIT: Done

 

[Scared0o0Rabbit]

I tend to play my 8bit and 16bit era games more than my more recent ones. Part of the reason behind that though is things like save states and fast forward on emulators, which really help to get past annoying or slow parts of games.

 

[Zaksund]

I think so too. Its not that new games aren't fun and all. I still have a blast with them. But it almost seems as though older games found a concept that was fun and crafted the game around it. If that game also happened to have awesome graphics or something truly fantastic like sampled speech :lol: , then that was just bonus! Nowadays, it just seems like developers cram stuff into games just cause they can. I remember I was in EB games looking for something for PS2 (I'm not giving up on this system yet...ended up getting Clock Tower 3) and the synopsis on the back of game cases reads more like a spec sheet!! And while I'm glad developers could get the character's nostrils to flare when they breathe, if the core game isn't fun..once the graphics whore in me subsides, then I truly won't give a crap. There are tons of exceptions, but generally that's my take. Its almost like features are primary while fun is an afterthought...when it used to be the other way around.

That and, by and large...new games are waaaaay too easy. And while it could be the arcade gamer in me talkin', I find the challenge is THE most fun part of a game.

Remember Contra HC? That game was tough and no one wanted to start that damn game from the beginning, so you made sure you did your best the whole game. After all the excellent and diverse boss battles you finally won and had a feeling of accomplishment...and quite possibly fired the cart up again to see if you could get another ending. My games now are generally beaten by the following weekend and then shelved. My palms don't sweat, my heart isn't pounding, and half the time I'm thinking of SS4/Ehrgeiz combos or something else while I'm playing. I'm more or less just playing to see what happens next, not cause its actually fun.

You know its sad when you'll read reviews of games and reviewers will take of points because theres actually a learning curve or some degree of difficulty to the thing. When will developers learn: Don't hold my hand, don't give me god-mode or some equivalent, and don't give me watered down enemy AI just so its easier for me to see more of the boring game you've crafted, as gamers...let us actually use our skill to come out on top and realize that YOU DO NOT NEED THE TWINSTICKS TO PLAY THIS FREAKIN' GAME!!! Just kiddin' (where'd that come from).

Heh, kinda went off on a tangent here, but I guess you can still find the central message somewhere :lol: .

 

[RitualOfTheTrout]

Id hafta say I agree with just about everything thats been said here. Games like Mario Bros, Blaster Master, Shining Force Series, Sonic Series on Genesis are all still awesome to play for me today, no matter how many times iv gone through them. However some games that I never bothered playing back in the day do not interest me at all today and then some games I thought were great then (example: Bart man VS radioactive man) just arent as fun as I remember them.

One thing I love though is letting kids of todays generation play the classics, Nester DC is a great way for that, my little nephew loves to play mario brothers. Its kinda cool watching him progress from sucking to becoming better and better all the while enjoying games that are older than he is in some cases.

Sometimes I think im just like those old men we used to hear talking as kids, how everything now is bad and how great things were in the day.

 

[Malakai]

As much fun as things were back in the day, I always seemed to dream about when things got better. My version of better was when home console graphics became no different than the arcade graphics (At the same time). The SNES came pretty damn close to this, with TMNT and Street fighter II about like the arcade, and then ya had the saturn and psx, and then skip the n64 completely, and there was the dreamcast. Its games were near arcade-perfect, at the same time the games were coming to the arcades, and then the xbox, where there is literally no difference between the arcade and console version of a game (except maybe less continues on some, and no quarters)

I know that graphics don't make a game, but if you hung around the arcades back then, seeing all of these awesome graphics, and then think about how bad the graphics are on your 8-bit nes, it's only fair that consoles reach the same point, but I suppose it could also end arcade gaming as we know it, and apparently has to a large degree.

Now that the graphics in the arcade and the consoles are the same, I just hope that we will start to see some games with not only superior graphics, but superior storyline, gameplay, something that is challenging, and long.... We've got enough 5 minute fighters out there.. let's see something new.

 

[CrazyGoon]

Originally posted by Malakai@Fri, 2005-07-01 @ 02:05 PM

We've got enough 5 minute fighters out there.. let's see something new.

[post=136125]Quoted post[/post]​

Risks come with change. Developers risk a flop if the new take of the fighter genre isn't received well. The consumer risks loosing the old, in favor of the new; granted that the new is well received.

 

[IronMongeR]

I'd say sometimes. When I go back and play a game from 5-10 years ago I am often shocked at how it's not as good as I remembered. But there are always going to be all-time classics that age really well. E.g. Road Rash, Streets of Rage, Sega Rally.

 

[msimplay]

i feel that it depends on what era of retro gaming you talk about

For example its true to say that the 8 bit games of their day do not compare in complexity to their new sequel bretherin. However for me it hasn't really changed all that much since the 32bit era

, Most of the 3d advancements like involving plotlines and new gameplay were made their from my point of view. I can see graphics have changed much , However i can still play Virtua Fighter 2 and think man this games excellent. This goes for many of the 32bit genre. I think that the 32bit era had the right mix of 2d to 3d gameplay whereas these days its mainly 3d.

I feel that the 8bit genre seemed to have more simple gameplay after all many games only used 2 buttons.

I still enjoy the classics on 8bit Nintendo / Master System however i feel they have aged and not as enjoyable as i once remember them.

The 16bit era did much to improve upon the 8bit genre. The most notable improvement i noticed was Mode 7 which was a technology which presented unsurpassed 3d for their time.

Infact for me a lot of games on 16bit consoles remain enjoyable however some did age very badly. Actraiser on the snes its extremley simple one hit attack motion seems dated but back then it felt great to play. However when the leap was made from 16 to 32bit it was probably the most notable change in history because 3d was new territory that many gamers hadn't seen before in the home to the degree that it was when the Playstation and Sega Saturn arrived. Infact my 32bit systems are still in use because many of the gameplay elements haven't really changed all that much.

Despite graphical enhancements Metal Gear Solid on the ps1 remains an all time classic that it seems plays as good today as it ever did previously.

I would say the 32bit genre + 128bit dreamcast was one of the best.

Them systems had absolute greatness with regards to have games of every single genre in plentiful quantities. Scrolling shootemups for example.

2d games is one of the reasons i love gameboy advance so much. The system brings the 16bit era back with avengence

 

[yourmaster]

Do old/retro games hold up well over time?

Simply put, it depends on if the old/retro game is fun to play and has any good qualities that make you want to come back to it (like unique/fun gameplay, challenges your skilll, addictiveness, multi-player, good story).

And how many "modern" games will hold up well over time? Modern games need to offer new and different play mechanics, not just better graphics/effects and more polygons.

Seems most modern games use the same type of cinema scenes, about the same camera angles during gameplay (behind the character), same themes (kill, beat-em up, stealth, drive), emotionless/unnatural expressions on polygon characters, and have load times. To me it almost feels the same 3D game engine is being used. But I'm also aware of the few modern games that do stand out.

With most of today's games, I agree with what Zaksund said. I'm just more or less playing to see what happens next, not cause it's actually that fun.

3D polygon games are now the "norm", but why have 2D games been left behind ?

I think developers need to add variety to today's polygon-based videogame market by also making new 2D sprite-based games that take advantage of the processing power of today's consoles (and I don't mean releasing old 2D games with a few enhancements.)

I don't think I've ever seen ANY new 2D sprite-based games that take full-advantage of today's 128-bit consoles.

Just imagine your favorite 2D game having an unlimited color-pallete, sharper graphics, Dolby-stereo sound, more animated/multi-scrolling backgrounds, more frames of animation for characters, more enemies/items, no slowdown, longer levels, all dialogue uses voice, multi-player, online, etc .

 

[CrazyGoon]

Well said, yourmaster.

3D polygon games are now the "norm", but why have 2D games been left behind ?

I know! It's maddening, isn't it? :smash

Just imagine...

All the time

 

[lordofduct]

What is upsetting is that even portable systems are entering the 3D realm more now and soon enough we won't even have there to go for some good ol' 2Ding fun...

GRRRRRR!

Thankfully some people are staying 2D on the DS like Sonic and Lunar Dragon Song!

 

[Dud]

I'm optimistic that Gameboy Advance will last into the 2010's. If it does I think it will show that there is a demand for 2D games, and the next Gameboy will continue to have 2D games. But I'll admit it doesn't look very good, even mobile phone games are starting to go 3D, that new Need For Speed game being an example.

Oh well, videogames are such a major part of my life, I'll stick with them no matter how bad things get. Games aren't worth abandoning at this point, there are still good ones being made occasionally. It's the same with movies, just because most movies suck now I don't give up on everything new that comes out and only watch old Hitchcock films like some kind of disgruntled old man. My suggestion to everyone that only plays 2D games is to get your hip waders on and try and find something current-gen that you like.

 

[lordofduct]

good, cause Hitchcock films are boring! Well I don't like em', and I like Kubrick films for christ sake!

 

[it290]

I like Hitchcock films, but not all of 'em. Rope is kinda crappy, IMO.

 

[Kuta]

At home I have a Mega Drive and an Xbox sitting bext to each other in my living room. One thing I have noticed over recent months is that my Mega Drive is the one which is getting played to death where as I hardly ever touch my Xbox. This is surprizing seeing as the Mega Drive is over 10 years older than my Xbox. Is this a sign of superior product or am I just a freak?

 

[Dud]

Originally posted by Kuta@Sun, 2005-07-31 @ 07:32 PM

At home I have a Mega Drive and an Xbox sitting bext to each other in my living room. One thing I have noticed over recent months is that my Mega Drive is the one which is getting played to death where as I hardly ever touch my Xbox. This is surprizing seeing as the Mega Drive is over 10 years older than my Xbox. Is this a sign of superior product or am I just a freak?

[post=137673]Quoted post[/post]​

Not suprising at all, even if it weren't summertime and there were new games coming out, games these days don't have much replay value. I find myself finishing games once and never playing them again way too often. If I still had a Genesis and Streets of Rage 2, I guarantee I'd be playing that instead of World of Warcraft or Half-Life 2.