/vr/ - Retro Games

>>6565118
Even Nintendo Power wasn't shy about saying it was a game for tiny babies.

>>4545860
There's a difference between "objective" and "literally making up technobabble because nobody knows what this means yet". And surprisingly, despite being a made-to-shill-anything rag, it still would give a fair review more often than not.
Here's Pokemon, a game that they knew (and ADVERTISED) that Japanese consumers spent millions of dollars on due to pokemania, and they still gave it a "It's decent but also an easy baby game" score.
>>4545948
>First-person shooters are way too commonplace today.
>How many Doom games can gamers take before they are fed up?
Poor Dan, I wonder what he'd think of this horrible future.