/vr/ - Retro Games

>>6296650
>>6296651
>>6296874

Didn't age well. Games that were considered good in their time, but unenjoyable today.
How is that simple concept so hard to grasp you turbo autists?

>>6296643
Yes. Of course "aging well" is a thing. It is in all media.

The much more interesting discussion would be whether X game did indeed age poorly, and why?

This is like faggots trying to define "what is art" instead of just discussing the quality of X art.

>>2211787
> just look at this network they made on youtube.

Yes, please elaborate anon.