/vr/ - Retro Games

>>10586119
good sprite art made with good technology is ageless though. what are "graphics" in a technological sense good for if not giving the devs room to get across cool art with less limits? arcade technology in particular allowed for really elaborate characters & backgrounds. old arcade Capcom beat-em-ups still have amazing visuals today cuz the technology was strong enough to allow their artists, which were some of the best in history of games, to really flex with the artwork & animation. not to mention limitations can also breed really charming visuals - look at Mighty Final Fight.

plus there's plenty of 2D ones with more variety in the moveset, fuck even Streets of Rage developed more & more moves as it went on & Final Fight 3 gives you extra fighting game-like moves too. you have the Capcom DnD stuff if you want more variety in your basic approach to combat. I also don't really differentiate between 2d & 3d/2.5d that much cuz the basic appeal is pretty similar. Die Hard Arcade/Dynamite Deka had sequels and I get the same sense of fun when I play those I haven't emulated Asian Dynamite yet though
>>10586117
they can be hard as shit though, so what makes them casual? coin-feeding? by this standard even the best-designed shoot-em-ups with more depth than beat-em-ups are "casual" cuz you can credit-spam and just enjoy the presentation. does a game allowing you to play it casually make it inherently casual?
>>10585378
>>10584760
"plodding and tedious" is nonspecific & doesn't say anything beyond "I don't like it". could might as well apply to modern From Software games or Monster Hunter or something if they're not someone's cup of tea.