/vr/ - Retro Games

>What is it that keeps you playing old games? The difficulty and overall complexity?
Modern game went to shit.

I play video games and some of them are old. That's all there is to it.

It's my spergers

I play all kind of games old and new.

A variety of reasons. One reason is that there are hundreds of thousands of games released in the last 20+ years, so there are bound to be hidden gems waiting to be discovered. Another reason is, yes, nostalgia, revisiting games of our youth. Still another reason is that some games are more tightly designed than the ones now - sure, there is still a lot of crap shovelware, but a lot of older games also get to the point quicker and don't need to be bogged down by hours of cinematics.

Old games just have a charm to them.
I play them because they're great games regardless of age, but there are design philosophies and other little tidbits that they ooze that are refreshing from more modern games.

I like them, some of those were far ahead of their time and are very good to play even today.

Certain genre are also dead now, like SHMUPS or run and gun games so there's no other way to play those if you feel in need for a quick fix.

Also, certain genres have declined imho and became very unimaginative, uninspired and mediocre, like turn based JRPGs.

I'm also being haunted by my backlog and all the shit I missed out when I was a kid for various reasons, now I have the time and means to play those games.

>>2212949

I really, really dislike people who make dumbass sweeping statements like "MODERN GAMES SUCK". There are tons of great games coming out in sorts of genres that we would have creamed ourselves over if they were on old systems back in the day. Most people who say this seem to have just looked at AAA garbage and called it a day, and don't even own a handheld.

>>2212945
This.

You might as well ask why I still listen to any pre-2000 music.

I think I like experimental periods more than anything else. That may be why I like the PS1 era of JRPGs (plus some NES/SNES) more than others. Even though obviously, they took many many established cliches.

You just don't see much of crazy genre mashups or interesting ideas outside of indie anymore.

The price. Old games were all I could afford and I don't want to spend tons of money on hardware either.
I don't feel bad about pirating 25 year old games that were never released here either.

I think they're more fun

games used to be made by developers with soul. sure there was plenty of shovelware bullshit on the nes etc, but the good games really shine. sure there are a couple good games released every year now but even those are very rarely made with the love and care that old games were.

also they are super fun. but so are some new games. i don't limit myself to exclusively old games for no reason like some kind of autism

There are lots of them and a good chunk of them are fun.

Discounting the NES which was like 11% fun tops. 600 games and maybe 50 of them were playable let alone beatable. Nintendo really got picking a handful of titles and spending billions ramming them into everybody's eyes every 5 seconds down to a science early on.

>>2213856
To be fair anon, to be fair. Copy and pasting source code was a lot simpler back in the day. It may not have been as refined as it is now but changing already existing source code was a damn sight simpler.

>>2212941
What keeps me playing Hybrid Heaven?
There's really no other game like it. That's how it goes for a lot of old games really, the reason I play them, at least.

>>2212941
>What is it that keeps you playing old games?
They're actually good, unlike the shit of today.

>>2212947
Then shouldn't you be playinged the WiiU instead?

Passion for gaming, I wanna play them all

simplicity. I miss games that are pick up and play. nowadays I'm too busy to get super-invested in deep games. For a while I was basically playing no vidya at all, and then I dug in the basement and rediscovered my old consoles and gotten into playing older games again.

Obsession.

I play old stuff because all i got was second hand crap growing up (no zeldas, marios, super marios, no psx, n64 etc). Its my goal to play as many of the good titles as possible from the 64bit era and previous.

>>2212941
I play modern games but there are so many cases were old games are better.
How about the max 5 second from power on to play start. Modern console games are an event that needs to be planned for and time booked in your schedule. Fine when you want to devote a weekend afternoon to shooting everything that moves with a few friends. Not so much when you just want to just play for 30 mins. In particular on the go because the worst retro console game is better than the best modern mobile game. Unless you don't have a proper mobile gaming device and actually like candy crush. Not that there's anything wrong with that.

>>2212949
Pretty much this OP, it just so happens that my vr backlog is far bigger than the non-vr part.

I believe this happens because of one thing I noticed that separates these games: limitations.

Developers had to be way more creative about how to do what they intended with the system they were working. No wonder a bunch of recent games feels kinda samefacey, graphically speaking, since achieving a quite decent amount of realism is easy these days. I simply prefer the distinct graphics from before when realism wasn't right around the corner, where the visual difference between games was clearer like the distinct brusheworks of different painters. Where music limitations generated something that wasn't the "generic hollywood orchestra" soundtrack. Where gameplay is more cherished than story.

Still, both modern and retro have their just part of gems and hidden gems as well as shovelware shit and such.

>>2212941
They are free and instantly available through emulation. Also, that's all my shitty WinXP laptop can run.

>>2212963
That's a good point, but there might be a little more to it than that. The space between 1999 and today is a much bigger chunk of video games' history than it is of music's history. Also the hardware games were presented on is an integral part of the game, while the hardware music is presented on doesn't make much of a difference.

>>2212941

I'm a poorfag and can't afford a computer/console to play anything newer than Gamecube.

>>2212943
Not true at all, but if you feel that way thats fine.

>>2212945
This is incredibly true. I'll play anything. Some things I nostalgia for, sometimes I just want to play some good games. Generally I don't myself with any desire to play games on Sega consoles and I've been on a Playstation kick recently (1-4).

Its fun to play the games I didn't get to play when I was a kid that I saw in magazines or video rental places, or friends houses, or at stores, but its also great to play some of the new games that are coming out these days too (looking forward to Bloodborne a lot). Its also fun to play some older games with my friends who nostalgia trip with me.

At the end of the day. I guess I just like video games of all types and thats all there is to it.

The fact that when I start it up I don't sit through a half hour scripted sequence trying to shove a shitty story by a hack Hollywood script writer down my throat. That being said I do play the occasional new game.

I only play games I always wanted to play as a kid but never got the chance to or games I loved as a kid and have special memories of.

I don't understand why one would want to play old games over new ones unless they have sentimental feelings for them. I'm playing Far Cry 4 right now and it's everything my childhood self wanted in video games and more.

It's mainly loading times that make me not want to play newer games, though my 2DS seems to rectify that issue. I love that little thing.

>>2212941
I love the sound design in 1985-1998 games, especially stuff done in MIDI. When we got more sophisticated, realistic sound chips some of that old magic was lost.

>>2214104

Sure it does. Ever listened to something that was recorded on monophone made to be played on a phonograph?

>>2214113
>Not true at all, but if you feel that way that's fine.
Name me 1 AAA game released in the past 10 years that didn't require a patch. Nothing from Nintendo.
There me be a few but my point stands. Video games are trash these days. Only way to find a gem is to stay away from EA and Activision. The big money titles used to actually be good but I guess that's been forgotten.

>>2214451

>AAA
>Nothing Nintendo

Why these restrictions? Because you'd be wrong otherwise?

Buy a fucking handheld.

>>2214451

EA was notoriously awful in the Genesis days, too. They made some good stuff but, like today, that was mostly stuff they just published.

Unless you're going to insist that games like Shaq Fu and the tidal wave of sports rehashes were great.

>>2214474
Because Nintendo is the only big name left not putting out shit title after shit title.
>>2214476
>EA was notoriously awful in the Genesis days, too.
They had some decent games. Like the one with the Helicopter. Desert Strike or something. Not great but not terrible.
Also Road Rash.
The rest were basically sports games and more ports.

Compared to today, I can't name a single EA game worth a shit in the last 10 years. Except for some PC titles that eventually got ruined.

They had some really good games on PS1. Mainly racing titles.

They're fun.

>>2214506
Fun is a buzzword.

>>2212941
Maximum comfy. :3

Are there any of you who grew up playing video games from let's say, the time of the first xbox until now but you like to play older games too? I've found a lot of younger people who won't even look at a game if it's older than that, like the old sprite based games, etc.

They'll even scoff at playing the first halo again and it's something they grew up with. I grew up with games like doom 1, quake, warcraft 1&2 and diablo 1. I still enjoy and play them to this day, not all the time, but a fair amount.

It doesn't seem to be like that at all for younger gamers, it's like they just want the newest thing and fuck everything else.

>>2212943
This

>>2214537
This

>>2214507
Will you stop pushing this shit?

>>2214532
Now you're starting to understand why 6th gen and up has such a stigma here. That generation had a significant change in play style and preference.
Trying to explain rts/rpg strategy and theorycraft over a mic to the younger generation is pretty funny. I guess they don't teach how to numbers properly in school anymore. And no, don't tell me it's because they are young. I understood a simple concept like how two instances of 50% chance doesn't equal 100% before I was 10. Or how stacking damage works.
It's worse when you get into fps theorycraft.

Maybe I'm just better off because I knew and played with a lot of dnd and Magic players. Modern gamers can't be bothered to play a real card game anymore. Shit has to free 2 play and micro transactioned out the ass for them to play.

I'm not trying to rag on you and it's awesome that you appreciate the old game.s But damn your generation really makes me scratch my head.

>>2212941

lack of cinematics/"muh graphics" and focus on gameplay across most old games. there are plenty of shit old games of course, but there is a wider selection of games that are interesting in this regard.

there are also plenty of new games that do interesting things here, but most of the ones you hear about are just D-level movies.

Because old games did not tried to look like movies. No unnecessary cutscenes, no expensive voice actors trying to sound deep, etc.

With rare exceptions, I must say, on 80% of modern games, I just play them for the graphics and story, and I play them on casual difficulty so I can finish them as fast as possible.

>>2214532
'95 here. I've been exclusively playing 5th gen and earlier games since 2011, but I always liked old games, even when I did play 6th and 7th gen stuff.

>>2214728

I find that I'm similar in that if I play a modern game to completion it's usually because the story interested me enough to keep going, or something about the graphics appealed to me in some way. The gameplay itself isn't fun or satisfying at all and most of the time the sound design is entirely unmemorable, generic cap guns and shit music.

>>2214451
>Name me 1 AAA game released in the past 10 years that didn't require a patch.

GTAV

>>2214474
>Why these restrictions? Because you'd be wrong otherwise?
He's wrong either way.

OP, I just play retro games because they're games. Fun ones. I don't make a distinction between old or new. You're just as likely to see me playing Contra as you are something made in 2014.

>>2214728
>Because old games did not tried to look like movies. No unnecessary cutscenes, no expensive voice actors trying to sound deep, etc.

Please tell me you're joking. I can see you thinking this if the only retro games you played were pre-SNES, but come on.

>>2214771
No, I'm not. The only retro game that I can think of right now that has these things is Resident Evil and it's clones.

>>2214771
>GTAV
Game requires a day 1 patch. It's garbage like the rest.

>>2214775
Did you never play a JRPG made after 1995 or something?

>>2214775
RPGs, dude.

>>2214776
>Game requires a day 1 patch. It's garbage like the rest.
No it doesn't. I played it through on it's original 2013 release (offline, mind you).

>>2214575

Its because video games are more mainstream. Less interested people are playing them now. due to advertising.

many new games today are too long or have too much to learn and remember each time u leave it for a month, be it plot or mechanics. i like many modern games too but they have to be very accessible for me to get into them

>>2214780
Don't know if you're right or wrong. Probably wrong. Regardless it has shitty DLC.

>>2214784
>Don't know if you're right or wrong.

I'm right considering I didn't even have Xbox live when I played through the game.

>Regardless it has shitty DLC.

This has fuck all to do with anything. And the DLC is all free anyway.

>>2214778
>>2214780

90's RPGs don't even have voice actors. And all of them have fixed cameras. No, they don't look anything like movie wannabes. Let's say, compare Final Fantasy 7 with The Last of Us for example.

>>2214786
>90's RPGs don't even have voice actors.

Is this bait.

>>2212962
yeah, some great indies for 3ds imo

>>2214786
I mean seriously, dude. It's not even good bait.

studying the design. i gotta if i wanna make games myself

>>2214785
I just checked the patch notes are there are a shit ton of patches. First one being about a week after launch.
Fuck that and fuck DLC. Get that shit out of here.

>>2214802
Anon, none of those patches are required for playing the game. Here, and I quote

>Name me 1 AAA game released in the past 10 years that didn't require a patch.

GTAV does not REQUIRE a patch.

And if we're basing a game's quality based on if it ever got patched, you might want to take a good look at a lot of your retro games. You can't always tell from the outside of the box, but a lot of games got multiple releases with minor patching here or there. You ever notice the 1.0 or something after downloading a ROM/ISO?

>Fuck that and fuck DLC.

What does this have to do anything? Why are you bitching about free content? Especially when we aren't even discussing free content, we're discussing *patches*.

>>2214798
>>2214793

I'm referring to the most popular and well-known ones. Final Fantasy, Chrono, Shining Force, Persona, etc.

>>2214809
>Most popular and well known
>Persona in the PSX era

Also, that was a moved goal post, but I'll let it rest here.

>>2214798
I don't know about you, but I think Star Ocean 2 would have been much better without voice acting.

>"CLAUDE HAS ADVANCED FORWARD!"
>"HERE COMES MR ENEMIES"

Xenogears also had an adjustable camera and voice actors for the anime cutscenes and that one card game.

>>2214806
So I'm reading the first patch. This game didn't have online enabled out of the gate? Wasn't that the main selling point?
You were saying about this game not needing patches?

As for you're comment about retro game and patches. You're comparing a a physical revision to a digital patch. Big differences. Very few games and ZERO AAA games are unplayable or missing major features on their first revision. Unlike today with games like GATV that can't even do online multiplayer out of the box.

>>2214816
>You were saying about this game not needing patches?
The single player did not need patches.

>Wasn't that the main selling point?
Jesus, no. It's GTA, not Unreal.

>>2214824
Game needed a patch for a major feature that is advertised on the box. My point stands as said.
Next up for modern game shit list?

>>2214831
>My point stands as said.

Not really, because the game was playable from release.

>Next up for modern game shit list?

So you can move the goalpost and make other arbitrary rules (lol no nintendo) so you can "win"? Nah, we good.

>>2214813
>>2214798
>>2214793
While we're posting 90's rpgs with voice acting and adjustable cameras.

>>2214835
>Not really, because the game was playable from release.
Oh so I could play the cool multiplayer that was advertised on the box day 1?
>So you can move the goalpost and make other arbitrary rules (lol no nintendo) so you can "win"? Nah, we good.
Ya a feature advertised on the box is really moving the goal post.
The game did not have all the features day 1. There for the game was not 100% playable day 1.
No goal posts were moved. Maybe you'll realize just how shit modern games have gotten and stop supporting the shithead developers making them.
You paid for an unfinished game. There is no debate.

>>2212962
I think it's true though that a lot of series worsened which probably is the main reason for retards saying shit like that. Also there is a overall change like >>2214575 wrote.
It seems to me that most gamers do not want to loose any progress at all anymore (because they get the feeling that it'd be wasted time) while wanting the most content. A friend of mine played GTAV on the easiest difficulty with target help while I was watching. I thought it looked great but also boring as fuck the way he played it. Then he died during a mission and didn't even have to redo it from the beginning, he could continue from a few seconds before he died, I don't know if that was just an unlucky example but it was enough for me.
In a lot of games you don't get punished for dying anymore because the focus shifted on them having more content (and multiplayer), making a game difficult was a way of making it feel longer despite limitations of hardware, this isn't necessary anymore.
At least those are the reasons why I don't really like a lot of the new stuff. It could be that this only holds true for the popular games and obviously those are only speculations, I haven't played a representative amount of games from all generations, so it could very well be that I'm talking shit right now, forgive me, if that's the case.

>>2214532
I'm pretty young and I grew up mainly with the PS2 but I had a SNES and a N64 from my brother, so I played with those too. A cousin left a PSX with lots of burned games at my grandma's house, really loved that system despite most of the games being in English and me not yet able to understand much.
I don't care about the age of games at all as long as they're fun but I know exactly what you're talking about, I don't know anyone in my age who plays games before the PS2 era (I also disdain them for playing English games in our language despite the voice acting being shittier, the opportunity of getting better at English and changes in translation).

>>2212941
I play both old and new games. I dislike newer games more because a lot of them reduce level/world sizes and gameplay complexity in favor of graphics. I love modern graphics, but not at the expense of gameplay.

>>2212941
I like games, thus I play games.

Because all of the games have been sorted for me already, and they're much cheaper

>>2214532
I was born in 96 and grew up with a Gamecube.
I think the kids who only want something new are just a result of games becoming more mainstream. The people you're talking about aren't really fans of games, but fans of what's new and popular and what their friends are talking about. It's the equivalent of people shunning classic black and white films to watch a blockbuster or shunning a 60s record because of its dated production to listen to top 40 hits.

>>2214476
Shaq Fu was just published by them as well, developed by the guys behind Another World and Flashback.

My memories of EA from the Megadrive are great. I enjoyed every EA game I had, whether they were the publisher or developer.

Though I was never into sports games so I never had any.

>>2214193
i do it for historical reasons, but also because theyre usually more pick-up-n-play than new games, and often have less extra costs

>>2214310
agreed partly. some new game music is great but now that its possible to just have a hollywood movie soundtrack many opt for that

>>2214532
my first console was a ps2, but i always knew that a lot of good games were older, like in cartoons theyd always play nes-looking games and every kid i knew had a gameboy and pokemon. then i got into older games thru youtube and such and bought a nes and while i like some newer games, older games usually seem to offer more of an actual challenge u know, i wanna play em to compete and win, not see how the plot ends

>>2214852
cough ff13

I play retro games because:

1. Nostalgia
2. Prefer sprite art to 3D
3. Love chip tunes
3. Emulation is free

>>2214476

EA made some great true 3D military simulator games like F-22 and M2 Abrams Battle Tank for Sega Genesis. They probably don't hold up well today but if you played them you'd probably be impressed with what they squeezed out of the system.

They're challenging, short, focus on having catchy music, are straight to the point and often have gorgeous 2D art. Retro throwbacks aside, there aren't many games like that these days so I don't really have much of a choice.

>>2214771
GTA 5 had a day one patch, not to mention the debacle that was GTA Online.

>>2215267
I'm still waiting for the guy to name me a single AAA game.
He's part of the problem of why modern games went to shit. Shit head developers and people with their head so far up their ass buying the shit they produces regardless of how incomplete the game is.
Just gotta have new and shiny. Nothing else matters to them.

They don't treat me like a braindead retard who will wander in circles in a cave for an hour. The Souls series proved just how over reliant games are on hand holding these days by making everyone think they played a super hard game just because they expected the player to think some things out on their own for once.

>>2214780

>No it doesn't. I played it through on it's original 2013 release (offline, mind you).

Even playing off-line PSN was constantly pestering me to update to a new patch. Its online mode was notoriously broken, so much so that Rockstar offered in-game gifts to those that had to suffer through it.

>>2214809
>I'm referring to the most popular and well-known ones

Lunar was an incredibly popular and well known one.

>>2212945
This.

>>2214532

I got my 13 year old brother a Sega Genesis for his birthday and he was super exicted about it. I think it depends on the individual, but onviously if they don't get exposed to it they'll have no reason to care about it.

>>2214728

Dragon's Lair

>>2215261
played shauntae? the 3rd game is out in the us i think, if its like 1 and 2 u might like it

>>2214451
Plenty of cart based games had the original code patched and new carts released with a different version number.
I guess all those games were shit.

I was playing wows latest expansion and if you die you just heal up right were you left off. I know their is an "everybody gotta win" but damn. Still pretty fun movie. But Ive got games that Ive never won. Were losing and never finishing was just the way it was. If they put retro game style on modern games their would be a shit storm the likes you have never seen. Then they would go out of business.

>>2215825
Yes they were patched later on.
Name me one AAA game from NES to N64 that was missing features or unplayable day1. The only thing coming to mind are some import games that weren’t really correctly brought over. If you can count those as AAA in the first place…
The point of the statement wasn’t that if a game receives a patch in its lifetime then it’s shit. It was that a game should release finished.
Just about all the AAA games in the last 10 years released needing a day 1 patch and/or not including all the advertised features.

Modern games are shit period. I don’t know why you're defending these shit practices. You’re not alone either. Got other people saying in this thread things like
>>2212962
>“I really, really dislike people who make dumbass sweeping statements like "MODERN GAMES SUCK".”
Guess what? Over 80% of the industry is EA and Activision. Every single game that make is a shit heap that is released unfinished and/or requires day 1 patching.
If you told me during the 5 th generation that video games are going to slowly decline over the next 15 years. I’d laugh.
If you told me they were not only going to decline but major developers would have the balls to release an unfished game. I’d say the video game industry would collapse before that.
If you told me those 2 things would happen and you have shit suckers like
>>2215825
>>2214474
>>2212962
that not only support it but will say that video game are still good. I’d say we’d be in nuclear winter before that.

Yet here we are today. Flooded with shit game and people that can’t wait to gobble them up.

Blows my mind.

>>2216125
>Guess what? Over 80% of the industry is EA and Activision.

You're full of shit. Stop only paying attention to AAA titles they advertise on TVs at Gamestop. EA and Activision make up a small part of the market. Buy a fucking handheld. It doesn't matter what EA is selling, just don't buy their awful shit and play games that are good instead.

>>2216132
>You're full of shit
> EA and Activision make up a small part of the market.
Counting software sales. It is true. EA and Activsion are the major players in the video game Industry.
>Stop only paying attention to AAA titles they advertise on TVs at Gamestop.
They are the games of today. They are what represents video gaming.
You are looking at video games with extremely narrow eyes. Blinders I guess would be a better example. As a whole modern video gaming is trash.

A few amazing games don't make up for 99% of the market.

>>2216138

Again, who gives a fuck what they're selling? That has no affect on what you're playing.

-I'm- the one with a narrow view of the market? Are you fucking kidding me? You're the one who refuses to see anything but garbage, which shouldn't even matter, because IF IT'S NOT GOOD DON'T FUCKING PLAY IT. No one is making you open your mouth and let EA shit in it. The great games released today without Game Informer covers are plenty of reason to play modern games.

Do you actually have some sort of mental disability? What you're telling me is that you can't enjoy a good game because someone else released a bad game that same year, am I understanding this correctly?

>>2216138
to be fair for every good nes game there were a thousand shitty clones that we just dont remember today because they sucked, like how every movie that came out got made into a clunky and boring platformer that was mostly unplayable. in a few years we'll sort out the gems from all the shitty gamed that are released today. our "duty" is to bring recognition to the occasional good game that comes out today and will be remembered like smb and loz, because otherwise some stupid cod fanboy will grow up to become a games journalist and put all cod games as "top 10 games we remember from the 10's"

>>2216149

>>2216138

Slow day at the office, he?

>>2216149
>Again, who gives a fuck what they're selling? That has no affect on what you're playing.
How does it not? These are the AAA games. The games meant to move consoles. Yet you say they don’t matter? What?

>-I'm- the one with a narrow view of the market? Are you fucking kidding me? You're the one who refuses to see anything but garbage, which shouldn't even matter, because IF IT'S NOT GOOD DON'T FUCKING PLAY IT. No one is making you open your mouth and let EA shit in it. The great games released today without Game Informer covers are plenty of reason to play modern games.
There are good games. None of the are AAA games.

>Do you actually have some sort of mental disability? What you're telling me is that you can't enjoy a good game because someone else released a bad game that same year, am I understanding this correctly?
Do you? Because you’re kept happy with whatever little indie game it is you play, it’s ok for the video game industry to just pump out shit?
That doesn’t affect the overall video game industry? Of course it does. Look where it’s got us.

But hey you just keep playing your little indie game while the video game industry is in this shit state. Maybe keep telling me video games are still “good”.

Idiot.
>>2216153
>to be fair for every good nes game there were a thousand shitty clones
Not talking about. We are talking about AAA games. The big selling games. The games that represent a console. Games that represent video gaming.

>>2216156

I'm on call and haven't been called. Nothing to do but argue with morons online.

>>2212945
>>2212949
If it's a good game, it's good. However, there's a plethora of old ass games I can just download and emulate so I do that.

Looking forward to MGSV.

>>2216125
>some import games
You mean most of the games from that time period? Shitty translations aside...

The first Final Fantasy game. Quite possibly one of the buggiest games from that era I've ever played. Half the spells don't work, half the items don't do what they're supposed to do.

Or, say, the second Megaman game, which is rather famous for a specific bug (metal blade is OP) that makes half the game ridiculously easy.
Or, it would be if sprite flicker didn't make you do the occasional bit of platforming while invisible.

>>2216164
Those are bugs. FF wasn't exactly AAA at that time.
>sprite flicke
That's a hardware issue.

>>2216138
> Only look for Activision and EA
> Seriously, two developers no serious gamer has EVER taken seriously
> says that people are looking at it with "narrow eyes"

No, seriously. Shut the fuck up. Activision is even RELEVANT anymore? And EA just buys whatever the fuck is available to be bought.

And what, they are what represents gaming? LOL. Yeah right, maybe in America (guess what, Europe/Japan and any other country don't give a single shit to your crap american devs)

>>2216158

No, they DON'T MATTER. When we're talking about what you choose to play, they don't matter one lick, unless you choose to play them.

It does not matter if they are AAA. It does not matter what sells. You do not have to follow the crowd.

>Implying I'm even talking about Indie games
You know there's a step inbetween EA and some dude in his basement, right?

We're not fuckig talking about AAA games, we're talkig about games as a whole. You say modern games are shit, but only seem to want to talk about a tiny percentage of available libraries. You've got your head up your ass so far you can't peak out and see that there are tons of titles available that would have made astounding /vr/ era games. What other people buy has no fucking affect on you. You seem to actually have trouble with this idea. Somehow, in your barely-functional mind, you seem to think that in order to find a good game, you would have to physically wade through every copy of Call of Duty ever sold, when all you have to do is just turn to the game you want to play on the shelf and pick that fucker up. Many of the great companies of the /vr/ era are still making great games today, totally unaffected by EA and Activision and Unisoft, and you're discounting all their efforts because OH NO SOMEONE MADE A BAD GAME AND IT WAS POPULAR.

You don't even have to get into modern graphics and 3D cameras. Buy a fucking handheld and play some great fucking side-scrollers, puzzle platformers, even the occasional beat-em-up.

Frankly, I don't gie a fuck if you decide to never touch a sixth gen or past console. That's fine. But I can't sit around and watch someone make retarded statements about how if some big companies released some shitty unfinished games, it means that all modern games are trash.

I like playing old games because old games are actually games, unlike all the tripe that gets released now that want to be movies more then they want to be games.

Fired up Tyrian a day ago and had more fun with it then I've had with modern games in ages.

>>2216171
>And what, they are what represents gaming? LOL. Yeah right, maybe in America (guess what, Europe/Japan and any other country don't give a single shit to your crap american devs)
Good shitpost but your consoles are just as much CoD boxes as they are here. Or fifa.
>>2216173
>We're not fuckig talking about AAA games, we're talkig about games as a whole
And as a whole EA and Activision are the dominate makers.
This really cracks me up. "Oh I play a game made by a developer that maybe gets 5% market share, so video gaming is still good". No... Just no.
Used to be if you bought a AAA games it was good and probably amazing. None of the top selling games were bad.
But today all the top selling games are trash.

Yes AS A WHOLE modern video gaming is trash. Stop looking at it with blinders.

>>2216182

You are looking at it with blinders. You are intentionally exclusing everything but a small percentage of a console's library.
Am I being fucking trolled? If so 10/10, I'm genuinely convinced that you're a walking learning disability.

Lets take your shit logic and apply it to retro games. Popful mail on the Sega CD sold gery low numbers. Meanwhile, there are eleventy-billion copies of Sewer Shark out there! I guess the Sega CD is only defined by Sewer Shark! Wow, the Sega CD is a piece of shit, now I can't play awesome games on it becuase if I do, Sewer Shark will break into my house and rape my me. What a tragedy.

>>2216186
Yes actually SEGA CD was defined by shitty FMV games. That's why it sold terribly. You wouldn't know though. That FMV fad was cool for 5 minutes.

I'm not saying there are no "hidden gem" games for either generation. Modern or retro.
Only the hidden gems are good in modern games. That makes modern video games good?

>>2216173

you're arguing with someone stupid and unreasonable. just move along

>>2216193

So you're saying the Sega CD is awful and you won't play it because there's a bunch of FMV trash on it that you don't have to play? Am I understanding you clearly?

>>2216201

You know what, you're right. Fuck this retard. He can keep himself from enjoying whatever he wants.

>>2216202
There's a few games I want to play on it. Mainly Keio Flying Squadron. Overall ya most the games on it are pretty bad.
Like PS4. There's a game or two on there that look like fun. Not enough to bring me to buy a PS4 though. The games that are meant to move that console, the AAA games are not games I like and are not games I want to support. So it's not worth me investing into the console.
>>2216201
>>2216205
Keep supporting modern games guys! I'll keep laughing. Don't forget to spend that $ in micro transactions.