/vr/ - Retro Games

>>3619657

Just...No.

/thread.

>>3619657
> implying advanced graphics = good game
to each his own

mods i am being triggered help
my safe space is being violated

>>3619661
Graphics are just so bad. Why arent games 3d? Why isnt there anti-aliasing or 4k in old games?

Also controls suck. Seriously take mario, it has only 2 buttons. Compare that to Assasins creed.

Controllers not wireless.

Shit sound

Etc.

>>3619657

I guess you think modern music is the best and old music sucks right, that's why the majority of old music is still praised today and your MTV pop music goes into the trash soon after its released. You don't know anything about retro gaming and why retro games will never disappear unlike your disposable Grand Theft Auto - Call of Duty garbage games.

>>3619664
They look pretty good to me.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EGGXBV40UvA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sVWIw6Qzgok

>>3619664
Assassin's Creed, the game where nobody in an entire theater notices a 220lbs man in a cape clambering across the balconies during a play.

Assassin's Creed, the game that railroads you constantly and has some of the worst combat mechanics I have ever seen.

Assassin's Creed, a game that could've had a good premise; assassins throughout history, but they had to shunt sci-fi nonsense into it.

Assassin's Creed, a game where you hold down one button to do awesome things.

>>3619664

>>3619695
Better than SMB, seriously the story is shit. no cut scenes. You cant upgrade anything. Shit graphics. Retro sucks.

>>3619698
Mate, I'm just indulging in your trolling for mutual amusement but you no longer amuse me so I'm just gonna go.

>>3619664
You ask pretty silly questions, honestly. Yes, the games were not as technologically advanced. And I assume to you this might be the only reason to play new games, but there are other people with different preferences than you. So, what's your problem then? Retro games simply aren't for you then. Probably the best option for you is to buy a powerful PC. But sure stay away from emulators and so on. To each his own as I said.

Or are you one of those "stop enjoying the things you enjoy!!!" people?

>>3619697
What's the game?

>>3619718

Little Nemo

>>3619714
Retro games have shit graphics and no DLC. Also no early access. How can you defend them?

>>3619726
>and no DLC
I haven't even read any other post in this thread and already know this is just bait. Try harder, anon-kun.

>>3619734
You retro losers delude yourself into thinking DLC is bad because old games dont have it. It is just extra content that means one can enjoy a game forever. Zelda wishes it had DLC.

>>3619738
Ahem

>>3619726
There's no early access because they came out years ago.

No one's defending retro games because there's nothing to defend from yet in this thread. You dislike them simply for what they are. Every point about them you hate is the point other people like. You might as well ask "how can you like oranges if they are sweet".

So your points are very subjective. Therefore, they don't even rustle anyone's jimmies here. The only one with rustled jimmies is you, and mind you, no one here forces you to play retro games

>>3619706
u ragequit because I am right

You guys are fucking easy at falling for this shit

>>3619726
>no early access

How about a 20-year early access?

>this whole thread

>>3619754
released 2000 so not retro.

>>3619754
>On Holiday
gtfo