/vr/ - Retro Games

Cancerous community of retarded manchildren.

They aren't made like that anymore.

Thanks /vr/.

Disc rot

>>4259715
>no HDMI
>no DLC
>no achievements your friends can see online
>infrequent hand holding
>skill required
Should I go on?

>>4259863
0/10
Make your bait less blatant

>>4259715
Old PC games often require vastly different hardware for games to run and look their best.
Floppy disks are dying out, and so are the drives
Emulation is still not up to par (see Blood, anything above 800x600 is too slow to play at a competent level)

>>4259956
>Old PC games often require vastly different hardware for games to run and look their best.
Don't remind me...
I got so many games for pc I basically can't play anymore...

>>4260075
DgVooodoo2 fixes 80% of issues with running old games.

very limited save slots

>>4259956
Good news: BloodGDX is mechanically authentic to Blood 1.0 with partial comp fixes up to 1.21, progressing fast, and a proper renderer instead of the Polymost is being made.

Some very good games aren't translated

Some games (a relatively small portion) that actually would benefit from a saving system don't have it

Disc based games

Compatibility issues with some titles on PC

Games with multiple fairly or vastly different ports which all have a different flaw so it's difficult to choose (nowadays the difference is basically down to performance, if that, and worthless exclusive DLC)

Nostalgia being a negative factor in the aspect that some games are definitely not just that good at all

Some games attempted to look better than was possible, ending up looking like shit (especially on ps1/n64)

Lifes

Limited saves

Poor menu navigation

>>4260520
You don't sound objective

>>4260529
All those things are objectively bad design

>>4260560
Said the millennial who is objectively objectionable

>>4259715
Read errors with floppy disks were common enough that a 'backup copy' actually served a purpose.

Don't know if it's just my SNES, but a loose cartridge connection sometimes nukes my save games... just lost all my progress on A Link to the Past yesterday. Checked the save battery and it's still good.

Games that were ridiculously hard and / or required multiple consecutive plays for the true ending in order to extend gameplay time.

NES cartridge slot design... do I REALLY need to explain this one?

>>4261209
Neck yourself. Either give me infinite or make me load my last save.

>>4261242
If I was gonna neck myself I would have done it when I was your age. Instead I spent the time I could have spent on being a suicidal loser on getting good. jk. My generation was born good. I spent it winning. Sucks to be you little millennial bitch.

* multi-disc games
* PC compatibility
* early non-PC 3D games had no idea what to do with the camera
* passwords < saves
* early interfaces are a mixed bag
* physical media problems (e.g. corrosion on cartridge connectors)
* only 2 player local splitscreen for a long time

>>4261242
As someone who has beaten Nethack 5 times, all i have to say is:

Git Gud

>>4261209
Lives iare a bullshit design for home games.

On Arcade games, it made sense to leech you of your sheckles. It was a sign of skill and pride to beat those arcade games and, hell, when they were in an arcade you sometimes had people to see you do it

But for a home game system? lives are just time wasting bull shit (modern day versions of this are the mobile games that you have pay to play more than 3 times in a day)

Limited saves can be defended, best version ive seen is only having saves at the start or middle of a level.

Poor menu navigation is a sin and is not defendable

I never liked password save systems

>>4262418
>I don't get Arcades
Why are you even here.

>>4262527
>arcades exist to take your money
>you dont get arcades
wut?

>>4262149
99% of nethack deaths are entirely your fault though. The last 1% is bullshit like you grabbing things in the dark and touching cockatrice corpses.

>>4262531
Arcades (and most console games of the era) were hard and sort. You're supposed to train for the 1cc or, at least, being able to beat the game with the less possible amount of continues. Once you're good enough, replaying the early levels is a breeze and you can use them to stock resources.

>>4262537
sure...and how many quarters did you spend getting to that point?
And then you keep coming back to prove you can beat it, so even if you arent a quarter fountain anymore, you still DO spend money on the game

the point of arcade style games was ALWAYS to make you spend money again and again

>>4262548
And games for home consoles provided you with the same experience but they didn't charge you for every continue. What seems to be the problem, anon?

>>4259715
Unwinnable game states. Some are really bad about this, especially adventure games.

>>4262018
>>4261209
There are no millennials, there is no avocado toast. The entire thing is made up by news media for clicks.

>>4262418
Why don't you just watch an LP you lazy unskilled knob?

>>4262418
You sound like a spoiled millenial.
>Here's a game we designed.
>You get three chances to beat it or you have to start over.
>WAHHH ITS NOT FAIR
>STOP WASTING MY TIME
Grow up.

t. Millenial

>>4262418
I disagree, lives extend the time needed to first beat the game, then increase replayability.

Sure, now you can download thousands of games in minutes this isn't really needed. So feel free to breeze through them with save states.

But back in the 90s for a kid with limited funds, it was good if a game took a while to beat, and still provided a challenge for some time afterwards.

>>4260529
>>4261209
Lives are meaningless because of two reasons. One, their primary purpose was to eat quarters in arcade system, which no longer serves a purpose when home consoles are basically on free play. Second, if your progress is being halted due to a lack of skill, it makes no difference whether you have one life or a billion lives.

Limited saves are flawed for much the same reason as lives are, and poor menu navigation is bad because it can affect how well a game's mechanics are properly conveyed during gameplay.

>>4265503
Lives don't make a game any more or less difficult though, it just adds padding because you're expected to go through an easier section of the level before getting to the more difficult sections and dying because of something you may or may not have anticipated before it's too late.

Some of the hardest games I've ever played gave you unlimited lives and even Castlevania took me a while to beat, even on an emulator, because goddamn, Frankenstein and Death are a bitch and a half to beat the first few times and kudos to anyone who managed to beat them on a physical cart.

>>4262551
It's the fact that unless you farm for lives in the easier parts of the game, you might not make it far enough to beat the later sections of the game.

Not to mention, you could be sent all the way to the start of the level, or even the start of the game, if you run out of lives, which doesn't make the game harder, it just pads things out so that you don't feel stunted after finding out that the game only had like six levels.

>>4266723
>Lives are meaningless because of two reasons
Neither avocados or toast mean anything? If you have such little skill that you can't progress in a game with a billion lives you have the mental capacity of an avocado.

>>4267567
So you pretty much missed the entire point of what I was trying to say and you're trying to act smug about it to boot. Gotcha.

>>4267576
>he's from rebbit

Well that explains it.

>>4259956
I have recently set up my old P2 PC and honestly just going to pcgamingwiki and getting shit to work on my win10 PC is much easier than scouring some ancient dead forums for solutions while having to sift through their '97 forum culture memes.

Too bad PGW doesn't have many older games, but I bet it's because autists couldn't argue out which is the "true" way to play the game.

>>4267579
I figured as much. Here's one last (you) for the road.

>>4266741
>It's the fact that unless you farm for lives in the easier parts of the game, you might not make it far enough to beat the later sections of the game.
Yeah, and? That's resource management, an integral part of arcade style games, and makes replaying the first levels not a chore.

>Not to mention, you could be sent all the way to the start of the level, or even the start of the game, if you run out of lives, which doesn't make the game harder, it just pads things out so that you don't feel stunted after finding out that the game only had like six levels.
Again, I fail to see how that's a bad thing. The goal is getting good at the game, developing a skill, not just watching the ending.

>>4267602
>Yeah, and? That's resource management, an integral part of arcade style games, and makes replaying the first levels not a chore.
Spending a few minutes kicking a turtle shell against a wall is not resource management, it's farming. Also, when you spend an hour getting hundreds of lives, it really begs the question of why they even bothered adding lives in the first place.
>Again, I fail to see how that's a bad thing.
Because if I fail a math class in college, I don't go all the way back to 1st grade to learn how basic addition works. Same shit here, I can already beat the starting levels without taking damage, so why am I forced to replay them over and over again when the real challenge won't be until another 2-3 levels?

>>4267586
Thanks but that's not how shit works here.

>>4267567
There are no millennials, and there is no avocado toast.

>>4267612
>Spending a few minutes kicking a turtle shell against a wall is not resource management, it's farming. Also, when you spend an hour getting hundreds of lives, it really begs the question of why they even bothered adding lives in the first place.
That's not what I was talking about. I mean stuff like getting and maintaining the upgrades in Gradius. Or explore the levels to get things. Or maximizing your score to get extra lifes.

>>4267612
Because first paragraph. Plus, as opposed to schoolwork, those games are supposed to be fun. If you really think that replaying them is such a chore maybe you should look for a different hobby.

Jackoffs that constantly ruin potentially good threads with their ego's and inability to stfu

>>4267627
>I mean stuff like getting and maintaining the upgrades in Gradius. Or explore the levels to get things. Or maximizing your score to get extra lifes.
None of those things need a lives system to work though.
>If you really think that replaying them is such a chore maybe you should look for a different hobby.
What is the point of replaying the same easy part of a level over and over again when the most challenging part is at least 2-3 levels away. I don't want to play the easy mode to unlock the harder difficulties, I want to be able to start at the harder difficulties by default.

>>4267627
People who play games for a challenge have a different fun than you are.

Overcoming a challenge they already overcame and know how to deal with is nofun anymore, it's a boring chore. Been there, done that.

First few times playing through a stage is fun, on third time it generally stops being a challenge and looses all the fun factor. Difficulty spikes combined with no continues are the worst for such players, since they have to wade through 20-30 min. of boring trite just to get to the fun part. When spike happens later in the game than that it just becomes not worth the effort.
That's why difficulty spikes, and not allowing continue from same stage (even without the powerups) is bad.

I've always hated getting hurt when I accidentally walk into a boss.

It's even worse when they take up 80% of the screen, recently finished Rocket Knight Adventures, and this fucker took 4 hearts if you accidentally flew into him.

Some games still do this, but otherwise it's been dropped or you take the smallest amount of damage from it.