/vr/ - Retro Games

>>6296643
only thing that ages is faggot redditors

>>6296643
By definition, games don't age.

DK64, seriously? Are you on crack?

>>6296695
Yeah it didn't exactly age badly, it was shit right when it was new

>>6296643
GSC aged way better. Indeed, RBY did ''age'' poorly.

>>6296643
sonic adventure was aged like shit immediately upon the release of 2. sa2 had some issues but i wouldnt say it aged like milk, it has mostly stood the test of time imo. goldeneye aged like shit. dk64 shit. pokemon rby were aged when gsc came out. daggerfall is still cool. megaman 1 aged after whichever megaman was released that allowed you to shoot up

>>6296643
games starting with gen 4 can age well, anything below looks like pixeled garbage and has outdated gameplay - but still gets sacred cow treatment

>>6296643
There are games that were--and, therefore, are--good. Then there are games that were-and, therefore, are--bad but you were far too easily impressed back than and know better now.
Games can't age. People's tastes can develop, though.

>>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.

All retro games are superior to all modern games, but it's true that some are even more superior than others.

>>6296643
>>6296650
>>6296651
>What is "expressun"?
>Grug not understand
>langueegee is diffcult

Cavemen unable understand language, context and abstract concepts

>>6296893
You mad gaymo?

>>6296643
When <thingname> was considered "good" only because there was no frame of reference
In retrospect, after you got something to compare it to, <thingname> was actually bad all along.
That means <thingname> didn't age well, because as time went by it got pushed further down on the good<->bad scale as there appeared more and more things that did the job better than <thingname>.

Videogames are complex, and consist of many aspects like visuals (which on its own consists of design and technical aspects), sound, gameplay, and so on.
Any of those aspects have their own frame of reference.

But again, you implying that you don't understand a simple concept of an expression, you are unlikely to understand the explanation either. Or at least will pretend not to.

the whole of the 5th generation.
tomb raider is barely playable by todays standards.

>>6296813
I'm glad that someone said that GoldenEye aged like shit. The truth that people won't accept in today's age. I get that it's revolutionary for fps games but they need to let that go

>>6296643
The games remain the same but the environment around them changes. Technically games themselves don't age but as people get more accustomed to modern luxuries (like skipping cutscenes or adjusting difficulty or saving at will) returning to older games becomes tedious and they will feel like they have aged poorly.

Some games hold up better than others. Pokemon GSC holds up better than RBY for example, and some 'classics' like SMW hold up well even when compared to many modern games in the same genre.

>>6296643
Alundra 1 is still a blast to play

>>6296893
It's not a hard to grasp concept, what's absurd is how angry people get when you point out how inferior they are in assessing the quality of something, to the point of not knowing what they personally enjoy or not.

I have played tons of games, from the SNES days to nowadays, and there has never been ONE SINGLE game I liked that I don't like anymore, or can't stand anymore.

My impressions of, say, 007 Goldeneye are the same now as they were when I was a kid. The aiming was a bit annoying but manageable then, it's annoying but manageable now.

It pisses me off and I will never apologize for having superior capabilities of judging games in objective and subjective terms.

Some of the criticisms you faggot memester plebbit 9fag cocksucking kuntaku shitheads says now are the ones I have said since the inception of "x" in 1999, 2002, 2005 or whatever the fuck you want. I have NEVER experienced this "Wow this game doesn't look or play as well as I remember".

What ages are your shit tastes and you being a faggot spoiled nigger dick cum guzzling shit eating toddler diddling onions addicted manchild consoomist motherfucker cuckold brainlet retard that is constantly changing your tolerance to certain gameplay designs and choices because you have no personality, you're a machine to be used by developers and kikes.

"$current_year product good, like it you goy, only like $oldyear_product if it's meme game like Super Mario or Zelda, but don't really play it, just meme about it and pretend you actually like anything other than the trash you push down your gay throat."

Yes, I'm fucking pissed and fuck you inferior faggots whose taste are shaped by your environment. Eat shit and die.

>>6296643
>>6296650
>>6296651

>>6296893
>unenjoyable today.

Subjective. You may just have the attention span of a goldfish or are overstimulated with media and your brain is craving more dopamine triggers than a normal human would, or maybe you are addicted skinnerbox gameplay with constant carrots on sticks as "motivation" to keep playing.

Long story short, in most cases you're the problem, not the game.

>>6296643
Yes, games can age poorly. Some games can be okay at the time but end up being poor to go back to after all the innovations nowadays. Like with GoldenEye, not only is it hard to go back to after the many different superior fps games that came out, it's also on the n64 which means the controls are somewhat clumsy and the n64 has a pretty shit framerate and not very good graphics. Hence, it aged poorly.

>>6296643
Of course. That's what the term means.

>>6296651
By definition they do, learn English if it's the language you're conversing in.

>>6297176
>What ages are your shit tastes and you being a faggot spoiled nigger dick cum guzzling shit eating toddler diddling onions addicted manchild consoomist motherfucker cuckold brainlet retard that is constantly changing your tolerance to certain gameplay designs and choices because you have no personality, you're a machine to be used by developers and kikes.
This but unironically

SA2 is the only only one that's not a slug to play nowadays in that picture.

>>6296643
For the most part, I prefer the single-player in Red/Blue over Sword/Shield. Especially when you consider the ability to connect with Stadium. The part that feels the most aged is some of the interface, like the Box system where you have to save every time you switch boxes. The battle system and multiplayer battling has improved a lot over the years, though Gen 1's battling can still be fun. If you're just playing through the story though, I'd take Gen 1 over the most recent Pokemon games. It actually has decent-sized dungeons to appear and some freedom of exploration.

>>6296643
Yeah, but mostly concerning the controls. Anyone who says they prefer Goldeneye's controls (and the N64s analogue stick) over modern FPS controls with twin sticks is a fucking liar.

Of course. For example, see how popular was FF1 back in the day. One generation later, FF changed completely. One must wonder why if the game was so popular.

>>6297271
Wrong faggot, the 1.2 controls, aka the Turok controls are far better than modern zoomer fps controls

>>6297283
FF1 is an actual RPG unlike anything 7-onwards you jrpg faggot

Aging exists in terms of mass appeal and perception, but the games themselves are the same. If a game was fun back then, it's likely it will be fun now, though maybe after an adjustment period to old controls. It's subjective to a large extent, there are people that will prefer the older "aged" games after playing them for the first time.

Frankly, I don't agree with a lot of the modern standards for games. In some cases, I've seen modern gamers say games are aged for ridiculous reasons. For example, you'll see some people online now saying the concept of lives in games is outdated.

>>6297283
FF1 can't compare to later games like Real Bout FF 2, but it's still fun playing against the CPU. It's interesting how most of the characters are CPU only like in Street Fighter 1.

>>6297283
The original Final Fight was a huge success that continues to sell and the reboot was a failure

>>6297324
Street Fighter 1 is a perfect example of a game that seemed amazing when it was new but quickly felt dated and obsolete. Street Fighter 2 is a perfect example of a game that's aged so well that all these years later there are players both old and new who consider it their favorite.

That's what aging well versus badly is. It shouldn't be a hard concept for most people to understand.

>>6297295
You're a fucking liar. I told you already.

>>6297283
Freedom Force 1 was released in 2002 and as such is not considered retro.

>>6297069
Thank you. Tomb Raider's controls are fucking abysmal. Saying games don't age is a meme. Arcade games are the only games I know of where this applies (check the only fun games on old atari systems)

>>6297374
Yeah, that's a good example. Though Street Fighter 1 was never as good as 2 relative to other games out at the time of their respective releases. So on top of 2 aging better, 2 was just always a better game.

>>6297320
>For example, you'll see some people online now saying the concept of lives in games is outdated.
A small counterpoint is that a *lot* of games aren't so much designed as assembled out of conventions that the developers took for granted without ever considering how their systems interact in overview.

Lives are a really good example of that since games have been mindlessly including them for longer than most other features.
I'd go so far as to say that as far as the home gaming industry goes, there are probably more examples of games which include lives where it's pointless or even detracts from the design, than there are games where it adds anything meaningful. Just by the numbers.
So that's actually an interesting example since it's such a tradition, was kind of a problem even in ye olde days, that modern games which still use em are even more likely to be just going through the motions than not.

They definitely have a purpose and can be central to a game which is actually mindfully designed... but zoomers don't have the encyclopedic knowledge of games that we do. Like I wouldn't be surprised if someone who has only played a smattering of modern stuff might literally never have played a game where it actually made sense as a feature.
That said, this wouldn't stop such a dipfuck sharing his game design wisdoms on his youtube channel.

>>6297426
Certainly Street Fighter 1 wasn't on the level of Contra or R-Type but it was still pretty spectacular and there was nothing else close to it. It is generally those games that are just plain a cut above that age best in general though.

>>6297439
Good point, there's definitely plenty of games where lives feel vestigial.

>>6297487
Ya, but my point was more that there's *so many* games which use them inappropriately that I can understand people whose modern standards are informed by potentially literally never having played a game that used the feature properly.

Actually I think the problem might be with having standards at all. Games are and always were a total clusterfuck

If you really believed any development on top of an established game was intrinsically better, you wouldn't be on this board.

Good game is always a good game. Problems only arise if you have 2020 expectations for game released in 1990. Issues with old graphics I can kinda understand because all the new games are so bright and flashy, but if you really give a try to older games you might learn to use your imagination again and see the game for the gameplay. It's just like starting to read books as a kid; at first it's really tedious and boring, but once you learn the correct pace to do it you'll see what it's all about.

>>6297176
Take your meds.

>>6297650
Take my dick.

And my point still stands.

>>6296643
"age" refers to mechanics. The first game in a long series is often going to have simplistic, un-intuitive gameplay mechanics compared to sequels just by design growth. You have to be 60iq to not understand this.

>>6297704
>You have to be 60iq to not understand this.
It must be nice to have people to look down on with your rock-solid 90.

There's a definite dunning-kruger kinda thing always going on in these types of threads with people talking past one another.
There's the semantic monkeys, and the genius types like yourself with the stunning revelation that the arrow of time exists and, maybe if you really strain yourself, the idea that the subjective conventional frame of the audience varies over time and that if a time traveler brought us a game from 20 years from now we'd probably face a similar interface hurdle as playing a game from 20 years ago.

And then there's the enlightened folks with a fully developed frontal lobe who understand the full truth of the matter, but don't worry about them. For the most part they don't feel the need to participate in these shitfests so you bright bulbs can stumble around going at it with each other to your lil hearts' content

I get what people mean when they say "aged", it's meant to represent some (rarely objective) ways to say that games from the past are not as refined as modern games (which a lot of the times is highly debatable due to many variables, for example, higher framerates from modern games are not always a plus as games chug a lot to keep the high framerates nowadays unless they're well optimized, while back then, even if early 3D games had low framerate, it was more consistent, and obviously developed with that in mind).
Anyway, my philosophy is: if a game was enjoyable once, it can be enjoyable any time. If you only liked a game back then because of the graphics and only the graphics, then it was never a very good game from the get go.

Not a retro example but I've never seen a game treated better by time than mgs2.

>>6297802
"Aged" has merit when you consider the games just are just software that was tested for a limited period of time and left in an unimprovable, closed state.

If any of these old/not-so-old console platformers with relatively complex mechanics were made open source, put on github, and had an active playerbase of speedrunners as well as developers who were looking to improve the game mechanically, it would objectively become better. Simply because in almost any game you find repetitive nuisances that would drive you nuts and you would want to see them improved. Some consensus would be needed, but you get the gist.

>>6296643
yeah they exist. they're usually the ones that get constantly re-released.

most of the people who fall for the "games don't age" meme are people who're blinded by nostalgia or insecure boomers who don't want to feel old.

gen 2 was better than gen 1, nobody cared about TES until either morrowind or skyrim (depending on who you ask), hating on sonic adventure is a meme, platformers are for nu-males & children, megaman 2 was only popular because it's easier than your mom and console shooters didn't come into their own until the advent & implementation of dual analog sticks.

>>6296643
Mega Man 1 is still a great game, it's just harder than the next 5 on the NES.

>>6296893
>unenjoyable today.
then they were simply bad games and you had Stockholm syndrome when they came out.

>>6296643
plenty of games are still good
>Mario rpg
>seiken densetsu 3
>Arc the lad
>breath of fire series
>many of the SNES and Sega platformers

3D ages like shit albiet it looks nice at the time,
sprites always look nice

>>6296643
>Do such thing as "aging well" exists regarding old games?

This is a really difficult question. I think it's very subjective. For example, Super Mario Bros. 3 is "objectively" superior to Super Mario Bros. 1. It has better controls, gameplay, graphics, music, more features, the works. However, I still like Super Mario Bros. I like the simplicity of it, I like the more basic graphics. In fact I think I've gone back to the first Super Mario Bros. more often than the third just because it seems more of a game I can just play without having to remember all that much.

On the other hand, Sonic Adventure 2 was a game that I thought was awesome as a kid but I don't like at all as an adult now, however Megaman Legends which I loved playing as a kid I still enjoy playing as an adult.

It's hard because peoples' tastes are all over the place. I like low-poly graphics and tank controls so for me Silent Hill 2, Megaman Legends and Parasite Eve are some of the "best" games that "aged well". Other people might not like those games at all though because they are "clunky" or something.

>>6298093
>This is a really difficult question.

No it's not. It very obviously does.

>>6297374
This is a solid example here.

>>6296643
I would say Mega Man 5 is the most fun of the classic series

>>6296643
Is a game born a masterpiece or does it become a masterpiece as it becomes more valued by the community? Is a game innately a masterpiece or is it a label that we give to it?

Pong was wildly popular and considered addicting in its time. Is it fair to say that it's "aged" because it's no longer as impressive?

Yes. A lot of old Horror games really do benefit from having far lower resolution art, which for some reason, just works really well in making a creepy atmosphere. I honestly do believe that at least when it comes to immersion in terms of horror, there is a balance that has to be struck between imagination and representation. It's why Junji Ito is so creepy despite literally being drawings, or why horror is so much creepier when you don't actually see the antagonist.

>>6296643
DK64 is phenomenal, the only collectathon that even holds up.

>>6298204
The former.

>>6297384
zoom zoom

>>6297374
Yes. Now all please move along.

>>6296643
I though the n64 autists liked goldeneye?

>>6297743

Games don't age.

>>6297076
yeah its not a game i get excited about playing in 2020, and i LOVED that fucking game when it came out, played it with cousins and friends and it was always a good time. but if i ever set up some kind of retro room and have friends over, goldeneye is just not gonna be one of the games i would want to play

Why are threads like this allowed? Serious question. On an ideal website, this would warrant a ban.

>>6297374
Not really. SF1 was NEVER considered good, it was just barely popular enough to warrant a sequel.
SF2 is great because it's great, time did nothing to it, it's the same game and it will always be the same game. It doesn't care about the context and the universe surrounding it, those things won't change a game, it will remain the same game forever. People change, entropy changes, societal values change. A piece of software doesn't change because it's incapable of changing. The hardware it runs on ages, the people playing it age, but not a bunch of ones and zeroes.How many times do I need to repeat the same thing with different words? I hope you and everyone else using this word incorrectly and fucking up this board even more die very painfully.

>>6296893
>turbo autists
That made me chuckle

>>6299062
Liar, liar, pants on fire.

Wow, Sunrise is such a great film. It has sure been "aging well".

>>6299338
SF1 seemed amazing when it first appeared. I use that because it's a good example for people like you who still don't understand the language.

>I hope you and everyone else using this word incorrectly and fucking up this board even more die very painfully.

That is you, not understanding or using it correctly. Your appeal to violence is weak and you are ignorant. Whether things like games age well or poorly isn't a debate it's a simple fact. If you don't understand, it's no one else's problem.

>>6296643
Things can only be judged in context. Ten, twenty, or thirty years of extra context is always going to change those judgements. The earliest games exploring a type of mechanic tend to suffer the most, as something that made them unique in the beginning is refined by games that come after. Doom was astonishing for it's time, but it's missing a lot by today's standards. Mario 64 was an amazing and innovative game, but it's infuriating to play if you've become used to decent fucking camera controls. And those are two examples that actually still hold up rather well, a lot of games have faired much worse.

>>6296893
Does light age?
Does thunder age?

>>6299598
Don't get me wrong, Doom Eternal and Super Mario Odyssey are ok games *for their time* and might even be "great" in that context, but now that the dust has settled I just don't think they hold up well compared to something like Doom 1 or Mario 64

>>6297176
Well fucking said.

>>6299616
Doom was great, for a game where all the enemies are flat sprites and you can't aim up and down. Mario 64 was a great game for a time when nobody knew how to make decent camera controls.

>>6297076
for *console* fps games, sure.
>>6297176
>My impressions of, say, 007 Goldeneye are the same now as they were when I was a kid.
congrats on not maturing as a person. tastes and preferences change as you age, and yours obviously didn't.
>It pisses me off and I will never apologize for having superior capabilities of judging games in objective and subjective terms.
lol
> faggot memester plebbit 9fag cocksucking kuntaku shitheads
i'm not the one using reddit spacing.
>you're a machine to be used by developers and kikes.
>>>/pol/
>Eat shit and die.
get aids and die, faggot
nice bait tho

I think Mortal Kombat is a great example of a game that hasn't aged well. At the time, the digitized graphics looked amazing, the excessive gore was novel, and the games were rumor mills for secrets. 30 years later, none of those things are as impressive as they once were, so all that's left is the awkward gameplay. I think that's the bar for whether a game has aged well: Is it still fun to play once the context of the time period has been taken away? People still have fun playing Mario 64 to this day thanks to how well Mario controls, despite the fact that it's been improved upon so much by later games.

>>6297176
>>6299338

Those are the only correct posts in this thread.

>>6296643
Aging well/poorly existed as a figure of speech before videogames were invented.

>>6299680
Neither of them are close to correct. It's basic language, they are functionally illiterate for not understanding the breadth of meanings words have.

>>6299682
This also. It isn't exclusive to video games, it's a widely understood concept with regards to many things.

>>6299692
>they are functionally illiterate for not understanding the breadth of meanings words have
I feel obligated to point out that difficulty with figurative language is a symptom of autism spectrum disorders.

>>6299775
It's not surprising I suppose. People with spectrum disorders are known for not being able to grasp certain subtleties and that's understandable. But when they take offense to a widely used well established form of critique like this example and then repeatedly derail conversation by demanding those subtleties get explained to them over and over so they can try to turn the debate to their misunderstandings then it becomes a problem.

this >>6299338