/vr/ - Retro Games

No.

There was a time when video games were played normally by nerds instead of normal data. When someone says a game hasn’t aged well what they mean is that it doesn’t fit their normal gag sensibilities.

It's one of those expressions that low IQ individuals throw around ever since videogames became trendy. It displaces any of the blame of your poor performance and lack of understanding of a videogame entirely in external, abstract concepts such as time.

>>6465418
>>6465430
Correct. Close the thread please

>>6465430

Videogames are still a pretty young medium. Every art form goes through growing pains as technology, aesthetics, and cultural mores change. There's a lot to love about older games, but not every black and white movie is a Casablanca, so to speak. Birth of a Nation might have been a hit in 1915, but it's pretty hard to watch nowadays, and I'm not talking about the KKK being the good guys. It was a technical marvel when it was released, but it seems amateurish and primitive after seeing films progress through the decades, and watching movies made by true masters of visual storytelling. Also, there's somewhat of a selection bias when talking about older games. People generally want to talk about the games that made the biggest impression on them, which are usually the best, or most interesting, examples from their time. You see this with classic rock fans, also. Like, of course Led Zeppelin and Black Sabbath are great, but no one talks about the dozens of forgettable, garbage rock bands from the 60s and 70s.

Zoomer cope for "I can't adapt to things from before my time"
Alternatively, low IQ cope for "I'm used to newer junk, so I can't enjoy older junk, even if it was actually better, dem higher framerates and resolutions though!"

>>6465430
To add to this, it’s also a phrase more commonly used by “games journalists” to explain their collective cognative disonnance as to how they could have given a 10/10 to a game that is completely antithetical to a game they would give a 10/10 in the modern day.

>>6465489
You mean giving 10/10 for walking simulators with political propaganda is anti ethical? Are you a Nazi?

>6465501
And here it begins. Just nuke the thread already.

When new standards makes it harder to come back to certain games or mechanics that are just too tedious or annoying.

>>6465542
If a game was ever tedious or annoying, it was never good to begin with.
Also, I dunno about you, but I actually find newer games more tedious. Just thinking about playing a newer game makes me yawn. Sitting through the console start up, using its OS to select the game, logging in, waiting through all the logo screens, waiting for the games to load the start up screen, and then once you finally start playing the game, depending on the game of course, but most of them are just very slowly paced.
Give me an older console anyday. Pop cart, turn on, press start, play game.
I'm making generalizations of course, but this is my honest experience. Every time I think about playing a non-retro system, I think it twice and I end up going back to something on MD or SNES instead.

- When zoomers can't appreciate old games becuase they don't use technology that didn't exist at the time, or the later games in the series were better
- Youtube video of a shitty 1980s computer game has comments that say it was "soooo good". The game was never good but it was somebody's muh childhood.

Oh look, it's the weekly thread in which zoomers cosplay as oldfags and boomers

>>6465553
>Just thinking about playing a newer game makes me yawn. Sitting through the console start up, using its OS to select the game, logging in, waiting through all the logo screens, waiting for the games to load the start up screen
Holy shit this level of sleepy boomer autism. No disc based games for grandpa becuase he falls asleep if he has to wait longer than 30 seconds to power on the system and load the game.

>>6465667
Cope, zoomie.
I still enjoy newer games, but most of the times it's a slog to turn on one of the newer systems.

>>6465405
>something is popular
>time goes by, standards change
>thing is no longer popular

That's literally it.

>>6465457
This is 100% true.

I saw a thread on here last year where the question was posed: what were you playing in December of 1997? And all the answers were big AAA games. No one remembers the "junk" games or just pretends not to.

>>6465698
But remember anon - only zoomers and normalfags play big titles. True "gamers" only play eternal classics that totally and completely weren't biggest shit mass-marketed back in the day. Nu-uh. That's just not true, back in the day, when anons were 5, games were pure and better and obviously didn't age at all.

/vr/ posers are literally worse than hipsters

>>6465738
Seething zoomie.

Pong was considered highly addictive at the time of release but nobody gives a fuck about it anymore as anything other than an ancient novelty. Tastes and sensibilities change.

>>6465769
>Tastes and sensibilities change.
I'd honestly play Pong rather than whatever FOTM online game is popular nowadays.
Pong is timeless, as is Pac-Man or Space Invaders.

>>6465405
games don't age, so it's a troll, not a meme.

>>6465405
Game get sequel.
Sequel refine gameplay mechanics.
Older game feel dated in comparison.

Just kidding, zoomer boomer derpy doo.

>>6465681
Not so much popular but you're close.

>>6465772
>I'd honestly play Pong rather than whatever FOTM online game is popular nowadays
No you wouldn't lmao.

>>6465405
I will
>Game is well received and a insta hit on release.
>Years later, nobody find the appeal of the game.

>>6465430
This sounds more like salt from a cry baby who gets angry when someone says a game hasn't aged well. What it means is that the game isnt up to modern sensibilties which can be due to archaic control schemes or other odd choices made at the time. It has nothing to do with player performance and wanting to blame the game. Goldeneye is a great game but hasn't aged well due to its poor frame rate. That isnt lacking any understand or having to do with player performance. This guy is a low iq individual. Finally, for the rest of you autistics out there the games dont physically age yes we know you fucking morons its just an expression.

>>6465915
Yes, I would.

>>6465971
There's a reason when a lot of those silky smooth 30 FPS games that have modern remasters usually have the people recommending the modern version. I would never advise anyone to play Perfect Dark on the N64 over the Xbox 360 version for example.

Might I also add that there are some games that I almost never see people claim to have "aged badly" like Super Mario Bros. 3 or Mega Man 2. It's because those games have very little to "put up" with and still provide an experience that isn't riddled by poor quality of life design.

>>6465405
It's not a meme you ignorant child. And no, if you're too lazy and stupid to learn what a very common critical measure pf something is then why should I waste my time trying to teach you?

>>6465430
>>6465489
Not even close

>>6466018
I love how you had that image on deck ready to post.

No, seriously. I agree with you.

>>6465971
Absolutely seething. You're what killed games.

>>6466034
Care to explain retard

>>6465772
Pong was the first casual shitter gane, only exists because normies at the time were too dumb to understand Spacewar

>you have low iq
>NO YOU have low iq

>>6466018
LOL it's that one guy who pulls that one single page as if it was some universal law.
People can still call out people who use "aged badly" for things they can't process due to being lazy/stupid. The fact some person used that phrase and it got published isn't proof of anything. You tried this before.

>>6466072
>Nigger doesnt even understand a figure of speech and calls others low iq
Typical baboonery

>>6466018
"Aged badly" is cope for brainlets who can't view entertainment in the context of the time period it was created in.

>>6466081
It has nothing to do with that and never did despite what some magazine retards did to you. Stop reading kotaku and other games journalism and you wont get so upset you retarded faggot

>>6465681
More or less this. Mostly I'd say its only a valid point on control schemes, usually on games which were first or otherwise early pioneers in a young genre or something.
By that I mean awkward implementation of dual analog sticks, or maybe a clunky interface, but it's rarely nothing you can't just adapt to and then do fine with. For example, classic Resident Evil, the player character is stiff and awkward to control, but you get used to it and eventually barely notice it.

>>6465971
Goldeneye has aged fine, the framerate isn't always silky smooth, but it was developed with the expectation that the player would almost always be under 30fps, often close to 20fps. If you look at how the weapons behave if pushed artificially to 60fps, it's noticeably weird, sound timing is off with the high ROF guns, such as the M16's three round burst sounding like a single shot. You also have things like movement speed tied to framerate, hence why speedrunners engage in 'shoegazing', because looking down into the ground makes the game have to render less and thus you can go a little faster.
The game is entirely married to the hardware, but the game also plays fine that way. Rarely does the framerate get so low as to hinder gameplay.

>>6466089
Even if you want to defend 30 FPS, you shouldn't be defending frame drops. Nobody wanted that shit.

>>6466084
Bro I can appreciate low framerate flat shaded poly 3d but dont ever fucking tell me that has aged gracefully. Seriously sounds more like retard cope coming from people upset someone criticized their nostalgia. Goldeneye like I mentioned previously is still a great game and lots of fun to play but it hasn't aged well because its choppy as fuck. That doesnt mean it's bad it's just not in line with modern sensibilities. I cant believe I have to explain this to you autistic fucking cunts who take everything so literally expecting games to turn to cheese with age or something, I dont fucking know you're the retards.

>>6466097
It hasn't aged because it's the same as it ever was. It's time to kill yourself.

>>6466009
>I would never advise anyone to play Perfect Dark on the N64 over the Xbox 360 version for example.
I would because the N64 control stick is way better suited for the game instead of the deadzone-prone 360 one which makes precise aiming a chore.

That's just me though, cause I prioritize gameplay over graphics.

>>6466089
Goldeneye is a great game but has not aged fine. You can still enjoy things that havent aged gracefully it doesnt mean they are bad. Ultima underworld has aged poorly due to a control scheme retarded zoomers cant wrap their heads around but it's still a master piece of a game it just has some aspects like the controls that fell out of line with the current paradigm. Hasn't aged well just means it's a little harder to approach than most things, doesnt mean its unplayable trash nobody should touch

>>6466101
Holy fuck how many times have I said it's a figure of speech and the game itself doesn't actually change from milk to cheese. Thanks for stating the fucking obvious though you autistic cunt. Sorry I have to be completely literal with you or else your fucking retard brain shorts out.

>>6466018
No one was saying that phrase didn’t exist before games journalism.

>>6466021
It's all I do anymore. This has been going on so long it's a better bet it's trolling in the first place. If people are too stupid to learn the language they're using I'll mock them for their ignorance but other than that is a waste.

>>6466081
That's not to say people don't use the term wrong also. But trying to act like you shouldn't need to is no excuse. Just you also accepting to wallow in ignorance.

>>6466084
Not even close, literal retard.

Generally, when I see somebody complaining about a game and saying it "hasn't aged well," the complaints they're making are the same damn things people complained about back when the game first came out. People love to say that Earthbound aged poorly because of its limited inventory space, but people complained about that back then, too. The difference of course being that back then they didn't have "b-b-but it's old" available as cope material, so instead they had actual conversations about games rather than repeating the same old exhausted thought-terminating cope.

"This game aged poorly" is cope, nothing more nothing less. Just call it shitty and move on, tards.

>>6465405
Lazy players

>>6465405
very simple, look at a early 3d game, in the time it was made it was the top notch, now if you look at it, it looks like shit, compared to today standars.
now 2d games almost always look good.

>>6465405
>>>/v/

>>6465457
/Thread

>>6465405
>>6465418
>>6465430
>>6465489
It's a common phrase used in all areas and not just video games. It's not our fault your autistic brain can't comprehend it.

>>6466212
>Generally, when I see somebody complaining about a game and saying it "hasn't aged well," the complaints they're making are the same damn things people complained about back when the game first came out.
/thread

>>6466282
>muh gwafix
stfu tard

>>6465667
>No disc based games for grandpa becuase he falls asleep if he has to wait longer than 30 seconds to power on the system and load the game.
I happen to agree with him: if I wanted a fucking PC I'd buy one. A console should be able to go from cold power-down to in-game in *less* than 60 seconds, including time spent fishing the disc out and popping it in! Today's abortions are the worst of all possible digital worlds, and that's why I quit buying.

>>6466212
>>6466307
I've never heard it used in reference to earthbound but to stuff like total eclipse which does like 10 fps. It's still a good game and fun to explore the low poly pyramid but it certainly has not aged well.

>>6465485
desu if you don't have so much as the curiosity of what it was like before your time for a given interest, you should just accept you aren't into that thing very much

>>6465430
>>6465485
>>6465575
>>6465602
>>6465673
>>6465760
>>6465772
>>6465883
>>6466018
Aight boomlet

>>6465405
Have you played Tony Hawk's Pro Skater? The first one? You'll find your answer, and it's not about graphics.

>>6465405
you have some form of severe autism or other mental retardation. seek help and medication if possible, otherwise stick to lurking, you mongoloid

>>6465837
>games don't age
factual but not accurate

the precise wording would be "games that, thanks to advancements in the medium, have lost the appeal that they had when they were released" but that's a lot of words. "games that haven't aged well" gets across the idea just fine, even though they aren't literally organic beings that suffer from aging.

Tekken 2 was fun when I was a kid. Now it isn't.

If your point for saying a game hasn't aged well is that the graphics look "ugly" then you're a retard but I think people like that wouldn't use the phrase anyway. I think games can age badly in the sense that they're made completely obsolete by newer entries of the franchise or the genre. The one example I have in mind is warcraft 1 and 2. The moment W2 came out, there was no reason whatsoever to play W1 because it was a strictly superior game. And then, when Starcraft came out, W2 kinda became obsolete as well. I still love it because of nostalgia and I really like the soundtrack, it's even installed on my computer, but I'm always gonna play Broodwar instead. So you could make the argument that both Warcraft 2 and 1 haven't aged well. And Broodwar arguably hasn't aged a day. So quality of life improvements can really make a game feel slow, annoying and ultimately, not fun.

It usually honestly just means a game has a bad UI or controls.

>>6467358
instead of that paragraph, you could have said the games haven't aged well

It means I don't like it and fuck you!

>>6465405
It's a meme used almost entirely because people are retarded and aren't able to into appreciating something in the context of when it came out.
If I can play and love the ultima games despite being born in 91, then some retard should be able to play a N64 or PS1 game without shitting themselves

Imagine thinking games don't age when you go back to play N64 games and they run at the speed of a powerpoint presentation.

Goldeneye was incredible at the time. Nowadays it's nearly unplayable.

>>6467454
Video games run on electricity and therefore fun at the speed of light brah

>>6467454
>Goldeneye was incredible at the time.
No it wasn't. We already had Doom and Quake. Goldeneye ran the same it did back then that it does today. You just have more to compare it to but that doesn't change the quality of the original game.

It means the game was released when its genre/technology used to run that game was in its infancy. Any sub 60 fps game hasn't aged well. Vast majority of early 3D games hasn't aged well. The earliest jRPGs hasn't aged well.

>>6467464
> You just have more to compare it to but that doesn't change the quality of the original game.
Yes it does. When people say something has aged poorly, that means standards have evolved beyond the original game. It was good at the time, and now it's not.

Like pop culture references, games can become dated as standards evolve. Some games never become dated because they're technically sound and mechanically flawless (see: R-Type Delta, F-Zero X), while others perform poorly because they were held back by limits (See: Star Fox).

No shit games don't technically 'age', that's a complaint levied by autistic retards that don't understand nuance. Films and books don't technically age either, but we still talk about how they age.

Quality standards are highly malleable and are shaped by the state of the world and game industry, a game is only good or bad not just in relation to other games but more specifically the games that you are the most exposed to. As times change so does game design creating different sets of expectations and standards, further more the mediums through which games are experienced change which shapes a lot of how you interact with them. The most obvious example of this would be novelty, either in the form of a good new game design idea or hardware, novelty expires very quickly as things become normalized and unexciting. Games which rely on impressing you with novelty will be dated and will be perceived vastly different by those for whom said novelty does not exist. Another example would be arcade machines, they are a unique medium that few people nowadays have dealt with directly, and the medium heavily influences all aspects of game design, making them inaccessible to younger players who have to learn to appreciate them. On the flipside, thanks to emulation many of the negative aspects of arcades disappeared, so here you have an example of games that feel dated yet also in many way improved when played nowadays. The problem is that "didnt age well" is often used as a dumb low effort buzzword to dismiss a game for no reason or very petty reasons. A game being dated doesn't make it bad, it means there are simply some things you have to get used to in order to fully appreciate it.

>>6467474
Nope, sorry. Games are just as much fun now as they were back then. Just because you're autistic and get butthurt they don't look as pretty or play as well as something that was released yesterday doesn't mean the quality of something changed. You can say stuff are better now then it was in the past and you could be right but you can't say that stuff in the past has grown worse because it literally hasn't changed.
I can't believe I have to explain this on fucking /vr/ of all things.

>>6467490
I'm sorry about your autism and how you get triggered with how people talk about things age. You must be a real fun guy to be around when people talk about films or books as well with how hard you retard out.

>>6467491
>You must be a real fun guy to be around when people talk about films or books
I would assume more fun than you are considering I could enjoy them for what they are instead of whining that it's not modern enough for me.

>>6467490
Do you think quality is some kind of inherent feature of a collection of code and art assets? No. The elements that make up a game haven't changed, but the kind of experience they provide (quality) has, because that aspect of games has always and will always exist only in our heads.

Listen, I'm really autistic and my butt hurts from all the pounding my dad has been doing but you guys have to agree with me that video games

>>6467501
>but the kind of experience they provide (quality) ha
Not remotely true. It's LITERALLY the same experience, you just have more to compare it to. If you sit down and play a game that was released right now it plays the same as it did 10 years ago. The game didn't change, you did.
Why is this a hard concept?

>>6467504
>f you sit down and play a game that was released right now it plays the same as it did 10 years ago.
and play a game today that was released a decade ago, it plays the same as it did 10 years ago.
Is what I meant to say.

>>6467504
Do you think people who go back and play a game made in the 80s would understand the pop culture references made? Are you supposed to understand every pop culture reference in order to fully appreciate a game as it was at the time?

What about motion controls? Do you think motion controllers for the NES aren't dated at all? What about if you played the Virtual Boy and compared it to modern VR?

>>6467504
>It's LITERALLY the same experience
No it's not, what are you talking about? 20+ years ago I would be excited about games just because they are games, I would be excited about simulated realistic looking 3D worlds, and so on. Now all of that means nothing to me because I have seen it all and realized how ultimately shallow enjoyment derived from simulated game worlds is.
>The game didn't change, you did.
Yes obviously, the problem is that quality, while being part of a game, is a subjective judgement and thus is directly affected by the person playing. If you abstract and generalize this you can notice patterns where a huge chunk of people will lose interest in games simply because of the changing times and environment. Anyone who takes a sober look at games will see this, at the very least among novelty based gimmick games.

>>6467516
Are you telling me that said nes motion controls somehow work less today then they did 10 years ago? Because that's the logic I'm saying is stupid.
My point is that the quality of the product was always what it was, you can say things got better, which is often true since I'm not saying old good and new bad, but that doesn't mean that the old thing became retroactively worse.
Pokemon RBY didn't get worse for Pokemon GSC existing and the original Doom didn't drop in quality just because a new Doom game came out.

>>6467524
>where a huge chunk of people will lose interest in games simply because of the changing times and environment
That's an issue with the person, not the game which is my fucking point. The product didn't change, people's patience and willing to look past stuff did.The product is the same now as it was then.

I've said that like a dozen times and if you're still too stupid to get it then there's no helping you.

>>6467525
Very disingenious way of thinking. The experience would be the same if you could wipe your memory of all the technological advancements prior to playing something dated, but alas, you can't.

>>6467525
Yes, things getting better does make the old thing retroactively worse.

>Old VR made people sick, was generally ineffective but really cool at the time and has aged poorly
>WHAT DO YOU MEAN IT AGED POORLY ITS THE EXACT SAME! STOP SAYING IT AGED! IT CAN'T BE BAD WHEN ITS EXACTLY THE SAME!

>>6467535
>Very disingenious way of thinking
How the hell is that disingenuous? If you can't put aside your exceptions and enjoy something in context then you're fucking retard.
>>6467536
You're fucking retarded. No, the VR hasn't gotten worse. It was always that shit and it's just straight up way better now. THAT'S the point you can't seem to grasp.

>>6467539
Okay then, rather than talking about how games have aged I'll just straight up say how all N64 and PS1 games are shit outside of a few games which run at 60fps.

Does that appease your autistic whining?

>>6467536
this. yet some games still manage to still be great, but not on the levels they once were, they just have a lot of room for dropping down a couple of tiers

>>6467541
No, because that's retarded as fuck. You should be able to pick up a N64 game and have the same level of fun with it today that you did 10 years ago. If you can't then it's a fault with YOU, not the product.

>>6467529
You can keep saying it but you fail to properly substantiate it. Just continuing to say that games don't change is a waste of time especially when you follow it up with pants on head retarded statements like "its the same experience". You can say that physically the code and assets remain the same, but everything intangible like the quality of a game or the experience changes, because again they only exist within the head of a person playing it. A game isn't good or bad in itself, it can only be perceived as good or bad by humans. Broadly speaking quality standards are dictated by societal norms which are always shifting.

>>6467548
Sorry, any game that can't run at 60fps is shit. That's the standard nowadays. Sorry your favorite N64 games are shit, anon. Thems the breaks.

>>6467558
>That's the standard nowadays.
As if. Modern consoles are still busting out 30 everywhere and sometimes not even that
Also my point is that old game haven't gotten worse. New stuff has just gotten better, which doesn't change any of the old stuff.
Maybe people should be less quick about lumping things into GREAT or SHIT and instead realize that there's a huge spectrum.

>>6465738
Listen, zoomzoom. Journalists and normies aren't actual gaming enthusiasts who have the patience for jank, or take jank too seriously. Saw someone call Kings Field games bad the other day and I just knew he was an adhd zoomlet

>>6465769
Pretty silly take. Im pretty sure there are classics like OoT that will never age like Pong has, also Pong was such an early game I feel like people viewed games differently and as much less than a dedicated hobby.

>>6465553
its about paradigms my dude. imagine you're like 17 now and you're a huge fortnite-head and someone tells you to check out the original doom dos game. they'd have a huge culture shock
>why cant i look up or down?!
>why are the bad guys 2d!?
stuff like that

>>6467715
Not him but yeah, the game can still be good. I love Deathtrap Dungeon but I would give my left nut to modernize the stupid tomb raider controls

>>6467541
>if you can't discuss appreciation for a game on its own merit rather than some personal arbitrary standard it means you're here to egotistically gratify your anecdotal taste which brings a shitty attitude to the board and makes people feel a need to justify what they like even though we're all anonymous...
Faggot

I don't understand what so difficult about this. With a lack of creativity or technical limitations we've have had plenty of games that were only great at a particular time. It doesn't mean these games are just shit now but there's just literally no point to playing them when there's probably sequels or different games that could be considered an upgrade. There are certain games that are jarring to play when you learn by playing that they're nothing but an inferior version of what you've just played.

>>6467769
>if you can't discuss appreciation for a game on its own merit
What does it mean to "appreciate a game on its own merits" in this context, can you explain?

>>6467525
>Pokemon RBY didn't get worse for Pokemon GSC existing

It's stuck at the same quality it had, but it didn't get any better with time either. Better titles have come out and there's not point in experiencing that one. The only issue here is semantics, what people mean by this is basically "there's a better experience readily and publicly available, therefore this is pointless and not what would be recommended nowadays over X or Y or Z". Which is true honestly. People would have to live sheltered to be amazed by this particular game because the existence and knowledge of other better games make it less appealing.

>>6466084
Yeah. Fuck video games. It's all about ball in a cup. It was gold then and it's platinum now.

>>6466101
>concepts don't age
Try caloric theory. Same as ever, and it didn't age very well.

>"hasn't aged well"

>>6467979
That's a misuse of the expression, but that has literally nothing to do with what most people refer to.

I definitely think controls can be dated or aged by virtue of being surpassed by a much better control system. Like no one is going to go back to arrow key aiming in doom after society as a whole figured out how much better mouse aim is for a FPS.

>>6467998
It's a pretty good explanation for how zoomers react to tank controls though

>>6467558
2:03 https://youtu.be/w025kQRMZwA

>>6467883
Merit is a nonspecific quality. If you enjoy Pong on the merit of being a competitive social game and not a challenging table tennis simulator, you'll be playing the game as it was intended and you will enjoy it more. You can't talk shit to an AI, and an AI is designed to intentionally make mistakes thus relying on AI for enjoyable Pong gameplay is not taking it on it's own merit. Writing off Pong because you got bored waiting for the AI to challenge you doesn't make the original intention of the game any less fun. The only good singleplayer is Pong: The Next Level anyway because it adds variation to gameplay and the AI won't waste your time

>>6468009
Some may still play that way occasionally for fun. Sadomasochistic fun, but fun nonetheless.