/vr/ - Retro Games

OP, your intentions are good, but you know damn well all you'll get is dick waving and "lol filtered" comments.

Yoshi on NES. I got it when it was new and just couldn't enjoy it that much because of how rudimentary and slow it was.

>>8669246
all games can be distilled to their most basic elements, whether it's lining a cursor up with a target or slotting blocks into their place, the enjoyment or game part of it comes with how this is achieved through interfaces and mechanics. Soccer prohibits the use of your hands, so you instead must strike using your feet. What's happening isn't what's happening on the screen, it's what's happening in your mind as you make those moment to moment decisions. If you cannot truly enjoy simplistic games you have only yet to realize that the games we play today are just as simplistic. So much of it is excess and secondary to the actual game. This sells short the highs early games hit by focusing on their simplicity. When there's no story, the most basic graphics imaginable and not even any music to underline things you're given far less distractions to take you away from the game. Your head isn't bobbing along to a beat, instead it's focused on your hand interacting with the input device, reacting to what's on screen as your brain fires off neurons to solve a problem presented to you.

Play Kaboom with a paddle controller on the Atari 2600. Play for a long time, the snappiness of the potentiometer will become ingrained in your head and by the third, fourth waves you'll fall into the flow state. At first it's shock at the speed and escalation, but suddenly you no longer feel yourself making conscious decision, almost as if your brain cut off the distractions and is now interfacing directly with the muscles in your hand so you can keep up with the events on the screen.

That is what gaming is ultimately. In 2022 the newest games have you shooting a guy between cover by lining up a cross symbol on them. In 1978 we were doing the same thing, although the bullets had to be lead to their target and you could shoot through the cover.

>>8669246
I honestly can't go lower than gen 3. This is coming from someone who enjoys watching silent films from time to time and playing ''''''''outdated'''''''' 8 bit RPGs. It's hard to admit but some games really do AGE and almost impossible to enjoy unless you are a 40 year old who grew up with them

>>8669251
I just want to delve into this, because it interests me. For one, I have NEVER been able to get into the old single-screen shmups like Galaxian or even Space Invaders. It's like I get it, I can play them, but I just don't find them remotely fun. But I love, for some reason, single-screen platform games (especially if they wrap).

>>8669279
Shmups are the most rudimentary form of game anyway and don't offer much beyond "shoot alien, increase score counter." Most of the time platformers have some kind of puzzle element or interesting gimmick.

>>8669264
Extreme reductionist doesn't make you smart.

>>8669289
It's not even that though, because the same doesn't occur with things like R-type. Maybe it's the lack of environmental factors?

Fuck "bullet hell" though.

>>8669271
For my part I think the 8bit RPGs are better than the 16bit RPGs (if you're talking about consoles), because they still had a tighter line towards dungeon crawling what with the limited inventory. When you could have 99 of every item it just becomes a war of attrition. Skill or strategy don't matter, all that matters if you have enough potions and enough health to use them.

>>8669246
I can't go any earlier than late 70's. The earliest game I have in MAME is 1977's Circus. For pinball it's late 60's. I have simulations of Gottlieb's 1969 Road Race and Spin-A-Card.

>>8669324
No, having an Iq of 151 does, failing to recognize how games actually operate is a sad show anon.

>>8669246
Good idea. I think I have a good one for JRPGs personally:
I love JRPGs because of its simplicity (doesn't require finesse to play), but I can't play ones that don't let me choose and/or customize my characters stats/skills etc because then I'd have zero effect on how I play it. For example something like Earthbound where you can't do anything regarding your playable characters. I'd say FF6 the lowest bar for me, helped only by the fact that I still get to choose between several party members even though they're very set in stone regarding builds/equips.

>>8669354
No, you just think it makes you smart. Zork and Elden Ring (to pick something current) are not the same game because "you walk around in both and fight now and then."
And even if I do concede that "under the hood" they're doing the same thing because "attack lower health number" then you've reduced it to such an extent that you could apply it to anything.
Is Space Invaders the same game as Metal Gear Solid?

I can't really fuck with text adventure games or anything with vector graphics honestly.

>>8669354
>>>r/iamverysmart

>>8669246
What is there to discuss? You have adhd and a desperate need of approval from strangers on the internet. Congratulations, you're just like every other zoomer in the world. And not even old enough to be retro.

>>8669338
River Raid still holds up. Might be worth trying.

>>8669246
For me, even the "best" handful of atari 2600 titles are playable for max 5 minutes. I can push Space Invaders to maybe 10 minutes.

>>8669363
I agree with text adventures, and even a lot of point and clicks. It was like no one learned the lessons Myst was teaching (including the makers of Myst, ironically). I could play Myst (not even the new versions, the "classic" Masterpiece version in SCUMMVM) just fine when even a lot of later point and clicks or text adventures felt like a chore.
Far too much "but WHY isn't that a solution?" in it for me.

>>8669358
If that's what you got from his post you're retarded

>>8669401
I think that is too easy to say, and the situation isn't that simple.

How's this for another topic on the same lines: when is it "too much" for you?
I was installing Chessmaster 10th Ed on my old WinXP laptop, and it has a 40GB hard drive (mostly because I'm scared to put in a bigger drive because I'll never find those drivers again. Don't think the brand even exists), and as it was installing I was looking at my available space shrink and shrink, and all I could think was "this seems like an awful lot just for Chess."
Now, I know there's audio files for the tutorials, and alternate piece and board sets, etc. but...I just wanted the Chess, you know?

I think that when I look at some modern "card games" with particle effects flying everywhere every second.

I feel like in some ways my mind just wants 640x480 2D and no more.

>>8669246
I'm 26 and don't really feel compelled to play anything older than the NES or Master System. I've played a little of my mom's 2600 and enjoyed it, but I don't really feel the pull to go back to it. I mostly played Adventure, Yar's Revenge and some Combat with my brothers. I had fun with the Apple IIe computers that the gifted and talented program at my elementary school had, but I don't know if I could really get interested in any home computer stuff older than those games. Even some DOS games are too obtuse for me.

I love retro games, but I simply cannot go below N64. Don't see how ppl can pretend to like genesis or snes

>>8669271
Agreed. It doesn't help that so many games prior to Gen 3 were just objectively bad. It isn't that it's old or rudimentary, it's that they sucked, and people back then knew that they sucked, which is why there was an industry crash.

>>8669412
I don't understand how anyone enjoys adventure games. Too much of the time the solutions are nonsensical, and I'm certain the devs make them this way on purpose. Ace Attorney was the only series I could stomach, and even that made you do some shit that didn't make any sense even though you knew what the answer was.

>>8669474
I think this is why I prefer outward puzzle games. At least they're abstract by nature. Atomix is really cool.

>>8669347
>I can't go any earlier than late 70's
Are those even archived?

>>8669446
There's really nothing commercial chess games can offer over Lichess. They're basically a scam at this point for people too dumb to query a search engine for "free chess game". And those people would be too dumb for chess anyway.

I grew up in the SNES/486 era, and that's more or less the kind of stuff that doesn't feel too archaic for me.

Of course I played NES games growing up, but the limited colors and simpler gameplay systems do feel a bit primitive. Going back to Atari and the titles start to barely feel like video games to me.

Weirdly enough, my sense of whats futuristic technology seems to have crystallized around the early 2000s, so all the technological improvements we have gotten since then just seem like the most amazing shit to me.

My guess is that it just depends on what you've grown up with, your brain comes to associate certain things with "video game".

>>8669246
lmao he got filtred

>>8669536
Oh, I know that. I mean, even if there were only commercial games you should be smart enough to pirate them. It just occurred to me how "much" a lot of things are sometimes. Maybe it's just because I have a toaster for a desktop, but it feels like a lot of modern games just seem way beyond their ... play, if that makes sense?

But it is nice to have offline things that aren't too bloated, since I've always been rather minimalist in terms of computers and the sizes of things.

>>8669246
I'm a true gaymer so I play the 1964 Sumerian Game in morse code.

>>8669246
Arena for me.
Big Elder Scrolls fan, started with Morrowind when I was a kid, went to Oblivion and then checked out Daggerfall waiting for Skyrim.
I just can’t into Arena, the necessity of Mouse movement and much of how it functions is a little to archaic for me. Even Daggerfall is a grand improvement over it.
I’m sure there are some mods out there to correct these issues and maybe I’ll give that a go one day, but it won’t be for a while.
> ps I also can’t into Ultima Underworld and I think Golden Eye has been erased by the passage of time

>>8669462
>I had fun with the Apple IIe computers that the gifted and talented program at my elementary school had, but I don't know if I could really get interested in any home computer stuff older than those games. Even some DOS games are too obtuse for me.
#filtered

>>8669421
Of course there's more to it. You were raised by iPads and HDTVs, so you have a very narrow view of how games should be. This is why you instinctively try to touch the GB screen to start a game. Why watching an 4:3 TV show hurts your eyes. Why an actual plot instead of soft core gay porn hurts your brain and bores you to death.

>>8669264
An apt description. I will say also, however, that flow states can be enhanced through use of the other elements, such as audiovisual, to heighten the intensity of the effect. For example, Tetrisphere is a game with an almost hypnotic effect, achieved through the gameplay but enhanced through the trippy visuals and pounding soundtrack. The roller coaster of fear and relief, the bliss of opening the layers of the sphere, it comes together and is like a religious experience. I think that the gameplay is part of it, but that the visuals and audio really take it to the next level.

>>8669524
video games barely even exist before golden age. I guess he's talking about home pong, quiz show, that kind of thing? That's a pretty small set of games to exclude.

Given that I can enjoy games like chess or mahjong, I'd say I don't have much of a limit. Hell, I'd list Warlords on VCS as one of the top multiplayer games of all time.

>>8669653
>Golden age
lol. You mean the death of true video games.

>>8669363
why vector graphics? I don't really see the distinction between say, Asteroids and another space shooter of similar design that uses raster graphics.

>>8669446
That's what I feel about 3D graphics. I honestly feel like fidelity greater than what was typical of console and PC games around 2001-2005 is the most that you really need, and that going beyond that is mostly just a wank fest of prioritizing visuals over anything else. At some point it feels like you are trying to make a movie or a painting more than you are trying to make a game.

I wouldn't be surprised if this is an age-based thing though, and perhaps we all just think that whatever was top of the line when we were a young teen is the most you really need.

>>8669523
this game looks cool, does it always focus on teaching you chemical compound bonds? I could use that to brush up on my chemistry lessons from way back.

>>8669557
if you've never speedrun water rings then you don't have room in which to criticize them.

>>8669671
It "kind of" teaches you them. But the objective is to actually form them. You move them in a direction, and they move until they hit something, then they stop. You have to form the compounds to beat the level.
The DOS version doesn't have the banging soundtrack of the C64 version if that matters.

>>8669668
>I wouldn't be surprised if this is an age-based thing though, and perhaps we all just think that whatever was top of the line when we were a young teen is the most you really need.
I think it's a little bit of both. I think maybe ten or twenty years in the future we could have the gameplay of those games with the photorealistic look of today's games, but with development costs as they are now it seems like games have to be one or the other.

>>8669668
>>8669686
The way I choose to think about it is "spectacle over clarity." There's a kind of fattening of everything. If there is an age thing, it might be more likely my slowly failing vision (keratoconus) and reaction times than purely taste from a time in my past.

But having said that I don't think, when you get right down to it, games have really changed that much since the PS2 in terms of how they play. But, as I said, modern 3D (and even some 2D) is becoming a real difficulty for me, so perhaps I'm just coping.

I love text-based adventures. Even the very primitive ones that are just multiple choice "Choose Your Own Adventures" made digital. A lot of fanmade CYOAs back in the GeoCities days, for example. Actual text adventures with a parser are great if you can get in to it like an more interactive book (and, of course, the text is interesting). Makes sense, because they're often also known as "interactive fiction."
Standard point-and-clicks are generally superior though.

>>8669246
if i don't like or enjoy something i don't play it
i don't see the problem here

For consoles, anything older than 3rd gen is too primitive. I cannot fathom how anything on the Atari 2600 can be considered good. And it's not even solely the graphics; the game design itself is just too rudimentary.
For computers, I have a passing interest in old RPGs like Wizardry & Ultima, old Sierra & Infocom adventures, old roguelikes like Hack & Moria, and old Japanese games like Dragon Slayer & Hydlide.
For arcade, anything older than Galaxian seems too primitive to be enjoyable.
t. 30-year-old whose earliest consoles were the NES and Genesis, and earliest computer had Windows 95

I'm open to anything but rarely play anything that dates from before the Famicom

>>8669446
Chessmaster Challenge, IIRC, is just the Chessmaster 10 engine, and a few tutorials and nothing else. If you want a minimal Chess game for offline that isn't old as balls, check that out. There's a cracked version on MyAbandonWare.

>>8669246
Console games usually are so simple and fast that any good game can be played and fun all the way to Atari 2600 but computer games... Oh boy too many are clunky all the way to the late 90's.

>>8669246
>When is a game too old/simple/rudimentary/etc. that you just can't enjoy it?
This doesn't exist for me, but I will stop playing if the game is fundamentally boring or unrefined or has too many cheap hits or just has an interface that isn't fun to use

I thought everybody liked Pac-Man and Galaga and especially Robotron, seems very gay not to

Cheese Thief for ZX Spectrum

How low? I don't even know. I can only say as low as I'm having fun. Some games just click with me. I can call a game outdated, but enjoy an even more ancient one. There's no consistency with me. I just don't want to waste my time if I'm not enjoying myself.

>>8669369
Not him but go the fuck back

I can't handle playing a game with ultra cool box/concept art that is in reality just blips and chits. This can scale up or down a lot, because even later games can have inaccurate or deceitful art anyway. It just bums me out.

Not sure if this would be classed as "too low" like OP or "too high" like >>8669446, but I just can't stand any game that can be described as "narrative," which is mostly RPGs and adventure games. This is especially bad as I have a lot of love for those genres from when I was young but now that I'm in my 30s I just can't stand them. Even nostalgia doesn't offset this, like when I tried to replay FF7 and I couldn't even play enough to get out of Midgar (over two days, so I wasn't binging). I want to get to the game when I'm in a story section, and I want to et to the story sections when I'm in the game... I can kind of appreciate VNs at this point, though they don't interest me at all, for just saying "yeah, this is just an RPG story without the RPG part."
So, anyway, now basically all my gaming is either directly puzzle games or the occasional action or platformer. If I played more WW2 sims I'd basically be my dad.

>>8669271
Yeah I'm going to have to agree. I can't really play shit earlier than the NES/Master System era. I've tried but I can't do it, and I'm 35 so I was too young for those consoles when they came out.

>>8669557
Am I wrong or is this basically just underwater pachinko?

I think for me it's Pac-Man (1980) and Rogue (1980)

>>8671182
You're wrong. Have you ever seen a pachinko game?

Best I could think of is Galaxian.
Galaga and Gaplus are just improvements in every way.
I do like the flyer art, though. Quite comfy.

>>8671252
What's wrong with Pac-Man?

>>8671495
no I mean those are the oldest games I enjoy.

>>8669246
For me it depends on the genre. The list below contains the first game that match the criteria, earlier games are too rudimentary/bad
FPS - Doom
Platformers - Super Mario Bros. No eurojank, no computers
Beat em ups - Most arcade games from 1986 onwards, consoles 1990s
Fighting games - Street fighter II
Shmups - Galaxian

>>8671497
oh oops

>>8671494
Shit I misread it.
The earliest game I get enjoyment out of is the original Pac-Man.

>>8669246
If the game was bad then, it’s bad now. If the game was good then, it’s good now.
I don’t personally believe age has anything to do with how entertaining a video game can be and this entire board is a testament to that fact.
>>8669324
His intention wasn’t to be a mr. smarty pants.
He explained that the fundamentals of what makes video games engaging has changed very little since their inception and he is correct.
I personally can have just as much fun or more with Home Pong, Defender II or Pitfall as I can with Mario Tennis, Rogue Squadron or Tomb Raider.
Everything technically ages, but the enjoyment value of sincere entertainment is ageless.
How’s that for pretentious?

I can go as low as pong, but I need good controls. I can't stand anything that has shitty controls.

>>8669246
text based adventures and c64 games do it for me fellas, i just cant take no pleasure in that

>>8669659
Because vector graphics never look like you're actually playing the game, it looks like a bizarre detached simulation of your inputs. I can't suspend my disbelief well enough to feel like there's any connection between my inputs and whats happening on the screen.

>>8669246
My limit is the NES. Anything older becomes too primitive.

>>8669246
Anything earlier than Pong/Fairchild Channel F is a bit too barebones and primitive for me, same can probably be said for most people on this board.

>>8671665
For text adventures I think what puts me off most of the time is the setting because its either medieval or futuristic.
Something more "urban" like anchorhead was great IMO. I'd also like something in victorian London too, that'd be great.

Not really a time period but games that are too, for lack of a better word, "arcadey". I want a game to have a definitive end, not necessarily in the story department but in the sense that you can walk away from it without feeling like you're missing something. So most arcade games, online shooters, fighting games, if the point of the game is to get better at playing the game indefinitely I'm can't maintain interest

>>8671665
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LRhbcDzbGSU

But if you could talk straight to that imagination and cut out all the senses, then you would--it would be impossible to ignore it. You couldn't say, "Oh, that's just an image of a dragon." That would be a dragon. And if there was some kind of technology which could enable you to talk straight to the imagination, well, there is. It's called text.

I don't see the point in 3D before Gamecube gen or 2D before SNES gen, as that's when those graphics got standardised.

Adventure-focused games also age worse, since exploration provides more downtime for visual scrutiny.

>>8669246
Text based adventure games.
Doesn't matter how old.
Same with Visual Novels.
That is the farthest I can stray away from God's light.