[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/vr/ - Retro Games

View post   
File: 42 KB, 289x139, sega.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2463964 No.2463964 [Reply] [Original]

Other than the fact you could rarely save your progress, what made them harder back then?

>> No.2463969

No (90% of people) internet in the early 90's

>> No.2463970

Having to actually read.

>> No.2463981

You had to git gud.

>> No.2463986

No GameFAQs.com unti the mid 90s' and no Google to search the rest of the internet.

>> No.2463991

>>2463964
They weren't necessarily more difficult, it's just that modern gaming is, on the whole, easier. The general model now is: tutorials, save anywhere, lots of checkpoints, rechargeable health, unlimited continues, and even stuff like QTEs in action games. Players in most modern games have been coddled for so long they don't even realize it. Add in the lack of arcade games and it's not surprising to see why some people believe older games are harder. The fact that something like Dark Souls received widespread praise for its challenge, as though that was an innovative feature, is very telling.

>> No.2463996

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CSMVxv_4UMU

>> No.2463997

>>2463986
>no Google to search the rest of the internet.
There were search engines before Google, not to mention portals like Yahoo. And most people with Internet access were using Usenet for video game info. Also, Andy Eddy (?) from GamePro maintained a popular FTP site with tons of FAQs.

>> No.2464002

>>2463996
>passes them Contra
>"what's this"
>Announcer says it's the hardest game made
There's my face palm for the day. Nice and early in the monring.

>> No.2464003

>>2463964
They are not harder.
Kids 90% of them today have ADD and its not even funny.

>> No.2464006

>>2464003
Modern games are easy as shit man. You got kids trying to say Dark Souls games are difficult for fucks sake.

>> No.2464013

>>2463997
Most search engines came about in the mid 90s; I used Google figuratively. And I know about usenet and Andy Eddy's ftp site ... I wrote a bunch of stuff hosted there.

>> No.2464018

>>2463996
You can duck in the water to avoid bullets?

I feel bad for learning something from this show. I feel worse for giving in and clicking it of course.

>> No.2464020

>>2464006
If they dont shoot something for 2 seconds they find the game boring.
Finding the game boring is an excuse to say its hard and you dont want to play.
Trust me when I say its ADD and nothing more.The times are changing.

>> No.2464025

>>2464002
>Announcer says it's the hardest game made
Not too good at hearing eh? He said it's considered 'one of the hardest games ever.' Not the hardest game made.
It is one of the harder mainstream NES games. But there's a lot of stuff much harder.

>> No.2464028

>>2464020
>If they dont shoot something for 2 seconds they find the game boring.
Bullshit. That's more a retro gaming thing.
Modern gamers don't mind if you have 45 minute cutscenes or have to take 15 minutes to walk across a room. They'd rather have a slow motion bullet time in third person with a QTE that takes 25 seconds to shoot something in the face once.

If they were ADD games might actually be good. Because then they'd have some degree of standards for getting shit done.

>> No.2464035

>>2464025
Ya 30 lives makes it really tough...

>> No.2464062

>>2464035
Any game is easy if you use cheat codes

>> No.2464064

>>2464035
Oh, you mean cheating makes a game easier? Who the fuck knew?

3 lives, 3 continues. 9 lives. That being said, yeah some of the later levels get to be a pain in the ass, especially when they go and decide that holding down and jumping to drop doesn't work like it's supposed and gets you killed since it starts fucking shit up.

>> No.2464072

Two words: Nintendo Thumb

>> No.2464102

I have a couple nieces, and they don't understand the concept that old games are hard.

Why?

Because they nurse save states in emulators. This gives them unlimited micro checkpoints that erase any penalty for mistake. I challenged one when she said she beat all the Ninja Gaiden games the day she got them, and she admitted to me that she chain-stated. Also, she said it's "no big deal because everyone uses them".

I weep for this generation. If they had a hardware chain to accept it at home, I'd love to sit them in front of a real game and console setup, and watch them struggle. Sadly, you can't call child services for emulator use.

>> No.2464110

>>2463991
>The general model now is: tutorials, save anywhere, lots of checkpoints, rechargeable health, unlimited continues
This. Games today are all about hand holding. I can't remember the last time I got a game over that really meant game over, like go back to the start and lose all progress. Now people would call that "artificial difficulty" or some shit.

>> No.2464123

>>2464102
At least they're playing the games? I dunno, you can't force them to play it the "real" way but it really does take away the sense of accomplishment. People joke about achievements for trivial shit in today's games but it's the truth; you used to really have to earn it in older games. I guess that's why I love pinball, it requires skill and you can't really dumb that down.

>> No.2464126

>>2464123
I say challenge them but sweeten the pot. Sit them down in front of the real game and say you'll give them like two dollars for every level they beat, with a bonus 20 bucks for beating it. Eventually they'll thrown down the controller but not before they made... 4 dollars maybe.

>> No.2464126,1 [INTERNAL] 

Having to take notes and map your dungeons to a piece of paper while playing a RPG. Paying attention to dialogue in general due to lack of journal, automap etc.

Having to read the manual before playing the game

>> No.2464409

>>2464072
I never got this, but then again I never pressed very hard on the gamepad either

Maybe I have weak hands? I dunno.

>> No.2464496

>>2464072
I used to get this on the original Nintendo Controller. I think it was just the shape of those stupid buttons.

>> No.2464510

>>2464110
Many PC strategy games have "ironman mode", which disables save scumming and makes mistakes permanent. EU 4, the new XCOM, and Shogun 2 come to mind. Strategy is pretty much the only genre that still gets great games, though.

>> No.2465068

Limited continues

most bullshit concept in gaming history.

>> No.2465104

I don't miss the difficulty of old action games. I don't want to repeat something over and over again anymore.

>>2463991
Tutorials are good though, unless they are too intrusive and long-winded.

>> No.2465109

>>2463964
That's what makes the games fun, you don't use a map, a guide, a faq. You only use the resources provided to you by your knowledge by what kids said in school, and by guessing.

Those were the days, still refuse to use any materials except for my mental resources of games.

>> No.2465116

In games now, there is usually a mini-map marker telling you where to go next. If there isn't, then there is a dedicated button which lights up a trail pointing you where to go next.

You don't need to read a single fucking thing in order to complete a game, just follow the yellow arrow. You never have to use your brain at all; nothing is cryptically worded and/or poorly translated for you to figure out.

The games that sell are the ones that are a soft guiding light al the way to the finish line; something that every single person who wants to does do. Beating a game is no longer an accomplishment and it rather a proof of hours spent. Games are now the equivalent of a "participation award"

>> No.2465119 [DELETED] 

>>2465104
cancer

>> No.2465127

>>2465068
You've got to be joking, right? Jesus Christ, limited continues is what made many games great. With unlimited continues they would be very "mediocre", I have a hard time believing you even played an old game like that properly.

If some parts were too hard and you didn't want to bother or hadn't the time, use the mother fucking game cheats, that's what they're for. The drawback was that you would clearly be... cheating. Not this holding your hand at all points, practically a TAS way of playing... or most retarded bullshit of all... "sliding" difficulty.

>> No.2465131

>>2463964
Reading manuals.
The car rides home from the store were the best as a kid, just getting pumped for the game. Reading the manual and imagining what you could do before you could even do it. Just built the hype and helped out the groundwork.

>> No.2465140

>>2465119
Oh fuck off you try-hard underage piece of shit.

>> No.2465151

Most games just start out hard and don't ease you into any difficulty

>> No.2465160

>>2463964
That there isn't a place where you can watch some swedish meatball play them, so you can say you played them as well.

>> No.2465165

>>2463964
Action games in the past followed the arcade design philosophy where you had to struggle through every screen. Being hit actually mattered because health, continues, and lives were scarce. The game was supposed to be exciting and dangerous. It was not uncommon to buy a game and never beat it.

A thing you might not know about old games is that the developers were also the play-testers. They could create extremely punishing levels that were still beatable, because they personally played their own games and understand all of it.

The audience for games back than consisted almost exclusivily hard core players. Even the fucking children were more hard-core than the adults today. Back in the past if a game was very difficult it was a good thing. Some magazine (think it was nintendo power) used to have a difficulty score in addition to it's music, graphics, gameplay, score. If a game was harder it got a better rating.

>> No.2465181

>>2465068
Disagree

Looming sense of actual loss on failure adds a pressure completely absent from current gen games.

>> No.2465185

>>2463964
>Other than the fact you could rarely save your progress, what made them harder back then?

They were more difficult, did not have forced tutorials every 2nd stage, and half the game was not made up of cinematics and QTEs. Also, you did not have Steam guides and gamefaqs.com, so you actually had to figure shit out for yourself.

>> No.2465198

>>2465165
>The audience for games back than consisted almost exclusivily hard core players. Even the fucking children were more hard-core than the adults today.
You're mythologizing the past. There were plenty of so-called "casual games" and people who only played "casually," and kids just played whatever was available to them whether it was easy, hard, good or bad.

>> No.2465214

>>2465104
>>2465119
Old games have tutorials except they were in the manual. Where games now only include an advertisement.

>> No.2465216

This thread got me kind of jacked up to play some hard games but I have no working controller right now

>> No.2465256

>>2464102
>I'd love to sit them in front of a real game and console setup
when my niece comes over sometimes she plays my snes i have hooked up in the living room. although she usually just plays minecraft

>> No.2465262

>>2465068
How many continues do you have in real life?

>> No.2465269

>>2465262
>>2465068
I think limited continues is bullshit. Games like Metal Slug and Space Harrier don't get shit for it.

Never liked it as a kid. Don't like it now.

Also real life isn't 2d.

>> No.2465273

>>2465269
>He doesn't play metal slug on 1 credit

>> No.2465281

>>2465269
>I'm bad, and old games are too hard. They should let me repeat everything when I fail, like in Fez.

>> No.2465292

>>2465269
>Also, real life isn't 2D

Actually, real life is pretty 2D

>> No.2465313

>>2463991

>They weren't necessarily more difficult, it's just that modern gaming is, on the whole, easier.

How does that work? If Game B is easier than Game A, Game A can't NOT be harder than Game B.

>The general model now is: tutorials, save anywhere, lots of checkpoints, rechargeable health, unlimited continues, and even stuff like QTEs in action games.

The bulk of this stuff existed in games as far back as the NES. In addition, games today are so much bigger and longer than they used to be that things like checkpoints are a necessity. Games GOT bigger and longer because things like checkpoints allowed them to be. This isn't a bad thing.

>> No.2465330

>>2463997
Doesn't realize that internet time was $2-$3 per minute on 24k modem in 1980s and early 90s.

Nobody used Usnet. Get the fuck outta here kid, you clearly weren't alive then.

>> No.2465331

>>2465292
>>2465281
>>2465273
So according to you kids Metal Slug and Space Harrier are bad games?

>> No.2465335
File: 33 KB, 220x346, 51GJ3W878FL._SY344_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2465335

>>2463986
>>2463997
>>2464013
>>2465109
>>2465330

Let's not forget that the print industry was quite healthy at the time. You had your pick of 15+ magazines at the news stands, player's guides, cheat books (the 300+ page book full of short sections for dozens of titles you'd get at the school book fair, pic related), and more. These were circulated between friends as widely as word of mouth was.

It's a bit shocking that all of you guys definitely grew up in the 90s and are totally OG old school retro gamers, yet none of you remembered this.

>> No.2465341

>>2465330
>Nobody used Usnet
This is simply untrue. If nobody used Usenet, why do I have such vivid memories of downloading FAQs off rec.games.video? There were plenty of people on the net before the Web was widespread.

>> No.2465343

>>2465331
How did what I say even remotely imply that?

>> No.2465348

>>2465335
Because print magazines were mostly bullshit filled with rumors, inaccuracies, and outright lies, not to mention months behind actual news. Sure I liked Nintendo Fun Club and UK's awesome C+VG, but they had nothing on Internet discussions.

>> No.2465351

>>2465341
Actually over 80% were schools. According to Nielsen.
Wasn't till like 2002 that you even had the entire internet usage of unique users equal the US population.

So ya the majority of kids saying they used faq guides from the internet in like 95 or even late 90s are talking out their ass.

>> No.2465356

>>2465343
Gee idk. You kids saying unlimited continues are bad? Both those games have unlimited continues.

>> No.2465357

>>2465348
They did when internet discussions weren't a household thing. You're overstating their worthlessness anyhow--as if the Internet wasn't/isn't rife with the same problems anyway.

>> No.2465367

>>2465351
I didn't say anything about a majority at all, just that it existed and if you had a modem and we're savvy enough, you could access the internet. It was definitely a thing, there were BBSes that offered telnet, ftp, and newsgroups. Also community networks like SCN and The Well offered free net access. Just because you weren't doing it doesn't mean lots of others weren't.

>> No.2465372

>>2465356
When did I say anything at all to do with continues?

>> No.2465373

>>2465367
I grew up in the 90s. VERY few people used the internet for anything other than maybe aol and that wasn't till the later 90s.
I was one of the few kids in my school that even had a PC.
And that's America. Internet was basically non existent anywhere else. From what I understand and looking at statistics.

>> No.2465374

>>2465351
Years before I had internet access at home, I went to the public library and saved FAQs and walkthroughs to a floppy disk.

>> No.2465380

>>2465372
Ok you're just shitposting about the 2d real life thing. My mistake for confusing your shitpost with the others,

>> No.2465381

>>2465373
>I, a single example, represent the entire American experience.

Please sit down.

>> No.2465384

>>2465381
Nielsen isn't just me you dumb kid. Why don't you go and play with your friends in /v/?
>>2465374
Yo were the minority.
Most people were lucky if they had a strategy guide.

>> No.2465387

>>2465380
It's not as much of a shitpost as it is a legitimate observation on how little there really is to life.

>> No.2465391

>>2465384
If you grew up in a town that didn't have access to print media, I'd say you were in the minority. We grew up in the 90s, not the 30s.

>> No.2465392

>>2465373
>Internet was basically non existent anywhere els
This was flat out fucking not the case! Thousands and thousands of people were participating and sharing on the internet in the mid 1990s, I am sorry that your personal experience is otherwise. Go look at rec.games.video on Google Groups, there's hundreds of thousands of posts back to the early 90s, to say nothing of the hundreds of other popular Usenet groups. I was running my own BBS in 1993 and dialed up the University of Washington to access MUDs, IRC, and newsgroups. The internet existed before the web, get over it.

>> No.2465393

>>2465387
Looks pretty 3d to me. Apparently reality goes on for as long as I can imagine. Will only last my short lifetime though.

>> No.2465406

>>2465391
Getting a game wasn't like it is now. Most kids got on average about 3 games a year. Actually fact sure someone will link the statistics I'm talking about.
You weren't getting guides for all those games on top.

You definitely weren't getting a guide for a rented game.
>>2465392
>your personal experience
Listen you kids hat can't read. Nielsen STATISTICS. Not my fucking personal experience.
Damn that common core teaching is trash.

>> No.2465409

>>2465406
Jesus, you can stop lecturing me as if I didn't live in the same time period. Again, YOUR personal experience is not the median for all 90's kids. Your life didn't correlate perfectly with whatever statistics you're citing. On that note, please, do show us this "average of 3 per year" statistic you're citing, along with the game guide corollary. Since, you know, you're referring to hard data and not just talking out of your ass.

>> No.2465414

>>2465409
>Your life didn't correlate perfectly with whatever statistics you're citing.
>do show us this "average of 3 per year" statistic you're citing
I don't keep this shit on hand.

Statistics aren't absolutes.

>> No.2465416

>>2465393
I think what he means is that you don't really take it all in anyway. I mean, it's just not important, unless you are paying special attention for some reason. It's like how you can drive a car a long distance and not really "see" anything if you know what I mean.

>> No.2465424

>>2465414
>Statistics aren't absolutes.
Then why do you keep citing them like they're irrefutable?

And you do you really expect us to believe that you have an accurate memory of statistics you happened to read that happen to be pertinent to the conversation and happen to be your only way of backing up your claims?

If you don't have supporting evidence, you CAN'T USE IT AS SUPPORTING EVIDENCE.

>> No.2465427

>>2465424
>Then why do you keep citing them like they're irrefutable?
Because they give you an idea?

Just because you used internet in the 90s a lot doesn't mean a lot of people did.

>> No.2465432

>>2465427
Just because you didn't, doesn't mean a lot of people didn't. In terms of anecdotal evidence you're outnumbered here. Move on.

>> No.2465434

>>2465427
Given that my public elementary school had internet in '95, I'd say tons of people did.

>> No.2465438

>>2465434
>>2465432
If you kids want to just continue to ignore Nielsen statistics go ahead. But I guess I've just been eating the bait this whole time.

>> No.2465440

>>2463981
I think you need to elaborate on that. There are plenty of harder games available today than before.

>> No.2465442

>>2465427
>doesn't mean a lot of people did.
Yet all evidence points to the fact that many, many people did use the Internet, you turbo retard.

>> No.2465446

>>2465442
Show me.

>> No.2465447

>>2465438
We can't ignore what's not even there to begin with. How do you not understand that "I read a statistic" is fucking meaningless?

"Hey, according to Nielsen, kids who didn't have internet in the mid 90s ate actual shit for 2 square meals a day!" See, I can do it too. You have to believe me because I said "Nielsen."

>> No.2465448

>>2464028
Correct me if I'm wrong, but most games allow the player to skip cutscenes nowadays where as in the 90s you typically couldn't.

>> No.2465452

>>2464102
Well I think that's the difference between "difficulty" in the 90s and now. Difficulty back then wasn't so much difficulty as it was a requirement of redoing every thing if you died once. It was tedium. I love me some old games but you can't deny that redoing a level that you already know how to do just to figure out one part 3/4 in to the level is fucking aggravating to say the least.

>> No.2465453

>>2465447
Yep kid shitting on Nielsen. A very old, established, and global entity for measuring data.
Yep ok kiddo.

>>>/v/

>> No.2465457

>>2465438
>If you kids want to just continue to ignore Nielsen statistics go ahead.
According the the World Wide Web Consortium -- the group responsible for the HTML standard -- there were 16 million people online in 1995.

BTFO

>> No.2465462

>>2464123
I'm less concerned about achievements for having to "earn" them, since quantifying earning anything is nothing more than an opinion. What bothers me is what you earn with achievements nowadays. Before achievements it was gear, cheatcodes, unlockables. Now it's just a fucking beep and some text saying "You did it."

>> No.2465463

>>2465457
World wide. Do you honestly think 16 million is a lot for the world? You couldn't even get a top rated TV show with that. You couldn't get a grade B show with that.

Holy shit. You actually think 16 million is a big number?

Seriously. Kid. How old are you? Please tell you me you aren't over 16.

>> No.2465469

>>2465127
That kinda speaks negatively to the game design though. If the only thing keeping you there is the threat of having to start all over, not the game's actual gameplay or design. Game design is more important.

>> No.2465470

>>2465453
I'm not shitting on statistics because none have been presented to shit on. I'm shitting on you for insisting on making claims you can't/won't back up and expecting us to accept them as gospel, despite earlier stating that statistics aren't absolutes to begin with.

I'm done with you. I look forward to you calling me a kid one more time. That'll show me.

>> No.2465472

>>2465281
Anyone can get better at a game with practice. Anyone. How much the game wastes your time before allowing you to is the difference here. Continues waste more of the players time.

>> No.2465475

>>2465470
>I'm shitting on you for insisting on making claims you can't/won't back up
Here you go kiddo.
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=nielsen+internet+usage+statistics+also+why+has+common+core+failed+me%3F

It's public information....

>> No.2465476

>>2465472
Limited continues I mean.

>> No.2465487

>>2465463
I'm 38, kiddo. My point is that there were a ton of people online back then. Yes, 16 million is a drop in the global bucket, blah blah; the fact stands that it was used by millions and grew daily. And many people used it to talk about video games. Check it:

https://groups.google.com/forum/m/#!search/final$20fantasy$203

Over 600,000 posts just about FF3, and that's only the stuff Google has saved (which is really the old Lycos News they bought).

>> No.2465494

>>2465487
US population in in 95 was 266 mil.
WORLD WIDE USERS was 16 million.
Fucking nothing. Just like Nielsen shows.

I really don't get these kids that come to /vr/ and spout this bullshit about the internet. I really don't.

>> No.2465505

>>2465494
16 million is a larger number than the total sold units of some consoles discussed here.

>> No.2465507

>>2465494
http://www.people-press.org/1995/10/16/americans-going-online-explosive-growth-uncertain-destinations/
>1995
>Our findings indicate that currently 18 million [American] homes have modem-equipped computers
>America alone

this is what citing sources looks like

>> No.2465516
File: 47 KB, 380x350, 1376555467680.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2465516

>>2465507
>>2465505
I'm done. State public information and even link it. Get called out for "not citing a source"

Place may as well be /v/ now.

>> No.2465525

>>2465469
Not at all, no. It meant that you had to make sure to hang onto as many lives/energy you could in the early part. It made it a big undertaking to start a new game. Sometimes with really hard games that took a while to play through the early levels, it could be a chore to start from scratch again, you could cheat if it became too much.

The threat of having to start all over is just an extension of having to start the same level over. Having some punishment is an intrinsic part of game design. The early parts were designed to be fun to play many times, that's why they often put the less good levels later on in the game.

It doesn't rely on the tension at all, the game has to be good or people just won't bother starting up again. You could equally say the exact opposite, that it's lazy to just allow unlimited continues. It also makes it a very different experience for different players depending on how long they spend on a single session, which is a big problem.

>> No.2465537

>>2465494
>16 million
>nothing
Choose one.

>> No.2465562

>>2465131
Fucking this. What's the last game you bought that had an actual manual?

>> No.2465567

>>2465507
And you honestly believe a majority of those were used for gaming purposes? Jesus Christ, how dense.

>> No.2465571

>>2465562
I was packing up a game for eBay and it made realize it's been a good ten years or more since I handled a game in a cardboard box. Not that it's a huge deal, but it was definitely a tactile part of the experience way back when. Nowadays only the bigger PC releases come in cardboard.

>> No.2465573

>>2465567
Did I say that? There's a whole lot of putting words in people's mouths tonight.

>> No.2465606

>>2465373
>VERY few people used the internet for anything other than maybe aol and that wasn't till the later 90s.
Virtually one used the internet for AOL except for AIM really. Anyone who had AOL generally used AOL through AOL's dialup and that precludes usage to the internet. AOL only gained internet access in 1996. AOL was also for the 'slower' population for the most part and most of them wouldn't have known to use the internet to connect to AOL instead of dialing up to AOL. Anyone who knew better generally didn't bother with AOL and just used a proper ISP.
At the beginning of 1996 there were ~18% of the U.S. or ~48.5 million internet users. There were plenty of them using other things like IRC, FTPs, browsing the web, playing games online, downloading files, etc...
For not a lot of people using it, there were quite a few people using it all over the place.

>> No.2465617

>>2465475
You do know nielsen ratings are bullshit. Kind of like how they set up 20K boxes to extrapolate for 300+ million people.

>> No.2465623

>>2465330
>Nobody used Usnet.
>Get the fuck outta here kid
>Ignorant kid alert

>> No.2465636

How the fuck is this an acceptable thread topic?
Get out. Jesus christ.

>> No.2465642

>>2464028
UNDERRATED POST
/THREAD
FUCK THE TIMES WE LIVE IN
THIS ANON IS CORRECT
THIS IS NOT SARCASM

>> No.2465651
File: 107 KB, 280x225, uston.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2465651

>>2465335
This was the last books I recall buying. Though I suppose I did largely forget there were published guide books as I was on the internet at the time ... why shell out for a guide book when I can find the info online?

In the 90s I was a but snobbish about game magazines, as I had ready access to Japanese ones and recognized that EGM basically ripped off much of their format and layout from Famicon Tsushin. I did enjoy going through Video Games Tips & Tricks though.

>> No.2465656

>>2465448
In the 90s cutscenes were barely a thing except for perhaps RPGs and a few late playstation games. Anything that would be construed as a cutscene was generally skippable or like 5 seconds long and the game was 99% gameplay from that point on if anything.

There was largely no real need for 'skipping cutscenes' until modern gaming. Also, I'm not sure even a lot of games let you. I'm pretty sure it's hit or miss and in plenty cases I find unskippable ones in modern games. I don't have any data for the percentage wise.

>> No.2465668

>>2465330
28.8K BTW. Unless you lowered your bitrate with an ceiling command on the modem. Which apparently a lot of people either didn't pay attention to or know about because they think dialing up meant you had to listen to the handshake protocol noise. It didn't - it was silent if you wanted it to be.
Also, 1993 - Netcom had twenty dollars unlimited access.

>> No.2465674

I will say this, I own Last Battle in the Genesis and it is the absolute hardest game Ive ever played

>> No.2465676

>>2465651
I did enjoy EGM! What was the best gaming mag?

>> No.2465804

>>2465335
Obviously there were print magazines. Nobody read Gamemaster, though, whatever the fuck that is. Nintendo Power, EGM, and Tips & Tricks.

Retard boy tries to tell me people used Yahoo! when it wasn't even founded until 1994.

>> No.2465804,1 [INTERNAL] 

>>2465198
There were plenty of Nintendo kids, but PC gaming was purely a hardcore market back then, adventure games&edutainment aside. Doom widened the appeal and games like Half Life turned into into a mainstream thing and eventually started the decline, but old RPGs, Strategy games, space sims etc were purely designed and developed for the "hardcore" gamers.

>> No.2465816

>>2465668
Even in 1997 only 18% of households even had internet access according to the US Census. https://www.census.gov/prod/2005pubs/p23-208.pdf.. Keep telling me how everybody used Usenet and Yahoo to look up video game tips.

>> No.2465819

>playing any version from SF2
>get my ass kicked about the 6th or 7th opponent when I try 1cc on the normal difficulty
>SF3
>have an easier time than SF2 but still get my ass kicked at the sub-boss and boss fights, never could finish using only 1 coin
>SF4
>hardest difficulty, can finish the game with several perfects

kek. Probably it's because the game isn't exactly arcade focused anymore, but still fun to watch. SFV will be even retardedly easier, I've heard even the 360º motions will be removed. Luckily emulators will forever exist.

>> No.2465841

>>2465816
Accuracy on stats is best guesstimate, most place it at 18% in 1996. However, 18% is a fuck ton of people, when it's 18% of 267 million.
I'm also not the one you were arguing with retard. But yes there were plenty of people who looked shit up online. Some people is not nobody. It's somebody. Not everybody. Not everything is black or white, so stop being an asshat.

>> No.2466121

>>2465819
>20 years of Street Fighter experience is not a factor in this

>> No.2466125

>>2465816
An even smaller percentage owned a Super Nintendo. I'm sure the two groups were entirely mutually exclusive. No one's saying that every gamer was on the web, but goddamn, stop insisting that nobody was.

>> No.2466128

>>2465416
Thank you. I know I was vague and off topic, but I'm glad I wasn't so unclear that nobody got it.

>> No.2466176

ever since I picked up a ps2 pad when I was three years old, I swore to myself that these oldfags know nothing.

xbox 360, best retro console of all time!!!
Gr8 memories being a kid playin that.
Oldcucks

>> No.2466178

>>2466176
Underage b&-

Dafuq you're old enough

>> No.2466259

>>2466121

Not sure, SFIV is far easier than 2 and I'm not even a good player. Also, I still got my ass kicked playing Turbo but go like a breeze thru 4.

>> No.2466498

I recall getting a few VHS tapes of gaming magazines which had Action Replay codes on them. You had to pause the tape to write the code down. So picture this, a 50 digit code, lots of 0s and os and 8s and Bs, 14 inch crt, paused VHS...
Drove me mad.

>> No.2466512
File: 86 KB, 620x305, hell.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2466512

>>2466498

I don't miss taking notes on long passwords and codes.

>> No.2466568

And then after what seemed like forever taking down/putting in the thing, if you made ONE little mistake, because some letters/numbers looked the fucking same.... the entire game "save" wouldn't work and likely gone....

>> No.2466606

>>2466568
>>2466498
O0 8B NMH in that shitty military font can all go fuck themselves

>> No.2466780

>>2466512
Damn. I remember these games. Beat them once and never play again. Kids now definitely lucked out with saves.

>> No.2466786

>Having a shitstorm over such a topic

>> No.2466848

>>2465351
>>2465373
I started using the web in 1997 (in Europe). There was a lot going on by then, such as Quakeworld which I played a lot. Ultima Online launched the same year.

http://www.mit.edu/people/mkgray/net/web-growth-summary.html

And like many others I used BBS' before the web, and downloaded for example a FAQ for Duke3D's BUILD editor.

Here are gaming-related textfiles distributed on American systems in the 80s and early 90s: http://textfiles.com/games/

>> No.2466853

>>2465104
What a young little slut. Fuck your cancerous input.

>> No.2466876

>>2466853
See >>2465140

>> No.2466897

>>2466176
You type very well some a 3 1/2 year old.

>> No.2467380

>>2465127
Limited continues are bullshit. You're going to be playing the hard part over and over again anyway. Let the player get gud at what is giving them trouble. Don't punish them by making them play what they already know how to do over again.

>> No.2467476

>>2467380
But allowing unlimited continues was the slippery slope that led to the casual mindset that it todays gaming.

>> No.2467480

>>2467476
I agree, the idea is to master the game and get so good that you don't have problems with X level anymore.

>> No.2467548

>>2466125
Yeah you're right not all of those 18% of US households with internet even had video game consoles, so the number of people who used it is even less.

The 18% figure from the census also comes from 1997 which is N64 era. How many people do you think were using Usenet for SNES in 1992 or NES in 1983 or Atari in the late seventies?

No Usenet was not prevalent, not even in the 90s. You're trolling, weren't alive then, or were a far outlier if you were using Usenet in 1992 instead of purchasing a much cheaper gamer mag.

>> No.2467563

>>2464018
Peasant

>> No.2467612

>>2464062
30 lives don't make it basically "easier" but you have more chances which I would call "more fair".

>> No.2467613

>>2465440
To be fair, kids aren't playing any of those games.

>> No.2467616

>>2465440
That's pretty much false, games today are piss easy, handholding, with tutorials, checkpoints and saves. Older games had none of that shit, plus you had limited lives on top of it. Yes you can cherrypick a few hard games today, but the average game just isn't. While the average retro game is usually pretty hard.

>> No.2467618

>>2465562
Manuals today just look like legal disclaimers, what a goddamn shame. Also manuals in the west were usually pretty shit, I'm so fucking jelly of the Jap manuals

>> No.2467649

>>2465281
Fez is more of a puzzle game than a platformer. It doesn't make sense to punish you for missing jumps, because that element is secondary.

>> No.2467654

>>2465406
>Most kids got on average about 3 games a year.
Were your parents filthy rich, or something?

>> No.2467691

>>2467548
Usenet was used throughout the 90s, not just the early 90s. And there were gaming web sites too. Before (and during the early years of) the web, people used bulletin board systems.

>>2467616
Tutorials are the same thing as manuals, only more effective. Saving and checkpoints have existed since the 80s.

>> No.2467706

>>2463964
Not being able to pull off mad 360 no scopes. No kids in the 90s had to settle with mad 360 no spindash moves.

>> No.2467741

If you were stuck, you were stuck.

You could pray that a magazine would have a cheat code or strategy guide. If you were lucky you'd have a hotline to call.

>> No.2467746

>>2466512
The password system in International Superstar Soccer is the most retarded thing I've ever seen. Took me ten minutes just to write it down and fifteen to enter all the symbols.

>> No.2467747

>>2467741
There was pretty much always a place to call for hints or a magazine or a walkthrough. On the back of like every box/manual or some shit there was a hint line you could call up.

>> No.2467770

>>2467691
>Saving and checkpoints have existed since the 80s.
I didn't say they didn't. We're talking about the average game here, in broad strokes it's really hard to make the argument that games are harder today.

>> No.2467796

>>2464002
I played that game yesterday and that shit is hard. I couldnt even beat it without the code

>> No.2467808

>>2464110
I wouldn't mind any of those. The thing is that the gameplay itself avoids any difficulty. Games where you can fall into a pit are extremely rare, and even if you can, then the game won't involve platforming of any kind. Look at Dark Souls or the new Castlevania.

Even games made to appeal to older audiences like the Strider remake are more simulating that you are playing it well rather than actually pose the slightest challenge. You literally can hold the analog stick in the vague direction of your next objective and keep pushing attack and not only will succeed, but with full health as well as enemies heal you faster when you hit them than they can damage you.

Same thing with the Arkham games for example. The gameplay is dumbed down to a single dimension of interaction, you push buttons when promted on-screen and the game does everything else for you.

I am unable to enjoy anything like that.

>> No.2467819

>>2465104
>I don't want to repeat something over and over again anymore.

Agreed, I really hated that about games at the time. Especially when it meant that you'd only get a few shots at whatever section you wanted to do before having to slog your way back again. Letting you do a given section as many times as you want is better, as it means you can retry much harder tasks more frequently.

>> No.2467842

>>2467819
Sounds like old games were too hard for you, and you feel entitled to checkpoints.

Good news!

Use an emulator with save states. Now you can cut away replaying any segment, no matter how small, and no longer have to face any penalty of death. So... cheat away!

>> No.2467894

>>2467842
There is no need for an emulator with save states. Game cheats were designed specifically to help you cheat while still remaining faithful to the intentions of the game designers. You should definitely consider using them first (and these are not the same as gameshark/gamegenie or other hacky codes). And you should consider using emulators last. So you can stuff your "good news".

>> No.2467917

>>2465330
>$2-$3 per minute
That's a fucking bargain, m8.
I remember my dad bitching at me about playing chess online back in very early 1990, February, I think, because it cost $5/minute. It didn't drop to $2-$3 until like 1995 or so, which is firmly mid-90s and not early, and didn't start going by the hour until a year later.

>> No.2467959
File: 112 KB, 210x262, Nielsen.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2467959

>>2465351
>caring about what a race traitor has to say

>> No.2467995

>>2467917
Ausland or UK perchance?

>> No.2467997

>>2467842
Having to start the level over is a decent enough penalty. Going back to the start is just bullshit.

>> No.2468021

>>2467995
Neither. We were in the US between 1989 and 1991.

>> No.2468038

>>2465068
casual detected

I bet you complain about 'artificial difficulty' all the time don't you?

>> No.2468039

>>2467997
Oh come on dude. If it's not to your taste that's fine, but just dismissing it as "bullshit" is just plain wrong.

You have to get the idea of going through a game with limited continues, trying to hold on to every life near the beginning. You cannot just dismiss that as all bullshit, come on dude. It's just a different way of game design. If you're just loading again at the start of a level... that is NOT how it's supposed to be played. I've done that myself for several games, but I'm not going to sit here and saying playing it right is "bullshit", that's just stupid. Just say you prefer to do that, stop saying that fucking shit, and then people won't have to come back talking about how you're cheating.

>> No.2468221

>>2463996

I really like how some of those kids end up actually enjoying the games. A classic design stays classic I guess.

>> No.2468229

>>2463964
oddly enough, I found most Sega Genesis games not as godly difficult when I was younger but now I can barely complete a few of my favorites without overthinking strategies and failing miserably.

>> No.2468235

>>2465131
holy shit, I remember when games started coming with a single slit of promotional paper and being dissapointed when I could not imagine how the game is going to play out. I used to memorize the tips section by heart.

>> No.2468241

>>2465216
F310/510/710
best all-around controllers by Logitech, no need to thank me.

>> No.2468242

>>2465269
the limited lives forced me to think about everything I do in the game. stimulated my critical thinking part of the brain.

>> No.2468245

>>2465216
Depends what system you're looking at. Most first party controllers are fairly reasonable on Amazon . The only exception to me is Genesis. Some of the third party 6 button ones feel better.

>> No.2468249

>>2465269
>>2465068
Limited continues add to the danger atmosphere and play pressure. It's really the only way to give a player a full-on feeling of impending doom.

>>2468242
This

>> No.2468252

>>2468245
for 6 buttons you want one of Saitek's 6-button rumble pad. Rumble might not work for everyone but you're playing emulators for games with no rumble.

>> No.2468259

>>2468252
Oh. Duh. Didn't even occur to me that he was talking about PC / Emulators.

Okay, in that context... I hate to say it but the XBox controllers are pretty damn good. I find anything else really usable. I've never used a Saitek controller before. May have to look into it.

>> No.2468283

>>2468245
Most PS1 or older. One of these days I'm just going to start investing in the X-USB adapters and track down lots of OEM controllers.

>> No.2468301

>>2468259
the controller has rumble capabilities and in the event that he goes through with the purchase I felt he should know rumble doesn't always work on a case by case basis. yah know? in case he wants to play PS1, n64 or Dreamcast emulators which have rumble support.

>> No.2468303

>>2468301
forgot to add,

Saitek controllers are built VERY VERY well and better than most first party controllers considering these guys make flight simulation controllers to feel like the real thing.

>> No.2468638

>>2468021
Should have got a local landline instead of paying $5 data roaming.

>> No.2468653

>>2468638
Boomba, haha! You-a real funny, girlie! You make-a me laugh! You like-a good joke? Is a funny trick-a, eh? Get ready for a big surprise!

>> No.2468671

>>2463991
Mobile games do have that arcade money-grabbing aspect, but they usually slow things down to a crawl until you pay instead of cranking up the difficulty and demanding more shekels when you inevitably die.

>> No.2468727

>>2468653
Funny is pretending to know what your dad paid for internet before you were born.

>> No.2469324

>>2468638
>Data roaming

No, we just straight up paid a lot for internet back in the day

>> No.2469483

>>2469324
No you didn't. You used your moms AOL account.

>> No.2469605

bumpan