[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / g / ic / jp / lit / sci / tg / vr ] [ index / top / reports / report a bug ] [ 4plebs / archived.moe / rbt ]

Maintenance is complete! We got more disk space.
Become a Patron!

/vr/ - Retro Games

View post   

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
File: 11 KB, 288x192, Lookin pretty QUALITY there Protoman.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
3166613 No.3166613 [Reply] [Original] [archived.moe]

Where does this idea of a game 'not aging well' come from? I understand that game conventions change over time, but if something was fun in the 80s, it's not like age takes away that fun.

>> No.3166617

Modern gamers. 6th genners primarily.

>> No.3166635

Specifically those who grew up on GameCube. PS2, and xbox.

>> No.3166638

Goldeneye was fun in the 90's but if you've played any modern shooter you would have to agree it has 'aged'. It might still be fun on some level but there's no denying it's more of a hassle than anything to play.

>> No.3166645

>modern console shooter trash

Thanks for proving my point relatively quickly, champ.

>> No.3166646

Only those who grew up on call of duty and halo would say that

>> No.3166647

The only thing about aging I can think is changing of the pop culture over time, which surrounds some games.
But some franchises like Batman are revived over and over, so, I think, fans Batman will like older Batman games too.

>> No.3166648
File: 280 KB, 1280x926, GOODEND2.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>these mechanics have been refined since the game came out
>these graphics have aged cause technology evolves
>these concepts have been expanded in games inspired by this one or similar ones for its time
>this somehow magically makes the game not worth playing

Well, no fucking shit.

Why is this a thing again?

Also Blues looks like a fucking fly in that pic, OP.

>> No.3166649

There are other modern shooters outside of the literally the most popular iterations of the genre.

But feel free to think Goldeneye hasn't aged in comparison to say

>Serious Sam

>> No.3166691

Nah man. I grew up on Doom and Dark Forces and I'm saying that too.

>> No.3166697

>some that were out at the time Goldeneye released.

Got to work on your wiki/google skills, kid.

>> No.3166713

The only one of these games that was out when Goldeneye was out is Quake 1. The rest are either newer or a LOT newer.

Honestly I feel Quake 1 aged worse than Goldeneye. Doom in the other hand is timeless.

>> No.3166767

I can somewhat agree with games not aging well, but thats mostly early 3d games.. 2d on the other hand is timeless

>> No.3166776
File: 8 KB, 256x197, 1456523706769.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

A game ages badly if another game comes along and does what the old game did, but better.
For instance, the Mega Drive Sonic trilogy aged well because Sega never managed to reach that level of quality again, and Doom has aged like fine wine because the FPS genre changed into something unrecognizable just a couple of years later.
Sports games with arcade style gameplay like Tecmo Super Bowl and NHL Hockey 93 have aged well, while later releases with more focus on complex and realistic gameplay seem archaic by today's standards.

>> No.3166780

I consider it to age badly if the way it did things was done in a really crude or obnoxious fashion. For instance, to move a unit you have to alt-click them, then click on move, then click a spot on the map, and click move again. That will age like a tub of sour cream.

If a simple change is a major fix, then it's aged badly.

>> No.3166805

Quake holds up really well actually, I played a lot of it on lan my senior year of high school a few years back because it ran well on the shitty old 2003 PCs. It still controls wonderfully (with some more modern keybinds) and if you up the resolution it looks great. Comparatively goldeneye is the king of wonk.

i'd say a lot of early rpg stuff does not hold up at all, especially early jrpgs and the omnipresent "ridiculously obtuse maze navigation game where everything looks exactly the same" genre. And a lot of the more generic NES era action platformers are pretty forgettable, not including the big ones like Shatterhand, Gimmick, Kickmaster, etc.

>> No.3166814


In the 1980's, you were 5. You're 35 now. What entertained you as a kid won't neccesarily entertain you as an adult.

You are harder to please, and demand more from games. Games have come along since that refined the format, or just did it better.

>> No.3166829
File: 49 KB, 376x350, 80sstyle.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>Where does this idea of a game 'not aging well' come from?
The simple fact things exist in the context of their time period's culture

>> No.3166842

It's not that easy, I think. Tomb Raider 1 is still the best game in the series, but it's really difficult to get people to play it without them complaining about "tank controls". Something else is at play there.

>> No.3166852

>Comparatively goldeneye is the king of wonk.

There's too much of an obsession with Goldeneye's controls (or any old games controls, really) as part of the "games have aged" argument.

It's awfully sloppy because these games only have "bad" controls because of the relative inexperience of users. Modern game controls have all been extremely homogenized now to the point that once you know how to control one FPS you know how to control them all (hell even before on PC there was Ctrl vs C for crouching).

If you look at Goldeneye's presentation it feels very contemporary, with its open-ended missions, stealth, enemies reacting to targeted hit box shots, reloading, etc. Even stylistically its graphics, albeit quite undetailed now.

Quake on the other hand feels really trapped in the 90s, and it doesn't even have that absolutely timeless comic feel of Doom.

Hey, I hate the aged argument all around, I think Quake is great, but if I've gotta play by these rules of discussion, those are my thoughts.

>> No.3166853

how would that apply to people that have not played these games in the past?

>> No.3166862

>There's too much of an obsession with Goldeneye's controls (or any old games controls, really) as part of the "games have aged" argument.
Controls are the ONLY way a player can interact with a game. They're crucial.

>because of the relative inexperience of users
That's being overly dismissive. In fact I'd dare argue the issue is experienced users. Just experienced in a different control scheme. It raises the bar to un-learn, and actually accept a seemingly more primitive input. That's one of the primary mechanics that lead to the experience of playing a game going down the drain.

>If you look at Goldeneye's presentation it feels very contemporary, with its open-ended missions, stealth, enemies reacting to targeted hit box shots, reloading, etc. Even stylistically its graphics, albeit quite undetailed now.
You're right about that, and now think. With the game being that close to present day gameplay, it's still one of the most often brought up games for the "aging badly" department. Guess controls are far more important than you'd like to accept.

On a side note: usually exchanges on games aging badly devolve into nonsense like "the bits can't change" and whatnot. If you take the stuff I said above and think of it as a shorthand of "the experience of playing the game is changing, even (or especially?) for people that never played the game before", the argument for things changing makes much more sense. present day goldeneye needs to stand up to players that are familiar with standardized FPS controls. goldeneye of the past didn't have to go past that hurdle.

>> No.3166873

Most of them find the majority of NES games boring or "bad" with the exception of the classics that became building blocks for later games.

>> No.3166874

Goldeneye I feel is unfairly singled out for two reasons, and the controls are just used as an easy scapegoat.

1) Many players these days emulate the game and do not know the controls can be changed (the options for doing so are hidden in a counter-intuitive place) and do not have a game manual nor the patience of past gamers to work it out for themselves

2) Despite Goldeneye popularizing many elements that are second nature to modern FPS (like the aforementioned stealth system, reloading, targeted body shots, etc) the gameplay *flow* is quite different to both modern shooters (Halo, COD) and retro shooters (Doom, Quake). I feel that leads to many modern gamers misunderstanding how the game is meant to be played.

>> No.3166876

Proper control schemes are how "homogenization", boys.

>> No.3166880

if people aren't willing to invest some time into getting to understand a game, that's their problem. I don't think impatience of a player is something we can count against a game.
I'd like to add though, with the amount of games available at any time to a player now, and many modern games using instant gratification mechanisms like xp, unlocks and achievements, it's more difficult for an old game to offer something to that kind of player

>> No.3166884

>if people aren't willing to invest some time into getting to understand a game, that's their problem.

It has nothing to do with that though. It has to do with gameplay evolving and refining over time. For us who played Atari or NES when it was new we still remember how novel it was and the small number of types of games meant even less than great ones stood out.

Someone who is used to games like Street Fighter would find playing Karate Champ a much more lack luster experience than someone who played it before SF even existed.

>> No.3166886
File: 163 KB, 720x960, modern games.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>games ageing

There are people out there that believe this. Especially kids.

>> No.3166893

>and do not have a game manual
That's an interesting aspect of a game aging. In the past it was very common for a manual to not just be included, but to be essential. The developer expected you to read it, and as a player you had a desire to read it. Modern games though silently hate the manual, treat it as a fallback, a failure mode. The primary way to learn the game is through hamfisted tutorials. While I will definitely not defend these modern abominations, it's important to maintain that perspective. A modern "tutorialized" player simply will not understand the importance and value of a manual. It's another variant of the palyer not being inexperienced, but having the "wrong" experience, and needing to actively work to unlearn it, or get over it. The simple fact the game encourages you to read the manual, is an aspect of its time, and a part of what makes it "age badly". Mind you, I'm not trying to look down on the game. I'd rather have an open and thoughtful exchange on the whole concept. I just think that kind of cultural context is important to understand why some games cause troubles.

>I feel that leads to many modern gamers misunderstanding how the game is meant to be played.
This is the very key the "aging badly" thing is based on. Misunderstandings. Expectations (not in terms of graphics or difficulty, this is not a hardcore vs. casual debate) shifted. In the most simple form they shifted from "none" (before the game existed) to "some" (after the game existed). People playing the game now are in a very different position to those that played it back then. The more an interface deviates from modern expectations, the harder it will be to unlearn what you know, and learn what the game does.

>> No.3166897

I guess I sort of think of games aging as some kind of retrospective recognition of failure in the original game design.

But you're looking at it differently: you see it as incompatibility with modern design paradigms.

That's perfectly fine of course, but I think people having different internal definitions of what is meant by a game aging produces a lot of arguments in these threads.

>> No.3166903

I've lost it.

>> No.3166908

I grew up with manuals as well but prefer tutorials to them in many cases. I think a quick in game explanation of the key mechanics where you actually perform them as you learn is better overall and why most games work like that now.

>> No.3166916

That's some serious cherry picking. There have always been easy point and click games. There are complex modern games as well as simplified ones.

>> No.3166918

No. You're just a modern gamer who likes his hand held.

>> No.3166921

>I sort of think of games aging as some kind of retrospective recognition of failure in the original game design
Yes and no. You will notice, the games that usually get used as examples for aging badly are ones that used experimental, or unusual control schemes, or schemes that have been abandoned for one reason or another. In that regard there's a "failure" in the devs just taking the path that history would not follow. It's important though to understand, the vast majority of developers are not interested in production shit, or going out of their way to annoy the player. The devs had all the right intentions, and did the best thing they could with their knowledge and abilities. It's up to the player to acknowledge it, and to some degree accept the implicit learning curve to get into such a game. It can be very rewarding, but that learning curve should not be played down.
As hard as it may be to get into some of the old games, I am glad they exist. Because for me, they are a window into a different thought process, a different approach to interface. There's plenty to learn from these games, and not just as bad examples, but sometimes as inspiration, for interfaces that modern game design forgot. I see no shame in a game aging, badly or otherwise. It's all experience, stuff we can learn from, or stuff we can (re)play and re-experience.

>I think people having different internal definitions of what is meant by a game aging produces a lot of arguments in these threads
yes, definitely. It's a bit tiresome, in my opinion. Because the whole basis of the shitposters is to take the aging concept literally. The game doesn't change, and nobody sane is arguing otherwise. People that think the concept of a game aging is real just look at it on a different level, where the game does not sit in isolation, but requires players, who have their own experience, culture, mindset.

>> No.3166923

>That's some serious cherry picking
Sorry kid. Picking out one of the most hyped up games of the current generation is far from "cherry picking".

>> No.3166931


Not him, but you do know that hype for western-made big-name bullshit is completely manufactured by the devs/publisher, right?

>> No.3166932

I'm 42 you fucking twit. I am so fucking sick of you people just throwing this "Ohh I disagree with you so you're a kid. That's it. That's my argument." I really miss the days I didn't need to bring this up constantly. Cut that shit out and use actual logic.

I'm sorry, but I think tutorials have taken over for a reason and I think it's a good thing. If you disagree and miss manuals, that's fine. But talk about that. Not this kiddo bullshit.

>> No.3166935

I twas the top selling PS4 games at the time...

>> No.3166942


>easily deceived normies fall for billion dollar marketing campaign
>game sells a trillion copies and is completely forgotten less than a week later

Not to mention that it was released at a time when the PS4 had a total of maybe 3 non-multiplat games. And even putting all of that aside,
>implying sales = quality

>> No.3166946

Thanks for confirming to use that you're just a modern gamer who likes his hand held.

Perhaps go back to neogaf?

>> No.3166948


Don't respond to shitposters.

>> No.3166949

You picked a quick time event game. And not even a popular or well reviewed one. That's like saying all games in the 80s were shit because Dragon's Lair existed. There are tons of modern games with deep, complex game mechanics.

>Sorry kid.
You have to find something better than this.

>> No.3166953

So your argument is that the game is too popular?

>> No.3166958

I hear you on the age thing.

As for the tutorials: My problem is that they're so condescending and aggressive, and kind of shit on the player, treating them like an imbecile. Games of the past, often out of necessity, were silent about certain mechanics, and instead let the player look, listen, think and learn. They'll get the right conclusion eventually. I feel much more respected by a developer when they do that.

Personally, I think neither included manual nor tutorial are the modern way to go. Instead something like the civilopedia, a constantly available instant lookup manual-like, tightly integrated into the game. It gets out of the way unless I request it, and it's relevant when I request it. No shuffling through pages to get to the paragraph I am interested in.
Likewise, games of the olden days often encouraged note taking and off-console/computer interaction. Manuals included short stories, boxes included feelies.
Modern games can learn from that. Certainly not retro, but, for example, Legend of Grimrock really dropped the ball on that one. The game includes a simple mode with auto-mapping, and a hardcore mode, where you're supposed to map yourself. But then it only includes graph paper, to print and pencil on. The game works on tablets, has a dedicated tablet mode. Where's the "notes" button in the corner of the screen, that pauses the game, and lets me scribble on my virtual piece of paper, to update the map (no party marker on it), or flip some pages over to the custom notes.

>> No.3166961

0/10 I'm done.

You're right. This shit is old. It's sucks that we're stuck with OP shitting up the board every day but at least I'll try not to feed him.

>> No.3166964


If you're too retarded to follow a basic comment chain, go funpost on some other board.

>> No.3166965
File: 34 KB, 971x606, DEEPgameplay.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>There are tons of modern games with deep, complex game mechanics.

Yep just look at them all.

>> No.3166969


>Because these popular modern games are shit, that means ALL modern games are shit!

Stop posting images like this, please.

>> No.3166974
File: 809 KB, 5000x5000, asthedevsintendedit.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>Modern games are great guis!
>just ignore the top 50 games.
>honest there's good stuff
>just keep digging
>I promise

I love this argument.

>> No.3166982

Wow, ten games out of the literal hundreds, perhaps even thousands of the games released in this decade. You sure showed that little faggot, I bet he's crying more than when daddy raped his dog.

>> No.3166983


There's probably just as many actual good games on the PS3 as there are on any retro console, but even if I post good modern games you'll post another epic reaction image and call them shit, so why bother?

>> No.3166987

>a constantly available instant lookup manual-like

That is how 3DS works for the most part. Any time playing the game you can minimize it, read the manual and then go back. It works pretty well. I do like that with manuals you can access them any time to check on things.

And I get what you're saying about tutorials being condescending. I guess I just take that as how they have to be to teach anyone. I just like the set up of having the game explain it and then letting you try the mechanic there a few times to get the hang of it.

Though I like it best when those sorts of tutorials are integrated is mini missions you can choose to do or not depending on how and what you want to learn. Monster Hunter 4 does that really well. Each of the weapons is completely different and pretty complex to get used to. If you want you can just take one and go hunting, but there are also some lengthy detailed tutorials. With that game especially, it's much more cumbersome to explain with words which is how it was in the early days of the franchise.

>> No.3166991
File: 204 KB, 740x550, 83aa9c99456a7a7b91b341aa1786a932.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


It's kinda sad how desperate you are.

I can tell you right now. Nobody goes and says something like "Hey you should try some NES games out kiddo!. Oh but stay away from that mainstream Mario shit. It's garbage".

>> No.3166993

Go play Ori and the Blind Forest, for starters.

>> No.3166996

>DLC ridden garbage "indie" game shit

No thanks.

>> No.3167002

>I guess I just take that as how they have to be to teach anyone
have you seen that infamous dissection of Mario Bros. World 1-1? Even if some of it is a bit out there, they do have a point in that the level itself is a tutorial. Just not with all the popups and interruptions. It teaches you through observation.
Developers kind of unlearned that respect towards the player, because focus groups are clinically retarded.

>> No.3167006
File: 33 KB, 320x288, super-mario-bros1.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

That's only 10 games....

Those games are totally cool for the people who like them. I've always been in this situation though. I find platformers pretty boring, so I'm pretty used to the big name games not necessarily appealing to me. I don't care about what's popular, I just care if there's stuff I like to play. And there's tons of modern as well as old stuff I like to play.

>> No.3167008


Actually it's because as games become more complex, with more buttons, commands, systems, and features, it becomes harder and harder to create a proper "learn by doing" tutorial.

>> No.3167012

Yeah that's a pretty great example of a well made in game tutorial. And works brilliantly with a game as relatively simple as Mario. Many old games first level is intentionally easy with various hooks to test the gameplay out on.

>> No.3167014

u wot?

games are less complicated and more simple than they were 15 years ago

peak complexity was reached in 6th gen and it's been downhill since then

>> No.3167018

I'd dare say no. Just got to have some trust in your players, and encourage them to experiment. Don't forget the manual to teach the overarching concept. The in-game tutorial should not teach the buttons. It doesn't in that infamous Mario example either.

>> No.3167025

Nigger are you drunk? The game doesn't have ANY DLC.

What it does have is 16500 positive reviews on Steam (out of 17000), overwhelmingly positive reception from every magazine and site that reviewed it, four years of development and inspired heavily by well-known 2D platformers, Miyazaki, and despite the ridiculous development time it turned a profit in mere weeks.

You are clearly suffering from a brain tumor and I hope you and your family live in a state without euthanasia.

>> No.3167026

They get outclassed, with newer games that did what the old game did, but better.

>> No.3167036


Don't respond to shitposters.

>> No.3167037
File: 44 KB, 622x262, Ori dlc.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


>> No.3167038


Shitpost-san, please stop pretending to be retarded. You're making a scene.

>> No.3167040

Your alleged "complexity" was little more than shit controls, ridiculous amounts of minor details, poor interfaces, and sheer mountains of numbers that turned games into chores.

Depth is supposed to be subtle.

>> No.3167041

Guess you got DLC blinders on.

>> No.3167049
File: 74 KB, 432x324, OvenInterior.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


>> No.3167051


It's just indie devs offering you the option of buying their soundtrack, anon. It doesn't add anything to the game.

Your next post is "B-B-B-B-BUT IT'S DLC!!!! IT SAYS IT RIGHT THERE, KIDDO!"

>> No.3167056

>Your next post is "B-B-B-B-BUT IT'S DLC!!!! IT SAYS IT RIGHT THERE, KIDDO!"


>> No.3167057

I wouldn't call a studio of international veterans under Microsoft "indie". The game had a pretty sizable budget.

>> No.3167058

>dlc costs HALF THE FUCKING GAME's price
>modern gamers defend their precious indie shit.

Oh sweet cancer.

>> No.3167060

Just report this guy, he's obviously trying to derail the thread.

>> No.3167071


>/vr/ janitors

nice one

>> No.3167078

>Janny the mean anon is hating indie games! Ban him!

>> No.3167083

If it was from the fifth gen, it's aged badly.
If a newer game comes along and does the same thing an older game does, but better, the older game hasn't aged as well.

A great example is Metal Gear Solid. Not a bad game by any means, but NOT RETRO Solid 2 did everything it did so much better.

Super Metroid took the formula set up by Metroid and Metroid 2, and refined it. Metroid has aged like milk in comparison.

>> No.3167085

Yeah and just ignore him. It's always the same guy with the same laundry list of reasons that he hates modern games. You can explain all the reasons he's misguided but he'll never take any of it in. He really just wants to vent about how mad he is about modern games. I feel bad for him, but there's not much point in actually trying to discuss anything with him.

>> No.3167089


You're giving him too much credit. It's just a shitposter with no strong opinion one way or another, who has a lot of fun seeing how long he can keep people responding.

>> No.3167091
File: 173 KB, 580x326, Dark-Souls.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>Super Metroid took the formula set up by Metroid and Metroid 2, and refined it. Metroid has aged like milk in comparison.

Perhaps metroid in particular has, but Castlevania and others took the gameplay formula and kept iterating on it.

>> No.3167092


>> No.3167094

Wow that's even sadder...

>> No.3167098


Just because something new is better doesn't mean the original is bad. I don't think that's fair.

Personally I enjoyed Metroid but find both 2 and Super to be as fun as pulling teeth

>> No.3167103

That's the sort of thing OP looks at like it's a hard hitting expose.

>> No.3167190

>As for the tutorials: My problem is that they're so condescending and aggressive, and kind of shit on the player, treating them like an imbecile. Games of the past, often out of necessity, were silent about certain mechanics, and instead let the player look, listen, think and learn. They'll get the right conclusion eventually. I feel much more respected by a developer when they do that.

Exactly. I also hate it when dialogues interrupt the gameplay constantly with some stupid lines anyone would have realised without the game telling you. Zelda games since Ocarina of Time are an example of that.

>> No.3167195

>using numbers from THAT site

Is it cherry picking or just flaming? Either way, I can't take your post seriously.

>> No.3167201

>Nobody goes and says something like "Hey you should try some NES games out kiddo!. Oh but stay away from that mainstream Mario shit. It's garbage".

Sounds like something people would say on this board or on gaming fora.

>> No.3167203
File: 94 KB, 681x342, ps4gh.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


>> No.3167210


It's okay when Sony does it you bernie supporter libcuck

>> No.3167217

>Sony releases games

>> No.3167225

dark souls > any old ass shitty nes game

>> No.3167229

Grew up with the genre, no free aiming while moving, shitty look and crouch mechanic. It's fun but not in the same way as it was when new.

Racing/driving games are much the same.

>> No.3167256

>no free aiming while moving

You do know you can change the controls right?

>> No.3167265

A games either fun or not. It's subjective, that's all there is to it.

>> No.3167284

>no free aiming while moving
Not really a shooter guy, but I thought moving while free looking the thing Halo finally got right?

>> No.3167301

That would be duke nukem 3d

>> No.3167334

I meant with a controller as opposed to mouse+keyboard. Thought that was obvious, but should have been more clear.

>> No.3167337

1.Super Mario Bros.
2.Super Mario Bros. 3
3.Super Mario Bros. 2
5.The Legend of Zelda
6.Zelda II: The Adventure of Link
7.Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles
8.Dragon Warrior III
9.Dragon Warrior IV

Given the option there are plenty of games I would tell people to play over the most popular, which consists mostly of first party nintendo games and dragon quests.I'd easily recommend Gimmick over Mario 2 and 3 as platformers. I'd recommend Faxanadu over either Zelda games. Teenage mutant ninja turtles is hot garbage go play ninja gaiden. I'd recommend Lagrange Point over DQ4. And I personally enjoyed Metal Storm more than Metroid.

If you go just a teensy bit further down the list you get shit games like Golf, Baseball, RC Pro-am (yes it is, fuck you), mahjong and family stadium.

>> No.3167351

I have rpgs for the saturn in 1997 that have movement and facing direction independent. I have a hard time believing that Halo was the first console shooter to not mimic that from early-mid 90s pc gaming.

>> No.3167819

Ori isn't indie, though.

>> No.3167829

Well OP, it's quite simple.

Game is fucking incredible. Really amazing. You are unaware of how much better it could be, it's poor controls, or how awful it looks, because it is the pinnacle of your time. No one could surpass platemail, it aged just fine against guns. Oh wait. We have Kevlar now. Yes, platemail is amazing, but not in the modern world.

Similarly, when all you know is what you have and what is available in the current time, when new and extraordinary things come, they make the thing as it was look clunky, hard to play, and show what poor controls or poor art design it actually had.

Exposure and view is everything.
The man chained at the back of a cave thinks shadows of men walking by are gods.

You see that it's just shadows. He doesn't.

>> No.3167846


Doesn't explain how I can go back and play retro games that I never played as a kid and still think they're better than 80% of modern games.

>> No.3167957

Games themselves don't age, only the standards we hold them too.

This concept doesn't even apply strictly to old games.
For instance, I enjoyed Fallout 3, but New Vegas took all of Fallout 3's gameplay elements and improved them, like fully implementing ammo crafting.
Because of this, I have a somewhat hard time getting back into Fo3, after playing New Vegas.

>INB4 Fallout 3 sucks
I don't care, it's a guilty pleasure, like The Master of Disguise.

>> No.3168654

Your standards should get higher as you get older.

>> No.3168657

The film equivalent of "game has aged like milk" is "eww Casablanca isn't in color".

>> No.3168675

Come on now, like most 4th gen games aren't as 90s as it gets in terms of the graphics, gameplay style, music, and concept.

>> No.3168682

Games age based on their limitations. For example, Atari 2600 games are very primitive and basic compared to 32-bit games. People can still enjoy 2600 games, but it's like comparing checkers to chess. The chess player will ultimately find checkers to be dull because he's more accustomed to the depth and variedness of chess.

>> No.3168694

Did not aged well actually means that: The game was /considered/ very good for it's time, but only because there were no games that did same thing better. Being a bit better than absolute trash is still going to be "mediocre" at best,so when a title comes up, that does same things right, people look back and say "man, that game actually was fairly meh in retrospect"

For instance: Mario, Megaman and Sonic-platformers in their core elements (controls, feel for the character, enemy roles) still have not evolved that much, and modern titles still aim up to them as a stellar example. that's why you can say that they have aged well - because many games that came out after them have not surpassed them in the parts that matter

Metroid 1 was experimental for the time, and as such it differed from what was before (it was not better), and was worse than what came after (Super Metroid), so it ended up being not up to snuff comparing to both previous and coming games

Another example: Quake 2. It was praised for technical achievment, but gameplay differet in number of ways from Q1 and Doom (more steady pace, not as varied in enemy roles and encounter design). It was not good or bad, just different, and the games that came out next same time-Unreal and HL exceeded it in the same style of gameplay,as well as technically. So Q2 ended up being neither better than what came before nor what came after,whcih resulted in it being regarded as not aging as well as the rest of the bunch

>> No.3168716

>90% of the gamers are casuals that would play whatever is marketed to them

Big fucking surprise.

That's a fucking soundtrack, not a game DLC. Apparently "reading comprehension" has become a rare superpower, just as much as "common sense".

Also regarding the "le indie shlock" meme: Sturgeon's Law is still relevant here (as always). Sometimes independant dev is not some shmuck who couldnt get into a big company so he decided to make a cashgrab with help of Unity, or a minority pandering grupe, but actual competent people with a good ideas that know what they are doing.

>> No.3168718

No, the film equivalent of "game has aged like milk" is the film ending up on MST3k. Some films that were good in the 50's aren't any good now. Look at fucking The Day the Earth Stood still. It aged like shit. You have all those old campy films that are shit to the point they're parodied by shitty cartoons.

>> No.3168719

Protip: They were always campy films that were most appealing only to the nerdy George McFly's of 50s society

>> No.3168721

What about Planet of the Apes? A critically acclaimed film from the 60's that aged like absolute shit outside of a select few that enjoy it out of nostalgia, i.e. exactly what this fucking general is.

>> No.3168995

He meant doing both at the same time while being able to also shoot, switch weapons etc like with keyboard and mouse. Halo was the first to make that control scheme work for a console FPS. But really it's more about the controller since it's the two analog sticks that made it possible.

>> No.3169019

>aged like absolute shit

This is the heart of this whole problem. If you saw Planet of the Apes when it was still relevant it likely still resonates with you. But if you grew up and only saw it long after then you would have the impression it "aged like absolute shit".

I think video games are very similar.

>> No.3169038

Turok on N64 already had movement and aiming independent. You don't need two analogue sticks for it.

>> No.3169048
File: 69 KB, 600x489, ford-model-t-3_600x0w.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Where does this idea of a car 'not aging well' come from? I understand that engineering conventions change over time, but if something was fast in the 1900's, it's not like age takes away that speed.

>> No.3169057

Analogies mean shit. Bits and ideas don't have any physical influence. You can play chess two millennia later after their invention, but for a car you need real parts.

>> No.3169062

Pretty much this. For the most part people like what they grew up with and use that as a baseline for everything else.

It's no surprise to anyone that someone who grew up in the 70's with 70's music will have a different connection to it than someone who grew up in the 80's, 90's or 00's. Not to say people from later years might not like that music, but it will be different.

>> No.3169251

However, games (or movies) aging badly also applies to people that never once before played (or saw) the product. Nostalgia or prior experience with the product is completely irrelevant

>> No.3169331

I think that applies to music and literature as well, not just games and movies. Really anything cultural is likely to have that effect.

>> No.3169337 [DELETED] 

I think the idea that a game ages is stupid. It literally doesn't change.

Do you feel like a game has aged? I'm here to help. Follow these steps.

>Remind yourself when it was made
>Remind yourself of hardware limitations

And there you go! Your game hasn't 'aged' anymore.

>> No.3169341

oh yes, definitely, my list was not meant to be exhaustive. Was just pointing out that nostalgia is not what causes it. Changing culture as context is the cause. Literature is a good example, actually. We'll never be able to read 1850s books the same way people did back then. Some of these books will feel silly instead of immersive. Some will leave us puzzled, because the book assumes knowledge and inherent understanding about things common in the day, but completely alien in the present.
I suppose it's just a bit more pronounced in games, because they're such a young genre, and because they rely on technology that has been almost completely invented and created within the last 5 decades.

>> No.3169343

Okay yeah, we're totally on the same page. I agree with all of that.

>> No.3169351
File: 462 KB, 1036x583, 2016-04-25 18.12.28.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

You're out of your mind.

It's still the best console shooter.

>> No.3169352

Fuck Bethesda for not implementing something to prevent save file bloat or at least be able to fucking handle it. "Here's this dlc".

"Btw if you try to play the whole game and all dlc on a console, your save is gonna shit out and the game will freeze. We won't tell you that or acknowledge it though."

>> No.3169376

Every game someone has told me aged badly I've had zero problems with when I played it. I must have transcended everything into a world of gaming bliss.

>> No.3169380

I watched my three year old nephew play with a feather duster like it was the greatest thing on earth for close to an hour this weekend. Maybe you've finally reached his level where anything at all will entertain you.

>> No.3169450

>for a car you need real parts

For a video game you need real parts. You think I can just "imagine" playing Super Mario Bros., and that's the same as playing it with an actual cartridge and console???? lol

>> No.3169458

Dumb modern gaming kids that think graphics and style trump gameplay and substance.

Just more of the bullshit that is has killed gaming.

>> No.3169471

>killed gaming.

Ohh lololololol you silly little boy. Gaming is very alive and well. You sticking your head in the sand and yelling about it being shit day after day doesn't change a thing. Gaming is thriving more now than ever.

>> No.3169498

"France is thriving more than ever! Look how rich I am compared as compared to before!" - Louis XVI

>> No.3169516

>They were trying to teach me about French history in school today, maybe if I awkwardly reference that I'll seem smart and people will take me seriously!

Sorry, but it didn't work.

>> No.3169521 [DELETED] 

Pre orders should be open for the new CoD, kiddo. I hear it's going to be really dank this time. More so than usual. Better run and hurry to pick it up.

>> No.3169531

Sorry mate but the industry is thriving. You are no longer relevant to the industry. Welcome to the capitalist future.

>> No.3169536

Literally have never played a Call of Duty game or really any other FPS. Outside of Tribes it's not a genre I care about and have totally ignored in the modern era. That's partly why your bitching is so completely hilarious.

>> No.3169540

>Welcome to the capitalist future.
>implying the video game industry hasn't always been capitalist

But you're right that he's not relevant to anything.

>> No.3169541

It means, just because a few players are doing well at the expense of everybody else doesn't mean the industry is thriving, idiot.

>> No.3169542

>CoD is too mainstream brah

Damn you 2 kids seem like cool hipsters. I happen to be pretty fly and down with the current dank indie games also.

>> No.3169553

CoD sucks though, breh. I feel like the entire series feels like playing on autopilot.

TF2 was cool back when it was simple as far as modern games go.

>> No.3169562


Yeah, I don't know, it feels like some people have trouble going into a game and not having very specific expectations of it. I find that going in and just letting a game be what it is, and working with it instead of going "why isn't it like this?!" is a lot more fun.

I also believe a lot of people who say games age badly go in expecting the game to suck and then let their biases get confirmed within ten minutes of play

>> No.3169565

Ya brah! Make 6th gen retro! Ya1321!

Thos games were truly dank. Like back when CoD was dank. But like a good dank.

>> No.3169573

I know what you meant. You're just completely off base.

I didn't say I had any problem with CoD, and I don't. I don't not play those games because they're popular. I just don't play them because I don't really like FPS games. I'm totally cool with them being popular though.

In fact what I'm saying is that part of what's so great about the game industry these days is that you can easily ignore anything you don't like, even if it is popular and there's still tons and tons of games of all sorts being made.

>> No.3169580

Name one modern game that's better than a top 10 retro game.

>> No.3169584


No matter what you do, you're not going to convince anybody here that modern games aren't all 100% shit, just stop. There's somebody screaming and crying about OSTs counting as DLC in this same fucking thread.

>> No.3169589

That's a meaningless request. Better is subjective, not everyone likes the same things. But put on a desert island I would take Monster Hunter 1 or 4 over any retro game ever made.

I'm sure probably half of the people who play Call of Duty seriously would say it's better than any given top 10 retro game. I wouldn't agree with that, and I can bet you wouldn't agree with that. But that's the whole point.

>> No.3169592

When people here stop bitching about modern games and bringing up how much they hate them then I'll stop. I never bring them up, but I will defend them if some idiot starts trashing them.

>> No.3169593

And that's why we call your kind cancer.

>> No.3169596


>> No.3169598


The point is that 90% of it is just regular shitposting. Like "okay, I have to remember, I'm on /vr/ right now, how can I fit in? Oh, I know! Modern games are shit! Cawadoody! GTA! It's all they make! There, now everybody will know I'm not a crossboarder!" It's just regular shitposting.

>> No.3169605

Any why I laugh at you every time you do.

It's very often the same guy repeating the same phrases. I just think he's funny.

>> No.3169613

what's the other 10%?

>> No.3169616

Do you honestly think 20 years form now people are going to be buying PS4s?

>> No.3169619


Old people that hate anything new without giving it a fair shot and when they hear a different opinion they start going "millenials! entitled brats! retarded little kids! you're so young, you're dumb!" The type of person who thinks that since they were around at the time, they just inherently know more and have better opinions about /vr/-related content, despite having shit taste and bad opinions.

>> No.3169624

In theory, yes. In practice, the lack of remote infrastructure is gonna make these machines hell. Modern online requirements are gonna be a serious issue in a decade or two

>> No.3169626

makes me part of the 0%, I suppose

>> No.3169645

>Old people that hate anything new without giving it a fair shot
Whoah hold up right there you fucking cancer little piece of shit modern gamer.

I gave your shit a shot. More than I should had. I looked at the top rated games. If it was CoD cancer or some shit PC port I ignored it. That was most of the top rated. Uncharted was horrible, GTA 4 was okish, Bioshock was trash and pretty much a walking simulator with guns (best way I can described that shitpit), and it just kept going. Not one of the like 15 games I tried was appealing. At best it was “ok”.
6th gen is barely collectible as it is. Good lock with the cancer mk3 generation.

>> No.3169652
File: 25 KB, 608x648, 1459657358799.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>it's another /vr/ autists argue about nothing to be forgotten instantly thread


>> No.3169657

I assume the basis of that question is do I think people in 20 years will still want to play the games being made for this generation of consoles.

I would bet you any amount of money that yes, they will.

In my experience it's not even the older posters, it's the middle ones who are the worse. I've only run into a couple of other posters here in their 40's and they haven't been as vitriolic as the main anti-modern gaming guys.

But calling people kiddo and constantly bringing age up is one of their main troll tactics. Especially when they don't have any actual points to make. It used to be I never had to mention my age on /vr/ Now it happens all the time. That's 4chan though. It's always going to attract people who just come here to stir up shit and vent their anger. It's the price we pay for the open board structure of anonymity.

>> No.3169658
File: 1.24 MB, 868x1227, fc3f2634ce53aac1b88cf3cbb75f4817.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Who are you quoting, dude?

>> No.3169667


>Uncharted was horrible


>GTA 4 was okayish

I wouldn't even give it that.

>Bioshock was trash

Yes. Look, here's the main difference between retro and modern games: you can't look at a fucking top ten list and assume those are actual good games. A top ten list literally just means "these are the games with the highest marketing budgets that were bought by the most normies." If you want actual good recommendations for modern games, go to the /v/ recommended games wiki and pick any console.

>> No.3169668

>most AAA games today are uncreative garbage

Wew lad who knew, i guess that means every video game made after 2005 is a terrible mess of shiny graphics and gameplay designed for retards

>> No.3169671
File: 17 KB, 186x210, 1455819706453.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

I donno. I feel like I've forgotten something important I learned. Sometime long ago.

>> No.3169672

I think the assumption that top 10 lists should appeal to you has a lot to do with your age in relation to who the games on the system are being marketed towards.

I think a lot of top 10 PS1 games are terrible because I don't like Crash Bandicoot or 3D collection platformers like Spyro. But there are plenty of people who grew up with those and love them.

>> No.3169682

You do know CoD is on that list right? Like 3 times in fact.

Sorry when the top games are trash the games as a whole are trash. Nobody 100 years from now is going to look back and see the random hipster trash on PS3 and say the console was good because of it.

>> No.3169686

There's a lot more on the PS1 top 10 than Crash.

>> No.3169702


CoD and whatever other shit western games score well because their reviews are literally bought and paid for, but no matter how many times I explain that, you're just going to keep pointing at the "top ten" list and saying "I don't get it." Again, you're doing what I said, which is pointing to the worst examples of modern games and using it to judge all of them. Then again, you seem a little too concerned with what's popular or mainstream, so it's not like your opinions on modern OR retro are worth half a shit. This is my last response.

>> No.3169707

>Goldeneye 1997

>Serious Sam 2001
>Painkiller 2004
>Quake 1996
>UT 1999
>Tribes 1998
>E.Y.E. 2011

come on man

>> No.3169708

I honestly find it strange to find Crash so highly praised lately. I remember CVG magazine gave the first one like 60% or something due to it being a tired rehash of DKC in 3D or something. And they couldn't stand the music, or the 'attitude'.

>> No.3169714
File: 88 KB, 5000x5000, 1446497095652.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>Hey I went to try something
>hmm how should I best experience it?
>I know all go educate myself and see what sold well and was rated highly

>> No.3169716
File: 68 KB, 400x241, top10ps1.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

I just grabbed this off google, not an offiical list just the first I found. I like 3 of the top 10 which is about the same in the 360 era.

Point is, you don't have to like what's popular to like the games on a system. Personally I don't care about what anyone else thinks is top 10. I just care about the games I like.

The way I choose to buy a system is when I see 5 games I know I really want to play. As soon as that is met, I'll consider buying one and doing so have never been disappointed in a console purchase.

>> No.3169717

Not that guy but I personally find all modern games to be trash. Pointing me at some obscure 7th or 8th gen game I'll probably think it's trash too.

I'm on this board for a reason.

>> No.3169719

I think you just hate games then, champ.

>> No.3169732

I bet you're the same guy who insists that anything that's not a best seller is an obscure game.

>> No.3169742

>Complains all games on top ten are shit
>Hey guys i know about some games from this era that actually try to be good
>Nope all post 2005 games are shit kiddo

>> No.3169748

But I love games. That's the whole point I'm trying to get across to you. Even though I don't care about some of the big popular games (Spyro is clearly aimed at kids and came out when I was 24), the Playstation still had a ton of games that I loved and became long time favorites.

I would have been a complete fool to look at the big name games and assume that the Playstation didn't have anything I would enjoy playing.

That's how I see people who look at shooters being popular now and assume it means there's nothing else. They're fools and I can't help but find that amusing.

>> No.3169749

All games on consoles that launched post 1999 are shit*

>> No.3169754

Anything that isn't in the top 10 is obscure. Didn't you know?

>> No.3169756

No you legit hate games if only 3 games on that list appeal to you.

>> No.3169762

I'm 99% sure I read this exact conversation a few weeks ago.

>> No.3169767

Yeah it's like saying 4th gen is garbage just because there are a lot of platformers

>> No.3169797

Honestly, I can't explain this to you any more plainly. You're either purely trolling or just plain too stupid to understand the correlations I'm putting right in front of you.

Indeed you did. I really should stop feeding him, but I keep giving the benefit of the doubt thinking the concept of popularity vs personal taste shouldn't be too hard to grasp. I keep getting proven wrong though.

This guy gets it.

>> No.3169991

Yeah I feel like that's almost a deliberate aspect of their design. Modern game publishers seem to have a "scorched earth" policy of making older games as inaccessible as possible. Publishers like Activision and EA don't want you to play a game for years and years; they want you to get bored of it in six months, and shell out sixty dollars for your next fix.

>> No.3170009

genres evolve and to those used to different or straight up better games of that genre the oldest games might seem crappy to them

>> No.3170059

man i love SF Alpha but im surprised people buy the PS1 version out of all of them with its reduced frames for animations and blurry backgrounds

>> No.3170078
File: 2.69 MB, 2100x1532, n64-wcwnworevenge-front.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

This is the only N64 game other than Harvest Moon 64 that I can still play without the game being so outdated that it gets in it's own way.

That's what "not aging well" is.

Every other cart in my collection didn't last more than ten minutes.

>> No.3170281

If you like RPGs, lost odyssey is great and that's from the 360 era.

And pertaining to this thread:
Idk what's up with some of you and I've got to believe you just don't like games. Any system that exists, I can find games that I find fun and want to play. I don't know what happened to all of you, but you need to chill out and stop getting mad at everything different.

>> No.3170743

It comes from people who haven't aged much.

>> No.3170769


Not a SINGLE game with always-online requirements is worth playing. Every single game with this form of DRM is shit, because the devs are more focused on selling (read: preventing piracy) than they are on making a good game.

Christ, the 360 is already absolutely worthless because it's got maybe two worthwhile exclusive titles that aren't online-focused.

>> No.3170779

>I feel like that's almost a deliberate aspect of their design
There's no almost. That is a fully intentional aspect of modern game publishing. The ability to shutdown a game in order to move players to its successor, and hence encourage sales. It's the currently best way to hide that you're not buying a game but renting it. Even if you buy a disc, the publisher still has the ability to pull the plug, making your game inaccessible, or broken.

>> No.3170794

>knock other wrestler down
>other wrestler goes for a nut punch as he gets up
>block it by standing arms akimbo and thrusting your chest and groin out

This has always bothered me, and they left it in so many of their wrestling games. What were there like, 4 of them you could do that in?

>> No.3170807

This is a pretty stupid thread. Aging does not refer to literal aging. No one thinks this.

A game aging well/bad depends on how it compares to games after it. If a game holds its own, it's aged well. If not, it's aged bad.

>A game ages badly if another game comes along and does what the old game did, but better.

Pretty much this. There's a reason something like Mega Man 2 is held up in high regards whereas Dragon Quest 1 is not (I like DQ1, mind you). One of these games continued to hold a candle to things that came after it. The other got stomped on by most of what came after it.

>> No.3170813

Alien Resurrection on PS1.

>> No.3170890

The autists that rail against this issue simply lack the ability to understand figures of speech. One of the many social constructs they can't comprehend. They're not as bad off as /v/, but it is like a spectrum disorder.

>> No.3170898

>A game aging well/bad depends on how it compares to games after it. If a game holds its own, it's aged well. If not, it's aged bad.

The thing is you can use this argument to construe that Doom aged like shit because Call of Duty exists and they're both FPS.

>> No.3170905

that's because you're using "FPS" as your criterion, which is hopelessly coarse. Present Doom players not only tolerate but seek the game, because it does things no other FPS do.

>> No.3170917

I'm not saying this it was a good argument (it is anything but), but it can no doubt serve as fertile ground for lots of shitposting because then it goes straight into subjective elements of game design.

>> No.3170931

>but it can no doubt serve as fertile ground for lots of shitposting
Yeah, your post was proof of it. The argument you showcased hinges on deliberately missing the finer points of a game. Not exactly a reductio ad absurdum, but getting there.

>because then it goes straight into subjective elements of game design
And now a messed up slippery slope for bonus.

Look, I have no idea if you're genuinely interested in the subject or not, but your post was a disservice. The subject is already difficult enough, because it depends so much on context and nuance. So throwing in an argument, even in just, that just throws all that shit away and goes for black/white brutality is not helpful.

To get back to the example of Doom: It's not corridor based, the maps openly embrace open spaces. It's not story heavy. You get a level progression and a picture at the end. It has dodging and evading as primary means to handle danger, as opposed to sucking up the damage. It has health instead of regen, which allows for very different kind of confrontations (that's a subject for a thread of its own though), it has a wide arsenal of weapons, instead of a loadout. And that's just the unemotional stats, without going into more subtle things like weapons and speed balance, level design that's not encumbered by high definition objects, inputs are streamlined, ignoring the vertical axis and so on. Your little argument ignored all of that, trying to reduce the games to a single keyword. Can you see now how that is dishonest, if not plain shitposting straight away? The only reason to ignore all these details and aspects is to make a dishonest point.

>> No.3171382

SF Alpha 3 was one of the only PS1 fighter ports that was actually playable. That's why it's all the way up there.

>> No.3171409

>Can you see now how that is dishonest, if not plain shitposting straight away?

What part was supposed to be shitposting? You pointed out various ways that Call of Duty and Doom are very different games. Someone who likes the kind of FPS that CoD is may not like the kind of FPS Doom is and the reverse.

A person liking the way Call of Duty plays could look at Doom and say they thought it aged badly because it's nothing like the kind of FPS game they enjoy. But that's not "shitposting". It's just an opinion. It might be an opinion you or I disagree with, but just because someone has an opinion that doesn't align with yours doesn't mean they're shitposting automatically. If they said

>Doom is a shit game and only retarded faggot cunt faces like it.

Now that would be shitposting, but it could just as easily be done from the other side.

>Call of Duty is a shit game and only retarded cunt faces like it.

Is just as much shitposting, even if it's an opinion you agree with more. The opinion isn't the shitposting, it's how you express it.

>> No.3171510

I'm in my thirties and grew up with a C64 and NES, and I am intelligent enough to understand that the concept of games aging is real.

>> No.3171672

Xcom is an example of a game that aged well, morrowind is one that did not.

>> No.3171679

From ADD teens and younger.
They literally don't have the patience or the mind to look at anything that is not by their specific tease.

>> No.3171681

Prrspective, my man. If the food you thought tasted good yesterday doesn't taste as good after you had better food, you'd have a different standard. Well our technology capabilities and quality standard also changes like that. If a game looks, sounds, feels, or plays like it experiences bad programming or technical limitations that something from that era would, it's age is attributed.

>> No.3171682

>I'm old so my opinion are no longer ignorant.
>games age
I got some bad news for you.

>> No.3171683

This. All games age, that's natural. But some age well and some don't. Street Fighter 2 aged much better than Mortal Kombat 2.

>> No.3171686

Around here if you just give your opinion the popular thing has become to insist that person must be young. Because they're really just trolling and have no logical point to make, it's what gets brought up all the time now.

It really sucks, but now some people feel they have to preface what they say with it. Shitty /vr/ troll wins again. I miss what /vr/ used to be like before people like you.

>> No.3171687

I don't know how I typed that, but I meant perspective, no cat puns.

>> No.3171689

Been here since day 1, kiddo.

You "games age" trolls should had been permanently banned the second those threads started.

>> No.3171695

Then you've gotten worse. "kiddo"

>> No.3171698

Call em like I see em.

>> No.3171704

You shitpost here every single day. Anything you don't like you swear and name call constantly. You're a horrible person and one of the worst things about this board.

>> No.3171706

Invoking age in anonimous conversation instantly devalues any input you may provide.

Games do age. Same as all other entertainment values actually. It all comes down whether or not something is product of it's time, or is it made timeless by the virtue of its great design.

Also I think this comes close to it >>3168694

>> No.3171708
File: 510 KB, 800x450, mulder.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>Is cancer
>started "games age" meta threads
>claims I'm the shitposter
It'd be funny if it wasn't so sad.

>> No.3171716

You call other people cancer because they have a different opinion from you and you honestly think you're not shitposting?

>> No.3171717

No you modern gamers really need to just kill yourselves. I'm serious. The cancer is beyond treatment now.

I can go and play Intellivision and Atari 2600 games no problem. Both of those systems came out before I was born.

I don't look at them with cancerous eyes like you shits and says pretentious garbage like "Oh I can't be seen playing that horribly aged trash".

Again, Please an hero.

>> No.3171719

Again cancer. Who is the one making the meta threads? Oh right you are, kid.

>> No.3171724

>kill yourselves
>claims not to be a shitposter

You have serious problems.

>> No.3171726

>you modern gamers
wew lad

>I can go and play Intellivision and Atari 2600 games no problem. Both of those systems came out before I was born.
You flaunt that as if it is a great achievment, especially on this board

wew lad x2

>> No.3171728

I've never made a single one of these threads.

>> No.3171730

>I can go and play Intellivision and Atari 2600 games no problem. Both of those systems came out before I was born.

I sense pretentious hipster :^)

>> No.3171731


adapt to the controls, scrub

You don't want to do that. So you say it "aged poorly". You want every shooter to control the same like a spoiled child that wants every meal to taste like candy.

>> No.3171732


You sound really upset. Maybe go give your dad a big hug and tell him you love him?

>> No.3171735

You really don't understand how control schemes evolve and refine over time, do you? You seriously can't understand it? Are you literally retarded?

>> No.3171740

I happen to like retro games.

Perhaps try /v/ if all you want to do it make meta threads and shitpost?

>> No.3171741
File: 28 KB, 300x400, kermitthefrogkermit.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


You're going to have to prove that they have refined over time, anon. That's the thing though, you can't do that. It's actually pretty fucking subjective when you get right down to to it.

The second thing you're going to have to do is hear me out:

Games these days for the most part all control nearly the exact same. You know what to expect going in. Every developer copies each other. Shadows of Mordor controls like Batman Arkham. All sports games control the same. Shooters? Well, you know what to expect. They all control the same. Third person shooters? They all control like Gears of War or Uncharted. You know what to expect and that is BORING.

I appreciate unorthodox controls. It's one reason there is no consensus on the quality of a game like God Hand. Scrubs can't control it well so they think its shit, when its actually a diamond of a game.

I can go back and play Goldeneye just fine. You just have to adapt to the control scheme. When you start thinking to yourself "i wish this played like Halo" then you're part of the cancer that can't adapt and there is no hope for you.

So really, try to prove that new control schemes are better. They're just boring and pander hard to people that can't adapt or play games well to begin with.

>> No.3171748

Not them, but I love retro games too. That's why I'm here. Got up extra early this morning just to play another round of Dr Mario. But you can't say that no games have aged badly!

>> No.3171752

No game ages at all.

Which is one of the best parts of video games. I can play a game that's over 30 years old exactly like it was new.

>> No.3171756

V retards

>> No.3171769

You dont really get what this thread is all about.

Games dont age in a "bytes dont age lol" retarded sense.

Your experience with them may change depending on what other experiences are available to you.

If the game provides same, or better (because modern titles are inferior in one way or the other) experience can be said to have aged well.

Games that provide worse experience now than they did before (for instance FMV games - tech was all the rage in times of SegaCD, but now you can see the downsides much clearer) due to retrospect, can be said to have aged worse.

It seems that concept like this can not fit into the narrow mind of some people.

>> No.3171784

There's nothing to prove, we simply have different perspectives. You can enjoy the Goldeneye control scheme, but I think the Halo one is more intuitive and better.

Shadows of Mordor is a good example of control schemes refining. Batman AA took notes from Assassin's Creed for it's combat system and iterated on it then Shadows took Batman's and iterated on that.

Street Fighter has been doing this continually. Now can you go back and enjoy earlier versions? Of course. But that doesn't mean that the refinements haven't happened.

>> No.3171787

>I can play a game that's over 30 years old exactly like it was new.

That's still a 30 year old game. If you can't tell a 3 year old game from a 2 year old game I think you might be retarded.

>> No.3171796

>You want every shooter to control the same

Complete opposite actually. I want them to keep getting better and better. Why you never want anything to improve is messed up.

>> No.3171802

>muh graphics
And the cancer comes on out.

>> No.3171804 [SPOILER] 
File: 51 KB, 546x455, 1461778240482.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

And who made this thread? (You)

>> No.3171813

>quoting shit I haven't said
wew lad x3

>> No.3171814


>There's nothing to prove

Except there is. It's boring for every game to control the same buddy. It really sounds like this isn't the board for you.

>muh halo


>I want them to keep getting better and better

And they haven't. They've stagnated. They all play the exact same. You're putting words in my mouth by the way. I never said I didn't want anything to improve. All I'm saying is that you can't really prove that they've gotten better.

>> No.3171815
File: 168 KB, 1919x1079, shovel knight14.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>muh graphics
Who said that? Are you telling me you would be unable to tell Shovel Knight apart from an actual NES game? (even if the aspect ratio and palette were made more authentic)

>> No.3171817

>And they haven't. They've stagnated.

I disagree very strongly. The Asscreed-Batman-Shadows guy gave a good example. The controls keep getting iterated upon. They're clearly related, but different.

Shooters are the same. It sounds like you're the one that doesn't play games. How much have you even played Batman AA and Shadows of Mordor?

>> No.3171818

>(for instance FMV games
>If you can't tell a 3 year old game from a 2 year old
Look at the cancer attempt to back pedal. Even adding a cute sandman with the indieshit comparison.

>> No.3171820


>> No.3171821


>strawmen field grows here

>> No.3171823

Well for starters it has much cleaner animation and a much higher sprite limit.

>> No.3171824

FMV games have little to do with graphics. There's no back peddling at all.

So you're really telling me that if someone put Shovel Knight in front of you, you wouldn't be able to tell it was a modern game by the way it plays? Because that's what it sounds like.

>> No.3171826

Interactive FMV is a gimmick as cancerous as QTE in modern titles. Both deserve to die.

You cant seriously play an FMV and pretend it's any better than modern QTE nonsense because they are exactly the same flawed concept.

>> No.3171829

Okay, you're seriously dodging the question. Assuming you didn't see areas with more sprites and the animation was made sufficiently choppy.

Are you saying that you would not be able to recognize that it's a modern era game?

>> No.3171830
File: 42 KB, 353x99, yep.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


>How much have you even played Batman AA and Shadows of Mordor

I can't be assed to grab all my playtime, but I've 100%'d Arkham Asylum on PS3 and finished the rest on Steam. I've played these games. And they play way too similarly for comfort. Asscreed in particular is boring as hell with Black Flag being the only fun one purely because of pirating.

The point I'm really trying to make here is that even if you perceive subjective improvements or variations on game control formulae you need to understand that its your OWN FAULT for being unable to adapt to an older control scheme. It is not the game's fault.

>> No.3171831

FMV isn't limited to QTE shit you dumb kids. RPGs and many of genres used FMV heavily in the 5th generation.

>> No.3171835

>unable to tell the differences between games of different ages

Hipster scrub detected. I bet you call pixelshit "retro" too, faggot.

>> No.3171837

>reading comprehension issues
"FMV Game" and "FMV cutscene" are different fucking things you retard

>> No.3171838

>What part was supposed to be shitposting?
The part where two very different games were lumped together under one keyword, in order to counter the argument that games aging at least partially depends on the quality that comes afterwards. The claim there being that CoD and Doom are both FPS, CoD is better, so Doom must age poorly. Of course it's a nonsense statement, and anon made clear they weren't even serious about it. The problem is you need to go out of your way to look at it from such a distance, that Doom and CoD are "the same", in order to discredit the made claim.

>Someone who likes the kind of FPS that CoD is may not like the kind of FPS Doom is and the reverse.
Indeed, that's why using the scope of "FPS" to discredit the claim that successors have an impact was dishonest. The games are too different to treat them as successors. In particular, it's difficult to actually find successors for Doom.

>A person liking the way Call of Duty plays could look at Doom and say they thought it aged badly because it's nothing like the kind of FPS game they enjoy
And they'd be wrong, as these two games come from different genres. Playing Mario allows no statements about Tetris.

>even if it's an opinion you agree with more
I'm entirely indifferent towards CoD, as I never played it. My sole issue was with lumping the two games together to make a dishonest claim. Not more.

>> No.3171840

>its your OWN FAULT for being unable to adapt to an older control

This is a completely false assumption that you are making though. I never said I couldn't adapt to old control schemes. I still love the way old Tomb Raider controls, but it doesn't mean that I wasn't really happy with the way Tomb Raider Underworld took that and refined it.

I have no problem with a lot of old control schemes and regularly play old games. But I still think controls have refined over time.

>> No.3171843


Really? Then you aren't the person complaining about GoldenEye and therefore jumped into an argument that wasn't your own.

By the way, that was rhetorical and not purely directed AT YOU.

>> No.3171846

Sorry I must have left my "Hipster dictionary for Retro Games" at home.

>> No.3171851

Must be hard being a hipster on /vr/, huh?

>> No.3171852

I'm not the kid trying to say FMV game and FMV cutscene are different genres of video game.

>> No.3171853

No I didn't make the original comment about Goldeneye, but I generally agree with it. I think it's playable, but I think newer FPS console controls are better and I hope they continue to improve. I disagree completely on the subject of stagnation.

>> No.3171857


>"Hipster dictionary for retro games"

Are you seriously implying that you're knowledgeable about retro games when you don't even know what a fucking FMV game is, much less the difference between an FMV game and "a game that contains FMV cutscenes?" Do you even know what the Sega CD is? (And before some shithead jumps in and goes B-B-BUT THAT'S NOT THE ONLY GENRE ON THAT CONSOLE, STOP PUSHING THAT MEME, yes, I know, but it's the console that had the most of them.)

>> No.3171858


>I hope they continue to improve

How would they continue to improve? By taking up a key/button and making it dedicated to sprint, modern shooters already fail at that.

DOOM controls better than ANY modern shooter pal.

>> No.3171863

Give my the definition of "FMV game", kiddo. I'll wait.

>> No.3171867

FMV Game is an interactive video with action prompts (and sometimes branching flow tree) like Space Gal or Dragon's Lair. They were called "FMV Games" back then, they are called so now. Go back to reading your hipster dictionary. You may have missed a few pages.

>> No.3171871

>How would they continue to improve?
I don't know. I'm not a game dev, I'll leave it up to them to work on. I think they've been improving so far.

>DOOM controls better than ANY modern shooter pal.

The game with no free look at all? Where you can't even manually aim up if you want to? I love Doom, but I disagree with that statement very strongly. Doom and modern shooters are almost different genres at this point though.

>> No.3171873

Not him, but Dragon's Lair. Come on. You can't be this dense. We even have a thread about it going >>3170879

>> No.3171874



The funniest part is you trying to pretend you're some kind of wise old man by invoking age despite being completely fucking clueless.





And so on. This shit right here. I know it's hard to believe, but before you were born people expected this type of game to be the future: you would interact with the most realistic graphics possible: real life footage.

Now stop trying to post like you have any fucking idea what you're talking about, you're like 15 years too young.

>> No.3171875
File: 17 KB, 320x200, Megarace_02.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

What's this?

>> No.3171878
File: 209 KB, 417x322, B93ARaGIUAAUppc.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>FMV Game is an interactive video with action prompts
So Night Trap isn't a FMV game. Got it.

That was way to easy. I was also most thinking you dumb kids weren't going to eat that bait that hard. But hey thanks for further proving you're like 15 years old and never played any of these games.

>> No.3171881


>muh free look

Don't need it.

>> No.3171882
File: 47 KB, 640x400, cyberia2_screenshot1.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

What is this?

>> No.3171883

>Where you can't even manually aim up if you want to?
Why would you want to? There is no "up" in Doom, it's a planar game

>> No.3171885

definition =/= examples
I know Obamacore is bad but is it that bad?

>> No.3171887

So you're shitposting? You're no better than them. Worse even, you're coming with the tired "kids" meme. You're more trouble for this board than kids could ever be

>> No.3171890

>I only pretend being retarded hur durr

It's a racing game that uses FMV as a method of rendering track. that's it. It is not an "interactive movie".

>> No.3171893 [DELETED] 


You kids do crack me up atleast. And you're dumb as shit which makes it so easy to derail these shit meta threads.

>> No.3171894

>It is not an "interactive movie"
Great, the subject was "FMV Game" though, not interactive movie.
And here you are
>It's a racing game that uses FMV as a method of rendering track

>> No.3171895
File: 118 KB, 1024x768, Starsiege_Tribes_3.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

So then we're on completely different pages. To me, having to look all around and aim vertically as well as horizontally is pretty important for an FPS.

It works fine in a game like Doom where everything is on a plane anyways >>3171883 but it wouldn't work at all for something more advanced like Tribes.

Now don't get me wrong, like I say I really like Doom. It's a fun game. But at the same time I'm really happy that we've moved on. Tribes would have been nowhere near as good if it was stuck with Doom's control scheme.

>> No.3171898

>oh i can not make an argument so I better disprove something by making incoherent statements and quoting out of context!

>> No.3171901 [SPOILER] 
File: 53 KB, 400x576, 1461781058436.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


>> No.3171907

Pretending to not understand what an FMV game is, is your grand plan to derail the thread?

>> No.3171910

This is where you're slightly wrong, I think. Doom has controls specifically for a planar FPS. They're made for a special case, and work excellent for that special case. It's like saying driving a manual shift car without gear changing controls is kind of bad. Automatic cars have no use for gear changing, so they don't clutter their controls with it.
Also, your implication that Tribes is better is misleading. They're just different games.Tribes' controls would be needlessly convoluted for a planar game. Its levels likely wouldn't work for it either. It goes both ways.

>> No.3171912


A shitposter's only goal is to see how long they can keep people responding.

>> No.3171920

Sure, but Tribes and the like came out of Doom, Wolf etc. This is the whole discussion, those original controls got iterated on (now you can look up and down) and game design evolved with it.

All I'm really saying with all of this is that even though I liked and still like Doom. I am happy that controls and game design have evolved over the years and that lead to other kinds of games.

>Also, your implication that Tribes is better is misleading.
I think it is better though. You don't have to agree, but that's my opinion. Much as I like Doom, I think Tribes is a better game in just about every way you can imagine. I like almost everything that Doom does. But I like almost everything that Tribes does better.

>> No.3171929

>Sure, but Tribes and the like came out of Doom, Wolf etc
Oh, definitely

>This is the whole discussion
Not necessarily. Think of Doom and Tribes as evolutionary branches, not iterations

>those original controls got iterated on
Nope, planar FPSes still use the classic controls

>now you can look up and down
That's a new control scheme, that is based on the planar one

>I am happy that controls and game design have evolved over the years
That's under dispute if, and only if, you treat it as a true succession, which one replacing the other, because that's not the reality of things.

>that lead to other kinds of games.
Derivation is how new games and genres come to be. Still it does not mean the derivate replaces or surpasses the origin

>I think it is better though
That's your opinion then, but nothing factual that results from one game being an evolution of the other.

>but that's my opinion
If you present it as such, that's fine. You presented Doom as an iterative step that is "behind us" now though, instead of a branch, and that's something I disagree with.

>> No.3171936

>Think of Doom and Tribes as evolutionary branches, not iterations

That's essentially the same thing to me. At any rate it gets at the same point. I dunno, you can disagree but that's the way I see it.

>> No.3171939

an iteration is replaced and obsolete. A branch is not

>> No.3171950

>A shitty modern arena shooter
How is that like Doom?

>> No.3171953

I get your point, but Doom style planar FPSs are largely replaced.

>> No.3171960

the active Doom community shows you what really happened. No other game managed to come close to what Doom did. Everything else went into 6 DOF territory. There is no successor, but plenty demand.

>> No.3171961 [SPOILER] 
File: 19 KB, 300x225, 1461783035074.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

quality post

>> No.3171963

It was a serious question?

Doom is part of the surreal "maze like" shooters.
Tribe is a modern edition of arena shooter.

>> No.3171987 [SPOILER] 
File: 169 KB, 565x847, 1461784545674.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Nice bait
>posting in a bait thread

>> No.3171997

It's time to stop posting.

>> No.3172000

Compared to the peak of arena shooters like 2k4. I'd say tribes is a bit shitty.

>> No.3172005
File: 146 KB, 750x563, fishing.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Thanks for the tip, sweetcheeks.

Whatever you say :^)

>> No.3172026

The only things that truly age poorly are controls/interface, and prerendered FMV.

>> No.3172040

>peak of arena shooters

hate to break it to you but that was well past the peak.

>> No.3172046

>two towers
>not the peak of arena shooter design

Are you high or just retarded?

>> No.3172053

NOPE! Nothing ages when it comes to games you fucking retard. If you can't use an old interface you just suck.

>> No.3172065

When a game you remember fondly has aged poorly it means that the series has moved forward and did much better things since it. A good example is Metroid, loved it when I was younger but Super and ZM are just functionally and factually better game experiences.

>> No.3172071

>a game you remember fondly
What about people that play that game for the first time?

>> No.3172075

That's their experience, just like a game aging poorly. It's all in the eyes of the beholder.

>> No.3172079

>That's their experience
what is?

>just like a game aging poorly
my point is, you equated games aging poorly to nostalgia. However, the effect of games being experienced differently also affects players that never played the game before. So nostalgia can not enter their picture.

>It's all in the eyes of the beholder
If it was, then when can we consistently point out games where we can reliably predict that people who never played them, will have troubles, in particular troubles related to the age of the game? eye of the beholder is a weasel term and you know it.

>> No.3172089

If you think these games 'age', you're on the wrong board.

These old games are exactly as fun as they were back when I first played them.

>> No.3172132

They definitely are. I dont know how you can argue that control schemes are not homogenized now

>> No.3172272

How did you grt a picture of Literally Me?

>> No.3174660

I think what you call homogenization is what I see as refinement. That's how control schemes evolve. They become refined, homogenize for a time and then iterated on more. That process is still continuing, even if it doesn't seem as obvious to you.

Name (leave empty)
Comment (leave empty)
Password [?]Password used for file deletion.