Continuous over-praising of classic games, and why it's a problem. - Games

[QUOTE=Swilly;27981116].....the almost lack of instructions, Ocarina didn't have this problem, but the original and a Link to the Past suffered greatly from it. I wondered around more than I try solving puzzles.[/QUOTE] Oh yeah I agree about A Link to the Past, I had no idea what the fuck I was doing in the GBA port.

I actually sat here for an hour trying to make a paragraph statement about the OP being wrong, but then I realized that he actually didn't state any sort of problem in his post, only in the title. [b]Edit:[/b] What [i]is[/i] the problem?

[QUOTE=johan_sm;27976525]It is? Are you 14 now?[/QUOTE] It is to me. I'm 18.

[QUOTE=Rahkshi lord;27981246]Oh yeah I agree about A Link to the Past, I had no idea what the fuck I was doing in the GBA port.[/QUOTE] Oh yeah, you need to get this text translated. What? You want to know how to do that? Nope, not going to tell you anything at all (Most certainly not going to tell you that the object needed to translate it was in an obscure building to the south of kakariko on top of a shelf that you have to dash into to get). Fuck that game. [editline]11th February 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=G-Strogg;27976594]"Golden age of COD" was CoD 2. Man that game was just too good.[/QUOTE] Vasili! Throw another smoke grenade!

[QUOTE=CoolKingKaso;27981227]I agree, the openworld environment can get really annoying several times, but that's why people liked it. There were several ways to solve a mission, and you usually find shit that you don't find at first glance.[/QUOTE] Well I had gotten used to that from other games. It was the fact that when I found a new spot...I would immediately get lost.

I never ever got lost in Deus ex.

The games I played in my childhood are "older" than they were then, so I regard "older" games as better. I have vivid memories of playing "old" games, whereas when I play many newer games I just don't care about them at all and forget everything about them soon after. Also, more classic games used to be more focused on "how much can we code inside the smallest bit of space, that will sell and be fun for our players. We want money, but we're also interested in proving ourselves as artists" as opposed to now where it is "let's release unoptimized games that we know will sell. We have visions and stuff but our focus is the money."

We all want to look back at our childhood's fondly, so that's what we're doing.

In all honesty a lot of "retro" games the Scott Pilgrim crowd and the like are in love with (NES, Genesis, SNES games) are filled with a lot of dumb game design flaws like lives, limited continues and ridiculously uneven difficulty levels. I'm sure I'm not the only one that "savescums" via savestates (or whatever term is used to put down people that save a lot in games) because I just don't have the patience to go through the same level over and over because of some poorly-designed section at the end. That shit's fine when you're like 9, but when you're much older, you just don't have the patience (or time) to go through lengthy sections over and over. I don't mind checkpoints, but make sure your system is set up to save often (like in the CoD games) or you're not much better than the NES games that make you go back to the start if you run out of lives.

[QUOTE=OP;27943979]Then there's the fact that memories are directly linked to how we felt in the moment; and positive memories seem to overwrite the negative ones. The Positivity Effect states that positive memories stay longer and more vivid in the mind while negative ones fade faster.[/QUOTE] If that were true, I wouldn't have so many sad memories. I think you remember moments that are emotionally powerful - whatever the emotion is.

I loved Fallout 3, good god it was my favorite game ever. But that doesn't mean I have the rights to say that the older ones sucked. I loved Fallout 3 so much that I got my hands on Fallout 2 and I enjoyed it allot! Same experience when I got to play Super Mario Bros. I guess that those who were born in the Gameboy/Playstation 1 era are pretty tolerant to much older games.

[QUOTE=Rahkshi lord;27980211]Yes they are, the new ones are just as good as the old ones.[/QUOTE] They are the same as the old ones.

Yes I agree classic games are shit. Now excuse me while I go play classic games using popular emulators on my PSP / PS3. [QUOTE=ChosenOne54;27975128] I am simply trying to make a point about people who continuously defend older games, and refuse to accept that they are outdated[/QUOTE] Oh wait you were just saying they are outdated. I guess all that fun I had playing classics over MW2 / Black Ops wasn't real.

I have a good example. Recently, I remembered that I've never actually played anything more than a snippet of the original Legend of Zelda (I find this odd seeing as I love Zelda). I started it up on my PSP and played the absolute fuck out of it and could not put it down. Now I'm playing through Majora's Mask and Ocarina of Time. Again. I haven't seen many newer games that get the Zelda-like formula right, so maybe that's why. That, and exploring the environment without any assistance was nice.

[QUOTE=Ziron;27984875]In all honesty a lot of "retro" games the Scott Pilgrim crowd and the like are in love with (NES, Genesis, SNES games) are filled with a lot of dumb game design flaws like lives, limited continues and ridiculously uneven difficulty levels. I'm sure I'm not the only one that "savescums" via savestates (or whatever term is used to put down people that save a lot in games) because I just don't have the patience to go through the same level over and over because of some poorly-designed section at the end. That shit's fine when you're like 9, but when you're much older, you just don't have the patience (or time) to go through lengthy sections over and over. I don't mind checkpoints, but make sure your system is set up to save often (like in the CoD games) or you're not much better than the NES games that make you go back to the start if you run out of lives.[/QUOTE] I have to take exception with this. LIVES are a design flaw? Really? So you should be able to blast through a game with no challenge or stake in completing a level with as few flaws as possible? If you're just going through the game mindlessly, you're not going to enjoy it, imo. The same with continues. Being limited in the amount of times you can restart forces you to get better or give up. Fucking Predator for the NES made me rage so hard, but I eventually beat the game and took great pleasure in it. You'd probably hate it (as I did). You may be different, but as I got older, I got more patience. I used to play through games with cheats when I was a kid until it dawned on me that I wasn't really enjoying what I was doing at all. If I can't get through a level or kill an enemy easily, it's often fun to come up with a new tactic, or try something else. If I save at a bad point in a game, I will often try my best to get my character out of the situation as opposed to rolling back to an earlier save. To me that is much more entertaining than tearing through a game in 20 minutes.

[QUOTE=CommanderMayhem;27945140]Half Life 2. I don't see why it's that amazing.[/QUOTE] Maybe the piles of mods?

This thread is a good example of 2 different groups colliding with each other. Ever since the "new age" of gaming, community has been split into 2 parts. The "new gamers", who view games as nothing more than 'just a game', as a tool for entertainment and the "old gamers" who view games as stories, or if you please, as Interactive Experiences. I'm not saying that any of the groups is right or wrong. What I'm trying to say is that if you are the "new gamer", you shouldn't call people retarded just because they see something extra in the game that doesn't look good from the surface "Deadly Premonition/Red Seeds Profile is a good example of such a game" and if you're the "old gamer" you shouldn't judge people just because they prefer games as a simple form of amusement.

[QUOTE=Jack Trades;27987967]This thread is a good example of 2 different groups colliding with each other. Ever since the "new age" of gaming, community has been split into 2 parts. The "new gamers", who view games as nothing more than 'just a game', as a tool for entertainment and the "old gamers" who view games as stories, or if you please, as Interactive Experiences. I'm not saying that any of the groups is right or wrong. What I'm trying to say is that if you are the "new gamer", you shouldn't call people retarded just because they see something extra in the game that doesn't look good from the surface "Deadly Premonition/Red Seeds Profile is a good example of such a game" and if you're the "old gamer" you shouldn't judge people just because they prefer games as a simple form of amusement.[/QUOTE] And then there's the dumb person who plays spreadsheet simulators giving his dumb opinion on something irrelevant not to mention wrong.

It saddens me that even after 4 consecutive posts, people still don't know how to read. Mhpf.

[QUOTE=Ziron;27984875]In all honesty a lot of "retro" games the Scott Pilgrim crowd and the like are in love with (NES, Genesis, SNES games) are filled with a lot of dumb game design flaws like lives, limited continues and ridiculously uneven difficulty levels. I'm sure I'm not the only one that "savescums" via savestates (or whatever term is used to put down people that save a lot in games) because I just don't have the patience to go through the same level over and over because of some poorly-designed section at the end. That shit's fine when you're like 9, but when you're much older, you just don't have the patience (or time) to go through lengthy sections over and over. I don't mind checkpoints, but make sure your system is set up to save often (like in the CoD games) or you're not much better than the NES games that make you go back to the start if you run out of lives.[/QUOTE] What's the Scott Pilgrim crowd?

[QUOTE=cqbcat;27990075]What's the Scott Pilgrim crowd?[/QUOTE] Hipsters. (At least, I think that's what he means, considering Pilgrim is a parody of hipsters)

[QUOTE=Ray-The-Sun;27990139]Hipsters. (At least, I think that's what he means, considering Pilgrim is a parody of hipsters)[/QUOTE] The ones that are totally in love with classic games FOREVER and tend to be hispters.

[QUOTE=Derkaderk;27987998]And then there's the dumb person who plays spreadsheet simulators giving his dumb opinion on something irrelevant not to mention wrong.[/QUOTE] In my personal opinion. [img_thumb]http://eve-online.info/images/simple-rxns.png[/img_thumb]>[img_thumb]http://www.faqs.org/photo-dict/photofiles/list/3087/4129coffee_grinder.jpg[/img_thumb] To each his own.

Same thing with classic music like beatles.

Its all Nostalgia. Well, with facepunch's support we could use a term of meaning like "its old, so I couldn't properly rate/review it". I guess since fp is pretty big, it would spread around the Internet pretty fast, and that might change that. Even just the people in the comments of a game review in a case like that would use it, and the reviewer would get the plan. So he'd just stop. (Did you get what i just said? Kind of hard to explain.)

To accurately measure present, we must know history. That also applies on games - if you have no reference points you won't be able to measure current games. [editline]11th February 2011[/editline] Old games are innovative and had great ideas when they were released, and those ideas are reapplied on later games. [editline]11th February 2011[/editline] That is the reason why they were real popular back in their time. Finding similarities on new and old games will help you figure what makes the game good in your opinion.

Some guy owns a ps2, I own a ps3 and ps2. "fucking graphics whore." I play fucking minecraft for fucks sakes!

[QUOTE=Da_Maniac_;27991567]Some guy owns a ps2, I own a ps3 and ps2. "fucking graphics whore." I play fucking minecraft for fucks sakes![/QUOTE] Anyone having a console as their primary gaming platform is absolutely NOT a graphics whore. Makes the argument of PS3 being for graphics whores invalid.

[QUOTE=Fippe;27991625]Anyone having a console as their primary gaming platform is absolutely NOT a graphics whore. Makes the argument of PS3 being for graphics whores invalid.[/QUOTE] Yeah, but they think that having a ps3 over their ps2 makes me a graphics whore.