surf dtoid with 
Rising (10+)
People you follow
Like any other medium there were games twenty years ago that stayed the test of time and are still VERY good games. And yes, some of them are better than attempts made today (I still think Chrono Trigger is the best JRPG ever made). But as a whole, no the industry is NOT worse than it was. Games are much better today, they're more intelligent and capable of much, much more.
I love playing classic games, they provide a fun challenge generally out of almost broken controls or stretching the possible limits of two buttons. It's really fun to try and beat Castlevania or Megaman 3. I love doing it. But I'm not going to say they're THAT much better. It's nostalgia, sure, but I'm not going to say I would rather things go back to 8-bit.
Now music, on the other hand, music WAS much better in retro games (again not to say there aren't any to, Koh Ohtani is fantastic), I mean...Ninja Gaiden's music is awesome
I love playing classic games, they provide a fun challenge generally out of almost broken controls or stretching the possible limits of two buttons. It's really fun to try and beat Castlevania or Megaman 3. I love doing it. But I'm not going to say they're THAT much better. It's nostalgia, sure, but I'm not going to say I would rather things go back to 8-bit.
Now music, on the other hand, music WAS much better in retro games (again not to say there aren't any to, Koh Ohtani is fantastic), I mean...Ninja Gaiden's music is awesome
I don't see a problem with people preferring old games to today's new age games if you compare the classics to today's considered quality. I'd much rather play something like Doom or Duke Nukem 3D over the Call of Duty or Halo franchise simply because I find them more fun and I didn't start playing Doom or Duke Nukem 3D until about a year ago.
The only issue I have with the retro gamers is when they complain about how games were more difficult back then. Then they claim to have beaten some really difficult games with ease on their hardest settings like Demon Souls, Bayonetta or Devil May Cry.
The only issue I have with the retro gamers is when they complain about how games were more difficult back then. Then they claim to have beaten some really difficult games with ease on their hardest settings like Demon Souls, Bayonetta or Devil May Cry.
I like that this is on the front page while an ad for a re-release of a retro game that supports this website is in the background.
Bart VS The Space Mutants is a bad ass game! Also Bart VS The World is great too if anyone remembers that.
Just came out of an 1h30 French documentary about games : the conclusions are totally opposite. Most of the french gamers interviewed regret the state of the gaming industry as it is now: less and less variety from the big ones (too much FPS's) and less risks, and also, that most of the companies making games don't feel invested in the games they are making (That's why CyberConnect 2 is my personal favorite actually(Just look at Solatorobo)). They also state that indie games are where it's at best. I for myself like retro games and actual games both, if they are good and interesting, if they feel fresh. My picks of the year for 2010 was either SMG2, Donkey Kong and Tail Concerto, CC2's first game that came out 10 years ago, because it had charm (bad camera, sure, but it was the game I was more invested in).
i agree with you fosho. but some of the best games from that era are still good. mega man and super metroid!
Dragon Quest's music has been composed since day one by a bat-shit insane nationionalist who denies his country had committed the atrocious Rape of Nanking. I hate how that guy has millions of dollars today. Maybe if everybody would stop buying and sucking that series off just because of peer pressure from retro-obsessed jagoffs...
I personally think the 16 bit generation holds up better than our first voyage in to 3d on the saturn/ps1/n64.
I landed a free 64 a couple years back and was thrilled to go back and play some of my favorites like "Extreme-G" and "Jet Force Gemini".
Yeah, i didn't last long.
I landed a free 64 a couple years back and was thrilled to go back and play some of my favorites like "Extreme-G" and "Jet Force Gemini".
Yeah, i didn't last long.
Old games like the original Castlevania and Legend of Zelda captured my imagination when I was a kid. I became the protagonist in these fantasy worlds through my own imagination. Today, fantasy immersion depends on a host of game-design factors. The greatest games of today still utilize the player's imagination, examples being ICO and Demon's Souls. Games with stronger narrative strength are not necessarily better. For instance, Final Fantasy XIII is pretty "like it or you don't." Even the replay value of Metal Gear Solid 4 is weakened unless you enjoy watching it as a movie as much as playing it as a game. Engaging the imagination for immersion is key and is just as much an elusive art today as it was in the good old days.
I consider myself a "retro gamer" and there are still some technological aspects of those games that I prefer over newer ones (for some reason I've always had a soft spot for Super Famicom-level graphics), but you sure won't see me complaining about the industry today. You also didn't mention that games were expensive as fuck back then.
I lol'd.
I agree... and I love retro games. Shit I still play them -- I got my Minestorm on and still loved it.
I agree... and I love retro games. Shit I still play them -- I got my Minestorm on and still loved it.
Just when I thought Jim couldn't make any more enemies. Regardless of the argument of whether or not games were "better" back in "the day", snobby retro assholes are snobby.
I am a complete curmudgeon utterly disappointed with the current state of the industry, but then I was an arcade man. The recent boon from fighting game is about all we arcade boys get anymore.
Love you, Jim, but I'm calling "straw man" on your argument.
I highly doubt [and if there are around, I would agree they are idiots] that anyone would argue that Die Hard or Bubsy or Bart vs. the Space Mutants is objectively [outside perhaps their rose-tinted memories of playing it] is anywhere approaching good.
Likewise, if a retro gamer is under the illusion that games were not hoisted forward as a commercial enterprise looking to make money of kids, I would too agree that, that person is delusional. Just look at anything licensed by LJN on the NES back in the day.
It is true that many "retro" folks wind up panning many current games. I would argue some unfairly do so, which I think you agree with me on this one, since many modern games are great. I think that they should be introduced to these experiences and new ones.
Others, and I think this is representative of a broad swathe of "retro gamers" in the 30-50 set, simply don't find many modern games to their tastes. People like action-platformer fans or point-and-click adventure game fans or twitch arcade fans. Sometimes, you can reintroduce them... Example: My father stopped playing games sometime after Doom 2. I recently showed him Left 4 Dead 2 and now he plays that *almost every day*. Likewise, got him Orange Box and he is mostly through Half Life 2 and the episodes.
But then again, save for retro revival-type titles like Pac Man CE or Geometry Wars, that consciously try to embrace and extend retro gameplay [visuals aside], very few "modern" (especially AAA titles) appeal to this set.
Also, a retro gamer has a vast library of *fantastic* games to draw from and occupy their time and don't want to bother with anything modern until they are 100% assured it is a worthwhile experience (or the type of experience they are looking for in a game). Let's imagine two people, both avid readers. One follows literary magazines and reads reviews and follows books that come out right now by modern authors. The other doesn't care that deeply and reads classic literature because there is simply *so much good stuff already written*. The latter would be an ass if he said that new books shouldn't be written because Joyce already wrote Ulysses, but the former is also an ass since he wants to put a postmodern reading on Cervantes and finds its moralizing shallow outside of context.
I have played Chrono Trigger dozens of times. Same with Link to the Past. I have clocked hundreds of hours, perhaps, playing Galaga. There are plenty of very worthwhile games.
I think another mistake that some (not all) retros make is assuming that later iterations or variations on a theme are shit because some franchises have indeed panned out that way. Take Sonic. First few were brilliant. Sonic and Knuckles was ok... beyond that, it really slipped and never really recovered. Even when they tried something new, it still fell flat. Not merely because it didn't ape the older ones, but because it didn't as a cohesive whole provide as polished and focused of an experience.
One things that, say, arcade-style gamers [not just shmup types, but those people included] love is simple play but nuance and depth to the gameplay. If you can get the hang of things, playing some of these games can be almost a hobby in and of itself. Some don't want a story. Their story is "I can fucking get to 20000000 points!"... That is the story they are after, and that is legitimate.
Honestly, I like Castlevania 2 and Legend of Zelda 2... sure they are broken in some ways and some of their sequels are far superior, but they are, to me, fun to play and have some really cool aspects to their design [particularly the latter]. Mind you, neither of these were titles I played more than a few hours at friends houses at as a kid, so they aren't particularly rose-colored.
In the end, I think everyone needs to be honest that a large swathe of games are either shit or kind of fun or pretty cool to keep you amused for now, but not great. This is true both now and in the past. A lot of retros won't bother with "kind of fun" new games, if they can play great old ones or "kind of fun" old ones that they have a personal connection with. The shame is when they don't try the new game that is a gem. Likewise, I think it is a shame when someone who is a modern gamer that doesn't want to play X old game that is objectively pretty amazing, just because it looks inferior to newer games.
So that is my rant of the day.
I highly doubt [and if there are around, I would agree they are idiots] that anyone would argue that Die Hard or Bubsy or Bart vs. the Space Mutants is objectively [outside perhaps their rose-tinted memories of playing it] is anywhere approaching good.
Likewise, if a retro gamer is under the illusion that games were not hoisted forward as a commercial enterprise looking to make money of kids, I would too agree that, that person is delusional. Just look at anything licensed by LJN on the NES back in the day.
It is true that many "retro" folks wind up panning many current games. I would argue some unfairly do so, which I think you agree with me on this one, since many modern games are great. I think that they should be introduced to these experiences and new ones.
Others, and I think this is representative of a broad swathe of "retro gamers" in the 30-50 set, simply don't find many modern games to their tastes. People like action-platformer fans or point-and-click adventure game fans or twitch arcade fans. Sometimes, you can reintroduce them... Example: My father stopped playing games sometime after Doom 2. I recently showed him Left 4 Dead 2 and now he plays that *almost every day*. Likewise, got him Orange Box and he is mostly through Half Life 2 and the episodes.
But then again, save for retro revival-type titles like Pac Man CE or Geometry Wars, that consciously try to embrace and extend retro gameplay [visuals aside], very few "modern" (especially AAA titles) appeal to this set.
Also, a retro gamer has a vast library of *fantastic* games to draw from and occupy their time and don't want to bother with anything modern until they are 100% assured it is a worthwhile experience (or the type of experience they are looking for in a game). Let's imagine two people, both avid readers. One follows literary magazines and reads reviews and follows books that come out right now by modern authors. The other doesn't care that deeply and reads classic literature because there is simply *so much good stuff already written*. The latter would be an ass if he said that new books shouldn't be written because Joyce already wrote Ulysses, but the former is also an ass since he wants to put a postmodern reading on Cervantes and finds its moralizing shallow outside of context.
I have played Chrono Trigger dozens of times. Same with Link to the Past. I have clocked hundreds of hours, perhaps, playing Galaga. There are plenty of very worthwhile games.
I think another mistake that some (not all) retros make is assuming that later iterations or variations on a theme are shit because some franchises have indeed panned out that way. Take Sonic. First few were brilliant. Sonic and Knuckles was ok... beyond that, it really slipped and never really recovered. Even when they tried something new, it still fell flat. Not merely because it didn't ape the older ones, but because it didn't as a cohesive whole provide as polished and focused of an experience.
One things that, say, arcade-style gamers [not just shmup types, but those people included] love is simple play but nuance and depth to the gameplay. If you can get the hang of things, playing some of these games can be almost a hobby in and of itself. Some don't want a story. Their story is "I can fucking get to 20000000 points!"... That is the story they are after, and that is legitimate.
Honestly, I like Castlevania 2 and Legend of Zelda 2... sure they are broken in some ways and some of their sequels are far superior, but they are, to me, fun to play and have some really cool aspects to their design [particularly the latter]. Mind you, neither of these were titles I played more than a few hours at friends houses at as a kid, so they aren't particularly rose-colored.
In the end, I think everyone needs to be honest that a large swathe of games are either shit or kind of fun or pretty cool to keep you amused for now, but not great. This is true both now and in the past. A lot of retros won't bother with "kind of fun" new games, if they can play great old ones or "kind of fun" old ones that they have a personal connection with. The shame is when they don't try the new game that is a gem. Likewise, I think it is a shame when someone who is a modern gamer that doesn't want to play X old game that is objectively pretty amazing, just because it looks inferior to newer games.
So that is my rant of the day.
I won't say that I think Jim is completely off-base, but I also can't say that I agree with him. The Super Nintendo is my favorite console of all time and never even owned one until around 2003. It's a matter of taste. It's the reason that the DS is my favorite console of this generation. The games on it are simpler and have more a retro feel to them. I feel like there was more variety in the look and content of games back then. It's the reason people still love games like Cave Story and Dragon Quest. It's a style of game. I'm not sure if you can argue that retro games were all around better, but I think in some ways they certainly were.
You're wrong, Jim.
I never thought that 'Bart Versus the Space Mutants' was a good game.
I also didn't appreciate that most games could be won in half an hour or less(Super Mario Brothers gets a pass because of how enjoyable those 30 minutes were for the time) and those that couldn't took a shot glass worth of content and added enough filler to innundate a desert,either (I'd say that Final Fantasy 1 was the worst in the series, but there's hardly anything there to care about, let alone hate).
If it weren't for the potential inherent in the idea of interactive media, I'd have probably completely given up on videogames a long time ago due to the low quality of the vast majority of the games to come out of the 'Golden Age'. After playing the games that are around today, I'm glad that I stuck around, though I'm still looking forward to where it all goes from here.
There is also this to help make your point about the profit-centric motivations for certain companies entering the industry in the first place, Jim.
http://www.1up.com/features/games-nintendo-konami
I never thought that 'Bart Versus the Space Mutants' was a good game.
I also didn't appreciate that most games could be won in half an hour or less(Super Mario Brothers gets a pass because of how enjoyable those 30 minutes were for the time) and those that couldn't took a shot glass worth of content and added enough filler to innundate a desert,either (I'd say that Final Fantasy 1 was the worst in the series, but there's hardly anything there to care about, let alone hate).
If it weren't for the potential inherent in the idea of interactive media, I'd have probably completely given up on videogames a long time ago due to the low quality of the vast majority of the games to come out of the 'Golden Age'. After playing the games that are around today, I'm glad that I stuck around, though I'm still looking forward to where it all goes from here.
There is also this to help make your point about the profit-centric motivations for certain companies entering the industry in the first place, Jim.
http://www.1up.com/features/games-nintendo-konami
I actually started playing video games very late I played some pc games in the 90s mainly worms.I really only played video games since 2002 when I got a gamecube( not that I stopped playing on pc I also played more games on my pc) so I haven't really played much nes and snes games when they came out but I did start playing some of those old games a year or so ago on emulators and I found some of them really good even now but others are just crap if you don't have any nostalgia with them, I didn't even try the shittier ones.
I agree with you Jim. Back when I was young I thought Donkey Kong 64 was the best game ever,but now,I'd say it one of the most blandest adventures ever.
Yeah video games and commericals go waaaaay back. I even had a game based on the Domino's Noid as kid.
Yeah video games and commercials go waaaaay back. I even had a game based on the Domino's Noid as kid.
I think a problem with this generation of games, is that a lot of gamers seem to dis the old generation of games just for having inferior graphics.
There are plenty of people I'm sure who will pass off Final Fantasy VII as just some dumb cliche JRPG without even trying it. (Well, FFVII did create a lot of JRPG cliches, but that's besides the point.)
There are plenty of people I'm sure who will pass off Final Fantasy VII as just some dumb cliche JRPG without even trying it. (Well, FFVII did create a lot of JRPG cliches, but that's besides the point.)
Agreed. I got into gaming as child in the PS1/N64 and could never truly appreciate the old games because of the massive steps that had been made over the years. I forced myself to beat Metroid NES just because I'm a huge fan of the series and it felt blasphemous to not play it, but I could not appreciate that game after playing Super Metroid and Metroid Fusion first. Also I bought Legend of Zelda NES on VC and I cannot bring myself to play it after playing Wind Waker, Links Awakening etc.
My main problem with Retro gamers isn't that they like old games it's when they try to make me sound ignorant, or say I'm not a "real gamer" because I didn't like a game because I played it over a decade after it was released maybe if I had gotten to play the game when it was released I would appreciate it but unfortunately many games age badly. Most of my favorite PS1 games did not hold up well and are complete crap by today's standards
My main problem with Retro gamers isn't that they like old games it's when they try to make me sound ignorant, or say I'm not a "real gamer" because I didn't like a game because I played it over a decade after it was released maybe if I had gotten to play the game when it was released I would appreciate it but unfortunately many games age badly. Most of my favorite PS1 games did not hold up well and are complete crap by today's standards
this site really needs a better commenting system it currently has no editing, no protection against double posting and support for quoting.
Also, 'Yo Noid!'.
I think older games with their dated graphics and less developed plots actually casued the gamer to use their imagination to help flesh out the details. There's something to be said about the silent protagonist type of games.
Newer games with voice-overs and strict plots lose that "connection". I feel like I'm playing a movie instead of getting mentally sucked it to the story as well.
Newer games with voice-overs and strict plots lose that "connection". I feel like I'm playing a movie instead of getting mentally sucked it to the story as well.
It's the same thing every generation. 5 fucking brilliant games, 5 fucking horrid games, and everything else is in the middle.
i agree that there are a shitload of crappy retro games a lot of those games i played as a kid where terrable when i look back at them now , but there are still a lot of great games i played as a kid that if i go back to them now still play great .
good gameplay is good gameplay no mather the concept.
good gameplay is good gameplay no mather the concept.
I do not fully agree with Jim this time, yes there were a lot of really bad games in retro time but that does not mean that all the retro games are bad.
When we compare game now to the games to the games of old , yes the older games will look worse but you have to understand that without the older games to influenced the new better games the new games would have not of existed.
I do have to say that I do enjoy After Burner on my NES more than After Burner Climax, because of the new mechanic to slow down time and kill everything; it seems stacked on and not a solid concept that improves the game in general.
Yes there is bad retro games and people that like them, that is their opinion and thats fine.
When we compare game now to the games to the games of old , yes the older games will look worse but you have to understand that without the older games to influenced the new better games the new games would have not of existed.
I do have to say that I do enjoy After Burner on my NES more than After Burner Climax, because of the new mechanic to slow down time and kill everything; it seems stacked on and not a solid concept that improves the game in general.
Yes there is bad retro games and people that like them, that is their opinion and thats fine.
There are tons of games from "the olden days" that I still enjoy popping in and playing. Chrono Trigger, A Link to the Past, Mega Man X, Street Fighter 2, Super Mario World, Resident Evil 2, Final Fantasy 8, etc. As much as I enjoy Mass Effect and Uncharted, the chances of me wanting to come back and play them in 10 years are zero. There are very few "timeless" games being made these days, and that's very sad.
Fuckin right. There are a handful of games from my youth that are still worth playing today. Movie spinoff games are the worst, now and then. Independence Day comes immediately to mind from my youth...
I think the obvious issue at hand here is that it is more fun to be a kid than it is to be an adult.
Why foist the responsibility on to future generations to do our work?
I will say the same of this era.
I will say the same of this era.
I would have to agree with this. I can count on my hands the number of games from the NES/SNES days that I can still go back and play. I've come to terms with the fact that most of them are, in fact, shit. Nostalgia's a hell of a drug.
I love the new generation, games are amazing now and everything.
But sorry, the SNES still has the best library ever.
But sorry, the SNES still has the best library ever.
Hands down the best Jimquisition yet. Although I do have a nostalgia boner for The Video Game Show What I've Done.
@JohnGalt27 : Counterpoint to spinoff games:
Aladdin (especially Genesis version)
Just about every Disney Capcom game
Aladdin (especially Genesis version)
Just about every Disney Capcom game
Another Sterling post to generate hits what surprise...
But seriously, just because the tech is better in games doesn't equal better games.
It's not like alot of companies have gotten better on how they treat their employees or their smaller studios.
Just because the limitations and the companies make you think the games were so awful doesn't exactly mean that they were horrible games.
But seriously, just because the tech is better in games doesn't equal better games.
It's not like alot of companies have gotten better on how they treat their employees or their smaller studios.
Just because the limitations and the companies make you think the games were so awful doesn't exactly mean that they were horrible games.
"Your Bioshocks your Final Fantasys"
I've played every Final Fantasy and can 100% say with no bias that FFVI is the best, BUT OMG IT'S UGLY LAW IT MUST SUCK. Fuck off, I used to like you but this just makes it clear you only want attention, only a troll or an idiot would say that all classic games suck, and your past videos at least tell me that you're not an idiot. However knowing that you've just been a troll the entire time isn't much better.
I've played every Final Fantasy and can 100% say with no bias that FFVI is the best, BUT OMG IT'S UGLY LAW IT MUST SUCK. Fuck off, I used to like you but this just makes it clear you only want attention, only a troll or an idiot would say that all classic games suck, and your past videos at least tell me that you're not an idiot. However knowing that you've just been a troll the entire time isn't much better.
Eh. I'm somewhat torn on this one, Jim. I do enjoy going back and playing Old School games. This one just doesn't really provoke much discussion.
First off, where do we draw the line in which if you primarily play games from this generation or earlier, you are a retro gamer? Third Generation? Fourth? Fifth? Sixth?
The fact is that good and bad existed in the past and still exist today. It's not profound, its common sense.
While gaming technology has progressed, that doesn't mean everything has gotten better. I will give retrogamers credit in that I believe 2D games have never felt right once we moved into the fifth generation. There is something intrinsic about Super Metriod, Super Mario Bros 3, Sonic the Hedgehog that makes them feel much better than the big 2D hits of today and I'm not sure what that is.
If we are drawing the line of retrogamer at any previous generation then I will disagree with you completely because I don't care for where online has taken home gaming consoles. There are certainly good aspects like stores, demos, patches to fix bugs ect. ect. But I don't care for the omnipresence of competitive multiplayer at all. I generally don't care for FPSs either. Achievements are gimmicks intended to keep you playing a game long after it has stopped being fun and downloadable content is simply a way to nickle and dime players. These are all why I don't have much respect for the PS3 and 360. I don't even own 5 PS3 games because there are so few I actually care for because of how pervasion online has become while my collection of actual Wii games I thoroughly enjoy is well past 25.
Either way it seems like your message is "There has always been high quality games and low quality games and there always will be." Okay, I agree. But it just isn't exactly a profound observation.
One thing I have to say though is screw you for dissing Rocket Knight Adventures >:(
First off, where do we draw the line in which if you primarily play games from this generation or earlier, you are a retro gamer? Third Generation? Fourth? Fifth? Sixth?
The fact is that good and bad existed in the past and still exist today. It's not profound, its common sense.
While gaming technology has progressed, that doesn't mean everything has gotten better. I will give retrogamers credit in that I believe 2D games have never felt right once we moved into the fifth generation. There is something intrinsic about Super Metriod, Super Mario Bros 3, Sonic the Hedgehog that makes them feel much better than the big 2D hits of today and I'm not sure what that is.
If we are drawing the line of retrogamer at any previous generation then I will disagree with you completely because I don't care for where online has taken home gaming consoles. There are certainly good aspects like stores, demos, patches to fix bugs ect. ect. But I don't care for the omnipresence of competitive multiplayer at all. I generally don't care for FPSs either. Achievements are gimmicks intended to keep you playing a game long after it has stopped being fun and downloadable content is simply a way to nickle and dime players. These are all why I don't have much respect for the PS3 and 360. I don't even own 5 PS3 games because there are so few I actually care for because of how pervasion online has become while my collection of actual Wii games I thoroughly enjoy is well past 25.
Either way it seems like your message is "There has always been high quality games and low quality games and there always will be." Okay, I agree. But it just isn't exactly a profound observation.
One thing I have to say though is screw you for dissing Rocket Knight Adventures >:(
I don't think retro games are shitty, some are and some aren't, just like games now. There is no doubt that many innovations have been made in terms of graphics, narrative and gameplay since the "good ol' days".
However I do think that we are passed my personal favourite gaming era (so far). When we got the PS, Saturn, N64 and eventually Dreamcast the technology was there to finally do something more with video games. While the technology has continued to improve and we've been treated to some incredible games that I wouldn't have been able to imagine as a kid I simply prefer the games from that generation.
It's all completely subjective of course, and personally I think that for the most part this video is 100% spot on. However, when I think back on my all time favourite games, and indeed favourite types of games, very few come from this generation. I still play games like X-COM, Planescape: Torment, Baldur's Gate, Monkey Island, Space Quest, Broken Sword, Outcast, Freespace 2, and I still don't think any of them have really been improved upon over the years. Thanks to places like GOG.com we don't have to wear rose tinted glasses, we can experience the games all over again. Of course all of those games are PC games, and I think that even back in the "retro" age of gaming PC devs were doing pretty incredible things.
However I do think that we are passed my personal favourite gaming era (so far). When we got the PS, Saturn, N64 and eventually Dreamcast the technology was there to finally do something more with video games. While the technology has continued to improve and we've been treated to some incredible games that I wouldn't have been able to imagine as a kid I simply prefer the games from that generation.
It's all completely subjective of course, and personally I think that for the most part this video is 100% spot on. However, when I think back on my all time favourite games, and indeed favourite types of games, very few come from this generation. I still play games like X-COM, Planescape: Torment, Baldur's Gate, Monkey Island, Space Quest, Broken Sword, Outcast, Freespace 2, and I still don't think any of them have really been improved upon over the years. Thanks to places like GOG.com we don't have to wear rose tinted glasses, we can experience the games all over again. Of course all of those games are PC games, and I think that even back in the "retro" age of gaming PC devs were doing pretty incredible things.
I have to agree mostly. There were a lot of shit games in the 80s and 90s, just like there are now. But just because they're bad games doesn't mean you can't enjoy them. Just like bad movies, you can like bad games.
Deadly Premonition anyone?
Deadly Premonition anyone?
I agree that gaming today is better than ever before; there's something for all audiences nowadays. I used to call myself a retro gamer until a couple years ago when I realized just how good the games nowadays are. I've realized that most of the NES library is simply unplayable to me, barring about maybe ten games (most of which are Mega Man or Mario). Still, the SNES is one of my favorite consoles to this day. And then N64 came along and even that I think was kinda shite.
I'd say about half of my top 20 games are from the 90s, and half are from the last few years.
I'd say about half of my top 20 games are from the 90s, and half are from the last few years.
follow
