PKMN.NET Forums

Misc => Gaming => Topic started by: The name master on November 01, 2015, 17:20

Title: Are older games better than newer ones?
Post by: The name master on November 01, 2015, 17:20
I was just thinking, which are better? Older or newer game? I like some of the old classics, like asteroids, space invaders ect. I think they should remake Wario Land 3 in the style of Super Mario 3D World. Imagine the zombies!
Title: Re: Are older games better than newer ones?
Post by: RocketMember002 on November 01, 2015, 18:56
I think it's nostalgia for the most part when people claim old games are best - If I try to play an old game that I didn't play when it was new then I just can't get into it. Even now when I try to play the older pokemon games I get annoyed at how many quality of life changes don't exist yet. (20 bag slots, seriously!?)
Title: Re: Are older games better than newer ones?
Post by: Captain Jigglypuff on November 01, 2015, 21:11
I think it all depends on the game and if it has been remade or remastered. It also depends of ports or console/systems you are playing.
Title: Re: Are older games better than newer ones?
Post by: Kpyna on November 02, 2015, 02:13
Definitely depends! The rose tinted glasses aspect is definitely a problem. Like, I don't understand people who say gen 1 is their favorite generation of Pokemon. Honestly, imo, not the best pokemon games, and they were the ones I started with. I feel like games now just aren't as simple as the old ones, and that's a good and bad thing I suppose. I love complicated games (DOTA 2 nerd here), but tbh you can't beat playing old school GBC role playing games on your phone
Title: Re: Are older games better than newer ones?
Post by: Lord Raven on November 02, 2015, 05:27
No.

Some of them do stand up to modern ones in terms of writing, design, music, etc.  Many of them don't.

On the flipside, many games these days aren't great either.  I just think people are unwilling to take the good with the bad all the time, they are unwilling to accept change, and consequently look down upon newer games simply because they're different and they do things differently.  They also add a bunch of complexity to a bunch of games which make them tedious at times, but in general people are unwilling to learn and they go back to their Final Fantasy 6s and crap like that.  Granted FF6 is one of my favorite games, but I definitely don't care for someone's opinion if they keep referring to it as a classic as opposed to a very good game.

Some other stuff that I thought of is how FE8/9 are better than its predecessors and successors, Pokemon Black/White is the same, and FF has not gone downhill but it's almost always the only JRPG willing to go into new directions which means that every game is not for everyone.  People mistake this for declining quality, but in reality they just don't like the new direction and it's extremely frustrating.  Shadow Hearts 2 is definitively better than 95% of the crap JRPGs they used to smear all over the PSX and the generic stuff on the SNES.

Let's also remind ourselves that "classics" of the 90s haven't aged well.  FF7 needed this remake for the past 20 or so years because the original game aged horribly both in Japan and the US.  Some games are just weird in their storytelling due to 90s conventions.  Ocarina of Time needed the 3DS reboot because of its poor graphics.  Other games have aged well, and stuff like FF8/FF9 has actually stood through the test of time and they still look great despite being dated, same with other SNES JRPGs like the SNES FFs, and even Generation 3 of Pokemon has aged well.  A lot of gamecube games have aged remarkably well too (Wind Waker, anyone?  What about Colosseum/XD?)  And the newer GTAs are definitely superior in every way possible to GTA 1/2.  I can keep going, but it's a matter of people confusing taste with quality.

I showed my sister a bunch of modern video games and modern video game storytelling (The Last Of Us being a prime example, I showed her the opening scene) and she was actually astonished that the games didn't attempt to necessarily be flashy and shallow, and that the video game medium was actually much much better than she had ever realized.  She's kinda opened her mind from the 90s video game nostalgia.
Title: Re: Are older games better than newer ones?
Post by: Captain Jigglypuff on November 03, 2015, 09:15
Kingdom Hearts 1 and 2 have stood up pretty well for the past decade and so has Super Mario World and Ultimate Mortal Kombat. The last one seems to be the most popular choice to be rereleased and remade as there are several variations of the game. Kirby Super Star (Ultra) is another excellent game that has stood the test of time. Most Kirby and Mario games seem to hold up very well. The first two gens of Pokemon are fun to play for nostalgic reasons but they are not the best due to graphics and system limitations. The remakes always make the games better and more engaging. The GB Pokemon games are excellent for speed runs though. My record for beating all the important trainers in Crystal including Red was somewhere under 48 hours.
Title: Re: Are older games better than newer ones?
Post by: The name master on November 03, 2015, 16:40
I'm thinking of taking back what I said about liking old games! I'm terrible at asteroids. I keep losing at pong! It's so hard to get a point against the computer in pong! Although I'm great at space invaders. I may be good at Pac-man too.
Title: Re: Are older games better than newer ones?
Post by: Milsap on November 12, 2015, 12:38
Quote
Let's also remind ourselves that "classics" of the 90s haven't aged well.  FF7 needed this remake for the past 20 or so years because the original game aged horribly both in Japan and the US

Whereas Resident Evil 2 didn't

I think too many people are caught up in the graphics aspect now and are judging games purely on the graphical content. People were genuinely upset that Fallout 4 was 'only' going to be 9-something-p on the consoles and limited to 'only' 50fps or something like that. To be honest, I can't tell the difference.

And I think that was my main beef with this (now confirmed) Resident Evil 2 remake. The original game aged terribly so they remade it and expanded on the lore for the Gamecube to tie in with the release of Resident Evil 0. The story, the gameplay and everything else for RE2 was fine, it was by far the best game in the series. People only wanted the remake for the shiny graphics.

But that said, GTAV, The Last Of Us, Heavy Rain and Modern Warfare 2 are all 'modern' games that were absolutely brilliant in terms of story, gameplay and graphics.
Title: Re: Are older games better than newer ones?
Post by: Captain Jigglypuff on November 12, 2015, 23:31
Storywise, FF VII has stood up pretty well. It's the graphics that are considered horrendous by today's standards that don't hold up so well. When it was first released, the quality was great but now those weird dumbbell arms are rather distracting and even scary to look at. Why is the mid arm so skinny but the hands and upper arms the same width and length?
Title: Re: Are older games better than newer ones?
Post by: Lord Raven on November 13, 2015, 06:46
FF7's story has not stood up well.  Its writing and pacing is quite bad by today's standards and even by the standards set by the very next game.  Believe it or not, this is a game that has needed a reboot for quite a while to sort out all of the script and pacing issues.

It did things that no other JRPG did before that, and very few video games did as well, so it still works as a pioneer.  But nostalgia aside, its story has quite a lot of flaws.

Quote
I think too many people are caught up in the graphics aspect now and are judging games purely on the graphical content. People were genuinely upset that Fallout 4 was 'only' going to be 9-something-p on the consoles and limited to 'only' 50fps or something like that. To be honest, I can't tell the difference.
Really?  Because I hear more mud slinging against games with good graphics because of a supposed lack of depth.  Granted, some do lack depth, but others don't.
Title: Re: Are older games better than newer ones?
Post by: The name master on November 16, 2015, 08:52
I just downloaded q*bert! such an old classic!
Title: Re: Are older games better than newer ones?
Post by: Milsap on November 16, 2015, 10:02
Quote
Really?

Yeah. Just did some looking into it and it's locked to 30fps on the consoles, while the PC can get 60+.
Title: Re: Are older games better than newer ones?
Post by: Lord Raven on November 16, 2015, 19:56
Oh, I meant to respond to the first few sentences of judging too much on graphics.

Consoles tend to be locked to 30fps and the PC versions tend to get 60+ anyway.  This isn't news.
Title: Re: Are older games better than newer ones?
Post by: The name master on December 10, 2015, 13:58
Is it just me? Or are older games (espically the bosses) easier than newer ones?
Title: Re: Are older games better than newer ones?
Post by: Lord Raven on December 10, 2015, 17:33
no they arent

youve been playing the wrong games
Title: Re: Are older games better than newer ones?
Post by: The name master on December 14, 2015, 15:07
I think it's nostalgia for the most part when people claim old games are best
I agree! It's so sad that I can't remember all the games I had on my Gameboy Advance or the titles of some of them! I'd like to play them again for nostalgia reasons.

So far I have found Wario Land 2 & 4, Super Mario Land 2, and Super Mario Advance!
Title: Re: Are older games better than newer ones?
Post by: Meowstic Royalty on December 14, 2015, 23:24
Even today I still like picking up my ancient DS games from like an eternity ago and replay them

And the nostalgia is wonderful

But the majority of the time, it occurs to me "wow, this game SUCKED."
Title: Re: Are older games better than newer ones?
Post by: Lord Raven on December 14, 2015, 23:41
You said DS games are ancient to you, but I checked your age and you're 15.  Jesus, a whole generation of gamers where DS games are considered ancient.

A lot of DS games were great though.
Title: Re: Are older games better than newer ones?
Post by: the bread dragon on December 15, 2015, 02:16
it's called hyperbole muhed. why are you such a grouchy old man )':

Title: Re: Are older games better than newer ones?
Post by: Lord Raven on December 15, 2015, 06:19
I'm very well aware it's hyperbole.  I don't know how you could construe me missing that in the post I made.

I was just saying that the poster was like 6 when Diamond/Pearl came out whereas I was 14, which I was commenting was crazy.
Title: Re: Are older games better than newer ones?
Post by: the bread dragon on December 15, 2015, 12:19
i just wanted an excuse to call you a grouchy old man
Title: Re: Are older games better than newer ones?
Post by: Milsap on December 16, 2015, 10:54
If DS games are ancient that makes me feel even older than I am.
Title: Re: Are older games better than newer ones?
Post by: Meowstic Royalty on December 20, 2015, 13:43
You said DS games are ancient to you, but I checked your age and you're 15.  Jesus, a whole generation of gamers where DS games are considered ancient.

A lot of DS games were great though.

I mean, the DS games came out when I was five years old, so it's quite understandable. I've sold the majority of them but I still have games from like almost a decade ago. It's not the same as a lifelong pokemon fan going straight back to gen 1 which they grew up with but still.
Title: Re: Are older games better than newer ones?
Post by: The name master on December 29, 2015, 13:29
straight back to gen 1 which they grew up with but still.
Gen 1 was a terrible generation of pokemon because of graphics and other things like music but because of nostalgia some people love gen 1 I don't really like it because of those things but if I had grown up with it I may like it now because of nostalgia

But in those days no one cared about graphics because lets face it the graphics were terrible but like I said no one cared because the gameboy was a portable game console which at the time was a great invention
Title: Re: Are older games better than newer ones?
Post by: the bread dragon on December 29, 2015, 14:38
i definitely wouldn't go so far as to call gen 1 terrible, they're good games
Title: Re: Are older games better than newer ones?
Post by: The name master on December 29, 2015, 16:09
i definitely wouldn't go so far as to call gen 1 terrible, they're good games
You obviously must be one of those people who don't care about poor graphics

I admit fire red and leaf green were OK
Title: Re: Are older games better than newer ones?
Post by: Meowstic Royalty on December 29, 2015, 16:15
I wouldn't call it terrible, but my least favourite generation by a landslide. I understand it's of course the first generation and they have a lot to learn but that doesn't change the fact that it's glitchy, unbalanced and all round rather cringeworthy as opposed to today.

For people who grew up with it it's understandable. In comparison to today, it's a bit of a nightmare.
Title: Re: Are older games better than newer ones?
Post by: Lord Raven on December 29, 2015, 20:19
The graphics were fine at the time, they just haven't aged well

You obviously must be one of those people who don't care about poor graphics
how do you figure from that?  the graphics aren't poor so much as parts of the interface were weird.  I'd also like to note that the old instruction manual was really terrible because there were constant instances of stuff/text in there that didn't appear in the game at all.  They also weren't poor for their time either, have you played any other gameboy game?
Title: Re: Are older games better than newer ones?
Post by: Turner on December 29, 2015, 22:30
I think about this sometimes.

The correct answer everyone wants to hear is "It depends" because it's nice and neutral. Yes it's true there are great and terrible games in every generation of gaming.

But on the other hand, when I studied some of what Satoshi Tajiri had to say about game design, it made me think that we're not really up to our potential. I read one interview where he talked about the design of Pac-Man and how the speed of the ghosts is actually balanced with how quickly you can turn around corners so there are different methodologies for clearing the map as the levels get harder based on which route you take.

Some of the greatest classic games have amazing attention to detail in terms of gameplay and difficulty curves that really isn't apparent until you know what to look for. In terms of programming and design, they totally maximized the potential with the constraints they were given. That kind of effort hasn't really proportionately scaled upwards. If you take the best looking games of all time today, I don't really think that there's an equal amount of effort and design gone into stuff like gameplay, difficulty, level design etc. as there has with the graphics. I'm not saying they're all shallow, but they haven't gone over it with a fine-toothed comb to get the absolute maximum out of the games like they did with the classics, probably because it would take twice as long to actually get the game released in the first place.

But still...in terms of fun. There are great old games and great new ones. Every year I'm able to find games I enjoy, 2016 looks to be no exception. I just (sort of) wish there was more of them and that I had more time to play them.
Title: Re: Are older games better than newer ones?
Post by: Liam on December 30, 2015, 01:05
I think the last game i bought was Pokémon Black version... that was ages ago! I'm really out of the loop with games nowadays, a lot more stuff is on PC now than there was before but I don't have the time or equipment to really get into it. It's a testament to older games that I'm always drawn back to them though! All I really play nowadays is fifa and the wii/gamecube every now and again. I might try play through Metroid Prime again I don't think I ever completed it :( lol

Older games aren't necessarily better than the newer ones though, I suppose it's very generational as to which games you grow up with and are more inclined to say are your favourites.
Title: Re: Are older games better than newer ones?
Post by: Lord Raven on December 30, 2015, 01:56
*snip*

I think with games that have relatively simpler interfaces in general you will find stuff like this all over the place.  I do believe that you are correct though - they're trying to 1up presentation and "fun factor" and it strips away some good design.  Other times they're trying to add new things and they don't spend as much time balancing it.

It also seems like there's a lot more stingy time constraints so you end up with games that the company pushes out a bit sooner than the designers would like so you end up with a slapdash job.  Look at the second half of FE Awakening to get a better idea of what I mean, cause the first 1/3 is actually pretty well-done and a few chapters after that but the quality just goes down quickly in map design and plot right afterwards.
Title: Re: Are older games better than newer ones?
Post by: Turner on December 30, 2015, 02:40
I think with games that have relatively simpler interfaces in general you will find stuff like this all over the place.  I do believe that you are correct though - they're trying to 1up presentation and "fun factor" and it strips away some good design.  Other times they're trying to add new things and they don't spend as much time balancing it.

It also seems like there's a lot more stingy time constraints so you end up with games that the company pushes out a bit sooner than the designers would like so you end up with a slapdash job.  Look at the second half of FE Awakening to get a better idea of what I mean, cause the first 1/3 is actually pretty well-done and a few chapters after that but the quality just goes down quickly in map design and plot right afterwards.

Yeah definitely, I remember a couple of years ago we were promised one new main-series Pokemon game a year and while I'm dying for Pokemon Delta Emerald or whatever I'm happy to wait for it and I'm glad we haven't seen annual Pokemon games, too much would get regurgitated otherwise and it'd just feel like routine.

I think it's because the video game market has become so much more valuable in recent years. It's not so much the case right now in 2015 but in 2011-2014 video game tech was driving a lot of the progress in the overall technological world because there was a lot of money and funding in the industry for breakthrough tech. I'm glad we had that bubble and that it's not totally over, but I want them to focus more on really fleshing the games out now.

My first nostalgia will always be the SNES and GBC because of Pokemon and Mario but I'm quite nostalgic for the first DS era. They do feel a bit ancient now but there were so many great games for the Nintendo DS once it picked up momentum. It was like the gift that kept giving, definitely one of my favorite video game golden-eras so far.