Support NeoGAF

[GamesDontSuck]

Let's go back to 1998 and one of the greatest games of all time in my opinion in released. Metal Gear Solid. The story, atmosphere, gameplay, production values .. you name it. It was an amazing game. It raised the bar of the AAA game in the industry. Fast foward to 2026 and could an 18 year old really enjoy the game as much? knowing the graphics are basically primitive by todays standards and it has tank controls. Sure, the story, characters and music is there but would it be the same experience?

A few years ago I worked along side a young guy (teens) and he was into video games. So chatting one day I asked if he played Half Life 2? (This was a good decade after it came out). He said he did but couldn't see why everyone was saying it was one of the best video games ever. He liked first person shooters but felt more modern (at the time) titles did it better. When HL2 came out the physics were insane (amongst everything else) but it raised the bar. Other games then had more physics etc.

I always felt that a good game is always a good game regardless of how long it's been since release - but i've been playing video games for decades. I can load up a game from the NES and slip right back in. Can the younger folk do the same? or they cant get past the technology, game design and standards of the time?

If it's the latter, then are video games really a product of their time?

 

[Polaris]

Stealth games still live under the shadow of Thief II: The Metal Age.
RPGs (W or J) are nowhere near as amazing as Daggerfall.
Half-Life 2 is still the benchmark for linear cinematic experiences.
The Silent Hill tetralogy is the apex of psychological horror.

The industry peaked a long time ago, with some exceptions.
Most of the great games post-2010 are only extrapolations of the giants who's shoulders they stand on.

EDIT: If controls are the breaking point for newer gamers, git gud. I'll take hardware compatibility and availability as more serious drawbacks of older games than uncommon control schemes.

 

[AJUMP23]

Sure.

There are greats you can go back to and play again, but all games are products of an era or age.

 

[EverydayBeast]

Great games secure their legacy IMO

 

[Sethbacca]

They're definitely products of their time, and some age far better than others.

 

[IFireflyl]

Nostalgia is a hell of a drug.

 

[ReBurn]

I think it's also that we're a product of those times. People who didn't grow up alongside the industry can't relate to the fun we had with those older games. They see them as limited and clunky compared to what was standard when they grew up. Plus nostalgia goes a long way. What was great at the time just may not hold up if the rose colored spectacles come off. Slipping back into an old game may just feel good because of the times you remember having with it. But it may not be that great anymore.

 

[The_hunter]

Fast foward to 2026 and could an 18 year old really enjoy the game as much?

I did play mgs1 for the first time this year. It was one of the best games I've ever played.

Some games are products of their time, but some games are eternally good.

 

[Magic Carpet]

Using a modern controller playing an old 3d platformer feels like playing with one of your arms chopped off. It's possible, but klunky AF.
People used to play games like this? At least they had something to play between hunting down wooly mammoths for dinner.

 

[Parazels]

Perfect Dark was overrated crap back in 2000

and remains the same today!

 

[March Climber]

OP you need a 'sometimes' option.

I don't think it's the case with all great games from the pre-PS2 era that they have aged like milk.

I just think that some of them now feel worse because we collectively know that something better exists. And lower framerates back then didn't help at all with gameplay feel.

Even with something like MGS, it can be a bit tough to go back to 1 when 2 controls so much smoother.

Me personally I love Perfect Dark but even I can admit that it feels very odd to play as a shooter, and even when it first released you had games like Quake 3 and UT coming out.

 

[ssringo]

The Psycho Mantis encounter/fight is 100% a product of it's time and a prime example of something you cannot fully "get" if you didn't experience it when it came out.

 

[March Climber]

The Psycho Mantis encounter/fight is 100% a product of it's time and a prime example of something you cannot fully "get" if you didn't experience it when it came out.

Speaking of this, not sure how many people here played the PS3 version but the 'controller change' part was a bit dumber because it made you open the XMB quick system settings to assign the controller to 'slot 2'.

 

[Radical_3d]

There is a strong component about great games of that time and is that you where a young lad in his prime, unknowingly being happy, and not a grumpy forty-something Spaniard complaining about colour haired females in GAF. And balding. And overweighted. Still kinda handsome, tho.

 

[Angry_Megalodon]

It depends.

Games that relay heavily on tech advancements and gimmicks are products of their times. Others are universal.

The original FFVII is better than most games releasing today.

The original Metroid is still great in its genre.

I could mention a thousand more, but that's the idea.

 

[HRK69]

So chatting one day I asked if he played Half Life 2? (This was a good decade after it came out). He said he did but couldn't see why everyone was saying it was one of the best video games ever. He liked first person shooters but felt more modern (at the time) titles did it better. When HL2 came out the physics were insane (amongst everything else) but it raised the bar. Other games then had more physics etc.

I never played Half-Life 2 back in the day but they gave it away for free on Steam during one of the anniversaries a while ago.

So I finally played it and honestly I really had to force myself through parts of it while constantly reminding myself: 'this game is over 20 years old'. I didn't think it was bad but for my personal tastes it was genuinely hard to get through at times

I think that's the curse of being influential. Half-Life 2 did so many things first that modern players don't experience them as innovations anymore. I just ended up seeing mechanics and ideas I'd already experienced in newer games with better pacing and gunplay

Never finished it and probably never will.

 

[Angry_Megalodon]

There is a strong component about great games of that time and is that you where a young lad in his prime, unknowingly being happy, and not a grumpy forty-something Spaniard complaining about colour haired females in GAF. And balding. And overweighted. Still kinda handsome, tho.

My hair is even lushier than the dude's that bangs your mom on Wednesdays.

Plenty of silver in it, though.

 

[HerjansEagleFeeder]

If this applies to film, literature and music, it sure as hell also applies to video games.

 

[Pejo]

As somebody that lived through it and loves a lot of the games, I can't play or even look at PS1 3D polygonal games for the most part these days. That and the N64 probably have the ugliest games of all time in retrospect.

Not that every PS1/N64 game is ugly, but by and large they are.

That doesn't detract from the good points like gameplay/story/etc, but yea, my imagination was doing a lot of lifting as a kid.

 

[Begleiter]

Of course. As long as they worked intelligently within their constraints you can still see the brilliance of the original developers. But you aren't going to awe a zoomer with Hyrule Field and z-targeting.

 

[Audiophile]

The more simplistic something is, the more I find it holds up over time. A prime eg. for me would be the Housemarque arcade stuff like Super Stardust HD, Dead Nation, Resogun, Nex Machina etc.. or thatgamecompany's trilogy of games on PS3.

I'm much more hesitant to go back to the more full-fledged games I loved like Assassin's Creed II, as I worry it just won't hold up and may sully the memory.