Support NeoGAF

[Sir_Crocodile]

I don't mind people saying "it's nostalgia", but BACK THAT UP. Just throwing "nostalgia" at a thread without stating what exactly is wrong with the game to cause it to no longer stand up is lazy, dismissive garbage.

If you don't like the game come out and say what's wrong with it. Nintendo, Capcom, Konami, Sega, Lucasfilm and others were making great games whose gameplay still stands up now 25-30 years ago - these were the games others would be judged against, so chances are if a game was generally considered good back then, there were reasons for it. You don't like it today? Say why

 

[nkarafo]

Funny you mention FEAR. I replayed it recently and it was better than i remember it being. Maybe the first time i played it i had better games alongside to play or maybe modern FPS games are so uninteresting that replaying FEAR made it look like a masterpiece or something.

HalfLife 2 was also, graphically, better than i remember it to be, i thought that it would look like shit today. But it looked great. Turns out they updated the graphics a bit since then, lol.

 

[Skilletor]

You also don't need to pull off those moves in Galaxy or especially 3D World where the game is more obstacle based than exploration based. I don't think not having as many flashy somersaults because of how excited the developers were about the analogue stick makes those games control worse and I actually prefer the movement in 3DW.

Same here.

 

[Calamari41]

You also don't need to pull off those moves in Galaxy or especially 3D World where the game is more obstacle based than exploration based. I don't think not having as many flashy somersaults because of how excited the developers were about the analogue stick makes those games control worse and I actually prefer the movement in 3DW.

3D World has very tight and responsive controls, which allows for much more complex platforming in the vein of the classic Mario games. Playing through Galaxy 2 recently, I have found Mario in that game to maybe have too much momentum. Like, if I'm standing still on a platform, I have to get too much of a running start to make it to the next one. To use Mario 64 and that gif as another example, in 3D World you don't need to dive forward to get yourself going like he does in the gif.

This is also why the run button is so key in 3D World. Pressing it changes the amount of momentum required to move around mid-air.

 

[AdventureMike]

One last thing I want to mention is that, like most gaming related stuff, people need to learn it's okay to say "This game isn't for me." whether it is new or old.

Controls you consider crappy causing you to not want to play a game? That game might not be for you.

Don't care for the story? That game might not be for you.

Don't care for the direction the devs are taking the game? It just might not be for you.

The list goes on, but we have threads all the time here on NeoGAF about "I tried (insert critically acclaimed older title) and I hate it. What's the matter with me GAF?!". There is nothing wrong with not liking a game tons of other people may like. I think there might be less calls of nostalgia on people if they stopped and think that "Dang, maybe I just don't care for that game."

 

[Skilletor]

One last thing I want to mention is that, like most gaming related stuff, people need to learn it's okay to say "This game isn't for me." whether it is new or old.

Controls you consider crappy causing you to not want to play a game? That game might not be for you.

Don't care for the story? That game might not be for you.

Don't care for the direction the devs are taking the game? It just might not be for you.

The list goes on, but we have threads all the time here on NeoGAF about "I tried (insert critically acclaimed older title) and I hate it. What's the matter with me GAF?!". There is nothing wrong with not liking a game tons of other people may like. I think there might be less calls of nostalgia on people if they stopped and think that "Dang, maybe I just don't care for that game."

Yeah, definitely. It's impossible to please everybody, and both gamers and developers need to realize this. Trying to appeal to too many people will always result in disappointing somebody.

 

[Gunslinger]

Nostalgia has nothing to do with old games still being good for me. I still replay those RE games, sf2, ff6,7,8,9,monkey island, lot of the capcom sidecrollers, samurai showdown and IMO they hold up just as well they did 16-20 years ago. Sure graphically they are not up to par but if you play games for graphics then I feel bad for you. Also I can't remember the last time I replayed a post ps2 era game multiple times aside from sfiv,mkix and rdr.simply IMO they now a days prefer style over substance.

 

[eXistor]

Games can definitely become outdated, but the time in which they were released can speak volumes. Tomb Raider has indeed become outdated, but I'd still rate it as a better game than the reboot (much better in fact).

They're both very much products of their time. TR 1 was released in a time where players still had to actively play a game and search for secrets and solutions. TR 2013 is very much a game where most of the work is done by the developers and the player is merely taken on a ride for the most part. So when I say old games are better, I really do think they're better games in terms of design and mindset. It doesn't necessarily means they've got better controls or anything.

 

[Coconut]

With older games you can excuse a lot of "poor" game design and control choices because that's just how it was done or people were worried about breaking the rules of game design at the time or the tech just wasn't there to facilitate the vision of the creators. That does not excuse these games from being held to the modern eye and scrutinized. Nostalgia is a terrible thing and a lot of people confuse that feeling of comfort with something being good or universally enjoyable. Most of the things that are truly good stand the test of time.

 

[tokkun]

Goldeneye is in the same tier as Toshinden. Okay man. Hang on, I have to retrieve my eyeballs as they've rolled into the upper atmosphere.

Just two examples of games that came to mind that were popular at the time of release, but are now nearly impossible to love outside of nostalgia.

If you want to defend Goldeneye on its merits, go ahead and try, because it is the quintessential nostalgia goggles game. Terrible controls, awful framerate, blurry graphics, bad animation, screen-looking in multiplayer...even an average modern FPS outclasses it completely.

 

[Molemitts]

I find the "It's a product of its time" argument to be weak. Since you're admitting that games have since came out that have massively improved on the mechanics. I can still enjoy older games, but I feel as though the early 3D era was one of the worst, most 16-bit games have aged better. As for older control schemes, more complex doesn't equal better.

I can agree that saying "It's just nostalgia" is a weak argument, unless it's clear the person isn't giving modern games a chance. I don't think there's anything wrong with remembering an older game from your childhood fondly. When people act as if older games are objectionably better is when it is a problem.

 

[LX_Theo]

Many people invoke a concept that blinds them to the faults of older games and older generations of games. That's the nostalgia effect.

 

[vocab]

Yes some "classics" have become average over time. Both control wise and graphically, like Tomb Raider for instance.
Some are timeless, like Tetris or SMB3.

Tomb raider controlled like shit when it first came out. It didn't magically get worse, it was always that bad.

 

[oni-link]

Games can definitely become outdated, but the time in which they were released can speak volumes. Tomb Raider has indeed become outdated, but I'd still rate it as a better game than the reboot (much better in fact).

They're both very much products of their time. TR 1 was released in a time where players still had to actively play a game and search for secrets and solutions. TR 2013 is very much a game where most of the work is done by the developers and the player is merely taken on a ride for the most part. So when I say old games are better, I really do think they're better games in terms of design and mindset. It doesn't necessarily means they've got better controls or anything.

Outdated ideas do not mean a game isn't as good as it was before, or that isn't not as good as modern games

A lot of indie games use "outdated" ideas and styles that often ape older games, but to say they're all worse than modern cutting edge AAA games because of that would be absurd

In the same way black and white films are outdated, films with no cgi effects are outdated, but these do not diminish them, though if people dislike black and white films or flimsy special effects then its understandable they'd take less enjoyment out of those works

The Souls games are practically revered because of their outdated systems, how many other modern games send you back to start of the level if you die? That's very much a gaming convention that has all but left the current AAA sphere

 

[silvermember]

Nostalgia is often seen as something inherently bad. I don't really understand why.

Tastes change. Quality is objective. What seemed like the best game ten years ago might not seem that way now.

Because people usually idealize their past experiences, unless something really horrible happen people tend to not remember it very much. Aka most memories and idealizations tend to be extremely positive.

 

[Black Pewter]

Films age too, in terms of visuals (black and white) pacing, directing style, and special effects, but no one considers older films to be worse than newer ones because of that

People do however like to critique or look back on older films in light of today's techniques though. Early CGI gets ragged on as does the over acting present in a lot of older movies. And I know a lot of people who still refuse to watch a black and white movie all the way through, even if they appreciate how good it is in other aspects.

 

[GnawtyDog]

I am very open to all types of games. I do often revisit games I never got the chance to shell money for when I was young. Majority are a miss but some are keepers.

 

[mclem]

It's tricky to write about this without sounding accusative of the people who do bring up the argument, but: once you've got an appreciation for game mechanics, it becomes easier to focus on those and not be distracted by the poor-by-modern-standards production values. I think a decent story is also something that, if the player is receptive to it, can overcome the method by which the story is delivered.

The thing is, of course, the nostalgia argument is too dismissive. As soon as you get players who've not played the games before enjoying them, it falls down, it becomes apparent that it's a cheapshot.

As it happens, in the last few years, I've played through a few very old notable RPGs that I'd never played seriously before. The Elder Scrolls: Arena I found interesting from a historical standpoint, and there were moments of genius, but I felt it fell down in a few key areas. On the other hand, though, I absolutely adored the even-older Might & Magic 1 a year-or-so later; I would absolutely regard the older, more primitive game as more enjoyable than the (comparatively) newer one - and that can't be driven by nostalgia, because I have no lasting nostalgia for either game.


So if the nostalgia argument is inherently flimsy in many cases, why do people resort to it? Is it a lack of comprehension that someone is able to enjoy a game despite the production values? I find that possibility distressing, because it seems to be ignoring a huge part of the appeal of gaming - yet, it's fair to say, it's that attitude that seems to be being cultivated in the modern AAA parts of the game industry. But then, that's too easy an accusation. I think it's more complex than that, but I can't really put my finger on why.

 

[brandonh83]

A good game is a good game regardless of how much time passes.Graphics may age,animations may age but the fundamentals of a deep and engaging gameplay system and level design never age.

The "blinded by nostalgia" argument is just silly and incredibly annoying.Unfortunately it's often used as the only argument in a conversation by someone who doesn't even bother to try and explain why something has suddenly stopped being "good".

This sums it all up in a nice, tidy package.

 

[ghibli99]

Nostalgia is a personal thing. I think it's a little sad when people can only look at things like games or movies through an objective lens and nothing else, because that takes the soul out of it all.

To a certain extent, good games will always be good... I can play something like River Raid on the Atari 2600 right now and have a great time with it, but I don't know if I would enjoy playing the Ultima update on the Apple and have as good a time as I did back in the day. Each game is different, but that doesn't -- or shouldn't -- change my opinion of it. Sure, I can say, "Wow, that's tough to play today," but that doesn't change how I felt about it nearly 30 years ago.

 

[catbrush]

Game mechanics haven't truly evolved since the late 90s/early 00s, but controls have been streamlined, and graphics and sound have improved vastly.

Compare the original Thief to Dishonored. The games have similar gameplay, but Thief is much less approachable today with its archaic keybinding scheme and dated graphics.

In some cases, going back to older games allows one to enjoy higher peaks, as long as one can forgive the dated aspects. Nostalgia is not required, only a little patience and understanding.

 

[Finale Fireworker]

The tastes of the market change a lot as well. Back when 3D games first became possible, 3D platformers were all the rage. Everybody wanted a character based 3D platformer. Mario 64, Donkey Kong 64, Spyro, Crash, Conker, Banjo, etc. Even later with games like Jak and Ratchet and Clank. That WAS the popular market. People loved these kinds of games and they were blockbusters because gaming now allowed for 3D space and view of characters. This was the technology impressing it's players.

3D platformers are absolutely not the rage anymore. If anything there has been a 2D revival. You can definitely still go back to these 3D platformers and enjoy them because they're really well made. But they have also outlasted a gimmick. The thrill of jumping forward into a game world is just not the same as it was twenty years ago. It would be very difficult to create the feeling of controlling a camera for the first time or jumping forward for anybody who was not present during this period.

This is just an example of how mindsets change and people's tastes change as a result. The experience somebody had playing Mario 64 when it was brand new is very difficult to communicate now. This is where nostalgia really comes from, I think. Seeing a game with vivid colors, or playing a game with animated voice acting, or the first time a game had let you play online with your friends.

These experiences expire.

 

[oni-link]

Game mechanics haven't truly evolved since the late 90s/early 00s, but controls have been streamlined, and graphics and sound have improved vastly.

Compare the original Thief to Dishonored. The games have similar gameplay, but Thief is much less approachable today with its archaic keybinding scheme and dated graphics.

In some cases, going back to older games allows one to enjoy higher peaks, as long as one can forgive the dated aspects. Nostalgia is not required, only a little patience and understanding.

As mentioned in the OP I recently played Deus Ex for the first time (well, in 2012) and sure it didn't play like a modern shooter, but it blew me away, even though a lot of it's systems and its execution are outdated, the game is incredible, it was very easy to look past all the things that have been done better since

I think if you're always playing games from the 90s and 00s as well as games from the last few years, it's not really something you notice too much when you jump around from era to era

If you only play modern AAA games and then jump back to a NES or SNES game it might be something that hits you harder than it would otherwise

 

[AdventureMike]

So if the nostalgia argument is inherently flimsy in many cases, why do people resort to it?

Path of least resistance. Many gamers on the internet have gotten used to being able to just throw it around without recourse or having to explain their dissent. Mechanically speaking about a game involves more effort and scrutiny than many are willing to put into their video games and to an extent, that's okay. We expect a bit of a higher decorum here on NeoGAF with regards to explaining our opinions, arguments and the like, but some people just want to say "I really like this game, it was a magical experience from beginning to end. It was much better than the new ones!" just as easily as someone wants to say "Uggh that game was shitty then, you just are being nostalgic."

I guess a question that I'd ask is, "If you are going to not put effort into your argument or critique, why bother participating in a forum on the subject?"

 

[Paskil]

I'll let you know after I get back around to playing "WWF SmackDown! 2: Know Your Role." Spent so many hours playing that game and it's the GOAT wrestling game. It's also the last wrestling game I played.

In terms of the nostalgia thing, it really just depends on the game.

 

[Novocaine]

Primal Rage was never good.

It was when I was 10. Doing handstands and farting gas clouds was the best.

 

[balladofwindfishes]

There are quite a lot of games I've played later in life that I've enjoyed. Games like Doctor Mario, Punch Out and Super Mario Bros 3 are classics and thanks to their mechanics and timeless graphics are still amazingly fun games for people who didn't grow up with them to play.

Heck, I played Doctor Mario Online on the Wii long before playing the NES original, and after playing the NES original, I actually find it to be better than the Wii remake. There's just something about puzzle games that makes me appreciate chip tunes and simple, colorful graphics more than 3D and higher quality MIDIs.

 

[SerTapTap]

True, but we can see fixes for this, Perfect Dark on XBLA was re-released with a better framerate and duel analogue control, but it's still the same game, and the same goes for the N64 Zelda games on 3DS

Yeah, but when you're re-releasing with changes that's sort of confirming the original hasn't aged well. Controls are part of the game. They may be fixable, but it's still a flaw, and very, very few games have the good fortune to be remastered from those eras. Some no longer even belong to a live company.

 

[terrisus]

Not really. Maybe you want to point out how I've discredited some dissenting opinions offhand? You want to argue that things never get dated and old mechanics can never be improved on? Go for it.

That first statement is not a hard and fast law, but reasonable people will acknowledge that some older mechanics have been objectively improved on.

"Maybe you want to point out how I've discredited some dissenting opinions offhand? The rest of this post is discrediting dissenting opinions offhand"

I mean, you're literally doing the exact thing you say you don't want other people to do, including the "but reasonable people will acknowledge" No True Scotsman argument. If someone doesn't agree with you, then they're not "reasonable people"

And no, I don't want to argue anything, because:

As someone who spends the majority of my time playing older games (SNES especially), and is constantly discovering and falling in love with "new" older games, any time someone brings out the "It's just nostalgia" card, I pretty much just roll my eyes at this point.

Different people have different tastes and preferences in games. Obviously some people are incapable of understanding that though. Not my problem. I enjoy what I enjoy.

 

[hydruxo]

I have alot of nostalgia for the DKC series & Banjo-Kazooie, I still think that gameplay wise they hold up just as well as anything nowadays. Sure alot of older games have gameplay that has aged terribly and doesn't work well, but dismissing an entire decade plus of games because they aren't as snappy as newer games is dumb.

 

[oni-link]

Yeah, but when you're re-releasing with changes that's sort of confirming the original hasn't aged well. Controls are part of the game. They may be fixable, but it's still a flaw, and very, very few games have the good fortune to be remastered from those eras. Some no longer even belong to a live company.

Its no different from re-releasing it with a better resolution, it's adding some modern convenience to an older game, people play Gamecube games on Dolphin in 1080p with widescreen on and using a DS4 with remapped buttons, that doesn't mean it's no longer the same game

Unless the camera was a core part of the gameplay experience and they change that (kind of like MGS:TTS letting you break parts of the game using the first person view from MGS2) then it's not an issue

 

[Cave Johnson]

"The nostalgia argument" is the worst strawman ever to be used in the side of the gaming debate. It is so inherently biased and one-sided with almost zero context to back it up. Everytime I see it, the only usage for that is to shut down any serious discussion because they put gaming into some bullshit arbitrary standard (i.e. modern vs classic controls).

I for one have never experienced many of the so-called classics but am still able to appreciate them for what they are when I play them. I played Deus Ex, Thief, Duke Nukem 3D for the first time in the past few years and I have no disconnect between the modern "shooter/RPG/stealth".

If anything, I can see that the classic games were more design focused in comparison. There were flaws, yes but almost no game today has come to address those elements. Instead, they take other foreign concepts to patch-in workable/marketable/pop design mechanics in the IP and roll with it. This is my main contention of the mentality for modern AAA games - they're not pushing design forward in the ways the classics were. Why do you think there is an insurgence of kickstarter projects?

When the developers stop playing safe, when they try more riskier elements and refining the design choices in the classics for today's games - then and only then will I find the "nostalgia" argument any sort of validity. For instance, if it comes to the discussion of Nintendo's games like the Mario bros, I will more happily be on the side of the Galaxy series than the Bros because that is a perfect example of how the modern can carry on the legacy classics.

 

[InfiniteCombo]

I'm with you on the "magic" term. That's a subjective nostalgic response. As in my earlier example, it'd be the same as saying "Everquest was fucking magical. This world was better than WoW's!". Yeah, that was my experience because it was new but it doesn't make sense in the context of speaking about WHY a game had stuff you enjoy and why you enjoyed it.

I wanted to mention though that things get kinda hairy when you start naming things as objectively better though. I'm kinda with you on comparing something like Alttp and Albw, because one is supposed to be an (albeit modern) sequel to the previous game. However, I could also see the argument that someone DOES prefer the controls in Link to the Past over the 3DS version. It could be anything from an SNES controller in their hand being more comfortable than a 3DS to the way the controls worked within the context of the game. It's not a 1:1 comparison, so I have trouble with saying one is OBJECTIVELY better over the other. Using Tomb Raider as another example (because it's being brought up a lot), Tomb Raider on the PS1 and Tomb Raider (2013/2014) are two completely differently made titles. One is closer to Uncharted than a classic Tomb Raider game, even though they both share a franchise. The modern one makes use of a cinematic style and QTE's, so it doesn't seem to gel to have one being said its better than the other. It's all up to preference.

Very, very good point. When I used "controls better" as an example, I was not thinking controller choices, among other factors. I tunnel-visioned into how the character moves and the abilities they have, and how easy it may be to get the character from one place to the next, and how to deal with enemies, all in a responsive, "smooth" manner.

Maybe I need to come up with a slightly different example to illustrate my point. Thanks for setting me straight though.

 

[MagnaderAlpha]

Many people invoke a concept that blinds them to the faults of older games and older generations of games. That's the nostalgia effect.

I believe many also invoke a concept that blinds them to the faults of newer games of the current generation of games. That's the Modernistic effect(I just made that tern up). Some believe everything released here and now is infallible when compared to that which came before and close their eyes to the shady business practices and bullshit of modern gaming because... MODERN GAMING TEH BEST! If there WEREN'T people like this, the bullshit publishers who get away with this sort of shit would NOT be wielding the amount of power that they currently are. It basically works both ways(people blinded by nostalgia, thinking the old ways can do no wrong, and people blinding by modern shit, thinking everything new can do no wrong).

 

[evilromero]

Citizen Kane is just nostalgia talking, am I right?

 

[terrisus]

"The nostalgia argument" is the worst strawman ever to be used in the side of the gaming debate. It is so inherently biased and one-sided with almost zero context to back it up. Everytime I see it, the only usage for that is to shut down any serious discussion because they put gaming into some bullshit arbitrary standard (i.e. modern vs classic controls).

Exactly. When it's brought up, it's basically a conversation-ender, since no matter what one says, "It's just nostalgia." There's no point to continuing on with the discussion at that point.

 

[Storm Kyleis]

It really depends on the game. Some have held up well, others are just not as good as we remember.

When you're a kid everything looks better.

 

[Blarg]

Depends on the game, lots of them hold up very well.

 

[Karu]

True, but we can see fixes for this, Perfect Dark on XBLA was re-released with a better framerate and duel analogue control, but it's still the same game, and the same goes for the N64 Zelda games on 3DS

It's not the same game since the controls are inherently part of the original. It has the same content, sure. This isn't about semantics either. Someone says Game X FPS from 1997 on the N64 is great, but from a todays perspective Game X's controls may be wonky as hell - there is a line where nostalgia (or fading memory rather than pure ignorance) sure can play a role in one's perception.

The recent discussion on Tomb Raider 2 is a really interesting companion piece for this thread. The OP himself played it back in the day, loved it, but hates it today. Though there are arguments that the controls of TR haven't in fact worsened, but are just so entirely different from today's standards that no one is able to see the benefits/the idea behind said scheme. I can't comment on any of this myself though, because it's years ago I played an TR game.

Comparing the OP's view

here

with that of Y2Kev's for example,

(here)

 

[Nightbird]

it's easy to spot people the Pokémon-Fandom who'se opinions are based on Nostalgia and nothing else. It's mostly those who run around and say that the First, or sometimes the First and the Second Generation were the best, and everything else was crap.

It's in Moments like this people are exposed that they are Nostalgia-driven, because Gen 1+2 have been remade in Gen 3+4, and it's has been done so well that it's almost impossible to go back because of the heavily improved Mechanics.

People who claim that Gen 1+2 are the best, have either never played another Game in the Franchise afterwards, or never replayed those again.

 

[JumpJeff84]

I think games age way more poorly than other forms of art such as books, movies, music, television shows etc.

That's not to say that there aren't 20+ year old games I still love, but a lot of games that are considered 'classic' don't hold up due to interface, control or performance issues. The good part is that we can remaster old games. I like that Ocarina of Time is on 3DS, but I could never play the N64 version again, mostly because of the atrocious frame rate.

On the other hand, the original Robotron is still amazing. Holds up to this day, and it's from the early 80s.

 

[SMattera]

Using nostalgia as an argument is largely the result of a huge backlash toward people that bash newer games without providing any arguments other than "it's not what I had as a kid".

Try observing the Pokemon fanbase and you'll get what I mean. For example, on GAF, it's very difficult for a Pokemon thread that isn't an |OT| to not have some drive-by post about everything after the Generation 1 (aka. the 151 Pokemon that make up Red/Blue/Yellow) being terrible, regardless of whether the topic was even about designs or Generations. This is something that has been going on for a very long time in the Pokemon community so there's a lot of bitterness attached to the concept of nostalgia. I think that bitterness causes people to forget that love for older things isn't inherently a bad thing.

Yes, I think the nostalgia argument is sort of a counter response to this line of thinking. Not on Neogaf, but other gaming forums, you'll often run into posters or topics arguing something like: "90s games were the best! Everything today is garbage! " And so saying "you're blinded by nostalgia" is just a quick way to write these people off.

I do think it applies to other mediums. I have a really difficult time watching movies made before 1960, for example. The overacting really bothers me. It's also quite difficult for the average person to read something like The Canterbury Tales or Shakespeare.

In general, some games have aged well, others have not. From the OP's post, I think pretty much all the games he mentioned aged well with the exception of Final Fantasy 7. The core game may be the same as ever, but the graphics are just so horrendous I have a difficult time imagining that you could convince the average kid to play it today.

 

[Mman235]

I will say there are times it can be valid, like when the only reasons a person can give for why they think an old game is better is abstract stuff like "magic" or "charm", but it's also one of the worst abused arguments with extremely arrogant implications too (you're pretty much saying that someone's argument isn't worth engaging with because they're delusional).

I also think the aging of games vs other media gets overstated a lot; having to actually interact with games does make certain unfamiliar aspects take more work to get around, but earlier works in other mediums can also feel very different compared to modern stuff and require a bit of investment to familiarise with them (and some people just can't or don't want to). In that regard I don't think there's this giant gulf in aging vs other mediums that many try to push.

The recent discussion on Tomb Raider 2 is a really interesting companion piece for this thread. The OP himself played it back in the day, loved it, but hates it today. Though there are arguments that the controls of TR haven't in fact worsened, but are just so entirely different from today's standards that no one is able to see the benefits/the idea behind said scheme. I can't comment on any of this myself though, because it's years ago I played an TR game.

Comparing the OP's view

here

with that of Y2Kev's for example,

(here)

The OP actually changed their opinion a bit later on in the thread.

 

[StraySheep]

I'm glad you bring up FF7 as an example of a game that holds up OP, because like you I played it for the first time 3 years ago and loved it. It is my second favorite Final Fantasy behind XIII-2 (Don't hate me gaf, I have only completed VII, X, XIII, and XIII-2 so far), and I think it is unfairly used as the example of games from that era not holding up on the internet. Whether from the message boards or from journalists you hear stuff all the time like "It was amazing when it came out, but now it looks awful. Look at their blocks for hands!"

...also I thought the stationary backgrounds were pretty cool. It is almost like in a way I appreciated that it was a little dated while playing it without having any personal attachment to the game itself. Like appreciating it historically. I wonder where that fits in to this discussion?

 

[Anura]

This type of argument just bugs me to no end! I love Major's Mask and regard it as one if the best games of all time. I can rant on and on about its atmosphere, or it's dark themes, or how clever the moon's design is, and so much more. It's an amazing, incredible, thought provoking classic! Yet, I beat it literally a week before the 3DS one finally got announced.

I don't need fond memories to know that game is absolutely stellar.

 

[SMattera]

Whether from the message boards or from journalists you hear stuff all the time like "It was amazing when it came out, but now it looks awful. Look at their blocks for hands!"

Square LITERALLY gave you the option to put a giant floating hand pointing directly to your character so that you didn't lose him on screen. The equivalent of the glowing hockey pucks in the 1990s before the advent of HDTV.

 

[Deleted member 752119]

I think it just varies by person. I stopped going back and trying to replay old games as I just wasn't enjoying them much anymore. I loved gameplay focused stuff back in the 8bit and 16 bit eras, but I've since moved on to wanting games to have good gameplay and good settings/stories/characters/graphics/atmosphere etc. With limited time, I focus on the cream of the crop in genres I like.

I also finally gave up on Nintendo after realizing I just didn't have much fun with the vast majority of their games anymore--largely due to most lacking the above--and was just buying them out of nostalgia/loyalty from growing up on NES and SNES.

 

[BumblebeeCody]

Outdated ideas do not mean a game isn't as good as it was before, or that isn't not as good as modern games

A lot of indie games use "outdated" ideas and styles that often ape older games, but to say they're all worse than modern cutting edge AAA games because of that would be absurd

In the same way black and white films are outdated, films with no cgi effects are outdated, but these do not diminish them, though if people dislike black and white films or flimsy special effects then its understandable they'd take less enjoyment out of those works

The Souls games are practically revered because of their outdated systems, how many other modern games send you back to start of the level if you die? That's very much a gaming convention that has all but left the current AAA sphere

Pretty much. But as I said earlier, game shave additional layer to them that other forms of media don't. And that's interaction, a game from the past can still be considered great is the mechanics still hold up today.

Also, I really don't see the point in bringing up films.

it's easy to spot people the Pokémon-Fandom who'se opinions are based on Nostalgia and nothing else. It's mostly those who run around and say that the First, or sometimes the First and the Second Generation were the best, and everything else was crap.

It's in Moments like this people are exposed that they are Nostalgia-driven, because Gen 1+2 have been remade in Gen 3+4, and it's has been done so well that it's almost impossible to go back because of the heavily improved Mechanics.

People who claim that Gen 1+2 are the best, have either never played another Game in the Franchise afterwards, or never replayed those again.

And that's my point about Nostalgia. "Gen 1 was the best generation ever". S'like...wow. Piss off.
I used to think Rascal on the PS1 was a good because I didn't know any better(at age 8). But it's clear to see it sucks arse. But if you play games that are classics and well revered now, you'll probably end up seeing their faults a lot easier.

 

[oni-link]

It's not the same game since the controls are inherently part of the original. It has the same content, sure. This isn't about semantics either. Someone says Game X FPS from 1997 on the N64 is great, but from a todays perspective Game X's controls may be wonky as hell - there is a line where nostalgia (or fading memory rather than pure ignorance) sure can play a role in one's perception. [/URL])

I'm not talking about perception, I'm talking about the nostalgia argument

If someone mentions a good game from a long time ago, someone else will say "ah that's just nostalgia" when I may have played that game in 2015 the first time I played it

In terms of controls, yes they are a key part of a game, but we can improve games and have been for years, whether that's upping the resolution and framerate, allowing controls to be rebinded, or changing the camera controls

A few examples:
- Perfect Dark on XBLA having duel analogue
- Virtual Console games being played on a classic controller/Gamecube controller
- Kingdom Hearts HD having the right stick move the camera like a more modern game
- PS2 remasters on PS3 being in widescreen

All of these changes are slight improvements that don't change the core game, if I say, I've beaten God or War 2, it doesn't invalidate that because I did so on the PS3, nor does the fact I've beaten Kingdom Hearts mean I have an opinion that isn't as valid because I did so with the improved camera

If one person plays Goldeneye on an N64, and then another plays it on an emulator with reconfigured controls so it works with dual analogue and uses a DS4 and plays it with a widescreen hack and running at 60fps, and they both play it for the first time in 2015, they have both played the same game, and both are able to comment on what it does well and what it does poorly

 

[eXistor]

Outdated ideas do not mean a game isn't as good as it was before, or that isn't not as good as modern games

A lot of indie games use "outdated" ideas and styles that often ape older games, but to say they're all worse than modern cutting edge AAA games because of that would be absurd

In the same way black and white films are outdated, films with no cgi effects are outdated, but these do not diminish them, though if people dislike black and white films or flimsy special effects then its understandable they'd take less enjoyment out of those works

The Souls games are practically revered because of their outdated systems, how many other modern games send you back to start of the level if you die? That's very much a gaming convention that has all but left the current AAA sphere

I agree 100% with you, I might not have worded it correctly, but what you're saying is actually exactly what I mean.