Topic: Do Older Games Suck?

[RCmodeler]

In another thread, KDR_11k posted:

Quote
I think most "classics" are inherently flawed.  Most old games are outdated by now and have been replaced by much superior games by now, their only drawback being lack of nostalgic feelings.  Of course an old gamer with nostalgia blinding him won't acknowledge when someone who didn't play the game at a young enough age to create nostalgia tells him his favourite classics suck.  Would you rather play Space Invaders or Ikaruga? Metroid or Super Metroid (or Zero Mission, if that makes you happier)?

Agree or disagree?
Mario 64 is inferior to Sunshine?
Mario Party 1 inferior to Mario Party 4?
Banjo-Kazooie is crapola?
Super Metroid is Metroid Prime's whipping boy?

=====

My opinion: Strongly disagree.  That's because I ignore the graphics.  They don't matter.  What matters is "Is it fun to play?"  I still enjoy Mario 64 because it's a damn fun game!  Ditto Super Metroid and Banjo-Kazooie and, yes, even Space Invaders or Pac-Man (I'm a high-score junkie... constantly challenging myself to get higher numbers & improve my skill).  The graphics on these games are primitive, but these are ALL fun games.

More fun than say, Mary-Kate & Ashley Visit the Mall.  Or the Matrix Sucked.

And no, I don't think Super Metroid is a "chore" to complete.  It's a masterpiece.  Story = 10.  Puzzles = 10.  Music = 10+ (I still listen to the soundtrack).  Fun = 10.  Yeah the pixelated sprites are primitive, but after an hour of immersion with this masterpiece, it no longer matters.

Ditto with Mario 64, Zelda 64, Mario RPG, Space Invaders, Pac-Man.  The games are so perfect, so masterful, that they draw you into their worlds despite their age.  You still see the pixels, but you cease to care.  You're having too much fun!

       

[S-U-P-E-R]

So someone sassed Ocarina of Time and you felt compelled to post a thread about it with "trDO' in the title?

Well, it's tough to take a side on old games vs new games, because there are plenty of good and bad on both ends and you can't possibly back it up with examples. We'd be going back and forth and it would escalate up until murder. People get lazy or uninspired for new games on occasion, so even certain big, popular, prestegious series can end up sucking later on (and they do).

As for the core question, "do older games suck?", the answer is pretty obvious. Of course not - people still play old games. Hell, people still BUY old games, like those those $20 NES roms, I mean, 'Classic NES Series' for the GBA.

Posting challenge: successfully argue a side without mentioning a game title

I feel compelled to answer these, though:

Quote
Mario 64 is inferior to Sunshine?
Mario Party 1 inferior to Mario Party 4?
Banjo-Kazooie is crapola?
Super Metroid is Metroid Prime's whipping boy?

1. Not really
2. Who cares
3. Not really
4. LOL LOL  

[Shift Key]

Quote
To me Zelda : Ocarina of Time feels like something you slug through because you have a feeling you have to do it, but there's just no fun on the way

so friggin ban'd

I love classic games, even those that pre-date Nintendo. I *almost* bought Midway Arcade Treasures last week (I don't know why I didn't, probably lack of money at the time) and then someone had the nerve to ask "Why this?"
I could have gone on a major rant about the state of games. I could have bitched about how games had reached a peak in 1986. I could have punched the guy in the face.

But I didn't. Want to know why?
Some people don't understand, no matter how much or how often you tell them. They'd gladly call Halo the "Best Game Ever" despite being unaware that Sega actually made consoles at some point, let alone some classic games (Alex the Kid :cool.

[S-U-P-E-R]

Maybe we should make a thread to debate what year all of gaming peaked.

(Also, if you get Midway Arcade Treasures, get one that isn't the GC version, it's broken)

[RCmodeler]

Quote
Originally posted by: S-U-P-E-R
So someone sassed Ocarina of Time and you felt compelled to post a thread?

No, you completely missed the point.  I was annoyed that he sassed "old games" like Space Invaders, Metroid, Mario 64.  These games ARE old, but they're also masterpieces of fun.  

[Draygaia]

I actually believe that.  Do older games suck?  Actually to me its more like are older games still worth playing?  Yes and No.  Yes, Some games such as Chrono Trigger are still worth playing so damn much.  Its pretty obvious.  Even the people who started with FFVII will like it.  No, games such as Diablo are worth remembering but IMO not worth going back to play.  Unless you happen to find it for really cheap to psychologically help somehow.  The game is just simply clicking on enemies.

[Flames_of_chaos]

Well diablo maybe just a clicky on enemy game but what PC game isnt that inreality? And to answer the topic question, I answer yes cause I still have a NES SNES and N64 hooked up next to my cube and PS2 since well i sometimes need the nostalgia like Yo Noid! on the NES and Super Mario All stars and countless otheres on the SNES.

[RCmodeler]

More points (from digitpress.com) in favor of old games like Ocarina or Mario 64 or Super Metroid:

Quote
- Does old music suck? Is modern music superior in every way to Mozart? To the Beatles? The Police?
- Do old movies suck? Are modern movies superior in every way to Citizen Kane? One Flew Over The Cuckoos Nest? The Godfather?
- The comment that old games suck serves one purpose. To display the ignortance of the person saying it.

Quote
I personally can't stand Ikuraga. I'd take Space Invader and 99% of all shooters over it. If he compared it to something like Battle Garegga it would be completely different story. Although I'm sure from his point of view Battle Garegga is a old game.  I don't know if I would prefer the orignial Metroid but I found it much more enjoyable than either Super Metroid or Zero Mission. I blew through the later 2 games in about a day or 2 where as the original Metroid took me many months to complete it for the first time.

Quote
What makes a game survive for so long that people still play it years later? Gameplay. A classic will always be a classic - A game doesn't need to be the best looking - it needs to be fun, and the classics of old (You know the games and I'm sure everyone here has their favorites) were designed with just that in mind.  Two things I often find lacking in many of todays games are;
1.) The "Pick up and play factor" - Sometimes you don't want to spend a few hours just learning the ins and outs of a game.
2.) High Scores and scores in general - There's just something added to a game when you can play it over and over again just to try and beat your score or someone elses.

Quote
Zelda: OoT is considered "old"??? Sheesh.  I think gamers who post stuff like that don't seem to know that there's more to it than just the "old" game itself, it's the history behind it. They don't give these oldies credit just because "they are outdated" but never put their brain to work to figure out that without these titles their modern games may not exist. Without Space Invaders raking in the bucks years back, Ikaruga wouldn't exist.

From the looks of it the real "beef" this person has is that classic games just don't look as good as today's games. The mention of the Metroid/Zero Mission gives that away. The Wind Waker/OoT comparison made me chuckle as both games are pretty much identical in gameplay.

Quote
Yeah, here's a list of "old games" that I think suck:
Baseball - invented in the late 1800s.
Basketball - invented in 1891
Football (American) - invented in mid 19th-century
Soccer - organized games played as early as 1890
Golf - invented mid-15th century
Chess - played as early as the 6th century (500 a.d.)

So tell Mister "New is Better" to blow it out of his (snip). If a game has staying power, it'll survive forever.

And to repeat my opinion: Mario 64, Zelda 64, Mario RPG, Super Metroid, Space Invaders, Pac-Man.  These games are so perfect, so masterful, that they draw you into their worlds despite their age.  You still see the pixels, but you cease to care.  You're having too much fun!

Quote
It isn't the tech that makes the art, but the artists behind it.

[Flames_of_chaos]

Quote
And to repeat my opinion: Mario 64, Zelda 64, Mario RPG, Super Metroid, Space Invaders, Pac-Man. These games are so perfect, so masterful, that they draw you into their worlds despite their age. You still see the pixels, but you cease to care. You're having too much fun!

All of the top are great games but you cant compare space invaders to Ikaruga since Ikaruga is a fast paced SHMUP that can be played horizontal or verticle and your enemies arent nessesarily infront of you all the time, Space invaders is just a top down SHMUP but it did pave a way to SHMUPS in the 16 bit era, also the only people who say those games suck is people who picked up videogaming in this era and are judgemental what is a good and bad game on graphics alone and ignore gameplay and story all together.

[RCmodeler]

I agree with your comment, but I was not directly comparing them.  I was saying that Space Invaders, by itself, is still a game worth playing.  Ditto Pac-Man, Super Metroid, et cetera.  These games were fun when they were new, and they are still fun today.

[Bill Aurion]

I think it's really quite unfair to compare similar titles from the past and the present...Newer games obviously have more "flair" so to speak because of new lighting effects, graphics, the works...Not to mention the ability to put in better physics engines and the like...Similarly, the older games seem better because the newer games are just gameplay rehashes...There's really nothing that can be done in either case, and all of those games are great in their own separate ways...

[SgtShiversBen]

I have to disagree with you Lord_die.  I didn't grow up playing games in this era, I actually started with Mario Bros. on a 1984 Mac.  I say these games suck because that's the matter of my opinion.  I don't like them as much as I do now.  Ikaruga blows the socks off of Space Invaders because of one thing, it's just damn hard and actually involves some rapid form of movement.  The same with Ocarina/Wind Waker.  I think it's better in gameplay than AoL, LttP and LA (bash me if you want) because it caused the player (me) to be immensed in the gameplay whilst I was killing Stalfos.  It also made me anxious to go into the next room.  My opinions might not be just, but that's what it is, my opinons.

[Bill Aurion]

"The same with Ocarina/Wind Waker. I think it's better in gameplay than AoL, LttP and LA (bash me if you want)"

Ok... >=(

[SgtShiversBen]

I wrote that "bash me" line just for you Bill, I know you get all hot and bothered about Link's Awakening and didn't want to offend you.  So yeah, I'm thinking about you when I post (JUST PLUTONICALLY THOUGH!! don't you get any ideas!!)

[Bill Aurion]

Actually I'm just joking...I've been able to hold in my temper on things involving Zelda...So though I disagree with you(with all my heart ^_^), I won't go crazy like I did in the past...

Oh, and it's "platonically"...

[Deguello]

Quote
Originally posted by: S-U-P-E-R

Quote
Super Metroid is Metroid Prime's whipping boy?

4. LOL LOL

LOL LOL I know, it's so obvious Prime is better.  WANNA FITE?!

But seriously, when talking about new games versus old games, I think old games definitely have the advantage because:

A) People have fond memories of playing these old games, which clouds their judgement sometimes.
B) New games in a series are most definitely put under very close scrutiny by the fans. Which, by the way, is baffling people haven't burned Nintendo in effigy, considering the amount of crap thrown around when they make one little change.
C) Acting "old-school" is hip, yo.  Things ain't the way they used to be, whippersnapper.

But really, sometimes I wish people woulod take off the rose-colored glasses when they wanna get nostalgic.  The "old days" of video games only look so good because we don't remember the crap.  Like the Home Improvement game for the SNES.  Like Urban Champion.  Like Home Alone.  And why should we?  But it isn't fair to say that games nowadays are festering piles when they were more so back then.

And now I'm gonna step on toes.  The Original Metroid is crap.  I'm glad Nintendo made Zero Mission, so that I can pretend that the original never existed.  I'm actually kinda miffed they included it in Zero Mission.  They could have used that space for something better.  Like Nothing.

The original Final Fantasy is one big snoozefest.  You walk around to fight stuff to level up fight more sutff until you fight this one thing and the credits roll.  This goes double for the original Dragon Warrior.

These games usually get lauded over current endeavors in the rose-colored Wayback machine, but in reality, these games blow.  Hard.  People just let their fond memories of playing this stuff after school cloud their judgement of how bad it actually was.  Whcih is ok, but when these games get put up on a pedastal, I have to wonder what they are thinking.

[Syl]

this topic makes me hurt inside. =(

I'll respond when i calm down and won't flame and rant so much.  

[Draygaia]

Quote
Originally posted by: Lord_die_seis
Well diablo maybe just a clicky on enemy game but what PC game isnt that inreality? And to answer the topic question, I answer yes cause I still have a NES SNES and N64 hooked up next to my cube and PS2 since well i sometimes need the nostalgia like Yo Noid! on the NES and Super Mario All stars and countless otheres on the SNES.

Maybe I should have went more into depth.  You see Diablo is well you choose the warrior and all you do is equip him, then click on enemies, and get stronger.  Uh well in todays PC rpgs its much more than that.  Not only do you click on enemies to fight them but while you run at the enemy you can get some missile shots in, cast magic, drink potions, etc  Or when you fight them you can pull up a shield in the middle of battle, make him think you given up, etc  I go back to diablo and its just well click and die, click and die, and the same thing happens throughout the game.

[Shift Key]

Quote
Originally posted by: S-U-P-E-R
(Also, if you get Midway Arcade Treasures, get one that isn't the GC version, it's broken)

Ok. It was the PS2 version I saw. I don't think the GC version was ever released down here, as is the style these days.

[evil intentions]

"Agree or disagree?
Mario 64 is inferior to Sunshine?
Mario Party 1 inferior to Mario Party 4?
Banjo-Kazooie is crapola?
Super Metroid is Metroid Prime's whipping boy?"

1. disagree
2. agree
3.
4. Agree

[Ness_the_Mess]

Quote
Originally posted by: Draygaia

Quote
Originally posted by: Lord_die_seis
Well diablo maybe just a clicky on enemy game but what PC game isnt that inreality? And to answer the topic question, I answer yes cause I still have a NES SNES and N64 hooked up next to my cube and PS2 since well i sometimes need the nostalgia like Yo Noid! on the NES and Super Mario All stars and countless otheres on the SNES.

Maybe I should have went more into depth.  You see Diablo is well you choose the warrior and all you do is equip him, then click on enemies, and get stronger.  Uh well in todays PC rpgs its much more than that.  Not only do you click on enemies to fight them but while you run at the enemy you can get some missile shots in, cast magic, drink potions, etc  Or when you fight them you can pull up a shield in the middle of battle, make him think you given up, etc  I go back to diablo and its just well click and die, click and die, and the same thing happens throughout the game.

Funny story: ... well, wait, not so funny.  Have you ever heard of something called D&D (or to be even more true to all of the classic fans, AD&D)?  Dungeons and Dragons was one of the most influential games of all time.  It created the RPG style of video game.  It was amazing.  A breakthrough.  You know what else was a breakthrough?  Diablo.  It took the heart of D&D and made it into a video game.  In the mid 90's, no less.  In fact, this game created so many spinoffs.  It was one of the main influences into the creation of MMORPGs because, not only was it such a vast RPG, it was massively multiplayer, and online.  And just to kind of finish my point off ... in Diablo, too, can you run at the enemy (the expansion Hellfire, anyone?), get missile shots in, cast magic, drink potions, etc.  You can also pull up a shield in the middle of battle.  I go back to diablo, and bask in the glory.

Off the topic of diablo, you know what other vintage game is awesome?  Earthbound.  Mmm, yummy.  You know what other game surpasses it's succesors?  Super Mario RPG.  Ten thousand times better than Paper Mario, you say?  Why, you're quite right!  What's that?  Link to the Past was better than Ocarina of Time?  Well, I suppose you're right there too!  My, you're a genious!

Back to the topic of diablo:  fine, I'll admit diablo 2 is infinitely easier to play, and mroe fun, and larger than the original.  But the point is that the original still has huge merits.  It broadened gaming ALOT.  And better yet, it made Blizzard lots of money so that they could stay alive another 10 years so taht they could finally come out with a TRUE sequal to Starcraft, being Starcraft 2: the RTS.  Yay.

Sleep.

[RCmodeler]

Quote
Originally posted by: DeguelloLOL LOL I know, it's so obvious Prime is better.  WANNA FITE?!

(You are soooo wrong.  It's not "obvious".  Else we would not be debating.)  Metroid in 3D looks beautiful, but is rather slooooow to play.  I prefer the faster pace of 2D.  I also prefer the 2D moves like hanging from ledges, and somesaulting through the air while demolishing your enemies.  And I prefer the way 2D gives you a third-person, god-like view of the world.   As someone said at digitpress.com:

Quote
3D games are much too easy. 2D games required a lot of practice to perfect the skills, but these days game manufacturers try to make the games accessible to everyone by making them so easy that anyone can make it through............. 2-D games are less of a headache to find your next objective. Everything you need to see will be on the screen. In 3-D games you have to move the camera up, down and around to look for things.  Not fun.  Slow & Boring.   Now, I play new games as much as I play classic games, but the one PS2 game I enjoy the most is not Grand Theft, but Activision Anthology. There is a magic to simplicity that some people will never get, but classic gamers like ourselves understand.

To bring this back to Metroid: 3D Metroid Prime is "too easy" to beat because it's been "dumbed down" to the lowest common denominator so even idiots can beat it.  And Metroid Prime has "slow & boring" pacing.  2D Super Metroid is harder, faster, with better moves, better views, better layout, and more fun.   I sold Prime, but still play Super Metroid every few months.

Super Metroid is best in my opinion.

[Syl]

...you are aware that in super metroid, you can't hang from ledges.  I'm curious what game you were playing.

I'm a gigantic metroid fan, probably moreso than anyone else on this site (and i will challenge that if wanted) and I personally like Prime better than Super Metroid.  I'll explain why when I have the time, my ride is going to be here in about 3 minutes.  

Quote
Off the topic of diablo, you know what other vintage game is awesome? Earthbound. Mmm, yummy. You know what other game surpasses it's succesors? Super Mario RPG. Ten thousand times better than Paper Mario, you say? Why, you're quite right! What's that? Link to the Past was better than Ocarina of Time? Well, I suppose you're right there too! My, you're a genious!

I also disagree with you, on all accounts.    

[Uglydot]

A game that was good, will always be good.  Whether or not a game improves on it does not make the older game suck, the newer game as just progressed.  You have to play a game in the context of it's time, just like when you read a book.  A book may be dated, but that does not mean it sucks.  The language may have been changed to suit the tastes of the newest generation, but a good book is a good book.  A video game is the same way.  If it was good, it will always be good.

[Smashman]

Well, anyway, I believe games to have ALWAYS been... 80-90% mostly crap, but the classic games we love are among the 20 or so percentage. It is frustrating to look through a pile of mostly crappy games, and find only 1 or 2 decent ones. The classics that we love are cherished forever, despite age. The games we play today will, at the very least, be respected in the year 9999. Most games are crap, yet the classics shine through. That's how it has ALWAYS been.