I'll admit it - I like newer games

[zircon]

This thread wasn't about you bahamut, it was about the OP mephisto

He was just shooting down the theory that you would always prefer games from when you started gaming, since he started gaming early but prefers more recent ones.

Frankly... I'm in the same boat in a lot of ways. Overall, most newer games are way better than old ones. Sure, Streets of Rage or TMNT were both great beat-em-ups. But compare those to The Force Unleashed or Castle Crashers. In my opinion, the latter take the fundamental "fun" of the brawler/beat-em-up genre and expand on it in ways that the early games simply couldn't.

[Stargem]

I have recently been playing Snatcher for the first time after the Policenauts patch was released, in order to get some grounding in the gameworld* lore - and Snatcher is giving me a very good impression thus far. A mix of Phoenix Wright adventuring mixed with Cyberpunk, with a dose of shooting gallery, Snatcher is just plain nifty to me. Once I play through Snatcher, I will give SD Snatcher a shot, I hear the RPG battlesystem in that game is good. Hopefully, an Snatcher DS game would be someday be made, the game's style really would suit that system, especially if the investigation system incorporated Phoenix Wright object manipulation and modern RPG mechanics.

In any case, I find that the best graphics are stylized. Things like Yoshi's Island, Snatcher, Link to the Past, and Earthbound age much better than games that go for a realistic appearance. Which really alters how well I adjust to a game, determining if I get a good first impression on if a game is worth playing. Furthermore, I really enjoy exploration in the games I play, it helps me get sucked into the game.

*Snatcher is related to Kojima's Metal Gear series. I didn't like Metal Gear Solid, but I ought to give the remake a shot, and find out how good the other games in the series would be.

[rig1015]

I'll play new games and old with the best of 'em.

The only really big thing that has effected my gaming is how some programmers insist on linear game play / story telling. This sucks. If I wanted a story I'd read a book. Super Metroid has to be my favorite example of a way of sequence breaking, if even that, because it is all about how good YOU control the character. If you can handle the control pad better than your friend you could get to places and do things that your friend(s) can't. I think that is fair. Make more games like that!

So often I see games that are "go here, then go here, then go here," anyone can follow instructions I don't play games to follow orders (might be good in Japan but not here) I play to entertain myself. The minute I master a game (memorize it) it becomes a quest to break the source code (make it do things it was never designed to do) while in normal operation. Older games you could do this, newer ones... not so much; go ahead try and sequence break Wind Waker without codes, mods, and glitches see how far you get.

Older games hail from an era where programmers made the games for fun, now-a-days 90% of games are massproduced to make $$$ and have no real game play within them. But "game play" is subjective so... each to their own.

[1337 1]

I suppose nostalgia is pretty big, but it isn't all powerful.

But let's not forget the quote by Zero Punctuation:

Nostalgia is a mouthful of balls. Games, or should I say the potential for games, has only gotten better as technology advances in direct proportion to the worsening of your memory.

Although that is an extremely cynical way to look at it, it does raise a valid point; our distance from these games often makes them appear better than they might necessarily be. I still hold FF7 to be my favourite game ever, but I know that it possibly wouldn't hold up to a lot of the more recent games. That doesn't mean newer games are any better or worse, and likewise to older ones. What it COULD mean however is that in time, we might, for example, be more inclined to remember the good games of an era, forgetting the utter garbage of an era.

I know we have our classics of the past generations, but who's to say that there aren't potential classics in this generation. Games like Portal tell me that 10-20 years down the track we'll be talking about some games like we do mario and zelda from the early days. And this isn't necessarily a bad thing.

[Gollgagh]

modern "achievements" are terrible, dumb, and arbitrary and this thing is an excellent commentary

[Brandon Strader]

The Force Unleashed >_> Man that game was annoying, but I actually played through it to the end, which is more than I can tolerate for most games. So yeah, it was kinda cool. Castle Crashers got boring super fast. Partially because I beat it in like an hour. x_x

[zircon]

modern "achievements" are terrible, dumb, and arbitrary and this thing is an excellent commentary

Why are they dumb? They're just adding to a game's code recognition for what we were all doing anyway.

[Cerrax]

Liking a game honestly just comes down to how it affects you.

I remember playing Soul Blazer because people on here suggested it and highly praised it as part of the whole ActRaiser/Gaia/Terranigma/etc. Enix universe. As soon as I started it I thought "Wow these graphics suck. Even for a SNES. And the story telling is sub-par at best." And for the most part, I was right. Everything from character animation and dialogue to dungeon layouts and enemies were stiff, unimaginative, and generally boring. Even the music seemed odd, out of place, and sparsely arranged most of the time.

But the GAMEPLAY. My god I couldn't put down the damn game for the life of me. I ended up loading it to my PSP and taking it everywhere with me. Any time I had a few minutes to burn I was turning it on and knocking out a few more monster hives. It was so simple and yet so addicting. And because of my obsession with playing the game, other pieces of nostalgia fell neatly into place. I began to like the music because of the fond memories I had from playing. I came to like the plain, boring graphics because they were very clear and everything was blatantly recognizable. Overall, because of one very impressive aspect of the game I was able to overlook it's flaws and truly enjoy it.

This happens to me a lot with games new and old. While most people merely enjoyed Mirror's Edge or really didn't care for it, I found the first-person perspective and relative linearity incredibly fun and challenging. The acting and cutscenes were terrible. The graphics were detailed but bland. Enemies were hijacked from Henchmen-R-Us and the whole concept was somewhat laughable. But I still highly recommend it to everyone I meet.

The point is, I find that older games have to work harder for our appreciation not because of graphics or other limitations of hardware, but because most old games have gameplay styles and genre establishments that are either boringly familiar or have been removed from modern gaming altogether. Its rare that a top-down action RPG will feature elements that haven't been beaten to death by Kingdom Hearts or Zelda, but sometimes they do. Those are the Soul Blazers of the gaming world.

[Gollgagh]

Why are they dumb? They're just adding to a game's code recognition for what we were all doing anyway.

because you were doing it anyway

you don't need to program a damned achievement for every damned level you level up

likewise, I don't need a program to tell me that I just cleared the highest difficulty without getting hit. I can tell people that myself and I don't give a damn whether they believe me or not, and if they don't then it's their loss.

they add absolutely nothing to my gaming experience except annoyance at having this dumb, distracting popup in my game every so often

I can see how they might add incentive to explore every corner of the game but having the achievements there removes the old excitement of not knowing how many secrets are in the game or what they look like. When "easter eggs" popped up in older games I was like "holy crap that's an awesome thing they put there I wasn't expecting that" but now it's like "okay there has to be a bonus weapon in this building somewhere cause it's in the achievement list". Fuck that noise.

[zircon]

Well, I guess if you don't care about proof of your achievements... then yeah, proof of your achievements is pointless. Most people like to show off, though.

[lazygecko]

[Reaif]

you don't need to program a damned achievement for every damned level you level up

likewise, I don't need a program to tell me that I just cleared the highest difficulty without getting hit. I can tell people that myself and I don't give a damn whether they believe me or not, and if they don't then it's their loss.

Wow, so violently opposed. Isn't there an option to turn off the in game pop up? I don't own a 360 so I don't really know, but there ought to be.

As far as the list spoiling things, just don't look at it. Problem solved.

The whole achievement thing is definitely here to stay though. In fact, getting those achievements is the only reason some people pick up a game again after finishing it. They bring replayability to a game that otherwise would have been dropped by many. I figure that is a good thing, though the pop up shouldn't be a required option. That can spoil a bit of the immersion if it comes up at a bad time.

One great thing about achievements as well is that they give old school gamers new reasons to go back and play old games. Don't all the XBL ports of old games have achievements added to them?

Edit: And just for kicks, here is a really cool video with an awesome chip tune in it.

[Malaki-LEGEND.sys]

Achievements add replay value to a 60 dollar game that you probably wouldn't bother touching again, or a game that you forgot you loved and went back to just for the sake of completion whoring. And not all achievements are easy to get either.

End of story.

Also: Nostalgia is the only reason everyone thinks FFVII is the most amazing thing ever.

'Cause you know, it's not n' stuff.

There I said it.

[Gollgagh]

I don't mind extra content, in fact, I love it, but I'm already motivated to find stuff in a game without the prospect of adding an icon to a collection of icons.

what really gets me the most though is the achievements that have nothing to do with actually playing the game at all like "Come back after a week long break". who the fuck cares that you DIDN'T play the game for a week for fuck's sake

or "spend ten minutes on the title screen" I mean, really? Really really?

[Malaki-LEGEND.sys]

I don't think you quite understand the psychology behind it...

Achievements are reinforcers that keep you playing much like the variable win ratios on slot machines.

Who doesn't wanna show off that they won 25 ranked online matches in a row in a game like Street Fighter 4(not an actual achievement)? That's actually something worth talking about, as that isn't easy at all. Congradulations! You just beat the hardest chapter in Gears of War 2 on insane difficulty! Damned right I want cred for that.

[prophetik music]

i enjoy achievements. it felt good getting my Hoarding the Horde achievement on GoW2, and the Pacifist achievement in Mirror's Edge. stuff like that, i enjoy. i'm not a fan of stupid achievements, though. if well thought-out, they can be a big part of any game.

i admit that i spend a lot more time in a game than i normally would because of them, though.

[Gollgagh]

maybe I'll never be able to convey my view, but having the computer congratulate me with a little popup feels so very... artificial that it aggravates me instead of elating me

[Malaki-LEGEND.sys]

Well as long as you admit you don't speak for everyone then we're all good here.

[Gollgagh]

sure, sure

[thegamefreak0134]

I figure my two cents are necessary here.

I like games. I'm really quite indifferent to the system, the time, or the place. I play games and judge them by the standards that were... well, standard at the time. This is why FF6 and Chrono Trigger are so consistently on my all time favorites list. They're not necessarily great games, FF6 especially had some grinding issues, but they were above and beyond anything that had been done at the time.

These are the true gems of Gaming, the games that stand the test of time. Get this: I don't really like the original Super Mario Bros. Not as a game. It has catchy music, but when you really think about it, it was a ridiculously simple platformer and not a lot else. It certainly wasn't new and innovative, and only its relative popularity (and the fact that it was boxed with the system, that helped) kept it alive. SMB3 was a great game, with lots of new elements and innovative platformer elements, so from the same genre, I think it's one of those that *does* stand the test of time well. And on the same series, I *love* what they've done with the NSMB games, with good fun level design and a significant lack of story and features to get in the way of good solid gameplay.

I could go on for a while here. Let's see... FFVII did some interesting things for an RPG, really it did. I can get over the graphics... well, sucking badly, because I know that it was a launch title, and was developed before the capabilities of the system were truly known. In terms of impressing me with the system's capabilities though, my hat's off to the (rather underappreciated) FF9, for *stunning* graphics and sound for that system. It's easily the most beautiful PSX game I have ever played. Another favorite here was the original (2D) Rayman. That game was *wacked*. It's the first time I've suspected the use of drugs during the creation of the GDD for a game.

It's interesting to go back and play the old games, and watch the progression in quality as the game release times go up in year. Once a console has lost its launch bang, and developers are confident with the system's limitations, you start to see some really interesting and unique attempts at pushing the envelope.

I think the Wii has failed the hardcore games market hard. Moms tend to love the draw of motion, but the most intuitive motion controls I've seen in the vast majority of games is no better than a mouse: point and click. Occasionally, they'll throw in a Wiimote shake where a button would have done, and it's not really thought about beyond that. Some games (Zelda) have innovative uses for the wiimote in mini-sections, but it's failed to be challenging in the least. They might fix this with the Motion Plus, but that seems like quite the ripoff. Wait, I have to pay $20 for an accessory to make the damn thing do what I bought it for in the first place?

The worst bit about this is that the three best games I've played on it so far (Galaxy, Twilight Princess, and MP3) worked almost like standard button pushers, and didn't even make use of the supposed main feature of the console very well. (Wait, Zelda actually *was* a pusher in the GC version!) So it doesn't seem like a good direction to go. I'll maintain this stance here: Motion control will only truly work when there's some kind of force feedback. Otherwise, you've given us a really fancy looking joystick/button thing that we can wave through the air.

There's a lot of talk about Xbox and the achievements system. I've never played an Xbox, but I *have* played some of the games released on steam, which include the same system. I won't say that the achievements add to or detract from the experience of the game itself, so I don't tend to judge the game by them. However, I do appreciate them and consider the challenge of unlocking them fun, since I have a thing for 100%-ing games. Games on the system aren't going to be judged by them, since all games include them. They're simply going to be judged by the usual factor: are you enjoying playing this game, and did you get $60 out of it?

My big complaint with new-gen games, especially games on the Wii console, is that so many of them are designed with casual gamers in mind. There used to be a day when just *beating* a game was fairly godly, and it was a social event to watch someone good plow through the last few areas of a good NES game. Now, it seems that games are rated on their length in hours it takes to "go through the story" which doesn't sound like much of a challenge. I won't deny that games now are still fun, but they're not nearly as hard as they used to be, and that's somewhat of a turn off. What I wouldn't mind at *all* here is some sort of "challenge" mode, that allowed the developers to go all out with the level design and really do a "kill the player" tactic like so many other games used to do, so that the achievement of beating the hardest level on intense was actually worth something. I've seen something like this is a few games, but it's becoming so uncommon that it's disheartening.

Anyway, these are just comments. Like I said, I judge games by the standards of the time, not the standards of the present. If all the system can do is 8-bit graphics and 4-channel chiptunes, then you quickly learn to judge the games that really pushed that medium as far as it could go.

While you're flame-warring over here, do try to remember something: different people get different things out of games. Happy Wii owners tend to like casual and social games that are light on the difficulty, and heavy on the silly, good natured, and kid-friendly fun. Happy PS3 owners are greatly pleased with technical achievements that can deliver high resolution imagery and surround sound, for total immersion. Happy Xbox 360 owners love hardcore games, multiplayer, and the social draw of online play. (At least, if you go by the stereotypes that these systems advertise as.) Not everyone will agree with these concepts, and not everyone should. After all, the day we all flock to the same system and like the same features is the day we humans as a species lose our individuality to "The One" and God help us if that day ever comes. If X and Y aspects of a game truly make you happy, then Hooray! You've won! You've found something you can really enjoy, and that's the whole point.

...if no one minds, I'm going to make this a blog post.

[Schwaltzvald]

...Achievements add replay value to a 60 dollar game...

What ever happen to

endings?

(SPOILERS FOR SH2 FOR THOSE THAT HAVE NOT PLAYED IT AND WANT TO: ONLY WARNing!!)

What ever happened to

..?

What ever happened to

?

What ever happened to

game play modes? {Golg I think you'll love this)

What about having truly climatic, poignant, rewarding, or at the very least satisfying endings for games with no extra possible endings that make you want to relive/replay it again?

WHAT ARE WE PLAYING FOR..?!

virtual trophies...

:L

[prophetik music]

so it's better to be emotionally satisfied, with no way to convey that to someone else? i get the same excellent ending, but i can point to something and say, hey, i got this! and they can say, wow, i wish i had that!

i'll never convince you to my point of view, and you'll never convince me that shitty graphics and (what i consider) average and annoying gameplay is better than the games i can do now. at least i can play multiplayer with my brother-in-law, even though he lives 200 miles away.

[Schwaltzvald]

so it's better to be emotionally satisfied, with no way to convey that to someone else? i get the same excellent ending, but i can point to something and say, hey, i got this! and they can say, wow, i wish i had that!

i'll never convince you to my point of view, and you'll never convince me that shitty graphics and (what i consider) average and annoying gameplay is better than the games i can do now. at least i can play multiplayer with my brother-in-law, even though he lives 200 miles away.

Woah woah woah

MY POINT...

is that a lot of good things were lost to the passage of time.

All of the currently existing improvements, from graphical to musical compositions are a boon and great thing. Just that while we have them, we lost what made such things as achievements or legendary stories truly worth creating and sharing with friends and family.

As of now most of them, personally imo, just "feel" shallow. There's no real recognition where ANY ONE can do it. Yes any one CAN however just having it sold rather than created by players just do not hold the same value.

Not to mention some are pretty inane or ridiculous.

No one cares if I pass the first section of Deadspace on any skill level. (especially on easy mode)Yet it's a trophy..? Really..?

Also please look at my post before this one if only for entertainment value

:3

Also I wouldn't mind going a few rounds with ya meph on a multiplayer game

Isn't it preferable to at least be known to have played an awesome game and beaten it hardcore with everything along with possibly funny or wild moments, over a tag with digitized trophies..?

The game along with the experiences of all should be the focus not some commercialized achievements in this regard.

[Gollgagh]

schwaltzwald understands me

there's just something intensely satisfying about saying one day "hey, I'm gonna go beat DOOM using only the fist" and doing it just 'cause you can, not because it's in a pre-packaged list of achivements

[ZealPath]

What ever happened to

game play modes?

That was pretty awesome. That is all.