|
Post by YourAverageJoe on Aug 20, 2006 9:09:43 GMT -5
I grew up with a Playstation, that was my first console, and I like the few games I bought for it, every single one. Yes, even today, I'd like to play them again, but the technical imperfections of the PSX (resulting in DESTROYING every game inside), and the internet quota from every local ISP makes that quite impossible.
Although I grew up with the Playstation, I really like playing older video games, and since I found Hardcore Gaming 101 I've been able to play those games I missed. Also, as a fact, there are MORE old games than new ones! Therefore there are more old games to like than new ones, so I tend to generally like older games more, just for the sheer amount of good games to choose from.
|
|
|
Post by shido on Aug 20, 2006 15:46:49 GMT -5
I like older and new games alike. The thing is, "older" is much more longer period of time than "new". New games are from when? let's say, from the last 6 years? so you have like 20 years of old games. of course in 20 years there will be more good games than in 6 years so it's stupid to compare.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 20, 2006 15:48:30 GMT -5
One of the reasons why I prefer playing older games (especially nowdays) are emulators. Thanks to their fast forward/frameskip and save states features, I have more control in older games than with most of the newer ones. Need to say any good examples where these features will greatly add to the gameplay? ;D Okay, here's one: Gaining experience points in RPGs gets less tedious.
|
|
Yimpinkilp
New Member
Gosh I have been registered here a long time!
Posts: 34
|
Post by Yimpinkilp on Aug 20, 2006 17:35:48 GMT -5
I must agree most especially with this last point. I remember when Win32 emulators like Rocknes and Nesten started "replacing" the likes of Nesticle and ah Nesticle. I couldn't understand it (I had Windows 95 and didn't yet realize all future windowses hated DOS) because most of them lacked easy access, if any, to speed manipulation. In 1998 I played Chrono Trigger with opache fog and silly springy sound effects out of protest to Snes9X or whatever it was called then's disagreeable interface.
|
|
|
Post by megatronbison on Aug 20, 2006 18:20:56 GMT -5
One of the reasons why I prefer playing older games (especially nowdays) are emulators. Thanks to their fast forward/frameskip and save states features, I have more control in older games than with most of the newer ones. Need to say any good examples where these features will greatly add to the gameplay? ;D Okay, here's one: Gaining experience points in RPGs gets less tedious. you know, I have to agree there. I literally just finished playing through Chrono Trigger via emulation - speeding up the damn battles when levelling up was one thing that helped me have the will to do it. Personally I had played through the game the first time around on the PS1 version, with its horrid cinemas and long loading times, being able to have instant fights that could be over just as quick has made me have a whole lot more love for the game this time around.
|
|
|
Post by MRSKELETON on Aug 20, 2006 18:37:54 GMT -5
I've never actually played chrono trigger all the way through. I get about upto the Masamune and then quit
|
|
|
Post by megatronbison on Aug 20, 2006 19:48:27 GMT -5
Man, I am surprised you haven't been clubbed to death by a rancid bunch of fanboys for admitting you never finished it! It's a good game, but in my opinion probably one of Squaresofts most overrated games ever. I preferred Cross- multiple stupid characters or otherwise! Its music was fantastic and it still looks beautiful.
|
|
|
Post by ReyVGM on Aug 20, 2006 23:43:44 GMT -5
Chrono Trigger has tedious level building? I guess none of you actually played a Dragon Warrior game.
|
|
|
Post by Neo Rasa on Aug 21, 2006 0:40:57 GMT -5
I don't remember ever having to level up my characters in Chrono Trigger at any point. The mandatory combats will take care of it.
|
|
|
Post by shido on Aug 21, 2006 6:39:24 GMT -5
I never did leveling in Chrono Trigger, and I can't see why anyone need to
|
|
|
Post by savagepencil on Aug 21, 2006 12:44:30 GMT -5
I've never been able to stand emulators...I've never felt that they were "right" with the sounds, colors, and timings.
Anyway, here's my opinion as to why 2D and older titles are more preferred:
By and large, the moment you give a player access to a realistic-looking 3D world, they are going to expect and want to interact with it in a more sophisticated manner. Right now, 3D titles (with a few exceptions) haven't made use of 3D to enhance the player's interactivity with the world.
Now, if you read Scott McCloud's "Understanding Comics", he talks about iconic realism. People expect (and read more into) a more realistic depiction. However, keeping it abstracted and simple (very common in 2D games), you can get across the archetypical messages without being bogged down by a shoddy depiction of reality and the expectations that go with it in 3D.
In addition, the control schemes have spiralled out of control for console games. We've gone from a D-Pad/joystick and a couple of buttons to two joysticks, a D-Pad, and 15 buttons on the controller. This is intimidating compared to a relatively friendly-looking NES pad, and casual players assume they will have to learn (and remember) what every button on the controller has to do. Add in a user-controlled camera and you've instantly got the know-how to learn to play the game outweighing the desire to play the game.
Lastly, modern games often diminish the fun of experimentation in the game world. Modern games are often very cinematic in nature, encouraging players to move along as if they were just walking through and interacting in a "movie" instead of giving players what is mostly a sandbox to experiment with intentionality and the action verbs offered to them.
|
|
|
Post by megatronbison on Aug 21, 2006 13:27:35 GMT -5
I never did leveling in Chrono Trigger, and I can't see why anyone need to Well, its not that you necessarily need to at all, I just wanted my characters to have all their tech's pre Crono leaving the party, so up on the Mountain of Woe I had them repeatedly fight the re-spawning Rubble A preference thing, but like you said, certainly not necessary given how the game is relatively easy
|
|
|
Post by jameseightbitstar on Aug 21, 2006 13:50:43 GMT -5
Personally, I never thought of "Old vs. New" as being the same thing as "2D vs. 3D." Have we forgotten about Battlezone, Vortex, Star Fox, the Star Wars arcade games, and other old games that are still undeniably 3D?
Personally when I think of "old" I tend to think primarily of the SNES, and anything that was contemporary with it or came before it.
|
|
|
Post by YourAverageJoe on Aug 21, 2006 15:31:10 GMT -5
I agree that old does not mean 2D, as the GBA is still going strong with a two thousand game library of pure 2D, along with the DS' big percentage of 2D games and SNK's efforts (among others') to keep 2D gaming alive.
|
|
|
Post by savagepencil on Aug 21, 2006 16:03:42 GMT -5
Personally, I never thought of "Old vs. New" as being the same thing as "2D vs. 3D." Have we forgotten about Battlezone, Vortex, Star Fox, the Star Wars arcade games, and other old games that are still undeniably 3D? Personally when I think of "old" I tend to think primarily of the SNES, and anything that was contemporary with it or came before it. For me, the SNES is the very top end of "old". I think, personally, I draw the line at cameras vs. not, and that there are "new" games with "old" sensibilities.
|
|