>>1079342 (228459) I'm happy this thread was made as I feel the exact same way. There are games in my youth while I loved and still love, I also realise that they weren't nearly as good as I remembered.

>>1079682 To be fair...how many of those youtube comments are just bots? Or Indians? But I repeat myself

>>1079683 Does it need to be a bot when we're on a planet filled with 8 billion people. It only takes 1 to be impressed by something not too impressive. Indian tho I'll give you, purely statistically speaking safe bet.

>>1079681 (OP) >And it'll be something like fucking Disney's Tarzan on the PS1... in fact... Yeah, 4th pic related. Talking about Tarzan on PS1. I constantly defend A Bug's Life on PS1. Most people I see mention it seem to say it's shit, but I don't get it. I fucking love the game. A lot of people seem to like Toy Story 2, which is essentially its sequel, and I like that game as well, but I think A Bug's Life is even better because it has a core puzzle element that I think is really fun. When seeing how badly the "popular opinion" seems to go against mine, I'm tempted to think that it's just nostalgia. But no, it's the children who are wrong. I also say the same about Jersey Devil on PS1. Is it the best game ever? No, but it's a pretty fun platformer with a fun halloween aesthetic. I think what turns people off is that the glide has barely any horizontal reach. It's really just a slide help to regular jumping, and I think people probably go in trying to play it like Spyro, and it doesn't work like that. It predates Spyro, and I played it first. It was one of the first 3D platformers I ever played (being from 1997, one of the first ever), so I got used to the controls, and I like it. Maybe it's nostalgia, but I'll defend it. Speaking of your Bounty Hunter example, I've found myself defending the Revenge of the Sith PS2 game, and people all seem to disagree with me on that. Again, best game ever? No. Pretty fun, though? Yes. Mostly I like it for the multiplayer mode, which is the closest we have to a good Star Wars fighting game. I know there's one for PS1, but I don't have nostalgia for that one, and it has a bunch of OCs I don't care about.

>the nigger is praising ninja gaiden 3 >and it's highly unlikely he's talking about he NES game or SNES remake

>>1079681 (OP) >I thought about this topic since I was playing the recent Star Wars Bounty Hunter PC port. Now I enjoy Bounter Hunter so I thought sure I'll give it a go again, but unsurprisingly, being a 2002 Star Wars Attack of the Clones Tie in game, it's a bit rough around the edges. You sure it's not because you're playing a console games, designed with a controller in mind, with a keyboard and mouse? IOW, you're playing the game incorrectly.

>>1079687 Do you know that you can play PC games with a controller? I do, which is what I'v been doing for a decade. With this Vader 4 Pro I bought because my Xbox controllers have worn down to the point I stripped the screws from opening them so many times to use super glue to fix the broken bumpers Numerous times. >>1079685 Revenge of the Sith actually is quite good, I was shocked to learn it wasn't made by the same devs who made The Return of the King game, they saw what that game did and copied it's design so seamlessly, I just assumed it was the same developers for years until I actually checked. A Bug's Life is a pretty cool game too, it took me years to actually beat it tho, I forget what level it was that stumped me for so long tho.

>>1079687 >IOW, you're playing the game incorrectly. Also, I also feel like this CANNOT be emphasized enough. A lot of the ridicule for "Old games play like shit" has absolutely fucking nothing to do with the actual game's design. So what ends up becoming the "caused" of said complaints tends to be: >Playing the game with the wrong controls Just like people endlessly point out how shooters cannot "directly" translate 1-to-1 from K+M to a dual-stick controller, the same cannot be said with a lot of older games. Hell, during the sixth gen, developers were still experimenting with controllers layouts. The Dreamcast just had the one thumbstick, the GC lacked two buttons of it's more relevant counterparts, and the original Xbox had six face buttons. Even then, some games had console-exclusive features, like the GC had the Game Boy cable that was used for in-game equipment like in the first Splinter Cell, or the PS2/PS3 having it's pressure sensitive face buttons. So ignoring a lot of these features and trying to jerry-rig them to a controller interface that it was never designed for completely breaks a lot of games. The most "common" example is how K+M tends to "break" console shooters, but you never see this arugment ever being had with how playing a fighting game on a keyboard also "breaks" fighting games. Or how racing games suck with anything except a controller. >Game was designed with different mindeset, therefore "bad" The most common instance of this tends to be how a lot of action and adventure games were still trying to grapple with full analog or tank controls being a "better" design, and this tended to extend to how a lot of games were designed. Even further when you're playing things like shooters using the face buttons instead of the shoulder buttons for firing weapons. Now in a rather ironic fashion, people tend to ridicule these design choices because of how "different" they are from modern design philosphies. However, just like the example above with the different controller designs and functions, this also extends to game design choices. If you ever actually take a step back and play the game the way the developer designed the game to be played, you'd realize that the title is actually far better than you're giving it credit for. Do these little anecdotes make the games "better" or just "more tolerable"? That's entirely up to you, but keep in mind that you're the one returning to games you "used to" play instead of playing a more recent title with all the "better philsophies" when it comes to game design.

>>1079688 I've been using Xbox controllers for a decade I mean, not using the Vader 4 pro that long obviously I got it recently. >>1079689 I will say many people who complain about older games, it actually is a skill issue a lot of the time, but my point is while there are fantastic older games, that still hold up, there are also a ton that were never too great in the first place, but some people think they were, due to a lack of Perspective.

>>1079690 >there are also a ton that were never too great in the first place, but some people think they were, due to a lack of Perspective. I'd argue that it's more due to older games taking risks. Even into the seventh gen, you still had some absolutely bonkers titles like NeverDead, that was shit by all accounts but still remembered for doing something unique. Meanwhile the only "recent" game I've heard of trying something actually "new" was Slitterhead. Contrast that to how, even when you had "copy-cat" games like Dead To Rights being Chinese Max Payne, it was still largely doing it's own thing. Or the big rivaly between MGS, Splinter Cell, and Syphon Filter.

>>1079685 Also I didn't intend to sound like I think all old Licensed games are bad, I don't even know too much about Tarzan PS1, so for all I know maybe it actually is the "Best Classic Game" and I'm ignorant of its greatness. One can be suprised just how many Licensed games were actually more solid then you'd expect, but a Licensed game made in a short time frame, to Coincide with a film release? Despite how good of a job some devs did given the limited time and budget at their Disposal being an admirable quality worthy of recognition. Sometime the final result while far from a bad game, it's not gonna be making waves in this history of Games as a medium. Nothing wrong with a game just being solid, but Masterpeices are another thing entirely. Devil May Cry 1 is a Masterpiece that changed the entire way the Industry viewed how an aciton game could be made. X-Men Origins Wolverine, while doing pretty much everything you would want from a Wolverine game at that time, and it actually surpasses the film it's based on, it's still below the quality of the Greek God of War games, because it's could only be so much with such a limited scope for it's Production.

>>1079689 This makes me think of Mega Man Legends. Now people sometimes complain about that game for having "tank controls," and the N64 version actually changes it a bit. But they're missing the point entirely. It doesn't have "tank controls" like Resident Evil, or even like Tomb Raider or Croc. Mega Man Legends has shooter controls, because it's a shooter. And it works perfectly well as a shooter. But some people are too braindead to play a shooter in any way other than dual joystick, even though there are tons of games that worked like this back in the day, to the point that, famously, Alien Resurrection was criticized for inventing dual-stick controls for shooters. And yes, it can't be emphasized enough that playing games with the wrong controller can totally fuck things up. A classic example is all the autists who fell for the "PC Master Race" meme so hard that they try to play everything with a keyboard, then wonder why everyone else loves platformers/racing games/fighting games. It's because everyone else is playing them with the proper controller. Can you physically play Mega Man with a keyboard? Yes. Will it suck balls? Also yes. Just play it with a damn controller and you'll get to enjoy a great game. With all that said, I can handle using the "wrong" controller if it is at least pretty close. Like I can play a PS1 game with any later PS controller. I can play a Super Nintendo game with a PS controller. I can play an NES game with almost any later controller as long as it has a good d-pad (so that disqualifies Dreamcast, Gamecube, and all Xboxes. I had tons of emulated NES games for Dreamcast, but the lack of good d-pad made many of them way less fun). Where problems arise, though, is playing games designed for systems with six face buttons with modern controllers, which only have four. The Genesis 3-button controller is kind of included with this, too, since some games do assume that button layout, and expect you to press button combos that are a bit more comfortable with that layout. But 6-button controllers, like Genesis, Saturn, and N64? Sure, you can jerry-rig plenty to work with modern four button controllers, but many others just suck. A lot of fighting games designed for those controllers suck on other controllers. People map the N64 C-buttons to the right joystick, but lots of games want you to tap those buttons like buttons. I was trying to play Castlevania 64, and it was playable like this, but it sure wasn't ideal. Even with Zelda, which I'm sure gets played like this plenty, feels pretty damn weird to flick the joystick in different directions for different items, or different notes on the ocarina. And that's a game that works pretty well in this fashion. I've said it before and I'll say it again, but I wish they would just make a modern controller that's just like every other damn modern controller, but just add two extra face buttons. I don't have to use them if I don't want to, but if I want them, they're there. Then I don't have to switch controllers whenever I want to play Sega or N64. The closest I found is a modern Saturn controller which added a right joystick and two extra shoulder buttons, but two of the six face buttons are hard coded to always be the same input as L and R, which makes the whole thing completely worthless. I've heard this is because Microsoft doesn't allow more inputs than what's on an Xbox controller, but then just sell it with some third party software. I have software that lets me use a PS4 controller with all its gyro and stuff, and it works fine. Just let me add two extra face buttons so I can play every game with the same controller. I just want six face buttons, a good d-pad, two clickable joysticks, two shoulder buttons, and two triggers. And actually, I like the gyro thing, since more and more games do use that, but beggars can't be choosers, so I'll settle just for six face buttons plus all the standard stuff for now. >>1079690 >I will say many people who complain about older games, it actually is a skill issue a lot of the time, but my point is while there are fantastic older games, that still hold up, there are also a ton that were never too great in the first place, but some people think they were, due to a lack of Perspective. A lot of older games, especially pre-PS1 era, just had a whole different style. I go to play a lot of 8 and 16-bit games, and they need to be played a lot more deliberately. Kids these days are used to just grabbing a controller and jumping around all willy-nilly, but of course if you go into Mega Man or Castlevania or Ninja Gaiden and try to pull that shit, it's not gonna work. But if you learn to play the games the way they're intended to be played, much more deliberately, you'll have a lot of fun. But even by the PS1 era, people were getting sick of this. Or as I prefer to say, people were too casual for this. So Castlevania became an RPG, explicitly so that it would become easier and you could grind your way through it. Mega Man was way easier than it was in the '80s. Ninja Gaiden stopped existing, and when it came back was completely different. SNES games are a lot easier than NES games, but you still need to be pretty deliberate to beat Donkey Kong Country, for example. And those are later SNES games. Crash 1 is a PS1 game that I feel still had this older philosophy, but Crash 2 abandons it entirely, and is a lot easier. Is Crash 2 great? Sure. But now that I actually sat down and learned to beat older games, I think I've come to appreciate Crash 1 more. I liked Crash 2 when I sucked at games, and it was one of the first games I could ever 100%. Now I can 100% all the Donkey Kong Country games, and I like Crash 1 for being a good 3D follow-up to them.

>>1079693 >"Playing games Deliberately" If that kind of design interests you, you might want to check out Body Harvest. I always loved this game's Aesthetic as a kid, but never bothered to play past the first Area in Greece 1916, not because the game was too hard for me, but because your weapons are taken away when you jump to a new area and point in time, so losing a really OP weapon you get only in the Greece stage kind of killed my motivation to keep playing. I didn't give it a serious shot until recently, and I found maybe it would have got too hard if I kept going, ha. Body Harvest can have some real difficulty spikes, Intentionally so I think, so the game has interesting pacing, as sometimes you are fighting for your life, and others you get to go on a Rampage, it's the harder parts of Body Harvest you really need to formulate a Strategy, the game will give you the tools to succeed, but might take some effort on your part for you to think on how to correctly use them. Once you formulate the right Strategy then you can win consistently, it's not an unfair game in it's challenge. Although the 2nd to last boss does get a bit wild in it's damage output, i'll admit. One of the most fascinating aspects of Body Harvest is that these devs would go on to make Fucking GTAIII, and you can tell that's where things would lead, but GTAIII changed the landscape of gaming, where Body Harvest was kind of glossed over and forgotten, despite playing an important role itself. In some aspects Body Harvest still has things in it that are better than the rockstar formula. As it cares more about being a fun game, then it cares about being realistic. An underrated game if there ever was one.

>>1079681 (OP) It's always like that with your first few games, you always have a massive uncorrectable bias towards them >>1079686 Your first character action game is always gonna stick out a lot in your mind because it's inherently a cool genre and even if the first game you play is trash by the standards of the genre it's still gonna have that "cool" factor, and some things you might find annoying a first time player might actually find enjoyable because he has no preconceived notion of what the genre is / should be. >>1079688 >With this Vader 4 Pro I don't know how this controller pops up everywhere when it's not really that remarkable for the price. >>1079693 > then wonder why everyone else loves platformers/racing games/fighting game You are vastly more precise, consistent and faster reacting playing 2D platformers on a good keyboard, 3d platformers usually are ass unless they rely on a fully 8 directional design with rigid camera angles. With fighting games it's not actually that bad on a keyboard once you catch the muscle memory for quarter / half circle inputs and variations of those once you do you're faster on keyboard. For racing games it really depends on whether analog throttle / directions actually play an important role or not, if they don't a keyboard is as good or slightly better, and if the game relies a lot on full left to right / right to left inputs a keyboard will be better. The one thing a controller has over M/KB is ease of use and comfort, but by inherent design it can never be as good at peak mastery as a KB besides on games where analog controls play a major factor unless you go peak tism and get a hall effect keyboard with analog keys

>>1079695 >I don't know how this controller pops up everywhere when it's not really that remarkable for the price. I simply wanted an Xbox style controller with better build quality, since I got tired of the Xbox controller having a Consistent design flaw, with the Bumpers wearing out/ breaking after enough use. The faceted D-pad was also a necessity in my decision, as I really grew to really enjoy the one the Xbox series control has. Lesser known fact about Devil May Cry 1 is that when the game makes the controls inverted, the D-Pad is un-inverted. The faceted D-Pad makes this control like a dream, as going diagonal can be done just as consistent as Vertical and Horizontal, trying to hit a Diagonal direction with the 360 D-pad was a nightmare in a pinch. Made trying to hit those diagonal d-pad shortcuts in Fallout 3/New Vegas worthless in a fight, back before I played on PC as my main Platform. All the other extra features of the Vader 4 pro are just a bonus.

>>1079696 I mean yeah it's not bad but a Gulikit KK3 PRO / 8bitdo Ultimate 2 are both cheaper and you get better build quality as well as better hall effect sticks and even HD vibration motor which are so much better than regular it's not even funny I mean I guess if you got the Vader with some super chink discount off Aliexpress at like $40 it really doesn't have much competition and if that faceted Dpad really is your thing then yeah you don't get that on the other two.

>>1079697 Yeah, not gonna pretend I got the objectively perfect controller, but I got exactly what I was looking for. The Vader 4 also has Gyro support, but I assume most controls that aren't Xbox do now, still haven't bothered to set up Gyro,but if I ever start playing the right game for it, I can now. It was handy in Breath of the Wild.

Good thread. I was thinking about this phenomenon recently, and in my personal experience there's a big example of a pair of games - Sonic Adventure 1 and 2. I played 1 as a kid, a lot, and I feel like if I sat down to play it again I could get decently far. I would probably give up when it came time to fish with Big. Fuck that. I missed out on 2 as a kid. Attempted it in my early 20s, didnt care for it. At all. Despite liking 1, and 2 being a lot of Sonic fans' favorite game. So whats a game that I played as a kid, loved it, but is probably actually bad? Dragon Ball Idainaru Densetsu is a guess. I can still play it, but I think the controls and the damage system would throw people off. Basically in this game there's a bar at the center of the screen that dictates which side of the battle has the advantage. When damage is dealt, it's not to HP, it's to the opponent's advantage. When one side fills the bar, a super attack (kamehameha, makankosapou, etc) plays. You dont have any input into it, it just plays. That is what deals damage. Your gameplay is just melee and ki blasts (very poor ones at that), super attacks are just "cutscenes".

>>1079681 (OP) How much of it is mentality shift though? For that time, those games could really be that good, but as you grow to play more, deal with advancements would you keep that same feelings when revisiting? For example having played more advanced games made me too conscious of how slow some older games feel and it bothers me, i don't think the problem is the game in that sense though, i'm the problem in that kind of thing and i wish i could disregard that.

>>1079700 >Sonic Adventure 1 and 2. Sonic Adventure 1 has less replayability since it relies more heavily on story and adventure elements. The Adventure Fields feel big and the story has a lot of twists, at least the first time you play. Once you know the story and you know where everything is on the map, there is a bit less to do. The extra missions that test your skill more than the regular ones aren't actually that much more challenging or interesting. I love the game, but I never enjoy it as much as I did the first time, just because games that focus on elements like this are inherently less replayable. If your problem is Big the Cat? That part of the game takes up like a half hour. It's pretty short. But yeah, with how many different gameplay styles the game has, I can see why people might not like all of them. But the ambition is why the game is impressive. Sonic Adventure 2 really treats its Story Mode practically as a practice mode. The real meat of the game is the Extra Mode, where every level has four more missions, and the ranking system is actually fun and interesting, and there are some neat unlockables for doing this mode. Plus the level design is simply a lot better than Sonic Adventure 1, much more deliberate and streamlined. That's what makes it my favorite game, and I feel like people think the game is a lot more shallow than it is if they only bother with Story Mode.

When it comes to Sonic Adventure 2 there has been a recent backlash against the game, due to it having such high praise, and due to Sonic becoming a punching bag for a long time, people were looking for a reason to discredit the one 3D Sonic game nobody complained about. They landed on shitting on the fact the Mech levels, and Treasure hunting, stages existed, Not that they were bad, but simply that you weren't playing as Sonic/Shadow which are the best levels. The Mech and Treasure Hunting are actually well-designed, and they add a lot to keep the pacing of the game interesting, but people who aren't willing to adapt to new gameplay scenarios, will act like a game switching from it's main gameplay style is an objective flaw, instead of an intentional design choice that benefits the game as a whole. If Adventure 2 was only speed stages, it would only be 40 Minutes long, not counting boss fights. While that wouldn't Necessarily make it a bad game, it would lead to people complaining the game was too short, so it's a catch 22. Sonic games have different gameplay styles, because if all Sonic is doing is going fast though a Linear stage, then trying to make enough content to make the game 8 hours long, is both not feasible, and also it would make the base Sonic gameplay style get old fast, pacing and variety is very important.

>>1079704 I say recent, but it's started around 10 years ago. When ProJared made his review, and ProJared sometimes has no fucking clue what he's talking about because he beat the entirety of Metal Gear Rising without knowing the Defensive/Offensive Dodge move existed.

>>1079705 Yup, people form their opinions just by watching YouTube videos. Most of them (probably all) have never actually played, watched, or read whatever they’re talking about. You can spot those types pretty easily. Those same videos are the reason why "Kane&Lynch" is now seen as a misunderstood masterpiece.

>>1079706 Kane&Lynch 1&2 are certainly interesting when you analyze them closely, but yeah doesn't make them good video games. K&L's game design was Bland and Generic in every way, at least in Singleplayer, apparently if you played as Lynch he'd have Psychotic breaks, and you saw things you never saw when playing as Kane, which fair that's a cool concept, but it's pretty much all the gameplay had that was novel. K&L2 didn't even fucking work, I tried playing though the steam version of the game in online co-op with a friend once, and it was such a Dysfunctional Experience it was hilarious. There was a point where one of us was able to make it though a door to the next area, but the other couldn't follow, and we got Soft-Locked, and had to redo shit and hope it didn't happen again. The game is shit, from an online Stability perspective, since it didn't work, and the entire appeal to Kane&Lynch is that it's co-op.

>>1079689 Fighting games on a keyboard > controller, tardo

>>1079708 I tried playing fighting games with a keyboard, and the only ones I can stand are ones without motion inputs like the Touhou fighting games from 13.5 onward. Something about trying to do motion inputs with arrow keys or numpad turns my brain to mush.

>>1079708 There might be a learning curve, but the Hit Box not being too different from what a Keyboard provides is proof that the arcade joystick was not the optimal way to play everyone thought it was, and now there is a Divide, in people who are Desperate to cling to the old ways, and the people who know an objectively better way exists. Then it just comes down to a creativity, or budget issue. People willing to pay or put in the effort to make it work themselves, can have an actual advantage over those who refuse to change.

>>1079709 I'm guessing you don't play FPS... >>1079710 I prefer keyboard over hitbox. Not only is it ludicrous to me that people pay as much as they do for a "flat controller" when they already have one attached to their PC, but the amount of WASD muscle memory a lot of people (including myself) already have makes it a no-brainer, in my opinion. >>1079697 >8BitDo Overrated redditard company >better hall effect sticks the fuck does that even mean? >and even HD vibration motor 1-855-COME-ON-NOW Your entire response drips of zoomer brainless consumerist bandwagoning. >>1079696 I am also a huge fan of the "hybrid D-pad", but good luck finding a controller with a symmetrical layout with one. I could only find one out there, the Scuf Envision/Pro, picrel. I wish it were a more common option, I think the cross dpad is overrated as fuck, very relevant to this thread in fact.

>>1079686 >and it's highly unlikely he's talking about he NES game or SNES remake As if that's any better? 3 had the most bullshit difficulty out of the NES games and limited continues

>>1079713 Only the Western Version of NGIII NES was made bullshit hard, the Japanese version is more reasonable. NGIII I susspect was a Victim of the video game rental Industry, which caused western versions of games to be harder to make people need to rent them Multiple times, or just buy them if they were ever going to beat them. I'm quite sure this was a huge factor in creating the "Hard Core Gamer" culture that the games industry spent the entire 360/PS3 generation pussifying the Difficulty of all games in order to try to win back casuals, because they didn't want an abundance that actually loved video games I suppose, but in the end seems the Industry won in that regard at least for a time. The average console gamer nowadays seems to have no concept of standards, they just consume the slop that they're told to enjoy. Commit years of their life to playing a single game like Destiny 2, because they've been conditioned with Fear of Missing Out Tactics, despite the fact they grow to hate the fucking game they're playing, and how shitty it gets after every new update, they stick around and dump their bank account into Impulsive Purchases designed to shortcut them ahead to content, that they could grind to reach if they had any Patience, but they weren't conditioned to have patience. Doing all this garbage because they don't know any better. They simply don't know better video games even exist, and they have no motivation to find anything new or old that is better in everyway. That's how this all goes with my older brother's Xbox Live Friends at least. My bro obviously is older than me and remembers the better times, but for some damn reason I can't understand he still chooses to play in the Xbox ecosystem, and play current games, instead of doing what I do and just enjoying countless old games from better times that I will never get to the bottom of, and on Occasion playing the single new video game a year that's worth my time. My brother just continuously plays Ark Survival evolved right now, which I guess is just Minecraft with Dinosaurs and Guns I guess. I guess I see the appeal, and he complains there isn't shit to play on Xbox that he cares about. He gets super impressed by something like NuDoom, and NuGod of War, because they're just decent enough single player games. But he just doesn't let himself find them, because he kept going Xbox. It does seem like we are nearing the end of this side of the industry, tho, at least in it's current form. Destiny 2 is basically gonna die. Live Service games are failing left right and center with only ones like Warframe being able to keep the money train rolling. But Sony played all their bets on Live Service, and it blew up in their faces so fucking bad they had to cut their losses after Concord was DOA, instead of releasing any of that shit. The Industry is gonna have to find some new scummy shit if they want to keep exploiting new people.

Thanks for filling in for me, anon Let the thread continue!

>>1079681 (OP) >>1079684 >>1079688 >>1079690 >>1079692 >>1079694 >>1079696 >>1079698 >>1079704 >>1079705 >>1079707 >>1079710 >>1079714 All ME and on the 1st night my thread rose again

>>1079717 HANK SAMA

Bringing things back to my OP a bit. This guy is talking about DBZ Sagas, a game I've seen get shit for years, although I can get why it can be enjoyable regardless of it being a HEAVLY flawed game.

>>1079720 Yeah, in that case it's most likely nostalgia.

>>1079681 (OP) This was discussed years ago because the writing was already on the wall, but there are people nostalgia baiting about Halo as well. Not just Halo CE, but Halo 2 and 3 and some other ones. The game which undoubtedly casualized first person shooters from then on is now considered a classic beloved by all.

>>1079725 The way I see it, Halo can still be a classic while unfortunately having very negative side effects for the trends it caused the industry to have. It's similar to blaming God of War for all the games that just copied God of War instead of being creative and coming up with their own shit. Or Blaming Assassains Creed/Batman Arkham for the free flow combat system, after that. Or blaming Dark Souls for games copying that. Or Blaming GTA3 for Jak II and Shadow the Hedgehog. A game has to be pretty good in the first place, for it to be worth copying on such a large scale for publishers and devs. Who's just going to copy a piece of shit. It's a maner of the first devs having a pretty good idea on it's own, and then everyone else wanting a piece of the pie, once that idea actually strikes oil. I'm not gonna get mad at the guys for finding the Oil, it's their Oil, and they went though the effort of drilling it up, they earned it to some degree, it's all the other leeches, that should get shit on.

>>1079728 But yeah while I like Halo well enough, Marathon is the REAL shit, it's WAY cooler.

>>1079725 I like CE and think all the sequels are shit

>>1079764 I think Halo 2 has some solid points, but yeah Halo lost allot of the open ended level design Halo CE had, and it became much more linear starting with Halo 2, I suppose that can be blamed on Bungie shitting the bed in terms of Halo 2's development, they spent so much time making the Halo 2 E3 Demo as cool as possible they for got to start actually making the fucking game, and the were making a tech demo that was impossible to actually put in Halo 2, Johnson says it not all smoke and Mirrors, but that was a bold face lie. While that tec demo was a game, if you went off the scripted path if even a little it would have fell a part at the seems. Once Bungie realized the fucked up hard wasting so much of their time, they had to go into hype crunch Production, and pump out Halo 2 as Efficiently as possible, which is what lead to Halo 2 being so Linear. They didn't have the time to spend on being more Ambitious, the game had to come out " Tomorrow" essentially. It just so happened everyone ended up really liking Halo 2, aside from it having a cliff hanger, that people obviously called bullshit on, but what can you do? Halo 2 is only 2/3's of the it should have been, even in that linear designed state. Halo 3's campaign is the entire 3rd act of Halo 2 dragged on for way too long, and it's not a satisfying story at all imo, when Halo 2's Narrative felt much more interesting and better paced, with only the cliffhanger being a potential dealbreaker. But the Campaign was only ever half the appeal of Halo, despite Halo CE's multiplayer being a complete after-thought made by pretty much a single dev, Multiplayer is a super important part to what made Halo good, even on the campaign side, since the Multiplayer dev convinced the other devs to make the Over shield and Invisibility power ups, because he understood weapon spawns, power up spawns, and map Control in Multiplayer is what makes a shooters Multiplayer good, as a result those devs now had those power ups as resources to put in the Campaign levels as well, which was an objective improvement, that if Halo CE didn't have them. Halo CE also had it's problems, since people seem to complain that the half way point of the campaign is going backwards, but they still did that in a good enough way, where those re-used assets are putting the player though decent levels still. The Linear nature of Halo 2's rushed output ended up showing you can impress the Larger audience with a lot less if you know how to present things right, it's not like console players were PC players, there was no Doom or Marathon community making their own additions to the game for their own enjoyment. Most people who bought the game weren't gonna be replaying the Campaign too many times, when the Online Mutiplayer existed, which was very novel for Console players at that time. Still Bungie Recognized the vital important of Player Generated content, which is why they created Forge Mode, so the actual creative players could make their own fun, and that would only be an objective Benefit, for the Longevity of Halo 3 and Halo Reach, Forge is a huge reason Halo is as fondly remembered as it is by so many people, the only problem with it was the limitations of the console hardware itself. After Bungie left Microsoft, to instead partner with Activision which lead to a fuck ton of other issues since that lead to Destiny "which might not have even been Activision fault, since Destiny 2 only got Greedier, once Activision was out of the picture." Microsoft shit the bed when they formed 343 to make further Halo games, because they didn't get people who wanted to make Halo, The Retards had the Brilliant Decision to higher staff that HATED Halo, and would turn it into Call of Duty. Nice job you stupid cunts, You made your most important franchise that was the Entire identity of your Xbox brand into a shittier version of your biggest Competitor's game. Hats off you dumb fucks, for fumbling a franchise that could have Limitless potential, Disney wouldn't start do that for another 5 years with Star Wars, so nice being of the curve, and driving off a cliff first. "THEY'RE SO STUPID!?"

>>1079725 It's really unfortunate that Halo did what it did to the FPS genre because it is far from a bad game and it does have some really good ideas in it, and it's probably one of the best asymmetrical enemy roster you can find in an FPS (especially if you're an archvile / pain elemental hater) >>1079728 >A game has to be pretty good in the first place, for it to be worth copying on such a large scale It doesn't have to be good, merely popular which does not mean it can't also be good but certainly doe not guarantee it. >it's all the other leeches, that should get shit on. But then you're basically saying no one can do an idea better than the originator of said idea, which I don't think is true

>>1079798 Yeah, they're the peanuts lodged into the soft piece of shit that it is.

>>1079798 >>1079819 >>1079831 Is it fair to say if a game is "relatively" good? Like X or Y may have been hated at the time, but when compared to the low effort AAA games of today, it's seen as honorably high-effort. Is that a fair way to judge things, or should they all be judged on an objective, timeless scale?

>>1079834 Older games were bad usually because they were badly executed but had some decent ideas or sometimes bland copies of more successful stuff. Modern games are bad because they're extremely polished time vampires with almost no originality and oftentimes forced political propaganda.

>>1079834 >>1079836 It's why most older games, even the mediocre ones, feel 10 times better than most modern shit. And at least the older stuff panders to me.

>>1079819 >But then you're basically saying no one can do an idea better than the originator of said idea, which I don't think is true Not at all why I intended to imply, but fair enough point. I wouldn't say that no one can take an established idea, and then refine it and make it better, that has happened constantly throughout history, but what I do mean is that most people fucking can't, and some fool themselves into thinking they can, that results in the Jewbix Cube "Vid related" Not that i'm gonna blame people for trying I guess that can be an Admirable quality to have, but having a good Attitude, and having refined talent to make your ideas work are Two different things. I wouldn't at all want to blame devs for any lackluster games they might make, since game development takes a fuck ton of work, and it's a miracle video games even exist, that we all take for granted. More often then not there are legitimate reasons games end up having the flaws that they do. It's why I tend to be forgiving in my critique of most games, even if they are objectively bad, I still try to find the good in them since often there is some good if you are willing to give something an honest chance. There is also the issue of Publishers only caring about the Money. There needs to be a Delicate balance, of Publishing, Producing and developing for a Masterpiece to truly come into being. A Ballance that is really fucking hard to reasonably obtain, as everyone wants what they Individually think is best for them. >>1079831 I've beaten each Halo game with Legendary All Skulls On aside from Halo 5, so I enjoyed what I got out of the games when I played at that Peak difficulty level, is what I'll say. Very novel Experience to crank things up that high, but mostly for Halo CE and Halo 2 as they were never intended to be played In that manner. Halo 3 and onward, it's far less of the impossible task it might seem. >>1079834 We all have our Biases Consciously and Unconsciously, so while Objectivity is something that's great to strive for, Humans are too flawed for that to truly be reached. An objective critique, can be good when someone is asking if you Recommend something or not, since you can think what would they truly enjoy, but if you get more personal in your thoughts you'll lose the plot and start gushing over how much you love something, and can even turn people off from it because you won't shut the fuck up about how "GOOD" it is. getting personal in your view point can still have great value, but only if your audience is wanting and willing to Listen.

>>1079714 >I'm quite sure this was a huge factor in creating the "Hard Core Gamer" culture that the games industry spent the entire 360/PS3 generation pussifying the Difficulty of all games in order to try to win back casuals, But that started generations earlier. SNES and Genesis games are on average way easier than NES games. N64 and PS1 games are on average way easier than SNES and Genesis games. And things just kept getting easier and easier from there. Even games that were released close together but on different generations show a big difference. Mario World is pathetically easy compared to Mario 3. Same for Castlevania IV v Castlevania III. Crash 1 is pretty damn hard, as it was made in the SNES era (and then released as a relatively early next-gen game), but then Crash 2 is easy as hell. But Crash 2 is bullshit hard compared to Jak & Daxter. Yeah, there are harder games in every gen, but the average difficulty has been going down for a very long time. Even late NES games tend to be easier than early NES games (or at least what the west got as "early" NES games, which were actually mid-generation Famicom games, but since the real early NES games were all much simpler arcade ports, you get the point). >>1079834 You raise a good point. As games get shittier, should standards get lower? I find myself going back and enjoying games I thought were mediocre in their time, but are good compared to modern garbage.

>>1079858 I won't deny that game started hard in the arcade days, and got easier over time, it's just for me that "Average game difficulty curve" fist dropped directly off a cliff, then plateaued for what felt like the entire Generation, and can still feel like it's around to this day. To me at least felt like in the Prior Generations if you wanted to find a nice Challenge, it was a simple task to find one, but once the change to HD development happened Making a game challenging was a risk to the bottom line, so even games with so-called "crushing difficulty" modes were still minor challenges compared to what there once was in abundance, if you actually had the skills required in the prior gen to beat the hardest games. Demon/Dark Souls got this huge Reputation for it's "Prepare To Die" marketing, but just because the game is Built around learning from Failure, that doesn't mean it's actually all that hard, because it Absolutely isn't, when you're a Ninja Gaiden Master Ninja, and Devil May Cry Dante Must Die player. NG2 (360) was still hard as balls, but Sigma 2 is infamous for Being way easier in nearly every way, with only Master Ninja having the Potential to kill you, because of Artificial Difficulty, instead of well-designed difficulty. DMC4 is noticeably more forgiving in most ways compared to DMC1 and DMC3, The Ranking system no longer negate an S rank if you take too much damage. Only playing as Dante in DMC4 is a big challange, because he's entirely unrefined and unpolished, and the skill floor needed to play him well is the roof. Compaired to DMC1 and DMC3 Dante, DMC4 Dante is a mess of ideas, that the majority of are unpractical in action, so the only people who get anything out of DMC4 Dante are those trying to just do fancy shit for fun with his tools, because the top of the Skill ceiling for him can't be seen with the naked eye, but Obviously DMC4 Dante isn't in a state he should have been released in, the positives were all a happy accident. > I find myself going back and enjoying games I thought were mediocre in their time, but are good compared to modern garbage. You can have a much different perspective on a game when it's old, and you aren't waying the pros and cons of buying it for full price.

>>1079681 (OP) While nostalgia goggles can certainly be a thing, you see lots of people making the same sort of comments about bad/mediocre modern games too. There are many other forms of personal bias that may be affecting the way they view those games just as much, if not more. >they just like the story, or even just one element of the story >they just like the IP >they just like the aesthetic >they just like the setting it took me forever to admit Skyward Sword is a bad game because of this >they just like the premise on an abstract level >they just like the waifus/husbandos this is more rampant than nostalgia goggles but /v/ will never admit it The list goes on and on. There's also the possibility that they do genuinely enjoy the gameplay. Sometimes you can get a weird kind of enjoyment from bad gameplay. Lots of people say they have fun with terrible games like Superman 64, even if they acknowledge it's a terrible game. It's possible the guy praising DMC 2 just thought "I had fun, therefore it's good" and left it at that.

>>1079876 One thing you miss here is that there's a few specific subset of nostalgia that aren't influenced by the game but the context you played it in like "that time I got stuck with one game" and his brother "the first game I bought with my pocket money" (maybe even the one you bought with your first salary) and an especially strong one "that game I played at the time X important event happened" and his brother "the game that led to X important event in my life happening" >>they just like the waifus/husbandos I have no problem admitting that, then again I try not to pretend a game is good just because of that. depends on the size of the tits though see >>1075314 (1073622) >Sometimes you can get a weird kind of enjoyment from bad gameplay Red Ninja is exactly that for me.

>>1079876 Absolutely correct. Frankly >"I had fun, therefore it's good" I think is the best way to go about things, every piece of media Ultimately exists to entertain the audience. If you are entertained and glad the experience happened, it objectively did its job in one way or another. People say they have “Guilty pleasures” and that term comes from a fear of Societal expectations, as if you should feel bad for enjoying something that isn't bringing any harm to anybody. Fuck that. Only reason I managed to develop such a critical eye for the media I enjoy is because I was genuinely confused and curious, why how I managed to enjoy so many things in as a kid that were apparently " The worst thing of all time" Thankfully I learn how to examine how a general audience can view things, without actually changing my own tastes and enjoyments. When people praise, or shit, on things, there tends to be an entirely logical reason for it, and to act as if just because your opinion of things is in disagreement, that means they're wrong, is an arrogant thing to do. It's whoever job making the media to get people to enjoy it, so if an General Audience ends up having a Undesirable reaction, that's an issue on the creators. Even if it's because people are too dumb to get it, that just means the point could have been made in an even better way, so that nobody would misunderstand it. There'll be exceptions, of course There are some people who are just insane, but most people aren't crazy.

>>1079884 Then again, this brings up the dilemma of the audience, or at the very least if the goal is to get the Largest, lowest common denominator, that Inherently requires Pandering to low intelligence, so a choice must be made if you're gonna pander, or you're gonna have more Integrity in what you are creating, and letting what you've made stand for itself, regardless of the Reception from an audience.

>>1079885 Well, that's the problem with "shareholders" who expect maximum shekels for minimum effort. The problem isn't that players got lower standards, it's that devs started aiming lower to try and maximize profits. The best media is always made when people have money to throw around on passion projects, like vidya in the 90's or anime in the 80's.

>>1079898 Quite true, but the issue with Passion Projects is often how their scope can balloon into something that is absurd to actually create, due to feature creep. I assume this is one of the issues that is causing Hallow Knight: Silksong to take so fucking long to make that the fan base consider themselves clowns for hoping it's ever gonna have news about it's current state come out. I'm guessing Team Cherry now has so much money that they have no Accountability anymore, and can do whatever they want, a similar Situation to Valve perhaps, only Valve is at least providing an extremely Desirable Service by keeping Steam running. Team Cherry doesn't have that publisher fire under their ass to actually let them finish the game, assuming the best at least that they are working on Silksong right now. We live in an age now where the amount of time it took for Duke Nukem Forver to release doesn't seem like something absurd anymore. Another side of the coin, and maybe a far better use of the term Passion Project, is Mega Man X Corrupted, An extremely cool looking game, that very well could be the greatest Mega Man game ever released, that nobody has played because this guy has been working on it in a cave for 17 years, and the only Evidence we have that it's progression is alive is this Google Dox Spreadsheet stating the last update was Feb 24, 2025, and a Youtube Channel, that has years between uploads. It's one of those things where it's easy to forget MMX Corrupted exists, until you by chance are reminded "Oh yeah, that thing i've been waiting Literal years for that guy who's existence is entirely off the grid to finish"

>>1079858 Arcades were hard with cheap deaths since that made cash. 7th Gen was when devs went from streamlining to downright just removing anything with any kind of depth.

>>1079903 >Quite true, but the issue with Passion Projects is often how their scope can balloon into something that is absurd to actually create I know someone with such a project and what was explained to me was (paraphrasing) >"This is a forever project I'll go at it at my own leisure until everything is absolutely perfect to me, because it's for me only and an actual release is an afterthought at best"

>>1079898 >that's the problem with "shareholders" who expect maximum shekels for minimum effort No, they don't. Shareholders want a stock that they're capable of selling in the future or delivers on the dividends. That cannot happen is a company destroys themselves in the name of making "infinite monies". The "only" people who care about "maximum shekels for minimum effort" are the pump-&-dump stock brokers that take a massive percentage from every trade and the retarded CEOs who want to leave the company on a "high note" just before they release their book detailing how they "saved" or "revived" it.

>>1079681 (OP) I believe that most of those comments asking about remakes are AI posted by some company's automatic fake account, to pretend to be just some guy. Nobody really wants remakes, not even from good games. and from bad games, everyone wants to forget those. The posts asking for remakes are all bland and you can see the soulless corporate speech in them.

>>1079929 >Nobody really wants remakes, not even from good games. I'd absolutely love to believe that were true, but i've seen way too much circle jerking over the concept of remaking everything under the sun over the years. A prominent example from my memory is MauLer on youtube, and his podcast EFAP, which I used to watch for a time, before I stopped keeping up with it. While I don't think any of them are bad guys, you can really see how odd of an eco chamber it is at times, but i'm digressing. What I want to bring up is some of their takes on games, MauLer when talking casually in one episode of EFAP started going "Capcom please please please remake Resident Evil 4" Like he couldn't wait to see a game that was already perfect needlessly reiterated, just because they did that with RE2. I saw what the ones on EFAP's tastes were, and they were as Normal Fag as you can get, MauLer was lapping up NuGod of War, and when I pointed out in the chat that NuGod of War kept reusing the same fucking troll boss over and over again, nobody got what I was saying. Rags said Hellblade 1 was his game of the year. He clams to be a PC gamer enough to want to debate a video made by a litreal 10 year old about how Consoles are better then PC, then plays Generic freemium online mutiplayer FPS shit. There was one Episode where there was a guy who made a video Criticizing how Doom Eternal looked in the pre-release trailers, and then they got that guy on the podcast to talk to him personally, and convinced him he didn't have a point Which to be fair he kind of didn't, at least he wasn't smart enough to actually articulate what the issues he saw were in a solid enough way to not be called out on them. Couldn't defend his video when challenged, so he Humbly folded. This is what a large portion of people who buy games are actually like, they got no fucking clue about anything, and these guys have Influence over a fuck ton of their viewers.

>>1079929 >>1079939 >Nobody wants remakes. Remakes are fine if they're developed by a team of people who have the intent to actually improve the game with QoL features while still respecting the spirit of the original release, like Star Ocean 2 The Second Story R, The Famicom Detective Club and Xenoblade Chronicles DE. Or even remasters like the GrimGrimoire OnceMore, which is superior over the OG PS2 version for just the speed-up button alone. Of course, you're going to have bad apples amongst the mix like the Demon Souls remake which was made by a completely different team with zero understanding of the OG work (like forgetting the events in DeS are only happening a mere few weeks after the demons raped everything + wholly changing the designs of monsters and architecture for no reason) or the YU-NO / Langrisser remakes with Nagi Ryou's art design being a severe downgrade (despite the guy originally worked in the first Ar Tonelico games on PS2). Ideally it would be cool to let, as something rather common, the ability of purchasing/playing the original versions of games that were given the remake treatment. Although I'm sure a few /v/ anons would bitch about people daring to buy those old titles instead of pirating them for emulation, like I've seen sometimes for retro collections. >>1079935 >This is what a large portion of people who buy games are actually like, they got no fucking clue about anything, It's something I've seen a few times before, and I don't exactly understand this mentality of throwing money on a game without some basic research such as checking gameplay videos. Or similarly, buying a console system without checking its catalog of games first, to see anything that could catch your interest. I can understand being disappointed by a game you believed to be good at first, but that's a different thing and more natural by comparison. In my case, I have like nearly 30 years of experience in videogames so I can trust my guts about whichever vidya will entertain me by just looking at some promotional materials so I suppose it's different for people who are newcomers.

>>1079953 >Remakes are fine if they're developed by a team of people who have the intent to actually improve the game with QoL features while still respecting the spirit of the original release, No, they're not. At best, they "improve" something while losing the tone and zest of the original game. At worst, they completely miss the fucking point and make something entirely different (Often for the worse). Consider the cases of REmake and MGS:TS, where both are "definate" improvements over the original games, but completely change the atmosphere and tone of the story in the process.

>>1079958 I think you actually need to play more videogames before parroting an Internet opinion you found it acceptable. Like I get the impression you only know mainstream examples too. And Twin Snakes has bigger issues, one of them being how it grossly exaggerates the animations in several cutscenes to the point it looks like a Micheal Bay movie. Or the ability to use first-person camera for shooting, which annihilates the difficulty especially with the bosses.

>>1079962 >I think you actually need to play more videogames before parroting an Internet opinion you found it acceptable. No, those are my genuine opinions. >And Twin Snakes has bigger issues, one of them being how it grossly exaggerates the animations in several cutscenes to the point it looks like a Micheal Bay movie. And REmake turns Resident Evil from a B-movie about a science experiment gone wrong and a massive cover-up, into a a straight-faced horror game where we're suppose to take giant spiders and genetically engineered sharks seriously. >Or the ability to use first-person camera for shooting, which annihilates the difficulty especially with the bosses. Are those not "quality of life" improvements by giving players more options?

>>1079958 >where both are "definate" improvements over the original games, but completely change the atmosphere and tone of the story in the process REmake and MGS:TS are very different in terms of approach REmake expands vastly on what the original intended to do in every single way and does not change any of the core parts of what makes the original MGS:TS instead reworks with more or less care (usually less) every core aspect of the original and ends up being a complete mess on most aspect, especially destructive was making the player MGS2 snake (as well as the enemy AI) while keeping the level design MGS1, it simply was not meant to work together. >>1079973 >And REmake turns Resident Evil from a B-movie But was the OG intended as a B movie, imo it wasn't, Alone in the Dark was intended as an horror game and pretty much anyone looking at it now will laugh at the notion it was a serious attempt.

>>1079979 >REmake and MGS:TS are very different in terms of approach They're both remakes of a PS1 game, developed by the creators of said PS1 game, with additional elements that said creators had expanded upon in follow-up entries, and added elements that the creator felt like he was incapable of adding in the original game given the technological limits that existed with the PS1. It doesn't matter if you consider one "better" executed than the other, they're both doing the same thing. Therefore, if you object how one handles the treatment, then you should hold the same standards and also detest the other for being of the same sins. >But was the OG intended as a B movie B-movie doesn't refer to quality, it refers to style of presentation. And, yes, it does matter.

>>1079983 >developed by the creators of said PS1 game MGS:TS is deved by Silicon Knights >with additional elements that said creators had expanded upon in follow-up entries MGS:TS has been memory holed > It doesn't matter if you consider one "better" executed than the other It's not a matter of it being done better it's a matter of respecting the originals intent >B-movie doesn't refer to quality That is somewhat wrong, B movies literally were movies destined to act as filler for movie packages studios rented to cinemas back in the Hayes code days, they had basically no budget and no access to people who were considered to be stars (be it actors or directors and authors) then, now it is true that it ultimately does not mean the movie will be of poor quality but it does make it exponentially more likely Resident Evil intended to be taken seriously and since it does not have the means to do so it falls into the same tropes as movies which were intended as serious but failed to have the means to do so.

>>1079986 >MGS:TS is deved by Silicon Knights Overseen and directed by Kojima >MGS:TS has been memory holed So? >It's not a matter of it being done better it's a matter of respecting the originals intent You respect the original by preserving and playing the original game. Playing a remake, whether it be REmake or Twin Snakes, is equally disrepsectful. >they had basically no budget and no access to people who were considered to be stars So the original Die Hard is a B-movie as Bruce Willis was an unknown actor prior to the release of it. >Resident Evil intended to be taken seriously and since it does not have the means to do so it falls into the same tropes as movies which were intended as serious but failed to have the means to do so. So REmake is disrespectful as it fails to preserve that nature of the original.

>>1079988 >Overseen and directed by Kojima Not a dev >So? Kind of goes against "with additional elements that said creators had expanded upon in follow-up entries" don't you think? >You respect the original by preserving and playing the original game. You are conflating intent with result, if the intent was making a serious horror game and you failed then remake it and succeed then I see nothing disrespectful being done here unlike MGS:TS which basically just shoves the original in a new engine without adapting either side while turning a somewhat serious take on "war bad guys" into a generic Hollywood action movie wannabee, which is about what is to be expected from Kojima being left alone with a north american studio. >So the original Die Hard is a B-movie as Bruce Willis was an unknown actor prior to the release of it. The system that created B movies doesn't exist anymore but if Die Hard is a movie made by unknowns with unknown actors on a comparatively low budget as some quick side project by the studio then it get about as close to the original meaning of the term as you can be. If I follow your reasoning then I would have to consider Mars Attacks! to be a B-Movie, which while it apes the style and presentation is still a movie that had star power, cutting edge tech and a big budget behind it. >So REmake is disrespectful as it fails to preserve that nature of the original. The nature is what you perceive the game to be. The intent is what the people who made the original wanted it to be. You can claim it's disrespectful based on the nature you perceived the original to have, but then it's a subjective opinion. I claim the original intent was to make a serious horror game and as such I don't see anything disrespectful being done in REmake as it's a serious horror game. Again I'll come back to Alone in the dark a it's the inspiration for RE, the original is 100% intended as a serious horror game but even then it kind of looked bad and really couldn't deliver on it but when AotD as a franchise was given a budget, you get The New Nightmare which can deliver on the serious horror.

>>1079953 >It's something I've seen a few times before, and I don't exactly understand this mentality of throwing money on a game without some basic research such as checking gameplay videos. Or similarly, buying a console system without checking its catalog of games first, to see anything that could catch your interest. Marketing budgets get paid millions of dollars, often more than the development teams, for a reason. The marketing strategies in high-level economics take GREAT advantage of the weaknesses inherent in (most) humans. Kissinger and his ilk weren't far off the mark when they said human beings are cattle. In an honest society, marketing wouldn't be required at all. Remind yourself that the idea of advertisement was seen as dehumanizing and a social faux-pas back in the 19th century. Businesses in London for example NEVER put ads in the paper about their stores or put "SALE" or marketing signs on their windows unless they were nearly broke, destitute, and facing poverty. As such, whenever a SALE sign or something like it was seen on a window, courteous, red-blooded Londinians would go out of their way to support these businesses with their money in as much as they could reasonably afford. Generally, a store was there out of necessity rather than the desire to make a profit, so in a way, you were trying to convince the store owner to sell you their stuff rather than the other way around. They didn't need to force their products on you to make a living, they had a steady source of income regardless, usually from regulars. Well, that got taken advantage of when Jewish immigrants found out about this system. They advertised and marketed their stores and products in the paper, on storefronts, wherever. This diluted the culture of sale over time until it became the ugly mess that you see today. This anecdote takes up to game development today. Rather than make a passion project into reality and people will play the game by merit of the game's qualities and "soul" alone, people are persuaded or even FORCED by modern marketing into liking a game. Remember that presentation photograph a few years ago? Turn fans into marketing representatives, brands into sensations, etc.

>>1079994 >Not a dev The creator of the orignal game overseeing, directing, and demanding what content be i cluded or changed in the remake doesn't make him the developer? Then I guess Other M is entirely Team Ninja's fault and Sakamoto had nothing to do with what happened with that game. >You are conflating intent with result, if the intent was making a serious horror game and you failed then remake it and succeed then I see nothing disrespectful being done It's disrespectful because people latched onto the B-movie original, and you refuse to respect the version of the game that became successful. Doom 3 was developed as being the game that the original Doom was "suppose" to be, yet people outright rejected that and still rake Carmack through the coals to this very day for it. That's not to mention that many "staples" of modern video game tropes and concepts (Such as the idea of combos) were unintended aspects of original games that sometimes existed as bugs or glitches, and just happened to become popular and successful. Just consider the fact that peope's biggest complaints over modern online games is how developers are constantly "fixing" games, and as a result remove all the fun aspects of it. >unlike MGS:TS which basically just shoves the original in a new engine without adapting either side They did the same thing with Half-Life with the Source release, yet it doesn't see nearly the amount of hate that it should deserve. >while turning a somewhat serious take on "war bad guys" into a generic Hollywood action movie wannabee, which is about what is to be expected from Kojima being left alone with a north american studio. I thought you said you wanted the developer to make the game that was always "intended", not necessarily what we got. >If I follow your reasoning then I would have to consider Mars Attacks! to be a B-Movie, which while it apes the style and presentation is still a movie that had star power, cutting edge tech and a big budget behind it. Don't forget Shama Llama Ding-Dong's The Happening, which was suppose to be a B-movie as well. >I claim the original intent was to make a serious horror game and as such I don't see anything disrespectful being done in REmake as it's a serious horror game. Yet you see it as disrespectful when Kojima does the exact same thing and turns MGS into a "generic Hollywood action movie wannabee". You cannot have it both ways.

>>1079998 >The creator of the orignal game overseeing, directing, and demanding what content be i cluded or changed in the remake doesn't make him the developer? Nope, he's but one person representing the will of a complete team, and as we can clearly the more he had control the worse MGS got >It's disrespectful because people latched onto the B-movie original This is the first step in the reasoning that leads to gay shit like "death of the author" so I won't agree with that, the intent of the author is more important than the desire of the audience, even if the result is shit >Just consider the fact that peope's biggest complaints over modern online games is how developers are constantly "fixing" games, and as a result remove all the fun aspects of it. But games now aren't the same as before (at least AAA and some AA), before it was a group that wanted to make a game first even on licensed games which do not give you much leeway for your own passion usually, now it's just a bunch of corporate drones pumping out a regurgitations of "popular things" to make money you can't really say there's an intent besides make money no matter the way. >That's not to mention that many "staples" of modern video game tropes and concepts (Such as the idea of combos) were unintended aspects of original games that sometimes existed as bugs or glitches, and just happened to become popular and successful. That is true, but ultimately it is the people who created the original who changed their intent usually because of their own opinions on those rather than popular pressure usually, though it is a very blurry line as to whether a decision is done because of popular pressure or personal reasoning from the devs as some devs are indeed very prone to outside influence while other will die on a molehill because what they want isn't what the people want. >yet it doesn't see nearly the amount of hate that it should deserve. Even Valve shits on it, people don't shit on it because there's no reason to beat that dead horse in particular, you still have the OG and a remake and mods why dwell on something that's literally the original but bad >Yet you see it as disrespectful when Kojima does the exact same thing and turns MGS into a "generic Hollywood action movie wannabee". You cannot have it both ways. A said earlier I don't consider Kojima to be the sole driving force behind MGS, and especially so with 1 & 2, you see the clear change from MG1&2 to MGS and then from MGS2 to MGS3/4, MGS1&2 being where he had the least overall control over the games.

>>1080002 >Nope, he's but one person representing the will of a complete team So Mikami was doing the exact same thing when he turned REmake into a straight-up horror game, and should be equally reviled for abandoning the intent of the original team that developed the game. >the intent of the author is more important than the desire of the audience, even if the result is shit So we should then celebrate The Terminator franchise for being an excellent example of feminism in action? Because that what Cameron says the films were "always" suppose to be. And the audience latching on to it about being big robot Arnold just never understood it. Have you ever considered that the author could be wrong, or that they hate their past selves? >before it was a group that wanted to make a game first even on licensed games which do not give you much leeway for your own passion usually You still have developers that think that way and act on it. You just don't care for them the way you do previous developers doing it. >A said earlier I don't consider Kojima to be the sole driving force behind MGS, And the Mikami wasn't the sole driving force behind the original Resident Evil either, yet your defending his rewrite of the original game. Yes, I am operating in extremes because I'm tired of this shit. Stop remaking shit and make something new.

>>1080006 >So Mikami was doing the exact same thing when he turned REmake into a straight-up horror game, and should be equally reviled for abandoning the intent of the original team that developed the game. I would agree with that if it was clear RE was never intended to be serious, which I don't think it is and there's some circumstantial evidence it wasn't. >So we should then celebrate The Terminator franchise for being an excellent example of feminism in action? That can be his intent and I will hold it as more important as my opinion when seriously discussing it, but I won't stop my opinions or my enjoyment coming from "Robot Arnold blowing stuff up is cool as fuck" >Have you ever considered that the author could be wrong, or that they hate their past selves? The author can by definition never truly be wrong about what he created, but he can be wrong about the way what he made is perceived And it's also true he can lie about his intent, which is why shit gets complicated (I've had enough debate about dev intent in hte emulation community to know how deep this autism pit goes" >And the Mikami wasn't the sole driving force behind the original Resident Evil either, yet your defending his rewrite of the original game. But was he really the only one from the original team or was he really disregarding the intent of others that worked on it, I don't think so because all the project he had control over at that time the project post RE1 where he obviously started having more control due to his success go in a very different direction from serious horror.

>>1080015 >But was he really the only one from the original team or was he really disregarding the intent of others that worked on it, I don't think so because all the project he had control over at that time the project post RE1 where he obviously started having more control due to his success go in a very different direction from serious horror. And the same can be said of Kojima with MGS. It's the same thing. You just didn't like the results one project produced because it hyprocritically conflicts with the you perceived a certain title. And that's where this argument always arrives. You either accept, celebrate, and embrace the original (Faults and all), or you allow history to be rewritten. There is no inbetween, you cannot have it both ways, this topic is a zero-sum game. And I'm tired of arguments that attempt to excuse examples because you "like it" or make excuses because it doesn't fit the "narrative" you want. If you're excusing REmake, the you need to excuse nuSilent Hill 2. If you loath Twin Snakes, then you also need to loath DAH Reprobed.

>>1079973 >Are those not "quality of life" improvements by giving players more options? The additions are not QoL per se if they do legitimately break up the game itself. As the other anon and myself said, Twin Snakes added MGS2 mechanics while retaining the MGS1's level and boss designs. Plus it added weird things during cutscenes such as making Snake suddenly going berserk for no reason, by pointing his gun at Baker (after saving him) or doing impossible acrobatics during the fight introduction against Vulcan or Rex for instance. The whole thing is super weird even by standards of the MGS trilogy. Other good remakes I could name are Atelier Marie (the OG is available to play too but only for people who bought the Deluxe edition), Atelier Rorona Plus (remake of the game originally on PS3 but with the stuff that the sequels Totori and Meruru included) and Super Robot Wars Original Generations (PS2 remake of the GBA games). Again, you need to actually play videogames rather than parroting opinions from the Internet so you could think you'll fit on /v/. It's getting obvious from your posts so far.

>>1079884 It's understandable that someone likes games you don't like, the issue I have is when people act like it's in a vacuum, and not realize that mechanics or trends that are detrimental can gain influence on the industry if a game that has them becomes popular. Like that's not an issue if you the like the game. It's the real reason why people are so passionate about shitting on vidga games. They don't want the 'bad' games to become popular or at least not spread influence to make more 'bad' games. That's why the phrase 'RE4 is a good game but a 'bad Resident Evil' game' exists. We haven't had a RE game that plays like the pre-RE4 games since then because it was so successful. Even the RE2 remake is just a re4-hybrid. Another example was people were absolute hostile to Metriod:Other M, it's not an outright bad game, it wasn't metroid good either, but if that was going to be the future of Metroid it was absolutely was going to fucking suck. After it was clear that nintendo wasn't going to make more Other M games, people relaxed their opinion on it now it was safe.

>>1080026 >Again, you need to actually play videogames If people actually were playing video games, they'd be playing the originals instead of settling for the remakes. Especially so when, in addition to watching the story unfold, you experience how the gameplay of titles developed and expanded.

>>1080025 >And the same can be said of Kojima with MGS. It's the same thing No simply because there is proof he was alone on MGS:TS and proof he has a different opinion on what MGS is than his team as a whole >You either accept, celebrate, and embrace the original (Faults and all), or you allow history to be rewritten. You can perfectly enjoy both the original and the remake

>>1080025 >or you allow history to be rewritten. But the old games still exist. The existence of Super Mario All-Stars doesn't mean I can't play the original Super Mario Bros. anymore.

>>1080031 >he was alone on MGS:TS and proof he has a different opinion on what MGS is than his team as a whole I thought the author's opinion on their work matters more, so which is it? If it's the team that matters more, then you cannot praise REmake as is doesn't have the opinions or consent of the original team. >You can perfectly enjoy both the original and the remake No, you cannot on a philosphical level. Preserving the original implies that you're moving forward as you're leaving the past alone and making something new. Developing a remake implies that the present cannot continue unless you first fix something about the past.

>>1080029 I think you need to settle down instead of desperately trying to have the last word with your "hurr hurr all remakes are bad" autism. I will throw another example of good game remake, EDF4.1 which is an enhanced version over the PS3 title. Besides adding Erginus and Balam, 4.1 reworked on the level design of several level missions (enemy placements, spawn patterns, etc), includes NPC ally vehicles that the OG didn't have, increased the amount of enemies on screen, underground missions are under dark, etc. As such, there is no reason to play the original game unless you're actually curious.

>>1080034 >As such, there is no reason to play the original game unless you're actually curious. If the original was really "so bad" that they had to "improve" it, that leaves the implication that I shouldn't play that game at all, original or remake. Much further, why waste the time and resources making something that already exists instead of making something new?

>>1080033 >I thought the author's opinion on their work matters more, so which is it? MGS has authors, plural. >No, you cannot on a philosphical level. I'm not gonna stop myself from enjoying something because of this kind of wankery. >>1080034 Odin Sphere Leïfthrasir is the only example I can think of for a remake actually erasing the original, and even then not truly the case.

>>1080027 Good point, I didn't intend to make the OP with the intent to shit on people who had Nostalgia for not so great game, merely drawing attention to it, so we could think about it. Even if you like something, there being harsh, but correct criticism is important, because that's the only way people can become aware of issues. Unfortunately, some people are very resistance to letting themselves admit there are problems when they like what they're getting. >>1080034 EDF3 was also basically just a remake of EDF1, EDF In general, keeps improving on it's core concept, but doesn't really change the Premise since it's very easy to just keep doing it. >>1080035 It's not at all that there is no reason to play EDF1, if you like the Ranger gameplay, then it's the same as it's ever been, so that's just more content for you to have fun as with the Ranger. EDF games are just always improving, and the storyline isn't the main appeal, as much as the gameplay itself is, so it's better to recommended the newest mainline entire first, unless it's directly connected to a prior game, like how EDF5 is connected to EDF6, but then again you don't REALLY need to play EDF5, it just makes EDF6 way cooler, if you happen to like the story.

>>1080037 >MGS has authors, plural. And Resident Evil had authors, plural. Whatever happened to Kenichi Iwao and Yasuyuki Saga? >Odin Sphere Leïfthrasir is the only example I can think of for a remake actually erasing the original, Ninja Gaiden Sigma? Doom 3 BFG? Lunar? Every FF before 7?

>>1080039 >EDF3 was also basically just a remake of EDF1, 3 is more its own game though. You could however argue EDF2 is a remake considering all the missions from 1 (which started as a joke project for the "Simple 2000 series" of D3 Publisher) appear exactly the same in 2, before later adding new levels/enemies (shield drones, flying ants, explosive pillbugs, imperial drones, etc) from there.

>>1080041 >Ninja Gaiden Sigma? I've not seen any place with multiple mention that the original is better, now if you really wanted to be right you could have said Black erased the OG > Doom 3 BFG? https://store.steampowered.com/app/208200/DOOM_3/ https://store.steampowered.com/app/9070/DOOM_3_Resurrection_of_Evil/ >Lunar? With the whole Working Design situation you never had the original to begin with and I assume that if you look about that you'll find the OG version patched with the gay shit >Every FF before 7? True enough, even 7 & 8 technically got erased by the PC release being the basis for any future release, 9 also has the unity port situation

>>1080035 >"so bad" Who are you quoting? He never used that phrase. You can improve something that isn't bad. In video games, where technical aspects are more prominent than other media, it may be possible to make the original obsolete. That said, since it's also art, and the limitations may be considered part of the art, I also think it's reasonable to disagree. There's also the issue of things like enhanced ports. Are they different from remakes? Or what about just rereleases? Sonic Adventure DX is frequently seen as having some significant downgrades over the previous version, but actually there were multiple versions even on Dreamcast. The American version had improvements over the Japanese version, and there was later a different Japanese release that had these improvements. Even Mario 64 has a similar case, actually (except it doesn't have the later high selling port that fans now dislike). It happens a bunch. Also, there are different kinds of remakes. Some video game remakes are remakes only in that they tell the same general story, but are really new games. The original Castlevania game, Akumajou Dracula, has many "remakes" which are all really different games but tell the same basic story. There is Vampire Killer for MSX, which in Japan is just called Akumajou Dracula. There is the game for X68000, again just called Akumajou Dracula. There is the arcade game, Haunted Castle, in Japan just called Akumajou Dracula. There is Super Castlevania IV, in Japan just called Akumajou Dracula. The above examples are different from games that are much closer to the originals. An example can actually be seen in the PS1 remake of Akumajou Dracula for the X68000, Castlevania Chronicles. It has a mode that is very close to the game it's remaking, but the default is changed, but is still clearly the same game, with the same basic level designs and such. And there are many remakes which go a lot further, and are almost shot for shot remakes of the original, like that time Vince Vaughan starred in a remake of Psycho. These are obviously different than trying to say Castlevania IV is the same as Castlevania I, even though it's a "remake." There are also things like Ratchet & Clank 2016, which is sort of a remake, with many levels being exactly or almost exactly the same, but many levels being swapped for entirely new ones. How about ports that come out later but have both ups and downs? Lots of games might have better colors on SNES but be lacking a level that is found on Genesis, or something like that. I know these aren't what you're talking about, but my point is that the line gets blurred. What about if a remake or port is worse but then mods make it better? To go back to Sonic Adventure, the 2012 PC release has many problems due to being a port of a port of a port of a port (of a game that actually wasn't the original release but was actually better), but mods fix (almost) all the problems and add many improvements, not just in technical aspects, but in adding in a bunch of long lost limited time DLC from the late '90s, which you'd otherwise have a very hard time getting. Plus little options for things like language settings or whatever. If people have the choice between this and the US Dreamcast version, I'd probably recommend this, as it has all the same content plus some improvements.

>>1080046 >You can improve something that isn't bad. Why waste the resources when you can make something new? >In video games, where technical aspects are more prominent than other media, it may be possible to make the original obsolete. And that's the part where you can fuck right off for having not read a single post of this entire argument. Games can never be rendered "obsolute" solely because of the fact that they're entirely dependent on artistic aspects from the literally texture work to the gameplay decisions. Even games outright lacking a story, such as numerous sports and racing titles, still have an insane amount of artistic work and thought put into the game's entire development. So declaring that an original game can be rendered "obsolute" is nothing more than the absolutely stupidest and most dumdfoundingly retarded comment one can make.

>>1080046 >What about if a remake or port is worse but then mods make it better? Also mods never make things better all it shows is that customers will gladly fix broken and incomplete games for the developers for free. And I'm tired of this complacent attitude.

My stance on The whole 'author's intention vs 'death of the author' vs the 'author is a lying fuck' is this: The author's original intent matters (this important i'll get into this later), but his execution to make it clear to the audience can muddle that up. If his intent and audience perception of the work are so vast then the author has 'failed' even when it's an enjoyable experience. So in this case if the author wants to try again it makes sense to. Even when the audience may reject the more clarified intent. Of course this can go out of the window when the author genuinely his mind more likely to chase trends. This can be regarded as someone else writing in the original author's stead. >>1080039 >Unfortunately, some people are very resistance to letting themselves admit there are problems when they like what they're getting. People see you attack their favorite things at worst as an attack on them, in best case they see you attacking 'good' games so there will be less 'good' games (because they like the game). An inversion of the critic's intention. >>1080041 >And Resident Evil had authors, plural. Whatever happened to Kenichi Iwao and Yasuyuki Saga? This is a good point, Kenichi Iwao was a major influence on RE1, both Alone in the Dark and CYOA books were a major influence to RE1. Shinji mikami wanted RE1 to be about cyborgs, claimed "A haunted house doesn't need a story", and was responsible for the terrible rushed live action opening. So if you loved the cheese Mikami was responsible for that, even though he hated the mockery of it. There's also the fact that the RE1 mansion had more of a the shining hotel design to it vs the gothic design in REmake. shinji mikami just probably wanted the game to be taken 'seriously' but also just saw RE1 as a generic spooky mansion even though said mansion was made in the 1960s which the original RE1 design would fit that era.

>>1080045 Ninja Gaiden Black is pretty much the Definitive version of NG1, but that by no means is proof that NG2004 or NG Sigma are without merit. A true Master Ninja will play all of them. NG Black making many changes from NG 2004 In particular, really changes how the game is played. NG 2004 you can't charge UT's without essence, until you play the DLC "which used to be borderline lost media until recently" The vanilla NG 2004 is a fascinating experience, in some ways it's even harder than NG Black can be. The Hurricane Packs add the Intercept Technique which is essentially giving Ryu Royal Guard. It's a pretty damn powerful tool, that is overturned in favor of the player, but it's also an entirely new dynamic for the game to be played with, making it a very novel play though. Sigma has issues, but it also has new content, so that's worth playing as well. I think the Survival mode in Sigma is a lot of fun, but most people never touched it back on PS3, because it was DLC. And while people are Heavly correct to point out the problems with Ninja Gaiden Sigma 2, it's mere existence wouldn't be a problem if NG2 360 was still just as available on modern platforms as Sigma 2 is. Sigma 2 isn't that big a deal if you just treat it as a differently arranged mode of the game. The problem is that the original NG2 isn't properly preserved enough yet, but hopeful that can change in the future with the potential from the Recompilation project. Then people can just choose which version they like better, intead of needing to defend the only version they have, against a version they never played. Even NG3 Vanilla is worth preserving over pure morbid curiosity, and PS3 Emulation is now in a state where that job is done just fine. A game developer can probably learn a ton from playing Vanilla NG3 and seeing just how bad it fucking everything up, then playing NG3 Razors Edge, and seeing just how Dramatically things can improve with some effort.

>>1080050 >Why waste the resources when you can make something new? Maybe you can't. Incremental improvements might be easier. That's why there are way more amateurs making romhacks than making full games. >Games can never be rendered "obsolute" solely because of the fact that they're entirely dependent on artistic aspects from the literally texture work to the gameplay decisions. I literally addressed this in the sentence immediately after the one you quoted. I'm sympathetic to the idea. But I'm also sympathetic to that idea that it's stupid to recommend to anyone the Game Boy version of, say, Yoshi, when you can play the NES version instead, which is exactly the same but with color and multiplayer and some other stuff. The Game Boy version was made to be portable on portable hardware of the time, and that hardware is now obsolete. You could make a point for appreciating the monochromatic graphics, but, at least in this particular case, I really think it's reaching. So while I think there is an essence of a point to it, in some cases I think it does become silly, and one version of a game might simply be better. I was playing Conker's Pocket Tales, a black cart Game Boy Color game, meaning it also works on original Game Boy. It was on an emulator, and at one point I switched to original Game Boy mode, and was shocked to find that actually some level designs were different. Only slightly, but still, it wasn't as simple as the color being removed. I'd consider the Game Boy version of that game to be more worth playing than the Game Boy version of Yoshi, because it's more different. That said, I'm also pretty sure the devs didn't intend you to actually bother with the Game Boy version and not the Game Boy Color version unless you had the hardware limitation. I'd consider this a borderline case where, even though there are artistic differences, I think it might be acceptable to say one version is obsolete. I would not say any of my previous Castlevania examples make any other Castlevania obsolete. But I would say the 2012 PC version of Sonic Adventure makes Sonic Adventure DX on both Gamecube and PC obsolete, and it comes very close to making all three Dreamcast versions obsolete if you use mods. >>1080053 I didn't say to buy any of the games involved. I did buy a copy of Sonic Adventure in 1999, and never bought another since. But when I heard about the improvements the mods could add, like putting in long lost limited time DLC from multiple regions, and adding a new, more accurate translation (subs only, of course), and removing Amy's panties, then I pirated it and checked it out. It does leave me little reason to play my Dreamcast version anymore. And my Dreamcast version technically wasn't the original, since it was different enough from the Japanese version to be rereleased in Japan later. How about Sonic 3D Blast Director's Cut? That's a mod made by the actual director of the original game, over 20 years later. It slightly modifies the physics, adds Time Attack and Score Attack modes, Super Sonic, Passwords, a level select/map screen (meaning now you can backtrack) and makes it harder to get all the Chaos Emeralds. There are probably a few other things I'm forgetting. But it's the original director. On the other hand, there is the Saturn version, which has (technically) improved textures and music, and replaces the Special Stage with a 3D one made by Sonic Team. I have a hard time believing anyone would sincerely say the graphics or Special Stages are better on the original than the Saturn version, but it's possible some people could think that, I suppose. The music is more subjective. The audio quality is higher, but you might not like the tunes as much. I would have previously said the Saturn version almost made the Genesis obsolete, except for the music, and the slight chance you for some reason prefer the original's graphics. But the Director's Cut now almost makes the Saturn version obsolete. But actually, I think the above example really just shows that sometimes there are remakes and the remakes aren't fully better but aren't fully worse, either, and both versions can have their advantages. >>1080054 >death of the author While I think the author's intent shouldn't just be ignored, there are definitely works I enjoy for reasons other than what the author intended, and think they're great works despite the author not intending why they are great. I genuinely think The Room is a fantastically deep and telling look into a man's tortured soul, but not in the way Tommy Wiseau intended it to be. He wanted you to watch the movie and see his soul, and I think you do, but what you see of his soul isn't what he intended to show.

>>1080056 >The problem is that the original NG2 isn't properly preserved enough yet, but hopeful that can change in the future with the potential from the Recompilation project. Emulation doesn't look too far from good (though that doesn't mean much), but yeah a recompilation would be insane. Going by your post I assume you don't even consider Yaiba: Ninja Gaiden Z as part of the franchise

>>1080058 >I assume you don't even consider Yaiba: Ninja Gaiden Z as part of the franchise Actually I might just be the biggest Yaiba Defender on planet Earth, but my boi Yaiba slipped my mind, since YNGZ is a spin off that's never going to see the light of day again, it has a Steam Version so it is preserved well enough. As much as i'd like to see Yaiba return and be in a much better game, since he's got a ton of potential, it's just not in the cards, it would be something that would require me actively Infiltrating and Influencing NG Development, which I'm not going to rule out in my future. "Honour and death go together like hot sauce and my balls!" -YAIBA: Ninja Gaiden Z E3 2013 trailer Yaiba is a great foil for Ryu and the cast, because the regular NG Cast are all business, and Yaiba is a Disgrace of a Ninja, honorless and only out for himself. He's the true Ying to Ryu's Yang, and he can totally work.

>>1080057 >But actually, I think the above example really just shows that sometimes there are remakes and the remakes aren't fully better but aren't fully worse, either, and both versions can have their advantages. I think you're also missing the significance that you're arguing about difference of the same exact game. You're largely going to have the same experience playing any one of the versions of Sonic 3D, or something like the original Mortal Kombat, and even arguably Sonic Adventure. And there are differences between those versions, some more significant than others, however they're released in close enough proximity that it's up to personal choice rather than artistic problems (Localizations aside). However it's another thing else entirely with full-blown remakes, from something like Sigma being a complete rewrite of NG(B), to just porting over the content in a new engine like Twin Snakes and HL: Source, to full blown new experiences like REmake and nuSilent Hill 2. And it's that latter category that I'm hung up on and refuse to surrender. I'm tired of seeing nothing but remakes, remasters, and rereleases of games that already exist. Especially when all these "new versions" do is end up butching the content of the original or missing the point, but it's all "okay" because you can unlock a new hat. So, yes, I did choose acquire the original FDS version of Castlevania, consider the original PS1 Resident Evil to be the "proper" experience, and think the animated cutscenes and mini-games of Tatsunoko Vs. Capcom:CGOH make it superior to it's Westernized Ultimate All-Stars release. However I will admit that I am a hypocrite to some length as I decided to get the PCE version of YS1/2 as opposed to playing the PC88 originals.

>>1080065 >And it's that latter category that I'm hung up on and refuse to surrender. Funny, it's the total opposite for me, I find remakes that basically change nothing but technical aspects to be near pointless, if I wanted that I could just play the OG Remake that change everything I can on the other hand completely separate from the OG, and I absolutely do not mind playing both usually (sometimes the remake does suck a massive amount of dicks, see Panzer Dragoon) Though then Odin Sphere: Leifthrasïr comes up and both basically changes nothing but technical aspects but at the same time really makes the OG pointless, there's very few remakes like that (maybe the SE edition of monkey island though you can argue about soundcards and platform variance where SE only smoothed out DOS graphics with okay sound emulation for a classic mode) >However I will admit that I am a hypocrite to some length Don't worry anon you're not Mother Theresa no one is expecting you to stick to your convictions in a completely inflexible way regardless of the consequences to yourself

>>1080078 >Funny, it's the total opposite for me, I find remakes that basically change nothing but technical aspects to be near pointless, if I wanted that I could just play the OG I'm in this camp as well, I don't really care technical changes that much. You have to give me decent QoL improvements, new mechanics. or mix it up just enough to make the game to be a defacto 'Master Quest'. Familiar enough to know how to play if you played the original but not too similar that one just do puzzles by using the same solutions of the original either. That alone makes it worth playing, as well as the original. If I wanted an 'remastered' of the original game I would just emulate it or mod it.

Was videogame quality really objective in the first place?

>>1080078 >>1080104 Problem comes with how so many modern remasters and remakes attempt to effectively "replace" the original in execution. Much the same sentiment as this post: >>1080027 nuSilent Hill 2 is a prime example of this with how it keeps calling back to the original game, while at the same trying to attest to how much it "preserves" the original so that you don't need to play the original and "establish" the franchise going forward. From what I understand, the only remake that has ever done this effectively was Yakuza Kiwami, but that's because of it being a follow-up from Yakluza 0 and effectively showing how the series has come full circle to where it now returns from whence it began.

>>1080105 While we as humans will always have our Biases, there are qualities we can tribute to a game that can be used to make Objective points as best we can. If a game doesn't fucking work because it's buggy as shit, that's an objective problem, even if it results in unintended fun gameplay like Sonic 06, most people aren't gonna take that as a reason to why the game is good. It has to work when playing as intended. I may have enjoyed Sonic 06 back in the day just fine, since I was conditioned by a ton of prior sonic games having similar game design, and similar but not as drastic issues, but that doesn't mean I'm objectively correct to call Sonic 06 a good game just because I can enjoy playing it. If someone without all that conditioning plays Sonic 06 it's gonna be a Disaster, because the just has objective problems, like the scripting on loops fucking up and getting killed in entirely unintended ways, due to the lack of polish. The game also only gives you a prompt to save after beating a level, if you don't pause the game and save yourself, if you get a game over it's all the way back to the last save, which means if you die at the end of the first level, which most people very likely will, and get a game over, you're getting sent all the way back to the first cutscene, and you have to do a sub mission again to get the Light Speed dash to make it to actually take a crack at the first level again, and that's not mentioning the ungodly long loading times, making that process take even longer. All just because you didn't know you had to manually save every time you made some small progress, to avoid losing it from a game over, in a glitchy game that'll get you killed in ways that aren't your fault. Me thinking Sonic 06 was actually a great game as a kid was entirely due to tunnel vision, from playing so many Sonic games, and being entirely detached from the viewpoint of the average person. Is an argument to be made here that I haven't just given objective points just now in regard to Sonic 06's quality?

>>1080105 Kind of, you just have to consistent of your observations and recording reactions to the game mechanics. Take frame rate for example you could make a lot of test from people how the feel about the game play with sub30 fps 30fps and 60fps 120fps. The opinions of the test subjects are subjective and are going to vary, possibly a lot, but if you get enough people test on you can get a general idea what people like or at least will not tolerate. Which you can use as a standard from that point on.

>>1080065 >However it's another thing else entirely with full-blown remakes If it's a full blown remake, then I don't give a fuck at all. If it offers a different experience, it's a different game, and I will treat it as such. There are at least four "remakes" of the original Castlevania, and at least two of those have remakes of their own. But they're all different games. The ones that are more different are the ones I get least hung up on, since they're just new games. I don't care if they have similar stories or fit into the same place in the timeline or whatever. They're different games. If one is good, play it. If it's not, then don't. But if you think playing NES Castlevania means you don't have to play Vampire Killer or Haunted Castle or Chronicles or Castlevania IV, since they're all "remakes" (and in Japan all have the same title), then you're missing out, because they're all different. Actually maybe not missing out on Vampire Killer or Haunted Castle, because they're the worst games in the series, but that's not the point. Also, Haunted Castle got a remake just recently that is much better, because really it's a brand new game that just uses ideas from the original. It's an example of the precise kind of remake you dislike, but it's actually better than the original, because the original Haunted Castle sucks balls, and the new one is actually good. But really they're totally different games, so it doesn't matter. Really the new one is just the sixth remake of the original Castlevania game. >>1080104 >"Master Quest" This is a good point. A lot of the remakes anon is complaining about are really more like Ocarina of Time: Master Quest than anything. And nobody would complain about that or consider it a remake. I think really it all comes down to marketing. OoT:MQ wasn't sold as a remake, even though it fills the same spot in the timeline as the original, and has similar ideas, but is changed quite significantly, which is precisely what all those other "remakes" do. >>1080105 Trying to get too objective results in arguing about nothing but tech, which people do all the time here. But of course that is fucking retarded, because games are also art, and art is subjective. I will assert that some games are better than others, but it is not nearly as simple as comparing objective measures. Some games are just more fun than others. But as we all know, fun is a buzzword. >>1080109 >Is an argument to be made here that I haven't just given objective points just now in regard to Sonic 06's quality? >>1080107 >while at the same trying to attest to how much it "preserves" the original so that you don't need to play the original and "establish" the franchise going forward. I don't know Silent Hill. How does the game do this? How does it try to imply it replaces the original and you don't need to play it? Perhaps the argument to be made is that you didn't have points of reference at the time. You hadn't played as many games, so there were fewer games you were aware of that were better than it, and quality can be relative. >>1080115 This is called focus grouping, and it's why we get such standardized braindead garbage the last few gens. Because you're applying it just to a particular technical thing in your example, but really it can be applied to any idea.

>>1080147 >How does the game do this? How does it try to imply it replaces the original and you don't need to play it? For one, it's only the only version of the game available on modern devices and platforms (Especially since "no one" buys physical PC games anymore).

>>1080180 Yeah but by that logic most games that ever existed don't exist anymore. But I have like eight hundred NES games that have never been rereleased on my computer (and several other devices around the house) right now.

>>1080181 >Yeah but by that logic most games that ever existed don't exist anymore That's not how it works. Those games do exist, though their ease of access does have a higher barrier of entry. Meanwhile, look at the case of something like PMTTYD or Another Code. You're options are that you either have the original games and the platforms their compatible with (When was the last time you ran into someone with a Wii or even a (3)DS?), OR you could go out an buy the Switch versions. Sure, the former's script has been updated to reflect "modern politics" and the latter has inserted niggers into the main cast where previously there was none, but it's the "same game", am I right? That's what I'm talking. And call it vengeful, but I'd rather these games remain on the platforms they original released on than risk them being butchered and turned into political propaganda.

>>1079681 (OP) I'v almost got to take back my OP when it comes ot what I said about Star Wars Bounty Hunter, I've almost finished the game, and it is far better than I recall it being so long ago. There is no way I beat this game legit when I was younger I 100% used Cheats to make it through to the end or something. Now I wouldn't say this game is a Masterpiece that much I stand by, the Lucas arts of the time were still absolutely talented devs that could have made it a Masterpiece, if they didn't have such limitations of the Specific product they had to make in the timeframe given, on the platforms at the time. I always had a wish that they'd make a Bounty Hunter 2 with Boba Fett, so I attracted the game that much, and saw the room for growth even back when it released, but this game is still well crafted all things considered. Only huge Criticism one could make of this game is the Jet Pack being so nerfed of it's potential which is a big fucking deal in a god damn Jango Fett game, but it's Obvious why the Jet Pack is limited to how it is, and not as powerful as the one from Shadows of the Empire. They had a timeframe of a movie releasing, the GameCube Controller, the GameCube Disc, and the PS2 to work with. They had to make the game based on tried and true methods of design, they didn't have the luxury to start pulling off some Experimental innovative high production shit. This game isn't a Masterpiece, but they were borderline masters of their craft, to pull off such a solid product. >>1080182 While I'm happy if more people can have access to play more good games, I am also not one to be impressed by a lack of motivation to get to games that people are entirely able to if they put in just put in the effort to access them on their own. In this day and age, people have way more options, even on their phones. People aren't gonna have sympathy from me, when they can have all the games they could ever want at their fingertips if they weren't lazy, and got informed.

>>1080193 Son of a fucking bitch, I deserve this... I'm not even mad. See I've been trying to beat Bounter Hunter with a Specific goal, beating the game without getting any of the collectables, making just the story progress for the goal of unlocking the Boba Fett skin, then I'd share the save game around, for people who just wanted access to the Boba Fett skin, I assumed people who already beat this game in the past would be like me, and just want to use the Boba Skin on a playthough while not remembering most of the game too well form all these years having passed. After all this little replayability, I said. Not am was I fucking wrong about the replayablity aspect, since this is just a good game that's worth playing twice in a row if you'd want, but I don't have a choice because of my own self Imposed rules. This is the 2nd fucking time I've accidentally got a collectable and the game autosaves them, I was on the 3rd to last level too. Gotta start all over, yet again. I'm getting WAY more bang for my buck then I thought with all this shit. You'd be surprised how unlucky you might be when trying to NOT pick up a fucking glowing Orange thing. God exists, and he's got a sense of humor alright. This is Hilarious, and I'm a fucking jack ass.

How is this one of the most active threads on the site? And why does it have so much 'tism and so many walls of text? If I were to contribute, I think a lot of NES games suffer from the nostalgia bug. There's tons of absolute shit on that console, shit people inexplicably praise solely because they grew up with it. I've seen Back to the Future of all games get defended, which in Japan is often considered THE worse game on the Famicom. The inverse is also true; there are plenty of NES games with terrible reputations that arguably don't deserve it, like Friday the 13th and Die Hard. Then there are great games which are totally unremembered outside of collector and enthusiast circles, most notably Little Samson. >>1079907 >pic >that character stinky kobold, get a bath

>>1080193 >>1080197 >I'v almost got to take back my OP when it comes ot what I said about Star Wars Bounty Hunter, I've almost finished the game, and it is far better than I recall it being so long ago. That is usually what happens when you go into a game expecting it to be worse than it actually is. >>1080228 >Die Hard You know a game that would be insanely great, a proper tactical survival shooter that actually goes to the full extent of what the NES game was trying for made by Teyon

>>1080228 I want to use blob miku as an onahole.

Its still good. Yeah SMB3 mogs it and you can cheese it with the feather cape but is still good.

There are zoomers out there who are nostalgic for the 2010s, Minecraft and Roblox. How does that make you feel?

>>1080312 I mean it's perfectly understandable, I am also nostalgic about crappy games I used to fill my spare time during my childhood.

>>1080268 I think she's several feet tall, not sure you can grasp her like a toy. <<1080312 >2010s, Minecraft and Roblox. 1. Both of these are from the 2000s. 2. I don't see it any differently to other nostalgia, at least MC is a decent game. Don't be an old man who gets upset time moves past you.

>>1080316 >1. Both of these are from the 2000s. That's a bit disingenous; how many zoomzooms were playing Minecraft before it launched on consoles?

>>1080321 What if they are millennials who are nostalgic about it, then?

>>1080337 The only "nostalgia" I have for Robolox during the Aughts is afternoons spent at the library trying and failing to get the damn game to run on their computers. Spent most of my time there checking out comics that I never read and vidya that I never played.

>>1080182 Kinda reminds me of assault weapon bans, "no one is taking your guns" is a typical talking point. Which the real issue is that you're intending no more production of those type of weapons eventually making them extremely expensive if you're allowed to buy & sell pre-ban 'assault weapons'.Which happen to real machine guns once it's registry got closed, those things cost more than a car these days.

>>1080115 The problem with majority rules is that the majority thought Skyrim was one of the best games ever made. There’s many games which are popular and financially successful that are still regarded as shit.

A majority of the issues discussed in this thread stem from the following: >the inability to construct objective thoughts (aka too stupid to live) >the unwillingness to look at things objectively (aka room readers and fence sitters) >the ignorance of how to be objective and why it's so damn important So here's a thought exercise I devised to help other people take their first steps towards having a more organized mind. The underlying principles are to encourage self reflection through vocabulary cojoined with comparison. First, open up notepad and write down 10 lines numbered 1 through 10. Associate words with each number representing both feelings and technical feedback/thought you'd have about a product, but you need to have the words representing 1 being similar to "inflicts physical pain", "dangerous", "doesn't work", with 10 being similar to "perfect", "life changing", and with 5 being simply "average". To keep it simple, keep it about video games at first. If you download a game and it doesn't boot, you spend a few hours digging for info on how to get it to run, succeed, only for it to chain crash then that game would be rated as a 1. Perfect games like Tetris would be a 10. Then you input every game you've played into that 1-10 list and then work out if a game actually you've assigned to a specific number actually deserves that spot. For example, you decided to put Mario 64 and Super Mario World as a 9, but you think Mario 64 is a superior game to Super Mario World. That means Super Mario World isn't actually a 9 and you need to re-evaluate where it belong on the list and what adjectives to use to address the game. If you put 9 as "amazing", then maybe you need to downgrade Super Mario World to an 8 which would be "great". Once you're done, do it for gameplay. And graphics. Sound. Do it for other objects and products in your life. Do it with people. After a while, it'll become second nature to view and organize the world in such a manner, and you'll come to realize just how often you're being lied to, misdirected, scammed, and fooled by others on a daily basis.

>>1080474 >After a while, it'll become second nature to view and organize the world in such a manner, and you'll come to realize just how often you're being lied to, misdirected, scammed, and fooled by others on a daily basis. How does this correlate to organizing one's own opinions on rating experiences/games? Sorry, I just don't see the connection between that paragraph and the ones preceding it.

>>1080312 I miss the days when Minecraft was only popular with computer geeks and college students.

>>1080491 Easier said than done when not appiled to luxury goods.

>>1080350 Here's your (You)

>>1080474 > feelings >"perfect", "life changing" Subjective

>>1080503 If you try something and someone tells you "it's great" and you're able to identify that it's shit, you can tell you're either being lied to, or talking to a moron with bad taste. Think of it as nurturing an immunity to bullshit. >>1080651 You can like something while acknowledging that it's not very good, and you can dislike something and acknowledge that it's great. Think of saying that a game is decent (6/10), but that you loved the art style/story/gameplay/whateverthefuckelse and ended up liking it way more than the game's quality would otherwise suggest. Now go eat your vegetables, it's good for you.

>>1079681 (OP) >>1080193 >>1080197 I've come full Circle on Star Wars :Bound Hunter This game really is a masterpiece Started actually reading the bounties, This guy wacks it in front of people in public, and probably is selling CP to this other guy. Just goes to show sometimes ones first gut Instinct is simply true, and over analyzing shit is unnecessary.

>>1080788 The problem is that the goal of entertainment is to entertain, which is largely if not entirely subjective. You can say much on what is objectively healthy for a human, but you can’t say much if anything. Of what is objectively entertaining to them. You can come up with a set of standards you can objectively measure a piece of entertainment on, but how can you say WHY those standards should be followed over any other?

>>1082282 We can see from how the Industry has progressed that there is some merit to finding standards that will lead to entertaining the audience. That's pretty much what continuing to produce a franchise is, but there is only so far those standards will get you before people will become tired of it. Eventually the need will come to surpass those standards, or go off in a different direction entirely. Innovation and change to some degree will always be necessary over playing it safe, but there is only so much one can do to predict what will be seen as Good change or Bad change, and sometime what is seen as good or bad is split down the middle. It is possible to reach some objective standard of Entertainment, but to surpass standards requires ideas that might not be objective safe bets, until they are proven to work time and again, which then leads us in a loop.

>>1079681 (OP) Isn't the strong nostalgia phenomenon also got something to do with the sad, current state of the game industry? I've seen people fed up with crap like micro transactions and other predatory shit that they just want how games were back then, in which they want to experience the full package at day one. >>1079935 As much as I dislike Synthetic Man for being a sperg, he had some solid points about remakes being quick cash-grabs so that retards can spend their money blindly. People like MauLer and those of EFAP really showed me that these guys are a bunch of fags. >>1079953 >Remakes are fine if they're developed by a team of people who have the intent to actually improve the game with QoL features while still respecting the spirit of the original release, like Star Ocean 2 The Second Story R, The Famicom Detective Club and Xenoblade Chronicles DE. Or even remasters like the GrimGrimoire OnceMore, which is superior over the OG PS2 version for just the speed-up button alone. I consider remakes like Pokemon FireRed and LeafGreen, and HeartGold and SoulSilver to be much better than the OG counterparts, but doesn't deviate too much. These games are probably the best remakes that GameFreak ever did.

>>1082315 >People like MauLer and those of EFAP >some ”people” here actually watch eceleb normalfaggotry The absolute state of this place

>>1082319 I'm not even a fan of those guys to begin with, anon.

>>1080228 Cuckchanners fleeing here, but then again it's extremely aberrant for them to type long posts. >>1082319 8chan prime had Super Best Friends threads before the group disbanded, and nowadays as time passed it's clear all the members were fags in one way or the other sorta like what this community is now. While I'm on this tangent, I wanted to list off a couple of old games prime was obsessed with and give a reevaluation. Just five for now. >Hotline Miami 2 Beyond Pardoposting, fizzled out as the devs intended with gameplay that relied on camping. Carpenter Brut chimping out over "Roller Mobster" being edited into rapefugee invasion compilations was hilarious, though. >Rainbow Six Siege Did not age well considering it devolved into hero shooter sludge and the absolute state of Ubishit. >MGSV It's bounced around for a while in terms of impact but ultimately while no longer actively discussed, 9 years later it came out ahead of the modern slate in both graphics and gameplay. >Metal Gear Rising: Revengeance Another Metal Gear title, while it's also faded some it's had a brief resurgence and probably has aged the best considering it still has a memetic legacy and despite Platinum's decline. >Synthetik Died with the sequel going to Early Access. Times were different.

>>1082324 >Super Best Friends Not great, but not really that bad compared to nutubers.

>>1079681 (OP) If you go to your mental health doctor and you say to them they're wrong, about everything, they've been wrong right back to Freud whose progeny and family links were full of badly, improperly, and compoundingly treated mental disfunctions exacerbated and caused by Freud himself, then you will be finger pointed at and told that you're suffering from delusional paranoia instead. But the truth is where it stands, regardless of the civil servant or the doctor using their sophistry to contain it/you. >GT2 was better than GT7 You'll make no argument of it, you weather condition simulating cuckold. >Fallout 1 was better than whateverthefuckmodern Fallout is on That if you were to time travel and introduce both foreign technologies to Rome, and they surpassed the stage of being bamboozled by the graphics of the latter, then the story of the first would resonate more (of course they would be more interested in the technology itself but that's the nature of man). And I can more or less do this all fucking day with it. And you'll hear back in response "woe is me there is no universal yard stick for art" from the subjectivists and from the deconstructionists. But if I'm presented with 1,000 different yard sticks in a storage locker, then sooner or later I can sort through them to find several useful ones and my fallible interpretation starts to become a sturdy one. So fuck you, you sophisticated civil servant whose arguments are weak, whose arguments will not pin down in any one direction without being slippery and slimy to move some other clever direction. You have the negative qualities of man to spite those who anchor themselves with the truth

>>1079681 (OP) >consider the people who can't do that. I wonder about that a lot. FF13, for example, rubbed me the wrong way when it came out. A lot of people were excited about it, and insisted it wasn't a half-baked mess. Almost nothing they had to say in its defense had anything to do with the game itself. Including one turbosperg who vomited up a 5000 word essay at me about his own schizophrenic interpretation of the thing being a symbolist epic, which really wasn't as interesting as it sounds. >you're just nostalgic for 6/7/9/10! >your opinion will change just like with the rest of the series! There wasn't much to do but shrug and say "alright, maybe in ten years when you've grown a brain you can articulate why you like the damn thing." Ten years later was 2020, and I made a point of looking up retrospectives, which ranged from tepid to negative except for a handful of faggots, niggers, and niggerfaggots who still couldn't articulate anything beyond the same vapid "Fang is liek, so k3wl" garbage as in 2010. Conversely, you can look up Resonant Arc on youtube and hear two reasonably intelligent guys go in depth about the rest of the series: moments they thought were moving, symbolism they found interesting. Their coverage of 13 was essentially an exploration of "what caused this train wreck?" because it doesn't have those other things. The answer to my question in 2010 is that there's no amount of steelmanning or benefit of the doubt you can give to it; it just sucked. But there are people who'll gulp it down like tube after tube of orange juice flavored toothpaste. >>1080312 I wonder about this, too. I want to get a vicarious sense of nostalgia from some bright-eyed 20 year old who was really into... whatever it would be, having been born in 2005. A lot of the younger people I encounter are most nostalgic for their dads' handmedown PS1s and gamecubes and other things from before they were born. Strikes me as a little odd, and probably my own sampling bias.

>>1082335 >he unironically listens to leftist retard jewtubers for either confirming or challenging his opinions I've learned a long time ago never to expect anything out of jewtubers who try to talk about JRPGs, I've very rarely seen any good retrospectives or analysis on any JRPG, no matter how good or bad the actual game might be. I tried listening to a Resonant Arc video once, and aside from them revealing that they were leftist homosexuals, they sounded basically the same as the rest of the jewtube leftist video essayist garbage on jewtube, with maybe a modicum more self-awareness than the usual retards. The simple fact is you simply haven't encountered anyone who can defend the game yet, that doesn't mean it's bad. Some games have a genuine dearth of presence when it comes to people being willing to defend their quality in a compelling way against stupid, often repeated criticisms that become a circlejerk.

>remember kids at school talking about NFS Underground 2 when it came out >how it was apparently the best thing since Gothic II or something >want gaem but parents say muh Fast&Furious are dangerous Hitler so I didn't get to >decades later I pirate and play it with a widescreen hack >holy niggers >this would've been an 11/10 for my race car adoring early 2000s self and still is an easy 9/10 today >gameplay, graphics, OST, it just fits together >tfw nostalgia for a game I never had as a child Am I retarded?

>>1082353 >nostalgia for a game I never had as a child It happens to me every time I play a good game from the 2000s that I never got to play as a kid.

>>1082353 >>1082358 Anon, it's not "nostalgia" If you're experiencing something that you never experienced before. However that's not going to stop a lot of shills or coping Progressivesfrom from declaring that you're "remembering things wrong" because they cannot allow people to remember that things used to be better. Because we're suppose to be "moving forward", so any attempt to point out that standards have regressed destroys their narrative of "toxic positivity" about how much "better" things are in CY+8. Now I'm not saying that "everything" has regressed, there are some aspects about today that are far better than as recently as a decade ago, just that a lot of metrics have regressed on what's deemed to be "acceptable".

>>1082367 >>1082353 >Anon, it's not "nostalgia" If you're experiencing something that you never experienced before. The game itself still represent a sort of snapshot of the era's mentality so while it's not nostalgia for the game itself it is still nostalgia for the era the game released in.

>>1082367 >there are some aspects about today that are far better than as recently as a decade ago Like what? Do you realize a decade ago was only 2015? The last thing I can think of that legitimately seems pretty convenient is cell phones. Not smartphones, cell phones. But even then, I remember an era before cell phones, and everything was fine. Maybe better. Video games sure haven't gotten better since the popularization of the cell phone in the early 2000s. I guess I have to assume medicine has gotten better, but with the coronavirus, maybe not. The internet? That sure as fuck hasn't gotten better. That peaked in 2007 at the latest. >>1082401 This. Somehow when I was a kid I missed out on games like Zelda and Castlevania. Decades later I went back to them, and it was such a great feeling to have games that were new to me, yet worked with the trends and styles of their eras. It was even better, because instead of waiting years for each one, I could play dozens in a row. It was great. By finding good old games, I can almost travel back in time to the eras they're from.