Which games didn't age very well, in your opinion?

Bob-ombs only battle mode from 7 is better

and besides it lacks a single-player battle mode so yeah, i never had a reason to play it other than making the game drop below 60 fps thanks to bombs spam
 
Games definitely age, some people get very serious nostalgia goggles about their original favorites. I get kind of annoyed when people say the original was best just because it was the most influential or some shit, games should be judged on their gameplay if you're asking "Which game is better?". Graphics without question get aged, some worse than others, but I'll agree that's largely a non-issue if original gameplay was just flat out better than the new ones.
 
It's the argument I see the most which made me associate 'aged' with 'holy fucking shit I have to be patient for 1 second and git gud for a little while this game is awful retro trash'.
 
I see aged as meaning less refined and worse than today's standard, which is pretty subjective, but games can flat out just be lacking or have really clunky controls for instance
 
I suppose it kinda depends what you mean in context with aged. Like how NES games can feel outdated with alot of them having no save feature, having to start at the very beginning if you lost all your lives. Frustrating to people who aren't that good at platformers, but if you're skilled, you don't mind the challenge. Nonetheless it could technically count as aging, as games now are pretty much required to have saving, Virtual Console releases these days even have Save States that could seriously help those who probably couldn't beat the game before with the limited lives they had.

But when people say a game hasn't aged well as a way of saying it's bad. It just opens a can of worms that I mentioned that it implies games these days are inherently better then games from the past. I do agree it should be a game-by-game basis when it comes to the "Which game is better?" question where you pick between which ones you enjoy more and/or have a personal preference to, it shouldn't be because the game is older and outdated, nor should it be true for the vice-versa.
 
It's not just about challenge, it's more that gameplay can be really shallow and dull even though it was revolutionary and the best game out at the time. I'd like to see an argument saying why the original SMB has better gameplay than NSMB, for instance. SMB is 10x more notable because of what it did for the industry, but as a game on it's own? It's alright but it's lacking compared to today, let alone SMB3 or SMW.

Personally liking a game more than another due to your own history with it is a completely different topic, though
 
I think aged games depends on your opinion on them.

SMB for me aged badly, especially because of how many replacement it had, romhacks, pc counterparts, the NSMB series. Each adding a few more to the original game, that's why it's number 1.

SM64, even though this is definitely my favorite 3d platformer ever, I can't say it aged well, the graphics are colorful, but lacking, the controls are responsive, but slippy at times. The camera is horrible, that's a fact. But I still think it plays better than SMG, even though the latter has 10 times better graphics, the controls are more limited, and the spin was the only thing that made it bearable, which is cheap. Consider doing a triple jump, in SM64, it's unassisted, but you can basically do it with little to no running, in SMG, it's assisted, hence it's easier to do, but you will have to get a long run before you are able to do it, otherwise you will stop short midair.

The original Mario Party, I just can't take this game, once I played MP2, this game counted as a terrible game, MP seems a bit more unfair for me and the models are ugly-looking. Of course, it's better than MP9+

I didn't play Zelda, Twilight Princess, but from what I have seen, this game looks terrible on an HD screen, so does Oot, surprisingly, MM doesn't look as terrible.
 
I didn't play Zelda, Twilight Princess, but from what I have seen, this game looks terrible on an HD screen, so does Oot, surprisingly, MM doesn't look as terrible.
Click to expand...
That's due to limitations in modern TVs not the games themselves, though I guess TP should have been late enough to not have that problem or at least find some middleground
 
Chiaki Nanami said:
It's the argument I see the most which made me associate 'aged' with 'holy *bleep*ing *bleep* I have to be patient for 1 second and git gud for a little while this game is awful retro trash'.
Click to expand...
Then change your association with "aged" since its usage, demonstrated by the discussion here, requires definition. By your previous question I would've said that how much you enjoy the game has no bearing if it has aged or not.
 
Northern Verve said:
I suppose it kinda depends what you mean in context with aged. Like how NES games can feel outdated with alot of them having no save feature, having to start at the very beginning if you lost all your lives. Frustrating to people who aren't that good at platformers, but if you're skilled, you don't mind the challenge. Nonetheless it could technically count as aging, as games now are pretty much required to have saving, Virtual Console releases these days even have Save States that could seriously help those who probably couldn't beat the game before with the limited lives they had.

But when people say a game hasn't aged well as a way of saying it's bad. It just opens a can of worms that I mentioned that it implies games these days are inherently better then games from the past. I do agree it should be a game-by-game basis when it comes to the "Which game is better?" question where you pick between which ones you enjoy more and/or have a personal preference to, it shouldn't be because the game is older and outdated, nor should it be true for the vice-versa.
Click to expand...

The thing is, modern games are definitely more capable of being good than older games. That's why we have a tendency to hold them to a higher standard than our old gems - old gems are often excused with hardware limitations, writing not being as refined, being the first in their genre, and other excuses that we toss out at them all the time. Of course these games haven't aged well, because nowadays we're capable of more than what games of the past were. Games today SHOULD be better because they don't have those excuses to hold them back.

Saying a game hasn't aged well isn't saying it's bad, it's saying that if it were introduced now it wouldn't receive the same praise that it did when it was first released because we know that games are capable of better.
 
Glitchy said:
There are many old games that stand the test of time, but there are also some that just didn't age well at all? Which games do you think aged the worst?

I think Fire Emblem: Dark Dragon and the Sword of Light (FE1) aged horribly. While it was the first in the Fire Emblem series and set the bar for the series, it did a lot of things strangely. For example:

-Marth didn't wear pants

-The Knight class and General class both existed in the game but unlike every other game in the series, Knights didn't promote to Generals.

-For whatever reason, they decided to make both a Archer and Hunter class, which are essentially the same, except Hunters don't promote and are a bit faster.

-Some... interesting character designs.

-Healers didn't gain exp from healing, they had to be attacked to gain exp.

Also FE3 Book 1 and FE11 exist.
Click to expand...

lol fast forward to now and I love FE1
 
Glitchy said:
lol fast forward to now and I love FE1
Click to expand...
FE1 was still weird as hell. Which classes could promote and which ones couldn't seemed entirely random, especially with the ones that had their promoted versions in the game and still couldn't do it, the healers experience deal, the magic and resistance stats didn't exist at all, etc. The Chameleon class was a pretty cool idea, though.
 
Tuxedo Ridley said:
Glitchy said:
lol fast forward to now and I love FE1
Click to expand...
FE1 was still weird as hell. Which classes could promote and which ones couldn't seemed entirely random, especially with the ones that had their promoted versions in the game and still couldn't do it, the healers experience deal, the magic and resistance stats didn't exist at all, etc. The Chameleon class was a pretty cool idea, though.
Click to expand...

That's part of the reason I love it. It's kind of fun to see how far the series progressed.

Fire Emblem Gaiden looks great too, I just finished watching Ghast's LP of it and despite its huge shortcomings it looks like a really cool game, with tons of cool innovations and ideas that were improved on in later games (especially Sacred Stones aka Gaiden 2) and the plot actually seems pretty solid, probably at least better than the plots of Conquest and Revelations. There needs to be a Gaiden remake.
 
I have to say the original Metroid for the NES.

I think it has a lot of flaws that make the game really frustrating such as starting you off with 30 health instead of full, not being able to shoot downwards and no shooting while ducking. You have to constantly grind for health which makes it less fun. I didn't enjoy it very much because of the flaws. I think Metroid II and Super Metroid have aged better than the original Metroid.
 
Games that I think have not aged well
  • Mario Kart 64's controls and graphics, plus some technical issues like no music in 3 or 4 player mode.
  • Super Mario Kart's physics and repeated course themes.
  • Super Smash Bros. 64 feels very clunky compared to the other games in the series and it's really limited in terms of characters, stages, and modes.
Games that people say did not age well but I disgree
  • Super Mario Bros. is actually still a very fun and solid platformer, although there are a few aspects that haven't aged well (inability to move the screen backwards, no saving).
 
playing pokemon yellow for the first time since 6th grade makes me wonder how this series took off in the first place

it's so clunky
 
eh i played blue last year and it was alright, there's gameboy games that aged worse...

...

...

wait i cant name one single gameboy game that has aged badly from the top of my head

huh
 
Not even Pokemon?

Remember the item management from that game? And that move called Wrap? Or that move called Screech.

Never let me experience those again.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back