Tell us the question.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
The Giant Bomb Quick Look Thread 2
- Thread starter Gowans
- Start date
Vampire On Titus
Member
Eh, there's a lot of clunkers in every era of video games, propped up by novelty or otherwise. I played a lot of them back then and they were terrible when they came out. But the good ones, the past two years I've been going back and playing them. So far still good every time. What would be an example of a game you considered great at the time but has aged poorly?
This point I don't get, tbh. You even said it yourself, frame rate is still an issue today. It's not like the frame rate was good back then and now the frame rate has aged poorly and sucks. It's an issue for sure, but if the frame rate isn't cripplingly bad and I'm enjoying the game, then it's just a flaw and all games have some flaws. These games aren't perfect but they never were perfect when they came out. It's not like there weren't any games with good frame rates and people didn't know any better, so to me that's not really an issue of aging poorly. It's just poor when that's the case for all games.
I can't think of any PS1 games that were great and had cripplingly bad frame-rate issues. But I could totally be forgetting some examples.
So maybe the perspective on what constitutes "really poorly" is just different. OoT is a bit choppy. Runs at like 24 FPS or something? I never even think about it playing the game. Definitely not what I would consider a substantial frame rate issue like say Banjo-Tooie definitely has.
What are the games that people actually considered great that have these issues? The camera issues in this era of gaming are massively over-stated, I believe. The style of the era was to have a camera that did the majority of the work for you and camera control used sparingly. Nowadays it's common place to expect the player to nurse the camera with the right stick throughout the entire game (something I don't have a problem with). A lot of the time the older stuff actually adds up to me spending less time messing with the camera then I do in modern games. That's not to say there weren't games with TERRIBLE cameras, there sure were. But there still are today (Resident Evil 6 says hi) and all the games I loved back then and still love have fine cameras (OoT, Banjo, Conker, etc).
The feeling like you're playing through Jam issue I don't get, can't think of a game that feels like that besides Donkey Kong 64, and I fucking hate Donkey Kong 64. Hated it when I was a kid and I rented it from block buster and it ruined my precious kid gaming weekend, still hate it now. That was more of a deliberate design choice for that specific game though, like Little Big Planet or something (though I thing LBP is fine).
If anything I get this feeling you're describing more so playing games on HD televisions with the lag inherent to doing so. Whenever I go back to playing old games on my CRT I'm shocked at how tight and responsive they feel by comparison.
Going back and playing some of these games, I think a case can even be made for Low Polygon models as a legitimate art style, not just a technical limitation, much the way Pixel Art has become. Idk something about the chunky look of stuff like Crash and Vagrant Story is legitimately appealing to me.
EmCeeGramr said:
Couldn't agree more, I feel older games have different trends in design, but the new trends don't invalidate the old ones for me, and more often then not I can really go for that nowadays.
Practically all of your points seem to be taken from the perspective that my standards haven't changed in fifteen years, they have. I remember loving games then that I find completely shit now, sinking countless hours into games I'd now consider almost unplayable.
Nothing can date if your perception of quality is unchanged.
EmCeeGramr
Member
My standards are way higher now! *disparages any film where there isn't fifty plot twists at the end or epic Zimmer-esque music making every scene seem more important than God*
Ask him if he likes Nier to break the tie.
Tatsumaki Senpuukyaku!
Member
Jeff hates super metroid too.
Vampire On Titus
Member
The frame rate thing in particular I'm probably more lenient with since you think OoT's frame rate is really poor @ 24fps. While I don't even notice it when I'm playing.
With everything else I'm saying the issues you noted aren't a factor with the best games of that era. They are with the bad games of the era. But clumsy controls, bad frame rate, crappy camera and a sluggish unresponsive feel are still an issue with modern bad games. So it isn't a question of being "dated" just one of quality.
The only standard that every game I play has to meet is giving me a good time, that's it. It hasn't ever changed, and it wont ever. What I said is that the flaws you mentioned in your post don't apply to the games I played and have been replaying (crash,vagrant story, spyro, banjo, conker, jet set radio). I'm going back, and the controls and level design still great compared right with the great games I'm playing now. For sure way less visually impressive.
What are these archaic games that are unplayable but were still good back then?
Treythalomew
Member
Yeah but the ps3 version came out in June 2010 and the xbox one came out December 2011. A pretty big gap compared to this where they announced that the ps3 version would be better less than a month after the xbox version came out.
I beat all over JD2 and didn't think it contained 15 dollars of content so it is kind of a weak move on their part to be holding back stuff like this.
You send him a PM on comicvine.com
Maybe you had high standards at the time, I did not, therefore as my tastes developed, games I previously enjoyed stopped being enjoyable. Although some of the games you listed I really don't like.
As for what, the Tomb Raider games are all terrible, as are the Resident Evils. Those stand out as games I really loved as a kid, and are shit.
shadyspace
Banned
No he doesn't.
Aren't you the guy who's always posting so cutely about people intentionally misrepresenting each others' posts?
EmCeeGramr
Member
Yes, so it's a good thing my point (about "standards changing" often being used when there's usually more of a stylistic change over time when it comes to certain old games) wasn't that.
DyslexicAlucard
Member
I know you weren't addressing me, but I'd have to throw my hat in and say Goldeneye 64. I loved that game as a kid, but nowadays, between the hideous framerate, clunky controls, and bad level design (compared to contemporary games, mind) I cannot go home again.
The soundtrack is still outstanding, though. Hell, here's a second example, for old time's sake.
AcceptableGhost
Member
Games being "dated" is a bad trope that needs to end. I don't know if NiGHTS is a good game or not but everytime someone says "does it hold up well" I die a little inside. The question is whether or not it was -ever- a good game. Although people not accustomed to arcade style gaming are probably not ones to give trustworthy opinions on older games (or people in general who hate it when a game gives any resistance to you completing it).
SapientWolf
Trucker Sexologist
It's not a trope. A lot of genres have seen such massive advancements that going back to play old games is heartbreaking.
shadyspace
Banned
Really sucks that the games that don't hold up well according to the guys are the ones probably the largest segment of their fan base grew up with.
Tatsumaki Senpuukyaku!
Member
this is true to an extent, but it doesnt make it not a lazy criticism
Yeah, seriously, this is perfectly valid. Video game design is an additive process (and get the fuck out of here with your "COD PLAYS GAME FOR YOU" nonsense) and if you start tracing the years you're bound to run into games that are frankly just too primitive and/or repetitive to be fun anymore. There are tons of examples of that.
shadyspace
Banned
Plenty of N64 games hold up perfectly dammnit
Tatsumaki Senpuukyaku!
Member
I count two, and you could make a good case that even those don't hold up
In this particular case I dont even think this applies, I think the game was garbage since it's conception. I remember hating it as a kid, looking at it, laugh and go back to play Mario 64, and I was a huuuuge SEGA fan.
I think what happened with Nights is that the "sega fanboy" opinion left such a mark that it just sorta turned into the general one because people started assuming the game was good or something and werent really giving their own opinion on it, but trying hard to like it. I just cant see how anyone would enjoy that game, unless purely from the fact that they didnt know better.
Hot Coldman
Banned
Well, Nintendo's back catalogue has weathered the winds of change quite well, in general. Better than SEGA's. A lot better than SEGA's.
I will say that SEGA's games at least still have the potential to hook people in much the same way they used to. I don't think any of them ever quite lost that. It's just been worn down to such a tiny fraction of players at this point. I mean, sad to say but I guess there's not many people nowadays that'd think much of games like Daytona USA or, yes, NiGHTS.
I had a Saturn, and me nor my friends were ever talking up 'YEAH MAN NIGHTS IS THE SHIT'. The only time we ever really played my Saturn was for Virtua Fighter 2 and Fighters Megamix. YMMV, but it's the Saturn. Even back in the day, people were disappointed by NiGHTS being the sequel to Sonic.
Now Jeff's insane idea that Sonic 2 is better than 3 is where you can make a better argument.
Hot Coldman
Banned
Owning a Saturn just seems like a depressing experience, if you were coming off of enjoying the Genesis. I mean, it's got good games, obviously, but the PlayStation was such a beast.
You think it's lazy because you'd rather people specify which elements they don't feel hold up?
It's typically the same stuff, I can understand why people don't both normally.
shadyspace
Banned
Owning a Saturn then might have been depressing but owning a Saturn now is awesome.
EmCeeGramr
Member
Game design also a branching process, and while more primitive versions may be harder (or nearly impossible) to play when you're accustomed to their descendants, there are plenty that are still viable. I've played plenty of games that are supposed to be "too dated to enjoy without nostalgia*" that are just fine once you get over the adjustment period. There are examples that are far harder to justify, but I don't think there's any truly objective measure for it.
This is also why people get annoyed at follow-the-leader game design. A first-person shooter can be just as viable without having an ADS mechanic, a 2 gun limit, a grenade button, or regenerating health, but release it today and it'll be treated more like a living fossil to be seen as a old school curiosity than a valid approach at advancing the genre.
*I've seen people claim that the game in my avatar is supposed to be too janky to truly enjoy without nostalgia. I first played it eight years (and one-and-a-half console generations) after it came out, and it became one of my all-time favorites. The sequel, which I had actually played at release with little foreknowledge, and which is supposed to be a "great game" if you adjust your expectations, I found incredibly mediocre.
This is also why people get annoyed at follow-the-leader game design. A first-person shooter can be just as viable without having an ADS mechanic, a 2 gun limit, a grenade button, or regenerating health, but release it today and it'll be treated more like a living fossil to be seen as a old school curiosity than a valid approach at advancing the genre.
*I've seen people claim that the game in my avatar is supposed to be too janky to truly enjoy without nostalgia. I first played it eight years (and one-and-a-half console generations) after it came out, and it became one of my all-time favorites. The sequel, which I had actually played at release with little foreknowledge, and which is supposed to be a "great game" if you adjust your expectations, I found incredibly mediocre.
Hot Coldman
Banned
Oh yeah, if I had money to burn on old video game shit like Jeff and Ryan I'd be hunting down one of those off eBay right now. I mean, I found a Mega Drive and Mega CD for cheap not long ago, clearly I'm going to go down some horrible dark tunnel sooner or later and the Saturn seems like part of that.
Typographenia
Member
Double Dragon Neon looks alright. I kind of like the goofiness going on.
War of the Roses is a Drew/Dave QL?! If I had known this, I would have watched it a long time ago. Definitely not my kind of game, but it was fun to see during the QL. Those executions are pretty cool. Made me laugh that Dave was essentially coaching Drew, and Drew was so focused on getting Courage Wolf, haha.
Diamond Trust of London is even less of a game I could ever get into. Was entertaining watching, but no way I could keep my interest up if I was playing it myself.
War of the Roses is a Drew/Dave QL?! If I had known this, I would have watched it a long time ago. Definitely not my kind of game, but it was fun to see during the QL. Those executions are pretty cool. Made me laugh that Dave was essentially coaching Drew, and Drew was so focused on getting Courage Wolf, haha.
Diamond Trust of London is even less of a game I could ever get into. Was entertaining watching, but no way I could keep my interest up if I was playing it myself.
yeah and i don't think it's coincidence that nintendo's most sega style series in f-zero (so sega that sega themselves made the best game in the series), starfox and waverace aren't getting much play from nintendo these days.
only if you lived outside of japan and were unwilling to import
shadyspace
Banned
Played Deus Ex for the first time not more than 3 or so years ago. No enhancement mods or anything like that, loved the hell out of it. The "Only with nostalgia" declaration is routinely bullshit, at least for me.
I can't play old games at all.
But I'm also the kind of person who doesn't do the whole 'oh games were so much smarter back then'. I just can't go back. Like I was playing GTA 3 the other day, and it was like ... wow, fuck these checkpoints and this 'camera' control. Plenty of 2d games also, where the 4:3 just makes me feel so boxed in now.
But I'm also the kind of person who doesn't do the whole 'oh games were so much smarter back then'. I just can't go back. Like I was playing GTA 3 the other day, and it was like ... wow, fuck these checkpoints and this 'camera' control. Plenty of 2d games also, where the 4:3 just makes me feel so boxed in now.
uhh... that's a lot of people
Antiwhippy
the holder of the trombone
I actually do find old shooters like Deus Ex and half life 1 hard to adjust to play.
Eh.
Might be a graphics issue for me though. I find sprite based stuff are usually much easier to play.
Eh.
Might be a graphics issue for me though. I find sprite based stuff are usually much easier to play.
shadyspace
Banned
I mean Half Life 2 isn't modern enough for Jeff what the hell is that.
sucks to be them
Yeah, they should have to pay extra to enjoy their console and play a lot of games they can barely understand.
The HL/SS2/DE trio was kind of as modern as FPS have gotten, games look a lot prettier now of course, more refined in areas, but from then on, it's just prettier coats of paint to me. Crysis was a notable advance (or I guess Far Cry was?), but for the most part they're still contemporary.
I didn't play Deus Ex until 2006 and I enjoyed, but I found a bit confusing and too easy to get lost. I liked Deus Ex HR a lot more.
heh, you sound bitter. i'm just saying the whole situation was not the same for everyone.
And you sound like you're trying to pass off your experience as the norm rather than the minority.
Hot Coldman
Banned
Even then, the console wasn't exactly pushing gaming forward in quite the same way the PS1 and N64 were. Seeing those consoles getting games like MGS, FFVII, Mario 64, OoT... not even all of Treasure's amazing work quite makes up for missing the games defining the art at the time (and even they bailed ship eventually).
def. the games were there, though! it's a shame more people couldn't see that.
you're right, but sega's m.o. was never to push anything, really. it was an iterative machine meant to do the kind of games we already had, only better. they had their arcade division doing the big technical leaps instead. no one's gonna argue that their business plan for the machine was a terrible failure, but as someone who loves 2d shooters, rpgs and arcade games, it was bliss.
If you're talking about PS1, Saturn, and N64, those systems were the Intellivision and 2600 of the modern polygonal era, when entirely new types of games were still covered in afterbirth and taking their first shaky steps in the world. Of course those initial versions look bad by today's standards.
The console generation prior to that featured the culmination of like 15 years of design work in 2D, so it's not surprising that more games from the SNES and Genesis are still hailed as classics and very playable today.