Page 1 of 3 [ 40 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next


Do you prefer older retro games or newer modern games?
Older retro games 79%  79%  [ 27 ]
Newer modern games 21%  21%  [ 7 ]
Total votes : 34

dcj123
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Sep 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,807

20 Jun 2013, 1:30 pm

Does anyone else enjoy playing older games more than newer games? I am defining older retro games as anything released before 2000 on any console released before 2000. Doesn't have to be PC specific but I personally think more work into games like Baldur's Gate, Heroes of Might and Magic 3, and Diablo. Modern games feel too easy with the exception of Dark Souls and they seem to lack quality or at the very least length, for example the modern warfare series.

Some examples in change in difficulty, look at how hard Zelda II - The Adventure of Link and Zelda - A Link to the Past compared to games like Zelda Wind Waker and Zelda Twilight Princess? The series progressively got easier as time went on and I am seeing this trend with more and more games. Its almost like newer games play themselves by basically telling the player what to do and exactly how to do it.

Anyway, poll time to see who agrees,



fueledbycoffee
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Nov 2010
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 603
Location: Baltimore

20 Jun 2013, 1:51 pm

I disagree. Granted, there are more older "classics", but that's fueled by the fact that they were the very best games of their age, so we're nostalgic about them. Personally, for example, I feel that Dragon Age was the natural progression of the system set up by Baldur's Gate, and improved on it in every way. In a few years, people are gonna be looking back and talking about Deus Ex: Human Revolution and S.T.A.L.K.E.R. in the same way that we look back and talk about games from the 80s and 90s. Oh, and there were actually more crap games back in the day than there are now. Anyone else remember the Great Advertising Game Bonanza of the early to mid-80s? We just remember the cream of the crop. And even that was worse than we remember. Diablo 1 was fun, but sucked in Online because it was a hacker's paradise.

As far as the difficulty thing goes, that's a natural progression as well. Console games have become VERY mainstream of late, and with increased exposure and acceptability comes increased funds, and with that comes the desire to build more capital by appealing to a wider audience. Go back and play, say, Everquest and Asheron's Call and compare it to WoW. It's an illusion though. Running with the MMO comparison, after you do that go look at Mortal Online. There's also the fact that "hard" games nowadays, like Dark Souls, tend to be more nuanced in their idea of a challenge than "Let's be a bunch of douches and make this AI cheat like crazy."

Finally, games these days, thanks to Kickstarter, Greenlight, Desura, etc. are having a bigger influx of talent and creative new ideas than ever before. Games no longer depend on the publisher, but the gamer for approval. Trust me, we're gonna look at the retro era as the "bad old days," by the time we're old and gray.



staremaster
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Dec 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,726
Location: New York

20 Jun 2013, 2:08 pm

I like to mix it up, myself. There is good stuff from every era. Sometimes it is such a relief to play old games just to escape from the pervasive, low quality voice-acting and writing in so many contemporary games.



GregCav
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Apr 2013
Age: 53
Gender: Male
Posts: 753
Location: Australia

20 Jun 2013, 2:56 pm

I find many of the new games visualy overloading, complex and difficult.

I like the older games because they are simpler to see, and simpler to understand.

I like what is called God Games. City builders and empire builder type strategy games. I havn't seen a good one of them in many years. And yes, I still play the old ones. My favorite is Settlers 2, a 13 year old game.



redrobin62
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Apr 2012
Age: 57
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,662
Location: Seattle, WA

20 Jun 2013, 3:25 pm

I like modern games. I play Metro:Last Light, BioShock Infinite, Dishonored, MOH Warfighter, etc.

It's interesting. Even though my computer is about 4 years old it can play these newer games. I guess they found a way to maximize frame rate while allowing your GPU to push as many pixels as possible. They're not all fast, but BioShock's engine is incredibly smooth.

Can't wait for Fallout 4 and Prey 2.



dcj123
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Sep 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,807

20 Jun 2013, 3:45 pm

fueledbycoffee wrote:
Personally, for example, I feel that Dragon Age was the natural progression of the system set up by Baldur's Gate, and improved on it in every way..


I have not played Dragon Age yet but if anything like Baldurs Gate, I am in.

GregCav wrote:
I like what is called God Games. City builders and empire builder type strategy games. I havn't seen a good one of them in many years. And yes, I still play the old ones. My favorite is Settlers 2, a 13 year old game.


You should check out Caesar III, Stronghold and Heroes of Might and Magic 3, Those are my favorite God Games.

redrobin62 wrote:
I like modern games. I play Metro:Last Light, BioShock Infinite, Dishonored, MOH Warfighter, etc.

It's interesting. Even though my computer is about 4 years old it can play these newer games. I guess they found a way to maximize frame rate while allowing your GPU to push as many pixels as possible. They're not all fast, but BioShock's engine is incredibly smooth.

Can't wait for Fallout 4 and Prey 2.


I can't wait for Prey 2 either and I enjoyed Dishonored, I am not hating on all new games, just saying there is a general decline in quality, length and difficulty. I still enjoy new games but not as much as the good old days, dosbox is one of my favorite applications lol



fueledbycoffee
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Nov 2010
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 603
Location: Baltimore

20 Jun 2013, 4:11 pm

dcj123 wrote:
I have not played Dragon Age yet but if anything like Baldurs Gate, I am in.


Go for it, man. It's pretty cheap these days. I recommend modding it out for maximum pleasure. It's fairly similar to Baldur's Gate or other classic CRPGS (World map system from Fallout, for example), but with a greater emphasis on choice, better character customization, better combat (Until you figure out the multiple mages trick, then it's just cheap), and a really cool world. As I said earlier, it's moddable on a level almost akin to the Elder Scrolls games, which is even sweeter.



GGPViper
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Sep 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,139

20 Jun 2013, 4:50 pm

Dragon Age did not impress me at all. The successor to Baldur's Gate is not Dragon Age. It is Mass Effect.

To me, all Dragon Age had was two memorable characters (Morrigan and Alistair). Other than that, I would prefer Baldur's Gate over it any day...


_________________
Our comforting conviction that the world makes sense rests on a secure foundation: our almost unlimited ability to ignore our ignorance.

- Daniel Kahneman


AScomposer13413
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 1 Feb 2012
Age: 27
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,191
Location: Canada

20 Jun 2013, 5:49 pm

Your definitions of "retro" and "modern" are the one thing preventing me from accurately answering this poll. My tastes overlap between the two.


_________________
I don't seek to be popular
I seek to be well-known
If we find a friendship that's forged without masks
Then I have done my job


Bitoku
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 18 Jun 2013
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 353
Location: Calgary

20 Jun 2013, 6:10 pm

staremaster wrote:
I like to mix it up, myself. There is good stuff from every era.

I agree with this. I've been a gamer for a long time, mostly PC and arcades (RIP arcades :()... and I've seen really good games and really bad games through it all.
I feel there were sometimes more fresh ideas in games of the past, but sometimes more overall quality put into some of the games today. But like you say, it's always been a mixed bag.



dcj123
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Sep 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,807

20 Jun 2013, 6:16 pm

AScomposer13413 wrote:
Your definitions of "retro" and "modern" are the one thing preventing me from accurately answering this poll. My tastes overlap between the two.


Well my definition of retro gaming is basically the same as 4chan's /vr/ section expect I said 2000 to include the Gameboy Advacne cause thats retro IMO. Funny thing is I just found out the Gameboy advance was released in 2001 not 2000 lol. I am not really strict on my definition, the poll is mostly for fun. If you have a game like Neverwinter Nights which was made in 2002 that you feel falls under retro than by all means vote for retro.



Misery
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Aug 2011
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,217

20 Jun 2013, 7:57 pm

Hmm, my answer to this depends on the platform, somewhat.

For the consoles? Oh yeah. I'll take retro over current, thanks. I'm definitely anti-console at this point, as far as the current stuff goes, for a few reasons:

1. The games are stupidly easy most of the time, enhancing that easiness with things like infinite continues, regenerating health, stuff like that. I need a challenge in order for a game to hold my interest. It's been a VERY long time since I've encountered a console game that can do this. And yes, I've played games like Dark Souls and all that; those are decently challenging at least, but they're a very rare breed these days.

2. Further going off of point 1, alot of console games these days are designed to be an "experience" *cough*, instead of an actual damn game. They're made easy like that because heaven forbid someone not have the skill to get all the way through and see the all-important story without actually trying or practicing much! "Beating" a game these days isnt really beating it, not as they are now; you didnt "beat" anything, the game was often designed to make SURE you end up winning and seeing the ending.

3. They're trying WAY too damn hard to be movies. I, personally, loathe all movies. ALL of them. So that one's a major repellant in my case. I dont want 10 squillion cutscenes, and I dont want "features" that essentially make the game play itself. If I liked that kind of passive crap, I probably WOULD watch movies. But I dont. If I'm playing a game.... I want to play the damn game, not WATCH it.


There's more to it than that, but those are my central reasons. The only exceptions for me are fighting games, and shmups.... and *all* of the shmups are imports; heck, I only even have an import 360, I got rid of the normal one because it was basically just a damn brick at this point, utterly useless. Didnt even sell it.... just outright gave it away.

Buuuuuuut..... that's just basic console games. There's also indie and PC stuff to look at, which is what I spend most of my time playing. In THAT regard, games that ARENT under giant publishers of doom, recent stuffs have been pretty great.... though even some of the bigger publishers have put out some interesting PC stuffs. It's very, very rare lately that I'll buy a console game, because there just isnt anything on them that wont put me to sleep.... but it's very, very FREQUENT (like, every couple of days or so) that I'll find something new on PC that I want, be it indie or otherwise. And it's super-rare that I'll buy something and then NOT like it, as I always research purchases heavily.


I do play the retro stuff pretty frequently though. Heck, got a 7800 *finally* after wanting one for so long, so I've been enjoying that quite a bit. At least it gives my TV a use, because the current consoles sure werent managing that.



seaturtleisland
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Feb 2012
Age: 26
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,248

20 Jun 2013, 11:00 pm

You're definition of retro games being anything released before the year 2000 would put Super Mario 64 in the category of retro. That was a very easy game. For me it was a million times easier than windwaker but windwaker had fake difficulty. The only thing that made it difficult for me is the part where you have to get Tingle to translate your Triforce charts. The only hint the game gives you that you have to go to Tingle is when you first meet him and he says to come to him if you ever need help with charts. Considering the time difference between the time he says that and the time you actually need him as well as the fact that you get no other hints afterwards it's easy to get lost at that point. I had to stop playing the game for a few months before I came back and figured it out. I was able to run through Super Mario which fits your definition of a retro game while I got stumped by the windwaker which is a modern game.

Now I admit that games have gotten easier in general and I don't consider games on the N64 to be retro. Anything before the N64 is retro in my book but the definition is subjective. There was a sidescrolling Mario game that was very hard for me that I only got to play seriously when it was remade. I played it in daycare before I even owned a system. It was on the SNES. When I played the remake it was hard for me because I never clued in to the fact that you have to find hidden goals. When I found my first key and keyhole it started to make more sense but I still needed a walkthrough in the end which I wouldn't have had 35 years ago.

I'm willing to get stumped and abandon games for a while before coming back to them. I'm willing to play a game that I need to be patient with to an extent but I'm not going to come back to a game more than 4 times before I just give up. If it stumps me more than 4 times and it's a year later and I still haven't figured it out it's time to quit for me. A game shouldn't take me 2 years to complete. It's nice to figure something out that has had me stumped for a little while but at some point it's just too much.



greengeek
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 18 Jul 2007
Age: 28
Gender: Male
Posts: 446
Location: New York USA

20 Jun 2013, 11:24 pm

seaturtleisland wrote:
There was a sidescrolling Mario game that was very hard for me that I only got to play seriously when it was remade. I played it in daycare before I even owned a system. It was on the SNES. When I played the remake it was hard for me because I never clued in to the fact that you have to find hidden goals. When I found my first key and keyhole it started to make more sense but I still needed a walkthrough in the end which I wouldn't have had 35 years ago.
It might have been one of the games on the Super Mario All-Stars cartridge for the SNES. There was a really hard Super Mario Game called Lost Levels on that Cart too.


_________________
Nothing is fool proof only fool resistant


greengeek
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 18 Jul 2007
Age: 28
Gender: Male
Posts: 446
Location: New York USA

20 Jun 2013, 11:26 pm

I like playing older games and I got a clone console that can play NES, SNES, Sega Genesis cartridges and use the original controllers from those systems for my birthday. I've been getting into playing Blockout for the Sega Genesis, and it's a really addicting 3D Tetris Game. It was developed by California Dreams. I sucked at it and didn't like it at first, but once I got the hang of the controls and what each of the three buttons does, it got addicting. I use the Three Button game Pad with it. I went out to dinner with my parents for my father's birthday, and i was still thinking about patterns in the game. It seems more addicting than the Nintendo Tetris for the NES, but that maybe because 2D Tetris is so simple, as everything is flat. Blockout makes you think more as it's 3D and not 2D.


_________________
Nothing is fool proof only fool resistant