Timeless games that still hold up today?

General and Gaming > Classic Video Games

<< < (11/20) > >>

atarileaf:
Lets walk this thread through shall we? We have a thread title - "Timeless games that still hold up today?" followed by a comment by the OP stating the exact same thing.

People then follow with responses like Galaga, Tetris and Breakout which are, IMO, legitimate answers.

OP then says "Thinking something more modernish. Some games just get so boring while others just don't."

My first reponse was, in part - "Lots of the 2600 library is still eminently playable today. Games don't have to be "modernish" to hold up well. A good game is a good game from any period. " - my thought reading through the thread was (1) the thread never mentioned that games needed to be post-NES to qualify as timeless and (2) there are plenty of timeless games on the 2600 and those early systems. Remember, I said "lots" of the 2600 library, not all. Of course it's full of shovelware, no one is saying it isn't. There are still dozens of 'timeless' games from that era like Donkey Kong, Asteroids, Pacman, Robotron, Defender, etc. Even if you want to dismiss the 2600, those original arcade games ARE timeless and those who originally mentioned galaga, tetris and breakout never even mentioned the 2600. YOU were the first one to bring up the 2600. I assumed they were talking about the arcade versions anyway. Another poster then goes on to talk about Galaga and you continue to bring up the 2600. Galaga isn't even on the 2600!

At this point you move from the argument of what constitutes "timeless" to accusing me of letting my nostalgia cloud my judgement and that people who talk retro don't even think atari and that atari has "aged terribly" and is worthless besides a handful of games. A blanket statement which is blatantly false. I countered that Atari is not only still a popular retro system that has a thriving community and active homebrew scene which makes it far from "worthless" but that nostalgia isn't the driving force. If it was, homebrews wouldn't be as popular as they are. It's the arcade style of game that still holds up - hence games like Galaga, Tetris, and Breakout are still eminently playable today

Then you go on a rant which began with a completely false statement about those who grew up in those "short Atari years". Seriously? One of the longest running systems EVER which had a shelf life from 1977 - 1992? Other than maybe the PS2 it's the longest running console. I could tell from that first sentence I was dealing with someone who doesn't know their video game history. Follow that with wild assumptions that no one actually plays the 2600, we just let them collect dust. Not true, see Atariage again, which I doubt you will. You continue with something that, again, everyone knows and is not the argument at hand - Atari made massive mistakes and made a ton of shovelware. Again, that doesn't mean there are no "timeless" games from that era. Remember, the topic YOU started?

Then you make some pretty bizarre statements - "Why does it even need a homebrew scene every few months, or even matter if the games were timeless? People wouldn't need to try and remember. It's irrelevant, if it was timeless it wouldn't need life support to try and stay relevant today. It's nothing but a show piece, and people showing there programing skills for a high price."

Homebrew scene every few months? What does that even mean? Why does it matter if the games were timeless? Seriously? That's what we're talking about!!
People wouldn't need to try to remember? They don't need to. The 2600 is still in the collective conscience of the modern world. Everyone remembers it who was around then. If it was timeless it wouldn't need life support? Like the NES which is still being sold in stores today? Or the Genesis? Or any other now discontinued video game system?

It's obvious you have a deep bias for anything before the NES which in and of itself is fine but don't pretend that some of those games still don't hold up well today. That's my problem with your stance from the beginning.

turf:
Timeless and fun vary from person to person. There are no wrong answers in this thread... other than:

--- Quote from: davifus on October 09, 2014, 06:05:09 pm ---Superman 64

The Guy Game

--- End quote ---

and

--- Quote from: dashv on October 10, 2014, 02:38:09 am ---I agree with whoever said E.T.

--- End quote ---

You gentlemen are completely wrong. :D

tpugmire:
I have several 2600 games that are worth more than most of the stuff that is being produced today. I'd say that they are hardly worthless. On a side note, I have to disagree with Super Metroid aging well. Don't get me wrong, this is one of my all-time favorite games ever, but even compared to Metroid: Zero Mission or Metroid Fusion, the gameplay feels too stiff. Every time I go back to it, it's almost like I have to train myself how to play all over again.

burningdoom:

--- Quote from: tpugmire on October 10, 2014, 09:29:20 am ---I have several 2600 games that are worth more than most of the stuff that is being produced today. I'd say that they are hardly worthless. On a side note, I have to disagree with Super Metroid aging well. Don't get me wrong, this is one of my all-time favorite games ever, but even compared to Metroid: Zero Mission or Metroid Fusion, the gameplay feels too stiff. Every time I go back to it, it's almost like I have to train myself how to play all over again.

--- End quote ---

But those other games totally stole Super Metroids controls.

evilnick:

--- Quote from: tpugmire on October 10, 2014, 09:29:20 am ---I have several 2600 games that are worth more than most of the stuff that is being produced today. I'd say that they are hardly worthless. On a side note, I have to disagree with Super Metroid aging well. Don't get me wrong, this is one of my all-time favorite games ever, but even compared to Metroid: Zero Mission or Metroid Fusion, the gameplay feels too stiff. Every time I go back to it, it's almost like I have to train myself how to play all over again.

--- End quote ---

I think the only part of Super Metroid to truly age poorly is the wall-jumping mechanic.

I think Fusion was a horrible back-step for the franchise that was only made worse as it lead to Other M--and by that, I mean the stilted storytelling and forced linear gameplay in a franchise that was founded on isolation and exploration. I think the openness of Super Metroid feels fresher than the forced straight line progress in Other M, which feels closed and absent of freedom or anything player-driven.

Navigation

 Message Index

Go to full version