VGCollect Forum
General and Gaming => Classic Video Games => Topic started by: seether on June 16, 2018, 02:02:39 am
-
?
-
You usually get to jump right into the game w/o worrying much about a narrative, along with score based gameplay for a large amount of titles.
-
Jumping right into the action seems like a pretty weak sauce appeal to me the games are way to different for such small things to have any influence in that.
People aren't going to drop modern games just to save some time, such games gameplay wise are totally different night and day, you can't compare the last of us, dark souls or battlefield with games like mario world or strider to name some examples.
In my opinion It's about certain genre's of games with their respective visuals gameplay music and sounds wich give it the appeal wich are very different from modern games.
-
Gameplay wise, it's a completely different discipline than most modern games. Most modern games focus on waypoint finding/following, creative puzzle solving, and multiplayer interactions. Retro tends towards reflexive response, trial and error, and pattern memorization. I was just discussing this with a co-worker who recently got the new Genesis collection & watched a younger relative flail horrifically in Sonic the Hedgehog.
There is also the aesthetic differences, simplicity compared to modern titles, and pure nostalgia to contend with- all notable factors.
(Do you guys ever get the feeling we're being secretly researched for some journalist's big expose? "Gamers- who are they, what drives them, and what triggers them to become violent, mass-shooting monsters? Story at 11!")
-
I think the appeal of retro games is mostly nostalgia; I feel like retro style games typically appeal to those that grew up with these games or similar games and remind them of simpler times in their lives. That's not to say these games aren't fun and nothing more than trips down memory lane, but I feel like their main draw is from people trying to recapture their past.
Also, as some have stated, they are typically easy to jump into and just play. There aren't any super complex systems to learn or convoluted control schemes to get used to; they are very accessible and easy to get into compared to a lot of newer games. I feel like this is the reason many prefer retro or retro style games, and why they occasionally appeal to those that weren't even born until well after the days of the SNES or NES. I think there is also something to be said about the sprite work of older games which has a very cool asthetic, as does old video game music which has a charm of its own.
-
A fun game is a fun game. That's all there is to it.
-
They're like a fine wine.
(https://media3.giphy.com/media/BO5lR6Kw6giXe/giphy.gif)
-
Nostalgia is much of it, but there's generally a simplicity and straightforward style retro games have.
-
I think it´s the simplicity, there were no downloading times, no dlc, everything was in the box
-
Nostalgia is much of it, but there's generally a simplicity and straightforward style retro games have.
I was going to say almost the exact same thing.
Part is nostalgia, but part is the simpler type of game, with a simpler type of graphics, totally unlike the polygonal powerhouses of today.
Plus, old school platformers or RPGs tap into totally different and unique skill sets which are not very prevalent anymore.
-
There's a lot of things. The biggest one is that there's a pretty huge difference in mentality between making modern games and people making games back then. In the past games were a new, budding thing, and the people making great games were doing so because they saw potential in the medium, and they wanted to take it to new heights and made their money that way. The people in charge of the AAA market nowadays do so because video games are the biggest industry in the world right now and have no real passion for games. You can see the difference in mentality in old AAA games and new AAA games like night and day.
Then there's the issue that hits smaller devs that do care about the games they're making, it's too easy nowadays. Back in the day developers had to be really clever when making games because of the limitations they faced. There was only so much they could do with the hardware they were working with, and there was only so much data that could fit on a cartridge/disc. The latter meant that unnecessary trash in games would be cut for space limitations, whereas nowadays that isn't part of the process, the main limitations are budget and time constraints, the latter of which typically just means first come first served with regards to content being added to the game, rather than the worst stuff being thrown out. Time constants weren't as big of a problem back in the day because the market didn't care as much about deadlines.
This isn't to say modern games are bad. But there is a purity to old games that no-one can deny. And also when going into older games you can normally do so with an optimistic mind because of the above reasons, whereas nowadays it's hard not to be cynical. Old games are like your disabled eldest son that is a bit slow but genuinely does his best and you all love him for it, modern games are your shitty toddler that runs around smearing his shit on the walls and screaming but you put up with him because he's clever for his age and he sometimes tells you he loves you.
And then of course there's the obvious nostalgia factor, we all feel a stronger connection to things from our childhood because they were a part of our lives while our brains were still learning and developing. So many warm fuzzy feels when I go back and play PS1 games. Prerendered graphics were the tits.
-
Eh, I always thought the idea that Retro games were made with more passion was kind of nonsense. Games were littered with cheap mechanics for no other reason to stretch the runtime, and when if you decided to seek almost anything outside of the mainstream companies, you'd be met with an unplayable mess. There were plenty of good games, but seeking them out was like a minefield because respecting the player and their tolerance for frustration wasn't a thing.
The only reason there wasn't EA/Ubisoft type companies back then was because they couldn't, not because they wouldn't.
-
^ I wouldn't say so. Like I said the reasons for entering the gaming market are completely different now to what they were back then. If you watch or read old interviews of the developers of the old classics talking about the games as they were making them there really was genuine passion in their words. Back then if you wanted to enter a multi-million dollar industry you'd enter movies or music or something like that, games were seen by the bigwigs as toys for kids. Making games was still to make profit obviously but people got into game development because they wanted to make games, not because they wanted to make massive stacks of cheddar.
Skip to today and now that videogames are raking in ridiculous sums of money the afforementioned bigwigs have jumped on the bandwagon, and their own talks about their games are full of 'WE ARE EXPANDING THE HORIZON OF VIDEOGAMES' and 'THE FUTURE IS NOW WE ARE VIDEOGAMES AND IT'S BECAUSE. OF. YOU.' and it's all so insincere it hurts. The genuinely passionate and creative people in the development teams of AAA companies are being stifled by the powers that be in the name of ridiculous timescales and backwards priorities.
-
Ah, but that's regarding the mindset of corporate folks, not game developers-and the mindset of those people haven't changed. Back then, like you said, they merely saw them as toys for kids, and that's why we got so many cheap, half baked licensed games even back then. Game developers are under the mercy of whatever their bigger, cold company wants-that was the case and and that was the case now.
So naturally, most games sucked, and you had to specifically fish the sea of new games coming out to find the good stuff.
Where's the change? They always say games as meanginless products, and still do-but now they've simply found it's more profitable to exploit adults rather than children. Becoming an AAA game developer isn't a get rich quick scheme because you're not the one getting paid most of the money. You don't spend years learning that sort of coding to prepare for making a 3D casino. It's a change entirely injected by the corporate folks, who care as much as they did back then.
Super Mario Odssey was made with the same amount of passion as Super Mario Bros, and, well, Star Wars Battlefront Two was made with the same amount of passion as ET for the atari. It's not a new thing, they just have new toys to devise evil plans with.
-
For me a big part of it is reliving the games I grew up with, or feeling the nostaliga of the era, even if I am playing retro games I never played back in the day. I also like the simplicity of older games. With free time constantly dwindling I grow tired of load times, waiting for games to install to the hard drive and downloading updates, conenctivity issues and lag for online games, etc. Nothing quite like putting in a game cartridge, clicking "on" and then starting the game within seconds.
I love the collectibility of older games too. I love the box art, the manuals, the maps that came with some games, I love the care that went into the whole package of a game back then. Now, you get a disc/cartridge and an otherwise empty case. Feels half-assed to me. Also, many games of today feel like the same damn game over and over. How many Call of Dutys, Maddens, Grand Theft Autos, Far Crys, Halos, etc do we need? I'm tired of online required games as other players often ruin the game for me. There are new games I enjoy still but many of them are retro in style, like Shovel Knight, or sequels to long loved classic franchises like Zelda or Mario. Retro games just have so much more personality than most new games too.
One last draw of retro games too is the fact that they're all avialable. There is no waiting for release dates, no pre-ordering, being hyped for something that ends up disappointing. The entire libraries of all retro systems are out, with reviews for pretty much every game, so you can pick and choose which ones you like.
Edit: And one more reason i thought of is that most modern games lack both replayability and challenge. Sure there are games like Dark Souls that really test your patience but most games are too cinematic and full of cutscenes and not enough actually gameplay.
-
It is a kind of nostalgia for things that (most of the time) I didn't have the opportunity to own.
I've always wanted to have all those awesome games that I saw on the covers of the magazines, put I never had the opportunity to own the majority of them. So, for me, collecting retro games represents to finally see those old dreams finally coming true, at the same time as I can find new things from that time that I didn't even know existed.
-
People aren't going to drop modern games just to save some time, such games gameplay wise are totally different night and day, you can't compare the last of us, dark souls or battlefield with games like mario world or strider to name some examples.
I'm a test case that proves this wrong right off the bat. I capitulate back and forth between the two for exactly that reason. If I've just spent 40+ hours playing and beating God of War or Bloodborne or The Witcher III I am way more likely to follow that up with a classic Mega Man or Mario game because they are so different.
-
Simplicity? It's so simple to just do. No paying for online, no installation, and no dlc etc. Plus it's cool.
-
Simplicity? It's so simple to just do. No paying for online, no installation, and no dlc etc. Plus it's cool.
Good answer!
-
People aren't going to drop modern games just to save some time, such games gameplay wise are totally different night and day, you can't compare the last of us, dark souls or battlefield with games like mario world or strider to name some examples.
I'm a test case that proves this wrong right off the bat. I capitulate back and forth between the two for exactly that reason. If I've just spent 40+ hours playing and beating God of War or Bloodborne or The Witcher III I am way more likely to follow that up with a classic Mega Man or Mario game because they are so different.
I wouldn't normally say this, but that response was kind of rude anyway. As well as less than applicable. I love the pop in and pop out aspect of vintage games. But calling it "weaksauce" is "weaksauce".
"In my opinion It's about certain genre's of games with their respective visuals gameplay music and sounds wich give it the appeal wich are very different from modern games." - this just describes every modern/retro high bit game (assuming the definition of retro is designed or styled to evoke nostalgia of a bygone era, as in contrast to vintage being of or from a bygone era), not vintage games themselves. This is how all game genres differentiate from one another. That "weaksauce" answer specifically answered the OP's question and captured the spirit that like ten other people since have reasserted.
Anyway, I'll regret saying that I'm sure... But, I would sell vintage games exactly as that, simple to pick up, tough to master, accessible, yet challenging, flawed, but always ambitious.
I don't always want to invest myself in a narrative, sit through cut-scenes, or invest myself emotionally into role playing. Sometimes I just want to shoot lemons at robots, or run, jump, and eat mushrooms.
-
I'm always hopping around from console to console - modern and/or retro.
After, say, 90+ hours in Xenoblade 2 I immediately head towards a simple something-something from years past.
-
That answer will change depending on who answers the question.
For myself it's nostalgia. Capturing a moment in time from my past, or buying games to play I never had the chance to. Even the act of walking by the display area can bring about those nostalgic feelings, of when I would spend hours in the rental shop browsing the shelves while my parents were at the laundromat next door.
For others it's curiosity, for some a soon to be discarded fad.
-
Eh, I always thought the idea that Retro games were made with more passion was kind of nonsense. Games were littered with cheap mechanics for no other reason to stretch the runtime, and when if you decided to seek almost anything outside of the mainstream companies, you'd be met with an unplayable mess. There were plenty of good games, but seeking them out was like a minefield because respecting the player and their tolerance for frustration wasn't a thing.
The only reason there wasn't EA/Ubisoft type companies back then was because they couldn't, not because they wouldn't.
Not only is all of the stuff you listed in the first paragraph true, the things in your second sadly were not. The NES era was littered with assembly line studios making terribly bland clone games. Its just that most of them were recognized as being of low quality and never left Japan. All it takes is a single episode of Chrontendo to tell someone that. If anything, things were worse back then, due to the aforementioned cheap mechanics.
And yet I love retro gaming and games anyway. Partly its due to nostalgia, partly due to the historic nature of these games (remember, if we are going off film as a comparison, we are only now entering the equivalent of the 1920s) and partly because the truly great ones still hold up today.
-
Somewhat nostalgia. But not fully, for me at least. Because I still find old games that are new to me and enjoy them.
When I started it was mostly due to budget. Retro gaming was cheap. That's kind of flip-flopped at this point, though.
Really, it's just because I'm a gamer. And I play games regardless of how new or old it may be.
-
Starting on the Atari 2600, games didn’t have cut scenes and story. That stuff was in the cover art and manuals (which I would read over and over). The story and progression was largely left to your imagination. Which, in my mind, made these games more epic than they really were.
Then NES came along. The first few games were very Atari like, just with way better graphics. Much of the story and detail still in the manuals.
But I remember playing Ninja Gaiden for NES and being blown the hell away by the cutscenes.
Gaming was still mostly new. The possibility, promise, and surprise seemed endless.
Sega Genesis later figured out how to change existing games (Lock-on) and blew my mind again.
At school during lunch, on the school bus, etc. we’d talk about “wouldn’t it be cool if this and that”. Then boom Nintendo or Sega would figure out how to do it. Full motion video in a Genesis game... No way!!! Digitized voices in NBA Jam! Get that stuff outta here!!!
Mario can fly now!? Holy shit!
We can plug the new game into the old game and use this Knuckles guy to get to hidden level!?
There’s a cheat code that gives me 30 lives!? There’s a blood kode for Mortal Kombat!?
Game Genie!? Holy shit, I can finally beat that damn boss and finish that game! I’m bored. Let’s plug in random codes and see what happens!
There were as many rumors about Easter eggs and codes as their were actual Easter eggs and code.
There was a sense of discovery, secrets, awe, and wonder.
Cheat codes are barely even a thing anymore. The internet and the age of “pics or it didn’t happen” and the cutting room floor have (for better and worse) eliminated the rumor mill.
We know now there is no way to resurrect Aeris. There is no Ermac in Mortal Kombat 1. No more mysteries. All quickly solved with a let’s play on YouTube. No Game Genies that work across our entire library of games. (Save game editors aren’t the same thing).
That’s not to say the magic is completely gone. It’s just harder to capture.
Games like Detroit: Become Human, Shadow of the Colossus, Nier Automata, Shantae, Super Mario Maker, and others are damn good at bringing some of that awe, wonder, and discovery magic but in a completely different way.
For me it takes a lot to beat the feeling that I’ve “been there. Done that.” And it was way cooler in my head.
-
I like to experience the past of video games, I often use YouTube for to get an edge of what to buy next before it's all gone.
And while I can still get most games CIB usally PS2 PS1 PS3 and Xbox and Xbox360 titles for $5 or less at a local flea market
-
A big part of it for me is to be able to play all the games I never was able to when I was younger. A kid's allowance can buy you just a minimal amount of games after-all. And rentals only stay in your house for a few days! I used to dream about so many games, drooling over magazines. Now I can hunt for them and satiated that hunger.
Best example is Lunar Silver Star Story Complete. There was a huge spread page ad in one of my old US Playstation Magazine when I was 9-10 years old. The four discs version with leather bound book and cloth map. The anime aesthetics and bulk of the special edition made me awe struck. But of course, I never got a copy. Didn't even get to rent it! Now I have it and it's one of my favorite piece in my collection! ;D <3
-
nostalgia. more fun games than the new games. competition with other retro gamers to outdo each other. to be different from new-age gamers/present day gamers. fun collecting retro games like some collect vinyl or comic books. in some cases obsession and collectardism. lack of women and sex, retro games are next best thing. to join a hipster movement that says it is cool to do retro games and not the new games. to join a yuppie movement that collects or plays downloadable retro games only! to one day become a great video game reviewer and showcase their collection, take that! AVGN and Metal Jesus!
...but most of us like retro games simply because modern games suck.
-
Nostalgia plays a big part of it, but it's not the only reason. i find myself enjoying smaller and shorter games like those from yesteryear. I just don't have the time and commitment to play 100 hour games (Breath of the Wild was one exception). I think a lot of the other posters already hit the major points: no downloading, simplicity, no load times, etc. Also I got a sense of creativity and passion from the older games, though i know even back then cash grabs were evident. But I feel like most developers now don't care about the games they make, as long as they make money off of it.
-
Best example is Lunar Silver Star Story Complete. There was a huge spread page ad in one of my old US Playstation Magazine when I was 9-10 years old. The four discs version with leather bound book and cloth map. The anime aesthetics and bulk of the special edition made me awe struck. But of course, I never got a copy. Didn't even get to rent it! Now I have it and it's one of my favorite piece in my collection! ;D <3
I remember that ad! At least, I remember the one saying the game was going out of print. I thought it looked so awesome, I begged to get it for a Christmas and/or birthday present (they're close together.) My mom later told me she went to damn near every game store in the county looking for it. One clerk actually laughed at her when she asked... but then checked the computer & helped her find the ONLY copy left for miles! I also got Eternal Blue that year as well, and they threw in the Ghaleon punching puppet becuase there was an extra in the back & they didn't want it taking up space. I feel like that & finding out how completely different the Sega CD version is, is a big part of why I love the Lunar games so much.
-
Most gamers when asked about retro games speak on nostalgia and simplistic play mechanics, responsiveness, memorization, and timing. Perhaps we can approach the question differently...
Retro games are akin to books. They are rather simplistic in presentation, bring you a sense of enjoyment, and transport you to a different place. However, they also require a great deal of skill, patience, and specifically the reader / gamer’s imagination.
Modern games are akin to cinematic movies (no coincidence that many often are cinematic experiences). They are all about graphic presentation, bring you a sense of enjoyment, and also transport you to a different place. These experiences often require checkpoints, more complicated game mechanics, and are presented through the imaginative interpretation of the director / developers.
Now with our analogy set... Have you ever read a book, and then watched the cinematic representation at the movies? Sometimes the movie adaptation manages to capture some of the experiences in the book but are not able to include all the book’s nuances. Sometimes the movies take creative liberties with the material provided (i.e. Ready Player One or the Bourne Identity). Experiences would differ depending on whether you watched the movie first or read the book first. This would explain why opinions vary with games that have made the transition to more modern aesthetics. For example, we experienced an impressive amount of joy and frustration playing Ninja Gaiden for the Nintendo NES. We then experienced a far different amount of joy and frustration playing Ninja Gaiden Black for XBOX. Now imagine if we were “Millennial” DW, and started our experience with Ninja Gaiden Sigma. Millennial DW would have rage quit the first time they got knocked into a chasm by that damn crow in the NES version (let alone be made aware they would have to start the round from the beginning). Granted, ole crusty DW also felt like rage quitting with Ninja Gaiden Black as well.
This analogy also provides other similarities. In both books and retro games, it is a simple thing to place yourself in the role of the hero / protagonist. In movies this experience is changed when a particular actor is cast to play the role (Hmm…We wonder what handsome devil would be portrayed as DW? He looks nothing like us!!!). Apart from games with a create-a-character feature, this seems to apply somewhat in modern games. Although changes in technology have allowed impressive feats to be translated to cinema, some imaginative experiences in books are difficult to translate in movie adaptations. Sometimes the movie does a far better job of capturing the imaginative experience then a book’s words impart. This also applies to both retro and modern games, which would also play a part in what makes the game appealing.
There are always exceptions with both games and gamers. However, it does offer another way to speak to the appeal of retro games.
-
Well for me it was one of the best parts of my childhood. Re-buying the games I had in my youth gives me a sense of connection to my younger self. Bascially there is that nostalgia factor that comes into play.
-
Nostalgia is a huge allure, but when developers grapple with limitations and truly master the capabilities of the hardware, the finest achievements on the SNES and Megadrive still have me in awe. I assume this thread pertains to actual retro games and not contemporary games that aim to pay homage (gotta love those "8-bit style" games that would have had the Saturn chugging).