Old games that didn't age well.

[Elexia]

I used to play in an online 3D chat community called 'Cybertown'. It still exists last time I checked and it was incredibly popular around 2000. But over time it never updated its software and the 3D now seems outdated. Especially compared to 'Second Life'.

A handful of oldies keep the place alive and if it wasn't paid I'd stop by frequently just to catch up on old times, and remember the first futuristic house I furnished and how blown away I was at the graphics.

 

[CleverCover]

Morrowind.

That game is just ugly as hell now, especially after playing Oblivion.
Couldn't play it for more than an hour.

 

[-Drifter-]

Fallout.

I went back and played it again because I was having some nostalgia after Fallout 3 and it was nothing like I remembered.

Really now? I thought it was pretty good, and I didn't play it for the first time until after I'd played Fallout 3.

 

[Rad Party God]

Fallout.

I went back and played it again because I was having some nostalgia after Fallout 3 and it was nothing like I remembered.

Really now? I thought it was pretty good, and I didn't play it for the first time until after I'd played Fallout 3.

Me too, right after I finished FO3, a couple of days later my video card got busted and I thought it could be fun to check out the older Fallouts. Both were pretty fun actually, I didn't stopped playing them for a week or two and that's after I finished FO3.

 

[Sharalon]

Super smash bros.

It just can't compare to Melee, let alone Brawl.

What? Super smash brow is one of the few old games I still play, but the later titles in the series are horrible! The first game had simple controls, simple moves and became a fairly accurate fighting game, but melee and brawl feels more like watching fireworks and randomly smashing buttons.

 

[shadowform]

WARHAWK!

Don't remember this one? This was - as far as I know - the first fully 3d arial warfare game ever made, in 1995 on the PS1 - TWO YEARS before the gem that was Star Fox 64. I saw this game on clearance at a nerd heaven store (comics, games from NES up to PS3, toys, books, VHS tapes, DVDs... place is awesome) a while ago and decided to pick it up and see how well it had aged.

And well... the controls are TERRIBLE. I can't get past the first level in the damn thing, hell, I can only get to the first boss by the bare seat of my pants.

 

[Dfskelleton]

The original Quake comes to mind. It was probably great at the time, but it lacks that old school charm of Doom or Wolfenstein or Duke Nukem 3D. Maybe it has something to do with how dark and bland it all is.

 

[The Madman]

Antique graphics and visuals don't bother me in the least, you're talking to a person who still regularly plays Nethack, X-Com, and even a few MUDs not to mention recent hideous games like Dwarf Fortress.

It's when the gameplay mechanics are tired that it bugs me. When the seams are all too visible. Probably why I have an easier time getting into Thief: The Dark Project (1998) than I do the original Splinter Cell (2002), though I still enjoy both. Thief is more unique, there's really no other game quite like it sequels aside whereas Splinter Cell has been retread quite a few times now.

That said there are few games I genuinely find hard to get into because of age, probably because the only reason I'd be replaying them is because they did something memorable for their time or I'd have forgotten them along with the rest of the crap.

 

[Choppaduel]

Erm... I think Half-Life 2 aged horribly. I mean I enjoyed the story of the games, but I was horribly annoyed by how predictable everything was. Basic weapons with simplistic mechanics, no bonuses in the game and no exploration, horrible driving sequences, very little strategy, etc etc
It was revolutionary, but it doesn't hold up

-_-

not gonna let this slide.

Predictable: how is it more predicable than current games? HOW? I guess you foresaw jumping on rocks to avoid antlions, yeah that was in the first game. you new that that the gravity gun would get supercharged anadsnhshv.... (my nerd rage is making it hard to finish this one)

Basic weapons: many weapons have two firing modes for one thing. yeah THE GRAVITY GUN was basic... sigh. I bet you didn't predict you'd be using a pheropod command a small army of minions! AND HOW ARE THE WEAPONS IS HL2 MORE BASIC THAN CURRENT GAMES!! you offer no evidence.

No Bonuses: whatchu talk bout willis?

No exploration: so I guess you didn't find all the caches, find the mystic vortigaunt at the end of that tunnel, use the barrel to get to that place in the coast, explore all the sections in sandtraps....... I could go on but you won't get it even I mentioned all the out of way places, secret, hidden caches, special scenes (G-man). Theres a lot of exploration to be had in HL2, its just not obvious.

driving sequences: the first person driving may be hard to get used to but its a whole lot more immersive than switching to third person every time you enter/exit a vehicle. and you try driving a rusty buggy over rough terrain.

little strategy: you can go fast, slow, try melee only, try only using the gravity gun, repeat different combat sequences with different two weapon combos, try different turret positions positions, etc etc... lots of strategy to be had for those who take the time.


none of your points are valid.
I hope you enjoy the current situation of FPS design. You, and the people like you, caused it.

damn, i try not to get trolled, but this one hit me hard.
If your not a troll then, in the future, give evidence when making points.


hl2 faces still look more real that some modern games. fallout new vegas for one.

 

[Bakuryukun]

I don't know...I tend to be able to play a lot of games even from the 70's and still have fun with them. I can't play most NES RPG's without speeding things up to lessen the tedium. But that's about it.

 

[Choppaduel]

could be beaten on a new players first or second run,

its an arcade game. beating the game isn't really beating the game. I doubt new players would get more than 1500 hits on the first play through.

 

[RandV80]

I have a hard time taking the people who are calling out games like Morrowind and FFVII based pretty much only on graphics quality seriously. Yes the look is dated but these games are about sooo much more than just pretty pictures.

For legitimate contenders, does anyone remember Ridge Racer? It was a big launch title for the PSone, one of the first high end 3D racing games that showcased the graphics capabilities of the new consoles over the old 16-bit generation. A quick google search shows some strong reviews too, including an 8.7/10 from EGM.

Try playing it today though and man is it horrible. Now that the graphics are badly dated rather than cutting edge, you notice the horrible physics (I can remember a friend spinning 360's while drifting around corners), extremely limited gameplay options & race tracks, and the biggest technical defect was the entire track had an invisible barrier preventing you from going offroad.

Being a Sega Saturn owner back in those earlier 3rd gen days with polished arcade racing ports like Daytona USA and Sega Rally I feel almost cheated that everyone jumped on the early Playstation bandwagon for games like this.

 

[GrizzlerBorno]

Erm... I think Half-Life 2 aged horribly. I mean I enjoyed the story of the games, but I was horribly annoyed by how predictable everything was. Basic weapons with simplistic mechanics, no bonuses in the game and no exploration, horrible driving sequences, very little strategy, etc etc
It was revolutionary, but it doesn't hold up

That's something you won't hear every day. Really though? I played Half-life 2 for the first time about 6 months ago and thought it was genius. It DOES have flaws, ofcourse, but it felt like all those flaws were inherent, not because of age.

OT: Can i be a douche and name games that HAVE aged very well? please, Please, Please? Okay: Halo1, and the old Command and Conquer strategy games.

 

[Aussy pyro]

Why are we judging games aging by their graphic qualities? Of course they suck, we're talking games released several console generations ago, when even the best computer could barely keep up with half the crap you guys claim to look terrible. Games aging is purely dependant on one quality. Are they still fun? FF7 and 8 I can still lose days to occasionally, not even notice when the first 24 hours elapses. Morrowind was my first gaming love and I will defend its shitty silt strider network till the day I die. It's hard not to love a game where a dude randomly falls out of the sky, and, you, being a foolish first timer, test out his scrolls. (for the record I made it to the dead centre (literally dead) of the map from seyda neen. In the end, sure, they're ugly, but hey, when they're old, most peoples parents will be too, and you're lieing if you say that (with the clear exception of those who's parents mistreated them) you won't love them then. I mean for examples of crappy graphics, look no further than the latest craze, minecraft.

 

[Gindil]

Earthbound. Dare anyone to say that it was good enough to force Nintendo to bring the sequels and original here in the US...

 

[ApeShapeDeity]

I don't think that you can lump an old game with the description 'bad' because its techinical aspects are dated. If you work like that, then you may as well say that Citizen Kane, Aliens, Highlander or Star Wars were shit house for the same reason.

I reckon if you want to file through old games, you can't hold their old graphics and such against them.

If they fall down now, where they didn't before, it's largely going to be to do with your own biases. Being unimpressed because a 15 year old game doesn't look or sound or handle lik a new one, well, your opinion isn't really based on the game content, is it?

If soething seemed good before, and not now, well that's ging to be (basically) because of 2 reasons.

1) There were technical aspects that blew you away, but the game actually lacked substance. Now the shine's come off, you see it for what it was... ordinary.

2) You grew up.

 

[Nexus4]

Deus Ex and Morrowind, both excellent games but age just hasn't been kind to them.

 

[mjc0961]

BUT, there are still some games that may have been considered good, but today, they simply aren't as fun as they were. Mostly, these games are based on a cheap gimmick, or simply weren't that great on their time. Games like the first Crash Bandicoot, I know the series got better with 2 & 3, but the first game was regarded as a "Mario killer", even back in the day, I found the game very frustrating, with ugly graphics, even for PS1 standards and a crappy save system.

Yeah. I actually thought Crash 1 was a pretty bad game even back when it was new. I certainly didn't find it as fun as 2 and 3, in any case.

I have to agree with the mention of Deus Ex as well. You can say it was a good shooter with RPG elements for back then, and that's cool, but now it's 2011 and I can find plenty of those, all of which seem to be a hell of a lot more entertaining.

Jet Force Gemini springs to mind too. I got all the way to the final boss once, never beat it though. I went to try again a few years back and holy shit, the controls are atrocious which makes the game unplayable. Even if you find a decent control scheme (aiming on the analog stick, moving on the c-buttons), it has this obnoxious auto-reset thing where if you don't keep pointing the stick at what you're trying to shoot, the cursor goes back to the middle of the screen. Awful.

I don't think that you can lump an old game with the description 'bad' because its techinical aspects are dated.

There is a difference between "didn't age well" and "bad." Some games that don't age well do turn out bad (see Jet Force Gemini), but some are still good, but not as good as they were back in the day (pretty sure most people would agree with putting Deus Ex here).

 

[Freechoice]

Splinter Cell comes to mind. MAN is that game clunky.

How has deus ex not aged well?
Its still one of (if not) the best examples of the shooter with RPG elements that is becoming so common today.

<a href=http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/326.262850-Reviews-from-the-Backroom-Deus-Ex>Perhaps I can explain.

Picture's worth the caption beneath it.

 

[Sebenko]

Morrowind. It was outstanding in its time but now it just is so ugly. Those character models look terrible. The combat is even worse. Anyone who is new to the game will be utterly confused by it, wondering why nothing seems to be happening and why the block button (I know, I know) doesn't work.

I must disagree. It's a well balanced and ginormous game. It has some drawbacks, storytelling is not perfectly structured and the diary doesn't work well. But I think Morrowind is still far better than Oblivion, that game was boring and had no atmosphere.
And all those bland characterfases...

Morrowind is still by far better than Failblivion, but it really hasn't aged well. The combat is clunkier than ever, and it's all so hideous.

But then, mods. Job done, game fixed and pretty. Morrowind stamping on Oblivion's face even more.