"Old" Games
- Thread starter Not That
- Start date
Recommended Videos
For me old is Atari, Commodore etc
then:
Snes to PS1/Dremacast/N64 - The Golden Age
PS2-PS3/Xbox 360 - The Silver Age
Wii - Not for me, so I can't rank it.
then:
Snes to PS1/Dremacast/N64 - The Golden Age
PS2-PS3/Xbox 360 - The Silver Age
Wii - Not for me, so I can't rank it.
Oh my LordyLord, Bioshock is sooooooo old!! What's with that whole swapping weapons and plasmid thing? You can't even play a Big Daddy! You play a regular schmoe! Ancient! Call of Duty 4 is so old, also! It's not cool like Modern Warfare 2, whose graphics are super amazing! The graphics in Call of Duty 4 look like rotten liquid poo on cardboard!
Just Kidding, that's a quote from a kid at my school. An actual old game is Tic Tac Toe or Rock Paper Scissors. Now THOSE are old games.
Just Kidding, that's a quote from a kid at my school. An actual old game is Tic Tac Toe or Rock Paper Scissors. Now THOSE are old games.
A friend of mine told me that Bayonetta is old...
It came out this year...
Then I told him I bought Quake 1 this year. He just stared at me.
I would consider games made in 2004 and before, "old." Not old as in, "OH GAWD IT SUX CoD TIME," but old as in it's been out for a bit of time, and that's it. I think Half Life 2 is old. The graphics are great, the gameplay is fun, but it's still part of the older games section (perhaps it's... semi-old). I don't know how to explain. I don't really call games made in 2000 and above old...but games such as Return to Castle Wolfenstein are still kind of old (and I love that game!). D:
Anyways, old != crap. Old games sometimes are very unique, and fun due to simplicity (or complexity that we don't see today). I recently bought Die by the Sword on GOG.com. That games is awesome. You use your mouse to control your hand swinging your sword, and you can cut limbs off your enemies. The combat is very hard, and the controls are a bit weird at times, but it's just so unique.
I'm actually finding myself playing these "old" games more than new ones now. Especially FPS games. New FPS games feel really weird, especially on the PC. The movement feels like the game was made for a console, even when it wasn't (PREY was a bit like this). I also love exploring old games for the NES, SNES, N64, and all that. Bionic Commando, and Goldeneye are sweet.
It came out this year...
Then I told him I bought Quake 1 this year. He just stared at me.
I would consider games made in 2004 and before, "old." Not old as in, "OH GAWD IT SUX CoD TIME," but old as in it's been out for a bit of time, and that's it. I think Half Life 2 is old. The graphics are great, the gameplay is fun, but it's still part of the older games section (perhaps it's... semi-old). I don't know how to explain. I don't really call games made in 2000 and above old...but games such as Return to Castle Wolfenstein are still kind of old (and I love that game!). D:
Anyways, old != crap. Old games sometimes are very unique, and fun due to simplicity (or complexity that we don't see today). I recently bought Die by the Sword on GOG.com. That games is awesome. You use your mouse to control your hand swinging your sword, and you can cut limbs off your enemies. The combat is very hard, and the controls are a bit weird at times, but it's just so unique.
I'm actually finding myself playing these "old" games more than new ones now. Especially FPS games. New FPS games feel really weird, especially on the PC. The movement feels like the game was made for a console, even when it wasn't (PREY was a bit like this). I also love exploring old games for the NES, SNES, N64, and all that. Bionic Commando, and Goldeneye are sweet.
Any game that came out two or more years ago is "old", as far as I'm concerned. Some old games manage to maintain their charm with age, but many are overshadowed by the current gen.
For me old is the NES era, but not that i don't love games from that era. I've always played SNES games expecting aged graphics but find they look like most other 2D games these days.
Anyone that considers games from 3 years ago old are idiots, and if they refuse to play those games it's their loss.
Anyone that considers games from 3 years ago old are idiots, and if they refuse to play those games it's their loss.
That's annoying. I think there are plenty of problems that cause this. One of our problems is that memories are short. Whenever you poll a general audience for their favorite [whatever], almost none of the answers will be more than four or five years old.
Another problem is that this industry is in a big hurry to make its previous efforts obsolete. The neverending quest for developers to one-up each other (and even themselves) leads to a kind of marketing that ensures that yesterday's game is already old news before it even hits the bargain bin.
Part of this is just human nature and not at all specific to the game industry. People want to claim that the "best" or "worst" of whatever are things that are within the person's own experience. So if you asked 100 Americans to name the most important person in the 20th century, they're far more likely to say Ronald Reagan or Bill Gates than FDR or Henry Ford. The pace of game development just accelerates that process.
Another problem is that this industry is in a big hurry to make its previous efforts obsolete. The neverending quest for developers to one-up each other (and even themselves) leads to a kind of marketing that ensures that yesterday's game is already old news before it even hits the bargain bin.
Part of this is just human nature and not at all specific to the game industry. People want to claim that the "best" or "worst" of whatever are things that are within the person's own experience. So if you asked 100 Americans to name the most important person in the 20th century, they're far more likely to say Ronald Reagan or Bill Gates than FDR or Henry Ford. The pace of game development just accelerates that process.
if its from the 80's or before then its old, if its from the 90's then its middle aged, anything from the 2000's is new.
And yes I am old.
Although those three decades do nicely slice gaming into eras of hardware and graphics tech.
And yes I am old.
Although those three decades do nicely slice gaming into eras of hardware and graphics tech.
Except films. I find a lot of people are more lenient when it comes to films.Steve Butts said:
I wasn't even born when my favourite film came out, and nothing, absolutely nothing that as been released can compare to it. I am of course referring to the Empire Strikes back.
It depends on the game. For instance Super Mario Land is still very playable today, even if it's simple compared to subsequent platformers, all you see is having less options.Not That said:
On the other thand there's Half Life, which was borderline revolutionary when it came out, but has aged, very, very, badly as gameplay wise it just isn't as good as subsequent games in the genre, and Halo was really the next Half Life - great when it came out but it aged poorly.
Now certainly I find this pretty bizarre when talking about gaming PCs, as people consider a system that can't run the newest games not to be a gaming PC.
Anyway, I find myself much in the same position as yourself, playing games on a lag, waiting for them to come down in price, or even waiting for a generation to end (I got my first PS1 several years after the PSone stopped selling, and replaced it with a PS2 in 2008, 5 years after the 360's release getting a 360 is I think the first time since I got my first PC in 1998 that I've had a current game system) before I get games. I find some of the games that people raved about as being awesome as rather trite, as I'm not playing them in the order they were released, but generally the order in which they become affordably available to me. I could play a newer game and then go back to an older one and think it sucks, while people who played the older one while it was fresh would think it's awesome. Games that actually age very well are far too often the last ones in a type of game. There hasn't been anything like Descent since Descent 3, and even there it was Descent, Descent 2, Forsaken, Descent 3 that made up the entire genre. Like that, even though D3 is from 1999 it's still great. On the other hand, if you look at Civilization II, there's III and IV out now, and V is about to be released, it really is too old as the newer games are just plain better.
Really Halo 3 is old, kids these days...
Well I consider anything from the NES days as "classic" not old. Anything from before that, then yeah I can see that as old. I have friends who think the same way, though. When I told them that instead of playing some Modern Warfare 2 (which I HATE) I decided to go play some Space Quest, they just gave me the most bizarre look. I doubt they even know about those games, let alone the awesomeness that Is Roger Wilco!
Well I consider anything from the NES days as "classic" not old. Anything from before that, then yeah I can see that as old. I have friends who think the same way, though. When I told them that instead of playing some Modern Warfare 2 (which I HATE) I decided to go play some Space Quest, they just gave me the most bizarre look. I doubt they even know about those games, let alone the awesomeness that Is Roger Wilco!
I bought Bioshock 2 recently, for the good price of only 15 euros I might add, only to be told by a friend that he considered that an old game and it was no wonder why it was going cheap.
Bioshock 2.. released only a few months ago.. old..
Bioshock 2.. released only a few months ago.. old..
That. Totally trueSteve Butts said:
I myself because of monetary limitations too, kinda tend to play some "old" games from time to time. And I discovered quite a few good ones which some of are my favorites. The biggest problem is probably that some (younger) people disregard much gaming history by not knowing it. And if you look like that, in a by perception shortened history of lets just say 10 years, 3 years is a LOT.
In short: Halo 3 old, WTF? I just finished the second
I once talked about a game being old and was ranted at for it not being old enouph but many are like me, we dont remember the release date we just estimate using graphics and mechanics.
If thats the case we should be glad that the medium is advancing faster than we think.
If thats the case we should be glad that the medium is advancing faster than we think.
Well, this certainly doesn't apply to me. I may be fairly young (just about to turn eighteen), but I still regularly enjoy playing games from the nineties when the feeling takes me, and I'm not adverse to playing anything older either, if it's good. Graphics really don't matter to me at all if the rest of the game is enjoyable.
In fact, whenever I've got money to spend and there's a lull in new releases that I'm interested in, I'll go back and buy some older classics that I missed the first time around. Often I buy three or four older games for the price of a new release, and it usually provides me with far more entertainment for my money.
In fact, whenever I've got money to spend and there's a lull in new releases that I'm interested in, I'll go back and buy some older classics that I missed the first time around. Often I buy three or four older games for the price of a new release, and it usually provides me with far more entertainment for my money.
in a live free or die hard quote "Just because its old doesnt make it a classic" in this case classic referring it to being good old is freebird and stairway to heaven where you've heard it to much AkA COD. Classic being you hear it not or just enough like final fantasy and Diablo