Of course, but Yoshi's Island is also still very impressive aesthetically. The crayon style graphics are very well done for a SNES game, whereas the previous Mario games show their age a bit more. Just compare the Yoshi from SMW to the Yoshi from SMW2
>>2891227 I don't like Yoshi's Island's aesthetics. They relied heavily on THICK black outlines to make the graphics stand out. To make things worst, they used a very small palette of colors for all the graphics in the game. Feels cheap.
>>2891206 Boy you sure are right! Games don't age! Movies don't age either! Or books! Or art! Or anything else! Nothing has ever aged! In fact, nothing has ever happened, ever! Time is an illusion, there is no such thing as history! Nothing has ever happened, and nothing ever will happen! There is only what is currently happening!
You stupid autistic fuck. Chop your hands off and eat them so that you can't type anymore, and with any luck you'll choke on them on the way down. Film it. We all want to watch.
My Sonic 2 cartridge aged so fucking well, the label looks almost new and the console seems to read it always at the first try. Meanwhile my FFVII is full of scratchs, specially disc 1, time didn't treat it so well.
Unimpressive is a given, nobody is going to be impressed by primitive 3D games unless they are able to position themselves in the time these games were released.
This applies to both Mario 64 and games with pseudo-cel shading like Legends of Fear Effect.
Also don't agree about Mario 64 being ugly, it's primitive but the art direction is consistent and clean. Ugly 3D games that come to mind are Bubsy 3D or Superman 64, which besides being badly designed games, have no sense of art direction.
>>2891353 Aging in gaming implies there's a modern standar which is right and you measure old games by how close they are to that mark. If you didn't expect some people from /vr/ when some of us don't even play modern games anymore maybe you're the one being autistic here.
>>2891353 >Time is an illusion, there is no such thing as history! Nothing has ever happened, and nothing ever will happen! There is only what is currently happening!
You're trying to be sarcastic, but with your goofy shitposting you actually wrote some words of wisdom without noticing it. Especially "There is only what is currently happening!", this is utterly true.
>>2891381 Maybe unimpressive isn't what I should have used? I don't know.
I'm just remembering being impressed by Seiken Densetsu 3 and Mega Man 8, and I first saw both of those games sometime around 2005. That stuff I feel held up for me, whereas some other games from that period would have looked ugly to me.
>>2891386 Regardless of how what games you play now, you're perceptions have changed. No one in the modern world, aside perhaps an isolated tribesman, is going to be as imperesed by Space Invaders as people were in the 70s. Not to say people today can't still love it, it's still a solid game and allways will be, but it will never have the same wow factor as it once did.
Needless to say, games that rely on wow factor over the core gameplay are games that often fail the test of time.
>>2891464 This. It makes much more sense to say the player has aged. Give any "aged" video game to a kid who has never played video games before and he'll likely enjoy as much as you did when you first played it.
>>2891464 "good" is subjective. What was "good" back then isn't the same as what "good" is now. I can't really say for sure when it comes to video games, but I benefited greatly from actually knowing the historical period and background of writers when reading their books.
>>2891464 Thank you for stating the obvious, my autistic friend. Of course games don't litterally age as a person would. But in this context the term "ageing" is used in a figurative sense to describe changing perceptions.
>>2891481 I don’t subscribe to that liberal bullshit of “good being subjective”. For example, that kind of thinking leads to groups of morons claiming a bunch of paint drops on a canvas is a great and meaningful art. That a man who spends his time taking random instruments dipping them in paint and then just running that shit up and down in a shed is somehow meaningful.
No “good” is not subjective and I don’t give a fuck about your shitty /v/ tastes. If you’re not from /vr/ then you sure do share the modern mentality of games and art in general.
There is a good and there is bad. There’s a lot of good games I hate. I still say the game is good because I can look past my opinion and see the gameplay is actually good just not what I like.
An example of something that runs rampant are people bitching about 5thgen camera controls. They are great in context. Just like if you compared a game from the 80s it looks terrible by a more modern standard.
>Games don’t age because code doesn’t age. Games age because the industry changes; that is, the older games have aged in relation to the state of the art. In your assertion that the actuality is one's opinions changing, you fail to consider that one may not have been around when the older games were published or that they may not play games in order of chronological release.
Older things can be compared to both their contemporary and modern standards in relative terms, regardless.
>>2891565 How is it not an excuse? >It's not bad think of it in the context of it's time! >It blew our feeble minds back in the day! By this rationale the bedtime stories you were read as a child are gripping literature.
>>2891616 Really, that's the best you can do? Something that is good regardless of context is timeless, something that requires context to be good is dated. >X isn't bad, for it's time it was revolutionary!
>>2891353 No seriously, using the term "aged" is you just trying to fit in. Stop being lukewarm and admit that you simply don't like the game or that you still like the game. The only thing that ages is you
>>2891203 Out of This World/Another World had fucking perfect art direction, and can actually be perfectly scaled up to HD and it's still fucking great.
It's a puzzle platformer, and the respawn locations are perfectly reasonable. It's great. A lot of the deaths aren't telegraphed well but it's not hard to recover from. It's not like replaying 10 hours of gameplay because you forgot to pick up something on the first screen. All you gotta do is find a way to get over the next obstacle.
Looks fucking amazing, and the author himself actually made the HD rerelease and did it justice.
>>2891304 Is the palette really that small? It always seemed very bright and colorful to me. The lines I can understand though, it's really up to personal preference and with a low resolution it's very in your face.
>>2891742 By your reasoning all things require context. That's idiotic. How is that logical? I'm stating that the requiring context to be good diminishes something, you're stating that all things require context to be good. An asinine conception. What context does fantasy require? Do you think people give a shit Tolkien was working through his WW1 experience when writing The Lord of the Rings?
>>2891778 I'm not the anon your hilarious fit of potato-brained rage is directed at, but I feel like I should point out that reading Lord of the Rings is greatly enhanced by the knowledge of Tolkien's struggles in WWI. And yes, a LOT of people care about that. That's why it's common knowledge. If it was irrelevant, it would have faded with time. I bet you think 6th gen isn't retro too, you cancerous /v/ troll.
>>2891784 >Young people Are you running out of argument or something? >>2891789 >a LOT of people care about that I'm sure all people initially reading The Lord of the Rings do a full background of Tolkien, his experiences and the fact that it's influenced by Wagner's Ring Cycle. It's irrelevant in that quite the opposite is true there are tons of foaming at the mouth fanboys who are ignorant of these things and enjoy the trilogy just the same.
>>2891821 I'm stating that despite being aware of context at this point I had none at the time of reading said books. I had no reason to know or care about these things and not knowing them had no negative effect on the experience of reading said books. In fact knowing them after the fact has not enriched my experience any further either. If you think I'm arguing for context then you misunderstood me entirely.
>>2891613 For myself, obviously. My opinions are my own and you are welcome to hold differing ones.
>>2891565 It isn't, but in the post I quoted he said that 5th gen camera controls are "great in context." Which to me suggests an acceptance that they aren't really that good. It's like he's saying "ok the camera's a bit shit, but it was before analogue controllers were standardised." You're essentially making excuses for it.
I'm one of those who thinks the 5th gen was a bit crap. The 4th gen is my favourite, as far as I'm concerned it's the pinnacle of 2d gaming, and if I want to show someone a game like Streets of Rage 2 or Contra Hard Corps then I don't need to put them into context for that person to see how great they are, they're just great.
>>2893154 >It isn't, but in the post I quoted he said that 5th gen camera controls are "great in context." Which to me suggests an acceptance that they aren't really that good. It's like he's saying "ok the camera's a bit shit, but it was before analogue controllers were standardised." You're essentially making excuses for it.
It's not an excuse it's the context. It's no different to saying how NES looks like shit but during the time it was great for a home console.
Makes no sense to me. I love 5th gen games and there were shitty controls. But to hate games like burning rangers for example because of the camera is making excuses and not taking things into context.
>>2893162 >It's not an excuse it's the context. Tomay-doh, tomah-toe
> It's no different to saying how NES looks like shit but during the time it was great for a home console. The thing is things like graphics, in my opinion are less important than things like controls, to me anyway.
The Mario games on the NES look dated, but they they still control like a dream. Which is why I would argue it has aged much better than Tomb Raider, which is still great game, but a little clunky to play.
>Makes no sense to me. I love 5th gen games and there were shitty controls. But to hate games like burning rangers for example because of the camera is making excuses and not taking things into context.
It doesn't mean you hate a game just because you accept it has flaws.
If you want to talk about controls or a guide many NES games are bullshit without a copy of Nintendo Power or a guide. You have to take that into context. Plenty of example that I don’t need to name of that.
>It doesn't mean you hate a game just because you accept it has flaws. There’s flaws and there’s limitation of the age. You can only make camera control so good with out the much preferred dual stick set up of modern games.
Even with the dualshock not many games took advantage of it.
>Somebody says a game has aged >Meaning it does not stand up well to modern standards and expectations >Meaning it would not be received as well if it were released today as when it was new >Grown men are so triggered by the word "aged" they reject the concept entirely, disregard the context and focus entirely on the word "aged" itself
You know exactly what is being said. Nobody is suggesting code ages. Nobody is implying your favourite old game is shit because it's not Black Ops VIII Calm the fuck down and stop trying to ban words that make you feel less special.
>>2891478 >Give any "aged" video game to a kid who has never played video games before and he'll likely enjoy as much as you did when you first played it. Exactly. I was impressed how a guy who barely played videogames was very excited with the original LoZ.
>>2893154 >The 4th gen is my favourite, as far as I'm concerned it's the pinnacle of 2d gaming, and if I want to show someone a game like Streets of Rage 2 or Contra Hard Corps then I don't need to put them into context for that person to see how great they are, they're just great. My nigga. By the way, do you like Mode 7 or similar plane distortion effects? I think they are still great.
>>2893660 I think mode 7 looks great still, though my view is probably biased as the only mode 7 games I have are Mario ones (not a big SNES collector), and I think that cartoony art style ages particularly well.
On the subject of graphics ageing, I think a lot of people that object to the term take it to mean older, less technologically advanced, graphics are inherently worse. I don't think that's what people are saying, it certainly isn't what I'm saying.
As I said, I think the SNES Mario games have aged very well, both in terms of gameplay and graphics, but for now let's focus on graphics. The reason they've aged so well is that they used an art style that worked so well on the technology they had available. I mean if Super Mario World or Yoshi's Island were made today with the same art style then they wouldn't look that different. A little less pixelly perhaps, but more or less the same.
In contrast look at the art of the newer Call of Duty games, the graphics are technologically impressive and they look good, but the art style is aiming for realism and as technology improves other games are gonna come along that do that better, and when that happens Advanced warfare isn't gonna look as good. It's not gonna age well.
In 20 years time the colourful cartoon sprites of Super Mario World and Yoshi's Island will still look as good as they do today. While Advanced Warfare will look like a painfully dated attempt at realistic graphics.
>>2891343 Mario 64 still holds up pretty well. I mean, the graphics are old and jagged, but it's a cartoony stylization that I think lends itself naturally to low definition graphics as well as high definition graphics.
>>2891406 Put more words into his mouth why don't you?
>>2891464 >because code doesn’t age Nobody is talking about aging literally you fag, it's about modern and old perceptions, about modern and old design sensibilities.
Something that was seen as an acceptable design decision then could be regarded as appalling game design today.
>>2893195 >>2893195 I understand why the camera controls were a little lacking, but the point remains that the controls were flawed. It's no ones fault, it doesn't make the games bad, but I would say they've aged badly because of it.
Again, let's go back to the 4th gen. 2d gaming by this point was well trodden ground and people had learnt from previous generations. The hardware manufacturers knew how to make consoles that could support 2d gaming well. They knew how to make controllers that supported it well. Developers knew how to make games that looked good and played well.
If you give someone a game like Sonic, you don't need to put it into context. It looks good , it controls well, the levels are well designed. It's solid 2d platforming action that can hold it's own against any 2d platformer released today. I don't need to explain why the controls are bad because they aren't bad.
>>2891503 >there is no subjectivity, only objectivity Ya gotta chill.
>>2891565 It's not, rather, it's subjective, which is ironic of you. You say that 5th gen 3D cameras are objectively fine "in context", I say that objectively, they were only bearable "in context", and that subjectively, a lot were dogshit.
I'll personally never understand people who say that 5th gen cameras were all fine, or that tank controls are amazing. I always felt that shit was bad even when it was new.
>>2893843 Sonic is a well designed easy to pick up game. Throw something like LttP at a kid today with a map and give him no internet. Good fucking luck beating that game anytime soon.
>>2893860 >I'll personally never understand people who say that 5th gen cameras were all fine, or that tank controls are amazing. I always felt that shit was bad even when it was new. Many were bad. But they were bad then and are still bad.
>>2891503 That you find a game good despite also hating it is still an opinion.
>For example, that kind of thinking leads to groups of morons claiming a bunch of paint drops on a canvas is a great and meaningful art. Not necessarily. You clearly don't study art. You certainly haven't studied philosophy.
>>2893162 >But to hate games like burning rangers for example because of the camera is making excuses I don't think anyone who takes anything seriously does that. I love Resident Evil despite the controls being seriously ass.
>>2893832 >Something that was seen as an acceptable design decision then could be regarded as appalling game design today.
Then how did games like Minecraft and Flappy Bird become so popular even though they used dated aesthetics and game play? Neither game was original. Minecraft was based on DF, a niche game, and Flappy Bird was a clone of a very obscure game.
How would you explain DLC and DRM? Don't tell me people's sensibilities have changed to joyfully accepting them.
Modern/old perception difference is a myth. Because games are made for profit, there's really no set standard to follow. You could say that graphics standards improve over time, but there are many exceptions. If there was a magic formula for making profitable video games, everyone would be doing it.
>>2894249 >Cites two extremely exceptional cases as if they were commonplace occurrences >Gets the inspirations wrong >Treats DLC and DRM as connected to game mechanics Mhm, mhm. Very insightful. You should submit an article to Kotaku or something.
>>2894470 I'm just saying that doing shit like opening doors and talking to people through a menu like in the first dragon quest would be unacceptable to most jrpg fans today.
That's an example of a game not aging good compared to something like the first Tales game.
Another example would be prerendered backgrounds on 5th gen games, they look fine on a CRT but they may look like arse when scaled to a bigger resolution, and every display today uses a bigger resolution than what the PS1 could output, this makes them look bad today and thus making them not "age" well.
That said, the whole "boogeyman" term is super misleading, since there definitely are radical leftists out there doxxing and attacking people with differing world views. Their whole defense is "We don't exist, what are you talking about? You're making things up, go back to bed." The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist.
Games age, just like books and movies do age. It's not just your perception, but the advance and development of the genre and convention.
For an example, SF2 has generally aged pretty poorly, both in the sense of perceptions (framerates, pixel art, fluidity) and within the genre: standard, even advanced gameplay at the time now plays as excessively simplistic, lacking genre staples like supers and combos.
Television, films and comics all do the same thing. What was once groundbreaking and new ages poorly if all it had to offer was that it was groundbreaking.
Because the medium and culture around them changes, they are left behind. Which is exactly what aging is.
>>2894575 Careful. Logic doesn't fly on /vr/. Only m-muh precious feelz
I'm about ready to just declare this place officially dead. It's stagnant, hyper-reactionary, and the autists are running the asylum. The five lunatics left that want to keep shitposting about CRTs vs. LCD or emulators or whatever, and waifus threads, and how "retro" somehow is a period of time that ends at 1999 and will be that way forever (how can you not see the MASSIVE, glaring logical fallacy in that?) can have it. They've about killed the place already. Soon enough they'll see what they've done and get bored and move on, finding some other community's well to poison with their mouth-frothing and shit throwing. I'm so close to giving up on trying to have any kind of actual discussions here.
Games are art, just like furniture is art, because they're made by humans and wouldn't exist otherwise. Just the definition, from artisan. As for aging things obviously age, to the point where you can look at a game and say "that's so 90s" based on the themes/music/tech used to create it. Aging isn't a bad thing, some things age well and others don't. Pls keep the meta discussions on time and shit on >>>/x/
>>2894678 Does chess require much physical activity?
Competitive video games are a sport no different to physical sports sans the use of avatars for the players. Like, you can't even argue this, all the fighting game tourneys and championships out there speak for themselves.
>>2894691 >>2894696 >While athletics emphasises the athletes’ efforts and control of the body (skiing, skating, boxing, tennis, handball and football), sports, meaning "anything humans find amusing or entertaining”, just as well appreciate the use of facilities, equipment, tools, devices, means of transport or animal as a basic condition (sailing, equestrianism and motor racing), and today the concepts are more often used interchangeably. Vidya is a sport.
>>2894701 >sailing, equestrianism and motor racing All of which require physical activity and stamina. Sorry, gookclicking doesn't count. >sports, meaning "anything humans find amusing or entertaining” Probably the most retarded definition I've ever heard.
>>2894575 >Games age, just like books and movies do age. It's not just your perception, but the advance and development of the genre and convention.
Except that the "advances" aren't always positive. There are many instances where things either don't change or they regress. Look at modern art. You can shit on a canvas and sell it for millions. Look at the many video game sequels. They're full of bugs and have less content than their predecessors. AI never improved. Game play depth never increased. Standards aren't being raised. They're being lowered or kept the same. The only consistent improvements we see in media over time are special effects in movies and graphics/sound in video games. Everything else is stagnant. As for literature, post-modernistic authors write nonsensical garbage and the most popular modern works are written for least-educated people.
What kind of person are you? Are you a yolo go-with-flow guy? Do you always jump on the latest fad, fashion, and electronic gadget? Do you have any personal standards, any sense of individuality?
>>2893942 >You can't just pick LttP up and beat it in a sitting. Well, no, it's not that kind of game.
>accessability Alttp is hardly a game with a high barrier of entry. It's easy to get into, even if the later bosses get pretty challenging. A complete noob will learn the ropes within a day of playing the game, and then learn the more advanced stuff as they go. Meanwhile, a game like Contra requires much more skill, it's a high octane action game that's fast and doesn't let up, it requires a lot of playing to get good at.
>>2894249 >Then how did games like Minecraft and Flappy Bird become so popular even though they used dated aesthetics and game play? Because the gameplay of Minecraft isn't poorly aged, it still holds up (or, I don't know if it is, I haven't played it in years and they kept throwing you for a loop with updates, like the gradual introduction of half-baked RPG/adventure game mechanics) The graphics were a stylistic choice, they're crude and simple by design.
By design sensibilities I don't mean graphics, more gameplay and controls.
>Neither game was original. Minecraft was based on DF, a niche game Isn't Dorf Fortress a ploddy ASCII art game that's entirely about micro management? It has similar themes I suppose, but it's more inspired by DigDug and that Infiniminer thing.
>and Flappy Bird Flappy Bird was released on smartphones, and the gameplay is very simple and stupid, of course it would become popular, say you're waiting on the bus or standing in line, it kills time with little investment. You could probably release a lot of old arcady and puzzley games on smartphones and a lot of them could have a good chance of getting popular.
Do you remember why Tetris got so huge? It's a simple and addicting game you could easily pick up at any time of day, it's easy fun.
A dated design element would be Resident Evil, amazing games, but people would never have that control scheme today, there's just so much better options.
>>2893832 >"Boy you sure are right! Games don't age! Movies don't age either! Or books! Or art! Or anything else! Nothing has ever aged! In fact, nothing has ever happened, ever! Time is an illusion, there is no such thing as history! Nothing has ever happened, and nothing ever will happen! There is only what is currently happening!" >M-mommy the bad 4chan man is putting words in my mouf! BAAAAAAW!
The Banjo Kazooie series holds up pretty well looking at it from where we are now. I think Kazooie is slightly better, I think the simplicity in gameplay and graphics are more redeeming where as Tooie undeniably has a different atmosphere.
The art direction, music and humour does well in keeping the games still enjoyable. Unless you're not into collecting then to each their own.
>>2894909 Tooie is great and all, it's just so heavy handed with the backtracking and everything you come upon that screams "see you in an hour or two when you can finally deal with me" weighs on you. The game really overstays it's welcome.
That said, I played nothing but that game when it first came out until I had 100%'d it. Tooie is easily my #1 game I was hyped for. I really enjoyed the first half or so of nuts and bolts, too. It just sucked once you had most of the parts and could build a "do-everything" machine
>>2892136 I like WC2 but I'd say Starcraft aged better, much more variety in content, much larger in scope, the races are actually radically different as opposed to WC2 where the only two races were 99% the same just with different sound and graphics, and where all tilesets are really just the same with different skins.
It has it's own wonderful atmosphere and feel though, despite being ultimately very simple.
>>2891386 Are you fucking kidding me? Not that guy but aging is the MOST apparent in games of all visual media. Maybe with books, not so much, with movies, somewhat so, but with games there are VERY obvious technical advancements that occur sometimes not even after 5 years that make a very obvious difference in gameplay, graphics, sound, etc.
It's so fucking obvious I don't see how this could possibly even be a discussion
>>2894709 >Except that the "advances" aren't always positive.
That doesn't have anything to do with the conversation at hand unless you think that something being of a tradition of an older era is bad, in which case you're a fucking retard arguing only because you think that aging is inherently of negative connotation.
>>2894709 no shit dumbass, that's what distinguishes "ages well" from "ages poorly."
games that have aged well either the advances haven't been major and they are still competitive, or the advances have in fact been comparably negative. Something ages poorly when much of what you're accustomed to and would want in the game is lacking, and everything it had done adequately has been done better more recently.
>>2895609 >That doesn't have anything to do with the conversation at hand unless you think that something being of a tradition of an older era is bad, in which case you're a fucking retard arguing only because you think that aging is inherently of negative connotation.
I never implied that video games of an older tradition are bad. In the context of video games, new standards don't imply anything about previous standards. Changes in standards aren't necessarily improvements in terms of entertainment value. Only technological improvements can be seen as objectively positive. How the new technology is applied is a different matter. The point of video games is to entertain. There's no magical formula for entertainment. If there is, then one could say the changing standards are improvements.
Generally speaking, the term aging has negative connotations. Even when you're describing someone who's aging well, the negative implications are still there: That person is getting closer to death and his/her body is becoming older. Aging doesn't have negative connotations only when it's used in specific contexts, such as when describing wine. When retro games are described as having "aged well", it's kind of ambiguous. What does it mean exactly? Why are modern standards being used as a reference point? To me, it sounds like the player's tastes have gravitated towards modern games, but claims that he still likes certain retro games, despite ironically judging them from a modern perspective. If you truly like the game, then why do you view it from the perspective of the modern video game industry instead of your own? If only your personal opinion of the retro game mattered to you, then why would you want the game to age? Why can't it be timeless? It doesn't make sense that people think like this. Is it because of cognitive dissonance?
>>2896567 >Generally speaking, the term aging has negative connotations. Even when you're describing someone who's aging well, the negative implications are still there: That person is getting closer to death and his/her body is becoming older. Aging doesn't have negative connotations only when it's used in specific contexts, such as when describing wine. When retro games are described as having "aged well", it's kind of ambiguous. What does it mean exactly?
Well OP specifically said "Aged like wine", so if you can't work it out for yourself then there's no helping you.
>Why are modern standards being used as a reference point? To me, it sounds like the player's tastes have gravitated towards modern games, but claims that he still likes certain retro games, despite ironically judging them from a modern perspective. If you truly like the game, then why do you view it from the perspective of the modern video game industry instead of your own? If only your personal opinion of the retro game mattered to you, then why would you want the game to age? Why can't it be timeless? It doesn't make sense that people think like this. Is it because of cognitive dissonance?
Because while only my personal opinions matter to me, those opinions are shaped by my experiences and I have experienced modern games.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at [email protected] with the post's information.