>Game X hasn't aged well >Game Yhas aged badly >Game

>>3778839
The good games are still the good games.

The bad games are still the bad games.

The issue is that some of the games that you thought were good maybe weren't as good as you remember,

Just a buzzword phrase for "muh nostalgia".

>aged

>>3778843
Pretty much this. "Aged well" is just some roundabout way of saying "yeah, this good game didn't stop being good." I've never bought into the notion that some arbitrary advancement in technology or the passing of time somehow makes a game more or less than it ever was.

>>3778839
Some features of games simply seem archaic now because modern tech has made them irrelevant. Such as:
—abundance of pre-rendered 3D/FMV
—requirement for writing down stuff and drawing maps
—lack of in-game plot and graphics, when instead the player is supposed to read and see everything in the manual
—lack of saving where it's actually needed
—stuff which """encourages player cooperation""" (read: is unplayable without FAQs) like Druaga
—weird controls making up for the lack of buttons/absence of analog

Other times, old games simply get obsoleted. Like for example with beat 'em ups before Double Dragon and then Final Fight. Or 2D fighters before Street Fighter 2.

Meanwhile, some games made use of their technical limitations. For example, Pac-Man feels absolutely fine as it is, playing on a single screen with basic graphics and controls. This is the case when the game has aged extremely well.

Games don't age, people's standards change as their attention spans lower.

File: LTTP2.jpg (133KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

133KB, 640x480px

Specifically in regards to graphics, compare LTTP to OOT. The former still looks gorgeous today.

>>3779082
OOT still looks pretty good tho
Basically if you can put a little ass kid in front of a game and he likes it it's "aged well"

>>3779082

I dunno man, I've always found ALTTP to be pretty ugly, or at least all the characters anyway, the environments are fine.

But I love the kind of foggy low poly look of OOT, it's just got a shitty framerate.

>>3779082
The truth is, both look fine. OoT just constantly tries to hide its lack of polygons, but aside from this it holds up well

>>3779082
I agree with you ALTTP looks a lot better or has aged better. Not to say either is a bad game, because both are amazing!

>>3779057
>people's standards change as they get to experience more games
ftfy

"aged poorly" means that the game does something in a way that was accepted at the time because no better alternative existed.
then years later someone figures out how to do that thing in a way that is objectively better than the old way so now when you play a game that does it the old way it feels like shit.

File: kung-fu.png (179KB, 360x500px) Image search: [Google]

179KB, 360x500px

This still hits the spot for me, in a pick-up-for-five-minutes way. Bright colors, satisfying sound effects, simple arcade action.

>>3779082

OOT and Majora still look damn good honestly, especially compared to other titles on the console. They took the N64's limitations and worked them into an art-style - the stuff that's 'aged badly' from that generation are games that let you see the console's flaws, Ocarina just lets you think they're all intentional design (aside from the framerate anyway).

>>3778839
All games are flawed in some way, some flaws become more obvious with time. Some don't.

>>3779057
>Games don't age, people's standards change

And that, my autistic friend, is exactly what people mean when they say games age.

>>3778839

What game is that?

>>3778923
It also assumes every person living in 2016 is used to modern games and sets them as the optimum. I really like Quantum Break, but the game runs badly and overuses motion blur to the point of literally making my eyes hurt. I am also physically disabled and the controls are sub-optimal to me. Meanwhile, I love System Shock 2, the controls are easier to me, the game runs in 1080p/60 fps on my PC without any upscale or motion blur bullshit and I do not mind the low poly graphics because making worm human hybrids "realistic" is an oxymoron in itself. Nothing against consoles, but I despise the consolification of PC gaming, it makes my gaming shittier as a disabled person, as these ports usually have less customisable controls etc. So in this case, an old game with "awkward controls" can be actually better controllable for me than a new game that is made for healthy Xbox One gamers and ported without giving two shits about PC gamers or the disabled.

>>3779057
>being this obtuse and pedantic

>>3778839
there are some games that were good for their time or were ambitious but not quite executed well, and those are the ones i guess people say haven't aged well and there are some games that have a unique gameplay or did a certain genre so good you can play it over and over. those are the ones that have aged well to most.

It seems some people become full of temporary excitement for games, or entire platforms, independent of the actual quality of individual titles, and it causes them to enjoy mediocre games in addition to good games, and then when that excitement wears off they say the bad games have "aged poorly" and the good games have "aged well."
Others saw most games as bad to begin with, so the "aging" thing sounds strange to them, since it implies bad games were good at some point in the past.

Goldeneye is the quintessential example of a game that hasn't aged well.

And it's a perfect example of why "hasn't aged well" is a load of horseshit. It still plays well today with fun level design and great music, but people complain because it doesn't use a "fluid" aiming system that it wasn't designed for.

>>3779057
I now feel much more enlightened, my internet friend! Upvote!

I really don't get why this term causes so much controversy. Is it just that people get defensive if someone has the adacity to say certain gaming concepts took a few tries to get right.

If a game can still be called great, without any qualifiers, then it's aged well, aged like fine wine, etc.

If a games still great but newer players might have some issues with certain aspects which have been improved since, like when people make excuses for the camera and controls in early 3d games, then the game is shoeing it's age. Not that that makes it bad by any means, once you get used to the quirks the games are just as fun as they ever were.

If you go back to a game and realise it was never particularly good and the only reason you ever liked it back in the day was because of something superficial such as graphics that were technically impressive for the time or some new novel feture it introduced, then it has aged badly, like milk or whatever.

>>3778843
>The issue is that some of the games that you thought were good maybe weren't as good as you remember
Or the gameplay has been vastly improved upon

>>3781593
>I really don't get why this term causes so much controversy.
Because some people take their hobbies to heart and feel as though an "attack" on said thing is like an attack on their very person