|
|
| Page 1 of 1 |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
crossmr
Posts: 2966
Location: United Kingdom
|
 Posted: Mon, 18th Aug 2008 11:35 Post subject: |
|
|
Some are..some aren't. I find the old gold box games still great (Curse of the azure bonds, etc)
and plenty of other old dos games can still be quite fun.
intel ultra 7 265k, 64gb ram, 3070
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon, 18th Aug 2008 11:47 Post subject: |
|
|
I think the above only holds true if you're unable to look past the graphical shortcomings of an older game. I just finished replaying Deus Ex today - it was just as awesome as I remember it being. Sure, the graphics were an eyesore, but the story and game play remained compelling and it still retains its title as one of the best games ever in my book.
There is a lot of heart put into older games, something severely lacking from the mass-marketed, eye-candied shit they put out today. I say give the classics another go.
I can never be free, because the shackles I wear can't be touched or be seen.
i9-9900k, MSI MPG-Z390 Gaming Pro Carbon, 32GB DDR4 @ 3000, eVGA GTX 1080 DT, Samsung 970 EVO Plus nVME 1TB
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon, 18th Aug 2008 12:46 Post subject: |
|
|
I guess some games just retain it and some don't. I played old summer and winter games from accolade and it still is amazing fun. It even have that ugly vector 3d graphics and I didn't mind it. Now in case of Rainbow Six: Rogue Spear it's just the opposite, I adored that game, but now I can't play it. Mouse and movement is too awkward, controls are unintuitive and graphics are awfully.
In overall I think 3d ages much worse than 2d graphics.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Phluxed
VIP Member
Posts: 4911
Location: Oakville, Ontario, Canada
|
| Posted: Mon, 18th Aug 2008 12:56 Post subject: |
|
|
Classics are fun for like 10 minutes to a couple hours, after that the nostalgia wears off and I'm just left wondering what could have been. What if they'd had the technology to go that extra step... to make it look like they really envisioned and to play like they'd hoped.
IDK, I never play classics anymore because they always always always ruin the memory for me.. I really think this is a to each their own scenario because I have a friend who all he does is sit around and play NES and SNES.
I tried playing Base Wars for nintendo not too long ago and it was a big meh, and pokemon for gameboy, same thing...
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon, 18th Aug 2008 13:16 Post subject: |
|
|
I'm playing Planescape Torment right now at 1680x1050. There a mod to play games that use the infinity engine at any resolution you want.
And I have to say those 2D backgrounds are still looking nice and not so repetitive than most 3D graphics. And I don't have to mess with the camera all the time, which is one thing that is really annoying in Neverwinter Nights 2 and other 3D RPGs. I really prefer having a fixed, non rotatable camera.
Planescape, Baldurs Gate series, Fallout 1 + 2 those are games that will never get old for me and they're so much better than most of the crappy 3D shit that gets released today.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
-=Cartoon=-
VIP Member
Posts: 8823
Location: South Pacific Ocean
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon, 18th Aug 2008 14:49 Post subject: |
|
|
The only thing which I can find hard to sort of "get over" in terms of replaying old games is the resolution and sometimes clunky UIs. As far as RPGs go, I really find the golden age came after Fallout 1, at least graphically. If one can raise the resolution (there are tools for for quite a few of them), then I find them to be much better looking and much more lovingly crafted than RPGs of today. The aforementioned Planescape: Torment for example looks absolutely gorgeous.
As sad as it is to say it, most of my gaming consists of replaying older games. There are very few games today that can keep my attention for long. They might be a good experience for a while, but very few have any staying power (STALKER is a good example though of a new games which I've constantly gone back to and replayed as is the expansion for NWN2, Mask of the Betrayer).
As for Fallout, I really enjoyed the turnbased combat for the most part in the first game, because encounters were generally better set up (with a few exceptions). Fallout 2 has a lot of random encounters with a lot of enemies at once (sometimes two factions fighting one another), and that is not good design for a turnbased game.
All in all, I desperately miss turnbased games. I much prefer slower-paced gaming, and I really dislike the notion that turnbased is somehow outdated. That's rubbish.
That's not to say that every "classic" lives up to how I remember them though. There are quite a few where I would wonder what attracted me to the game in the first place. But there are also many which contain much more depth and personality than what we typically see today.
So yeah, I have no problem playing older games mostly.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Karmeck
Posts: 3348
Location: Sweden
|
| Posted: Mon, 18th Aug 2008 16:21 Post subject: |
|
|
| Immunity wrote: | I think the above only holds true if you're unable to look past the graphical shortcomings of an older game. I just finished replaying Deus Ex today - it was just as awesome as I remember it being. Sure, the graphics were an eyesore, but the story and game play remained compelling and it still retains its title as one of the best games ever in my book.
There is a lot of heart put into older games, something severely lacking from the mass-marketed, eye-candied shit they put out today. I say give the classics another go. |
Indeed, I love playing my old games like Diablo (1), Fallout 2, silver and all the old Tony hawk games. Gamplay is what is important, that is why we can even to this day still enjoy Super Mario world.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon, 18th Aug 2008 16:42 Post subject: |
|
|
Reinstalled Fallout 2 a week ago, still as good as it was 10 years ago. Still play other old games aswell like X-Com, Planescape, Diablo and so on and they are as good as the first time. Yes there is some games that age badly because of bad core mechancis but usually they are rather few.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Mon, 18th Aug 2008 17:24 Post subject: |
|
|
First of all, the games we play are shaping our own taste. Most of what we expect from a game is based on what we are used to. Back then, when turn based gameplay was standard, games like fallout didn't stand out of the crowd. Then they just moved on from turn based gaming, which would be fine if the genre would have survived it, but sadly it didn't, and now most people just shrug when they hear the words: "turn based".
Supreme Commander introduced the seamless zooming around concept on the battlefield and guess what, i see games start to use it. Eventually it will become kind of a standard, an expectation for gamers and after that you will feel the UI to be cumbersome if it does not have the feature, rendering older titles to be just that.. cumbersome.
So what games can we play despite them being older than some of you, and what are the ones that just turn us off? Its quite easy.
The games that had successors, games in genres that are still alive in kicking are the games you will feel bad when playing again. Why? Because there is not much of a difference between CnC 1 and supreme commander, except that SupCom is bigger, better and more advanced in about every way. Let's not even talk about CnC X+1, which just voids even the idea of revisiting CnC 1 for any other reason than nostalgia and as someone said, nostalgia quickly wears off.
There are some games however, that didnt really have any successorss, games that belong to genres that kind of died or are in the process of dying.
Now most of these games are turn based by nature, so while the gameplay itself might be unique and rewarding, some might just not be able to get past the fact that action is slow and not continuous.
Personally i feel that these kinds of games are the dinosaurs of PC gaming, and the massive expansion of PC gaming did hit them like the comet that made the dinos go extinct. Theres just too many dumb people out there looking for quick gratification from their games to make it worth producing games that only target a small segment of the playerbase.
I really wish there would be a proper successor of master of orion, but after the MOO3 fiasco, which wasn't even a fault of the playerbase not liking the idea of the game, but merely the fact that the game was horribly done, so after that fiasco there is unlikely they will ever make a new MOO game. Not for a long time.
Fallout? What we will get now is not a fallout game. The whole idea of fallout dies when you make it a real time first person action/RPG. Fallout was a tactical rpg, which relied on its turn based nature very heavily. So all those of you who wait for a neat new fallout game. Brace yourself, because what we are getting is a glorified sci-fi mod for oblivion.
Elite? When i talk about elite, people start to talk about X2 and X3 and Xx+1, which to be honest is like me starting to talk about soccer, when someone mentions american football. They are both player by balls, but thats about all the similarities there is to it 
The list could just go on.. Theres a few classics of course that get the respect they deserve even today, but thats mostly because of the people / companies behind them.
You will probably never see the interest fade for the blizzard games, whatever they do, just as well as Sid Meyer's name is probably a synonym for quality and reliability for quite a few of us.
Apart form this however, most of the games i did find great from those old times either died with their developing company, or took a rather long time to be properly reincarnated. Most of them are still out there waiting for the chosen ones to appear and pick up the fallen flag.
Just to name a few:
- Elite
- Master of Orion
- Master of Magic
- Fallout! - a real new Fallout, not just a marketing fallout, that only has the name and the theme.
- Transport Tycoon? Sure we had locomotion, but to be honest it was beaten even by the original TTD, not to mention openTTD, which was quite advanced by that time.
All in one, theres plenty of room to make new games.. thing is, companies want - understandably - make the most money out of their investment, and the above games are just not games for the masses. So even though I'm sure the above games would sell well, the usual FPS/RTS/Sports/SIM games just sell more.
Thats it. ranting is over on my part.
At this time, all that we can do is to be thankful for the few great games we get, pay generously for them to show that there is indeed a demand for those games out there.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Page 1 of 1 |
All times are GMT + 1 Hour |
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB 2.0.8 © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
|
|
 |
|
