are they as good as you think they were?

[beecee]

you play all these old 'retro' games. but are they as good as you remember them.

do you actually play them all the way through or when you loose a life you switch it off put on something else. a sort of fine for five min's type of situation!

[olly]

Often I find myself only playing short bursts when I dig old games out. But that's mainly because I have adventure games and have played them to death already. When I buy "new" retro games, ones I have never played before, I play them just as long as new released, if they're any good.

[dgnr7982]

I used to love Heavyweight champ on the SMS - I remember struggling to beat the last guy and how happy I was when I did it. I dug the game out recently and completed it on my first go, nice for the memories but pretty shallow in terms of an enjoyable play.

[Burai]

I still play Outrun just to remind myself how ass it is now.

A classic for the time, but it hasn't stood the test of time at all well sadly.

[yashiro]

are they as good as you think they were?

No. Never.

[War Crimes Tribunal]

are they as good as you think they were?

No. Never.

Shame on you.

[Treble]

Depends whether they've been updated properly (the concept, that is).

Examples:

Any 2D Shinobi game > Shinobi PS2

Sonic 1, 2, 3 > Sonic Advance 1,2 and Sonic adventure 2

Also, age doth not wither the 2D Mario games or the 2D Zelda games, imo. 3D updates are easier to criticise though. When we talk about whether or not 16-bit era games retain their playability, we invariably talk about the ones released at the end of their lifespan, when the most was being wrung from the hardware. We do the same with the 32-bit era, and the games that get knocked tend to have been released early-on in the machine's lifespan.

As all 3D concepts are being updated and improved on as we speak, I think these'll age in a much worse way than 16-bit games. In other words, you'll still bother with Mario World in ten year's time, but the first Playstation Tekken will look like a crude child's drawing.

[paddyo]

i still play ghouls n ghosts regularly , still as good as when i first played it

[Magnakai]

As all 3D concepts are being updated and improved on as we speak, I think these'll age in a much worse way than 16-bit games. In other words, you'll still bother with Mario World in ten year's time, but the first Playstation Tekken will look like a crude child's drawing.

I totally agree with you.
This might be a pretty short-sighted statement... but I think that consoles (at least in terms of graphics) come in waves of palatability. There's the 8bit wave, of which very few games are now playable and the 16bit wave, of which most games are playable without hurting your eyes. Obviously, there are exceptions to this.
I also think that 99% of the 32/64-bit era games look like ass today, and in two waves time, they'll look utterly awful. Whereas most decently made games today look pretty damn nice, and I honestly think that they'll stand up to the test of time.

However, I don't know what the next generation of consoles will bring in terms of graphics, except maybe more realism/detail. Or maybe 4D!!!! yah!

[Arctic Feather]

I've been replaying mega drive classics recently like Micro Machines (96), Bonanza Bros, Alex Kidd and they are just as i remember playing themm all those years ago

I don't think further developments in a genre reduce gameplay, if it was fun then why isn't it fun now - i just see the newer ones as different styled alternatives

About graphics - i don't think they really matter in a game, but i have always felt 2D graphics have a more polished feel about them usually compared to 3D

[Concept]

Isn't nostalgia a wonderful thing?

I can envisage a generation growing up with the likes of Prime, Orta, Wind Waker, Shenmue, Vice City, Silent Hill, ICO, Rez, VF4 Evo et al.

...

Saying the same thing in ten years:

"Are they as good as they used to be?"

For me, the overall quality is higher now, although perhaps the imagination shown back during the 80's and 70's isn't in as much abundance.

There are still titles being released that I say can stand toe-to-toe with yester-year's best.

Be thankful of that. I know I am.

[MIK]

There will always be good and bad games as well as a few original titles. The answer is I play them if they are good, after all we should all know graphics don't make a game good, just go check 'Made in Wario' for confirmation.

[Brats]

As all 3D concepts are being updated and improved on as we speak, I think these'll age in a much worse way than 16-bit games. In other words, you'll still bother with Mario World in ten year's time, but the first Playstation Tekken will look like a crude child's drawing.

I totally agree with you.
This might be a pretty short-sighted statement... but I think that consoles (at least in terms of graphics) come in waves of palatability. There's the 8bit wave, of which very few games are now playable and the 16bit wave, of which most games are playable without hurting your eyes. Obviously, there are exceptions to this.

I agree. IMO, 1989 is a key year in gaming. Most classics since this time are still as playable today, whilst fewer of the games before this date are. Off the top of my head, the only games I would consider playing would be "pure" arcade games. By that I mean stuff like Bubble Bobble, Robotron, Defender, Tempest, Outrun, etc. Anything with any kind of adventuring (the first Zelda, Dungeon Master) are difficult to enjoy now. Even games like Elite and Exile can be seen to have massive flaws by today's standards.

[olly]

Magnakai, I definitely agree. For me the 8-bit systems are too primitive, but the 16-bit systems fine. The 32-bit systems can have some dody 3d games, but the N64 holds up fine.