Retro games are crap.

[Kubrick]

I'm inclined to agree that the majority of early retro games have aged so badly that they're now no longer fun to play or worth bothering with.
The point about playing a superior driving game like TOCA 2 instead of Revs is a valid one and can be applied to nearly every single game out there that was made before 1985. I think I could safely say that there isn't a single game made before 1985 that is still the best thing ever in any given genre. (apart from genres that don't exist anymore like Text adventures :P)

However, the years have been far kinder to games from roughly the NES era onwards. Games from that era feel more of a finished product and have acceptable controls and framerates. They still play very well today as Nintendo's Famicom Mini releases for the GBA have shown. Some of those games would definitely still warrant 7/10 scores in today's market.

[innovator]

MD is right and for all his insane collector mentality, his head is firmly screwed on when it comes to the games themselves. These games from the 80s are generally speaking, ****. They may have been good back then but who cares, this is 2004 not 1984. Games have progressed, deal with it. Most of these old games are the sort you'd put on for 5 minutes, say "oh yeah I remember this", then realise what a dated load of cack it is and then play something that is worthy of your time.

1 - Jet Set Willy 2 - Spectrum - Software Projects 1/10
2 - Armalyte - Commodore 64 - Thalamus 1/10
3 - Deathchase 3D - Spectrum - Micromega 1/10
4 - Pac-Man - Arcade - Namco 7/10
5 - Elite - BBC Micro - Acornsoft 8/10
6 - I-Robot - Arcade - Atari 1/10
7 - Pong - Anything with two bats and a ball - Various 1/10
8 - Head over Heels - Spectrum - Ocean 9/10
9 - Amidar - Arcade - Konami 1/10
10 - Summer Games - Commodore 64 - Epyx 1/10

"Your idea of reviewing games by todays standards is incredibly flawed as very, very, few titles would get decent marks."

I find this very amusing. Robotron has awesome game design and has pretty much universal appeal once you look past the graphics. I-Robot, no. That'll be your rose tinted contact lenses.

[innovator]

Oh and SNES/MD stuff = still awesome. Even non-gamers enjoy these games whilst 80s stuff is the domain of overweight men in their late 20s who can't let go of the past. You've got to accept that the hardware back then limited the game design immensely and that only the true classics stand the test of time. Arcade gaming is different though obviously.

[Strider]

Robotron 2084 is a classic though and like you said doesn't need fancy graphics to make it good.

To say that pratically all games released before 1985 are rubbish, is both wrong and laughably funny. IMO of course

[innovator]

No but 99% of all home games released before 1990 are ****. FACT.

[Shez]

I have no inclination to play on my C64 or my atari 2600, but I do like to boot up mame and have a blast on some 80's classics on a regular basis.

Games such as roadrunner, bubble bobble, time pilot, phoenix, tiger heli, xevious and my most played classic...galaga are timeless games in my view. Where as a lot of what I used to love playing on my C64 wouldn't hold my attention for 5 minutes. Although, for sure the odd title still shines through, but they are in very small minority.

[Darwock]

No but 99% of all home games released before 1990 are ****. FACT.

Hey look, David Brent is in the house!

Anyway I challenge you to name 99 undebatably crap games (that we will have heard of) released before 1990 and I will allow you 1 that nobody thinks is ****.

Actually maybe I didn't think this through...

[MD]

It sounds like your argument is that a retro game is only good today if it still stands up in the playability stakes.

Bingo! There does seem to be a lot of games getting good marks even though by todays standards they are quite poor and most people wouldn't play them for more then a few minutes before finding something else to do.

By the way MD, what was your actual point, cos you said retro games are all crap and then acknowledged several that are excellent (Jet Set Willy, Head over Heels)

Retro games are crap, however classic games are not. See the subtle difference there.

As for Armalyte, it's all a principal of opinion. I think it's the best horizontal scrolling shooter on the C64 and second best pure shooter overall on the C64 (losing out to Dropzone). It's what an arcade shooter from the late 80s would have turned out like if ported to a lowly 8bit machine. So give me some reasons why you don't like it at all...

As you say its all about opinion, I'm sure I could find other C64 shooters which would be more playable then Armalyte. The thing is that the only people that praise Armalyte to the hilt are people that played it the first time around, playing it now and showing it to people didn't really impress, I own it so it's not that I've not played it. It's not a bad game, it's just it's not a good game compared with other horizontal shooters even of the time. However there are games on the C64 which are slightly better and have a bit more spark to them which include Dropzone, Uridium and Blue Max.

If I had to pick games which are playable now I would also chuck in Gridrunner and X-Out and struggle with others....

You're totally dismissing graphics and sound? So by that logic, Metroid Prime is a really, really **** game? Heh, no arguments here...

Well take away the gloss of a lot of games and they are fairly weak, Fry cry is a nice game for example but there is nothing there that hasn't been done before.

If you going to review retro games then it should be on nothing more the playability, you don't watch a film and decide it's crap because they are using stop motion animation or it's in black and white rather you rate it on the story, so why should games be any different? Rate them on how good (ie playable) they are.

So basically all this comes down to the fact that we like certain games that you don't. You may have a vast knowledge of games, but that doesn't make your opinion fact (as you so obviously think it does).

Urrr-Urrrgh. I'm sorry that wasn't one of the most popular answers. The missing answers were...

Games that I've asked a lot of people about (including people on this board)and whether they would play them for more then half an hour.
People that have not played on the Spectrum or C64, etc. These include Schoolkids, etc
Just because I have a lot of knowledge doesn't mean I can't be impartial. I don't like the N64, but if you count the number of N64 games to say Megadrive...

Your idea of reviewing games by todays standards is incredibly flawed as very, very, few titles would get decent marks.

Funny as that's a good reason why they should. The fact most of them won't get decent marks would mean that they are flawed or unplayable in todays market. I still think that giving marks on games as they appear today would show really how good these games are, rather then looking at them through NHS full strength rose tinted glasses. Go on do it for an issue, show them how brave and forward thinking you can be.

Chase HQ is a great example of a game that looked amazing back in its time and still plays well today.

No it doesn't, at the time it was a good game, but today it looks very dated and compared to a lot of games it is very very poor. The graphics are poor, the handling is dodgy at best and the gameplay is fairly weak. When I was working in a Retro games store and we sold Chase HQ / SCI on the Saturn most people did comment on 'It doesn't seem as good as I remember it'. Remember apart for a lack of steering wheel the Saturn version is arcade perfect...

As for your Armalyte jibes, I suggest you actually go and play it, as it's still a great blaster.

I have played it, I own it and have played it on a C128D, but it just feels too fixed, slow and nothing like what a good shooter should be like (see above...)

The same can be said for I, Robot, it's still fantastically playable and hasn't aged.

Hasn't aged? It's a low res polygon game that takes a concept that Amidar and Crush Roller did before it. I showed it to some people today and even after explaining the concept most of them though it was dull.

You are correct that certain games have aged badly, but to say that there are only a few great games of yesteryear is laughable

I'm not saying there aren't, take text adventure games. They are the computer game equivelent of the paperback novel. A simple story where you imagine everything and you type in commands. Fairly simple, but these are games that don't really age and you can play them just as much today as you could have done then.

Looking at a lot of games made in the 80s and early 90s there are a lot of games which by todays standards are just rubbish and it's the rose tinted specs that make people think that these games are really quite good.

Take Defender, if it came out today most people would dismiss it as it doesn't look all that good. However playing it would reveal a deep and enjoyable shoot 'em up. Take Armalyte and it would get slated and in all honesty would you really play it when you have some many other good shooters? I think not.

[Strider]

I could write a massive post like yourself to try and justify myself, but there's no real point as you've already made your mind up.

You can dress it up as much as you like but the fact is, you think you're right and I'm wrong. All the games I stated that are still fun to play in my opinion are, just like in your opinion they are not. I'm not saying every retro game is a classic by any means, but the majority of ones that I've covered are still fun to play.

I'll let you go back to having your little rants and digs about our Retro section (which incidentally, you seemed so keen on writing for) and I'll continue doing a job I love.

[Ian(not Ian)]

Mr. MD
I just picked on this thread and I am amazed by your lack of vision, retro or otherwise, perhaps it is you who should be getting tested for those NHS glasses.
Those of us who have played those crap games 'live' will attest to that I'm sure.

During those those golden days in and around 1980 -1985 gamers were treated to an explosion of innovatation, exploration and creative freedom the like of which would not be allowed today by the money-mad producers and publishers. Not just in games but also in hardware.

I certainly wont try to narrow down that statement to particular games, apps or peripherals since you already know what I speak of.

As for 'playabiltiy' in retro games I would argue the same barren situation exists today.

Armalyte* on the C64 is as playable, and as good today as ever....If you truly want to play it. Which obviously you dont.

One thing about those golden days I remember is that I was never disappointed when I played a game on the C64 / ST / Amiga. Certainly not to the extent that I am these days with the 2 year hype-filled waits for generic, soul-less graphical updates of proper playable games of old. I appreciated the work that went into making those games, and still do.

The low-res polygon efforts you blatently dismiss were cutting edge for their time. Show me cutting edge today.

And as for text adventures being simple stories. SIMPLE!
Infocom, Level 9 and Magentic Scrolls will beg to differ.

What it all boils down to Mr. MD is the simple fact that games today are simple, quick, generic. soul-less and right up your alley.

[Strider]

Mr. MD
I certainly wont try to narrow down that statement to particular games

It's only because he's using them to have a thinly veiled swipe at the retro section of gamesTM (why else mention a load of games we've recently covered?)

Still one good thing has come of this MD, you've made me realise that NTSC is no better than any other forum, so I'm now going to save my time each day by not having to post my opinions here (I'll keep those for the mag).

Later all...

[Pie]

Cool thread.

I personally agree, most 'retro' games are pretty poor. Nostalgia can be very powerful at times. Until a few years ago I was a pc gamer. Nearly all pc games that I liked when I first played them (even really nasty shareware stuff) I still love today. They often aren?t great games, and don't have some magical purity of game play.

Console games however are entirely different. Most NES games just don?t seem all that fun these days. There are of course exceptions, but very often these exceptions have been updated with better graphics/smoother frame rates on more modern consoles anyway.

An example - I loved Karateka on the pc, and still love it now (with all it's what?four colours?). The NES version just doesn't do anything for me?the graphics and sound are slightly different, as is the controller. The NES version is perhaps better, but doesn't have the nostalgic kick.

Games that are still unique today age better I think - pong with proper paddles is still fun, as are most arcade games with trackballs etc.

Of course it's all totally subjective, and they are all opinions, but there is nothing wrong with that.

[Zero 1]

Oh Dear!!!

So ntsc is finally going the way of Gamestyle..

Retro games are as pleyable or unaplayable today as the day that they were released, only our perceptions have changed.

If you dont remember the games first time around, and didnt have the privellige of playing them in the time frame of that in which they were created then you may quite easily miss the point of the game, look at the strike series, if you were experiencing media coverage of the first Iraq war it was saying something, and became a great (relevant) piece of software, then it was forgotten and until last year it was just another retro shoot em up, then suddenly it becomes the most downloaded md/snes rom of 2003, why? because its content has found a new relevance, the playability hasnt changed the game hasnt got sharper, it stays the same only the context it is played in has changed along with the mind set of the players.

As for I Robot t'was I that put Darran on to it, i was fortunate enough to grow up in a town with all the great machines, i could only offer Darran emulation and explanation, he loved the game and then went about tracking an arcade cabinet so he could experience the game AS IT WAS to be played, rose tinted spectacles they maybe, but i can assure you that before 2003 Darran had never heard of I Robot the video game, he just remembers the time and what he was playing back in the day in comparison to this monster machine that used to intimidate players, hard core or not.

Retro is becoming a buzz word, but that should be commended as it signifies the growth of "historical gaming" and demonstrates that there obviously still is a passion amongst many, maybe the developers and licence holders will find a way to allow to play these games legally on current hardware. Maybe not enough of us want it yet, hell we cant even agree what makes a good retro game, but look at it like this...While you are bemoaning the playability of older games, there is a kid having his lunch break at school playing a game on his mobile phone that his parents paid over a fiver to download, which is a poor imitation of the games that you guys are discrediting, but hes playing it, and hes enjoying it, and you know what? he only has the one game on his phone so hes making damn sure he gets something from it...Im sure as he gets older and his mate switches him on to mame and the thousands of free games he too will become bored and cynical, maybe emulation spoils retro gaming.

PS Darran happens to be my best m8 by far, his love of gaming is awe inspiring and he writes every section with a pasion you wont see in many 3D spoilt psx swigging fanboys..Be warned though he wont heed any of this drivel, he has a much harder sterner critic for a friend...

[Ian(not Ian)]

Still one good thing has come of this MD, you've made me realise that NTSC is no better than any other forum, so I'm now going to save my time each day by not having to post my opinions here (I'll keep those for the mag).

Later all...

Take it easy my man. 99.9% of retro forumites are behind you. Your opinions are more than welcome. Mr. MD will see the light one day, of that I'm sure.

Ian(not Ian)

Sheesh! Zero 1 got his post in front of mine. Reading Zero 1's rantings confirms my suspicions about Mr. MD........All his bases are loaded.

[Robster]

everyone is entitled to their opinion:

For me the whole retro thing is about games i played when i was younger.

I dont think its fair to say that most old games are ****,they were good at the time and they should be rememberd in that way.

What you are doing MD is, say - comparing a drawing you did when you were 5 with a drawing you did yesterday. The difference would be vast but both drawings have been done to the best of your ability's at the time, therefore you cant possibly fault the older drawing.

Its all about moving on but acknowledge the past at the same time.