This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

When people say that certain games "didn't age well" is subjective

You're browsing the GameFAQs Message Boards as a guest. Sign Up for free (or Log In if you already have an account) to be able to post messages, change how messages are displayed, and view media in posts.
  1. Boards
  2. PC
  3. When people say that certain games "didn't age well" is subjective

User Info: Voxwik

Voxwik
3 weeks ago#21
jake-sf posted...
Voxwik posted...
I'll never understand when people cite being able to overpower/exploit a game as something that makes the game 'bad' either. In an extreme example, there are people that complain Divinity: Original Sin 2 gets easier if you do everything you can to get all the experience you can total (there is no grinding and experience is limited in the game). Nothing forces people to exploit game mechanics to the fullest all because they know they can either (such as the cape in Super Mario World).


I don't agree with you entirely. Lets take the cape example: The cap is part of the basic movement mechanics, and avoiding it requires too much will on the player's part. I'm not saying "using will power is bad", I'm saying using it to make your character worse at traversing the game feels like s***.

Thats why I'm a bigger believer of "options" and "mods". It is not a waste of willpower to change the cape in an option menu before starting the game.

Whatever state the game is in, the player should not feel that they have to "hold back" during gameplay to get more "challenge" (or some such) out of it.

My statement isn't that those things are beyond any criticism, but instead that it's over the top to call a game "bad" all because people who are experts can complete it with ease or can min/max if they play specific ways.

User Info: Ultimate_Noob

Ultimate_Noob
3 weeks ago#22
The cranky hermit posted...
Ultimate_Noob posted...
For example, I'd say the original XCOM: UFO Defense has aged extremely poor because of things like game-breaking designs (mind control hopping) and an atrocious UI that has no hotkeys, but that doesn't mean I think it's not fun.

You'd be wrong. These would have been issues for the vast majority of gamers in 1994 too. The difference is back then, the vast majority of gamers weren't playing games on their computers, and developers assumed anyone actually doing that would be comfortable reading a thick manual, and designed the game accordingly. X-COM was always a game that most people would have found impenetrable due to the UI and other design features. Microprose was OK with that.

edit: misread post. Personally I found it bearable at the time since I didn't have much else to compare it to other than some unwieldy adventure games, but now that I've had many years of other games under the proverbial belt I've been able to notice how horrid the UI was. That's aging poorly to me. It's however a lot more forgivable in point & click games. I'd say for instance that Grim Fandango, even with crappy tank controls, aged very well as a game regardless.

Also, being able to break X-COM doesn't become noticeable from playing games made after it. Being able to break X-COM becomes noticeable from playing X-COM a lot.

Not particularly. It didn't take that much time to figure out that if you got a bunch of psionic soldiers, mind controlled one alien, used it to move into the view range of another alien, mind control that one, kill the first, and keep repeating that process over the course of an entire mission, you'd complete the mission without any casualties. Obviously the remedy is to simply not do it, but gamey stuff like that makes it feel like I'm seeing the seams of the game design. It's harder to see those same seams in modern games, perhaps because they've gotten overall (though not completely) less difficult throughout the years. It's really hard to care about chameleon stacking in Elder Scrolls' Oblivion when the game wasn't that difficult in the first place.
A pc's brain is the cpu, its heart is the motherboard, its stomach is the hard drive, and its anus is the user.
(edited 3 weeks ago)
#23
(message deleted)

User Info: o0stoneduk0o

o0stoneduk0o
3 weeks ago#24
Posted in the wrong topic. Apologies.
I don't smoke dope, I don't drink bourbon, all I want to do is shake my turban.

User Info: Born Lucky

Born Lucky
3 weeks ago#25
I just take games for what they are. If they were good when they were released , they're probably good now.

For example - I 'm playing The Bard's Tale right now. I think it looks great.
Corsair 550D/ Gigabyte Z170X Gaming3 / Vengeance 16GB DDR4 2666 / i-5 6600k / MSI Twin Frozr VI GTX 1060 / Thermaltake NiC C5

User Info: pothocket

pothocket
3 weeks ago#26
Ultimate_Noob posted...
I'd say the original XCOM: UFO Defense has aged extremely poor because of things like game-breaking designs (mind control hopping) and an atrocious UI that has no hotkeys, but that doesn't mean I think it's not fun.


Exactly. I was going to specifically mention XCOM as a game that has not aged well (and there's nothing subjective about it) so I'm not surprised someone else beat me to it.
http://www.koalastothemax.com/?aHR0cDovL2kuaW1ndXIuY29tL3pnMGpYWDcuanBn

User Info: Terotrous

Terotrous
3 weeks ago#27
ryouma17 posted...
thats the point your playing it for the first time, when people say a game hasnt aged well their usually to the graphics

I think it's usually implied that when people say a game hasn't aged well, they mean the game mechanics, not the graphics, since it's trivially obvious that graphics age. It is, however, usually games that had very good graphics that age the worst, because if a game has very good graphics but mediocre gameplay, once the graphics lose their shine the gameplay becomes the sole focus.
http://www.backloggery.com/tero - My backloggery
http://whatliesbeyondnovel.blogspot.ca/ - A psychological fantasy novel series, book 2 finally complete
(edited 3 weeks ago)
Ultimate_Noob posted...
Personally I found it bearable at the time since I didn't have much else to compare it to other than some unwieldy adventure games,

I found it bearable at the time because it's functional and I can read a manual. That time was around 2002 or so. There were plenty of games with more intuitive interfaces by then, and there were plenty of games with more intuitive interfaces in 1994 too, but none really had the level of depth or options as X-COM. Nor do any now, for that matter.

And I don't know what "unwieldy adventure games" you're talking about, but if you had trouble figuring out how to play a LucasArts point & click adventure or something like that, then I am facepalming harder than Guybrush Threepwood at a loogie-hawking contest.

Not particularly. It didn't take that much time to figure out that if you got a bunch of psionic soldiers, mind controlled one alien, used it to move into the view range of another alien, mind control that one, kill the first, and keep repeating that process over the course of an entire mission, you'd complete the mission without any casualties. Obviously the remedy is to simply not do it, but gamey stuff like that makes it feel like I'm seeing the seams of the game design.

It's still got nothing to do with the age of the game.

It's harder to see those same seams in modern games, perhaps because they've gotten overall (though not completely) less difficult throughout the years. It's really hard to care about chameleon stacking in Elder Scrolls' Oblivion when the game wasn't that difficult in the first place.

Oh, that's total bull. Modern game design is absolutely riddled with seams that just scream out "hey, you're playing a game!" Like X-COM 2 and its arbitrary turn limits that were clearly just put there to discourage turtling, and don't make any kind of sense from a narrative mechanic. Stealth games have indicators when you're being seen and from what direction, open world games have big glowing indicators telling you where to go next, shooters have regenerating health, and it's hard to find a singleplayer game that isn't completely breakable in a multitude of ways. And you're essentially defending these games by saying "it's OK, they weren't difficult in the first place," as if a hard game that can be made easy with exploits is somehow less preferable to a game that's so easy you don't even need its exploits.

Terotrous posted...
It is, however, usually games that had very good graphics that age the worst, because if a game has very good graphics but mediocre gameplay, once the graphics lose their shine the gameplay becomes the sole focus.

You're implying here that games with very good graphics tend to have mediocre gameplay. I say that's nonsense. If anything, games with very good graphics tend to have very good gameplay to back it up. It's rare for a team that doesn't know what they are doing to be able to conjure up great graphics.
http://thecrankyhermit.shoutwiki.com
Year-by-year analysis of the finest gaming has to offer, and (eventually) more!

User Info: XianMei

XianMei
2 weeks ago#29
Ryyaann_Is_Band posted...
Of course, because design takes priority over age. A good example is Diablo 2 vs. Diablo 3. Some people say D2 has aged horribly, yet it's still overall a better game than D3. Why do you think that is?


Is the idea that a game can age terribly and be a better game than something that is recent that hard to grasp?
My quest to beat 40 games by March 1st 2018!
https://pastebin.com/8i5EiCi1

User Info: XianMei

XianMei
2 weeks ago#30
Ultimate_Noob posted...
The difference is back then, the vast majority of gamers weren't playing games on their computers, and developers assumed anyone actually doing that would be comfortable reading a thick manual,


When I hear stuff like this I think, I consider myself lucky that I missed "the good old days," and was a "filthy console peasant." It also makes me glad that I don't play for the challenge, and now I can just filter through older games that didn't pull this s***, or in cases like the might and magic games, there's good walkthroughs out there.
My quest to beat 40 games by March 1st 2018!
https://pastebin.com/8i5EiCi1
  1. Boards
  2. PC
  3. When people say that certain games "didn't age well" is subjective

Report Message

Terms of Use Violations:

Etiquette Issues:

Notes (optional; required for "Other"):
Add user to Ignore List after reporting

Topic Sticky

You are not allowed to request a sticky.