zarx said:
99% of 8 and 16bit games ether have horrible gameplay or are super derivative tho. Have you ever gone back to play a "good" 8bit game (and not one you liked as a kid so have nostalgia for ether)? Not one of the few classics I mean just your average good game for the time, unless you enjoy borderline broken shit I doubt you would last long. It's easy for nostalgia goggles to filter out all the trash and leave only the classics, and also when you were a kid you have much higher tolerance for terrible broken gameplay. There are more people playing games today than ever before so the statement that games have got away from what makes games a great passtime makes no sense ether, and there are plenty of indie devs making games in 8 and 16 styles today if that is your jam there is just so much more variety today than ever before. |
Sorry, but everything you just said is kind of pointless and immensely silly, in this man's view. YEAH, I kinda have gone back and played 8bit games, all the damn time. I own modern consoles, but I'm very much a "retro gamer" at heart. I grew up in the 80s and 90s, and no, it isn't just nostalgia. That is a pisspoor excuse people use to try and disregard someone's argument, "Oh that's just nostalgia". No, in fact, almost all the games I loved as a kid are STILL great, because they hold up to the test of time, they're fun to play, they're challenging, and to me, they play like VIDEO GAMES, not $60 Quicktime Events. Saying that most 8bit, and even 16bit games (HUH?), had "horrible gameplay" or "were super derivative"..........that is not 99%, that's 100% your opinion, and one not shared by most gamers. I'd wager that most gamers who prefer modern games would still not wholly agree with that sentiment. Just because you apparently don't like side-scrollers, or "schmups", or whatever, doesn't mean they were or are "super derivative". What would you call most modern games? 90% (not an exaggeration) of the big games I saw shown at least year's E3 WERE super derivative, most of them involving a character with a gun, and all of those involving "shoot, find cover, shoot some more" gameplay mechanics that have been done to death over the last generation. If THAT isn't boring, uninspired, and derivative gameplay and game design I don't know what is.
Certainly, old side-scrolling games almost all involved running and jumping, the GOOD ones (and there were a lot), always tried to be creative and put their own spin on things, oftimes being very innovative in the process. I would argue that develors back then, not ALL (there were and always will be lazy, shitty developers), but a lot, would often employ a lot more effort and creativity because they had to, and because gaming wasn't so corporate and mainstream back then, so it was okay to take a risk and come up with some far out, ridiculous idea. Now most non-indie developers outside of Nintendo seem to play it safe, which is why you see the super-derivative "Shoot stuff" games I mentioned. There are certainly things about modern gaming that are "better", some I even like and am glad to see. But I still say that gaming and the games industry was better off back in the 8 and 16bit days, not because I'm nostalgic and pine for those times, but because it seems to me that they genuinely were. For my dollar, you just saw a hell of a lot more creativity and FUN in a lot of games from that era, whereas now if a game doesn't sell 2 million copies it's a "Flop", so developers are scared shitless to even bother BEING creative or taking risks.
