As long as it's just smooth enough to switch between parts of the interface and or other menu screens, the style of turn based gameplay and menu selection gameplay doesn't age.

How can it?  Unlike action oriented gameplay which is much more reliant to the controllers they are meant to be used for on their respective system, selection style gameplay has direct inputs which will give you an understandable and predetermined output.  There's almost no frustration dealing with this kind of gameplay mechanic because it's so simple to utilize and the output is almost always reliable or understandable.  It's easy to implement this on any controller, D-Pad preferred for the 2D gameplay mechanic.

 Frame rate isn't that much of an issue as it's sort of like chess where the AI will do their movements or effects with an absolute outcome rather than having some random overly complex AI system where the AI has complete free reign to possibly screw up, or because there's so many dynamic objects on screen the frame rate stalls, or the game glitches, or the game freezes game gods forbid.

In my experience I've never had a game glitch or freeze in a turn based game.  Maybe some slight slow down during graphic heavy attacks, but nothing bad because the direct input has already gone through and I can just witness it in slightly slower motion than before.

Edit:

To follow up on that, being exciting or thrilling isn't synonymous with satisfying...which I think the end goal should always be for a game.

Interesting. Though many would argue turn based gameplay is out of date regardless of it's benefits.

Never thought about it like that, but you're right.

Never considered that. You're right, it's simple enough that it will pretty much always feel just as good.

Also, tell that to the guys remaking Final Fantasy VII. Everything they're saying makes it sound like it will be a totally different game. If it's not at least turn-based I'm definitely out.

I'm glad some are seeing this :)

On the other hand, action gameplay is far more likely to age because they are reliant on sensitivity issues with the controllers or control scheme they were created for..not to mention all the complex free-to-screw up AI or coding due to AI or objects doing something to push the boundaries of a game.

For action gameplay it is extremely important to have a simple control scheme for movement that doesn't hinder playing. The quicker and more reactive the input is to the output, the better. It's one reason I don't like too many physics based game worlds.

You could say this is why Nintendo games age well as they have more direct input with quick outputs. Less lag time between both for whatever game design. It's snappy and just gets you there when you want.

Agreed. Fighting games are basically chess in motion and turn based games, are you know, like plain old chess. And I don't see chess going extinct anytime soon.

Yeah, I've never understood how people could say turn-based is outdated. Usually I find people who think this way are those who believe only their type of preferred game play-style is the only and best way to play games. However, I very much disagree as I think the more diversity in game play experience, the better.

But I've always loved turn-based games -it reminds me of chess, something I love playing as well

Very interesting post. Some will not agree on everything you said, but it's refreshing to see a new perspective regarding the age of the games.

Well they do age.The difference is that they age so slowly, especially compared to other types of gameplay, that they always feels good 20/30 years after.