1990s, for sure. A decade of endless innovation, going from 2D to 3D, going from offline to online. Multiple GOAT contenders being released every year of the decade. Of course, the true GOAT, Ocarina of Time, in 1998. The decade of Pokemon. The decade of couch co-op, which is sorely missing from games now. No DLC (minus large-scale expansions) / microtransactions. No day one patches to rely on - you either released the game broken and it stayed that way forever, or you waited and released it in a working state. This resulted in broken / unplayable messes being released far less common than they are today. Lastly, one can just look at the best titles released throughout the decades and see for themselves. 90s, followed by the 2000s. It's been all downhill since about 2014 for me. That's not to say that great games never happen now, but the frequency of greatness vs disappointment is skewed far more in the latter category these days, imo, especially when compared to the 90s and 00s.

Random question, but do you ever sit down with an old game (like even from Amiga days or NES days) and either of the kids come over and ask to play or watch?.

Both seem like they have their own favourite games, but I've always wondered if they would pick up after your tastes.

Also, do they spent more time online gaming versus what we grew up with? (single player/co-op).

Early 3D games don't hold up very well. The cameras almost universally suck, and the industry hadn't really settled on what kind of control schemes made sense. A lot of that stuff is more or less unplayable today, especially if you're are a player of modern games, so you are used to modern cameras and modern controls.

I obviously have no way of knowing how well current games will hold up 20 years down the line. But, I think it will be a lot better than the early 3D games hold up today.  

Games from today will almost definitely hold up a lot better in 20-30 years than say, N64/PS1 do today, yeah. Around 2006-2009 was when a lot of the templates for modern game genres solidified like Gears of War for third person shooters, COD4 for competitive FPS, Assassin's Creed 1/2 for the AAA open world, Uncharted 2 for the cinematic third person blockbuster, etc.

Still, I don't think it's outlandish to guess that in another 20 or 30 years, Super Mario World might hold up better than something like Elden Ring, just due to it's polished simplicity.

It depends on where we're going with controllers. Older games use far fewer buttons, another reason why they are much easier to replay. The amount of finger gymnastics required for TotK will be a problem with drastic controller changes. TotK needs 14 buttons plus 2 analog sticks to play, which are also buttons lol. Oh and the camera still sucks :p

So yeah, in 20-30 years, games with easier more flexible control schemes will hold up better.

That's not a TOTK thing though, pretty much every big modern game uses every input on a standard controller.

But yeah a lot will hinge on what happens as far as controller design over the next few decades.

That's not a TOTK thing though, pretty much every big modern game uses every input on a standard controller.

But yeah a lot will hinge on what happens as far as controller design over the next few decades.

Elden Ring gameplay loop  and controls is  polished simplicity. It not like totk. Where it's controls are probably the most complicated/ clunky I have ever played. Main point is game with good controls and solid gameplay loop will age just fine. Ninja Gaiden black is is 20 years old and it ages beautifully 

It's not simple really, not compared to Mario World. Compare the amount of inputs used for both and it's not even close. 2D to 3D alone is a massive step up in complexity.

As for polished, Elden Ring has performance issues on every platform its on, plus there's that inherent degree of jank that's part of the series/genre.