Old games = fun . . . Today's games = boring

Yes, the 80's and 90's were the pinacle of gaming and there will never be another era quite like it. Here are the best games I have ever played that were the most fun and compelling.

1. Zelda II: The adventure of Link (NES)

2. Zelda: Ocarina of Time (N64)

3. Final Fantasy VII (PS)

4. 007: Goldeneye (N64)

5. Half Life (PC)

I found the late 90's to be the pinacle of gaming and the late 80's.

roleplayer2004

I take issue with your entire list, but as a massive jrpg fan (my first was Phantasy Star on the SMS) I'll focus on FF7.

FF7's big contribution to the genre was its amazing audiovisuals and massive advertising campaign, which massively increased the popularity of rpgs outside of Japan (on consoles).

It was a quality game, but it was far from the first (nods towards Chrono Trigger, Dragon Warrior, Phantasy Star and some of the past Final Fantasies) and never the best.

Its also exceeded in quality by post-FF7 games like Suikoden 2, Xenogears, FFX, Shadow Hearts Covenent, KOTOR, SMT: Nocturne, FFX-2 (controversial in theWestfor its tone, but some great game design/gameplay), Persona 3, FF12 and Persona 4.

I disagree with the comment that Xenogears is superior to FF VII.

Xenogears was popular with a niche crowd who enjoyed the premise of "killing God" It even misquotes the Bible to make Christianity seem evil.- and that's the only reason people still talk about it, though most won't admit it.

-

As far as modern games being boring - they are. Games used to be imaginative, and challenged people's hand/eye coordination, which made them exciting to play, and even just watch. Not anymore - now everything

Best game ever = Super Mario Bros. 3

You started with your disrespect towards Tauu, and that's when I realized I didn't like you. You were hard on him from the beginning. Go back to watching Batman.

And Blades of Athena went too far by using my son against me. That's just weird.

Rizla_Plus

Is that really all you've got? "Go back to watching Batman?" Is there any particular reason why my affinity for Batman is offensive to you personally?

As to insulting Tauu, I simply tore down his arguments and did it well, which is the entire point of this forum. He obviously wanted to discuss his position and given his choice of vernacular was going about foisting his viewpoint in a very propagandist manner, which I find both offensive and aggravating. That said, I clearly kept to the rules of this board where by contrast you have violated the TOS like the newb you clearly are. Truth be told, I don't buy your rationale for attacking me to begin with because it wasn't until I dismantled and tossed your arguments back in your face that you became hostile. The real reason you don't like me is because I can punch right through your flimsy, transparent arguments like wet newspaper so you then opted to employ personal attacks but since those attacks aren't working you've found the audacity to play the victim, claiming Blades is using your son against you, boo hoo hoo, in some vain attempt to shift the attention away from your god-awful rhetoric.

I will concede that I was tough on Tauu but I was also fair and addressed his points specifically as well as tore down his counter arguments. If he thought he was going to come in here, make some inflammatory assertions, and walk away without having to defend them he came to the wrong forum. There are plenty of message boards populated primarily by 13 year old gamers who readily employ the same argument styles you and he latch on to so ultimately, your decision to come here means you must either elevate your game or close your mouth. Both you and he employ circular logic, fallacious reasoning, and a host of other tactics that render your arguments almost entirely worthless. I don't write these things to offend you but rather to edify since I have been formally trained in argument and even teach it from time to time. Your argument style is weak, which is why you've resorted to attacking me personally.

If you want to continue debating the issue at hand I'm happy to do so but I've just about had my fill of the nastiness that permeates your posts. Either grow up and stick to the topic or kindly extricate yourself from this place because you have repeatedly violated the TOS of the forum.

As far as modern games being boring - they are. Games used to be imaginative, and challenged people's hand/eye coordination, which made them exciting to play, and even just watch. Not anymore - now everything

Best game ever = Super Mario Bros. 3

Born_Lucky

Ironically, modern games do everything you claim older games accomplish and in many cases do it considerably better. Braid andLittle Big Planet are incredibly imaginative games and plentyof contemporary titles challenge hand/eye coordination and allow the manipulation of the game world to be much more expansive and substantive.

If you really think the apex of this medium was Mario 3, why are you even playing game anymore? Mario 3 is a terrific game but if that was the best game I'd ever played and everything since had fallen short, I'd have personally quit gaming many years ago. This would be especially true had I adopted your mentality because by claiming something is definitively "the best", you negate the possibility of anything else matching or surpassing it, meaning that no game will ever receive a fair, completely unbiased reception from you because of your dogmatic, entrenched viewpoint.

I disagree with the comment that Xenogears is superior to FF VII.

Xenogears was popular with a niche crowd who enjoyed the premise of "killing God" It even misquotes the Bible to make Christianity seem evil.- and that's the only reason people still talk about it, though most won't admit it.

Born_Lucky

:question: Have you played a jrpg other than FF7 or was it your first and only? You clearly didn't play Xenogears since you didn't say anything about the game itself and merely conveyed your disapproval of what you erroneously believe to be the premise of the game.

I love Symphony of the Night, so here is an interesting Igarashi quote:

"Let's talk about this in terms of 2D vs. 3D. 2D is easier to understand, where the monster is, where to attack, where to run, etc. 2D would be very easy to create. The graphics don't have to be very high quality, because every element of the game is obvious to the player. So we've extended a 2D game into 3D, but 3D has a very different environment. It's really obscure, comparatively. Having a 3D environment is not as precise as it was with the 2D. The good point about 3D gaming is bringing the actual, reality-based environment, to gaming."

Bring to it what you will, there's a time and place for everything, but if you enjoy precision, 2d games are for you. If you love Symphony of the Night, you'll also love Super Meroid. There's many games of the past to admire, it's not about nostalgia.

I never played Bonk's Adventure and Bonk's Revenge when I was young. I'm playing them today, and I love them.

There are no nostalgic memories attached to the Bonk games for me. I find the head butts very satisfying and fun to do.

Gameplay first, everything else second (even realism).

I love Symphony of the Night, so here is an interesting Igarashi quote:

"Let's talk about this in terms of 2D vs. 3D. 2D is easier to understand, where the monster is, where to attack, where to run, etc. 2D would be very easy to create. The graphics don't have to be very high quality, because every element of the game is obvious to the player. So we've extended a 2D game into 3D, but 3D has a very different environment. It's really obscure, comparatively. Having a 3D environment is not as precise as it was with the 2D. The good point about 3D gaming is bringing the actual, reality-based environment, to gaming."

Bring to it what you will, there's a time and place for everything, but if you enjoy precision, 2d games are for you. If you love Symphony of the Night, you'll also love Super Meroid. There's many games of the past to admire, it's not about nostalgia.

I never played Bonk's Adventure and Bonk's Revenge when I was young. I'm playing them today, and I love them.

There are no nostalgic memories attached to the Bonk games for me. I find the head butts very satisfying and fun to do.

Gameplay first, everything else second (even realism).

Rizla_Plus

So how did Iga do with that 3D console Castlevania he's been obsessed with all these years? Not so good, right?

Why do you think Kojima took over and is making Lords of Shadow? Therefore, Iga, although a accomplished game developer, has no credibility whatsoever when it comes to 3D games.

The sad truth is, Iga doesn't know how to make a good 3D game, which is why he's making that excuse. Look at God of War, Shadow of the Colossus, Zelda, or Super Mario and the countless of other awesome 3D games? They play and are great in their 3D transition. They control with precision the last time I played them, maybe even better than most 2D games.

Seriously man, give it a rest. You're entitled to your own taste and views, but don't set yourself on a higher horse than us and try to shove your views down our throats. You think you're right and everyone else is wrong, but it's still just opinions.

Well when I bought my PS3 and got a catch on these more "modern" games I was rather overwhelmed. I'm not old enough to have played many old old games, but I really think the standard for "fun" back then wasn't very high :wink:

To the above poster above me. Funny how you said that. Because a lot of old nerds may reminiscence about the past but the newer generation gamers say the past sucks.

I don't know how many new gamers say things like Chrono Trigger or Zelda Ocarina of Time was crap or how they can't get into the past 16-bit or 8-bit games.

The point is, it's ALL nostalgia, subjective taste, and a continuous cycle that'll never end. A few years from now, the people who grew up with games today will claim how Uncharted 2, Fallout 3, Modern Warfare, Gears of War, or Dragon Age are the greatest games ever made while the newer generation will say these games suck. Although I can't imagine Uncharted 2 or Gears of War graphics sucking. But then again, I thought Resident Evil 4 had the greatest graphics I've ever seen but it's nothing when you see it now.

See, it never ends.

Then there are some who'd argue that the old games withstand the test of time so they should be better, right? Yes and no. But that's not the point I'm making. The newer generation of gamers think differently. They can't get into old games. We should respect that.

I was fortunate enough to experience the past games as a kid and I cherish the past. But it's the past. We have to move on and just enjoy games instead of troll stubbornly with all this nerdy video game superiority nonsense.

Everyone has their own opinions and preferences but why can't we all just get along? All this bitterness and spite on both sides of the argument is unbecoming of all good GS posters. Old games are great, new games are great. What else is there really to say?

I thought you would be able to figure it out. Limited continues just makes you repeat more. I like difficulty, but not when it's cheap like that. I did mention previously that Ninja Gaiden NES had a cheap last level that I thought was wrong to do (it brings you back to the beginning of the level when you die from the last boss).Rizla_Plus

What's there to figure out when you don't even have a point to stick with, much less be hypocritical? Here's a tip: try to at least stay consistent with your main points….it'll bring more credibility to your posts and people will respect you more.

Sure, limited continues makes you repeat more, but it also forces you to improve and be more self-aware. You said it yourself that an experience blown through with ease is an experience well forgotten. If there's no challenge involved, then there's no accomplishment. Calling the game cheap is just an excuse for your inability to learn and memorize from your mistakes, and it does absolutely nothing to improve your outcome. Just humbly admit that you suck at the game and move on.

Read what I wrote. I don't like cheap when it involves repeating something that you previously proven that you can do. Although the cheap that comes from a medusa head in Castlevania is something that I accept as a fair challenge. Not everything is balck and white. I'm flexible.Rizla_Plus

Don't need to. However, you should think about what you just wrote because calling yourself flexible is just a fancy way of saying that you like to flip-flop whenever its convenient for you. Sorry, but you're not going to fool anyone with that John Kerry tactic you keep employing.

Alright, so not everything is black and white. But see, I can use that same line of thinking and counter your "2D > 3D" argument, as there are indeed 3D titles that are superior to their 2D counterparts. If you're going to make statements like that, then you can't turn around and make absolutes.

Stop using the nostalgia card. Anyways here's a quick example for now:Rizla_Plus

I'm just calling 'em like I see 'em. Thing is, all your arguments in favor of the retro-age stem from nostalgia than anything else. Cuddling the fond memories of your youth is the sole reason for your enjoyment behind the very games you appreciate. And that's the honest to God truth.

(it happens at exactly 1:20 in the video, but check the area before and after to get the gist)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZRSqUposUfg&feature=related

That style of gameplay is all over the game.Rizla_Plus

That's just a walkthrough. How is that supposed to explain to me how and why Zelda 3 is better than anything else? Define better.

The benefits of 2d gaming according to Igarashi is that the elements of positioning and direction are streamlined by 2D visuals, leaving developers free to create challenges based around the elements of timing and distance, and thus offer more immediate and gratifying gameplay. This, Igarashi opines, is the true attraction of 2D gaming.Rizla_Plus

Right, its certainly a vague explanation of why 2D gaming is compelling, but it doesn't explain why its better than 3D. There are challenges based around timing and distance in 3D games too, just on a different dimension.

[QUOTE="BladesOfAthena"]

Why aren't you a responsible and model father figure tending to your son's needs instead of debating with folks over the internet?

Rizla_Plus

For shame. I mention working infront of a computer so that you can understand that posting here is not an effort that takes me away from my son. Think for a second.

Okay, that's nice. Now stick to the main topic and cease with the irrelevant jabs. I'm not asking you, I'm TELLING you. This is your final warning.

And to even have my parenting questioned. That's more personal than anything that was mentioned on this thread, you all have to look at yourselves in the mirror, not just me.

And to even have my parenting questioned. That's more personal than anything that was mentioned on this thread, you all have to look at yourselves in the mirror, not just me.

Rizla_Plus

Seriously, you need to drop it. Playing the hurt victim won't win you any sympathy on this board, seeing how you are clearly trolling at this point.

plus the games they have out today ARE way too easy compared to the older games. sure you play for awhile and then you beat it. thats it. wanna try again ok then play the hard mode, expert mode, master mode. you beat it on master mode. awww no more? not much of a challenge huh? how many games out there today let you play a game for about 15 mins, beat it, and have it loop over and over again with the difficulty getting higher and higher each time you restart the levels and then it becomes virtually "impossible" to beat the level? with no special weapons or anything. just jumping and ducking and avoiding.

krazy_guy931

Video Games arn't eaiser, you are just better from experience. Also if you want a challenge, try playing Halo 3 on Mythic Difficulty, which is Solo-Legendary with All Skulls On, and you cannot save or die.

So how did Iga do with that 3D console Castlevania he's been obsessed with all these years? Not so good, right?

Why do you think Kojima took over and is making Lords of Shadow? Therefore, Iga, although a accomplished game developer, has no credibility whatsoever when it comes to 3D games.

The sad truth is, Iga doesn't know how to make a good 3D game, which is why he's making that excuse. Look at God of War, Shadow of the Colossus, Zelda, or Super Mario and the countless of other awesome 3D games? They play and are great in their 3D transition. They control with precision the last time I played them, maybe even better than most 2D games.

ASK_Story

The point is, it's ALL nostalgia, subjective taste, and a continuous cycle that'll never end.ASK_Story

There have been fun and boring games form the start. I personally prefer modern games. Sure you may fnd yourslef searching for where to go, but that infinitely better than playing a game that is damn near a matter of memorizing patterns more than playing.

You're the kind of guy who thinks Little Big Planet is better than Super Mario Bros 3. Debating you is futile.

Rizla_Plus

Actually, one could very easily make the argument that Little Big Planet is the superior game for any number of academic reasons. Graphically the game is a marvel; artistically it is rife with creative flourishes and minutia; and from a technical standpoint the game is incredibly well-designed. Compound those attributes with the fact that the game contains a robust editor that quite literally makes the opportunities for added gameplay and levels infinite and yes, one could easily argue that Little Big Planet is the superior game.

But here's the real problem: your pedestrian approach to this issue, like the OP's, requires you to create a hierarchy of quality that in turn bogs you down in dogmatic philosophies of game design, some of which simply are no longer viable. Personally, I would never state definitely that Little Big Planet is better than Mario 3 because such a statement is a crass oversimplification of the issue. Mario 3 was made more than two decades ago with technology that by today's standards is literally archaic; the fact that Mario 3 is still playable and fun is a testament to the quality of the game and a reaffirmation that the Mario series as a whole is the progenitor of the genre. That said, to dismiss the overt quality and expansive nature of Little Big Planet because it is a contemporary effort is puerile. Both games represent the apex of the genre with the largest difference being that Mario 3 did it much earlier. Unfortunately, you've confused being first with quality and erroneously assume that older means better, which isn't necessarily true. You are so entrenched in the notion that older games will always be superior that you fail to recognize the massive strides the medium has and continues to make, which is frankly an unfortunate way to view anything because it effectively limits your ability to appreciate newer endeavors.

In your haste to venerate and defend retro-gaming, you fail to grasp the fact that I and others who love the medium appreciate older games and count them among our favorites. What we refuse to do is put on nostalgic-blinders that limit our ability to appreciate the outstanding software being produced on a weekly and monthly basis. No matter how you spin, twist or attack my arguments, the reality is that my stance is far more progressive and open-minded than your own because I appreciate both while all you are capable of is manufacturing propaganda in an attempt to deride contemporary games to suit your own narrow perspective.

Just as I told Tauu, the problem is most definitely your retro-ideology and not the medium of videogames.