Nostalgia is a funny thing. The brain tends to gloss over the negatives of our past and cast memories is a warm, fuzzy glow. There is a reason many people still feel attracted to former partners even after a bad breakup; you repress the negative memories and the positive ones are brought to the fore. It's a natural response: Stressful events become blurry and happy events take over. It's not unlike an old movie where the director would smear petroleum jelly on the camera lens to give it a soft, dream-like quality.
The same holds true in video games. Though I've been playing since the Atari 800, Dragon Warrior made me a gamer for life. I can still tell you where the Stones of Sunlight are located. Yet going back to grind slimes outside Tantegel Castle to level up seems tedious alongside modern titles that feature story-driven quests and dynamic battle sequences. At least, it would seem tedious if playing Dragon Warrior didn't make me feel like I was ten all over again.
Therein lies the influence of nostalgia: Certainly if Dragon Warrior were released in a vaccuum today, without any of the brand good will it has built over the years, it would be panned. Yet, I still have fun pulling it out once in a while for some soothing, turn-based action.
So I found myself flummoxed when I read through the recent review of The Simpsons Arcade Game. I do not own an XBox 360, but have fond memories of playing the game in various arcades back when they were relevant. You know, back when "Eat my shorts" was considered edgy humor. The game had voice clips and art from the show, which was a rarity at the time. It was terrible, but you played it anyway because in 1991 you loved The Simpsons. Tom McShea wrote the review, and received some flack for his scathing opinion of its repetitive combat and nonsensical story. In the comments he wrote:
This is what got me thinking about nostalgia and how it plays into our opinion - and sometimes defensiveness - of beloved older titles. The Simpsons really was a terrible game, and there was no excuse for playing it with titles like Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, Neo Geo machines, or the six-man X-Men Arcade machine at hand unless you were a huge fan of the show. I was a huge fan of the show, though the game was never one of my favorites. Still, I have fond memories of my childhood in the arcades, and - judging by the comments in the Gamespot review - so do many other Gamespot users.
So how do you treat an old favorite? Do you do two reviews for a ported title? Do you factor nostalgia into its score? Do you just talk about how faithful it is or is not relative to the original? Do you factor the price at its release into the review? Or do you go Gamespot's route, and just look at it as if it were a new title released in a vaccuum?
Mostly I agree with the Gamespot policy: Is the game good relative to competing titles as of its release, regardless of whether it is a port or not? This is what matters from a scoring standpoint. That said, ports of old titles deserve a footnote, because gamers looking at these titles are by and large going to have played the original. Those gamers want to know how faithful the port is to the original, and whether they will enjoy it as much today as they did back then, regardless of whether it's good or not on an absolute basis.
Nostalgia is a funny thing, because it affects modern perception of histroical events to which we have attached emotion. An old game can be terrible and still be enjoyable, after all. This is important: Nostalgia can make a game that was great at the time, like Operation: Wolf, still relevant today despite the fact that far superior titles might be widely available.
-Disclosure-
Opinions and speculation of and by Bozanimal are his own and not those of Gamespot.com or its affiliates. Bozanimal is not a Gamespot employee, and is not affiliated with any gaming companies in any way.
Several links within this article may lead to external sites. Neither Bozanimal nor host Gamespot.com or affiliates are responsible for the content of those sites.
So true, so true. A lot of games just don't hold up as well as when they were released. Some games are down right boring now, others unplayable due to dodgy controls. But really good games can easily be recognized as it is those games that you can still enjoy today regardless of nostalgia. Super Mario Bros or more recently Dungeon Keeper to name but two. Both great games on different platforms, but both still very enjoyable.
So true, so true. A lot of games just don't hold up as well as when they were released. Some games are down right boring now, others unplayable due to dodgy controls. But really good games can easily be recognized as it is those games that you can still enjoy today regardless of nostalgia. Super Mario Bros or more recently Dungeon Keeper to name but two. Both great games on different platforms, but both still very enjoyable.
@Boznimal - That's always the problem with these things. We CAN'T really view those old games that we loved as someone who never played them because, well, we've played them. The closest we can do is look back and play games we missed that were critical darlings of the time. How we gauge the longevity of a game is whether people who are new to them are still enjoying them (not necessarily kids, but people from the whole age spectrum). The classics are the ones that last, that are still fun to new players 20 years from now and onward.
@Boznimal - That's always the problem with these things. We CAN'T really view those old games that we loved as someone who never played them because, well, we've played them. The closest we can do is look back and play games we missed that were critical darlings of the time. How we gauge the longevity of a game is whether people who are new to them are still enjoying them (not necessarily kids, but people from the whole age spectrum). The classics are the ones that last, that are still fun to new players 20 years from now and onward.
@so_hal - I agree with you mostly. However, there ARE some games that don't stand up. I think we can all agree that Super Mario Bros. is still a fantastic game to play even today. How many games are like that? Dragon Warrior clearly isn't. @nocoolnamejim - Well, Nintendo's been coasting for years like that, especially with the mainline Pokemon and Zelda series, where it feels like the same games re-released again and again. The problem with Nintendo is that, from the mid-80s to mid-90s, they were THE name in gaming. Sega never even came close. So you have a generation of games reviewers who look at Nintendo more like a childhood friend than a business. This leads to naked favoritism, and it's honestly disgusting. On another note, I would NOT factor price into reviews. As Vinnie once said about Linux, it's only free if your time is worth nothing.
@so_hal - I agree with you mostly. However, there ARE some games that don't stand up. I think we can all agree that Super Mario Bros. is still a fantastic game to play even today. How many games are like that? Dragon Warrior clearly isn't. @nocoolnamejim - Well, Nintendo's been coasting for years like that, especially with the mainline Pokemon and Zelda series, where it feels like the same games re-released again and again. The problem with Nintendo is that, from the mid-80s to mid-90s, they were THE name in gaming. Sega never even came close. So you have a generation of games reviewers who look at Nintendo more like a childhood friend than a business. This leads to naked favoritism, and it's honestly disgusting. On another note, I would NOT factor price into reviews. As Vinnie once said about Linux, it's only free if your time is worth nothing.
nostalgia certainly does colour things. I had debated picking that game up, but after seeing the review, as @nocoolnamejim put it, priced lower, I'd pick it up. But I think price notwithstanding, I agreed with Tom's right to a scathing review, I almost always do. I never understand the outcries of low ratings.
nostalgia certainly does colour things. I had debated picking that game up, but after seeing the review, as @nocoolnamejim put it, priced lower, I'd pick it up. But I think price notwithstanding, I agreed with Tom's right to a scathing review, I almost always do. I never understand the outcries of low ratings.
Worse than nostalgia is 20/20 hindsight. This is where McShea's system breaks down. We all know games are going to be better in the future, but that doesn't mean that we can be talked out of enjoying them to the full now. One day, skyrim will look quaint, simple and dated. Shall we stop playing now because it has limited relevance? No. Should we not play old games because their relevance is lost to history? That's up to the player, but the answer almost always seems to be no - enjoy old games.
Worse than nostalgia is 20/20 hindsight. This is where McShea's system breaks down. We all know games are going to be better in the future, but that doesn't mean that we can be talked out of enjoying them to the full now. One day, skyrim will look quaint, simple and dated. Shall we stop playing now because it has limited relevance? No. Should we not play old games because their relevance is lost to history? That's up to the player, but the answer almost always seems to be no - enjoy old games.
Even if the game is an accurate port, it ends up being unenjoyable. I remember loving Sonic Adventure when that came out and loving the heck out of that game. I bought the Arcade Live game because of this and was sorely disappointed. It just doesn't hold up today. It's buggy, the controls aren't very good, and there are far too many times where you're running around in the "adventure" portion of the game (which can get tedious). Sometimes the memories are the only good thing left from an old game.
Even if the game is an accurate port, it ends up being unenjoyable. I remember loving Sonic Adventure when that came out and loving the heck out of that game. I bought the Arcade Live game because of this and was sorely disappointed. It just doesn't hold up today. It's buggy, the controls aren't very good, and there are far too many times where you're running around in the "adventure" portion of the game (which can get tedious). Sometimes the memories are the only good thing left from an old game.
I have wondered if I would play The Secret of Evermore again if I had the chance. After having played some of my old faves like Final Fantasy IV and V probably would decide to stick with the great memories of the game that turned me on to the RPG genre. Although playing those and a couple other older titles again reminded me that the main reason we think of our old games as harder and more challenging was the repetitive play, the lack of quick saves, and probably mainly is that back then a game guide or walkthrough was a concept that we were not familiar with as of yet:P
I have wondered if I would play The Secret of Evermore again if I had the chance. After having played some of my old faves like Final Fantasy IV and V probably would decide to stick with the great memories of the game that turned me on to the RPG genre. Although playing those and a couple other older titles again reminded me that the main reason we think of our old games as harder and more challenging was the repetitive play, the lack of quick saves, and probably mainly is that back then a game guide or walkthrough was a concept that we were not familiar with as of yet:P
So, this is a difficult issue, I think. Pretty much every single game on GoG (Except The Witcher titles since they are current-gen) is really old, and most haven't aged too well. You have a lot to look past to get into them, from the now-awful graphics to the sometimes convoluted and dated mechanics. It can be hard judging them by today's standards, though like Jim said price is a good point to bring up. Even though I love a sizeable chunk of the games on GoG, primarily because I grew up with many of these games, I can kinda forgive someone for being really turned off by them today.
So, this is a difficult issue, I think. Pretty much every single game on GoG (Except The Witcher titles since they are current-gen) is really old, and most haven't aged too well. You have a lot to look past to get into them, from the now-awful graphics to the sometimes convoluted and dated mechanics. It can be hard judging them by today's standards, though like Jim said price is a good point to bring up. Even though I love a sizeable chunk of the games on GoG, primarily because I grew up with many of these games, I can kinda forgive someone for being really turned off by them today.
This is a difficult discussion with no clear answer. Certainly games should be judged based on today's standards, to a degree, but nostalgia is almost impossible to take out of the equation. One game on GoG I highly recommend is Shogo: Mobile Armor Division, a cult classic FPS from '98. I grew up loving that game, and eventually bought it again on GoG. I still love that game. But, I fully admit that it is ugly and archaic by today's standards. All the shooting mechanics are still competent, but are ultimately based on gameplay from that era. The once jaw-dropping graphics are downright horrid today. I could fully forgive someone for being turned off, despite the fact that it is like $5 on GoG. Other games, like the old isometric D&D titles, have some archaic mechanics and horrible graphics but have otherwise aged fairly well. Planescape: Torment still has a great story, for example. Icewind Dale is still a deep party-based RPG, even if some mechanics are ancient.
This is a difficult discussion with no clear answer. Certainly games should be judged based on today's standards, to a degree, but nostalgia is almost impossible to take out of the equation. One game on GoG I highly recommend is Shogo: Mobile Armor Division, a cult classic FPS from '98. I grew up loving that game, and eventually bought it again on GoG. I still love that game. But, I fully admit that it is ugly and archaic by today's standards. All the shooting mechanics are still competent, but are ultimately based on gameplay from that era. The once jaw-dropping graphics are downright horrid today. I could fully forgive someone for being turned off, despite the fact that it is like $5 on GoG. Other games, like the old isometric D&D titles, have some archaic mechanics and horrible graphics but have otherwise aged fairly well. Planescape: Torment still has a great story, for example. Icewind Dale is still a deep party-based RPG, even if some mechanics are ancient.
Tangential to this, there's nothing better than revisiting a cherished game specific to your childhood and finding that it's still great, even by today's standards.
Tangential to this, there's nothing better than revisiting a cherished game specific to your childhood and finding that it's still great, even by today's standards.
good read, I remember the simpsons game when I was a kid. I Played the arcade version inside the mall back then. I think the year was back in the 8 bit era.
good read, I remember the simpsons game when I was a kid. I Played the arcade version inside the mall back then. I think the year was back in the 8 bit era.
I'm very pleased to see those comments of Tom's on older games. I'll be honest, I think Nintendo has been benefiting for years with review scores based on nostalgia. I've lost track of the staggering amounts of remakes and rereleases of old games that Nintendo has done, and most (not all) of the time I look at the scores of the games and just shake my head. It is a rare game that can stand the test of time over decades. Most of them are games that are story driven because a good story tends to stand up over time whereas gameplay, graphics, etc. tends to look dated when it's a couple of decades old. My firm belief is that games that are released today should be judged by today's standards. Edit: I would, however, factor price in when giving a final rating. A rerelease of an older game at a vastly reduced price point can still be worth a very high rating based on the value for your money factor.
I'm very pleased to see those comments of Tom's on older games. I'll be honest, I think Nintendo has been benefiting for years with review scores based on nostalgia. I've lost track of the staggering amounts of remakes and rereleases of old games that Nintendo has done, and most (not all) of the time I look at the scores of the games and just shake my head. It is a rare game that can stand the test of time over decades. Most of them are games that are story driven because a good story tends to stand up over time whereas gameplay, graphics, etc. tends to look dated when it's a couple of decades old. My firm belief is that games that are released today should be judged by today's standards. Edit: I would, however, factor price in when giving a final rating. A rerelease of an older game at a vastly reduced price point can still be worth a very high rating based on the value for your money factor.
This was a very interesting Editorial for me to write. It made me think back to beloved titles like Metal Slug, Goldeneye, Q*Bert, and Mortal Kombat to wonder: What would I think of them today? How would I rate them? Would I still enjoy them, or would I enjoy them only because I had played them as a kid? The mind is a fickle mistress.
This was a very interesting Editorial for me to write. It made me think back to beloved titles like Metal Slug, Goldeneye, Q*Bert, and Mortal Kombat to wonder: What would I think of them today? How would I rate them? Would I still enjoy them, or would I enjoy them only because I had played them as a kid? The mind is a fickle mistress.
