Who are some relics (people with old gaming ideas) who annoy you? 56k no

FINAL FANTASY RELICS

People who still think every great Final Fantasy was made before FF7. I don't care how great an early Final Fantasy was back in the day, you can't tell me those outdated NES/SNES systems beat what developers have accomplished with more modern Final Fantasies on the PS1, PS2, and soon the PS3. Yes waitress, please give me the richer story, stunningly beautiful graphics, mind-blowing CGI scenes, and advanced customization of characters over some outdated and simplified NES version.

Call me crazy, but I'll take this:

over this:

...anyday of the week. Go away relics! No one cares how much you enjoyed Final Fantasy II when you were a teenager!

NOLAN BUSHNELL

Dude is the definition of a relic. Why is that this guy who invented Pong is quoted every few months for some criticism of the gaming industry? Yeah, it's great that he spawned the first memorable video game, but specializing in Pong does not somehow make you qualified on the Xbox 360 or ANY game today. People like him want a casual rebirth with the Wii because they're scared of anything that can't be played with a token in five minutes. He's designing an MMOG now, but I seriously doubt that over the last decade, this guy has played online with anything other than Mahjong.

Go away Nolan! Hook up your Wii and enjoy the tennis game, but leave us alone!

FALLOUT RELICS

Okay, I realize Fallout was a mind-blowing WRPG for its time. It basically spawned the Baldur's Gate, Planescape and other great RPGs on the PC years ago. But please... when we approach the topic of best RPG, stop acting like Fallout is God and it doesn't feel a little outdated. What is it with these people who have to play every RPG in a Dungeons & Dragons ****isometric layout? There's nothing wrong with what Morrowind and Oblivion did, and while I can still have fun with the old-school tabletop views like this:

Sometimes, I just want to play like this:

So I like RPGs with beautiful distant 3-D scenery, that feel more alive, and rely a little bit more on my natural reflexes instead of some pre-rolled formula. So sue me! I think that makes a great RPG and relics who refuse to believe otherwise annoying the living snuzz out of me.

GOLDENEYE RELICS

Give me a break about people who are heartbroken that this game won't be ported to Xbox Live. In 2008, this game sucks! When talking about the best shooters, this game always comes up, but it feels VERY OUTDATED compared to ANY shooter on the market today. Fact is just about any game that relies on 3-D action will always become one upped in the next generation, and the only reason people still hold on to this game as a torchbearer is because they have nostalgic memories of great times with friends and family on a split-screen during their youth. This game has not aged well, and if you want a great shooter, try one of these games:

Because they pretty much improve on just about everything in Goldeneye, and you're cheating yourself if you somehow keep trying to recapture the "glory" you remember from Goldeneye because it was your first experience with a split-screen shooter.

RELICS WHO REFUSE TO BELIEVE A RE-DO CAN ACTUALLY BE BETTER

Look, the only games that are truly timeless are platformers like the Mario games that relied on one aspect: FUN! Most other games in video game history can always be improved by today's standards. People who get all grumpy about Bioshock and still declare its predecessor, System Shock, as the #1 game just need to open their minds more.

W00t! Yeah, i get it, you loved System Shock, but frankly, I'd rather play:

Same bizarre world and rich story. Same creative shooter gameplay, one just feels a lot more compelling in 2008... ya know?

You can crack on them for ripping off a concept that was already established years ago, but don't act like a new model can't improve on an old popular game.

What are some types of relics you can't stand?

Your missing some great games by not playing the old FFs. I am playing FF3 right now on the DS still an amazing game after all this time.

Edit: To answer your question the guy that owned Atari. It always funny that when ever he says something about gaming now big of news it is.

Your missing some great games by not playing the old FFs. I am playing FF3 right now on the DS still an amazing game after all this time.HarlockJC

I didn't say it wasn't a good game, just the relic fanboys who refuse to believe any FF made after the cartridge days is a great game.

I'm mad at people with new gaming ideas! :p Like casual Wii owners that buy games like Ninjabread man.

Predicting stupid final fantasy elitist fanboy in 3... 2... 1...

[QUOTE="HarlockJC"]Your missing some great games by not playing the old FFs. I am playing FF3 right now on the DS still an amazing game after all this time.The__MCP

I didn't say it wasn't a good game, just the relic fanboys who refuse to believe any FF made after the cartridge days is a great game.

[QUOTE="HarlockJC"]Your missing some great games by not playing the old FFs. I am playing FF3 right now on the DS still an amazing game after all this time.The__MCP

I didn't say it wasn't a good game, just the relic fanboys who refuse to believe any FF made after the cartridge days is a great game.

you're a fool who speaks that which he knows nothing about. I can not urge you to play the early final fantasies... 1 2 and 3 (1 4 and 6) as they are above you, if you can, however, disengage yourself from preconceptions about what a game should be... and just take what those games offer you... you'd find out that they are infinitely more enjoyable and exciting than their later followers-on. You also need to grow some experience... which is time.

You're crazy.

The first screen shot may LOOK a little better... but that doesn't automatically make it the better game.

I really enjoyed Final Fantasy II when I played it a few months ago - for the first time. I have yet to play XII, and I am looking forward to it. But honestly, it doesn't sound as appealing as the older games... even it it looks a bit prettier. But I guess I'll have to hold final judgement for after I play it.

[QUOTE="HarlockJC"]Your missing some great games by not playing the old FFs. I am playing FF3 right now on the DS still an amazing game after all this time.The__MCP

I didn't say it wasn't a good game, just the relic fanboys who refuse to believe any FF made after the cartridge days is a great game.

I understand what you are trying to say. I mixed on my feeling for your answer they are all just great games. I have never played the MMO but rest of the FF are all amazing.

Any sort of Mac gamers. ANY.Shazenab

This is tough one, but I do have to agree with the Atari founder.

I do run into Zelda relics. People who refuse to move beyond the SNES Zelda games, because they feel they have lost a lot of their touch.

[QUOTE="Shazenab"]Any sort of Mac gamers. ANY.musicalmac

Ok, that was a bit harsh.

The thing that bugs me about certian mac gamers i've come across is that they make a bigger issue out of it than it actually is. Sure Apple Macs have games, but it certianly is the weakest part of Apples lineup. Everything Apple has done recently has been a huge success, yet they seem to be moving very slowly in the gaming department, which I really dont understand.

I'm sure if apple actually attempted to approach developers for support (and apple supported them themselves) then it will have a market share to rival Microsofts, as it stands though there in a tapped market out there, which Microsoft is claiming for itself.

This is tough one, but I do have to agree with the Atari founder.

I do run into Zelda relics. People who refuse to move beyond the SNES Zelda games, because they feel they have lost a lot of their touch.

dbzfreak

I think it lost it's touch after OOT.

[QUOTE="dbzfreak"]

This is tough one, but I do have to agree with the Atari founder.

I do run into Zelda relics. People who refuse to move beyond the SNES Zelda games, because they feel they have lost a lot of their touch.

Relys

I think it lost it's touch after OOT.

Ok, that was a bit harsh.

The thing that bugs me about certian mac gamers i've come across is that they make a bigger issue out of it than it actually is. Sure Apple Macs have games, but it certianly is the weakest part of Apples lineup. Everything Apple has done recently has been a huge success, yet they seem to be moving very slowly in the gaming department, which I really dont understand.

I'm sure if apple actually attempted to approach developers for support (and apple supported them themselves) then it will have a market share to rival Microsofts, as it stands though there in a tapped market out there, which Microsoft is claiming for itself.

Shazenab

Boss battles

bad camera

Boss battles in small rooms with a bad camera

[QUOTE="Shazenab"]Any sort of Mac gamers. ANY.musicalmac

Two words:

Black turtleneck

...strangely enough I have to agree with the TC. I know that's odd - but there's a lot of truth in saying that the worship we have of certain older games is nothing more than nostalgia, some have not aged well *at all*. For example, anyone claiming Goldeneye is the "best FPS ever" needs to be introduced to something called "a second joystick".

And yes, it's incredibly odd to take a guy whose last contribution to gaming was a pixel that floated around the screen as a "guru" on modern 3D game design. Now, it's one thing if you take someone who made say, an old RPG like Fallout (black isle) and say "what are some design elements we need to consider? What styles, dialogue, and interactions are important?" - but for marios sakes Nolan's contribution was a bouncing pixel.

The average hobbyist writer would have a better understanding of game design. The average ten year old probably knows more about modern game design - that's not an insult to the man's intellect, or his contribution - it's simply a statement of progress - a retired engineer doesn't get conferred the power of artistic vision or media business sense.

Sadly enough, the truth is some of these people do becomes relics - they simply don't upgrade with the times. For example, the people hating on Mac gaming, you know who you are - get with the times, Macs are PCs, they have been since the Intel adoption. John Romero? When was the last time the creator of the great Doom did anything useful? The answer isn't in anything that has been released in this millennium.

-

In fact, isn't a lot of System Wars itself simply a relic? The reality is we're marching toward Dyack's grand vision of the unified gaming module (whether we realize it or not), and the merger of media, pc, mobile, and gaming into some kind of quasi-utopian USB dongle that mates with your tv, computer, gameboy, and brain while supporting an orgy of control methods isn't more than two decades away. The merger has already happened on the software side, as multiplatform, and possibly cross-platform gaming materializs into a solid reality.

The "blood soaked" fight of fanboyism is nothing more than a relic of a time when the Sega - Nintendo, and later Nintendo - Sony "war" believed in a zero-sum game - in the modern world, where a new gamer is born every day, what's left for the fight? We have turned in on ourselves, and what's left are the perceptions of lunatics.

[QUOTE="musicalmac"][QUOTE="Shazenab"]Any sort of Mac gamers. ANY.subrosian

Two words:

Black turtleneck

...strangely enough I have to agree with the TC. I know that's odd - but there's a lot of truth in saying that the worship we have of certain older games is nothing more than nostalgia, some have not aged well *at all*. For example, anyone claiming Goldeneye is the "best FPS ever" needs to be introduced to something called "a second joystick".

And yes, it's incredibly odd to take a guy whose last contribution to gaming was a pixel that floated around the screen as a "guru" on modern 3D game design. Now, it's one thing if you take someone who made say, an old RPG like Fallout (black isle) and say "what are some design elements we need to consider? What styles, dialogue, and interactions are important?" - but for marios sakes Nolan's contribution was a bouncing pixel.

The average hobbyist writer would have a better understanding of game design. The average ten year old probably knows more about modern game design - that's not an insult to the man's intellect, or his contribution - it's simply a statement of progress - a retired engineer doesn't get conferred the power of artistic vision or media business sense.

Sadly enough, the truth is some of these people do becomes relics - they simply don't upgrade with the times. For example, the people hating on Mac gaming, you know who you are - get with the times, Macs are PCs, they have been since the Intel adoption. John Romero? When was the last time the creator of the great Doom did anything useful? The answer isn't in anything that has been released in this millennium.

-

In fact, isn't a lot of System Wars itself simply a relic? The reality is we're marching toward Dyack's grand vision of the unified gaming module (whether we realize it or not), and the merger of media, pc, mobile, and gaming into some kind of quasi-utopian USB dongle that mates with your tv, computer, gameboy, and brain while supporting an orgy of control methods isn't more than two decades away. The merger has already happened on the software side, as multiplatform, and possibly cross-platform gaming materializs into a solid reality.

The "blood soaked" fight of fanboyism is nothing more than a relic of a time when the Sega - Nintendo, and later Nintendo - Sony "war" believed in a zero-sum game - in the modern world, where a new gamer is born every day, what's left for the fight? We have turned in on ourselves, and what's left are the perceptions of lunatics.

Goldeneye and perfect dark both had duel analoge... All you needed was two controllers.

Goldeneye and perfect dark both had duel analoge... All you needed was two controllers.

Relys

Come off it, it as utterly unplayable like that. No access to any other buttons.

[QUOTE="Relys"]

Goldeneye and perfect dark both had duel analoge... All you needed was two controllers.

cakeorrdeath

Come off it, it as utterly unplayable like that. No access to any other buttons.

LOLWUT?

You must have NEVER played it in duel analoge. I never tried it in goldeneye, but perfect dark worked just fine. All the buttons were easy as pie to press.

[QUOTE="The__MCP"]

[QUOTE="HarlockJC"]Your missing some great games by not playing the old FFs. I am playing FF3 right now on the DS still an amazing game after all this time.Tuvola

I didn't say it wasn't a good game, just the relic fanboys who refuse to believe any FF made after the cartridge days is a great game.

you're a fool who speaks that which he knows nothing about. I can not urge you to play the early final fantasies... 1 2 and 3 (1 4 and 6) as they are above you, if you can, however, disengage yourself from preconceptions about what a game should be... and just take what those games offer you... you'd find out that they are infinitely more enjoyable and exciting than their later followers-on. You also need to grow some experience... which is time.

thanks for your opinion, and your complete reinforcement of the TC original post.

[QUOTE="subrosian"]

[QUOTE="musicalmac"][QUOTE="Shazenab"]Any sort of Mac gamers. ANY.Relys

Two words:

Black turtleneck

...strangely enough I have to agree with the TC. I know that's odd - but there's a lot of truth in saying that the worship we have of certain older games is nothing more than nostalgia, some have not aged well *at all*. For example, anyone claiming Goldeneye is the "best FPS ever" needs to be introduced to something called "a second joystick".

And yes, it's incredibly odd to take a guy whose last contribution to gaming was a pixel that floated around the screen as a "guru" on modern 3D game design. Now, it's one thing if you take someone who made say, an old RPG like Fallout (black isle) and say "what are some design elements we need to consider? What styles, dialogue, and interactions are important?" - but for marios sakes Nolan's contribution was a bouncing pixel.

The average hobbyist writer would have a better understanding of game design. The average ten year old probably knows more about modern game design - that's not an insult to the man's intellect, or his contribution - it's simply a statement of progress - a retired engineer doesn't get conferred the power of artistic vision or media business sense.

Sadly enough, the truth is some of these people do becomes relics - they simply don't upgrade with the times. For example, the people hating on Mac gaming, you know who you are - get with the times, Macs are PCs, they have been since the Intel adoption. John Romero? When was the last time the creator of the great Doom did anything useful? The answer isn't in anything that has been released in this millennium.

-

In fact, isn't a lot of System Wars itself simply a relic? The reality is we're marching toward Dyack's grand vision of the unified gaming module (whether we realize it or not), and the merger of media, pc, mobile, and gaming into some kind of quasi-utopian USB dongle that mates with your tv, computer, gameboy, and brain while supporting an orgy of control methods isn't more than two decades away. The merger has already happened on the software side, as multiplatform, and possibly cross-platform gaming materializs into a solid reality.

The "blood soaked" fight of fanboyism is nothing more than a relic of a time when the Sega - Nintendo, and later Nintendo - Sony "war" believed in a zero-sum game - in the modern world, where a new gamer is born every day, what's left for the fight? We have turned in on ourselves, and what's left are the perceptions of lunatics.

Goldeneye and perfect dark both had duel analoge... All you needed was two controllers.

Please read carefully, you've simply skimmed, and missed the forest for the trees.

[QUOTE="Relys"][QUOTE="subrosian"]

[QUOTE="musicalmac"][QUOTE="Shazenab"]Any sort of Mac gamers. ANY.subrosian

Two words:

Black turtleneck

...strangely enough I have to agree with the TC. I know that's odd - but there's a lot of truth in saying that the worship we have of certain older games is nothing more than nostalgia, some have not aged well *at all*. For example, anyone claiming Goldeneye is the "best FPS ever" needs to be introduced to something called "a second joystick".

And yes, it's incredibly odd to take a guy whose last contribution to gaming was a pixel that floated around the screen as a "guru" on modern 3D game design. Now, it's one thing if you take someone who made say, an old RPG like Fallout (black isle) and say "what are some design elements we need to consider? What styles, dialogue, and interactions are important?" - but for marios sakes Nolan's contribution was a bouncing pixel.

The average hobbyist writer would have a better understanding of game design. The average ten year old probably knows more about modern game design - that's not an insult to the man's intellect, or his contribution - it's simply a statement of progress - a retired engineer doesn't get conferred the power of artistic vision or media business sense.

Sadly enough, the truth is some of these people do becomes relics - they simply don't upgrade with the times. For example, the people hating on Mac gaming, you know who you are - get with the times, Macs are PCs, they have been since the Intel adoption. John Romero? When was the last time the creator of the great Doom did anything useful? The answer isn't in anything that has been released in this millennium.

-

In fact, isn't a lot of System Wars itself simply a relic? The reality is we're marching toward Dyack's grand vision of the unified gaming module (whether we realize it or not), and the merger of media, pc, mobile, and gaming into some kind of quasi-utopian USB dongle that mates with your tv, computer, gameboy, and brain while supporting an orgy of control methods isn't more than two decades away. The merger has already happened on the software side, as multiplatform, and possibly cross-platform gaming materializs into a solid reality.

The "blood soaked" fight of fanboyism is nothing more than a relic of a time when the Sega - Nintendo, and later Nintendo - Sony "war" believed in a zero-sum game - in the modern world, where a new gamer is born every day, what's left for the fight? We have turned in on ourselves, and what's left are the perceptions of lunatics.

Goldeneye and perfect dark both had duel analoge... All you needed was two controllers.

If that's what you felt the need to reply to, and was all you had to say after skimming my post, I'd suggest actually reading it this time around ;). I think you'll find you've missed the forest for the trees.

Maybe it was because that was the only problem I had with your post?

You clearly dont (and will never) understand how much it rocked to be an old school gamer.

In order to understand, you have to have played those games back when they came out, and if you didnt, you never will.

The feeling of elation you get from going back to the old Megaman games on the NES can usually beat the fun from the greatest of today's games.

That was when gaming was fresh and original; the NES / SNES era was the peak of gaming, and it will likely never come back to that time.

Nowadays people are babied by games that give you a checkpoint every 10 minutes, that have more flash than substance, that think that more complicated makes better, and that are nowhere near as difficult as classic games. This makes most modern gamers get frustrated very easily by classics.

You will never understand, and there is no way I can convince you.

Edit: Fixed a couple typos

You clearly dont (and will never) understand how much it rocked to be an old school gamer.

In order to understand, you have to have played those games back when they came out, and if you didnt, you never will.

The feeling of elation you get from going back to the old Megaman games on the NES can usually beat the fun from the greatest of today's games.

That was when gaming was fresh and original; the NES / SNES era was the peak of gaming, and it will likely never come back to that time.

Nowadays people are babied by games that give you a checkpoint every 10 minutes, that have more flash than substance, that think that more complicated makes better, and that are nowhere near as difficult as classic games. This makes most modern gamers get frustrated very easily by classics.

You will never understand, and there is no way I can convince you.

Edit: Fixed a couple typos

Big_Red_Button

Oh please, I was gaming in the NES / Master System / Arcade era - I had an Apple II and a DOS computer, and seriously - please - don't kid yourself. Modern Castlevanias on the DS are more fun than the old Castlevanias - FF VII and FF VIII were better than FF I - V, Goldeneye and Perfect Dark are nothing more than nostalgia now.

You're confusing nostalgia for greatness - let me tell you - the glitches in Battletoads that make it so co-op play makes it impossible to win - or playing a racing gamer where the other cars on the track have no collision because the system can't handle physics were the highlights of my life.

The reason modern gamers can't grasp the "greatness" of 98%+ of the old games is because most of them *aren't great*. We've got a handful of arcade classics, a dozen games from the 8-bit era, and the one hundred or so "true classics" from the 16-bit era onward (stuff like OOT, Deus Ex, and Fallout 2). And even then, how much of that is approachable? How much of that hasn't been redone, or bested by games created by newer designers facing fewer limitations?

I'm sorry - the grim reality is that the TC is right - a lot of the old stuff is like Citizen Kane - yeah you know it is a "classic", but the only people watching it for fun are people who lived in the era it was released, or a few art students with the hots for Orson Welles (ew).

Everyone.

All pretty much every single well known user here ever does is complain about how this genre isn't around anymore and how this genre is now taking over the entire market and all innovation or gameplay or story or fun or art or style or development team is gone.

It bothers the crap out of me.

Fallout 1 and 2 were probably really reall really freaking awesome, but do you have to make an eight paragraph long post about how awesome Fallout is every single time someone brings up the industry?

Everyone.

All pretty much every single well known user here ever does is complain about how this genre isn't around anymore and how this genre is now taking over the entire market and all innovation or gameplay or story or fun or art or style or development team is gone.

It bothers the crap out of me.

Fallout 1 and 2 were probably really reall really freaking awesome, but do you have to make an eight paragraph long post about how awesome Fallout is every single time someone brings up the industry?

-TheSecondSign-

That's actually the one exception to the rule. And I'll simply put it this way - do you ever play a modern game, and just notice things like "say, why aren't there any children?". I mean, it's kind of odd that The Simpsons Game has a more realistic world than Oblivion (children, pregnant women, life cycle, people with jobs).

That's why Fallout gets mentioned. As far as early Final Fantasies go - I've no idea

[QUOTE="Big_Red_Button"]

You clearly dont (and will never) understand how much it rocked to be an old school gamer.

In order to understand, you have to have played those games back when they came out, and if you didnt, you never will.

The feeling of elation you get from going back to the old Megaman games on the NES can usually beat the fun from the greatest of today's games.

That was when gaming was fresh and original; the NES / SNES era was the peak of gaming, and it will likely never come back to that time.

Nowadays people are babied by games that give you a checkpoint every 10 minutes, that have more flash than substance, that think that more complicated makes better, and that are nowhere near as difficult as classic games. This makes most modern gamers get frustrated very easily by classics.

You will never understand, and there is no way I can convince you.

Edit: Fixed a couple typos

subrosian

Oh please, I was gaming in the NES / Master System / Arcade era - I had an Apple II and a DOS computer, and seriously - please - don't kid yourself. Modern Castlevanias on the DS are more fun than the old Castlevanias - FF VII and FF VIII were better than FF I - V, Goldeneye and Perfect Dark are nothing more than nostalgia now.

You're confusing nostalgia for greatness - let me tell you - the glitches in Battletoads that make it so co-op play makes it impossible to win - or playing a racing gamer where the other cars on the track have no collision because the system can't handle physics were the highlights of my life.

The reason modern gamers can't grasp the "greatness" of 98%+ of the old games is because most of them *aren't great*. We've got a handful of arcade classics, a dozen games from the 8-bit era, and the one hundred or so "true classics" from the 16-bit era onward (stuff like OOT, Deus Ex, and Fallout 2). And even then, how much of that is approachable? How much of that hasn't been redone, or bested by games created by newer designers facing fewer limitations?

I'm sorry - the grim reality is that the TC is right - a lot of the old stuff is like Citizen Kane - yeah you know it is a "classic", but the only people watching it for fun are people who lived in the era it was released, or a few art students with the hots for Orson Welles (ew).

I've beaten co-op Battletoads with my friends many times... I dont know why you think its impossible. Hard as hell, sure, but not impossible.

And I agree on the example you gave of racers... I wasnt much of a fan of racing games back in those days either.

"The reason modern gamers can't grasp the "greatness" of 98%+ of the old games is because most of them *aren't great*."

You're missing the point; 98% of old games ARE crap, but we dont remember a time based on the vast majority of crap. It was that 2% of greatness that we remember it for.

The same is true today; for every good game there are legions of crappy games, but those arent what we're going to remember in 15-25 years time.

Any time of any entertainment medium is filled with mostly crap; we dont remember the crap though; we remember the good ones.

Kk, I have to go for like 15 minutes, so if I dont respond dont worry; I'm still alive :)

Anyone who thinks that "casuals" are going to ruin the industry, and force developers like Kojima and Bioware to turn out the gaming equivalents of Norbit and Spiderman 3. The notion that these developers are simply chasing paychecks is rediculous. They make games because they love to, not because it helps them pay the bills. Are we going to see more simplified and streamlined games in the future? Probably, but that doesn't mean Dragon Age is going to be the RPG equivalent of Carnival Games. Much like in the film and music industries, just because the mainstream eats up products designed for the lowest common denominator, that doesn't stop great productions from being released.

If anything I would argue "casualization" is a good thing for the industry. Not only will it help fund riskier projects (ie EA can risk losing money on Dragon Age because they'll make it back with Madden) but it will bring more creative talent to the industry. Over the past 8 years or so we've seen little innovation. Just look at CoD 4, not only does it use outdated gameplay elements like trigger points, constantly respawning enemies and invisible barriers, but it plays just like it's granddaddy MoH:AA. Now while I'd say were are starting to see innovation in games like Mass Effect (for its speech engine and cinematic feel), Fable 2 (for its ideas revolving around consequences), Stalker (for its atmosphere) and World in Conflict (for its new take on RTS gameplay), the majority of developers are playing it safe and stifling innovation. By opening up the market to more consumers more people will become interested in pursuing a career in development. If the gaming market was limited to only the hardest of hardcore the good Drs. Zeschuk and Muzyka at Bioware would be making the rounds at a hospital instead of turning out some of the finest RPGs we've ever seen.

[QUOTE="-TheSecondSign-"]

Everyone.

All pretty much every single well known user here ever does is complain about how this genre isn't around anymore and how this genre is now taking over the entire market and all innovation or gameplay or story or fun or art or style or development team is gone.

It bothers the crap out of me.

Fallout 1 and 2 were probably really reall really freaking awesome, but do you have to make an eight paragraph long post about how awesome Fallout is every single time someone brings up the industry?

subrosian

That's actually the one exception to the rule. And I'll simply put it this way - do you ever play a modern game, and just notice things like "say, why aren't there any children?". I mean, it's kind of odd that The Simpsons Game has a more realistic world than Oblivion (children, pregnant women, life cycle, people with jobs).

That's why Fallout gets mentioned. As far as early Final Fantasies go - I've no idea

I consider Oblivion's lack of children perhaps it's least significant problem. When playing that game, my mind is assaulted by too many other questions to think about the lack of children to mow down when I'm angry.

Besides, those Bosmer make great substitutes.

FINAL FANTASY RELICS

People who still think every great Final Fantasy was made before FF7. I don't care how great an early Final Fantasy was back in the day, you can't tell me those outdated NES/SNES systems beat what developers have accomplished with more modern Final Fantasies on the PS1, PS2, and soon the PS3. Yes waitress, please give me the richer story, stunningly beautiful graphics, mind-blowing CGI scenes, and advanced customization of characters over some outdated and simplified NES version.

The__MCP

Have you ever played any early FF games? I was sceptical about them to until I bought the GBA remakes. Those games have amazing stores (except for FFI) and amazing characters (again, except for FFI). I would take FFIV, FFII, and FFVI over FFVII, FFVIII, FFIX, FFX, FFXI, FXII, and FFXIII anyday, no matter how good they are or how good they will be.

[QUOTE="subrosian"][QUOTE="Big_Red_Button"]

You clearly dont (and will never) understand how much it rocked to be an old school gamer.

In order to understand, you have to have played those games back when they came out, and if you didnt, you never will.

The feeling of elation you get from going back to the old Megaman games on the NES can usually beat the fun from the greatest of today's games.

That was when gaming was fresh and original; the NES / SNES era was the peak of gaming, and it will likely never come back to that time.

Nowadays people are babied by games that give you a checkpoint every 10 minutes, that have more flash than substance, that think that more complicated makes better, and that are nowhere near as difficult as classic games. This makes most modern gamers get frustrated very easily by classics.

You will never understand, and there is no way I can convince you.

Edit: Fixed a couple typos

Big_Red_Button

Oh please, I was gaming in the NES / Master System / Arcade era - I had an Apple II and a DOS computer, and seriously - please - don't kid yourself. Modern Castlevanias on the DS are more fun than the old Castlevanias - FF VII and FF VIII were better than FF I - V, Goldeneye and Perfect Dark are nothing more than nostalgia now.

You're confusing nostalgia for greatness - let me tell you - the glitches in Battletoads that make it so co-op play makes it impossible to win - or playing a racing gamer where the other cars on the track have no collision because the system can't handle physics were the highlights of my life.

The reason modern gamers can't grasp the "greatness" of 98%+ of the old games is because most of them *aren't great*. We've got a handful of arcade classics, a dozen games from the 8-bit era, and the one hundred or so "true classics" from the 16-bit era onward (stuff like OOT, Deus Ex, and Fallout 2). And even then, how much of that is approachable? How much of that hasn't been redone, or bested by games created by newer designers facing fewer limitations?

I'm sorry - the grim reality is that the TC is right - a lot of the old stuff is like Citizen Kane - yeah you know it is a "classic", but the only people watching it for fun are people who lived in the era it was released, or a few art students with the hots for Orson Welles (ew).

I've beaten co-op Battletoads with my friends many times... I dont know why you think its impossible. Hard as hell, sure, but not impossible.

And I agree on the example you gave of racers... I wasnt much of a fan of racing games back in those days either.

"The reason modern gamers can't grasp the "greatness" of 98%+ of the old games is because most of them *aren't great*."

You're missing the point; 98% of old games ARE crap, but we dont remember a time based on the vast majority of crap. It was that 2% of greatness that we remember it for.

The same is true today; for every good game there are legions of crappy games, but those arent what we're going to remember in 15-25 years time.

Any time of any entertainment medium is filled with mostly crap; we dont remember the crap though; we remember the good ones.

Kk, I have to go for like 15 minutes, so if I dont respond dont worry; I'm still alive :)

Right, but much of what was "great for its time" is now crap too. I like Halo CE, in fact more than Halo 3 in some ways - but if someone said "which is a better game to own right now - Halo CE or Halo 3?" - there's no question - Halo 3. And in five years? The answer will be a different game, and we'll be wondering why those Halo fanatics keep saying the Halo series is better than the new Awesomo 3000 FPS series.

We can't predict how technological progress will date a game right now - certain genres it is easy - you know FPS will get better because of improving servers, graphics, physics, controls, et cetera. But what about other genres? The "famous" Streets of Rage is an incredibly dull game by modern standards. Even trying to "appreciate it for what it is" is hard.

I mean basically, to make modern gamers who have no nostalgia for a particular game like FF V, Phantasy Star, Streets of Rage, Battletoads, et cetera - you're asking them to say "compare this maybe to a flash minigame - that or you're assigning them a historical reading that the play like a research paper instead of a game.

Who would pick up Everquest now over World of Warcraft? Who would pick up a MMO MUD nowadays? It's a pretty narrow group of people - for most people it's a chore by comparisson.

-

Time just hasn't treated many "great old games" well, and it shows - the more they relied on being "a game of their time", graphics, sound, or control - the worse they have aged. Only the few games based on freedom, story, and arcade-style fun factor remain - the platformers, the best-of RPGs, and a few standout games in other genres - as playable.

I'm telling you - 98% of the games then were crap - and we're left with 2% "good games" - and of that 2%, 98% of those are now crap - so we're down to what? 0.04% - 1 out of 250 old games being maybe playable to a modern gamer? And that is being generous.

The TC is right about false nostalgia -both for persons (Romero, Nolan, Carmack) and games (Doom, Quake, Goldeneye, FF VI, et cetera)

-

BTW - I'm referring to Battletoads on the NES - the Clinger Winger glitch forces the second player to waste all their lives (and thus one continue) before they can move. It makes the game almost impossible to beat (if not impossible) in two-player mode. All other versions of Battletoads are significantly easier than the US NES version.

the new ones are still amazing, but you can't look me in the eye and say that a game like FF12 is BETTER in any way than FF7 or FF8.

If you sat me down right now and asked me Final Fantasy titles I would want to actually sit and play,

They would be FFVI and FFVII.

They may be dated, but they are still better than FFX-FFXII.

[QUOTE="Relys"][QUOTE="dbzfreak"]

This is tough one, but I do have to agree with the Atari founder.

I do run into Zelda relics. People who refuse to move beyond the SNES Zelda games, because they feel they have lost a lot of their touch.

dbzfreak

I think it lost it's touch after OOT.

Tp was superior in every single way though.

[QUOTE="dbzfreak"][QUOTE="Relys"][QUOTE="dbzfreak"]

This is tough one, but I do have to agree with the Atari founder.

I do run into Zelda relics. People who refuse to move beyond the SNES Zelda games, because they feel they have lost a lot of their touch.

Marth6781

I think it lost it's touch after OOT.

Tp was superior in every single way though.

TP was the most boring game I've played this gen

If you sat me down right now and asked me Final Fantasy titles I would want to actually sit and play,

They would be FFVI and FFVII.

They may be dated, but they are still better than FFX-FFXII.

CelineDion

Yeah, but if we were honest about JRPGs, the genre has advanced since then. What we have with Square-Enix is almost a Sega situation - the old Final Fantasies aren't better because of some magic 16-bit era mojo - it's just that SE keeps making the same damn mistakes and refusing to branch out, a bit like Sega making the same flawed 3D Sonic games over, and over again.

[QUOTE="The__MCP"]

[QUOTE="HarlockJC"]Your missing some great games by not playing the old FFs. I am playing FF3 right now on the DS still an amazing game after all this time.Tuvola

I didn't say it wasn't a good game, just the relic fanboys who refuse to believe any FF made after the cartridge days is a great game.

you're a fool who speaks that which he knows nothing about. I can not urge you to play the early final fantasies... 1 2 and 3 (1 4 and 6) as they are above you, if you can, however, disengage yourself from preconceptions about what a game should be... and just take what those games offer you... you'd find out that they are infinitely more enjoyable and exciting than their later followers-on. You also need to grow some experience... which is time.

i hope this post made you feel superior lol:roll:

[QUOTE="CelineDion"]

If you sat me down right now and asked me Final Fantasy titles I would want to actually sit and play,

They would be FFVI and FFVII.

They may be dated, but they are still better than FFX-FFXII.

subrosian

Yeah, but if we were honest about JRPGs, the genre has advanced since then. What we have with Square-Enix is almost a Sega situation - the old Final Fantasies aren't better because of some magic 16-bit era mojo - it's just that SE keeps making the same damn mistakes and refusing to branch out, a bit like Sega making the same flawed 3D Sonic games over, and over again.

what sort of mistakes did SE made actually?

[QUOTE="subrosian"][QUOTE="CelineDion"]

If you sat me down right now and asked me Final Fantasy titles I would want to actually sit and play,

They would be FFVI and FFVII.

They may be dated, but they are still better than FFX-FFXII.

AlbertChai

Yeah, but if we were honest about JRPGs, the genre has advanced since then. What we have with Square-Enix is almost a Sega situation - the old Final Fantasies aren't better because of some magic 16-bit era mojo - it's just that SE keeps making the same damn mistakes and refusing to branch out, a bit like Sega making the same flawed 3D Sonic games over, and over again.

what sort of mistakes did SE made actually?

1. Overly complex, plodding, game-detracting level up system (FF X, XI, and XII). The sphere grid system in X and XII, and the painfully slow leveling in FF XI are simply unacceptable in this day-and-age. The sphere grid system, in particular, losses points for being unintuitive - it essentially requires players to devote time to plotting their development in Excel spreadsheets, instead of enjoying their character growth.

2. Serialization of storyline - the FF7 spinoffs, X-2, FF XIII as a "universe" of games - SE has turned the focus from creating self-contained masterpieces into instead building each numbered Final Fantasy into a complete franchise. The end result hasn't been something that can honestly claim to be on par with where SE stood in the FF6/7/8 era - aka being the industry leader.

The problem is that the spinoff stories are on-par quality wise with say, a long-running anime like Bleach or DBZ. The standalone games, on the other hand, were more like a special series -something more like Cowboy Bebop - you could feel the investment into crafting a solid experience within the one game.

3. Not "getting it". SE doesn't get it - for example - Crystal Chronicles. Gamecube owners wanted *real* Final Fantasy, and SE handed them a gameboy-driven snooze fest, with stupid design concepts (the chalice... oh boy, imagine the fun of carrying around a vase for three hours). Now on the Wii, they're still creating an "intro to JRPGs" game, sure not quite as dumbed down, but it's not XIII either. The only people who know what "Final Fantasy" is on the Wii want a game that is more complex, end of story.

SE doesn't seem to get with the picture though - they were producing a load of crap even back in the day, but modern Final Fantasy just misses the mark, in my opinion, compared to what a world-class company like SE should be achieving.

Nostalgia is definitely an interesting subject.

I think what makes Final Fantasy titles unique in this aspect is that they really haven't changed all that much over time. Sure, the settings change, and the story changes, and the battle system gets tweaked, but the overall design is still really similar. The main difference between FFVI and FFX is the production values. FFXII is a step forward in some ways, but there are a lot of 'cliches' (it's not the word I'm looking for, but it's close) that are continually used.

There are a few titles that if you go back to them, they still feel excellent. Chrono Trigger feels further ahead than a lot of other JRPGs (even recent ones), and that's because it does a lot of things differently than other titles in its genre have. As a result, it stands up pretty well over time. I haven't played Fallout, but it's probably similar because it handles itself in a different way than other WRPGs that would follow it.

Meanwhile, if you take a title like Perfect Dark, it's nearly impossible to go back to after having played a dual-analog shooter like Halo. That doesn't mean it wasn't excellent when it came out, but nowadays, it's simply not very good. I'd expect that to be the case with a lot of 3D platformers from the same era.

Twilight Princess has received a fairly mixed reception in terms of quality, but it was a game that was more expansive in scope in every way than a game like OoT. Does that mean that game design quality has gotten worse over time? Or does it mean that the titles we thought (and still think) were good wouldn't hold up as well as we thought they would if they came out today and nobody had played them?

I personaly think Nintendo fans suffer from this kind of thing the most.

The controller may be radicaly differant but games like Zelda still felt like the same damn thing to me.