# Games aging badly?



## Alolan_Apples (Aug 25, 2015)

Whem someone says that a video game (typically older games) has aged badly, what does that really mean? I seen some people say that Super Mario 64 and Donkey Kong 64 have aged badly, but I don't get what it means. I would also like an explanation of how those two games aged badly, just to help me understand the definition better.


----------



## Solus (Aug 25, 2015)

It just means that the game's graphics, level of detail, gameplay mechanics, or level designs are outdated now because of the hardware limitation during the time or newer titles have replaced the way we play games.

I can't imagine Super Mario 64 aging badly, but I bet some people probably claiming that it is pretty linear, redundant use of stages, and it didn't really have a variety of things. We're just used to open world games, or each objective having their own maps, or another features that older consoles like the n64 couldn't handle.


----------



## Neechan (Aug 26, 2015)

I've recently replayed SM64 (and finished it) and while it may have simplistic shading/shadowing models (something like Super Mario Sunshine is better in appearance, shading and model) 

It’s still a pretty good plat-former for its time and it handles very well (the re-release for DS is horrible as the D-Pad lacks any function of the analog stick, don't know what Nintendo was thinking with this)


----------



## Alolan_Apples (Aug 26, 2015)

Thanks for an explanation on what it means. I know the N64 games, in terms of gameplay and graphics, are outdated, but I still think they were better than the games I see now. Yes, they didn't have good graphics like we see now, as levels/courses were smaller due to the size limits, but I still liked the older games more.


----------



## Alienfish (Aug 26, 2015)

Neechan said:


> I've recently replayed SM64 (and finished it) and while it may have simplistic shading/shadowing models (something like Super Mario Sunshine is better in appearance, shading and model)
> 
> It’s still a pretty good plat-former for its time and it handles very well (the re-release for DS is horrible as the D-Pad lacks any function of the analog stick, don't know what Nintendo was thinking with this)



Yeah the DS version is crappy I agree lol. It's barely playable with a D-pad so yeah that aged badly if they hoped for a good port.


----------



## DJStarstryker (Aug 26, 2015)

I don't think Super Mario 64 has aged badly. 

Some of the PS1-era games have aged pretty badly though. Final Fantasy VII is probably the most notorious example of this. The characters are way too blocky looking. The original Tomb Raider game suffers the same problem.


----------



## Caius (Aug 26, 2015)

DJStarstryker said:


> I don't think Super Mario 64 has aged badly.
> 
> Some of the PS1-era games have aged pretty badly though. Final Fantasy VII is probably the most notorious example of this. The characters are way too blocky looking. The original Tomb Raider game suffers the same problem.



Luckily since it wasn't an action game it's entirely playable. (FF7 that is)

I've recently gone back and tried to beat MGS1 again, man.. I remember that a lot differently. The controls are complete murder. The game wasn't even fun to play through anymore, just a test.


----------



## DarkDesertFox (Aug 26, 2015)

Metal Arms: Glitch in the System - I remember the multiplayer being A LOT more fun than it was when I last played it with my sister. Maybe it's only fun with four people doing local co-op?


----------



## Bowie (Aug 26, 2015)

I'm really getting sick of the idea that a game has to have the latest technology and graphics implemented in order to be good or relevant in the video game industry. If people enjoy a game, it's a good bloody game. Whether it's comparable to the graphics of Mario Kart 8 or not shouldn't matter at all.


----------



## Alienfish (Aug 26, 2015)

Bowie said:


> I'm really getting sick of the idea that a game has to have the latest technology and graphics implemented in order to be good or relevant in the video game industry. If people enjoy a game, it's a good bloody game. Whether it's comparable to the graphics of Mario Kart 8 or not shouldn't matter at all.



Yeah, unless the graphics are completely trash and hinders movement then it's another thing.


----------



## Bowie (Aug 26, 2015)

Moko said:


> Yeah, unless the graphics are completely trash and hinders movement then it's another thing.



Exactly.


----------



## Alienfish (Aug 26, 2015)

Yeah I've played a few of those and they were just ech...


----------



## DarkDesertFox (Aug 26, 2015)

Bowie said:


> I'm really getting sick of the idea that a game has to have the latest technology and graphics implemented in order to be good or relevant in the video game industry. If people enjoy a game, it's a good bloody game. Whether it's comparable to the graphics of Mario Kart 8 or not shouldn't matter at all.



I agree. I think people are getting way too picky about the graphics and fps these days. Personally, I think older games with their graphics have a classic feel to it when you play it again. I feel like more people are starting to bag on some classic games instead of admire them.


----------



## Alienfish (Aug 26, 2015)

DarkDesertFox said:


> I agree. I think people are getting way too picky about the graphics and fps these days. Personally, I think older games with their graphics have a classic feel to it when you play it again. I feel like more people are starting to bag on some classic games instead of admire them.



Yeah.. also while some older games might have the problem there are a lot of newer games that got the graphics problems so you can't control as you should. It's all about how the game is made.

Sure some older games are not meant to be played on newer consoles/computer unless people port it really well, but tbh if a game is good as it was no need to port and destroy it further.


----------



## Alolan_Apples (Aug 26, 2015)

DJStarstryker said:


> I don't think Super Mario 64 has aged badly.
> 
> Some of the PS1-era games have aged pretty badly though. Final Fantasy VII is probably the most notorious example of this. The characters are way too blocky looking. The original Tomb Raider game suffers the same problem.



I know another good example. Gex. It was fun as a kid, and I remembered that going though the first stage in Toon TV took forever. A lot of the stages were challenging. Going back to it, I began to realize that Gex wasn't as good as it once was. All of Toon TV was too easy, and the graphics looked worse. It also feels like nothing as soon as you get 30 collectables of one kind.

I never had a PS1, but I did download Gex 2 and Gex 3 to my PS3 from the PSN, and it was the PS1 version (which was not the same version I had as a kid).



Bowie said:


> I'm really getting sick of the idea that a game has to have the latest technology and graphics implemented in order to be good or relevant in the video game industry. If people enjoy a game, it's a good bloody game. Whether it's comparable to the graphics of Mario Kart 8 or not shouldn't matter at all.



Exactly. Yeah, SM64 and Mario Kart 64 had terrible graphics, but compare these games from previous times to games today. The difference was that those games were more memorable. Games these days are primarily rated M (even child gamers prefer M games more), connect to the internet, have co-op multiplayer and less family-friendly multiplayer, and/or first person shooters. If they don't fall under any of these categories, then they are usually sports games for a specific season. I took a look at the Xbox 360 library, and a good deal of the E games are sports. Thankfully, we have some exceptions (like this upcoming Animal Crossing spin-off), but I hear more about the others than I hear about these games. Honestly, I prefer the remakes of older games (like Mario Kart or Smash) than first person shooters or GTA.



DarkDesertFox said:


> I agree. I think people are getting way too picky about the graphics and fps these days. Personally, I think older games with their graphics have a classic feel to it when you play it again. I feel like more people are starting to bag on some classic games instead of admire them.



Here are my preferences about games:

3D Platformers, Kids & Family, Management (you know, the Tycoon games), and Arcade >Shooters
Offline Multiplayer > Online Multiplayer
E Games (6+) > M Games (17+)
Third person > First person

But it doesn't mean older games are any better for being older. It's all about how enjoyable they were at the time (I'm not sure how ti say it). DK64 is still fun to play these days, and so is SM64. Pokemon Stadium would have to be my best example about my comparisons of multiplayer games.


----------



## Tao (Aug 26, 2015)

From the N64 games I've replayed more recently, most of them as still fine in terms of gameplay. They're just really hard to look at.

PS1 games I've found to age the worst overall. Visually they pretty much all look like arse, even worse than the N64 in my opinion. The faster paced 'actiony' games are mostly nigh unplayable by today's standards from gameplay alone, especially those released earlier in the PS1's life before the Duelshock was released. Games that still used sprites like Megaman X4 and Tombai are still fantastic today, and turn based RPG's at least still play well.

That generation of consoles was awesome at the time, but they definitely have the most issuess in retrospect.




Caius said:


> I've recently gone back and tried to beat MGS1 again, man.. I remember that a lot differently. The controls are complete murder. The game wasn't even fun to play through anymore, just a test.



Yea, I found it somewhat awkward when I replayed it, though it was at least still acceptable enough for me to reach the end. I think the only part of MGS 1 that I found totally unplayable when I replayed it was the Sniper Wolf battle. Those first person d-pad controls are hideous.


----------



## That Zephyr Guy (Aug 26, 2015)

To be entirely honest I don't think I ever hear anybody complain about graphics when it comes to games even remotely.

In fact I hear more of the people who complain about said annoyance. It might have been a big issue a few years ago but it's probably sunk in nowadays that prettier doesn't always equate to better quality.

I will say though - excellent graphics do make for a more _relaxing_ game experience. There's something very calming about it, but maybe that's the fact that I've only recently gotten access to it after being denied it for so long.

And yet I still no life on Diablo II. The dream.


----------



## Acruoxil (Aug 26, 2015)

The 6th Gen Grand Theft Auto games: GTA III, Vice City, San Andreas ;-;


----------



## Astro Cake (Aug 27, 2015)

Early 3D games' controls can feel wonky or just plain bad compared to current day 3D games' controls. Standards have changed drastically, after all.


----------



## Stalfos (Aug 27, 2015)

The first Starfox-game. It's more or less unplayable today. >.<


----------



## Caius (Aug 29, 2015)

Astro Cake said:


> Early 3D games' controls can feel wonky or just plain bad compared to current day 3D games' controls. Standards have changed drastically, after all.



This is true, yeah. Any game that utilizes shoulder buttons for camera flexibility and control these days instantly gets me irritated. 



Dilute said:


> The 6th Gen Grand Theft Auto games: GTA III, Vice City, San Andreas ;-;



I ended up buying the collection on PC so I could mod it and make the titles playable again. I continually wonder how I played all of them years ago.


----------



## Acruoxil (Aug 29, 2015)

I still play Vice City and SA time to time. I've invested 2000+ hours in the latter. Its that good.


----------



## Caius (Aug 29, 2015)

Dilute said:


> I still play Vice City and SA time to time. I've invested 2000+ hours in the latter. Its that good.



I do as well. I enjoy stealing a bus, grabbing 7 homies and taking them on Vacation up a mountain.. then flooring it off the side. Good times.


----------



## Alolan_Apples (Aug 29, 2015)

I could see why some if you don't think a few N64 games aged badly while saying the PS1 games did. Yes, the graphics don't match today's standard, but it's possibly because this is a Nintendo site, as I wouldn't be surprised to see pro-Nintendo bias, but it's true that the graphics and gameplay is outdated.

I think Super Mario 64, Donkey Kong 64, and a few N64 classics aged pretty well. Even as we move on, the older games still had some charm.

This may not be on-topic, but I had some friends who thought that Mario Kart 64 was better than the newer versions because of how simple it was and less complicated.


----------



## ChaosEmperor1988 (Aug 29, 2015)

when i talk about how well a game has aged, i always compare how fun a game was when it come out or when you first played it and if it still provides that level of enjoyment as well as how earlier game in a series compare to newer entires and if changes made make the experience overall better or worse (for example comparing gen 1 of pokemon to gen 6 or comparing mario 64 to mario galaxy). i feel thats the fairest comparison; comparing for example mario to GTA is unfair as theyre 2 diffrent genres with 2 difrent gameplay styles aimed at 2 diffrent audiences. even comparing 2 franchises of the same genre (final fantasy and persona for example) doesnt seem right as they'll have some diffrence to set it apart from other games in a genre.

comparing graphics and saying thats why it hasnt aged well is a copout; of course a game made in 1985 or 1995 isnt gonna look as good as a game made in 2015, and games made now will look like rubbish compared to what we'll likely be playing in 2035. yes final fantasy 7 for example is blocky but that was squares first attempt at a 3D FF game so of course its not gonna look awesome. likewise with mario 64/ocarina of time/megaman legends and really any game that is a franchises first leap to 3D.


----------



## Sansa (Sep 24, 2015)

I think it's really sad when I hear that a game has "aged badly."  

There are some really wonderful games from the 90's that were immensely challenging, even by today's standards, yet don't entirely live on aside from a cult following because the graphics aren't up to the standards of today.  Books and movies live on even if they're from another decade, but somehow games haven't quite found a "classic" genre (aside from big names which are still made today).   

Myst and Riven are some of the most challenging and beautiful games I have ever played, and even though the graphics are a tad dated, they still bring me into another world like few other games have been able to do so.  Both of these games are super cheap on GOG and Steam, so if anyone is looking for a great "vintage" game, they are definitely worth the small investment!


----------



## lars708 (Sep 24, 2015)

Honestly, Super Mario 64 and Donkey Kong 64 did not age "bad", i still have fun playing them to this date! The N64 game which i think has aged HORRIBLY is Mario Kart 64, it is just outdated, ugly, and the mechanics suck...


----------



## LambdaDelta (Sep 24, 2015)

Not sure about other people's perceptions, but I base this strictly on the gameplay itself. How it controls, fluidity, level design, etc in relation to how gaming has changed since then.

And even me saying it hasn't aged well doesn't necessarily mean its bad, but just that it has clear problems to me looking back on it. Especially problems that people were far more lenient on at the time for one reason or another, but would be considered faults in this day and age.

Like I really don't think Mario 64 has aged well (though it hasn't aged terribly either), but I still consider it to be a solidly fun game despite that. Just not as solid as it's made out to be.


----------



## Alienfish (Sep 24, 2015)

The first PSO game. Mostly because the horrible camera and the GCN controls were clunky asf.

It is a good game but I'd rather play it on like Dreamcast or the 2nd one.


----------



## Tao (Sep 24, 2015)

Sansa said:


> I think it's really sad when I hear that a game has "aged badly."
> 
> There are some really wonderful games from the 90's that were immensely challenging, even by today's standards, yet don't entirely live on aside from a cult following because the graphics aren't up to the standards of today.  Books and movies live on even if they're from another decade, but somehow games haven't quite found a "classic" genre (aside from big names which are still made today).



Graphics aren't the only thing that people are talking about on the subject of how well a game has aged. In fact, graphics are probably the least important thing, though some games have still aged worse than others visually. 


There's also game mechanics that can be wonky, clunky, not work 100%, hard to understand/use or just plain bad. Or controls could be awful and dated, which can easily stop me wanting to play something since I'm going to have to deal with bad controls for the duration. 

Some of this stuff we overlooked at the time for whatever reason, usually because at the time these things were still somewhat groundbreaking with nothing better to compare them to. In 2015 though when we've seen countless other games do those things so much better, it can be hard to go back to something like Goldeneye and enjoy the dated crappy FPS controls that were amazing at the time.


----------



## Micah (Sep 24, 2015)

Play the original Dragon Age or Mass Effect, then play their later sequels. That's a good example of games aging poorly.

Or play Fallout 3 and look at the Fallout 4 gameplay videos. It's a night and day difference between graphics, movement, AI, and other things.


----------



## Jawile (Sep 24, 2015)

Bowie said:


> I'm really getting sick of the idea that a game has to have the latest technology and graphics implemented in order to be good or relevant in the video game industry. If people enjoy a game, it's a good bloody game. Whether it's comparable to the graphics of Mario Kart 8 or not shouldn't matter at all.



Outdated graphics and technology doesnt define a game aging badly, however; games like Grim Fandango and Fallout 1/2 are games that have low quality graphics and do not use the newest technology yet they are hailed as some of the best games ever made.


----------



## Ramza (Sep 24, 2015)

Next week when Mega Man Legends is released on PSN, everyone is going to realize how badly it aged.


----------



## lars708 (Sep 26, 2015)

Ramza said:


> Next week when Mega Man Legends is released on PSN, everyone is going to realize how badly it aged.



Lmao so true, i am going to laugh so hard when i see the reactions!


----------

