Why classic gaming?

[Flam]

Why do people choose classic gaming over modern gaming? I wouldn’t consider myself a “gamer”, I play my NES when I have 15-20 min. to kill because it has nostalgic value and is pretty simple to control (ie only has two buttons). However, it seems that if I was more involved in gaming I’d be playing the new systems because the graphics are better and the games seems more complex, plus you can interact with others on a greater level. So why do people prefer older systems over the new? The Atari was my first system and I can’t for the life of me figure out why people find those games fun at all.

[Bojay1997]

Why do people choose classic gaming over modern gaming? I wouldn’t consider myself a “gamer”, I play my NES when I have 15-20 min. to kill because it has nostalgic value and is pretty simple to control (ie only has two buttons). However, it seems that if I was more involved in gaming I’d be playing the new systems because the graphics are better and the games seems more complex, plus you can interact with others on a greater level. So why do people prefer older systems over the new? The Atari was my first system and I can’t for the life of me figure out why people find those games fun at all.

Why do trolls bother to register and post here on such a regular basis?

[Lady Jaye]

For the pre-NES games: it was the simplicity of the games that was attractive. You could play short sessions at a time and be done with it. That simplicity is also what makes flash games so popular.

Classic gameplay remains playable gameplay after all these years. That's why people still play Pac-Man, Galaga, Donkey Kong. And in later years, a game like Zelda and Final Fantasy may seem simple on the surface, but they offer a level of challenge that's quite high (try playing the Zelda games on NES for the first time ever without relying on any walkthrough of any kind, and you'll likely to spend quite a bit of time wandering around).

There are also great recent games, but most of them require a much higher time commitment than older games, which is fine when you're young and have much free time, but much more difficult to manage as you grow older. Of course, it's not impossible to finish those long games too, but it may take weeks, if not months if one leads a busy life.

[peter_gunz]

It's pretty simple for me. I hate the way games control today, I don't like 3-D for the most part although there are exceptions and FPS games IMO suck. I like 2-D fighters and side scrolling, the challenge is greater. If you play games nowadays you'll find that initially beating the game is easy, but now you have to unlock achievements for there to be any replay value. Take away online gaming and the fun factor for most games drops considerably IMO.

Personally, I think gaming has gotten away from the big picture of what a game should be and instead focused on details. The details do improve games, but if a game relies on gimmicks to be popular, what does that say about the quality of the maker?

One example of what I consider to be straight up laziness is EA Sports and the Madden franchise. Ever since they got the exclusive NFL rights, the games have been nothing more than a $59.99 updated roster w/1 or 2 new features/controls. If it weren't for playing online and the various tournaments one could win on top of the exclusivity rights, this franchise would be in the toilet by now. It's only because no one else can make a game w/active NFL teams/rosters on it that people even buy this thing.

I would say even my beloved Street Fighter series fell into this group, even before modern gaming. All they do is update games and for the most part keep the fighting system and mechanics the same. SNK didn't do this, but alas since they are seen as SF clones, it doesn't matter. But take for instance the Samurai Shodown series. That series has evolved BIG time from its original inception. Many think 2 is the best, but I actually like 3 and 4 for the increase in strategy that they bring out. Fatal Fury was another franchise that looks and plays completely different from the original titles because SNK had the balls to experiment and try new things. Even Mortal Kombat (not SNK, but still a fighting title) has tried new things. Some sucked, some were great. But SF for all intents and purposes is still the same damn game it was in 1990 with slightly a little more speed and maybe 1 or 2 new features that they didn't even invent on their own, lol (super combo was an SNK innovation). Granted SF is no longer the horrible Fighting Street, but SF IV is pretty much SF II. Most of the same tricks still work (as evidenced in tournaments where the same guys always win because the same tricks they used 20 years ago work today) and even some of the same storylines are still in the game, lmao.

[TurboGenesis]

I play these games because of their focus on score play… these games may be "simple" but the fun is found in playing and improving my score. I always can do better… many games of the pre-crash era are fun quick play games and I can enjoy a session of under an hour and work on my score. Todays games are more concerned with walking around and shooting crap and killing other players. The only stat is how many times you kill another man… this also leads to people playing online and talking mean, degrading garbage to other players and I don't enjoy to be made fun of when I am playing a game trying to enjoy myself and unwind from a long days work…
Sure, there are some modern game play that maintain the classic focus of score play, and I do enjoy to play those titles, but my time these days is spent playing on my Atari 5200, Colecovision, and Vectrex…

[eskobar]

I don't ....


I was fortunate enough to enjoy gaming since the Atari days and I have always gone with the current systems when I have time to play.

No video game era has dissapointed me, classic gaming is good when you didn't have the time to play when the games originally came out .... but modern gaming is better for me, there are many good games and a few brilliant ones too.

[Aussie2B]

A good game is a good game. It doesn't matter if it was released 30 days ago or 30 years ago.

[swlovinist]

Easy one for me. I grew up with the classic systems and have countess positive memories attached to them. You didnt need to wait for loading screen. You didnt need the internet. You didnt need to have to worry about game level addon extras that would cost extra. It was a more simple time to play and enjoy games with friends. In a way I miss the days in which innovative games were not a rare thing.

[7th lutz]

Classic games for me actually has genres that I enjoy playing and I am not a graphics whore either.

shoot'em ups don't show up on modern game consoles a lot like they used to. I grew playing games like Galaga, Demon Attack, Astroblast, River Raid,phoenix, and Xevious as examples of shooters that I grew up with for the Atari 2600 or Atari 7800.

I don't care what generation a good game came from, as long its fun, I play it.

[Flam]

thanks for the responses. it seems like your reasons for playing the classics are the same as mine. I ask because I have not played many new generation games, so I have no basis to support my opinion that classis games are better. I can honestly say that I've never played an X-Box or a PS3, and I've only played my nephews Wii a handful of times. I just remember the excitement when NES was in it's prime and rushing to Toys-R-Us to get new games that would come out.

[kupomogli]

This gen most developers feel the need to pump nothing but graphics into the game and call it a day. Gameplay is usually an afterthought.

Classic doesn't matter to me though as long as the game is good, though.

[portnoyd]

This gen most developers feel the need to pump nothing but graphics into the game and call it a day. Gameplay is usually an afterthought.

Classic doesn't matter to me though as long as the game is good, though.

Why do trolls bother to register and post here on such a regular basis?

Hypocrite trifecta.

[Edmond Dantes]

Because classic gaming is just better. Just like classic cartoons are better, classic comics are better, classic novels are better, classic anime is better, classic Coke is better, and classic sex is better.

It's never too late to go classic!

[chrisballer]

A good game is a good game. It doesn't matter if it was released 30 days ago or 30 years ago.

My thoughts exactly. I find both classic and modern games to be very fun. For me personally, I enjoy games ten times more when playing or competing with others. New games are great to play online with friends and old games are fun to compete for high scores. Also, time and patience is a factor as well. I get bored easy with many newer games, because they are too long to keep me interested.

[Orion Pimpdaddy]

I enjoy classic games because they are different (not better) than what's being offered today.

[jammajup]

I am 90% a retro gamer so i do play the odd modern 1st person shooter (like Crisis at the moment) but really i am not impressed with the variety of games being released.There seem to be even fewer game genres than there was in the 16bit era-okay so technology improvements mean that 1st/3rd person games are now quite incredible and are my favourite but i do not want to play them for ever so i flip-flopped from a 10% retro gamer to a 10% modern gamer in a matter of months and have never looked back.
I have descovered gems on other classic console/computer systems that i had missed and it is going to take me a hell of a long time to exhaust a 30 year back catalogue

[Bojay1997]

Hypocrite trifecta.

Oh, I get what you did there, you're saying you're the third part of the trifecta. Very clever. I'm so happy to be on the same site as such a brilliant and witty individual as yourself.

[Kyle15]

A good game is a good game. It doesn't matter if it was released 30 days ago or 30 years ago.

Good lord, this. This, this, this, this.

I'm so sick of the mentality people have over games "aging." It's as if they're obligated to automatically disown games after so many years have passed. I'm into gaming for what it has to offer, past and present. Also, good graphics are good graphics. They can be 2D or 3D and it doesn't really matter.

[369WIERDO369]

Why classic gaming?
Let's face it...Sonic Adventure was alright. Sonic '06 wasn't bad. Sonic Unleashed was playable.
But Sonic is about speed, speed, speed. And no game yet has captured that, IMO, as well as the original 8- and 16-bit games.
Mario, too, in my opinion, has only gotten worse over the years. I mean, '64 and Sunshine were great games, but who can honestly say they're better platformers than the original NES games?
To me, it seems as if with modern games, developers are concerned about making the games LOOK good. But back then, when games weren't gonna look good no matter what, the devs put more focus on making them really fun.
And you can't forget the nostalgia factor. If you were to take a look at my gaming "wish list," you'd find a heckload of games that I played as a child but never got around to owning, or games I owned but got rid of.

But to each his own I suppose

[Flam]

I guess I thought jsut because the games were newer they were more complex.