classics on this gen

[rscaramelo]

I was wondering why so many classic titles from past generation consoles flop on current generation consoles? Is it that they really aren't good or is it the nostalgia/romantic factor?

I've been a gamer since the late 70's/early 80's. I stopped buying anything from 95-01 and just stuck with my Genny. Then I bought the original XBox. I've just started collecting some retro games that I missed in the 90's, targeting "classics".

For example Jet Set Radio, Shenmue, Crazy Taxi and Soul Calibur on Dreamcast are held up as "classics". They're just run of the mill games on XBox.

thanks

RC

[GillianSeed]

For example Jet Set Radio, Shenmue, Crazy Taxi and Soul Calibur on Dreamcast are held up as "classics". They're just run of the mill games on XBox.

Part of what made Soulcaliber a classic was the fact that it was unique for its time, we'd never seen anything like it on a home system -- the graphics, the presentation, the music, the whole package raised the bar for console translations of arcade fighters. It was the Dreamcast's Halo.

By the time the Xbox rolled around, it was just one of many titles and Dead or Alive became the featured fighting game for that console.

The fact that it went multiplatform probably hurt it a bit too in that department -- every Dreamcast zealot could point to SC as a shining example of what the system could do. When everyone could play it, it lost a bit of that exclusive mystique.

[cyberfluxor]

It might be so they can continue to make some money off of it. Whenever a new game comes out that's in a series, usually fans of the new will become interested in the old and check them out. If the previous titles were on older generations then there's no profit to be made from that demand. I'm sure some game companies look at eBay and wonder around used games stores and think: "Wow, with that demand in price we may be able to rerelease it," but then again I don't work for a game company so I can't be sure. I certainly buy the "collections" for newer systems from time to time even when I own most of them on their original platforms.

[Superman]

I think classic games on current generation systems fail because there isn't that much of a market for them.

One reason is a game is outdated compared to what the current systems can do. Although, it may be a good game, a large portion of game buyers may not be familiar with the game and don't want to play a 'remake' or port of an old game, yet pay current game prices.

The other reason is, those who might be interested in a game already have it on the original system. Again, they don't want to pay current game prices for an older game and one which they already have.

I think cyberfluxor is right. It seems like the game companies see enough of a market to make some money and that is why the games are released.

[rscaramelo]

I think classic games on current generation systems fail because there isn't that much of a market for them.

One reason is a game is outdated compared to what the current systems can do. Although, it may be a good game, a large portion of game buyers may not be familiar with the game and don't want to play a 'remake' or port of an old game, yet pay current game prices.

The other reason is, those who might be interested in a game already have it on the original system. Again, they don't want to pay current game prices for an older game and one which they already have.

I think cyberfluxor is right. It seems like the game companies see enough of a market to make some money and that is why the games are released.


Well look at Shenmue. It's held up as one of the top DC games. Shenmue 2 on XBox can be had for 5 bucks at Gamestop and isn't on any best of list. Maybe games are like movies - sequels suck.

RC

[Spartacus]

I thought these classics got some great updates...
Panzer Dragoon Orta
Ninja Gaiden
Sid Meier's Pirates!
Prince of Persia
Oddworld

Star Wars improved with KTOR and Battlefront.

Silent Hill's have been a little bit up and down, but they're keeping me interested as they come out.

Resident Evil isn't on the Xbox, but took a nice step up with RE4.

[theshizzle3000]

I was wondering why so many classic titles from past generation consoles flop on current generation consoles? Is it that they really aren't good or is it the nostalgia/romantic factor?

I've been a gamer since the late 70's/early 80's. I stopped buying anything from 95-01 and just stuck with my Genny. Then I bought the original XBox. I've just started collecting some retro games that I missed in the 90's, targeting "classics".

For example Jet Set Radio, Shenmue, Crazy Taxi and Soul Calibur on Dreamcast are held up as "classics". They're just run of the mill games on XBox.

thanks

RC

The games that are re-released hardly have any differences and therefore the people feel as though they are buying the same game. I wish this would only happen with Marvel vs. Capcom 2 then I would be a made man.

[GillianSeed]

Well look at Shenmue. It's held up as one of the top DC games. Shenmue 2 on XBox can be had for 5 bucks at Gamestop and isn't on any best of list. Maybe games are like movies - sequels suck.

It's not necessarily that sequels suck -- I think most folks would rate Resident Evil 4 far above the original, for example, and it was a commercial success as well.

But if the sequel simply offers more of the same, it's harder to stand out from the crowd the way the original did. (in part because several me-too games often flood the market)

In the case of Shenmue 2, I would imagine that part of the problem was the fact that many people didn't own a Dreamcast -- and thus never played the first installment. It's a story-driven game, and nobody likes coming in on the middle of a story.

[Kitsune Sniper]

It's not necessarily that sequels suck -- I think most folks would rate Resident Evil 4 far above the original, for example, and it was a commercial success as well.

But if the sequel simply offers more of the same, it's harder to stand out from the crowd the way the original did. (in part because several me-too games often flood the market)

In the case of Shenmue 2, I would imagine that part of the problem was the fact that many people didn't own a Dreamcast -- and thus never played the first installment. It's a story-driven game, and nobody likes coming in on the middle of a story.

But XBox owners got the entire story from Shenmue 1 on a DVD, so...

[GillianSeed]

But XBox owners got the entire story from Shenmue 1 on a DVD, so...

Yep, I have that disc -- but there's not the same level of attachment and name recognition that you would have gotten from playing through the first game.

People are drooling over God of War II because plenty of people have played the game, they know what to expect and they want more Kratos. If you had to watch a feature length movie to catch up, to get the most out of the game, interest wouldn't be running nearly as high. People buy games to play games.

[exit]

But XBox owners got the entire story from Shenmue 1 on a DVD, so...

For a story driven game, that wouldn't be the same at all. It's like trying to watch the last installment of a movie, relying only on a 2 minute re-cap of the others as a reference on what's going on.

[Sweater Fish Deluxe]

One thing is that the audience is different for different systems.

This goes without saying when you're talking about two systems like, say, the Genesis and the Gamecube which are separated by 10 years of history and change in society and technology. The people who played and enjoyed classic games on the Genesis are not the same people--not even the same *KIND* of people in many essential ways--who play and enjoy games on the Gamecube and decide which ones will be classic for that system.

I think the same even applies to systems like the Dreamcast and Xbox that were released more or less in the same generation. The Dreamcast's audience, its fans, the people who decided that games like Crazy Taxi or Shenmue were classics on that system are different from the people that deicide which Xbox games are classics. Different tastes, different expectations, different zeitgeist.


...word is bondage...

[Steve W]

Phantasy Star Online was a great Dreamcast game, but when it was brought over to the Xbox and GameCube, it didn't seem like many were interested. For one thing, the GC version needed a broadband adapter since it was the only online game ever made for the 'Cube, and you had to buy extra gear just to play it. The Xbox version forced you to get Xbox Live, even though you may never have had any intention of ever playing the game online (like me). And nowadays I can go into a local Fry's Electronics and buy PSO for the Xbox for less than $4 new. At least the Xbox didn't get saddled with the third installment, that awful card battle bastardization of PSO, like the GameCube did.

[j_factor]

When Dreamcast died, the market for a certain type of game died with it. I think Shenmue II, PSO Ep. 1&2, PDO, Crazy Taxi 3, JSRF, and so on would've sold better on DC.

[PSXferrari]

It's really simple. We can do a lot of analysis here and pick apart all the dozens and dozens of factors that cause this effect, but there is ONLY TWO IMPORTANT REASONS that override all others-- the first, let's face it, most games do not age gracefully. Video games are the only art form that comes to mind for me that degrades so quickly in comparison to all others (books, movies, music, etc). As games just get better and better, what was once revolutionary is now outdated and boring. As classic gamers, reflect on the games in your collection-- particularly the ones considered excellent when released. Few are so "timeless" as to still be A+ games when compared to the games of today (yes, it may take putting a lot of nostalgia and old-school bias behind you too really come to this conclusion). But come on-- Soul Calibur is no longer the miles-above-the-rest Best Fighting Game of All Time it once was. Doom and Wolfenstein 3D, the standards for FPS, are now completely messy compared to today's FPS. We may disagree from game to game, but overall you gotta realize that games degrade quickly as new steps are made. It's weird to think, but it won't be too long before games like Gears of War and God of War II suffer similar fates. Just play an old game on Xbox Live Arcade or the Wii VC-- how much time do you really invest in a remake you download? Certainly not as much as if you had played it when it got released 10 years ago.

Oh, and the 2nd reason-- casual gamers are idiots! Yes, though the majority of people on these boards are hardcore gamers, the vast majority of the market is casual gamers (just check out sales for NBA Live 07 if you need proof). While most games do degrade, there are some timeless classic that will endure forever as pure masterpieces (Super Metroid, Final Fantasy VI, Super Mario Bros 3, Pac-Man, etc). The problem? Only hardcore gamers can appreciate these-- casual gamers scuff at them for their ugly graphics and WHAT?? No Blo0d???? battles. Another post on here asks "What happened to Alex Kidd?" Well, he was killed by the retardedness of casual gamers-- and companies like Sega know that trying to bring characters like that back is just asking for failure. Hardcore gamers play forever-- casual gamers grow up and move on to boring things, like raising a nice family and getting a good paying job and going outside in the sun. Because the casual gamer market is constantly being replaced, you can't sell them things they've never heard of.

BTW rscaramelo, I must note that you picked just about the worst possible stretch to stop collecting games. Between the PlayStation and Dreamcast (and far less significantly, the Saturn and N64), you missed possibly the best era in terms of the quality of games produced.

[Poofta!]

I was wondering why so many classic titles from past generation consoles flop on current generation consoles? Is it that they really aren't good or is it the nostalgia/romantic factor?

I've been a gamer since the late 70's/early 80's. I stopped buying anything from 95-01 and just stuck with my Genny. Then I bought the original XBox. I've just started collecting some retro games that I missed in the 90's, targeting "classics".

For example Jet Set Radio, Shenmue, Crazy Taxi and Soul Calibur on Dreamcast are held up as "classics". They're just run of the mill games on XBox.

thanks

RC



prolly cause back then they were the best a system could offer, and during the following gen, everything gets stepped up a few notches so now they just arent that appealing. of course some games stand the test of time no matter what console theyre on (for me, mario world is one of them, but there are plenty others) all the DC games youve listed, on the xbox just seem like budget titles when there so many better games available.

[GillianSeed]

Oh, and the 2nd reason-- casual gamers are idiots! Yes, though the majority of people on these boards are hardcore gamers, the vast majority of the market is casual gamers (just check out sales for NBA Live 07 if you need proof). While most games do degrade, there are some timeless classic that will endure forever as pure masterpieces (Super Metroid, Final Fantasy VI, Super Mario Bros 3, Pac-Man, etc). The problem? Only hardcore gamers can appreciate these-- casual gamers scuff at them for their ugly graphics and WHAT?? No Blo0d???? battles.

Well then how do you explain the fact that, by the end of January, they had sold 1.5 million VC games on a system aimed at casual gamers? To my mind, it's the hardcore gamer that's obsessed with blood and polygons counts.

[PSXferrari]

Well then how do you explain the fact that, by the end of January, they had sold 1.5 million VC games on a system aimed at casual gamers? To my mind, it's the hardcore gamer that's obsessed with blood and polygons counts.

Cuz they cost closer to $5 than $50. The VC and Xbox Live are more like going to arcade than actually investing money in a retail game. When games like the TMNT Arcade game get rereleased for the Xbox Live arcade game, hardcore gamers who remember it from the arcades get excited and casual gamers probably get even more excited because to them it's like a brand new game (just check out the Modern Gaming forum if you need proof). Sure, people will pay $5 for them, but do you think anyone is fooled into thinking they're worth much more than that (if they sold for $20 would they have 1.5 million games?). If they rereleased that game in stores for $50, or even budget priced at $20, would anyone care? No, because it's not worth it anymore; not even close. I remember saving up birthday money to buy that for $60 when it came out on the NES....