Genres that don't age well

[Half Japanese]

I was thinking the other day about how many genres generally don't hold up to the test of time (i.e. become worse as the years pass). Here are my thoughts on some genres that tend to lose their luster over the years, feel free to add your own:

Racing games - by this I'm talking about the NES/SNES games that were nothing more than sitting still in front of a moving foreground (you know the type)

3D games - by this I mean early ps1/saturn games that just look like arse by today's standards and don't hold up terribly well overall

Fighting Games - sure some are still great, but how many people still play a lot of very early fighting games on a regular basis?



On the other side of the coin, you have many genres that tend to age well and in some cases get even better with time:

Platformers - there is NOTHING like a good 2d platformer

RPGs - many people still love these things after many years (I still can't stand them )

Sports - most old sports games are better than their modern incarnations imo. You can't beat games like Tecmo Bowl, Baseball Stars or Nintendo World Cup. You just can't.


What are your thoughts on this topic?

[josekortez]

I think fighting games are long-term games because they have a lot of replay value if you mean later 2D series like Street Fighter, Mortal Kombat, and King of the Fighters, and 3Ds like DOA, Tekken, and Virtua Fighter. If you just have a few minutes to kill, you can always play a few rounds and stop. A few beat-em-ups fall into this category, but not many...

Puzzle games stand the test of time for the same. Tetris, Puyo, and Tetris Attack are great examples of games like this. Most puzzle games aren't graphics-intensive, but they are simple and addictive...

First-person shooters and shmups don't lose their luster because they're addictive, allowing you to rank up more frags or points. Even if you learn all the enemy patterns on either, those games are great stress relievers...

For me, adventure games and platformers get old quickly because once they're beaten, you don't want to replay them. Even if you don't beat them, they're sometimes too frustrating to return to. Same with most RPGS (of course, I don't include Harvest Moon in this group). And the appeal of most sports games doesn't last more than a season...

Oh, and I recently picked up Jumping Flash 2, and it wowed me more than the first time I saw Super Mario 64...still, I think it's just the resolution of everything post-Dreamcast...Dreamcast makes most systems before it look kind of crappy by comparison.

[hydr0x]

what? i totally disagree with your 3 genres here, i still like those games a lot

[omnedon]

I think, tech wise, racing games do suffer over time. That may be diminishing, as time goes on, since 3D came along. I see the advent of 3D being particularly kind to racing games. Since Virtua Racing, it's hard to go back to any kind of spite based racer, for me anyway. It's about sense of speed, and it was a sea change when 3D came along for this genre.

[Flack]

For those who missed it, here is a link to Gamespy's list of "top 10 dead genres". Good stuff.

http://www.gamespy.com/top10/march03/genres/

Flack

[Jorpho]

How about button-mashing sports games? Or sports games in general? (After all, who plays NHL '95 when they can play NHL 2k3?)
________
Gm Foods

[TRM]

I disagree with the three genres as well. Micro Machines on the NES has held up pretty damn well. On another note, I was playing the original Rad Racer the other day, and I played it for hours on end. To think I didn't even like the game too much as a kid.

[IntvGene]

Really, I think that it depends how far back you are willing to go. Sure, everyone enjoys Baseball Stars and Tecmo Bowl. But, who really plays Atari Football anymore? Or the original Baseball?

Fighting Games: I think that the old ones are just as much fun as the new ones. Sure, there are flashy 3-d graphics for all the new ones, but I still prefer the 2-d ones like Samurai Shodown or Vampire Savior, or even SF. Going all the way back, I still play games like Karateka, and Karate Champ with friends. Can't say that Urban Champion was ever fun though...

I know we've talked about this before, but better graphics don't mean a better game. But, there are some genres, like Sports, where the newer consoles can do more to emulate the real game. And, in sports, playing something as close to the real thing is fairly important. Puzzle, Fighting games, platformers are fun for just what they are. The newer ones look better, but don't play tons better most of the time. More buttons and combos do not equal better game.

[The Unknown Gamer]

You should catch the lastest episode of Judgement Day on G4TV. The two hosts almost got in to fight over this very subject. They were reviewing Capcom vs SNK EO for the XBOX. Which is basically a 2-D fighters over a 3-D background. Like they said you either love this genre or your gonna hate it. For that is what I am seeing here. Me I am staying neutral.

[Shadysmurf]

unfournately for them I would'nt even begin to consider "Maze" as a genere..Maze would fall under puzzle so in actuality they have 9 Generes and I would'nt really consider Virutal Reality a Genre ethier

[jaydubnb]

Most racing games have aged horribly...its hard to go back to em after seeing the ultra smooth scaling of today. Either they look incredibly crappy in terms of scaling (ie, Victory Run) or like yourre plastered against a moving background (ie Top Gear). Graphics is a racing game are more important than in prehaps any other genre: its vital to create the illusion of depth, movement, and speed. In fact, the almighty Outrun is the only racer from back in the day that is still just as much fun now as it was then.

And i think that most sports games that tried to be accurate sims of real life sports leagues have not held up. However, the ones that were intended to just be fun romps (Baseball Stars NES, Baseball Stars II NEO*GEO) are still classics and are incredibly playable. Games like RBI Baseball are total ass now.

And fighting games from the past are still highly enjoyable....I can still enjoy the early Street Fighter 2 games because, frankly, not really that much as changed. You attack, block, do a special move. Even with the advent of 3D fighters, those three still were the basics of the genre.

[RetroYoungen]

I think all genres can stand the test of time, but not all of the games IN those genres do. Games like Street Fighter and Puyo Puyo stand the test of time because they're good games, but games like Puzzle Link and Battle Arena Toshinden (though I still like both of them) don't particularly stand well.

And I agree, nothing like a good side-scroller. Games like Super Mario World and Rocket Knight Adventures were good in their heyday, they're good now, and they're still be good for years to come.

[YoshiM]

I don't know if genres can really "age" per se to the point of not being good. They evolve more so than anything. The racing genre (for example), at its core, hasn't changed but the technology that presents it has a great deal.

[ClubNinja]

After all, who plays NHL '95 when they can play NHL 2k3?

Allow me to change a few dates here, though the same applies to 95 vs 2K3...

I'll take NHL 94 on the Sega CD over NHL 2K2 on the Dreamcast any day (and I do own and enjoy both.) As great of a hockey simulation as 2K2 is, NHL 94 is just way more FUN. That's of course only my opinion, though I know I'm not alone... you know who you are out there

[IGotTheDot]

I have never needed to buy another hockey game since 1993 when NHL 94 came out.

[The Manimal]

I really think no specific genre ages poorly. If a game really WASN'T that 'fun' to begin with...then I could see it aging poorly.



TECMO SUPER BOWL is still the best football game ever!

Those 16-Bit EA NHL games are still lord!

(Original) Tetris is still the best version of Tetris.


In a general sense, however, newer technology has improved the genre's overall. Avg quality of any sports game is higher than it ever was....but on an individual basis, it's not necessarily true.


Wayne Gretzky Hockey VS Wayne Gretzky 3-D Hockey

They both suck!

[Kid Fenris]

Yes, it's pretty much a given that any well-made game ages well, regardless of its genre. Still, there are some titles that were merely decent years ago, and they haven't held up over the years. I enjoyed RPGs like Lufia and some of the Bard's Tale titles when I was a kid, but they have too much repetitive combat to drawn me in as they once did.

[Classicgamesdepot]

Hehe I would tottaly have to disagree with the tetris post, Tetris attack is soo much fun with a friend, the original tetris didn't even have a two player mode (at least the nes version didn't)

I would have to agree with the posts about sport games that tried to really simulate a real game, I wouldn't go back to almost any of em, it's almost like why play nhl2k when there is nhl2k2002?

[shoes23]

I believe that rail shooters are on the decline. The initial appeal to games like Lethal Enforcers, Time Crisis, ect seem to be fading, especially on todays next-gen consoles. The PS2 has seen an array of sub-par lightgun shooters (End Game, Ninja Assualt, Dino Stalker).

My personal opinion- we will still see rail shooters, however, only as a smaller part of a game, especially in the FPS catagory. Arcades should be able to keep the genre alive with new gimmicks and expensive hardware, but for console lovers, I think they may be out of luck.

[tylerwillis]

If you look at the value side, I think it's clear that most sports games don't age well. Admittedly, there are classics out there... but when the latest (2005,2k5,ad nauseum) comes out, the value of the previous incarnation plummets.