I wasted so many quarters on Die Hard Arcade in the summer of laser quest. It was a great game for its time.
Printable View
I wasted so many quarters on Die Hard Arcade in the summer of laser quest. It was a great game for its time.
I like using that one too, I just pretend I never saw the thread get updated and walk away.Quote:
Originally Posted by Opaque
But SOR2 was better.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mzo
:lol:Quote:
I think Die Hard Arcade was better than SoR.
It is odd, isnt it?Quote:
I guess what Im trying to say is, it's odd how you find these new games so interesting, but the game you seem to be playing the most is on a message board.
I dont know what to tell you. Except that new games are better than old ones.
I can't believe somebody shut diffusionX up.
I can't believe he's owned TNL to the point where nobody does anything except obsess over him.
I like Melf better when he's not all anti-troll and loud for no reason. His heel turns suck.
I wouldn't say any generation was definitively the best, because all generations have produced awesome games that still hold up. I could understand an argument that this generation is better, but definitely not based on diffusionx's taste in games.
Exibit A. Konami most definitely does not suck now. MGS2, Zone of the Enders, Boktai, GBA Castlevania--all incredible games that outclass just about anything else you can pit against them.Quote:
Originally Posted by diffusionx
When did pointing out to you how retarded you are equate to Internet stalking? If a kid with Downs syndrome posted in every thread on TNL "nyurrrrr durrrrrr" I'd fully expect someone to consistently say, "Shut up, kid with Downs syndrome."Quote:
Originally Posted by diffusionx
Blame it on shitty booking.Quote:
Originally Posted by omfgninjas
I was going to post here but then I realized that the people I'd be talking to already either think my opinion sucks or are on the same side as I am already, so there's pretty much no reason. However, this is the internet so shutting up entirely is out of the question.
New games are mostly better than old games, but I'd love to see updated versions of old styles of gameplay. I played Burnout 3 to death and plan on going full-tilt into GTA:SA (still undecided on waiting for the X-Box version, but that's another post), but I'd love to see more stuff like Geometry Wars or Mario Vs Donkey Kong.
And that's it in a nutshell.
James
Die Hard Arcade had more moves, more weapons, and a better flow imo.Quote:
Originally Posted by Will
SoR2 was good when it came out, but now it's just boring and repetitive. I tried beating it a few months back and actually fell asleep around the aliens. That's not a joke, it's a fact. People were like, durrr, it's so short, I can't believe you never beat it, so I tried. Why are you so obsessed with it?
Youre not a hardcore gamer if the music by that guy doesnt give you a hardon.
*shakes head disapprovingly*Quote:
Originally Posted by diffusionx
I seriously can't remember a single tune from that game.Quote:
Originally Posted by diffusionx
I can probably hum most of Final Fight, though.
This thread reminds me I still need to buy Gradius V. I'm not sure why.
Konami sucks now? Tell that to Firefighter F.D. 18, Winning Eleven 7 International, Rumble Roses, and oh yeah, MGS 3, which should be a classic stealth title. Lament sucking had NOTHING to do with the unfixed flaws of 3D gaming permeating it...nope, nothing at all, it's all just due to those damned Japanese developers working on it. Even if there were Americans on the development staff, the Japanese dragged them down to the point where they couldn't fix things.
Jeremy, did you play the demo? MGS3 sucks. Holla!
All I want from Castlevania on the home consoles is what I got on the GBA but with Guilty Gear quality sprites and Metal Slug quality animation. Is that so wrong?
James
Dude, what the fuck are you talking about, seriously.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeremy
Games like Devil May Cry, Ninja Gaiden, hell, even Rygar are awesome 3d brawlers. I don't see alot of "flaws" in those games.
It wasn't the fault of 3d, because if the man spent more time polishing up his game, it could have easily have been in league with something like the original DMC.
Lament sucked only because the fucking developers shat all over the license, end of story.
I thought the action and the platforming elements were spot on.Quote:
Originally Posted by James
I've seen enough Metroid-Vania's, and I'm getting a bit sick of them.
Fix up the levels, jack up the difficulty, leave everything else, and you'd have a decent enough Castlevania game. Oh, and add more platforming in.
Unless it was an old school Castelvania with updated sprites, I'd take that.
If that's wrong I don't want to be right.Quote:
Originally Posted by James
Lament of Innocence was so bad I traded it in after buying it used for $17.99. Every room looked like every other room. It had super lazy ass design that was slightly similar to the Metroidvanias, except shitty in every way. The combat was lame as hell, the graphics were mediocre at best, and the game was boring beyond rational though. Every other 3D action game shits all over it.
I just find it funny that Diff never asks what others think, he does not care. He only wants to make sure you know his opinion.
Its like if some just randomly walked up to a person and went,
Diff: "Football is the best sport. People who like baseball are stupid fags. If you'd rather watch baseball than football your a fucking moron."
Person: "Nah, I like baseball better. I prefer the strategy in baseball over footballs."
Diff: "No, football is better."
Person: "Why is that?"
Diff: "It just is, stop living in the past!"
Person: "Go away."
Diff: "No I am just going to keep telling you that you're wrong."
Clash, dude, I like baseball and football. Stop hatin' on a nigga.
I'm just using it as an example. I used an alternate version of Diff that hates baseball.
But it had some amazing music. And great...cover art.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mzo
POTY.Quote:
Originally Posted by James
Sigged.
Since part of diff's soul is baseball, its impossible to take it out. No such alternate version would exist. It would be like a Mzo that hates Harry Potter, or an Opaque that hates the worthless emo loser scene.Quote:
Originally Posted by Clash_Master
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkRyan
agreed.. it was a rare case of "game doesn't deserve the music in it"..
really good stuff.
*edit*
Baseball sucks.. If you disagree, you are simply wrong.
Only reason I kept it.Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkRyan
If you can beat something like Contra SS and that crap you call Final Fight, you can beat Streets of Rage 2 ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Mzo
Because it's awesome. Had some fond memories with it back in the old days of Genesis.Quote:
Why are you so obsessed with it?
You know, despite how bad the game sucked, it was an inner struggle to trade it in. I had started it, and goddamn it I really wanted to finish it =(Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkRyan
I'm trying to control my irrational impulses. Now that I'm rid of it, I have no need to ever get it again.
And that cover art was crappy. Again, I didn't notice the music. I guess I'm not a big "music" person.
How about I use New games and Old games as the example? And use that to show how you provide no tolerance to others opinions?Quote:
Originally Posted by diffusionx
It wasn't a problem with the difficulty. It was a problem maintaining consciousness.Quote:
Originally Posted by Will
http://www.toysnjoys.com/usps2/lamentofinnocence.jpgQuote:
Originally Posted by Mzo
Very far from crappy (it's my favorite cover art this generation). And here's a sample of the awesome music: click here. At 1:35 this song tears me apart.
Thanks for that song, Mark.
I saw and I heard.
Eh.
Funny.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mzo
Remind me to buy it off you next time I stop by, I wanna hate this too.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brisco Bold
The shining voice of reason.Quote:
Originally Posted by NeoZeedeater
Actually, gamefaqs has people that appreciate older games or PC games.Quote:
Originally Posted by DjRocca
Lame stab aside. Everyone neglects to remember that none of the games would be here today if it wasn't for the trial and error of past designs.
Comparing games from different eras is retarded. Its like trying to compare electronics, movies, automobiles, blenders. Everything we have now, will be an improvement in some way.
Thats why I don't play alot of classic games ... I keep them as fond memories, so I don't ruin my impressions of them.
Thats the great thing about gaming now, alot of the classics are being updated (Lucasfilm Games) ... so it lets me relive them, and lets others get to see the great games of the past.
Tell me when you're coming. I'll scrounge and find a copy.Quote:
Originally Posted by DjRocca
That Opaque already exists.Quote:
Originally Posted by diffusionx
I am that Opaque.
I'd say her LoI work was Ayami Kojima's weakest Castlevania art by a country mile. Her art from SotN, Chronicles, HoD, and AoS art all looked much better.Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkRyan
Like or dislike diffx and his opinions, this thread has oozed out 5 pages in a bit under 5 hours. It goes to show how what he says gets a couple members jumpy. That's a good thing.
I wasn't necessarily saying it was better than her old work, but flipping through this page I'd have to say that Lament of Innocence art is at least as good as the others.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bacon McShig
toxic, that's a great one, and one that I've seen brought up before. Gaming always evolved, the stuff from 10 years ago might not seem great now, diff, but by that same token, the stuff you like now will be laughed at by your equivalent in 10 years. There is great stuff in every generation, which is furthered in the succeeding generations, which then bring forth new types of games, and then THOSE are evolved...and so on and so forth. Same tale, different generation, and I wouldn't have it any other way. Well, minus the childish bitching.
Id argue very strongly that the best era of movies was the 1970s, and I think Id have a pretty good case.Quote:
Comparing games from different eras is retarded. Its like trying to compare electronics, movies, automobiles, blenders. Everything we have now, will be an improvement in some way.
Videogames are actually kinda unique among the different popular "art" that we have nowadays, in that the new products are so clearly better than the old ones.
Of course, its not like the publishers care much either. Most of them are lazy with their old franchises. EA is sitting on a gold mine of classic franchises, like MULE or Archon or Pinball Construction Set. And if the publisher doesnt ignore them, theyre all too eager to whore them out.
Man, people love that mode in Mortal Kombat: Deception, maybe EA will notice this and bring it back out.Quote:
Originally Posted by diffusionx
Archon was battle chess, right?
the scope of the game overroad my gripes with the melee combat system. diff mentions gta, a game with some of the ugliest melee in the history of gaming, but it served a purpose for him, as did morrowind for me. mechanics are mechanics, but for an all-inclusive go anywhere game, morrowind was it. heres an example, if you played magician lord, you remember there were areas with beautiful backgrounds, now for some they were just nice decoration, but i couldnt help feel cheated because i wanted to explore them too, or in a game where a bad guy had a certain weapon, i wondered why, since i killed/beat the baddie, why i coudlnt take the weapon..he isnt using it anymore,a nd its better than mine, in morrowind you could do that,and i liked that a lot, you saw it, you could interact with it.. And morrowind isnt that brown, the grazelands are lush, ebonheart castle is kind of silvery, and the caves with mages in them tend to have purplish crystal lights, so :P.Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew
and diff, your examples may be true, im not really into raceing or fps's so i cant really comment on some of the games you mentioned. and i agreed that modern games are overall better, but i think you can still appreciate what came before on the instances that games transcended jut greatness(liek the ones i mentioned). its all good.
No, Archon was a different game.
There actually was a kinda-Archon on PSX, called something of War by Crystal Dynamics. God of War or some shit. I heard it was decent, it kinda failed though.
Diff you make it sound like you are so DISGUSTED with older games. I am just wondering like what old games would you maybe play. Because I can't imagine you hate ALL older games.
The Unholy War. It was ok-ish, I guess. I tried to play it when I found it for $5 but couldn't get into it at all.
James
what about wrath unleashed? that was similar. I rented unholy war, the control sucked, i hated it, pity because the idea was actually interesting.
Archon's a perfect example of a type of game done better in the past. Wrath Unleashed tried to be the ultimate modern Archon but it failed. There are plenty of cases where past games are timeless and haven't been surpassed by sequels or modern resemblers, for example Sonic and TRON.Quote:
Originally Posted by diffusionx
Thanks for the link.Quote:
Originally Posted by toxic
*hug*
It was sort of like chess. You had a dark side and a light side. If a player attacked a light side character, while they were in a black square, the dark character would get a slight boost in stats. Basically, the two players would meet on the battle field (Say Valkyrie =shooter) and (Grunt= Guy with a club). Valkyrie would sit back and shoot at the guy with the club, while he would try his best to get close and club the bitch silly. The winner of the battle would stay on the board, the loser would disappear. Plus, even though Valkyrie may have won the match with the grunt, she would still have damage from her battle with him. So, the other player could come back with another grunt guy and kill her with one hit.Quote:
Originally Posted by Roufuss
It's really a great 2 player game.
So essentially it's the same thing found in Mortal Kombat: Deception, that everyone loves.Quote:
Originally Posted by gamevet
Now EA should bring me a proper sequel.
Nothing to see here.
Just another excuse for DiffX to call everyone who disagrees with him "retards" while the mods look on in approval.
yeah lets keep encouraging him to call everyone retards outside of fc good idea
If the shoe fits...Quote:
Originally Posted by PBMax
Coming from you, of all people, that's doubly funny.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
Games now are more fully realized versions of games then. The ultimate goal of a game is to emulate some type of reality/fantasy that we can't achieve in our everyday, mundane lives, and in this games now are indeed better than ever. Of course there are also goals of telling a story, or as in some games like the Metal Gear series telling a story with a moral, and of course, to entertain.
2d shooters or sidescrolling adventures are entertaining in their own right, due to their unique feel and gameplay style. However, games today just blow them away in creating immersive and realistic entertaining fantasies.
But it can be better. And this is what's so exciting. Before I'm 40 years old, games will be absolutely freakin unbelievable. And hopefully Lucas Arts will get itself together before then. The next big big revolution in gaming, I think, after the current genres and ideas of bigger and better games are more refined and expanded, is cross-genre games. There are already a bunch, but these will get better as hardware improves.
Imagine a star wars game that takes the star wars battlefront, SWG, Rogue Squadron, Jedi Academy, etc..., merges them and improves them all in every way?
Imagine living in a fully realized city, with traders that come and go, people leading good lives, etc. Add Kotor in. Say the game is the rebuilding of the Jedi Academy, and you play as a young jedi student. You can go Kotor/fable style and do good or bad things in your free time. Say you can become a merc. on a ship and do lots of starfighter combat. Say a group of enemies attacks and you can help fight the invasion via land, or jump in your starship parked outside and fly up through the atmosphere and have a dogfight that rivals the best in Rogue Squadron and Colony wars with no load times, that can go in and out of or be affected by the atmosphere.
The possibilities are just...man it excites me. And this is just one example. Our only limitation might very well be user input - how to design and map controllers that can handle more and more functions. But I'm not worried about that.
This is what I dream about at night. No joke.
wow... this is disgusting in so many ways, only partially because I read all of it.
Hook line and sinker....
:( My post or this thread?Quote:
Originally Posted by Shapermc
Oh, sorry, the whole thread.
When I first saw the title of this thread, and who it was started by, I thought it was some kind of joke.
Turns out it is, but not in the way I expected. :/
Anyone wanna take bets on who will get reprimanded for their statements in the thread, while diff gets nothing?
You know, I think Jeremy makes something like the third person I've seen complain about DiffX this week alone. It really makes me wonder why the TNL Troll King is still around.
Speaking of trolling -- Diff, if you actually do have some sort of legitimate reason for making a thread commending new games when all you've been doing for the past few months is taking a steaming dump on every new title that's been announced/released (aside from two or three PC titles), please, by all means, share.
Because I'm getting the impression that you're just using this as an excuse to piss all over all the old games, too. :|
Assuming that diffyx was indeed sincere in his original post, then it's really simple to explain why his opinion doesn't represent everyone's point of view.
What he always wanted out of gaming was - open-endedness and ease of multiplayer, with immersiveness and lower cost being a bonus. If those are his driving factors, then of course modern gaming appeals to him. It's logical.
The difference is that not everyone wanted the same ideals. What I want is maximum gameplay (technique, hand/eye coordination, strategy). The bonuses I get out of modern gaming are ease of multiplayer (4 gaming ports + broadband ability) and lower cost.
But it's simple to see that our gaming philosophies collide. I *like* restrictions in gaming. My greatest joy in a game is to realize I'm playing it as the developer had intended. A very specific example is Sonic Adventure 2, City Escape stage (ie stage 1). I had literally played the stage over and over again... about 150 lives worth... until I scored an "A" rating. I got a total rush after receiving it because I know that by receiving that elusive A, it was the way the stage was designed, and the run I produced was absolutely perfect enough to match that design.
diffusionx would undoubtedly despise that kind of level design because it forces you into one particular way to do things. I think it's brilliant because it requires the maximum amount of technique in order to do it.
And whereas diffusionx feels that immersiveness is a bonus, I often times think it's counter to gameplay. Because every high budget cut scene, every minute spent revealing story details, etc is time taken away from actually "playing" the game. And often, is a substitute for gameplay as seen in most RPGs, Japanese and Western alike.
I don't think that diffusionx is necessarily "right" or "wrong" in his assertion that games are better today. But I hope he understands that his views are based on his perceptions of what games should be like, and that not everyone shares those same perceptions.
Eh... I wouldn't argue that this is the ultimate point of games.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cowutopia
Look at games that aren't videogames. Chess isn't a battle simulation, it's just an amazingly well-designed game. Immersiveness isn't a part of the equation. The same goes for Monopoly, or any kind of sport you could name. Monopoly wouldn't be more entertaining if it suddenly included real tax laws, and somehow I think chess is going to be played longer than Medieval: Total War.
The ultimate goal of gaming is not to be a simulation of some fantasy, it's to entertain. Some games acheive this through simulating a fantasy (Morrowind, any number of flight simulators, tycoon games, etc), but the simulation is just a means to an end. Some games can be just as addictive and entertaining when they're purely abstract puzzle games (look at the populatity of Zuma).
Diffx is entitled to his beliefs, and he didn't cross the line in his first few posts. Of course, by beliefs, I mean statements summed up as "X game is shit" which doesn't amount to much discussion. Diffx, perhaps you should try to elaborate more next time?Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeremy
I meant a video game.Quote:
Originally Posted by sethsez
Almost all games simulate something or other, but that's not necessarily why you play them or where the fun is.
I'm big on strategy games myself. Chess simulates generalship, but pretending to be the leader of a vast army is not why people still play it.
Okay, so it's half and half. The goal of some games is still to emulate some experience we can't actually have, and others aim to be fun for the play alone.
Thank you to sethsez and Tsubaki for typing out what I don't have time for. Many of your words are right from my head (even the chess comparison).
Anyone want to take bets on who is useful in this thread, other than diffx?Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeremy
So what are puzzle games simulating? They're completely abstract.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cowutopia
Is there an "all of the above" option?
No, because that is the wrong answer.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeremy
Grrr post edit too late. Reread plz.Quote:
Originally Posted by sethsez
Pertaining to this thread though, the only video games that are "better than ever" are the games that are experience-based. Board game translations, strategy games, addicting games...new ones might come out, and they might look a little better, but the core gameplay thrill hasn't changed much since the dawn of games.
But you're right, it may not be the "ultimate goal of video games" to some people. That's when it comes down to your taste and opinion - Why you play video games.
And any game is worthless if it's not fun, so make "entertaining" goal 1 and the other goal goal 2.
+1 awesomeness to me for having my statements challenged and not clinging to them desperately like an orphaned retard to his teddy bear. It's called thinking.
Certainly not you. ;DQuote:
Originally Posted by Yoshi
Ah, you and Diff make such a wacky pair!
Maybe they're cousins.Quote:
Ah, you and Diff make such a wacky pair!
Identical cousins, two of a kind.
I think when it comes down to it games at this point can be broken down into two main catagories.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cowutopia
Catagory One: Skill-honeing/competative. Many games of yesteryear fit this well including 2D fighters (well, fighters in general), strategy games, puzzle games, pure action games ala Metal Slug and Smash TV, pinball even. More recently you can count genres such as Bemani, deathmatch FPS, racing games, the Tont Hawk series (well at least the early games). These are games where the story, the settings, the characters either are vaugley assigned or don't even exist. Why? Because they don't have to. The entire game is built around the particular hand-eye skill that you're developing. There may be elements of storyand such that are immersive but by far they take a back seat to the game play and the quality of the game is perceived on how well and balanced tht game play is. This is also why these games are big for multiplayer.
Catagory Two: Immersive/story telling games. More and more games are becoming majoridly of this catagory. RPGs, survival horror, story driven FPSs, the GTAs, of the world all fall into this catagory. There is definitly skill required to make your way through the game but what is in the foreground is the immersive ambiance of the game or it's great story and characters. To aid in the submersiveness of the game many of these titles are best played solo. This isn't to say that all games coming out now aren't competative based, that would be a crazy statement seeing sports games being played online and the sucess of online gaming as a whole of late but with so many licensed Hollywood titles coming out it's clear that this is a big part of the gaming future.
You don't get to talk anymore.Quote:
Originally Posted by Valgar
I can't believe this thread went on this long. He likes newer games. Good for him. Newer games are easier, and he thinks they hide the fact that he is utterly worthless in about everything else he could possibly do. Sports, life, etc...you name it. When he gets past the 9 year old mentality, maybe that will change.
Tragic- I was going to follow up with your exact post. Thanks for saving me the trouble.
Yeah, I forgot about one of the ways those category one games have really improved; multiplayer + the wonder that is the internet.
You get so offended over him not liking the games you do.Quote:
Originally Posted by Joust Williams
Well, at this point multi-player over the internet is virtually the only way that these games exist. Arcades are all but gone (although I'm luckly right near NJ's best arcade 8 on the Break), shooters like those of Treasure or Gradius or R-Type are few and far between, and even series like Tony Hawk are starting to get more away from the hand-eye thing and more into the crazy enviroment and story aspects with Underground.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cowutopia
Because I dissed a 2D game? Diffx is 100%, you guys go fucking nutz because it is 2D. The art style and animation in Alien Hominid doesn't look professional to me and it looks slow/boring, I am already certain I would play Gunstar Heroes instead.Quote:
Originally Posted by MysteriousRacerC
I will meet you there to play Beatmania/MK/whatever someday.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tragic
I think the ratio of good/bad games is the same while the quality of the best of the good games today is relatively no higher than the quality of the best of the good games of the past.
I don't think things are much different than they used to be, excepting obviousness like online play (is that really so new?) and OMG 3D!!!
But any new SW game would have the influence of the "new" Lucasarts and would therefore be ruined. ;) The last two decent Lucasarts assisted games I've played have been KotoR and XvT. I think there's a problem with someone over there that needs to be taken care of before things get better on the SW front - someone needs to knock off ol' Georgie. That man is like a plague.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cowutopia
Yeah. Nowadays, Lucasarts = the suck.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cowutopia
Still, if other companies pioneer an awesome game like what I described, I'm sure Lucasarts will make a horrible copy of it.
(ex: Battlefield and Battlefront.)
Yes, gaming now is better than it's ever been. It's cheaper and the selection is huge. That being said, there's still some classics that will never be beaten.
Games don't need options or depth or complexity to be fun.
Games also don't need to hold your attention for an hour to be great.
Can Asteroids hold my attention for more than 15 min? No. However, Asteroids can hold my attention for 15 min every now and then over a period of 20+ years. To this day I'm giving Asteroids a go here and there. Same with Pacman, Donkey Kong, etc etc. Great games, great fun, great re-playability and longevity, but a totally different kind of longevity and re-playability. And sometimes that's what you need.
Tsubaki, why do you equate cut scenes with immersiveness? The two are mutually exclusive, for the most part. Half-Life doesnt have cut scenes, Warcraft 3 multi doesnt have cut scenes, PGR doesnt have cut scenes, etc. Immersiveness is a somewhat elusive quality but generally I think of it like that whole synchronicity type thing I was describing before, where everything turns into a giant goober of gaming quality.
And also, why did you spend so much time playing a junk game like Sonic Adventure 2?
Heh. You've responded 4 times in this thread.Quote:
I can't believe this thread went on this long. He likes newer games. Good for him. Newer games are easier, and he thinks they hide the fact that he is utterly worthless in about everything else he could possibly do. Sports, life, etc...you name it. When he gets past the 9 year old mentality, maybe that will change.
In which case, Diffx's point that newer games are better than old games is wrong. *gasp!* He can never be wrong!Quote:
Originally Posted by Valgar
Finally, you realize this.Quote:
He can never be wrong!
Diff never said that EVERY new game is good.
He just pointed out Sonic Adventure 2 as being utter garbage, which it was. I'm sure even he would agree that Sonic 2 > Sonic Adventure 2.
I think from the tone of his first post, he basically says that if you're still lamenting the good old days, then get over it, it's not as good as you think. And then it hits you, those games were actually good, and it's not because of nostalgia. At the same time, no one is saying new games are crap.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mzo
Yea, I said that they arent as good as you think. However, the 2nd part of your statement is definitely not true. Most of those games really arent worth playing. I played Sonic The Hedgehog 1 and 2 last year and they were silly and simple and not much fun at all. Same goes with a lot of the Genesis games. They were good back then but really not so much anymore.
If I want to go ahead and play some Super Metroid or something, Im wary of it because I dont want to ruin my memories of the game. Aside from a very, very short list of games, which consists of maybe Robotron, Street Fighter 2, and some of the Mario games, the good memories are just that - memories. The rest is straight up nostalgia.
And you can see that when you see a lot of the new GBA games. Quite frankly, these games just arent very good. People jizz over them simply because theyre 2D, and thats silly.
They aren't very good...and you know this after playing them, right?
I don't play games because they are 2D or 3D. I play games because they are enjoyable. Just like I don't "jizz" all over one console because I like it so much.Quote:
Originally Posted by diffusionx
I play Mega Man Zero because the recent PS2 Mega Man X games are horrible in 3D.