Well said dude. The worst type of gamer is the one that is adamant that "this is the best shit and nothing else comes close" yet they don't bother to TRY anything outside their narrow scope.
I'm 15, and a lot of my friends are like this (i.e. Halo kids).
There are actually a few people I know who are my age and are genuinely interested, however. One of my friends is obsessed with Earthbound.
When I bring my SNES over to gatherings, I still get the obligatory "what is that?" question. Nobody really says that "this system sucks" though.
True that. I'm 16, and none of my friends are really into old games, but they don't dislike it either. Pretty much the only reason why they even know what an NES is is because of the Angry Video Game Nerd. =/
My 8 year old nephew likes all types of games Mario is his 2nd favorite whether he's playing the oldest or the newest part of the series. But he likes Sonic more. Sonic 2 is his favorite. I don't think he understands what 2d and 3d are because every now and then he'll say that 2d games suck. I fix that by taking away all the 2d games and he starts screaming "no! no!"
I'm surprised and happy that so many kids play NES instead of the new consoles with excellent graphic.
I sold a NES with games today. The buyer was a young boy around 15-16 years old. He hadn't had a NES earlier but had recently bought a Sega Master System.
My niece is 5 years old and when she comes over and wonders into my Lair ( the basement ) I sit her down and put on Super Mario Bros. I figure shes got to learn the same way I did. Its great to watch her play, half the time shes got the contoller upside down. I was quite proud when she figured out how to kill the fisrt goomba after about 10 tries lol
I'm surprised and happy that so many kids play NES instead of the new consoles with excellent graphic.
I prefer the cartoon-ish artwork of 8-16 bit games, rather than realistic graphics of many modern games. Just because it's more realistic doesn't mean it's better.
Why are people so offended by this? Most of us appreciate retro games due to nostalgia. Kids today don't have that nostalgia. So of course the games are going to seem dull and boring to them.
Think of it like cars. I like modern cars and I love seeing the brand new models every year even if I can't afford many of them. But when I see old muscle cars I yawn. I respect them as the powerful vehicles that they are, but I find no appeal in them and I'll never own one.
And why are we acting like more save points in a bad thing? It's called technology and it exists for a reason. Most of us adults don't have 3-4 hours to spend in a straight gaming sessions, especially those of us with homes or wives or children. It's great to put in 30 minutes or an hour and save and come back later.
I think both sides are ignorant, those who shun old games because they are too primitive, and those who shun new games because they are "too easy / too fancy / like a movie / etc." I love my Tecmo Super Bowl for a quick arcade football session, but there is no better feeling then beating your friend on the last second play in Madden when you break a tackle down the sidelines. There's something to be said about realism in games.
I'm pretty sure save points were not a technology barrier. They just didn't have more in most NES games because it makes the games dull. Where is the excitement in a game, if there is no risk? I bought the SNK arcade collection for PS2, and I thought it was going to be awesome. I never play the damn thing though, because every game gives you unlimited credits. If there is not challenge, the game just becomes unplayable for me.
Originally posted by: mojorojoe
General NES - "This controller only has two buttons...how lame"
Should have handed them a Colecovision controller and said "Well then try this you little fucker!"
I'm pretty sure save points were not a technology barrier. They just didn't have more in most NES games because it makes the games dull. Where is the excitement in a game, if there is no risk?
More like a cost savings.
Take SMB3 for instance...a game that is just as fun and playable in rereleases that include a save poitn.
The save feature in an NES cartridge probably added $1 - $2 per game, back in the day. For SMB3, the big N got to pocket an extra $15MM in profit by leaving that feature out of the game.
I'm surprised and happy that so many kids play NES instead of the new consoles with excellent graphic.
I prefer the cartoon-ish artwork of 8-16 bit games, rather than realistic graphics of many modern games. Just because it's more realistic doesn't mean it's better.
This. Games nowadays seem to want to mimic reality rather than try to be something entirely different. I am a huge fan of cartoony graphics and fantastical characters. It seems that Imagination has died in the industry and we are left instead with generic space shooters and the same bland dark futuristic environments.
I'm surprised and happy that so many kids play NES instead of the new consoles with excellent graphic.
I prefer the cartoon-ish artwork of 8-16 bit games, rather than realistic graphics of many modern games. Just because it's more realistic doesn't mean it's better.
This. Games nowadays seem to want to mimic reality rather than try to be something entirely different. I am a huge fan of cartoony graphics and fantastical characters. It seems that Imagination has died in the industry and we are left instead with generic space shooters and the same bland dark futuristic environments.
I'm surprised and happy that so many kids play NES instead of the new consoles with excellent graphic.
I prefer the cartoon-ish artwork of 8-16 bit games, rather than realistic graphics of many modern games. Just because it's more realistic doesn't mean it's better.
This. Games nowadays seem to want to mimic reality rather than try to be something entirely different. I am a huge fan of cartoony graphics and fantastical characters. It seems that Imagination has died in the industry and we are left instead with generic space shooters and the same bland dark futuristic environments.
Play Super Paper Mario, A Boy and His Blob, and Wario Land: Shake It.
Your hope for modern games will increase dramatically.
Those three games represent what we wished games could look like, as kids.
I traded a few atari games off for a couple NES games (my first trade on AA actually). I took the games to work to ship and one of my coworkers who is probably in his 40s asked what I was shipping. I told him that it was some sealed Atari games, he flipped and was like you still play that shit?? Missile Command? Donkey Kong? Frogger? WTF?!?! Whats wrong with X360? Lame. But I agree with the others, we grew up with it, and thats why we love the games. I'm sure these kids will say the same thing when they have 300 PS3 games and their young family members are wondering why they aren't playing the latest and greatest.
I think my first response to the little quotes was to get furious about it, but now you know what I feel pity and shame more than the other. The fact is today gaming on the most basest of levels has not changed, but all the superficial and tactile crap has had serious overhauls on one realm or another. Hell keeping to the board theme let's compare a Gamecube to a NES right? On the GC you got dpad, analog, 8 buttons in all too, and a camera stick. NES...4 buttons and a dpad. Controls have become vastly more complicated, in some ways looking at a few NES games to the better, but in others definitely not from a confusion factor. Then well the games, on the GC you got millions of colors, dolby pro sound stereo, and so on ...the NES has a mono setup(stereo internally) with just a few tone generators and a dpcm, a few colors comparatively, and a crap ton less can go on screen. The tradeoff obviously is the new kids can get a 'Toy Story' level of creativity and reality, the NES well it's pretty 8bit and is anything but that.
Basically the point is gaming today has spoiled those of the now away from the past, at least those too close minded to fire up a GBA NES Classics, a Wii Virtual Console release, one of the million variants of Namco Museum or the Atari/Midway equivalents, and so on. They're basically as gamers being stunted, severely. Few if damn near any games back in the 80s had training levels or missions with coded in manuals at dialog or popups, now it's fairly standard. Back then you damn well beat the stage, world, got a good item or two, or something and got your save/password and were happy it happened before your life or 3 lives were burnt. Now, you got pussywhipped pause-save anywhere or Call of Duty like checkpoints every 2-5 minutes so you can pop back in at little cost with little lesson learned. Gaming has kind of turned into how (hate to make it political but it fits) the democrats in the States are trying to nanny state the shit out of a lot of Americans lives. Back in the 1950s or 80s you goddman well got a job, kept that job for decades, and learned that job from a crap load of hard work mastering it and that's kind of how games were...time, experience, mastery. Video games of now are much like the current president/congress it's kind of nanny state and socialist a bit in that everyone is put on an equal playing field, if something doesn't go right you're made to feel it's not your fault, and you get dusted off right then and there or a moment back in time to just erase the booboo and pick it up again with no lesson or experience of it learned. It's a weird comparison but sadly it fits. The point is the kids are growing up in a nanny state, everyone's equal, there are no losers, and we'll do it for you type society and the games reflect that with all the gimmes now and balancing bs with a lot of complexity and nice bit pretty pictures and words in the way. They can't be happy with an old way, where you had to suffer, get your ass kicked, have to start the hell over, and redo your shit to the point you screwed up and then figure out how not the blow it again and move on as it's too hard, there's no help, and it's not fair.
I took the games to work to ship and one of my coworkers who is probably in his 40s asked what I was shipping. I told him that it was some sealed Atari games, he flipped and was like you still play that shit?? Missile Command? Donkey Kong? Frogger? WTF?!?! Whats wrong with X360? Lame.
Inappropriate political comments aside, our boys (ages 9 and 11) are currently addicted to Technos Ice Hockey. Their other faves on the NES include Riki Kunio, RBI Baseball 3, Base Wars, Nintendo World Cup and Gyruss. On the Genesis, it's the Streets of Rage series, Street Fighter II Special Champion Edition, Mortal Kombat 3, Toejam & Earl, Moonwalker and Dragon's Fury. I've also modded a PSP for each of them, loaded with all NES and Genesis games. They love their Wii, of course, but they've always got time for the classics. It sure does my old heart good to see that!
I just turned 18 a few weeks ago, my first system was a Snes. I still have that very same snes hooked up in my room.
Oh what joyous times my friends and i had.... But now its only me... They're off playing there Call of Dutys and Halos, and I'm still in the 1990s playing my snes with the killer instinct it came with.
Why are people so offended by this? Most of us appreciate retro games due to nostalgia. Kids today don't have that nostalgia. So of course the games are going to seem dull and boring to them.
Think of it like cars. I like modern cars and I love seeing the brand new models every year even if I can't afford many of them. But when I see old muscle cars I yawn. I respect them as the powerful vehicles that they are, but I find no appeal in them and I'll never own one.
And why are we acting like more save points in a bad thing? It's called technology and it exists for a reason. Most of us adults don't have 3-4 hours to spend in a straight gaming sessions, especially those of us with homes or wives or children. It's great to put in 30 minutes or an hour and save and come back later.
I think both sides are ignorant, those who shun old games because they are too primitive, and those who shun new games because they are "too easy / too fancy / like a movie / etc." I love my Tecmo Super Bowl for a quick arcade football session, but there is no better feeling then beating your friend on the last second play in Madden when you break a tackle down the sidelines. There's something to be said about realism in games.
I'm pretty sure save points were not a technology barrier. They just didn't have more in most NES games because it makes the games dull. Where is the excitement in a game, if there is no risk? I bought the SNK arcade collection for PS2, and I thought it was going to be awesome. I never play the damn thing though, because every game gives you unlimited credits. If there is not challenge, the game just becomes unplayable for me.
If they weren't a technology barrier then why didn't every game come with a save battery? Because of costs, which are directly associated with technology. As technology improves, the cost of adding batteries came down and more games came with built-in saves.
I'm not sure if you're being stubborn just to argue or if you honestly believe that save points make games dull? Save points make games convenient and are completely disjoint from difficulty.
You can take an NES game like Ninja Gaiden that is perceived as hard because you have to beat it in one sitting with no save points. However, you have unlimited continues and you restart at the beginning of a stage when you die (except for Stage 6), so how hard is it really? Or take a game like Henry Hatsworth for DS which let's you save after every level, and gives you a mini-checkpoint right before boss battles. I swear I spent about 2 hours reloading and refighting the same damn boss over and over until I beat him. The checkpoint took no enjoyment out of the game, it just saved me time and repetition from having to play the long goddamn level for 15 minutes leading up to the boss.
Games should be hard based on enemy placement, power-ups, health bars, combo execution, and other game play mechanisms. Games should not be artificially hard because they require you to beat them in one sitting. And from a marketing standpoint, all games should be released with difficulty levels (as virtually all of them are nowadays), so it appeals to a wide audience of gamers... from beginners to the hardcore experts.
I'm not sure if you're being stubborn just to argue or if you honestly believe that save points make games dull? Save points make games convenient and are completely disjoint from difficulty.
Good call...I save my COD every 3-4 minutes. Obsessive? Maybe. But it saves me from taking the same enemy's life multiple times.
I just turned 18 a few weeks ago, my first system was a Snes. I still have that very same snes hooked up in my room.
Oh what joyous times my friends and i had.... But now its only me... They're off playing there Call of Dutys and Halos, and I'm still in the 1990s playing my snes with the killer instinct it came with.
I know what you mean. I took all kinds of grief from my friends in the late 90's for not upgrading to a PlayStation. While they were all drooling over Final Fantasy 7, I was still happily whooping Kefka's ass in FF3. Good times.
I think young kids have their point. They didn't grow up with the retro stuff, most of them can't play Mario as I can but they will kick my ass in MW2 with their eyes closed...
Not me...I whip those punk azz kids into shape. Those suckers wanna n00b tube me I'll use strategy to get them.
I really feel that newer games are easier. They all have tutorials. Honestly our games had instruction manuals that you read...or you went in blind. Most newer games have saves/checkpoints etc. Older games had passwords. The passwords usually didn't even give you half the stuff you had before you died. And those with battery backup were few and far between(other than RPGS).
iressivor and in the end you had the true and better final fantasy experience because 7 was a pile of flotsum mediocrity designed to draw in the non-gamer group by using basically anything other than what made that series what it was for all the years before it's release. FF3(6) was the last of the goodies until 9.
Going back to the subject of realism in games for a moment, my roommate is in his early 40's and wasn't much of a gamer at all until several years after I moved in. Though he grew up playing ColecoVision, as an adult, his gaming preferences have shifted dramatically to high-end games, like Bioshock 2 and Crysis. In order for him to be fully invested in a game, he says, it has to look as realistic as possible. Anything less just doesn't allow him to suspend his disbelief. That said, he finds my NES games fairly primitive, to the point that the screen-shaking battle effect in Dragon Warrior once prompted him to ask, "What's wrong with your TV?"
Why are people so offended by this? Most of us appreciate retro games due to nostalgia. Kids today don't have that nostalgia. So of course the games are going to seem dull and boring to them.
Think of it like cars. I like modern cars and I love seeing the brand new models every year even if I can't afford many of them. But when I see old muscle cars I yawn. I respect them as the powerful vehicles that they are, but I find no appeal in them and I'll never own one.
And why are we acting like more save points in a bad thing? It's called technology and it exists for a reason. Most of us adults don't have 3-4 hours to spend in a straight gaming sessions, especially those of us with homes or wives or children. It's great to put in 30 minutes or an hour and save and come back later.
I think both sides are ignorant, those who shun old games because they are too primitive, and those who shun new games because they are "too easy / too fancy / like a movie / etc." I love my Tecmo Super Bowl for a quick arcade football session, but there is no better feeling then beating your friend on the last second play in Madden when you break a tackle down the sidelines. There's something to be said about realism in games.
I'm pretty sure save points were not a technology barrier. They just didn't have more in most NES games because it makes the games dull. Where is the excitement in a game, if there is no risk? I bought the SNK arcade collection for PS2, and I thought it was going to be awesome. I never play the damn thing though, because every game gives you unlimited credits. If there is not challenge, the game just becomes unplayable for me.
If they weren't a technology barrier then why didn't every game come with a save battery? Because of costs, which are directly associated with technology. As technology improves, the cost of adding batteries came down and more games came with built-in saves.
I'm not sure if you're being stubborn just to argue or if you honestly believe that save points make games dull? Save points make games convenient and are completely disjoint from difficulty.
You can take an NES game like Ninja Gaiden that is perceived as hard because you have to beat it in one sitting with no save points. However, you have unlimited continues and you restart at the beginning of a stage when you die (except for Stage 6), so how hard is it really? Or take a game like Henry Hatsworth for DS which let's you save after every level, and gives you a mini-checkpoint right before boss battles. I swear I spent about 2 hours reloading and refighting the same damn boss over and over until I beat him. The checkpoint took no enjoyment out of the game, it just saved me time and repetition from having to play the long goddamn level for 15 minutes leading up to the boss.
Games should be hard based on enemy placement, power-ups, health bars, combo execution, and other game play mechanisms. Games should not be artificially hard because they require you to beat them in one sitting. And from a marketing standpoint, all games should be released with difficulty levels (as virtually all of them are nowadays), so it appeals to a wide audience of gamers... from beginners to the hardcore experts.
"Originally posted by: jonebone
And why are we acting like more save points in a bad thing? It's called technology and it exists for a reason. Most of us adults don't have 3-4 hours to spend in a straight gaming sessions, especially those of us with homes or wives or children. It's great to put in 30 minutes or an hour and save and come back later. "
I guess I misunderstood what you were saying. I thought you meant more save points as in, some of the newer game that let you save every five feet, or let you save anywhere you want. I didn't think you meant more games save features built in. My beef is just with games that baby you every step of the way, and make you immune to any setbacks at all. Games that make you work for a save point are way more fun for me than a game where you know your last save was 3 seconds ago, so nothing is on the line.
Why don't you record this and you could make an NA version of kid's say the darnest things
Somewhere on youtube there are a few interesting videos in a 3 or 4 part (more like 3 or 4 game) series of exactly what you describe - A kid is introduced to a NES game and plays it for around a week, then responds to a sort of question session about what he thought about the whole ordeal.
They're pretty interesting If I recall correctly, but I can't seen to find them. I absolutely KNOW that one of the games was Contra and another was TMNT, but even searching "Kid retrospective review contra TMNT turtles blah blah blah" all I can find is normal reviews and youtube poop.
If any of you feel ambitious maybe you should look for the videos so that we may all watch them to snicker in glee.
Comments
I'm 15, and a lot of my friends are like this (i.e. Halo kids).
There are actually a few people I know who are my age and are genuinely interested, however. One of my friends is obsessed with Earthbound.
When I bring my SNES over to gatherings, I still get the obligatory "what is that?" question. Nobody really says that "this system sucks" though.
True that. I'm 16, and none of my friends are really into old games, but they don't dislike it either. Pretty much the only reason why they even know what an NES is is because of the Angry Video Game Nerd. =/
Doing anything under duress will illicit a negative response, even video games.
I sold a NES with games today. The buyer was a young boy around 15-16 years old. He hadn't had a NES earlier but had recently bought a Sega Master System.
I'm surprised and happy that so many kids play NES instead of the new consoles with excellent graphic.
I prefer the cartoon-ish artwork of 8-16 bit games, rather than realistic graphics of many modern games. Just because it's more realistic doesn't mean it's better.
Why are people so offended by this? Most of us appreciate retro games due to nostalgia. Kids today don't have that nostalgia. So of course the games are going to seem dull and boring to them.
Think of it like cars. I like modern cars and I love seeing the brand new models every year even if I can't afford many of them. But when I see old muscle cars I yawn. I respect them as the powerful vehicles that they are, but I find no appeal in them and I'll never own one.
And why are we acting like more save points in a bad thing? It's called technology and it exists for a reason. Most of us adults don't have 3-4 hours to spend in a straight gaming sessions, especially those of us with homes or wives or children. It's great to put in 30 minutes or an hour and save and come back later.
I think both sides are ignorant, those who shun old games because they are too primitive, and those who shun new games because they are "too easy / too fancy / like a movie / etc." I love my Tecmo Super Bowl for a quick arcade football session, but there is no better feeling then beating your friend on the last second play in Madden when you break a tackle down the sidelines. There's something to be said about realism in games.
I'm pretty sure save points were not a technology barrier. They just didn't have more in most NES games because it makes the games dull. Where is the excitement in a game, if there is no risk? I bought the SNK arcade collection for PS2, and I thought it was going to be awesome. I never play the damn thing though, because every game gives you unlimited credits. If there is not challenge, the game just becomes unplayable for me.
General NES - "This controller only has two buttons...how lame"
I'm pretty sure save points were not a technology barrier. They just didn't have more in most NES games because it makes the games dull. Where is the excitement in a game, if there is no risk?
More like a cost savings.
Take SMB3 for instance...a game that is just as fun and playable in rereleases that include a save poitn.
The save feature in an NES cartridge probably added $1 - $2 per game, back in the day.
For SMB3, the big N got to pocket an extra $15MM in profit by leaving that feature out of the game.
I'm surprised and happy that so many kids play NES instead of the new consoles with excellent graphic.
I prefer the cartoon-ish artwork of 8-16 bit games, rather than realistic graphics of many modern games. Just because it's more realistic doesn't mean it's better.
This. Games nowadays seem to want to mimic reality rather than try to be something entirely different. I am a huge fan of cartoony graphics and fantastical characters. It seems that Imagination has died in the industry and we are left instead with generic space shooters and the same bland dark futuristic environments.
I'm surprised and happy that so many kids play NES instead of the new consoles with excellent graphic.
I prefer the cartoon-ish artwork of 8-16 bit games, rather than realistic graphics of many modern games. Just because it's more realistic doesn't mean it's better.
This. Games nowadays seem to want to mimic reality rather than try to be something entirely different. I am a huge fan of cartoony graphics and fantastical characters. It seems that Imagination has died in the industry and we are left instead with generic space shooters and the same bland dark futuristic environments.
^True, save for a few exceptions.
I'm surprised and happy that so many kids play NES instead of the new consoles with excellent graphic.
I prefer the cartoon-ish artwork of 8-16 bit games, rather than realistic graphics of many modern games. Just because it's more realistic doesn't mean it's better.
This. Games nowadays seem to want to mimic reality rather than try to be something entirely different. I am a huge fan of cartoony graphics and fantastical characters. It seems that Imagination has died in the industry and we are left instead with generic space shooters and the same bland dark futuristic environments.
Play Super Paper Mario, A Boy and His Blob, and Wario Land: Shake It.
Your hope for modern games will increase dramatically.
Those three games represent what we wished games could look like, as kids.
I traded a few atari games off for a couple NES games (my first trade on AA actually). I took the games to work to ship and one of my coworkers who is probably in his 40s asked what I was shipping. I told him that it was some sealed Atari games, he flipped and was like you still play that shit?? Missile Command? Donkey Kong? Frogger? WTF?!?! Whats wrong with X360? Lame. But I agree with the others, we grew up with it, and thats why we love the games. I'm sure these kids will say the same thing when they have 300 PS3 games and their young family members are wondering why they aren't playing the latest and greatest.
Basically the point is gaming today has spoiled those of the now away from the past, at least those too close minded to fire up a GBA NES Classics, a Wii Virtual Console release, one of the million variants of Namco Museum or the Atari/Midway equivalents, and so on. They're basically as gamers being stunted, severely. Few if damn near any games back in the 80s had training levels or missions with coded in manuals at dialog or popups, now it's fairly standard. Back then you damn well beat the stage, world, got a good item or two, or something and got your save/password and were happy it happened before your life or 3 lives were burnt. Now, you got pussywhipped pause-save anywhere or Call of Duty like checkpoints every 2-5 minutes so you can pop back in at little cost with little lesson learned. Gaming has kind of turned into how (hate to make it political but it fits) the democrats in the States are trying to nanny state the shit out of a lot of Americans lives. Back in the 1950s or 80s you goddman well got a job, kept that job for decades, and learned that job from a crap load of hard work mastering it and that's kind of how games were...time, experience, mastery. Video games of now are much like the current president/congress it's kind of nanny state and socialist a bit in that everyone is put on an equal playing field, if something doesn't go right you're made to feel it's not your fault, and you get dusted off right then and there or a moment back in time to just erase the booboo and pick it up again with no lesson or experience of it learned. It's a weird comparison but sadly it fits. The point is the kids are growing up in a nanny state, everyone's equal, there are no losers, and we'll do it for you type society and the games reflect that with all the gimmes now and balancing bs with a lot of complexity and nice bit pretty pictures and words in the way. They can't be happy with an old way, where you had to suffer, get your ass kicked, have to start the hell over, and redo your shit to the point you screwed up and then figure out how not the blow it again and move on as it's too hard, there's no help, and it's not fair.
Sound about right?
I took the games to work to ship and one of my coworkers who is probably in his 40s asked what I was shipping. I told him that it was some sealed Atari games, he flipped and was like you still play that shit?? Missile Command? Donkey Kong? Frogger? WTF?!?! Whats wrong with X360? Lame.
0_0 That's pretty messed up.
Oh what joyous times my friends and i had.... But now its only me... They're off playing there Call of Dutys and Halos, and I'm still in the 1990s playing my snes with the killer instinct it came with.
Why are people so offended by this? Most of us appreciate retro games due to nostalgia. Kids today don't have that nostalgia. So of course the games are going to seem dull and boring to them.
Think of it like cars. I like modern cars and I love seeing the brand new models every year even if I can't afford many of them. But when I see old muscle cars I yawn. I respect them as the powerful vehicles that they are, but I find no appeal in them and I'll never own one.
And why are we acting like more save points in a bad thing? It's called technology and it exists for a reason. Most of us adults don't have 3-4 hours to spend in a straight gaming sessions, especially those of us with homes or wives or children. It's great to put in 30 minutes or an hour and save and come back later.
I think both sides are ignorant, those who shun old games because they are too primitive, and those who shun new games because they are "too easy / too fancy / like a movie / etc." I love my Tecmo Super Bowl for a quick arcade football session, but there is no better feeling then beating your friend on the last second play in Madden when you break a tackle down the sidelines. There's something to be said about realism in games.
I'm pretty sure save points were not a technology barrier. They just didn't have more in most NES games because it makes the games dull. Where is the excitement in a game, if there is no risk? I bought the SNK arcade collection for PS2, and I thought it was going to be awesome. I never play the damn thing though, because every game gives you unlimited credits. If there is not challenge, the game just becomes unplayable for me.
If they weren't a technology barrier then why didn't every game come with a save battery? Because of costs, which are directly associated with technology. As technology improves, the cost of adding batteries came down and more games came with built-in saves.
I'm not sure if you're being stubborn just to argue or if you honestly believe that save points make games dull? Save points make games convenient and are completely disjoint from difficulty.
You can take an NES game like Ninja Gaiden that is perceived as hard because you have to beat it in one sitting with no save points. However, you have unlimited continues and you restart at the beginning of a stage when you die (except for Stage 6), so how hard is it really? Or take a game like Henry Hatsworth for DS which let's you save after every level, and gives you a mini-checkpoint right before boss battles. I swear I spent about 2 hours reloading and refighting the same damn boss over and over until I beat him. The checkpoint took no enjoyment out of the game, it just saved me time and repetition from having to play the long goddamn level for 15 minutes leading up to the boss.
Games should be hard based on enemy placement, power-ups, health bars, combo execution, and other game play mechanisms. Games should not be artificially hard because they require you to beat them in one sitting. And from a marketing standpoint, all games should be released with difficulty levels (as virtually all of them are nowadays), so it appeals to a wide audience of gamers... from beginners to the hardcore experts.
I'm not sure if you're being stubborn just to argue or if you honestly believe that save points make games dull? Save points make games convenient and are completely disjoint from difficulty.
Good call...I save my COD every 3-4 minutes. Obsessive? Maybe. But it saves me from taking the same enemy's life multiple times.
I just turned 18 a few weeks ago, my first system was a Snes. I still have that very same snes hooked up in my room.
Oh what joyous times my friends and i had.... But now its only me... They're off playing there Call of Dutys and Halos, and I'm still in the 1990s playing my snes with the killer instinct it came with.
I know what you mean. I took all kinds of grief from my friends in the late 90's for not upgrading to a PlayStation. While they were all drooling over Final Fantasy 7, I was still happily whooping Kefka's ass in FF3. Good times.
I think young kids have their point. They didn't grow up with the retro stuff, most of them can't play Mario as I can but they will kick my ass in MW2 with their eyes closed...
Not me...I whip those punk azz kids into shape. Those suckers wanna n00b tube me I'll use strategy to get them.
I really feel that newer games are easier. They all have tutorials. Honestly our games had instruction manuals that you read...or you went in blind. Most newer games have saves/checkpoints etc. Older games had passwords. The passwords usually didn't even give you half the stuff you had before you died. And those with battery backup were few and far between(other than RPGS).
Just an interesting story I thought I'd share.
Why are people so offended by this? Most of us appreciate retro games due to nostalgia. Kids today don't have that nostalgia. So of course the games are going to seem dull and boring to them.
Think of it like cars. I like modern cars and I love seeing the brand new models every year even if I can't afford many of them. But when I see old muscle cars I yawn. I respect them as the powerful vehicles that they are, but I find no appeal in them and I'll never own one.
And why are we acting like more save points in a bad thing? It's called technology and it exists for a reason. Most of us adults don't have 3-4 hours to spend in a straight gaming sessions, especially those of us with homes or wives or children. It's great to put in 30 minutes or an hour and save and come back later.
I think both sides are ignorant, those who shun old games because they are too primitive, and those who shun new games because they are "too easy / too fancy / like a movie / etc." I love my Tecmo Super Bowl for a quick arcade football session, but there is no better feeling then beating your friend on the last second play in Madden when you break a tackle down the sidelines. There's something to be said about realism in games.
I'm pretty sure save points were not a technology barrier. They just didn't have more in most NES games because it makes the games dull. Where is the excitement in a game, if there is no risk? I bought the SNK arcade collection for PS2, and I thought it was going to be awesome. I never play the damn thing though, because every game gives you unlimited credits. If there is not challenge, the game just becomes unplayable for me.
If they weren't a technology barrier then why didn't every game come with a save battery? Because of costs, which are directly associated with technology. As technology improves, the cost of adding batteries came down and more games came with built-in saves.
I'm not sure if you're being stubborn just to argue or if you honestly believe that save points make games dull? Save points make games convenient and are completely disjoint from difficulty.
You can take an NES game like Ninja Gaiden that is perceived as hard because you have to beat it in one sitting with no save points. However, you have unlimited continues and you restart at the beginning of a stage when you die (except for Stage 6), so how hard is it really? Or take a game like Henry Hatsworth for DS which let's you save after every level, and gives you a mini-checkpoint right before boss battles. I swear I spent about 2 hours reloading and refighting the same damn boss over and over until I beat him. The checkpoint took no enjoyment out of the game, it just saved me time and repetition from having to play the long goddamn level for 15 minutes leading up to the boss.
Games should be hard based on enemy placement, power-ups, health bars, combo execution, and other game play mechanisms. Games should not be artificially hard because they require you to beat them in one sitting. And from a marketing standpoint, all games should be released with difficulty levels (as virtually all of them are nowadays), so it appeals to a wide audience of gamers... from beginners to the hardcore experts.
And why are we acting like more save points in a bad thing? It's called technology and it exists for a reason. Most of us adults don't have 3-4 hours to spend in a straight gaming sessions, especially those of us with homes or wives or children. It's great to put in 30 minutes or an hour and save and come back later. "
Why don't you record this and you could make an NA version of kid's say the darnest things
Somewhere on youtube there are a few interesting videos in a 3 or 4 part (more like 3 or 4 game) series of exactly what you describe - A kid is introduced to a NES game and plays it for around a week, then responds to a sort of question session about what he thought about the whole ordeal.
They're pretty interesting If I recall correctly, but I can't seen to find them. I absolutely KNOW that one of the games was Contra and another was TMNT, but even searching "Kid retrospective review contra TMNT turtles blah blah blah" all I can find is normal reviews and youtube poop.
If any of you feel ambitious maybe you should look for the videos so that we may all watch them to snicker in glee.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rKnzeXkefDo