Classic games I've never played

Retr0gamer

Penn wrote: »

That's fair enough, and it is a subjective thing. I guess my point was basically, I don't know if Mario World is a good game. I don't know if Sleeping Dogs is a good game. But given a choice between the two (which is a realistic choice as like you said, emulators and roms can be downloaded in minutes, and I'm currently downloading Sleeping Dogs for free from PS+), I'm going to play Sleeping Dogs because I think current gen games (with good reviews) are more appealing to a lot of people than much older games (even if they are considered to be classics). Just my opinion based on my own preferences though.

In my opinion, choosing Sleeping Dogs over Super Mario World is a terrible choice, but then the world sometimes has to deal with terrible choices :P

A lot of it is down to other factors. As a lot of us on the arcade and retro forum have discussed despite us all having emulators and roms on PC's we very rarely ever play them. There's a convenience thing as well to it. Why would you turn on a PC, wait for it to boot and then boot up an emulator, connect up a pad that isn't total dirt for these games (in other words not a PS3 or 360 pad) just so you can play a game when you can just jump into your steam list and be playing away or play a game on a console that is sitting in front of the TV. There's also the 'bamboozled with choice' factor as well. You have an entire consoles library in front of you it can be hard to pick one.

In my own experience I never played emulators much myself until I hacked my Wii. Now it's convenient for me to just switch on the wii and be in snes9x within seconds.

Now if you had a super nintendo with super mario world in front of the TV you'll be more inclined to play it. Then you will kick yourself for wasting time on mediocre open world games when you could be playing something with heart, soul and pixel perfect game design.

CastorTroy

Or play Mario World while waiting for Sleeping Dogs to download. What I sometimes do is use emulators as "just a quick go" games like you would solitaire or minesweeper. Or in my case GTA 2, which I never played properly. Had it on my desktop and if doing a report for college, would open it up, go to the bottom right corner and get the tank for a kill frenzy. Ah fun times. Got to level 3 without doing any missions.

Though I remember just starting up the Simpsons arcade game on MAME for a quick go. The quick go lasted until I completed the game. Reminds me I must do the same with the Turtles Arcade game

krudler

Penn wrote: »

That's fair enough, and it is a subjective thing. I guess my point was basically, I don't know if Mario World is a good game. I don't know if Sleeping Dogs is a good game. But given a choice between the two (which is a realistic choice as like you said, emulators and roms can be downloaded in minutes, and I'm currently downloading Sleeping Dogs for free from PS+), I'm going to play Sleeping Dogs because I think current gen games (with good reviews) are more appealing to a lot of people than much older games (even if they are considered to be classics). Just my opinion based on my own preferences though.

Preferences are good, as are valid opinions and articulate arguments that don't just go "old games are sh1t!" :pac:

I think a big part of it is a generational thing as well, I'm almost 32, so I was a kid during the late NES/early SNES and Megadrive years, teenager during PS1 when gaming became cool again, adult for the PS2 and onward and now a grownup (ha!) during the current gen.
Rose tinted glasses may be a big part of why I emulate a lot, but I just enjoy playing older games, sure tons of them don't hold up at all, but bonafide classics like Super Metroid (I think that game has been mentioned more times than anything else on this thread lol), A Link To The Past, Mario World, etc. etc. will stay classics forever because they're brilliantly designed and simply enjoyable to play.

I enjoy playing current gen stuff as much as the next person, and there's loads on the radar I can't wait for. But the 16bit era will always hold a place in my withered, blackened heart. If someone told the 10 year old me that one day I'd own a device with more SNES games than I could dream of that fits in my pocket, I'd have called them a lying scumbag, but here we are, best of both worlds, HD current gen gaming at home and classic stuff on portable devices. It's never been a better time to be a gamer and revisit past generations of stuff.

johnny_ultimate

Kinski wrote: »

And so maybe the same applies to Portal, which is only a fraction of the length of HL2. But having said all that, I still think Portal falls short. IMO, it doesn't outstay its welcome because it doesn't have enough ambition, doesn't push its gameplay mechanics as far as it can, leaving lots of unrealised potential leftover. That's why I don't consider it one of the greatest games ever.

I think it's important to remember the context of Portal's arrival, which still dictates why it enjoys such a strong reputation (although of course the game speaks for itself too). It was - despite being developed by Valve - a bit of an underdog. An experimental game, made by a couple of graduates based on a final year project, and bundled with two of the most anticipated sequels of all-time. Both those games were fantastic, but it was the little game that got the most attention - this brief, wildly imaginative title that had more ambition in its short running time than dozens of higher profile titles put together. Add to that a near peerless script and one of the rare breed of genuinely 'funny' games and you had a true one-of-a-kind - and all built on basically one glorious gameplay trick. If it was a proof of concept, it was perhaps the finest proof of concept gaming had ever seen. HL2: Episode 2 and TF2 were no slouches in the quality department, but they were more than matched by Portal's wild invention.

Games, probably more than any other medium (although very few authors or directors made their masterpiece first go around), are often reliant on sequels and iteration to fulfill their true potential. This is a bit of an inevitability, given the medium's reliance on advancing technology and commercial success. But even Portal 2, as wonderful as it is, needed to add a lot of new tricks and gimmicks over its extended running time. The original has a purity of mechanics and style lacking in so many games. Fair enough if you didn't think it fulfilled its potential, but for so many it was an exhilarating, perfectly paced breath of fresh air.

If you think a different sort of classification or definition is needed, I'm not necessarily going to argue. It's an ongoing process, and being facilitated by paradigm-shifting titles like Dear Esther or Protheus that are causing many to vocally question what the heck the meaning of 'game' is in the first place.

On a vaguely related note, have you played Thirty Flights of Loving? Think it's quite relevant to this discussion. Fifteen minutes long, but one that utilizes cinematic editing techniques to satirically but intelligently comment on the bloat that is often par for the course in gaming.

On the other ongoing discussion: classic games aging? Some have, particularly early 3D titles. But just like the best of classic cinema or literature are still as much if not more vital today, it's great that we still have the opportunity to discover and experience them.

Sleeping Dogs vs Super Metroid? The latter any day of the week.

Sarky

Portal is one of the finest experiences I have enjoyed in 25 years of gaming. Naysayers can gtfo.

It is with no small amount of regret that I confess to never having played Beneath A Steel Sky.

krudler

speaking of point n clickers, I've never played Full Throttle or Monkey Island 1, played 2 though.

Kinski

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

On a vaguely related note, have you played Thirty Shades of Loving? Think it's quite relevant to this discussion. Fifteen minutes long, but one that utilizes cinematic editing techniques to satirically but intelligently comment on the bloat that is often par for the course in gaming.

No, but thanks for the recommendation, looks interesting in a deliberately-bad sort of way. Bloody hard to google though, since it's actually called Thirty Flights of Loving. If you've been secretly reading Fifty Shades of Gray, your unconscious guilt just caused you to give the game away.;)

Kinski

krudler wrote: »

speaking of point n clickers, I've never played Full Throttle or Monkey Island 1, played 2 though.

I've never played Day of the Tentacle! Actually, think there's an android app that lets you run all those games with touchscreen controls, might be worth checking out.

johnny_ultimate

Kinski wrote: »

No, but thanks for the recommendation, looks interesting in a deliberately-bad sort of way. Bloody hard to google though, since it's actually called Thirty Flights of Loving. If you've been secretly reading Fifty Shades of Gray, your unconscious guilt just caused you to give the game away.;)

Hah, I had to google it myself cause I kept writing down Fifty Shades of Loving even though I knew it was wrong :pac:

Darwin

Have to agree with what Krudler said above about gaming and it being a generational thing, I've been around a bit longer than most I suspect and have been gaming since the 8-bit days, so the likes of Scramble, Defender, Jet-set willy, Beach head, Raid over Moscow etc were classics for me. I just can't understand the whole Pokemon thing nor the obsession with anything imported from the far east (e.g. Final Fantasy stuff). Having said that I've no great desire to go back and play those early 8-bit games, I think gaming has never been more exciting with the huge choice of platforms and genres to pick from these days. Anyway back on topic, and I've never played any Nintendo titles except for a small few on the DS, nor some mainstream PC titles such as Half Life 1, Counter Strike etc. I've gotten to the stage where I won't play through a game again either...there is always something else waiting in the wings!

Penn

I'm not exactly young myself and was raised playing my cousins Atari, before we both got MegaDrives (and I'm still the only person I know who had a GameGear). I only had four games for it myself (the 6-in-1 that came with it, Sonic & Knuckles, The Lion King and Mega Bomberman). Then there were whatever games I could rent from our local video shop, or games swapped with friends or relatives. If you gave me the option of playing any of those games now, I probably would. If you gave me the option of playing Legend of Zelda (which I've never played), I probably wouldn't. I honestly think nostalgia plays a huge part in it. Not that they're not good games and wouldn't be playable, but I'd just have no desire to play them over current gen games. Maybe I'd be more inclined to play them as krudler said on a portable device or something. I just think when comparing like for like (a SNES with Legend of Zelda and an Xbox with Halo (both being games from series' I've never played on consoles I never had)), I'd go with the much more modern game (not in every instance, but the gap between the examples is quite substantial)

nesf

krudler wrote: »

I think a big part of it is a generational thing as well, I'm almost 32, so I was a kid during the late NES/early SNES and Megadrive years, teenager during PS1 when gaming became cool again, adult for the PS2 and onward and now a grownup (ha!) during the current gen.
Rose tinted glasses may be a big part of why I emulate a lot, but I just enjoy playing older games, sure tons of them don't hold up at all, but bonafide classics like Super Metroid (I think that game has been mentioned more times than anything else on this thread lol), A Link To The Past, Mario World, etc. etc. will stay classics forever because they're brilliantly designed and simply enjoyable to play.

I enjoy playing current gen stuff as much as the next person, and there's loads on the radar I can't wait for. But the 16bit era will always hold a place in my withered, blackened heart. If someone told the 10 year old me that one day I'd own a device with more SNES games than I could dream of that fits in my pocket, I'd have called them a lying scumbag, but here we are, best of both worlds, HD current gen gaming at home and classic stuff on portable devices. It's never been a better time to be a gamer and revisit past generations of stuff.

I'm similar, 31 and messing around with computer/console platforms since I was 8 or so. Started with a Sinclair Spectrum, I don't really want to go back to those game. What was different for me is that my parents bought me and my brother a PC when I was 14 or so (I had an interest in computer programming back then) and I discovered PC gaming.

What I really want to go back and do is play Panzer General, Fantasy General, Steel Panthers (all of these are old SSI games and lost in "who owns the trademark" madness after SSI's collapse), SM's Alpha Centuri, maybe Civ II, Transport Tycoon, UFO + the sequels and similar again. I don't feel any urge to go back to Sonic or Starfox or any of the earlier console games I played, they never really seized me in the way strategy games on the PC did.

Possibly the most fun thing has been introducing my 6 year old son to computer gaming (his 3 year old sister is treading the same path). Unfortunately my taste in games isn't that suitable for his young age and my attempts to introduce him to Sonic were met with "this is just too hard." My wife, who grew up in the NES/SNES world has had more success with introducing him to Mario. I did manage one victory though, for the iPad there's a hex based, turn based game in the Shogun Total War franchise and I bought it for myself initially. A small while later I discovered him playing it obsessively to try and figuring out all the rules and tactics for himself (being 6, he isn't good at reading yet so help files are no use so everything is figured out through trial and error). He managed the clear the game, it's pretty much a pretty standard rock/paper/scissors kind of wargame and he got the hang of it. He's just wavering on the age that I could start him on PC wargaming, I was looking at something like Battle for Wesnoth or Fantasy Wars/Elven Legacy for him (and me). They're basically spiritual sequels to a lesser and greater extent respectfully to Fantasy General which I loved but which isn't available through GoG like the rest of SSI's wargames and since it's an old DOS game it needs DosBox and doesn't run properly (no sound, and the music was very good even including a Bach Cantata if I remember right).

Anyway, sorry for rambling, basically the fun starts when you're introducing a kid to the classics from your childhood. Oh, and having them sit by your shoulder plying you with questions whilst playing a modern game*.

*Of course this tendency also means you can't play certain games in your collection until they're in bed!

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

djwheat (esports guy) made a show where he was teaching his six year old son how to play starcraft 2.. kid picked up quite a few of the basics

maybe yours would like age of empires 1 or the original c&c? they're slow enough games that apm/micro wouldn't be a huge issue, just grasping the basics of production and resource gathering

nesf

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar wrote: »

djwheat (esports guy) made a show where he was teaching his six year old son how to play starcraft 2.. kid picked up quite a few of the basics

maybe yours would like age of empires 1 or the original c&c? they're slow enough games that apm/micro wouldn't be a huge issue, just grasping the basics of production and resource gathering

Oh Age of Empires might be good, that's one both myself and my wife used to play quite a bit. Thanks for the idea.

Potential-Monke

nesf wrote: »

Oh Age of Empires might be good, that's one both myself and my wife used to play quite a bit. Thanks for the idea.

I recommend the second one over the other 2.

krudler

there's tons of RTS games I've never played, have played a few of the C&C ones, never stuff like Civilisation or Rome or any of those, havent had a gaming pc since forever and was never really into strategy games tbh.

does World of Warcraft count? never played that either, well I played it for all of a half hour at a friends, but endless grinding doesnt appeal.

havent played Earthbound either, don't really know a whole lot about the series

SouthTippBass

I have never played any Metal Gear Solid game, or any Megaman game.

I tried to play Super Metroid back when it was released for the Wii virtual console, I got lost after a few hours in and I just gave up. Same with Link to the past, I realised I just wasnt enjoying either so much so I just quit halfway. I just didnt "get" either of those titles.

Oh well...

dorkacle

SouthTippBass wrote: »

I have never played any Metal Gear Solid game, or any Megaman game.

Sort that out fast :P MGS gets a mixed reception from different gamers.
I absolutely love it though!

And for RTS games, I'd say get stuck into Warcraft 3. Best RTS I've personally played!

I played the latest Starcraft, (never played the old) and just couldn't get into it however...

COYVB

Castlevania is the only one u can think of off the top of my head

nesf

krudler wrote: »

there's tons of RTS games I've never played, have played a few of the C&C ones, never stuff like Civilisation or Rome or any of those, havent had a gaming pc since forever and was never really into strategy games tbh.

Civ definitely isn't a RTS.

Real time strategy like the C&C games is quite different to turn based strategy like Civ, the Generals series from SSI or UFO (for three different scales of play). Strategy is a genre that definitely isn't for everybody though. The more hardcore "grognard" games especially.

tok9

Magill wrote: »

Im ashamed to admit it, but i've never played shadow of the colossus... im sorry.
.

I don't understand, do you have a ps2 or 3 as it's available on both. You should get it right now!

krudler

Shadow Of The Colossus is one of the best games ever made, some people hated its sparseness and the fact there's only 16 enemies in the game, but its one of those rare games that makes you feel something as you play it. The soundtrack is magnificent as well.

sarumite

nesf wrote: »

Civ definitely isn't a RTS.

Real time strategy like the C&C games is quite different to turn based strategy like Civ, the Generals series from SSI or UFO (for three different scales of play). Strategy is a genre that definitely isn't for everybody though. The more hardcore "grognard" games especially.

Civ is greatest game I never play. Only because I want a life and having spent too many nights turning into mornings with the "one more turn" attitude wasn't good. I was thinking of getting Civ revolutions as I heard it is less involved.

nesf

sarumite wrote: »

Civ is greatest game I never play. Only because I want a life and having spent too many nights turning into mornings with the "one more turn" attitude wasn't good. I was thinking of getting Civ revolutions as I heard it is less involved.

Civ Rev is very lightweight. It's hated by a lot of Civ fans for the changes made but if you think of it as bringing a lighter form of Civ to a broader audience who want more casual friendly game lengths (let's face it, someone can dedicate weeks to a single Civ campaign if they want to) then it can be ok. Just don't go into it expecting Civ, it's quite different.

NTMK

nesf wrote: »

Civ Rev is very lightweight. It's hated by a lot of Civ fans for the changes made but if you think of it as bringing a lighter form of Civ to a broader audience who want more casual friendly game lengths (let's face it, someone can dedicate weeks to a single Civ campaign if they want to) then it can be ok. Just don't go into it expecting Civ, it's quite different.

Lightweights:pac:

SouthTippBass

dorkacle wrote: »

Sort that out fast :P MGS gets a mixed reception from different gamers.
I absolutely love it though!

I'd like to. I'd like to start at the beginning though, with the first MGS. I remember the buzz of that game getting released for PS1 back in the Christmas of whatever year it came out, I didnt own a PS at the time though, so it passed me by. Same with MGS2, didnt really care for the concept of MGS3, so that was that then.

But what are my options to play MGS1? I couldnt go back and play the original now, it would look like ass, and the gamecube version is a bit expensive on ebay. Any chance of a HD download getting a release on PS3 anytime soon?

Id happily drop €10 on it.

Retr0gamer

The original MGS holds up extremely well in the gameplay department and still looks great. You can get away with low tech graphics with great art and MGS is a good case in point. Whatever you do, don't play the GC remake. It adds MGS2 features like first person aiming that completely break the game, the dialogue was rerecorded and the actors phoned it in since there was a dispute over pay, and the re-done cutscenes are beyond terrible.

SouthTippBass

Retr0gamer wrote: »

The original MGS holds up extremely well in the gameplay department and still looks great. You can get away with low tech graphics with great art and MGS is a good case in point. Whatever you do, don't play the GC remake. It adds MGS2 features like first person aiming that completely break the game, the dialogue was rerecorded and the actors phoned it in since there was a dispute over pay, and the re-done cutscenes are beyond terrible.

Ok, thanks for the tip, I was not aware of that. Still, I'l hang on for a HD release, it WILL happen eventually. No MGS for me until then

krudler

SouthTippBass wrote: »

Ok, thanks for the tip, I was not aware of that. Still, I'l hang on for a HD release, it WILL happen eventually. No MGS for me until then

MGS doesn't look that bad, I only played it again recently on a ps1 emulator and its grand, you forget about the low res-ness after a while, its still a great game. And yes the Twin Snakes added 1st person aiming and made it way too easy.

Retr0gamer

I'd rather play it than that stinker MGS4. Another case of the classic being better than the modern entry in the series.