Games that Haven't aged well

I got to thinking this after Getting Tekken 5 and going back to Tekken 1 and Tekken 2 and realizing the first 2 games suck now (3 is still good)

I don't think Joust and robotron aged all that well either as well as Xevious

Others off the top of my head

Primal Rage
Mortal Kombat
The Simpsons Arcade game (since it was made after Season 1)
Ninja Gaiden Arcade
Almost everything on the 2600

 

Soul Edge hasnt aged well at all, as I was disappointed to find out heh.

 

Sonic Adventure is one of those that was impressive when the Dreamcast came out, but feels unimpressive by todays standards.

Pretty much all the Pokemon games before D/P. Its hard to go back once you play the DS versions (Mostly because the battles are much slower).

Most FPS games from Quake 2 to Half-Life. Something about colored lighting and MS paint quality textures does not do well.

Final Fantasy VII is another one. 8 and 9 hold up very well for playstation games, but VII's textures look like complete shit.

Zelda II on a gameplay standpoint. I remember hating it back when it first came out, and I still think it is quite broken.

 

Well...

Descent and Cyberia look tacky today, and those had some of the best graphics in those days. HL1 and Homeworld1 look kinda bad too, specially the HL with its unrealistic (as in deformed) character models and blurry textures.

On the console side, I'll say that while Starfox and Virtua Racing still look okay all other polygon games from the 16bit era look like crap today, specially those from the jag. Early Saturn and PSX games look laughable to say the least, specially cyber sled.

I'll say most 2D games still look good mostly due to the fact that 2D never peaked at the time (like, we didnt get NeoGeo-grade 2Ds in the mass market) and therefore there little to compare, not like with 3Ds now when you look at GoW, then at Doom and its like "what was I thinking?".

 

you were probably thinking these are the best damn graphics available at the time. kinda makes you think a lot of retro games collecting leads to a long line of disappointing reaquaintances with beloved games.

 

Ah, but there is a huge difference between what can be a completely compelling, yet simple title and what can be a rather complex title which fails to hold your attention.

I would suggest games like Klax, Tetris, Arkanoid & Mario might not on the whole appear to be graphically exciting, but I can still happily play for hours and get rather tense if I don't beat previous best records. I am sure that few current members will remember a Rainbird title called "Thrust". I have that on an old 8-bit Amstrad upstairs and I've recently rediscovered it (basically because I repaired my 464). Anyhow, I spent almost 3hrs playing on it without giving it a seconds thought. Graphics or no graphics that damned pesky little ship assigned to remove the nuclear core HAD to be saved!

On the other hand, I can think of many titles that have failed to live up to expectations because they simply didn't have that appealing, challenging, addictive & / or simple essense that is "gaming".

 

Hmmm .. that's a good topic question actually.

In my opinion

Sonic Adventure: I just really don't feel this game at all anymore, its boring, the voice acting sucks, and its slow.... Its not sonic and its not fun. The levels are either decent or annoying because of shoddy camera work . The chao were cool, but SA2 chao system is just a heck of a lot better. And whats a shame is that this is me playing Sonic Adventure DX, which was a shoddy excuse for a remake!! it still pisses me off when I think about paying full price for the game only to find out that almost nothing had been fixed or added. The camera for christ sake was dying to be fixed. But, I digress...

1080 snowboarding: Now here is a game that just makes me upset when I come back to it. I remeber at one point this being my favorite game for months on end, trying to master everything. The problem is, is that I play it and I guess its just not fun anymore, b/c the other snowboarding games seem to have replaced my idea of what a good snowboarding game should have (tricks, tricks, tricks). I guess the fact that this is a more focused racer then a trick game has made it pale in comparision. Still maybe I need to spend a bit more time with it as I only picked it up for a hour the last time.

Goldeneye 007: Maybe I'm crazy, but meh this one just isn't as fun for me, maybe I've grow tired of FPS's. Maybe after using wii I'm still waiting for the first easy to control shooter. I dunno, but for me the multiplayer wasn't that great the last time we tried it, but again, it was a quick afair only using one level, and perhaps I needed to famillarize myself more with the controls. It was fun sure, just not incredible.

Others maybe, Splatterhouse.

can't think of any others. maybe I need to revist more of my old collection.

 

I also feel the same with quite a lot of old classic 3D games. I can play any N64 games but when it comes to games like Timesplitters which I remember playing loads when it first came out just don't cut it any more Also feel the same for Sonic Adventure. 2D games oddly I can still play like the fresh. Street Fighter and Streets of Rage would be a good example.

 

All of the Resident Evil games before 4 because after playing with the new control scheme the old "steer your character like an RC car" controls feel really awkward.

 

Dude how could you buy that DX crap? reviews everywhere said it had a mere character model fix, but thats all.

Anyway, the problem I see with SA today is mainly the framerate: only on certain moments (like in the loops of Speed Highway) you get the 60fps, but the rest of the game runs on 30fps, which makes the whole thing look jerky.

At the time that wasnt a problem at all since more games were actually running below the 30fps mark, but today with every single game running at a 60fps minimun and more, SA feels slower than frozen yogurt.

That coupled with the glitches and unpolished details kinda breaks the illusion.

 

A trend that would continue in other 3d sonic games.

However I think Next Gen is actually a pretty good game. 5 people agree with me but those 5 people are right.

 

Final Fantasy VII.

and maybe street fighter 2/2CE/2Turbo is not as good as used to be...
the alpha serie is not so bad (but never reaching the 2d fighting goodness of King Of Fighters)

 

Hahahaha, I thought the complete opposite. RE4 was fun, but the new control scheme was just to much of a change for me. ;-)

And as for games that havent aged well..... I would definately say "The Bouncer." It was nearly one of the first PS2 games I rented, and I loved it. I bought it about 2 weeks ago and thought, "Wow, this is terrible." :crying:

 

I'm with you on the Goldeneye. I played it everychance I had growing up. But now, after playing FPS's with two joysticks on a controller, I can't go back. I can't stand playing Goldeneye anymore, a game that I used to love.

 

a lot of games do still stand up today as exciting and fresh as they always were, but as other members have said with the original concepts being expanded so thoroughly over the years. the originals seem to appear unplayable in many cases. Games which dont rely solely on there graphics will stand the test of time but the early 3d games will not unless they have a great storyline or something else special that isnt offered on a later system. there is a difference between just plain bad games and games that havent aged well. if a game had a bad control setup or flaws at the time it will only get worse.

 

I find it funny when people say that, 'cause what's probably changed the least in RE4 when compared to previous RE games is actually the controls.
Only difference between controls in RE4 and the previous REs is the added QTE buttons and the free aiming (as in no longer 3 steps for height, but a free system)



Anyway, instead of naming specific games, I'd say that the entire RPG genre often has a hard time passing the test of time.
There are always some sort of improvements/alterations/variations of the gameplay formula for RPGs that makes it somewhat hard to go back to previous incarnations or older RPGs in general. Though, some of them have stories and settings that passes the test perfectly fine.

I also think that most newer "cinematic" RPGs wont pass the test of time storywise, unlike some older "less cinematic/visually realistic" RPGs have.

The older games, with their lack of Voice Acting and the abstract look on everything, leaves quite a lot up to your imagination. Making everything about the gameplay experience more personal to you, kinda like reading a book.
Newer cinematic games basicly robs you of your fantasy and imagination and gives you everything. Basicly creating somewhat of a similiar thing to what you often hear when there are movies made out of books; the whole "the book was better"-thing. Which is what makes people often remember a book better than a movie, 'cause there's quite a lot of use of your imagination and fantasy when reading a book.

 

It's totally different cuz the old REs are viewed from isometric camera angles while RE4 is viewed from the character's perspective. The old backgrounds are pre-rendered and RE4 is free roaming 3D.

As for games like GoldenEye and Perfect Dark, yeah, they were phenomenal when they first came out but now the frame rate just feels way too slow.

Edit: The RPG conundrum, as in "cinematic experience vs. make your own adventure" seems to divide a lot of people. I like a good story but most modern RPGs seem very contrived. I'm tired of big headed kids with giant swords and no parental supervision trying to save the world from darkness.

 

DX was retarded, but it ran at 60fps, or at least it ran smoother then the old one.

 

For what I saw it has the same dumb glitches from SA1...

SA2 is still in my opinion the best 3D sonic game yet, the problem is those dumb tails and knuckles levels, since the sonic areas of the game boast some of the best level design in the series.

Nope, I remember IGN was about "WTF? its still running at 30fps!" when it came out.

From the wiki:

The original 60fps frame rate was partially restored. Unfortunately, due to the unstable nature of the Sonic Adventure engine, the frame rate frequently fluctuates ramdomly between 60fps and 30fps, usually very rapidly, and even in places where few objects are displayed, and/or where the Dreamcast version didn't slow down.

The is only "major" improvements are the updated models (which is good cuz the hands alone looked like something out of the N64) and some extras like the GG games, but thats all.

 

It sure seemed smoother to me anyhow. Especially the first level.