In my twitter War with that douche from The Verge about Nights. He said pretty much All Saturn games don't hold up. I told him that isn't true since I only recently got a Saturn. So far... I got nothin even the games that look like complete ass with a Fame rate of nothing like Daytona are still fun as hell to play.
Sorry to say it, but Virtua Cop 1 doesn't hold up, it's way too slow compared to the faster, more fun light gun shooters that came afterwards. VC2 is a lot more fun, but it also feels a bit slow for me nowadays. Manx TT is also pretty disappointing because of the lack of content.
I can't disagree there and playing it with a controller is a real bitch the response time between pulling the trigger and the gun firing is way too long.
Most games from the mid-90s have aged extremely badly, but Saturn ones still hold up surprisingly well because most of them are arcade-styled.
I mostly pursued the Shmup library with my saturn and i think this system is badass. I had plenty of fun with Shining force 3 also. I seriously cant think of a bad game right now, but im sure there are some out there.
It's not a game, but the Netlink really doesn't hold up. The only times I really fire up a Saturn these days is for shooters and the occasional round of Virtua Fighter 2.
That's not really true, there are several terrible ports on XBLA that don't have anything extra except maybe online multiplayer if you're lucky. The overpriced Simpsons arcade is a good example.
Most of the Saturn games I've played that didn't age well were American games, which were usually half-assed ports. I've enjoyed pretty much all of the SEGA-developed Saturn games I've played, with the one exception of Virtua Fighter (the port of the original Model 1 game). That game is buggy as hell. Right, nowadays we expect games to be much shittier.
I don't agree with this "age" point of view (bullshit). The bad games of the time are the bad games today. Cyber Speeday, for example. It's weird. So simple. What were they thinking?
A game's own quality doesn't change. Expectations can however. I mean things like NES Baseball I'm sure I played my fill of at some point. But I'd be unlikely invest much time into them now. So many newer games are fancier, smoother, prettier, more realistic...
Going of what some people are saying in this thread then ALL games on ALL systems haven't aged well due to lack of contents and not as good versions as some modern ports or emulation. In that case, why the fuck are we still playing them? To say a game hasn't aged well due to lack of contents is stupid.
It is a stupid thing to say. What you have to consider is, to say a game hasn't held up means you once considered it really good and now think it's bad, and the chances of your mind being swayed so extremely just by the age of a game is highly highly unlikely. You can't for example say The Crow City Of Angels on the Saturn doesn't hold up because it was utter shit to begin with. Tomb Raider started life on the Saturn, it was a great game then and it's a great game now.
Some people in general just ignore or don't appreciate older games. Who knows why. I've heard people say, I'm not nostalgic. Which I can understand if you are not nostalgic you don't cut the game any breaks. But you can still judge it on how it is as a game. Some people are graphics/technology whores and won't play the old games because they aren't on the modern level of graphics. It's their loss. I'll still play a PS1 or Saturn 3D game. If it's a good game, it doesn't matter to me that it isn't in 1080p with 4x Anti Aliasing or whatever.
It's because games have improved over the years? I still think the Saturn has great games, Fighting Vipers hasn't been re-released (no the PS2 version doesn't count) it's the only system that has it. Daytona on the Saturn sucks though, the Arcade version however still holds up today (for me). In summary, I think the Saturn is fine. If you're a true retro gamer and love SEGA it will always hold up. A "reviewer's" opinions are usually biased anyway. I wouldn't take it to heart.