Yeah I totally see your point as well. It's the two sides of the game development coin really; having a healthy appreciation and understanding of what came before, as well as having fresh ideas and the boldness to innovate. The hobby suffers if either one is lacking.Exhuminator wrote:The fact is that most people are afraid of new concepts, or at least uncomfortable with them. Most people instinctively seek out familiar experiences because those are safe and known commodities. On the other hand, someone like myself feels like they are wasting their time when they are playing a game that is just a straight aping of a previous experience. Is either approach better? Well that boils down to what each individual gamer is seeking from their gameplay experience.
I think it's possible to successfully revisit older ideas and mechanics in gaming, but it requires knowledge and insight into what made those ideas great in the first place. A developer has to have a thorough understanding of the older concept in order to reuse it successfully. Level design, implementation of mechanics, capturing a certain feel while having the wisdom to know when it becomes derivative; all of these things contribute to successful implementation of older ideas into modern gaming.
We've long since passed the point at which "retro-gamer" became just another marketing demographic. I think the best we can do at this point is embrace the good that's come out of it and shun the bad. I do think some innovative and interesting things have been done within this realm (along with plenty of drivel naturally); but likewise I think that we run the risk of missing out on some quality titles if we become overly dismissive of games on the grounds of "not innovative enough". I think as you pointed out in another thread, A Link Between Worlds is still a solid game even if it's not particularly groundbreaking.
