Games that just wouldn't be made in the modern game industry

[alienjesus]

There's a fair number of difficult games being released today. Can we let go of the "games of yore were so much harder, I grew chest hair when I was 7 just by playing" line?

When I was a kid, I didn't like the really hard games. They just didn't get played. I wanted to turn on a game and enjoy it, I wasnt going to sit for hours trying to get past some challenge I wasn't having fun with. I had other toys I could be playing with, and plenty of books to read (I was a readaholic as a kid). Thus on my SNES, Donkey Kong Country 3 got a lot of love, but Prince of Persia got none. On my Mega drive, I loved Sonic and Streets of Rage and Bomberman, but I hated Revenge of Shinobi because I couldnt get past the 2nd level. In fact, It wasn't until I played through it again last year that I realise what a good game it was. The fact is, I don't see why it matters if games have got easier or not: they're there to be fun, and quite honestly I find that the difficulty in a lotof older games really detracts from that. Even now I can't be assed with the original Prince of Persia series.

Video games were one of many toys I had, and as a kid, if one toy wasn't fun, why should I play with that one over another one I know I'll enjoy?

[ZeroAX]

To be fair a game can be very very hard, and still fun. Donkey Kong Country Returns manages that. You will die a lot, but lives are so easy to get, the game saves automatically constantly, and the game over screen doesn't mean you lost hours of your life.

Many old games used cheap tricks, like no saving your game, or limited lives, to get you to insert more credits in the Arcade machine, or for their 10 level game to last longer. Some did it while providing a fun game.

Though these days I just don't have the time to be playing these games, so after a couple of tries of playing Earthworm Jim and Alladin till the end, I just gave up on those games, cause I don't have the time to be playing the same stuff again and again, only to run out of time once I reach the part I haven't beaten yet.

[Lord_Santa]

I mean, say what you want but having to type commands is far, far worse than using graphical menus. And having to write down maps is boring.

and that is what we call an opinion

I for one (and I know there are more) disagree and love taking notes, drawing maps and interacting with characters through typing

That doesn't mean they were good because of such technical limitations. I would say that they were good in spite of such limitations.

if you ever get around to actually try some of the games I mentioned, you will soon realize that they are great games in the way that they were made

they didn't have a need for more "advanced" technology; International Karate being a splendid example of what is in my opinion the greatest fighter games to ever surface, simply due to the fact that they use only one button

[Erik_Twice]

and that is what we call an opinion

No more than everything you say.

if you ever get around to actually try some of the games I mentioned,

I already did. I have beaten most of the games in your list so don't think for a moment I don't know what I'm talking about because I very much do.

[Lord_Santa]

and that is what we call an opinion
No more than everything you say.

such as?
do note I clarify when stating opinions, instead of typing it trying to make it sound like a fact

( "I mean, say what you want but having to type commands is far, far worse than using graphical menus. And having to write down maps is boring." ) <--- case in point

if you ever get around to actually try some of the games I mentioned,

I already did. I have beaten most of the games in your list so don't think for a moment I don't know what I'm talking about because I very much do.

then explain to me what these technological limitations are on the games, in no specific order

[ZeroAX]

such as?
do note I clarify when stating opinions, instead of typing it trying to make it sound like a fact

Yeah, but at the same time someone might enjoy being anally probed by airport security. It doesn't change the fact that most people hate it

[Lord_Santa]

such as?
do note I clarify when stating opinions, instead of typing it trying to make it sound like a fact

Yeah, but at the same time someone might enjoy being anally probed by airport security. It doesn't change the fact that most people hate it

only problem is that writing maps, typing questions and taking notes is considered a "standard" in cRPG's which are considered "retro"

it may not be what most people like, but given the forum we are discussing on, I dare say that it's a valid point

[Erik_Twice]

such as?
do note I clarify when stating opinions, instead of typing it trying to make it sound like a fact

You know why it wasn't phrased like an opinion? Because I wasn't issuing an opinion.

And you "try to make opinions sound like facts" very often hence my comment. If you want to play the subjective card remember that it applies to you as well.

For example:
"you will soon realize that they are great games"
Isn't that an opinion?

only problem is that writing maps, typing questions and taking notes is considered a "standard" in cRPG's which are considered "retro"

Nobody contested that they were commonplace, what we quesiton is that they are good mechanics.

[Gunstar Green]

The "In my day games were almost impossible to beat and we liked it that way." is going to become the "We walked fifteen miles in the snow to go to school." of our generation.

Some games are good because they're hard, others don't have to be. It depends on what you're looking for. Each game needs to find its own balance based on what it's trying to accomplish. There's still a lot of nightmarishly difficult games out there today. You just have to go look for them.

The industry doesn't have to rely on difficulty as much as it used to. And that's a good thing.

[ZeroAX]

Imo a good "hard" game is a game where once you've mastered it, you can beat it in 1/4 the time it took you when you weren't so good at it.