Why do we still play retro games?

[DinnerX]

There seems to be a startlingly large number of kids who are WAY too young to be nostalgic--you know, seeing as they're still kids right now--yet who still prefer the older games that you and I grew up with.

This is very true. The same goes for music.

[AppleQueso]

I feel utterly compelled to disagree with the overly cynical view of the current (and future) state of gaming.

...but I can't really think of much to say.

Current gen games are pretty much just last gen games, only prettier. I guess that's not really a bad thing, but it does make everything feel awfully static.

[BoringSupreez]

I think TV animation is in a better state now than in 2001, from both sides of the Pacific.

The animation itself? Maybe. The overall quality of the shows? No.

That's where I think it depends on which side of the Pacific you're talking about. Japanese anime? Yeah, the ratio of good stuff to crap is about the same, and the highs, lows, and the median in story quality are about the same. Nothing has really gotten worse though, so I'd say the current shows are better simply on the merits of the improved animation.

Western animation (maybe "Western" needs quotation marks)? Holy crap did we get better at writing and directing these shows! I think it was about 2000 or 2001 that we only just started to build momentum toward the quality we see now, especially in the action/adventure genre. We had a trickle of good stuff before then, but we were still mostly filling that genre with badly dubbed anime.

Is there still a lot of drivel compared to ten years ago? Sure, and some of it even seems to be the same drivel. But man, if we had shows like the new ThunderCats, Avatar, Ben 10, Venture Bros., Boondocks, TransFormers: Prime--hell, that's a good point of comparison right there. Check out the current TransFormers TV series and compare it to TransFormers: Armada from 2002. It's like the difference between the old and new Captain America movies. Anyway, the point is if we had all these shows over here about a decade ago, my head would have exploded.

I tend to look at the period from 1991-2004 as Western TV animation's golden age. Remember what ran during that period: Ren and Stimpy, Doug, Batman the Animated Series, Rocko's Modern Life, Space Ghost Coast to Coast, The Tick, Animaniacs, Freakazoid, Pinky and the Brain, Dexter's Lab, Johnny Bravo, The Powerpuff Girls, Spongebob seasons 1-3, Courage the Cowardly Dog, Fairly Oddparent's good seasons, Invader Zim, and Billy and Mandy's early seasons. I think these all blow Ben 10 and Transformers out of the water! 2004 and onward just pales in comparison to what we had before. Except for a few exceptions like Flapjack and Adventure Time, most cartoons on TV since have bad flash animation and crappy writing. If we had had today's shows 10 years ago instead of what we did have, my head would be far from exploding. More like crying.

There seems to be a startlingly large number of kids who are WAY too young to be nostalgic--you know, seeing as they're still kids right now--yet who still prefer the older games that you and I grew up with.

This is very true. The same goes for music.

I know that I spend a lot more time listening to 60's-80's music than modern music. It's just so much better than stuff like Katy Perry.

[D.D.D.]

There seems to be a startlingly large number of kids who are WAY too young to be nostalgic--you know, seeing as they're still kids right now--yet who still prefer the older games that you and I grew up with.

This is very true. The same goes for music.

I grew up listening to classical music and 70s rock as my parents influenced my musical taste and anything good is timeless, especially music.

The games part I find odd as I grew up from NES~ and on and I never at the time saw anything appealing about Atari, Coleco etc as they looked crappy compared to the NES + SMS when they were new. For kids today liking SNES etc games, perhaps it's a retro-charm thing but I don't get why there are so many retro kids even when they're still kids and don't have any associated affinity for games that are significantly older (unless their parents showed them).

[flamepanther]

I tend to look at the period from 1991-2004 as Western TV animation's golden age. Remember what ran during that period: Ren and Stimpy, Doug, Batman the Animated Series, Rocko's Modern Life, Space Ghost Coast to Coast, The Tick, Animaniacs, Freakazoid, Pinky and the Brain, Dexter's Lab, Johnny Bravo, The Powerpuff Girls, Spongebob seasons 1-3, Courage the Cowardly Dog, Fairly Oddparent's good seasons, Invader Zim, and Billy and Mandy's early seasons. I think these all blow Ben 10 and Transformers out of the water! 2004 and onward just pales in comparison to what we had before. Except for a few exceptions like Flapjack and Adventure Time, most cartoons on TV since have bad flash animation and crappy writing. If we had had today's shows 10 years ago instead of what we did have, my head would be far from exploding. More like crying.

Hmm. I think we just focus on entirely different types of shows. Since about 1983 onward, I've always gravitated toward the action and adventure shows. After I outgrew Ren & Stimpy, I've never been able to watch comedy cartoons that weren't as witty as Pinky & The Brain--so naturally that, Batman, Rocko, and Invader Zim are about the only shows on your list that I care about at all--and to me they were the exceptions at the time.

Additionally, Batman TAS was closer to 20 years ago than ten. Ditto Rocko's Modern Life, Ren & Stimpy, & a few others you mention. I'm trying to keep to a window of about 5 years in either direction of 2011 and 2001 respectively (which gives the 2001 window an unfair advantage in scope, yet I still prefer the current era). Most of what I'd say are the better shows on your list were cancelled around the beginning of the 2001 era

In any case, I don't mind revising my statement. The current era has seen a massive improvement in the quality and quantity of Western action-adventure series cartoons specifically. Happy?

For kids today liking SNES etc games, perhaps it's a retro-charm thing but I don't get why there are so many retro kids even when they're still kids and don't have any associated affinity for games that are significantly older (unless their parents showed them).

Well, we could listen to the 13 year old that started the thread.

I think there's a lot to the idea that simple fun is better. The big titles in modern games have largely lost that. Some of us have been saying it all along, while maybe others don't want to admit it after yearning for games to "mature" for so long. It's the same reason smart phone games and the Wii are so successful. Modern mega-hit games are drab and homogeneous, interrupt the game frequently to foist a bad drama on the player, and overly cumbersome to play with nothing really to show for the added complexity. Its the very future of gaming I predicted when Tomb Raider and Resident Evil caught fire on the PS1.

Vintage games, on the other hand, like modern "casual" games, tend to be colorful, simple to play yet difficult to master, fun without worrying about story or realism, free of excessive filler content--oh and much cheaper to buy too. What about that would a kid not be likely to prefer? While I occasionally like a deep, dark, gritty game, and I definitely think there's a valid place for these, for the most part I've got to side with these kids. I just think we took a wrong turn somewhere in "the PlayStation Era" in making our current trends the norm instead of a niche.

[pakopako]

I tend to look at the period from 1991-2004 as Western TV animation's golden age....

Hmm. I think we just focus on entirely different types of shows. Since about 1983 onward, I've always gravitated toward the action and adventure shows. After I outgrew Ren & Stimpy, I've never been able to watch comedy cartoons that weren't as witty as Pinky & The Brain--so naturally that, Batman, Rocko, and Invader Zim are about the only shows on your list that I care about at all--and to me they were the exceptions at the time.

This happens to all of us. I was just catching the 2009 animated Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles finale/movie, where they treated the 1987 animated version as its own dimension and had a crossover. While I can say that I liked the humor each character of the early 80s version seemed to have (which was exaggerated in the feature), the 2009 version provided a much more diverse ensemble and more diverse features (and more diverse filler).

The current era has seen a massive improvement in the quality and quantity of Western action-adventure series cartoons specifically.

Animation is significantly smoother, but I could say the same about Japanese animation due to familiarity with new time-saving techniques (CGI). But then again, a lot of modern series are hiring decent or experienced writers who worked in other mediums (comic books, TV dramas, standup comedians, et al.).

Modern mega-hit games are drab and homogeneous, interrupt the game frequently to foist a bad (melo-)drama on the player, and overly cumbersome to play with nothing really to show for the added complexity.

Even back in the 90s, this happened. I give you Final Fantasy II US (SNES) and Final Fantasy Adventure (GB). Those games were exceptions to the rule, RPGs/JRPGs being a smaller genre at the time, but things grew from there. Even Prince of Persia became Blackthorne.

[flamepanther]

(which was exaggerated in the feature)

Not by much, depending on what season of the '87 series you're watching. The first season was fairly solid for its vintage, as was the second season to a lesser degree. Seasons three and onward get a LOT more ridiculous, pretty much to the point we see in Turtles Forever. I mean, they team up with the rabbit from Aesop's The Tortoise and the Hare (literally, it's supposed to be the same one!) to stop Shredder's plan to have Bebop and Rocksteady (in bunny costumes) zap everyone with a ray Krang invented to turn humans into cowards (could the "giggle ray" be from the same batch of inventions?). This story thread continues on into the next episode, wherein the Turtles team up with not just the Hare, but also with comical senile future versions of themselves. Believe me, by that point in the show, it's every bit as silly and outlandish as it was in Turtles Forever. It more or less remains that way until around the final three seasons, when the series decided to take a more serious tone--and also lose 90% of the fanbase, but hey, ten years is a great run!

Even back in the 90s, this happened. I give you Final Fantasy II US (SNES) and Final Fantasy Adventure (GB). Those games were exceptions to the rule, RPGs/JRPGs being a smaller genre at the time, but things grew from there. Even Prince of Persia became Blackthorne.

It happened occasionally, sure, but it didn't really come close to being a trend at that point. I don't have a problem with it as a treat for the most gritty and serious of gamers. It was sort of a trend on Sega CD and CDi, but it didn't catch on with the public there. On the PS1 though, the trend exploded, consuming what seems like a larger portion of each subsequent console generation. It seems like Sony's attempt to market the PS1 as more "mature" placed a lot of extra emphasis on these games (I'm sure dropping shitty FMV-based gameplay helped too).

[dogman91]

Well I see it like this: just because it's "newer" doesn't mean the current generation of game or music creators know out of nowhere how to make "better" music or games (or gain a previous generation's experience at doing them). In the case of developers/composers who worked on past things that were great, it's also not like they know how to get way more creative/inspired as time goes on as well.

I made this same mistake myself when I was in my early teens; pretty much dissing anything that wasn't new as if music/games/movies etc. can be outdated the same way as there are technological advances for other things. Well the world isn't that cut and dry, and in the case of music and games it simply doesn't WORK like that.

In the case of why this is even an issue, would it ever occur to the average person to even search for stuff to listen to or play? Look into a different genre or style? Of course not, there's no reason to... they're already caught up in what they're letting themselves be TOLD is good from what is constantly around them in their environment and with what they're familiar with already; how this is a "hot new release; #1 top hit!"... basically driving these "age" and "popularity" mentalities (or any other reason they can grasp at such as "graphics") in there with the same group as "quality". Plus, no effort on their part! Just watch MTV and listen to their brainless friends (social proof!) for the latest greatest music (or Call of Duty game); convenience is a compelling reason in itself for someone to deny anything old being "better", along with the stubbornness of not wanting to think they have been 'doing it wrong this whole time' in favor of something that requires a lot more effort.

When opening up to something that is "different" (whether it's old or not), IMO it's usually just a matter of getting used to it only because we aren't familiar with the particular format the music genre or style of game is... in other words not because it's OLD! Some people just aren't open-minded enough to even bother; it IS hard to intentionally venture off and spend time listening/playing/reading something with no guarantee of personal satisfaction, but without the effort people will remain mindless drones who won't open their horizons to anything that isn't in front of their face at all times, is what I'm trying to say.

As an example I can relate this to another thread here where you can say the same with cultures thinking that eating bugs is disgusting, and with others thinking it's the most normal thing in the world; it's only what's been driven in to people this whole time for the particular things they are conditioned to perceive in a certain way. Don't be afraid to get out of your comfort zone; it IS possible to enjoy something different as much as you do with what you're used to now... at least someone has done so before and they're human, so it is possible!

tl;dr people who dismiss something only because it's old are dumb.

[pakopako]

Even back in the 90s, this happened. I give you Final Fantasy II US (SNES) and Final Fantasy Adventure (GB). Those games were exceptions to the rule, RPGs/JRPGs being a smaller genre at the time, but things grew from there. Even Prince of Persia became Blackthorne.

It happened occasionally, sure, but it didn't really come close to being a trend at that point. I don't have a problem with it as a treat for the most gritty and serious of gamers. It was sort of a trend on Sega CD and CDi, but it didn't catch on with the public there. On the PS1 though, the trend exploded, consuming what seems like a larger portion of each subsequent console generation. It seems like Sony's attempt to market the PS1 as more "mature" placed a lot of extra emphasis on these games (I'm sure dropping shitty FMV-based gameplay helped too).

Good point. But that's also smart marketing by SONY, tracking how old the previous gaming generation was. A modern parallel would be the Harry Potter series; as the years went on, both the characters and their readers aged.

(The 1987 TMNT) more or less remains (at '11' ridiculousness) until around the final three seasons, when the series decided to take a more serious tone--and also lose 90% of the fanbase, but hey, ten years is a great run!

Holy crap, ten years? My brain compressed then into 7 (I thought they ended when the movies did) and misplaced the middle three.

[flamepanther]

[quote="pakopako]Good point. But that's also smart marketing by SONY, tracking how old the previous gaming generation was. A modern parallel would be the Harry Potter series; as the years went on, both the characters and their readers aged.[/quote]It was certainly a shrewd move on Sony's part, yes. However, I think a company that was more invested in the creative side of the games industry (rather than one that just bought a bunch of developers to get exclusives) would have done a better job maturing the popular trends in gaming. Had Sega been allowed to fill this role, or had Nintendo's attempts come sooner and with more success, I don't believe the industry as a whole would have been as encouraged to make so many bland, cumbersome, colorless game-as-movie affairs.