Which older genres/games have aged better than others?

[shadobeni]

I find that when I seek out older games that I missed or never completed as a kid I tend to enjoy 2d platformers more because I feel like they tend to offer more unique gameplay that hasn't been surpassed by later efforts.

Although I was a huge fan of beatemups, today I very quickly get bored of the classics of the genre finding them too limited and repetitive by today's standards. I also don't find myself playing old sports games since in most cases more modern iterations have improved on the gameplay. Similarly I don't spend much time playing older fighting games since I find the later installments offer the same core gameplay but with additional improvements/refinements. Although at least with some of the better older fighting games they still offer a good amount of strategy depth.

[Flake]

I think that in the right hand any genre is quite viable.

People said for years that the 2D Platformer was dead. We can all agree that Capcom and Konami have proven that false in the last couple of years. Nintendo definitely made a great showing with New Mario Bros. Wii. Hopefully Sega will follow suit.

The same can be said for the 2D fighter but Blazblue, SFIV, and Tatsunoko vs Capcom proved that the genre is still alive and kicking.

I don't think that genres age. I think the ability of developers to properly execute a game of 'X' genre is where quality levels falter.

Edit: To round out my thoughts, I don't think 'limited design' is something suffered only by older games. I think the current FPS craze is as one trick a pony as the arcade style beat-em-ups were. A few titles have something unique and stand out...most are derivative and will be easily forgotten.

[Yiddishpilot]

NBA Live 95 is still the best sports game ever and Kid Nikki is still the greatest thing ever created by humans.

[ns12123]

Since Dreamcast is my favorite console, I'll comment on some of those games, although it's generally considered to be within the past generation (PS2, Cube, Xbox), our current generation is nearly five years old for the 360 at least.

I don't think Sonic Adventure has aged well at all. Typically people that played the game for the first time only recently can't understand why people think it's so great. Part of what made the experience so awesome in '98/99 was the technical achievement of the game. The graphics were amazing at the time, and it maintained a steady framerate even during very high speed gameplay. Some of the gameplay mechanics haven't held up very well. The camera angles seem worse and less workable than they did 10 years ago. If it were released today as a new title, I have no doubt that it wouldn't review at a higher average than 70%.

I think Rayman 2 on Dreamcast aged much more gracefully. I'm playing through it for the first time now and I don't have many complaints about its age. The only thing that bothers me, slightly, is that the camera angle is more zoomed in than I would like it to be.

Arcade games like Crazy Taxi and House of the Dead 2 are timeless. They're mostly clean cut games that are straightforward and simply fun. Even House of the Dead on Saturn still holds up well today, despite being part of the first 3D generation. I make this inference because I only played it for the first time a year ago and nothing about its age affected the gameplay at all (and I can be quite picky at times..).

To mention a Super NES game, Starfox has aged horribly. In fact, most 3D attempts during the 16-bit generation have as well. I didn't play Starfox back in the day (I was a Genesis kid), and playing it in 2008 really wasn't a good time to see why it was loved back then. The gameplay felt sluggish, and it seemed like it was more of a SNES tech demo than a game. I was under the impression that the developers simply pushed the SNES far beyond what it was capable of.

[GigaPepsiMan]

I think Star Fox (or star wing as it is know in the uk) has aged quite well, not as good as the sequel but still very playable.

[ns12123]

I think Star Fox (or star wing as it is know in the uk) has aged quite well, not as good as the sequel but still very playable.

Maybe it's the nostalgia glasses at work, or maybe I'm being too picky. I spend a lot of time playing retro games and Starfox doesn't seem playable to me. I can't really get into 3D shooters earlier than the 32-bit generation (Panzer Dragoon games are fine).

[Josh]

I agree that Star Fox hasn't aged well. I'm not sure if 64 spoiled me with the voices and graphics but the polygons just don't look that good to me. Seeing as I won't base my opinion alone on graphics, I also feel that the game plays better with an analog stick.

[BogusMeatFactory]

For me one of the greatest genres still holds an awesome place for me and that is the interactive fiction genre/text based games. Some of them do not hold a candle to others. Games like Adventure/Colossal Cave, Zork and many others do not stand the test of time at ALL, where as games like A Mind Forever Voyaging (don't know what this is..google it, it is one of the most amazing games I have ever played) and the current realm of independent interactive fiction (most importantly a great game, Blue Lacuna) all seem to carry the torch of great writing and interactivity.

The 16-bit fighting game genre is a tough one. There were so many 2D fighters out there that ended up horrible while others were great. A great example is Eternal Champions for the Genesis, which did NOT stand up to the test of time, where as the Sega CD sequel is one of my all time favorites in that genre. Also games like Brutal: Paw of Fury, Primal Rage and Mortal Kombat 1 through a million, all did not stand up a look back.

[MrPopo]

If it were released today as a new title, I have no doubt that it wouldn't review at a higher average than 70%.

Funny you should say that:

http://www.1up.com/do/reviewPage?cId=3181366