What makes a game age well? How does it even make sense for something immutable to age?
 Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
 Ape Out Shirt $21.68 |
Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
What makes a game age well? How does it even make sense for something immutable to age?
When it's gameplay mechanics stand on their own right and aren't sources from the misguided zeitgeist of the time.
All gameplay mechanics stand the test of time in a void if they were developed with purpose and accomplish it accordingly. A good example is the Kings Field series.
moronic statement. The test of time is how a game is judged according to those in the future. Games like Ninja Gaiden are universally viewed as bullshit due to infinitely respawning enemies and other unfair mechanics.
Tyrian is a game that has aged poorly, as it emphasizes the shittiest aspects of yuroshmups, such as health bars, unavoidable damage, ect.
It is a game that has ultimately aged poorly, AKA, not stood the test of time.
Ninja Gaiden stands the test of time. Just say you don't like it.
Euroshmups were always garbage.
Ninja Gaiden is fair and you need to have a nice day if you unironically can't beat it.
Enemies respawn when you stay at there spawning position because the game wants you to move forward. You're a complete moron if you can't understand this.
>kings field
it's slow ass boring garbage, what's even remotely good about it?
>All gameplay mechanics stand the test of time in a void if they were developed with purpose and accomplish it accordingly.
Not really, take something like Gyruss, really good arcade game for its time but nowadays it's hardly playable because the genre made enormous steps forward.
This is even more evident when we're talking about sequels, Star Luster on NES was certainly an ambitious and largely well realized game for its time, but its mechanics are largely horrid nowadays precisely because it was experimenting a lot and got surpassed not only by its sequel Star Ixiom but also things like Ace Combat, there's no reason to play something like Star Luster nowadays despite the game being pretty mindblowing back then and being definitely up to the standards of its own time.
On the other hand certain games do manage to achieve formulas that are pretty much timeless and could only receive minor improvements, Tetris is the most common example of that, AoEII managed to get things down so well that it eclipses not just its predecessors but its successors as well, these are games that "aged" really well in the sense that they managed to create something that goes beyond their time.
Truth is you simply can't judge things in a void because they're fundamentally and unescapably tied to the time they came out, some things can be not only ahead of their time but also endure and keep being standards of quality well beyond that, that is true for all sorts of human expression, it's (partly) why El Greco's paintings are still appreciated today but most modern painters are not even footnotes when they're alive, it's why we keep reading and reimagining the arthurian cycle after several centuries but people like Dan Brown are forgotten after a decade.
It doesn't. You've been brainwashed by corporations to think senseless abstractions grow obsolete regardless of purpose in favor of ease of use and accessibility, ergo, buy the new thing goy. And don't you dare step out of line. They'd wipe the old and all history and reference with it if they could.
>Black pipo don't rot dey food
lmfao do cumskins REALLY eat moldy food?
Well brownie boy, we don't eat it, we use to make things like penicillin, which keeps diseases like yourself in check
A good narrative or setting.
Gameplay that's innovative.
Artstyle that doesn't go for realism.
/thread
But Half-Life 2 looks realistic and aged well.
Half-Life 2 is very stylized. It's not realistic-looking at all.
You could go to Bulgaria and take pictures that at a distance look identical to Half-Life 2 screenshots
what's stylized?
its stylized to look like "realistic" graphics from the 2000s
>luv me gorgonzola
>I've tried three different ones and they all tasted different, from good to bad
I don't know anymore
not a fan of viking blue, the french sounding one and another one I forgot the name of
if its dumbed down enough for zoomers to enjoy
something not aging well just means it was too complex for them to figure out
technology. games date themselves by relying too heavily on the latest technology which will soon be outdated technology. an ageless game is one that focuses on the game mechanics, art direction, and presentation, rather than continually and incrementally chasing realism before the technology exists to accurately replicate reality. remember those early implementations of ragdoll where models would literally just fold in half? did that actually improve the game in any way? no. its only appeal was to show people something new that you could talk about. but a few years later, it wasn't new, and it just made the otherwise serious "realistic" game look cartoonishly stupid. that is how games age.
It means that no matter how much time passes and how much games advance (not in this timeline), the game still looks pleasing to the eye and fun to play.
Whatever they put into Deus Ex.
>game good? = aged well
>game no good? = aged badly
It really is that simple.
>Brie smells like literal shit and gorgonzola is vile
Yet somehow blue cheese is just delectable. I can eat a whole wheel with just a bit of jam.
>do something novel like Dune2k
>many clones follow who clearly improve the formula
timeless 2d graphics made by artists
I still replay MHFU every other year or so. Despite the series not becoming absolutely terrible like alot of franchises, FU still remains the best and my most replayed MH game.