I never understood the "game aged poorly" thing...

I never understood the "game aged poorly" thing, some games i played back then I can easily go back to them and have fun (and no, nostalgia doesn't play a big role here), while some games I've never played as a kid I can still find them fun to play or see its pros and cons, so I can't have nostalgia bias towards them.
So why does this aged poorly thing gets thrown at old games so much?

Attached: 1460072965678.jpg (221x218, 7.77K)

Other urls found in this thread:

tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/SeinfeldIsUnfunny
myredditvideos.com/
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

Games don't age, people do.

Attached: Kenshiro.jpg (399x549, 118.8K)

fippy bippy

the same way the humans aged poorly in toy story
and the dog

you played games that aged well

Some things may age poorly due to technical limitations at the time. I recently played System Shock 1 and while the interface is clunky as hell, although you do get used to it pretty fast, the gameplay, atmosphere and story are ahead of their time, to the point where it could compete directly with anything in the market today. And that game is almost 25 years old.

I love those Sunny dolls

Attached: 15134266538695.png (1650x2200, 1.39M)

Some games have mechanics that seem outdated due to being improved upon in the years since their release. Sometimes you don't realize how many little quality of life improvements were made over the years until you go back and realize how frustrating or tedious some old games can be.

I’m not sure I’d call those aspects ahead of their time, when games rarely, if ever, have reached those levels since then

post sunny cunny

I kept hearing Goldeneye 007 aged like milk but when I played it on console I found the game to be fucking great despite some really frustrasting segments and low framerate.
I played it again using the kb+m and it's just as good.

Attached: 1569541745481.png (276x254, 95.98K)

"game aged poorly" means that a game was always shit, but the person saying it didn't know any better at the time and doesn't want to admit they liked something bad

the thing is
if you understood game/movie/song aged poorly
you have shit taste you were born with shit taste
infact you would literally be a piece of shit
aka a journalist
normalfag
popular kid
ect
obviously if youre not
you understand
i know multiple people who have never had shit taste ever
i am one
you are most likely one
a lost breed

I never understood games, uh ever.

Attached: dr-ian-malcolm-jeff-goldblum-shirtless-statue-chronicle-collectibles.png (807x631, 396.02K)

The real issue with Goldeneye has nothing to do with age, and everything to do with Perfect Dark being everything Goldeneye was, and then some

N64 = Aging like Milk
PS1 & Saturn = Fine Wine.
Questions?

Attached: comparison.png (1086x609, 1.9M)

I still don't know why people use "aged" to describe a piece of media. An object ages, a work does not unless it is a physical work.
"Dated" or "doesn't hold up" are about as vague but they're not outright wrong.
The only games or pieces of media that can age poorly are the ones that get updated, like balance patches making a game less and less fun, or a movie getting re-edited so many times in so many bad ways it takes fans of that movie to stitch its original form back together.

>A hobby where talking about it is better than actually doing it.
I give up

Attached: hqdefault-2.jpg (480x360, 16.2K)

Games can have archaic design choices and mechanics that simply don't hold up to what games now know don't work or have improved upon. Countless quality of life improvement and better realization of what controls are good and what controls are shit.
That's what not aged well means.
Time has not been kind to the choices made now that we've been exposed to better examples of them or better ways of doing the thing the game tried to do.

People never bring PD in regards to GE007 "aging poorly", it's always about the graphics, framerate or the controls.

Because other games do what a lot of old games do better. This doesn't apply to all games of course.

where's the crt filters?
cringe.

Those are captures from real hardware onto a scaler. Filters are cancer.

What cables?
Cringe.

It's an RGB signal

>dem tits
hell yeah
>that everything else
wtf

i like the doll too but i hate all the shitty tf art.

Attached: 15134266538693.png (446x841, 111.22K)

There are some games where gameplay-impacting technical limitations make them tough to go back to. Final Fantasy IX instantly comes to mind. But overall, I don't think games age as poorly as people like to say they do. Shit, I played the original Doom for the first time like a week before Doom 2016 came out, no mods or anything. And I still had a fucking blast with it.

Art doesn’t age. Plebs just lose the ability to enjoy a piece of media in the same way it was enjoyed at the time. The onus is not on the game to understand the future, but the player to understand the games of the past.

I’m practically a zoomer and I find new games that I love from before I was born all the time.

>Art doesn’t age.
yes it does queer. otherwise art restorations wouldnt be a thing

Attached: 18ltxx61gvpeejpg.jpg (636x472, 46.37K)

same, too much /d/-tier garbage

Attached: 1568924899595.webm (1920x940, 1.49M)

is this thing supposed to be a sexy version of the den mother from psychonauts.

That’s not an example of the art aging. That is an example of the medium itself being altered. The art isn’t the medium itself, but the original idea presented.

If I delete every original copy of doom in the world and replace it with brutal doom, that doesn’t mean doom has aged.

It's "Seinfeld was never funny" syndrome.

tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/SeinfeldIsUnfunny

Retards on this board throw "aged like milk" at literally every old game these days but the reason games age is because newer games do their mechanics better. Goldeneye 007 aged poorly because Halo did FPS controls on consoles better, and every game after Halo copied what Halo did.

Attached: 1518819966650.jpg (300x300, 64.2K)

I agree, the games are as good as when they released. I also don't believe in "bad game design"

They're butthurt because they can't handle the superior console aiming system of Goldeneye and Perfect Dark.

I love Sunny Miami!

Attached: 1565314877320.png (498x1200, 265.87K)

Based on the replies here I think the question is too general. I personally believe that if a game is considered "bad" now then it was bad when it released. The issue is that taste is subjective. Another big issue is that some people don't seem to understand that when a game has certain limitations it was made with those limitations in mind. A lot of these posts are just assuming that because something was limited in any way that implies that it's bad in comparisons to other more recent titles.

>Botw isn't even close to my favorite Zelda
>Mario 3, World and Yoshi's island are still the best 2d Mario games
>DKC trilogy is still better than many games being made today
>Brave Fencer Musashi is still great
I even played RE1 for the first time ever last Halloween and I had an excellent time. I was very impressed with how much I was enjoying the game. There are a lot of people who will go on about how it aged poorly, but I'm certain the vast majority of them are ususally talking about the graphics or va without actually learning how to play the game. I think some of these people need to learn when it isn't that the game has aged poorly it is actually just the fact that they do not like the game. Of course this doesn't apply to games that clearly haven't aged well like Rampage. (Yeah, I like Rampage and all, but it was meant for arcades and nothing more. I'd love to see a virtual reality take on things though).
Not going to proofread any of that sense I'm tired.

Attached: 1568231183691.gif (500x338, 507.79K)

Some of my favorite games are games that I only first played more than a decade after they came out, so I agree with you OP.

For me personally, the pre-DOS era of computer gaming and the NES and before era of console gaming are where you hit that roadblock of "wow these games were made with zero quality of life features." like how in the original NES Fire Emblem, you can't see movement ranges at all of you or enemies so you have to do a lot of square counting, and the cursor moves like it's in molasses. That's the only thing I consider as poorly aged, especially in that case because there's a remake that retains the good while incorporating those QoL features.

goddamn

what the fuck are you talking about

it's midwit speak for a gameplay mechanic or design choice that doesn't fit the standard of the modern industry.

Attached: 1583889768684.jpg (4000x4000, 892.83K)

I know my examples kind of look like I'm leaning towards gaming being better when I was younger, so I'd like to point this out.
>Tropical Freeze is my favorite dkc game
>Don't like either galaxy game, but I loved 3d Land and World
>I don't care for Mario 64
>I really liked res 4 and 2 remake

I always assume it meant graphics

Knick Knack is comfy

2 words OP:
tank controls

Attached: 1569385726879.gif (323x419, 11.97K)

Go play Jet Set Radio and tell me that again faggot. The controls for that game are abysmal and aged like rotten ass. Same for a lot of old game's control schemes. Tank controls comes to mind the most.

...are fine if the game is designed around them

Try going back and playing Persona 1

Attached: RUTXR87x.png (389x415, 12.1K)

>what is resident evil

Attached: 1566756057592.jpg (674x1285, 85.56K)

>Art doesn't age

You know how much art is lost to history and their references too son? What we have is a survivorship bias, only the art that was timeless is what we get but in reality there was so much art throughout history, all of it shitty and trendy, all forgotten. We are seeing the EXCEPTION.

Read a book.

Attached: 1584862271592.jpg (1466x760, 110.11K)

we aren't talking about actual, physical aging of art retard
we're talking about how people perceive art

Attached: 1566755759706.gif (189x341, 9.3K)

>superior console aiming system

Attached: 1500797530734.jpg (866x838, 140.46K)

what?

Games age differently.
You've played games that aged well or you are unable to determine anything and should be shunned.

Standards increase. The AI in Thief and Deus Ex are laughably stupid now. Hard to find a lot of enjoyment in these games when they dont offer much of a challenge or the gameplay is janky af.

I think it is easier to define a game that aged well: A game that still holds up against current games of the same genre. Something you can recommend someone play instead of the newest hot garbage off the shelf. A game that has aged poorly was likely a milestone in the industry that received lots of praise at the time, but has repeatedly been outdone to the point of being overshadowed by most of what has come since and may have relied too much on then-new innovations or gimmicks for its praise in the first place.
factually incorrect

Attached: ants_1.jpg (1920x1080, 1.41M)

Sunny is better as a robot

Attached: sunny_miami_by_.jpg (1280x1996, 187.7K)

Here is an example, password saves. When they were the standard, they were a hassle but understandable. But now where saving is as convenient as a press of a button, any game that has password saves will come as unnecessarily annoying
>but you have to judge by its time!
And this is what people are doing, they see something that was meh back then but now its awful and say "this has aged poorly"

some games can't be enjoyed by carefully trained consumers in the modern era who had their attention spans shot by corporate brainwashing and instant gratification culture.

>.gif
>not transparent .png
This is upsetting.