As much as the gaming veterans don't want to admit it, it has become plain that classics are only for those who played the classics when they first arrived.

Given the huge advancements in the interactive entertainment realm, it certainly seems silly to compare Super Mario Bros. to Uncharted 2: Among Thieves and indeed, it is. Logic and reasoning says we really can't compare those products; it's like comparing a Model T to a Bugatti. And no matter how special that ol' '55 Chevy may seem to a car collector, or to someone who was actually alive when such vehicles roamed the roads, there is no comparison in terms of performance, comfort and just about any other element. I suppose one could like the design of one over the other, but even that doesn't quite fly in the world of old vs. new video games. We can all appreciate how amazing SMB was at the time but of course, it doesn't have better graphics than Uncharted 2 . Different universes.

The point is, it seems more and more obvious that if one wasn't around for the early days, they will never appreciate the early days. They will continue to mock those who give the golden age any credit whatsoever, and will wonder how any of us can go back and play something like Final Fantasy VII . It looks archaic, it has archaic gameplay mechanics, and oh dear lord, there aren't even any voices! The further back you go, the less appeal those classic titles have for anybody under the age of 20. Two things are chiefly to blame: first, nostalgia, which is often the bane of objectivity, and second, the aforementioned industry advancements. We've gone so far in such a short span of time, 30-year-olds have very different gaming experiences close to their hearts, when directly compared to 20-year-olds.

I will say this, though. It seems the purity and simplicity of the classics in question will never be replicated, nostalgia or no. It's why so many of those games can be replayed by just about anyone at any time, and they will enjoy themselves. Tetris is only one example. And I question if the new generation will create games the young'uns will want to go back and play in 10 years time. Thing is, I'm not sure I see any huge gameplay innovations on the horizon, and if the only difference between now and 10 years from now is visual, why bother with the inferior visuals? See, I don't go back to play old FFs or other games for the graphics (obviously); I do it because they boast gameplay we simply don't have, anymore.

So what do you think about all this?

Subscribe
Notify of
132 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Oxvial
Oxvial
9 years ago

My 10 yo bro still appreciate the Mario Nes and Snes games on his Wii, he also wants to have the N64 Zelda's on it…but again when he hits puberty perhaps he gonna turn into a FPS drone trying to prove his maturity with violent games lol.

archs13
archs13
9 years ago

that's awesome, my 8 year old brother's different.. i tried to get him to play the final fantasy games on psx but he didn't want to because it looks 'old'

SubjectiveTruth
SubjectiveTruth
9 years ago

Awesome pic.

Beamboom
Beamboom
9 years ago

… Could the same apply to old-fashioned, turn-based rpgs? 😉

/ducks

Underdog15
Underdog15
9 years ago

uh yup. I think that's kinda the point of the article. lol Hense the 2 different lines referencing the FF franchise. ^.^

Ben Dutka PSXE
Ben Dutka PSXE
9 years ago

Pretty sure he didn't read it.

Beamboom
Beamboom
9 years ago

Oh I read it, but I was referring to the often requested (or lack of) *new* titles that would have old-school turn based fights, not the old classics itself.

Though I see now how I could be misunderstood. Oh well, it was just meant as a friendly leg-pulling anyways. Nothing serious. 🙂


Last edited by Beamboom on 1/17/2011 1:06:48 PM

cLoudou
cLoudou
9 years ago

I'll take those rpgs over current ones anyday.

ace_boon_coon
ace_boon_coon
9 years ago

These new games don't deserve to be called rpg's. The old school turn base will always be the cream of the crop.

Underdog15
Underdog15
9 years ago

"I do it because they boast gameplay we simply don't have, anymore."

This quote pretty much sums the entire thing up. And it's a concept many younger folks might not be able to fully grasp yet, either.

We can all scream and holler til' the cows come home trying to prove which era had the best gameplay. Some hated FFXIII, for example, while many loved it. Perhaps nostalgia plays such a large role, that we can't accurately or fairly criticise such games. Not really, anyways.

But one thing is definitely true… whether it's for the best or for the worse is irrelevant… And that is this:

The reason we go back to the classics so often is because that style of gameplay we fell in love with simply does not exist anymore.

I don't care if anyone thinks it's a good or a bad thing. It's just the way it is.

SmokeyPSD
SmokeyPSD
9 years ago

Nostalgia has nothing to do with bad game design… My opinion anyway

Underdog15
Underdog15
9 years ago

lol yeah, I tend to agree with you on that one. I just wanted to make a point while avoiding anything that could be debated, such as whether or not FFXIII was a good design. I didn't like the battle mechanic either, but some people swear by it. I wanted to make my point while avoiding that debate. lol

TheHighlander
TheHighlander
9 years ago

Three words;

Demographic market segmentation.

Different demographic groups will prefer different things, this is a fundamental truth in marketing, and video games are *no* different.

SmokeyPSD
SmokeyPSD
9 years ago

Sucks to be them then doesn't it.

Majority of games that are released right now lack maturity,, uniqueness and and design. Sometimes even good taste. I really haven't experienced this so called mocking of retro classics but then I hang out and converse with people above the age of 20.

Underdog15
Underdog15
9 years ago

I volunteer with youth and I work with youth. In video game talks, I often get asked things like, "I know FFVII is supposed to be great and all, but how can you stand those graphics? There isn't even any voice acting! That's way too much reading."

At least that's a common theme… >.<

StangMan80
StangMan80
9 years ago

Graphics are not important, yes there nice but after playing U2 and MGS4 I went back and played Crash bandicoot and spyro and I had a blast, the 'horrible' graphics did not bother me at all, People who say that kind of stuff don't realize that FFVII was the U2 of the time(graphics wise)

TheHighlander
TheHighlander
9 years ago

I agree with you, but at the same time it can be positively painful to go back and watch some of the early silent comedies that literally had people rolling in the aisles in their day, but now just look like a museum curiosity. We have to recognize that higher and higher production values have spoiled current gamers to the point where a game like FFVII just doesn't work because of the lack of voice acting and relatively primitive graphics. They can't look past that, it's to great a cultural barrier for them to overcome.

Ben Dutka PSXE
Ben Dutka PSXE
9 years ago

Yeah, and when they complain about "reading" in a game like FFVII, I wonder what they might have thought about something like Vandal Hearts II…

Still one of the best written games ever, by the way.

ace_boon_coon
ace_boon_coon
9 years ago

Every kid this generation has "ADHD", so they hate to read causing them to think reading on games is crap.

totozero18
totozero18
9 years ago

@Underdog: Man you must have the biggest patience, if a kid ever tells me that I'd slap it in the mouth so it shuts up.

The only thing I hope is to some how get my children to play good old FF-VII.
I'll be like "finish it or you won't go to college!!!"

PasteNuggs
PasteNuggs
9 years ago

I'm waiting for reading to go to the wayside. All the time with my son I hear "I didn't know this so I looked it up on youtube". Instead of at least finding a text on the internet it has to be a video otherwise it won't hold his attention. It saddens me to think of what the world is will be like after our generations are gone.

TheHighlander
TheHighlander
9 years ago

@nuggs

It's only a matter of time before paper pages and ink print become an anachronism in an age of electronic readers and the ever present overmind of the Eye of Moron….er…I mean Internet.

Nynja
Nynja
9 years ago

Interesting that you post this story only days after I started playing the old NES game "Dragon Warrior" again. Gotta love nesoid on Android phones! 🙂

Man, talk about feeling old.

Lawless SXE
Lawless SXE
9 years ago

It's more than gameplay design and all that though. I think it ultimately comes down to dated appeal. The games of yesteryear were shorter, harder and focussed towards an audience that had the patience to deal with it. It's why back then almost every core gamer was a complete nerd (generalisation, not a fact). They had the time and patience to learn each and every little trick, jump and shot that was required to complete the game.

Now, the story factors in, the games are easier, the graphics are better, they're more in your face to appeal to the adrenaline junkie youth. I don't believe it. I think that some people are receptive to these older games, regardless of their age. They want to experience the simplicity and joy of ages past, and the burgeoning time in their chosen hobby is as good a place as any.
Peace.

WorldEndsWithMe
WorldEndsWithMe
9 years ago

I think we developed the patience to deal with it, simply because you only had a few decent games to choose from… like ever. There were like 50 bad games for every good one. So we played the few our parents could afford.

Ludicrous_Liam
Ludicrous_Liam
9 years ago

I'm 15 & I can still see how amazing MGS1 was/is. Funny, when it released I DESPISED it, I could never get past the first part. I think once you get past a certain age (11-12) your attention span really starts to widen, maybe its how I was brought up but I could play through MGS4 at that age without ever so much as thinking of skipping the cutscenes (hell even the last (last) one I thought coulda been a bit longer!)

Now I can even read big books, books that are 1000 pages big & I feel tottaly engrossed (though only stephen king books..any other book I can never get into..probably his style of writing).

Though…I'll never know why you guys ever liked final fantasy..maybe it's just not my thing but even things that aren't I can usually see the reason behind people liking it, but not this time 😛
But by far & large this generation is the best yet, excluding the obvious fact that it would be…if ya..know what I mean. 😀

By the way Ben, wheres those PSHome/Gaming nights you (sorta) promised us! >:o


Last edited by Ludicrous_Liam on 1/17/2011 1:04:54 PM

WorldEndsWithMe
WorldEndsWithMe
9 years ago

You may have to just trust the majority on Final Fantasy, it is one of the biggest video game phenomenons in history for a reason.

Ludicrous_Liam
Ludicrous_Liam
9 years ago

Guess that's my only option..

Ben Dutka PSXE
Ben Dutka PSXE
9 years ago

I'm a little confused. You say you're 15 and when MGS first released, you despised it.

…weren't you like, 3?

StangMan80
StangMan80
9 years ago

So, That means Nintendo will be screwed once all these "veterans" die off.

TheHighlander
TheHighlander
9 years ago

I'm kinda surprised they aren't already dead. Most 'mature' gamers I know have a PS3. I think that the Wii and Nintendo in general is the thing that comes to mind first for parents looking to buy a game console for their kids. It's not necessarily the first thing that comes to their kids mind, but remember it's parents that buy them, so that older, more conservative, perspective comes into play – especially if the parents were not gamers themselves.


Last edited by TheHighlander on 1/17/2011 1:27:22 PM

PorkChopGamer
PorkChopGamer
9 years ago

Yup. I'm normally surprised as well when a company makes great games on a regular basis stays in business. Shocking… Seriously though, as long as they make great games, super advanced or not, Nintendo will be in this business. The day this industry has no place for them is the day I take my leave as well.

Ben Dutka PSXE
Ben Dutka PSXE
9 years ago

PorkChop: Oh yes. An abysmally mediocre average Metacritic score for the whole of the Wii library certainly indicates "great games on a regular basis."

Rather, the standard for Nintendo has been since the late N64 days- one great game a year, layered with a ton of shovelware. So apparently, all a business needs to do to make money is lure everyone with a gimmick, produce the first piece of hardware in the history of the industry that doesn't NEED good software to sell (due to said gimmick), hang on for a bunch of years while the rest of the competition catches up, and then…whatever.

ace_boon_coon
ace_boon_coon
9 years ago

Nintendo has pulled the wool over the publics eyes with the wii. If the had made a more powerful console and had price tag like ps3 and 360, nintendo would be dead in the water. They'd be living off of the DS.

PorkChopGamer
PorkChopGamer
9 years ago

You're completely right, Ben. The Wii's library is less than stellar. But Nintendo has supported it with good games and they've supported their handheld with a steady stream of great games. You seem to despise that Nintendo 'stole' this generation from the competition. In my opinion, the Wii may be the best thing that happened to the industry. Not the motion gaming aspect, but it proves that console makers don't have to rush for newer and more complicated tech every five years. This will allow devs to develop games at cheaper costs and, in turn, producing companies will take a chance on more unique titles and not try to tap into the casual gamer vein to recoup their money. This is why we see the most unique games on handhelds, it's cheaper to make. Most gens, the greatest games come late after the devs have a grasp of the hardware. Look at this fifth year of the PS3. Amazing. I'd rather have another five years of this system firing on all cylinders from this point, then just having another restart with pretty graphics.

And ,on a side note, if your Wii is collecting dust because you didn't buy into SMG2 hype, go pick up Fragile Dreams: Farewell Ruins Of The Moon. True, there may not be a plethora, but it's games like this that make the Wii worth owning.

Ben Dutka PSXE
Ben Dutka PSXE
9 years ago

I'm all for maintaining tradition and providing gamers with what they enjoy. I also give mad props to Nintendo for doing what they did this generation. I and most every analyst and journalist on the planet pronounced Nintendo dead (on the hardware side of things) entering this generation, and they surprised everyone by delivering a product that hit huge. They proved us all wrong and I freely admit that.

But I will also add they did so by actually catering to the NON-gamers. Most of the hardcore didn't see much but the GameCube with motion sensing. However, as clearly seen in the advertisements for the Wii, Nintendo decided to hit everyone ELSE. Girls, senior citizens, those with families who normally don't have a lot of time, etc. It was ingenious. At the same time, I really don't consider those to be "games" as we know them; the titles are so far separated from the cutting edge games on other platforms, I'm more inclined to call the Wii a gadget rather than a legitimate competitor in the console market.

Sony and Microsoft see it the same way, in that they've never said they were in competition with Nintendo. Sony and Microsoft are going for a very different audience/demographic, and Nintendo freely admits that. It was the only way Nintendo could survive, really. But in the end, software is what matters. And that's why, despite my absolute respect for Nintendo as a company, I sort of resent the fact that they can succeed without that software.

PorkChopGamer
PorkChopGamer
9 years ago

Wait. Not games? That's the craziest thing I've ever read, Ben. No offense. The only thing that has changed from this gen and the last are graphics and physics. Are they really that important? There aren't a bunch of new genres being created this gen. By that logic, the simple but beautiful gameplay of Shadow of the Colossus cannot be considered a game becase it had hardly any dialogue and a straight forward story without alot of characterization. Are we really dismissing games like that for Hollywood-type visuals and cutscenes? Does that truly constitute a 'game'?

Ben Dutka PSXE
Ben Dutka PSXE
9 years ago

What?

Who said anything about new genres? I don't think I get what you're saying.

TheHighlander
TheHighlander
9 years ago

Hmm…

I do agree that to a greater extent that I would like to admit, old games really are only appreciated by the older gamer who remembers them when they were new. But, this subject is far broader than that for me.

This kind of goes along with what I have been saying for a while now about the segmentation of the video games market. Older gamers do not like the same games as younger gamers. Yes, there are exceptions, and hardcore gamers tend to worry less about this kind of thing because a really hardcore gamers is looking for the gameplay more so than the visual.

However, If you go back to those 8-bit games, you realize just how incredibly primitive they look and sound. Blocky sprite driven graphics and synthesized sound that runs the gamut of the frequency spectrum just to be heard. Things have come a long way to be sure.

I do think that younger gamers are less tolerant of the shortcomings of these older games. that's not surprising, they are used to far higher production values. I mean you really can't compare Gran Turismo 5 against a racing game running on an 8-bit processor with a 2MHz clock in less than 20KB or RAM. In terms of production value, it's not even a comparison. One cost tens of millions to make took years and a whole team of artists, designers and programmers. The other was programmed by a couple of guys in a few months.

But, that old 8-bit racing game had the core gameplay down pat. I mean seriously, on the courses it included (all 5) the physics, track layout, rise and fall, and all the rest were spot on, and lap times were in line with what was really achievable. So the gameplay was there, even in that primitive game.

The same is true when you look at most game genre. But, some genre have undergone changes that others have not. Platform games have evolved, but still involve learning patterns, timing jumps, collecting things, and beating the bad guys. The core elements remain. Third person shooters are far more sophisticated now than back in the days of Commando but at the heart you are still watching your guy run around the screen shooting things. Operation Wolf may have been an 'on the rails' first person shooter, but a first person shooter it was. Things have come a long way, but still the core mechanics are the same.

Multi-player has added a whole new dimension to many of these games, but the core mechanics remain remarkably intact. But those production values are what have changed, hugely.

One genre that to me has changed considerably in the last 10 years is the RPG. We've discussed RPGs here so many times, but the fact of the matter is that the core game play *has* changed. Production values have gone up, but games like FFXIII are not remotely the same as games like FFVII. The game play is very, very different. If you remade FFVII today with modern production values, would that old game play survive the transition? If it did, would it really work for the current core market of gamers? Or would it be something that only nostalgia drenched older gamers would like?

See, that is one of the questions that market segmentation raises. I used FFVII as the example, but it's true of any game that favors older game play style. but, if the industry asks whether that game would work for younger gamers. May I ask why they do not equally wonder whether the new game play in FFXIII would work for the older gamers?

I have no problem recognizing that gamers over 30 like different things than gamers under 30. I have no problem segmenting the entire gaming market into age groups such as 10 and under, 11-16, 17-30, 30-45, 46+ – or whatever banding you wish to apply. I believe that is a very valid way to view the video game market. you could cut it up using genre and casual gaming vs non-casual gaming. I'm sure that gender has a big impact as well.

When you say old games are for the old, that is true – to a large extent. So does that mean that such games are irrelevant to the *whole* market, or that they are relevant only to specific market groups? Isn't that true of every game genre and type?

If we recognize that old games are not liked by younger gamers for various reasons. Should we not recognize that equally, new games may not be well liked by the older gamers because they abandon certain kinds of game play or aesthetic that they like?

Which brings me back to what I always say. Isn't it time for the industry which has grown so large to start looking at it's market as a group of overlapping market segments instead of a single homogeneous market? Can we start making games for older players, and games for younger players and accept that some gamers in either segment may enjoy both, but the majority do not? There's a lot of money to be made, if the right games are made for the right people.

Ludicrous_Liam
Ludicrous_Liam
9 years ago

Hmm..

That was one long ass post. LOL.

I think that its just a matter of transition; That style of games were the rage back then, COD is the rage now. I'd even say each generation had a different style of game dominated: PS1 – RPG's, PS2 platformers & PS3 FPS. Gamers tastes just change. Sure age might have become a factor, but still I don't think it would have changed the way games are today.

It's like, in 20 years time when were on PS6, we will see the PS3 as we see the PS1 era now. We'll be like "Argh…what happend to them good ole' FPS's!? Those were the good days…" XD

(BTW sorry if I don't make such long winded, sophisticated post's such as yourself lol)

Ben Dutka PSXE
Ben Dutka PSXE
9 years ago

Highlander: And after reading that, it leads me to the biggest question:

If it is true there are a lot of older, hardcore gamers out there, and it's true that we are a separate group – a separate, LARGE group – then why does it seem as if developers believe we don't exist? Or, that we do exist, but we're not big enough to matter, and only a certain demographic exists?

We often lament the loss of gameplay styles we loved but what I don't understand is why some game makers don't get this. It almost seems as if they think that anybody over the age of 30 either doesn't play games anymore, or has adapted their tastes to that of the younger demographics. If they didn't think that, multiple major franchises wouldn't have changed the way they have…

At least, that's how I see it.

DemonNeno
DemonNeno
9 years ago

It's true. I'm probably an exception to some of what is said and thought because, at 28, I've played every US console released in the past… I fell off the console boat when the ps 1 and n64 became mainstream because I hated the gameplay of Mario and didn't like the idea of an ps1 because.. It was out of my budget.

What I didn't like about games in the first "3d" generation was the controls and the layout took more work than fun to get the groove of it all. Fast forward about, what, 15 years and I'm still facing similar problems. My analog abilities are generally for crap and things are generally rushed on to me. I feel every second of a games learning curve, but at this point, d pads don't really help so I'm stuck in the middle.

M 64 was the beginning of the end of performers, to me. Pesky camera angles intruding on mt directional controls, annoying glitches in sensitivity when leaping and immediately stopping your character. The way it became was not fun. Repeating the same 8 jumps for an hour or more because everything spins and alters your directional inputs just pissed me off.

What bothers me the most is non turned based rpgs, for sure. It's not very strategic to just go in guns blazing, to me. It's not as well played when you can't soak in your next move, hoping to make it a quick kill with your well equipped crew. It's not as captivating when you feel dissected from practically all your characters…

Today, you feel like an narrator whereas yesteryear you felt like the legacy that was narrated.

TheHighlander
TheHighlander
9 years ago

Ben,

I think that the industry is focused on the core group of gamers who's ages range between about 16 and 30. I think that the industry has a blind spot when it comes to older gamers. It wants to acknowledge older gamers because they lend an air of adulthood to the games industry. But I think that the gamin industry focuses on the core demographic of male gamers between 16 and 30. Of course they have to also cater to younger gamers because in a few years they will be core demographic gamers and therefore they need to hook them in now. But once you are in that core demographic and get older, you leave their focus. Gaming wants to maintain a young image to continue to attract new consumers, so older gamers are not so welcome. their dollars are, but the industry would rather not pay too much attention to them, except when it's convenient to do so.

I think you are 100% correct when you wonder whether they think that older gamers will simply adapt to the newer games or move on to something else. I think that's exactly what the industry believes. the thing is, if the industry doesn't cater to older gamers, what choice to do they have but to adapt, or find something else to do?

I don't understand it either. Gamers who were in this core group when FFVII launched are now getting older and moving into that 'older gamer' category that the industry doesn't care to pay attention to. We have money, lots of money. I can afford many more games than my younger counterparts. So, why not pay attention to me as a consumer?

The thing is, I agree with you that the industry has made an assumption about older gamers, which is why certain franchises have changed. But I think that the industry's assumption is very wrong. People who grew up with books, continue reading books. People who grew up with radio and cinema, continue to use the Radio and cinema (or did until the movie industry did to them what the gaming industry is currently doing to older gamers). Many of us 'older' gamers have grown up with video games, it's a primary hobby for us, we wouldn't know what to do with out spare time if it weren't for a game console and controller. Even though I'm years past 40, I still game regularly, and will likely continue to do so, as long as there are games for me.

But, if the industry consistently fails to serve me as a consumer, what do I do about it? I can lament the turn of events here on the intenet, I can tweet about it, or email game companies, but nothing changes.

I imagine that for those used to the golden age of cinema and radio, the advent of modern TV and contemporary movies is quite a shocking and unwelcome change. Your average romantic comedy now has more f-bombs than just about anything short of a conversation on XBL. Drama is no longer about story and character so much as it is the action and inherent drama of whatever crisis is the basis of the dramatic story. What passes for 'drama' today in a movie was once called 'action'. So, the movie industry ceased to cater for older consumers. I'm certain those consumers felt displaced and complained bitterly, but in the end, no one listened or cared.

Sadly, I think that the gaming industry will not change, and us aging dinosaurs of gaming will either have to adapt or find something else to do. Complaining about it doesn't appear to work.

Ben Dutka PSXE
Ben Dutka PSXE
9 years ago

Highlander: In all respects, I think it's a matter of increased speed. Everything has to be faster and more in your face. You mentioned romantic comedies and one of my favorites is "When Harry Met Sally." But you couldn't even make that movie today; it wouldn't hold the average person's attention. They don't switch the camera view every five seconds, and there's actual writing and dialogue, and nothing in the way of titillating crap for the masses.

I'm afraid we're headed in a similar direction with games as time goes on and the industry becomes more mainstream. And to me, it almost seems as if developers have grabbed this concept of "mainstreaming" and just ran with it. Still, as you say, I don't understand why older gamers aren't part of that mainstream and furthermore, why game publishers haven't latched onto the fact that WE'RE the ones with the money. Well, at least in relation to the 16-25 demographic.

There was a time when that was the single biggest obstacle: when games really were for kids, the game producers had the same problem any maker of an expensive toy had. Which is to say, they needed to sell it to the PARENTS, not the kid. The kid doesn't have the money. Now, WE'RE the parents in this scenario and they don't seem to notice. Nor do they seem to notice that we still play games.

It's all a little disheartening.

TheHighlander
TheHighlander
9 years ago

Ben,

Agreed 100%. You're completely right about the increased speed. Everything is quick cuts and short lines of dialog.

It is disheartening, and I am disheartened. But I was playing White Knight Chronicles last night, and it still rocks, no matter what.

Ben Dutka PSXE
Ben Dutka PSXE
9 years ago

I missed out on WKC; will have to play WKC2.

kraygen
kraygen
9 years ago

Ben,

With all your love for rpgs and you missed WKC?
WHAT?!?!

It's combat is similar to ff12 and they story is amazing. Best rpg on the ps3. Go buy WKC now, yes it will be bundled with WKC 2, but it's worth the purchase now and when WKC 2 comes out.

Ben Dutka PSXE
Ben Dutka PSXE
9 years ago

A friend has it and I watched a little, so I know what the deal is. I forget why I didn't play it at the time; I think I was swamped with reviews or something.

But I do plan on getting WKC2.


Last edited by Ben Dutka PSXE on 1/17/2011 8:31:18 PM

Nick42
Nick42
9 years ago

I'm 21 and I live with a group of 20 year olds.

In our house we have:

Atari 2600 (With adventure, pacman, pong (we even have the rotational controllers for pong!)
NES (SMB + others)
SNES (Super Star Wars, tetris attacks etc)
N64 (Mariokart 64, Goldeneye, SW Ep 1 Podracer, SW Rogue squadron)
PS1 (All crash bandicoots, a good proportion of the FFs etc)

and you know what… as great as the games of today are… after the exams we have at the moment the best way to recover is still playing Pitfall on the Atari 2600

*bloop* *bleep* *bloop* *tarzan noise*

My housemate and I also recently sat down and did another 100% completion run of crash bandicoot 1. Hours well spent.


Last edited by Nick42 on 1/17/2011 1:31:42 PM

TheHighlander
TheHighlander
9 years ago

Atari 2600, the best game on that platform is…

Haunted House!

It's one of the the most minimalist games ever, and yet it…just…plain…works.