| Sysop: | Amessyroom |
|---|---|
| Location: | Fayetteville, NC |
| Users: | 35 |
| Nodes: | 6 (0 / 6) |
| Uptime: | 30:02:43 |
| Calls: | 333 |
| Files: | 990 |
| Messages: | 84,638 |
It's not that I don't think most of those games aren't worth playing
but a lot of them either have mechanics that feels a bit dated, or
lack quality-of-life features that we've come to expect, or just have >underlying assumptions that no longer feel quite as apt anymore.
BioShock (2007)
Chrono Trigger (1995)
Super Mario Sunshine (2002)
Dragon Age Origins (2009)
Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim (2011)
Gears of War (2006)
MirrorÆs Edge (2010)
Okami (2006)
Sleeping Dogs (2012)
Super Meat Boy (2010)
Uncharted 2: Among Thieves (2009)
What do you think? Are these eleven games good examples of having
'aged insanely well'? Do you have a better selection? Or are you sort
of like me, and think most of these games just came out yesterday? 😉
Time to piggy-back off somebody else's work again. This time, it's in relation to an article talking about "Games that have aged insanely
well".* Once again, I'll save you the effort of clicking and reading
and just list the games they picked for you:
BioShock (2007)
Chrono Trigger (1995)
Super Mario Sunshine (2002)
Dragon Age Origins (2009)
Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim (2011)
Gears of War (2006)
Mirror?s Edge (2010)
Okami (2006)
Sleeping Dogs (2012)
Super Meat Boy (2010)
Uncharted 2: Among Thieves (2009)
[And yeah, this is pretty much a rehash of an earlier article
("8 Classic Games You Haven't Played (but should)" but it's
an excuse for us to talk about different games, so what's the
harm? ;-)]
So the first thing that crossed my mind while reading that list was,
"Aged? These games just came out a little while ago!" but that
probably says more about me than the games. I mean, the youngest is 13
years old and while that was practically yesterday for me, for
youngsters I guess it seems a lot longer. But some of those games just
don't feel old at all; they're still relevant to a lot of players who
still actively engage with the game. Of course they haven't aged;
they're... well, not new obviously, but still in their prime.
The second thing is that, aside from any that fit into that first
group (and really, it's just "Skyrim" and "Super Meat Boy" that
qualify), I wouldn't say they've aged 'insanely well'. Most of them
don't seem very old, but I think that --were I go back to play them
right now-- I wouldn't be shouting to the heavens about how they still
feel so modern.
[And some of them I think don't deserve to be on the list at
all, because I don't think they were that good even when they
were new. Yes, "Gears of War", I'm looking right at you!]
It's not that I don't think most of those games aren't worth playing
but a lot of them either have mechanics that feels a bit dated, or
lack quality-of-life features that we've come to expect, or just have underlying assumptions that no longer feel quite as apt anymore.
But none of the listed games are examples of titles that I would hold
up as having aged 'insanely well'; as games that could be sold today
(maybe with a slight visual upgrade) and still be as playable and fun
as the day they were released. There are games like that (from our
last article, I suggested "Day of the Tentacle" from 1993 as one such example) but none of the games named above seem to fit.
What do you think? Are these eleven games good examples of having
'aged insanely well'? Do you have a better selection? Or are you sort
of like me, and think most of these games just came out yesterday? ;-)
* here's the original article https://www.xda-developers.com/games-that-have-aged-insanely-well/
I still want to play the whole BioShock game. I only played its demo. I remember the cliffhanger was the glass tunnels cracked and ocean water flooded.
Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> wrote:...
Time to piggy-back off somebody else's work again. This time, it's in relation to an article talking about "Games that have aged insanely
well".* Once again, I'll save you the effort of clicking and reading
and just list the games they picked for you:
BioShock (2007)
Chrono Trigger (1995)
Super Mario Sunshine (2002)
Dragon Age Origins (2009)
Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim (2011)
Gears of War (2006)
Mirror?s Edge (2010)
Okami (2006)
Sleeping Dogs (2012)
Super Meat Boy (2010)
Uncharted 2: Among Thieves (2009)
On Tue, 04 Mar 2025 20:19:35 +0000, ant@zimage.comANT (Ant) wrote:
Oh, I want to play Mirror's Edge. It looks like fun. I finished Skyrim a >few years ago. It was decent. I never played Uncharted. Sleeping Dogs
and Super Meat Boy games were OK from their demos.
The joy in Mirror's Edge were in mastering its mechanical aspects. If
doing the same run over and over trying to get the fastest time / most efficient route sound fun, you'll like the game. But as a
single-player narrative experience... not so much. It's not that the free-running is bad (although I think its wasted in first-person view)
but it is interspersed with a dull story and awful combat sequences,
and that weakens the overall experience.
It has some nice aesthetics though. All that white and red; the
visuals are incredibly impressive.
Ant <ant@zimage.comant> wrote:
I still want to play the whole BioShock game. I only played its demo. I
remember the cliffhanger was the glass tunnels cracked and ocean water
flooded.
If you've seen that, you've seen the best the game has to offer. And
it's a set-piece moment in the first half-hour of the game. After that
it's a lot of crawling through ruined tunnels. The fact that you're underwater is barely an issue in this game.
(The featured event is also completely scripted, and as far as I
remember there's no real water physics used there. It's all smoke-n- mirrors).
Bioshock is really front-loaded with its best moments. From the plane
crash to the impressive lighthouse to the awesome spectacle of your
descent to the underwater city, it all promises an awesome adventure
unlike anything you've ever seen before. And then it just turns out to
be another corridor-shooter.
It's not that it's a bad game, but you really are made to expect a lot
more from the game then you ultimately get.
On 3/4/2025 12:15 PM, Ant wrote:
I still want to play the whole BioShock game. I only played its demo. I remember the cliffhanger was the glass tunnels cracked and ocean water flooded.
IIRC it was given away on Prime recently, check those threads and
someone (JAB I think?) was willing to give out the code. I claimed it
myself, as though I had it on Steam already, it was on GoG which I prefer.
On Thu, 06 Mar 2025 02:46:12 +0000, ant@zimage.comANT (Ant) wrote:
Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> wrote:
The joy in Mirror's Edge were in mastering its mechanical aspects. If
doing the same run over and over trying to get the fastest time / most
efficient route sound fun, you'll like the game. But as a
single-player narrative experience... not so much. It's not that the
free-running is bad (although I think its wasted in first-person view)
but it is interspersed with a dull story and awful combat sequences,
and that weakens the overall experience.
It has some nice aesthetics though. All that white and red; the
visuals are incredibly impressive.
Is it like Superhot? https://store.steampowered.com/app/322500/SUPERHOT/
If so, then I enjoyed it even though it got annoying in some parts. At >least, it was short (managed to finish it during its free weekend!) and
had a decent story/plot.
I mean, I can't deny there are /some/ similarities, in that both use a
very stylized and pared down color gamut. But the games are are
completely different mechanically, and "SuperHot's" visuals are a lot
more basic than "Mirror's Edge".
Both, ultimately, are also about mastering the mechanics, but
"Superhot" is a lot more upfront about it. "Mirror's Edge" story keeps getting in the way.
It's not that it's a bad game, but you really are made to expect a lot
more from the game then you ultimately get.
Aw. Nothing good after that? Maybe I will pass. :( What about its sequel?
I wouldn't say there's 'nothing good'. The game is fairly solid... for
what it is; an above-average shooter with some light role-playing
elements, a fixation on environmental traps, and a neat Art-Deco
visual style. It's a good game. It's just not a TERRIFIC game.
(The end-boss absolutely sucks, though).
On Thu, 06 Mar 2025 20:13:03 +0000, ant@zimage.comANT (Ant) wrote:
Spalls Hurgenson <spallshurgenson@gmail.com> wrote:
Haha, like System Shock 2?! :P I still need to retry SS1, but with its >remake this time. I couldn't stand the controls in the original DOS >release. Loved the remake's tech demo years ago on my work's fancy high
end lappy (shh!) in 2016.
There's always the "System Shock Enhanced Edition", which is the
classic game except... well, enhanced with higher resolutions and QOL features like WASD.
Although the original was _almost_ WASD already. You looked around
with the mouse and moved with the keyboard; it's just that the keys
you used were the arrow keys (which was the style at the time).
Although the game could be (almost) entirely controlled by mouse,
since it re-used the "Ultima Underworld" control-scheme too.
I'm not so endeared with the 2023 remake. It played too closely to the original, trying to balance mondern sensibilities with the old-school
style of the original game, and doing favors to neither. Of all the
versions, I feel the 2015 "Enhanced Edition" is the best to play.
