here's the primary thing I miss about old school games...

O

organicow

CAGiversary!
Feedback
9 (100%)
I miss being able to just pop in a cart and play. Sure, the graphics weren't up to todays standards, and I do feel that improved gameplay is certainly worth increased load-times.

But i miss the speed of the whole operation; nowadays, it is nearly impossible to squeeze in 'just a minute or two' of gaming.

I remember that as a kid growing up in the late '70s and early '80s, I would utilized every spare second I had by popping in an NES or Atari cart. Even if I had just 2 minutes before dinnertime, I could fit in a round or two of pac man or Galaga.

So basically, when I want to fully immerse myself in a game, I switch on my GC, PS2, DC, or XB. But when I have a few minutes to spare here and there, its still Atari 7800 or NES, all the way!

Similar feelings? Comments?

Somewhat-related story: When the first GB came out (that's the BIG one, for all you youngsters out there!), I couldn't get enough! I would find ways to sneak in gametime when I was supposed to be doing other things (homework, sleeping, etc.). One night, I was determined to stay up until I finished Super Mario Land. So, after my folks went to sleep, I grabbed my GB, pulled my sheets up over my head, and tried to play. But, as you know, the original GB had no light! So, I pulled my desklamp under there with me, and turned it on. God, was i a moron. About 10 minutes into playing, I started to smell fire. I had apparently gotten so wrapped up in the game that i didn't notice that the lamp was tipped over, and the exposed bulb had caught my sheets on fire. Parents awake!!! The 'Cow gets grounded!!! GB go bye-bye!! BOOO!!!!!
 
I find with old skool games the gameplay had to be more innovative due to the lack of graphic power of system .It seems these days with the new systems, the innovation takes a back seat to gfx.
 
i agree with you on the fact that games nowadays take a longer time to get started due to all of the loading time and menus and everything....but....i dont think that its 100% the fact that games have changed....i think that its partly because as a kid....you loved playing games that much more....thats all you wanted to do....so sneaking in that extra minute or two here and there meant a lot....as i watch my nephew (6 yrs old now) grow up....i notice that he'll play any game....no matter what it is....for any given amount of time....if he can sneak in a minute or two....and after getting through the menus and loading....just playing 30 seconds of the game makes it worthwhile....its something in the mind of kids....though like i said....games have changed...
 
Yeah, I agree about the loading. When I want to have what I like to call a "no commitment" gaming experience I pop in Super Mario World, Super Mario Kart, or All Stars. Within seconds I am happily smashing goombas or shooting turtle shells. The only loading screen i see is a quck *Ding* with a nintendo logo. Then its fun time!
 
I agree to some extent. I despise loading times and it's one reason I don't like the Playstation or PS2 as much as I would otherwise. I miss turning on a new game and immediately seeing the title screen as you would in the NES' prime. Then they started adding all these stupid logo screens and other crap while the game loaded up. :x

Also the structure of the games themselves, they often lend themselves only to playing in chunks of 1/2 hours, hours, even multiple hours to get anywhere. Of course, I prefer older games anyway, but there are few newer games that let you jump right in and play a whole game in 5-10 minutes. There are some, notably things like Wario Ware, though.
 
Yeah I hate all of those logos you have to see. The NES was nice for that almost zero load time. I would say it take sover a minute to get a game started on the nex gen consoles, watching the logos, selecting a saved game, waiting for all of it to load..............
 
Yeah, load times are the worst. Lots of times if I'm going to play my PS2, I'll turn it on and put the disc in, then go take care of some little 5 minute job I may have to do around the house so that when I get back, the game is ready to go. It's a pain in the neck when your gametime is short to begin with, like it always is for me.

Having said all that, though, I'll still call it a small price to pay for the graphics and huge sprawling worlds in todays games. As far as gameplay itself is concerned, I don't always agree that it's worse today. The best titles of this generation are as good as the best from the past in that regard, IMO. Maybe there's just more crap to wade through then there used to be. I'm not sure, but I'd guess the number of titles released per year nowadays dwarfs the total number per year from the days of Atari or NES. So it may just be a matter of holding out for the best games.
 
Yeah, I know what you all mean. The average 5 to 10 second load times on games really kill me. I just hate wasting that inconsequential amount of time. I'd much rather pay the monsterous price a cartridge version of modern games would cost, if they'd be possible at all, than sit through another fraction of a minute of an animated loading message. Loading time is really right up there with cancer, I think, in the ways humans can suffer.
 
i don't think loading times are that big of a deal for what we're getting. sure, that means 10 or 15 less seconds that we're in a game, but look at the graphics we're getting. if they took a collection of genesis games and put them on a disc, i would think the loading time for one particular game wouldn't be that long (in fact, I'd like to see Sega release a genesis collection on PS2 or Xbox)

Games have become way too complicated. it takes me an hour to walk from one town to the next in FFXI!!! sometimes i miss the simple pleasure of a 2-D scroller that you can finish in a few hours. why are they not around on next gen consoles? because i think people have gotten used to the graphics and level size in today's games. if a game company came out with a 2-d scroller and charged $49.99 people would freak! especially for a game that has 10-20 levels and could be beaten in a few hours.

the only way i ever see 2-D coming back to PS2, Xbox, or GCN is if they made 5 or 6 different scrollers and put them on one disc. IMO
 
I don't mind the load times so much, rather its the time commitment that the newer games require. Even if I have just 10 minutes I don't bother turning on my PS2 or GC because I know I really can't accomplish anything in that amount of time. Instead I just turn on my GBA which I find I play more than any of my other systems. Back in the 8 bit and 16 bit days you could blow through an entire level in 5 minutes and you didn't mind so much if you had to play it over again since it was so much fun. Now I get frustrated if I have to replay a level since it takes too much of my time.
 
[quote name='jmcc']Yeah, I know what you all mean. The average 5 to 10 second load times on games really kill me. I just hate wasting that inconsequential amount of time. I'd much rather pay the monsterous price a cartridge version of modern games would cost, if they'd be possible at all, than sit through another fraction of a minute of an animated loading message. Loading time is really right up there with cancer, I think, in the ways humans can suffer.[/quote]

Hey man, don't be a jerk. we're just discussing pros and cons of new vs old games; we're not saying that load times are the scourge of the earth!!

I agree with Pyrotyrant: sometimes i just want a "no commitment" game to play, and that's why i still have my old school sytems.
 
i arely play games anymore, just because i dont have the time to pop in a whole game and get involved. i miss the glory days when it was instant satisfaction.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top