Chrono Trigger and old styled games in general

[helioseclipsed]

Just got it on the DS, and played and beat it for the first time . Liked it quite a bit.

I was taken with how nostalgic it felt, considering it was my first time. Just the kind of game it is took me back to the same feelings I had playing FF VI or even the ones on the Playstation. And as good as games' production values have gotten, I still like the feel of older games without voice acting, where the music fills the entire audio element of the game's aesthetics, and the visuals are enough to catch your attention, but still simplistic enough to let your imagination fill in the gaps.

I'm curious if others feel the same way. Is there a value in this minimalist approach, or do you think that newer, flashier games make it obsolete? I'll admit that part of the old appeal was how it used the limitations of the technology at the time to sort of catch your attention, and my current view might be clouded by nostalgia for that feeling. I don't know if younger people who grew up with the current stuff would connect with it.

But I still like it either way.

[Rett Mikhal]

I have always said newer games just use graphics and 3D as a crutch. 16-bit and pre-16 bit games, and especially DOS games, will always be superior. I highly recommend you check out DOS Box and Abandonware sites. All the games are free and legal to download, and DOS Box plays them like a charm every time.

Of course, because we're talking about Super Nintendo, I have to plug this in:

Play Lufia II. Now.

[rabidmonkeys]

I had a GBA kickin around that i hadn't touched.. since I recently have been riding transit alot I picked up a couple carts for it... Yoshi's Island (or something).. the one with the baby mario that rides on yoshi's back. and the original NES Metroid. Oh and Warioware Twisted.. the motion sensing one.

So that would be me retrying old style games again.. for the 1st time since 2d games went out of style. None of them really grabbed me.. Yoshi's Island was decent for the first couple of worlds, but its gotten boring and Metroid.. err maybe my attention span is too short, I couldn't get through the first level and got bored.

Maybe I've just gotten too used to 3d games..

[dex]

Jan 18, 2009 18:47:58 GMT -5 helioseclipsed said:

And as good as games' production values have gotten, I still like the feel of older games without voice acting, where the music fills the entire audio element of the game's aesthetics, and the visuals are enough to catch your attention, but still simplistic enough to let your imagination fill in the gaps.

Couldn't have said it better myself. My current example: Monkey Island. I've just played Part 1 (very little music--that's a bit too minimalistic) on the ScummVM and started with Part 2. It's exactly like you said. Basically I even thought so when I was playing the series for the first time. E.g. in the first two parts, I thought Elaine was pretty--a handful of pixels and imagination, just like you said. Later installments looked pretty--not the same.

Another recent example: Stunts. (Same era, you build tracks with crazy obstacles.) Me and my friends spent a lot of time with that. It was excellent fun, especially using the little bugs to your advantage. I've tried it's recent clone, Ultimatestunts. Bigger, better, smoother, more spectacular. And very boring.

I doubt the young folk could get into this nostalgic mood, at least concerning the same era. Maybe they'll feel the same way about Counterstrike in five years.

At the same time, I'm all for using new technology for new games. Using it to make a game fun, not to demonstrate it for its own sake.

[Al]

On the other side of the coin, you may want to take a look at this:

The Case Against Candy Land

I like older games, too, and titles like Chrono Trigger and Monkey Island are obviously not the target of the article. I just find it interesting to think that most kids brought up in an Xbox and Playstation world would never sit through Super Mario Brothers. It isn't necessarily because the graphics are twenty years obsolete; the game just simply wouldn't give them nearly as much to do as they are used to.

[dex]

Feb 2, 2009 15:09:17 GMT -5 Al said:

On the other side of the coin, you may want to take a look at this:

The Case Against Candy Land

Interesting article. Let me summarize: The author realizes that board/whatever games like Battleship and Candy Land, which excited him at five years old, are in fact shockingly trivial. Today's five year olds have pretty complex video games, however. He seems to imply his generation's playing was dumb, while today's one is interesting (and possibly educating.)

Basically, his thoughts are correct: Playing is not only fun, but it means learning, too. Dumb playing=wasted potential. I get that. But he make an implicit false assumption: Before computers, kids did not just play those trivial games (nor should they now.) I don't remember getting excited over or spending a lot of time with such games at any age, ditto for my friends. We spent ages with lego, toy cars and other totally made up free form games, which are as complex as you want them. I think this kind of playing is quite fun and educational.

I like older games, too, and titles like Chrono Trigger and Monkey Island are obviously not the target of the article. I just find it interesting to think that most kids brought up in an Xbox and Playstation world would never sit through Super Mario Brothers. It isn't necessarily because the graphics are twenty years obsolete; the game just simply wouldn't give them nearly as much to do as they are used to.

Now you seem to be making an implicit assumption: Little kids today only play relatively complex video games. (No offense intended: I exaggerated for the sake of the discussion. Also, I have little experience with consoles and might therefore not get your point.) When I look over the children's shoulders in my extended family, I see trivial arcade style games. There's one on the Nintendo DS where most of the time you pull a leash around randomly, and a cutesy puppy traipses along. Blech! (It's great cynical symbolism, though, if you take it as a metaphorical life lesson like the article's author does. )

Certainly there is more potential for (some kinds of) fun and learning in video games today compared to simple board games and old video games, but neither does everyone use that potential all the time nor are video games the only source of such potential.

Ooof, another long rant. There's something about tangents...

[helioseclipsed]

Feb 2, 2009 15:09:17 GMT -5 Al said:

I just find it interesting to think that most kids brought up in an Xbox and Playstation world would never sit through Super Mario Brothers. It isn't necessarily because the graphics are twenty years obsolete; the game just simply wouldn't give them nearly as much to do as they are used to.

Actually, there's nearly just as much to do in the original Super Mario Bros. as in New Super Mario Bros. on the DS, and that was a big hit. I know the point you're trying to make, but literally the only difference are the grapics and the lack of goofy powerups (like the giant and tiny mushrooms) that were usually just interruptions to the gameplay rather than enhancements anyway.

Well, that and the original SMB was balls hard in comparison. I don't remember the new games having a lot of running jumps over chasms, needing to bounce off of at least two single square spires perfectly in order to reach the other side, a cruel death noise awaiting those who couldn't make it.

Back on point, though. I do agree about those old board games. I remember playing them when I was kid, simply because, you know... "that's how games are, right?" I remember that going through my head. It's almost shameful how stupidly people treat kids, when they're obviously capable of more. Games like Candy Land basically just drill in the ability to interpret symbols and follow basic instructions. As soon as you're old enough to read the instructions, that's a no-brainer.

...and did anybody else ever try to interpret the "plot" of Candyland? It seems like the Olde King and whatnot were Northern Isolationists that you had to reach in order to be safe from the perils of the odd dwarves and witches of the land. Oh, and Lord Licorice, or whatever he was called... definitely "into the children." My God, those pants... <shudder>.

[dex]

When I read misleading headlines about the demise of the F-22, a wave of nostalgia washed over me: TFX. Shockingly primitive graphics (even so, my 486@33MHz only managed ~2.5 fps during carrier landings), but the most fun flight sim I've ever seen. It had the "soap opera engine", very cool still images and you could carry the missiles you wanted. Sure, modern graphics could improve it, but I couldn't afford the hardware for it; and the gameplay remains unrivaled. Did any of you play TFX?