You are right, a space marine always means shooting and that is what hardcore gamers like us like. And also dont forget that:
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Retro-GAF unite!
- Thread starter IrishNinja
- Start date
You are right, a space marine always means shooting and that is what hardcore gamers like us like. And also dont forget that:
Shadowman16
Member
The difficulty is definitely one of the reasons I waited - I wasn't "great" at games back in the day, I could clear a few games but I never felt I was all that great at games, however as I've gotten older my skills have improved so I can clear most hard retro games with just a bit of time and patience. Zelda 2 was one I held back on also because of the whole levelling up system - I was always concerned I'd level up the wrong thing and screw myself over, so I was very careful at what I'd level up and when. I still needed a guide for the locations of a few bits in Zelda 2, but combat wise I took to it immediately, I loved the fast paced dueling feel to the combat - attacking and blocking very quickly to dispatch the harder foes.
Only two NES games I've never really managed to conquer are Battle Toads (I'm getting better, but it still kicks my butt) and Dragons Lair which I can only get a few screens in.
I don't know, guys. I'm sure many of you are on this boat with me, but I enjoy retrogaming as a whole experience, that transcends the standard perception of gameplay in terms of 1-to-10 score.
I tend to respect everyone's opinion, but I genuinely smile at/don't even care to reply to the majority or our 'retro' threads, which come up with this very inexplicable intent of revisiting/dissecting old games with shiny GTAV goggles. It's not really a matter of how deep you can go, trying to prove why Sonic IS a bad game, or fails compared to Mario, or why SMB isn't even interesting anymore... I mean, to me, you're doing it wrong, and missing the point by a long shot.
I don't expect everyone to share my point of view, here, or agree with me on the whole, but I love retrogame so much because it allows me to rediscover unique creative processes, and get lost in a bazillion of tiny little details. Every single time I turn on an old system, it's magic renewing itself.
Sure you may want to still complete that one game and get pissed off if you keep failing, but - once again, to me - there's no negativity going on, even when I dig up something that didn't get flattering reviews back then, and realize with 'modern' eyes why it didn't. It's still time which was worth having spent that way. A bit cheesy, perhaps? Sure thing, but I believe sentimentalism needs to be there, and cherished.
So yeah, if all you can do, after you went close and personal with Sonic, is going to GAF and try to convice everyone about how hard it sucks... Well, you're welcome, but don't expect to grab my attention.
I tend to respect everyone's opinion, but I genuinely smile at/don't even care to reply to the majority or our 'retro' threads, which come up with this very inexplicable intent of revisiting/dissecting old games with shiny GTAV goggles. It's not really a matter of how deep you can go, trying to prove why Sonic IS a bad game, or fails compared to Mario, or why SMB isn't even interesting anymore... I mean, to me, you're doing it wrong, and missing the point by a long shot.
I don't expect everyone to share my point of view, here, or agree with me on the whole, but I love retrogame so much because it allows me to rediscover unique creative processes, and get lost in a bazillion of tiny little details. Every single time I turn on an old system, it's magic renewing itself.
Sure you may want to still complete that one game and get pissed off if you keep failing, but - once again, to me - there's no negativity going on, even when I dig up something that didn't get flattering reviews back then, and realize with 'modern' eyes why it didn't. It's still time which was worth having spent that way. A bit cheesy, perhaps? Sure thing, but I believe sentimentalism needs to be there, and cherished.
So yeah, if all you can do, after you went close and personal with Sonic, is going to GAF and try to convice everyone about how hard it sucks... Well, you're welcome, but don't expect to grab my attention.
NOLA_Gaffer
Banned
Hopefully this "NES Sucks" sentiment continues so the prices of secondhand carts start coming down.
BocoDragon
or, How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Realize This Assgrab is Delicious
I hear Little Samson and Duck Tales 2 are horrible pieces of crap. Boo!
NOLA_Gaffer
Banned
Can't even spell "Tails" right, the morons.
Fucking crapcom.
Fucking crapcom.
PumpkinSpice
Banned
CAPCPOM MIRITE? Capcpom's never made anything good.
Also Fuckonami, even their old games. All of them. Especially Castlevania games.
god I hope this works
Edit: also re: complaining threads.
I think it's fine for someone to say they don't like an old highly regarded game. It's certainly a lot better than shitposting. I don't like Pitfall, or Dig Dug, and I wouldn't appreciate someone harping on that.
It would also be good to avoid brigading threads like that.
Now some of the posts in that thread are another story. Did dudebro forget about the GameBoy? DS? Wii?
davidwhangchoi
Member
Flizzzipper
Member
That thread is an incredible read. I'll give it that. SMB was a shared cultural experience for my entire generation and it's weird seeing a different perspective. Especially because it is unflattering.
NOLA_Gaffer
Banned
If anything is makes me feel like an old man. An old, old, old man.
I also think it is completely fine not to like games that are highly regarded. What I dont like is 1) to judge them based on what you want them to do, and not what they do, like saying Mario sucks because the story is boring, and 2) to use this to make generalized statements about the quality of the games.
The opening post in that thread was acutally pretty respectful, even though saying that the game is not interesting is obviously false. But in the context it was written, what he meant was that if you cruise through the game just to look at what it has to offer, it isnt really that interesting. Which is true. The game becomes interesting when you play it for the challenge, then the excellent design becomes clear.
Now a lot of the other posts there are a completely other story, saying that Nintendo is irrelevant and most Nes-games suck simply because they dont try to tell a story or constantly surprise the player with new vistas or whatever. Not liking old games is fine, judging them bad because they dont adhere to the rules you prefer in gaming, is imo disrespectful of the games, its creators and those who like them.
The opening post in that thread was acutally pretty respectful, even though saying that the game is not interesting is obviously false. But in the context it was written, what he meant was that if you cruise through the game just to look at what it has to offer, it isnt really that interesting. Which is true. The game becomes interesting when you play it for the challenge, then the excellent design becomes clear.
Now a lot of the other posts there are a completely other story, saying that Nintendo is irrelevant and most Nes-games suck simply because they dont try to tell a story or constantly surprise the player with new vistas or whatever. Not liking old games is fine, judging them bad because they dont adhere to the rules you prefer in gaming, is imo disrespectful of the games, its creators and those who like them.
PumpkinSpice
Banned
I see, but I can kind of understand where the OP was coming from.
For me, almost everything pre-Super Mario Bros is really not all that. The gameplay mechanics are just too primitive, the focus on score is ridiculous, the arcade-hard-because-we-wanted-more-quarters is just broken... I could go on. So in that context I just can't see the appeal in Frogger or the 4-screen Donkey Kong. And it's clear that Super Mario Bros changed games from then on.
I'm not sure I could pinpoint an exact game, maybe Metal Gear Solid (?), but at some point most well known big console games became very story driven affairs. If that's the context from which you like games, I can totally understand playing SMB and wondering where the story is. Just as I play Donkey Kong and wonder where the depth is, and wonder why it's 4 repeating screens.
gingerbeardman
Member
Can I join your club? ThanksI don't know, guys. I'm sure many of you are on this boat with me, but I enjoy retrogaming as a whole experience, that transcends the standard perception of gameplay in terms of 1-to-10 score.
I tend to respect everyone's opinion, but I genuinely smile at/don't even care to reply to the majority or our 'retro' threads, which come up with this very inexplicable intent of revisiting/dissecting old games with shiny GTAV goggles. It's not really a matter of how deep you can go, trying to prove why Sonic IS a bad game, or fails compared to Mario, or why SMB isn't even interesting anymore... I mean, to me, you're doing it wrong, and missing the point by a long shot.
I don't expect everyone to share my point of view, here, or agree with me on the whole, but I love retrogame so much because it allows me to rediscover unique creative processes, and get lost in a bazillion of tiny little details. Every single time I turn on an old system, it's magic renewing itself.
Sure you may want to still complete that one game and get pissed off if you keep failing, but - once again, to me - there's no negativity going on, even when I dig up something that didn't get flattering reviews back then, and realize with 'modern' eyes why it didn't. It's still time which was worth having spent that way. A bit cheesy, perhaps? Sure thing, but I believe sentimentalism needs to be there, and cherished.
So yeah, if all you can do, after you went close and personal with Sonic, is going to GAF and try to convice everyone about how hard it sucks... Well, you're welcome, but don't expect to grab my attention.
So, I have PSVR... and this is the second time I've ever felt the "Super Mario 64" moment in my entire life. WOW.
My mind is completely blown. I know this is off topic... but posted it here because I feel like this is how gaming used to be at the start of every new generation back in the retro days.
It feels completely new and is the first "next gen" feeling I've had in probably 10 years.
My mind is completely blown. I know this is off topic... but posted it here because I feel like this is how gaming used to be at the start of every new generation back in the retro days.
It feels completely new and is the first "next gen" feeling I've had in probably 10 years.
davidwhangchoi
Member
hey congrats!
do you get dizzy? what's the longest you feel you can game in one sitting with it on without feeling sick?
i'm so afraid of VR... =/
No dizziness. I would probably be able to do 2 hours or so. It definitely gets a bit fatiguing for some reason, but somehow never uncomfortable. All of the motion sickness reports are totally overblown. If you can do rides at amusement parks, you could easily do VR. The sense of presence is real and there were several moments that I totally forgot I was in my apartment.
My biggest complaint is that it's a bit of an isolating experience. It's all encompassing and you are genuinely inside of a video game. Even when I turned around to look behind me, the effect was flawless. I absolutely do think this is the future.
I just wish it was something I could share with my friends and family.
If you'd like to know what it's like to actually be inside of a video game, that's genuinely how it feels. You're fully there.
davidwhangchoi
Member
thanks for the personal user feedback. i really trust people that share the same interests on retroGAF.
shoot! i'm waiting for my ps4 pro. (i sold my ps4 in July while resale was high just for the pro) i'm tempted to get the VR with it =)
D.Lo
Member
Interesting. Yeah you'd be 'stuck playing solo' in your own world but that's also true of handhelds.
Not really since the GBA with single cart play.
Most multiplayer 3DS games allow for single cart play with up to 4 people (like the next Mario Party for example).
Online centric games are different, obviously (like Monster Hunter). Heck I believe even SF IV 3DS has single cart multiplay
Monado Blade
Member
All this VR talk is just making me want to buy a Virtual Boy. Teleroboxer anyone?
Playing a game boy is as anti social as reading a book though. People can still communicate with you and you only have to look up (and pause) to reply. With VR and a whole apparatus on your head, it's more complicated.
D.Lo
Member
That's true.
l love Teleroboxer. My Virtual Boys are all broken with garbled graphics though :*(
sixteen-bit
Member
Yea, just to clarify... the thing I found isolating about it wasn't necessarily the gameplay. Playroom VR is actually a very fun party game with multiple people.
But rather, if you're alone in your apartment and you're playing a VR game, literally no one can get in touch with you. You cannot check your email, phone, or even the time of day inside the headset. A front facing camera (like the Vive) really should have been included so that you can see a video feed of your surroundings with the push of a button.
In that sense, it is far more isolating than even the Virtual Boy which isn't strapped to your head, let alone a book or a handheld.
Hopefully, all future VR headsets include a front facing camera to alleviate this issue... because it's a big one.
I wouldn't mind a Vive-style camera, but I find it almost as easy to slide the scope out and look around it.Peltz said:
Even the ability to pause the game and view what the PS Eye sees (basically your reflection) at the press of a button, would be helpful. It might be nice to periodically check if my apartment is on fire around me...
I generally stay out of threads like that and the "SMB is bad" one. Either you like the older stuff or you don't. No point with trying to make discussion with most people on the subject, unfortunately. But it's been that way as far as I can remember and I'm old. I recall going on usenet newsgroups and there were people shitting on the Genesis back in 1995 and the NES/SMS were ancient - god forbid if you brought up the 2600 or Colecovision.
I just had a terifying image of playing VR alone in my apartment, toggling the camera and seeing someone standing behind me...
Imagine if a horror game did this! We know Sony can do AR using the Playstation Camera...
Speaking of old games and VR, y'all have seen New Retro Arcade, right? It's a VR app that lets you play libretro emulators in a UE4 arcade space.
It has insanely good material work and the controllers respond to your inputs and stuff. Lean in and you can see scanline effects on the CRT games.
Back when I last tried it it wasn't the most accurate thing, due to the cheeseball default arcade scene and issues with HMD refresh rate adaptation and sound, but I think it's a neat concept. I could picture future emulation via VR involving full box recreations of games (with scanned and modeled manuals, carts, registration cards, etc), consoles, even CRT televisions with accurate subtleties if the headset is advanced enough. Obviously arcade games would be well-represented, too (in fact, outside of actual CRT displays, light gun games are theoretically best represented in VR right now).
It has insanely good material work and the controllers respond to your inputs and stuff. Lean in and you can see scanline effects on the CRT games.
Back when I last tried it it wasn't the most accurate thing, due to the cheeseball default arcade scene and issues with HMD refresh rate adaptation and sound, but I think it's a neat concept. I could picture future emulation via VR involving full box recreations of games (with scanned and modeled manuals, carts, registration cards, etc), consoles, even CRT televisions with accurate subtleties if the headset is advanced enough. Obviously arcade games would be well-represented, too (in fact, outside of actual CRT displays, light gun games are theoretically best represented in VR right now).
That's pretty awesome looking, except for that horrible Chromatic Abberation. I don't mind a little bit, but that seems FAR too excessive.
Yep, rather have that effect off personally.
That was my first thought as well. Virtual reality has no place for chromatic aberrations, lens flare and other camera emulation trick.
I can see no chromatic aberration in the real world.
Well I can, but that's because I wear specs.
How do you aim?
The chromatic aberration effect is actually part of the VR stack. It's there because the real-world lenses you look through, at least the ones on that early version of the Rift, cause actual real-world CA, so the CA rendered by the software is a corrective countermeasure. It worked pretty well, been a while since I've used that headset but in practice I only remember minimal discoloration. CA doesn't seem to be a notable issue at all with the current headsets.
The Vive and Oculus motion controllers are extremely accurate and responsive (so far ahead of Wiimote/Move/Kinect stuff), to the point that you could reliably use them as light guns. You'd shoot a floating virtual screen, and could even have your controller represented by a model of a bulky clacking Time Crisis arcade gun or whatever. I haven't tried this myself, sadly, but from the VR games I've played I see no reason why it wouldn't be a REALLY GOOD representation of arcade light gun games.
Here's a video of some dude's project, I don't think he released anything: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NMVn52vbp88 (videos don't seem really lined up, there's no notable controller lag in practice). I'd love to try it. It looks like he wired up physical motion to the Time Crisis pedal and I'd maybe rather just use a button in that case.
VR controllers.
This is true in my experience.
I think I might check out the current state of VR software this weekend. I have an old Rift I haven't fired up since 2014 and even basic things were a mess back then.
I still don't like it much, and if there's too much of it it can hurt my eyes if I stare at it too long. I rather it be subtle, little, or none at all. CA is one of my least fav graphical effects, worse than lens flare and bloom even.
He's saying it's not a graphical effect. The lens have naturally occurring CA.
Outside of being added in video games, the true origins of CA are the inherent imperfection of photo-capturing lenses. I think better, more expensive ones can eliminate that problem. I'm hoping it's negligible in more recent iterations of VR headsets but I think even with the old ones it wasn't a huge dealbreaker. It didn't feel as heavy handed as in some video games that artificially throw it in.
CA should be nonexistent with quality lenses. I was half joking with my specs comment, but they only do a tiny bit of CA only at the extreme edges of the lenses where I can't really look at anyway. But the material is probably 100x more expensive than your basic plastic lens.
I do have to say, with the price of the headsets and the amount of expensive electronics they put in, cheapening on the lenses is a bit surprising.
I do have to say, with the price of the headsets and the amount of expensive electronics they put in, cheapening on the lenses is a bit surprising.
Camaway2
Member
That's exactly what I wanted to read!
I am on the fence on VR, part of me wants so badly to jump in, while the more rational side keeps saying "hold your horses, it's first gen, wait until it's more mature before forking out the cash".
I must have confirmed and canceled my PSVR pre-order like 3 or 4 times and I don't even own a PS4 (waiting for the PRO to arrive).
Reading your post rekindled my enthusiasm once again. I want to feel exaclty like you described, being thrown back by the experience in a way games haven't made me feel since, well, Mario 64.
On a side note, this is my very first GAF post, as I received validation today. Yay!
Welcome to NeoGAF. Believe.