Click here to register.
Forgot Your Password?
May 25 2019

· Home
· Reviews
· Kazuya's Neo Top 10
· In Depth FAQ's
· Downloads
· Web Links
· News Categories
· Image Gallery
· Official Wallpapers
· Fan Made Wallpapers

· NGFL Site Projects

· Neo Geo - The Console
· Neo Geo Pocket Handheld
· Articles

· SNK Jukebox
· NGFL Arcade

· Discussion Forum
· Chatroom
· Latest Comments
· Xbox Live Leaderboard
· NGFL World Map

· Contact Me
· Site FAQ's
· Search Site

· Submit News
· Submit Link
· Submit Article
· Submit a Photo
· Submit Download

Random Review
Shock Troopers

Users Online
· Guests Online: 8

· Members Online: 0

· Total Members: 2,351
· Newest Member: tomhilde

Last Seen Users
RiKo 1 day
bakudandan 2 days
green beret 1 week
Debujin 1 week
cthulhu 1 week
Murikov 2 weeks
NeoGeoNinja 3 weeks
King Gojulas 3 weeks
Atomduck 4 weeks


Support Us!
Donate To Us!
Enter an amount to donate:

Why Donate?

Game events
Latest scores
scored 193 points in
League Bowling
League Bowling
scored 523 points in
Snow Bowling
Snow Bowling
scored 172 points in
League Bowling
League Bowling
scored 28725 points in
Heli Boarding
Heli Boarding

Latest champions
is the new champion in
Snow Bowling with 523 points
Snow Bowling
is the new champion in
Heli Boarding with 28725 points
Heli Boarding
is the new champion in
Donkey Kong with 24900 points
Donkey Kong
is the new champion in
Helicopter with 1125 points

Thread Author: RiKo
Thread ID: 4812
Thread Info
There are 10 posts in this thread, and it has been viewed 3193 times.
  View Thread
Who is here? 1 guest(s)
 Print Thread
Old Games Are Great Because You Had To Do Things Yourself
I feel like having a moan.

I enjoy both modern and old (retro) games. But one of the things I like best about most retro games is that they are often more satisying because you usually had to do things yourself - rather than the console/computer doing them for you. To give an example : One of the first things my friends and I switch off when we play multiplayer on Perfect Dark is the aiming assist. How in any way is it fun or satisying if you just point vaguely at your opponent and hold fire down and let the N64 hit the target for you?? I don't get it! This aiming lock-on is found in a lot of modern games now. Not that those games aren't fun and there are times when it's a good idea but it means you are also robbed of the satisfaction of becoming a good shot by gradually increasing your skill.

It's similar with old football (soccer) games. Before FIFA arrived on the scene - you had to actually aim and put the ball in the net yourself. Soemtimes applying aftertouch as you saw fit (you could vary how much aftertouch) to curl it into the top corner. Often you would miss but when you did score a spectacular goal it really felt satisfying.

One of my favourite football games was Kick Off on the Amiga- which was incredibly hard when you first started to play because the ball didn't even stick to your feet (unthinkable now). But it meant with time and skill you would gradually master the art of dribbling the ball. And when you did eventually take the ball round 4 opposing players and lob the ball over the keeper - it was a goal worth saving to disk and an achievement to savour.

This is proper skill rather than skill that is mapped to buttons. Not all games need to be that hardcore to be good but why did most become so dumb?
Mini-Reviews of films I have just watched :
Mini-Reviews of ZX Spectrum games :
I agree with you 100%. Modern games are fun, but they usually don't require skill of any kind. When was the last time you actually saw a Game Over screen in modern games? Anyone can finish a game without too much trouble nowadays...with retro games you have limited lives and continues and if you loose those, you have to start over again. You were forced to get really good at a game through practice...I miss games like those (the reason why I love arcade games as they still require skill if you don't credit feed).
My arcade stuff

"ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn! Ia! Ia! Cthulhu fhtagn!"
cthulhu wrote:When was the last time you actually saw a Game Over screen in modern games?
The Last of Us instantly comes to mind. And while I haven't played them, the Dark Souls games are apparently relentless.

It's a different design philosophy though. I wouldn't say one is any worse than the other. If I'm dying constantly in an RPG I'm not having fun, but if I'm dying constantly in something like Contra then I'm driven to improve and probably having a blast. I feel like I totally suck at Metal Slug yet they're some of my favorite games ever made. But so are games like Infamous or Halo.

Most major developers are avoiding old school arcade like challenge, but it's definitely still out there if you know where to look.
Dark Souls was a very good game that forced the player to get better and rethink failed stratagies...I personally think it was not as difficult as most people claim though, I only had problems with a few parts of the game and only one boss was really difficult. I spent three days figuring out how to beat them (it was a duo of bosses). Very good game, I'll definitely buy the second one as well.
My arcade stuff

"ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn! Ia! Ia! Cthulhu fhtagn!"
Cthulhu wrote :- When was the last time you actually saw a Game Over screen in modern games? Anyone can finish a game without too much trouble nowadays...

I think that's the problem - that a lot of players seem to expect to see all of the game and the story (most game stories are crap so I don't know why). I see comments in reviews like "only a 8 hour play through time". A lot of old games actually had around an hour play through time! It was just it would take you a month (or maybe never) to to get to the skill level where you could complete it. I remember enjoying Tomb Raider 2 but after the 2nd level assuming it would be finishing. I just couldn't face playing another 10 or 14 levels (however many it was). The same gameplay is only fun for so long.

I started playing Kid Icarus on 3DS last night - and it's a game that has the potential to be up there with Space Harrier (if it didn't have a load of story stuff and talking intruding that is) but it's just so easy you can get hit about 50 times and still make it through a level. It holds your hand for you. It's not so much about making it hard but as a new player I should be getting beaten and then have to change my strategy and then if that doesnt work - change again. When I do figure out the right way to play - I've done it myself, rather than had the game help me.

Mojo wrote:- Most major developers are avoiding old school arcade like challenge, but it's definitely still out there if you know where to look.

You are right mojo - there are games out there which have that philosopy still but they are becoming a minority. Part of Dark Souls's popularity was down to the fact that you needed to work very hard to get through it. I think a lot of players want this type of game again which is good.
Mini-Reviews of films I have just watched :
Mini-Reviews of ZX Spectrum games :
I really enjoy modern games as a relaxing and fun pass time, but I play a lot of Arcade Games lately. More specificaly Bullet Hell Shmups with only one credit, to see how far I can get or how good I can's way more intense and fun. Also it's a lot more rewarding if you had a hard time to finish a game and finally managed it. I've cleared all modern games I have played with relative ease, but there are a lot of retro games I've never been able to clear like Castlevania, Castlevania 3 and most Atari Lynx games and I like it that way, they're still a challenge to me. I do have to admit that I've gotten worse at playing retro games compared to when I was still a child...I think it comes with age as my wife has the same and she only plays retro or retro style games.
My arcade stuff

"ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn! Ia! Ia! Cthulhu fhtagn!"
I like both of them and I agree with Mojo's comment about design.
Last modern game with a old school style was Hotline Miami for me and that game was just great. It doesn't matter if you die a lot in the game, it's almost the best way to discover the levels.
You are immediately back in the action, it works great.

When playing retro games, the experiences are (far) more intense then modern games. Kick Off has been mentioned, but Sensible (World of) Soccer is the same kind of football game I have very fond memories of. Ony a couple of Winning Eleven chapters could satisfy me after that. But yeah, almost all modern games aren't memorable anymore, it's a shame.
Modern gaming culture that runs in the UK...



Buy Triple-A, long-anticipated title 'X' on day of release, that Friday, after reading about it and anticipating it for months in advance based on market saturation and hype offered by popular gaming websites and pop culture magazines/publications.

Live on that game throughout the following week. Complete it in 20 hours (average).

Trade in Triple-A, long-anticipated title 'X' following Friday for Triple-A, long-anticipated title 'Y' on day of release.

Remark that Triple-A, long-anticipated title 'X' was "really good" and that you "really enjoyed playing through it" and that you attained "lots of achievements" before handing it over, for a part-ex value of 1/4 of what you paid ONLY 7 days ago, but somehow, in that window, managed to scratch the disc and crease the manual quite severely.

Leave shop, not before pre-ordering highly anticipated Triple-A, title 'Z', due out in 6 months time.




Buy Triple-A, long-anticipated title 'X' on day of release, that Friday, after pre-ordering it NEARLY a year prior, based on the successful track history of the previous series iterations i.e. 10+ prequels in 5/6 year window.

Live on that game throughout the following YEAR, spending the equivalent of MONTHS in gamer time on one, single title via the online competitive arena. The equivalent of THREE times the value of the game is spent on "DLC" throughout the games peak market validity and social acceptability.

For the first time, since the prequel to Triple-A, long-anticipated title 'X' (title 'W'?!) was sat in your disc tray, Triple-A, long-anticipated title 'X' is finally ejected from your system and, for the first time ever, placed back in it's case.

Trade in Triple-A, long-anticipated title 'X' for Triple-A, long-anticipated sequel in series title 'Y' on day of release. Trade in is refused because the store already has a backlog of over 100 (now unsellable) copies of title 'X', so it is taken back home with you, along with your shiny new sealed copy of Triple-A, long-anticipated title 'Y'.

Open seal and place game in disc tray. Press close and install content if necessary.

If necessary: play game for half hour and complain that the prequel was superior and how you will be 'going back' to that version to meet future gameplay requirements.

*** RINSE AND REPEAT VIA 180-day (approx) CYCLE ***


Thanks for watching... Wink
I think the most satisfaction is to be had from arcade games, mostly because of their intended business model.

Trivial mobile games are cheap enough that they can afford to make them too hard or too easy.

Modern PC and console games are trending more and more toward the "movie theatre" model, whereby the game has to be easy enough to be seen by everyone, beginning to end. After all, you've paid quite a bit for it!

Classic PC and console games were harder, but ultimately cost a significant amount up front, so they had to be easy enough to be beaten eventually.

Arcade games, on the other hand, had to make money continuously. The game play had to last long enough to satisfy, and short enough that quarters kept on flowing! I quote from my beloved Knights of the Round arcade manual: "Thorough Research shows that two and a half minutes both satisfy players and also keep the quarters flowing".

(I abstain from any innuendos, as hard as that may be...)

As such, arcade games had no constraints as to how easily they could be beaten. This meant that they could make them really hard! And when you 1cc one of them, man, did it feel good!
I don't care if a game is too hard or easy. But turns into a problem when the easy games become tedious and the hard games become frustrating. There are a lot of old games that are so poorly done, that you keep failing because of bugs, bad implementation of controls and impossible patters. You can find examples on the NES with games like those made by LJN, or other examples in Us ports of japanese arcade games, like some shooters with unavoidable patterns or the SUper Street Fighter Turbo version, which doesn't only have a killer AI, but also it is completely unfair.
Jump to Forum:

  Similar Threads
Thread Forum Replies Last Post
Arcade games collection Non SNK Console/PC Gaming Discussion 168 21. April 2019 21:36
Megaton Punch: New Video Games YouTube Channel! Non SNK Console/PC Gaming Discussion 1 03. January 2019 18:55
Rank the R-Type Games from Best To Worst Non SNK Console/PC Gaming Discussion 4 09. November 2018 16:12
Homebrew Games Thread Non SNK Console/PC Gaming Discussion 7 05. August 2018 14:56
SNK vs Capcom Match of the Millennium Review and things unknown in the game. Neo Geo & General SNK Talk 1 24. August 2017 16:16