Be honest, do you have a hard time playing old games?

Sometimes. The nostalgia goggles come off hard with some games.

Dino Crisis 1 and 2 I just played last week again, and it still feels nice to play. Good games just stand the test of time.

>playing vidya
>"dont wanna waste my time"

yeah, you asked for it.
why the fuck do you even play anything outside Angry Birds and Cod-Blops if you are not willing to dive into the experience and enjoy the aspect of adventure and exploration?

No, but that's because I'm an oldfag who doesn't ragequit when games involve more than "PRESS X TO WIN."

Because wasting limited resources and then fucking up and losing the progress is not fun when I could just be experiencing the challenge of heading in the right direction. Do I want to run around an ENTIRE mansion filled with Hunters or fight the Hunters who are already challenging in the way of the things that I need?

shake your fist at some clouds in another thread, old-timer.

I'd never played all the surivival horror classics until last year.
I didn't like the original dino crisis but enjoyed the PS1 resident evils, and parasite eve. Dino Crisis 2 was alright.

I only have a harder time if I didn't like the game. I think DC1 just didn't age well...

Should I take it as you haven't play a good recent videogame?

Depends. In tedious games that requires lots of time and thinking, like strategy or turn-based combat, I went back to completely destroy it.

Action-heavy games that need precise timing or rapid button-mashing feels more difficult though.

Not at all. I love my PS1 and PS2. I'd love my SNES but that got stolen by some movers along with all my games.

I think a lot of 'gamers' these days would benefit from playing older systems and their libraries.

No, I play a lot of older games and I'm not put off by what would be thought of as archaic design.

That said, not a big Dino Crisis 1 fan. I think my problem was the setting. Resident Evil has such a concrete, evocative sense of place, and DC's samey, boring research facility just wasn't cutting it.

I still play games from pretty much any era. It really depends on the game. Some hold up better than others.

I'll likely use a walkthrough if I don't know where I'm going, but no game has been "too hard" for me.

Yes and no. Games I played as a kid I have zero problem replaying as an adult. Dragon Warrior, Final Fantasy, Resident Evil, Lufia, etc. But I never played Illusion of Gaia as a kid, and I cant get into it as an adult.

So a lot of people have been talking about Dino Crisis in Cred Forums recently, is this some new underground free ad space thread for a soon to be released reboot?

Yeah, specially Dino Crisis 2. Those controls take a while to get used to.

Dino Crisis had a better save room theme than any of the REs, honestly.

youtube.com/watch?v=v1wb_NOHBHc

>Because wasting limited resources and then fucking up and losing the progress is not fun
The fact that you're even trying to describe games like the survival-horror title with "fun" already proves your wrong approach.
Even if we'd go with that naive "fun just means enjoyable!" mindset, I do find exactly that excitement fun as hell. One reason REmake is still one of my all time favorite games.

>I could just be experiencing the challenge of heading in the right direction.
Ah yes, the second more and more common argument that comes up. People like you seem to fail to realize the fact that these games are NOT linear. They are meant for exploration, with more than half of the appeal being the fact that the environment is a dangerous puzzle of its own, which could also change any second.

>Do I want to run around an ENTIRE mansion filled with Hunters or fight the Hunters who are already challenging in the way of the things that I need?
That's the whole point: unless you're a guide-staring casual moron, you can't know what's out there on the first run, and thus need to make preparations and plans, to avoid getting into complete SHTF situations.

>old timer
You wish.
I got my wife to give REmake a shot for the very first time last fall. Was also her first time playing any RE game. She totally fell in love with it, and it was just so heart warming to watch her stare at the map, think out loud strategies to avoid this and that, and spend countless minutes shuffling her inventory.

She actually replayed it 3 times in a row.

>no game has been "too hard" for me.
>I'll likely use a walkthrough if I don't know where I'm going
does not compute

Nope.

youtube.com/watch?v=4pZV3UPmXI4

i can't play a lot of 3d titles because of devs just couldn't get the movement "right".

it's upsetting because SM64 came out early, and yet a lot of 3D games couldn't just copy the fluidity of that.

Not every game would even make sense with SM64 style controls and "fluidity".

I quite miss the times when each game had its own thing going on with both the visuals and controls. Nowadays, everything on consoles is pretty much jammed into this same shitty AssCreed/CoD/whatev mold.

If it's something I used to play back then? No.

I honestly just want a remake of RE2 to alleviate my autism flaring up at the lack of visual consistency between entries during my occasional series marathon sessions. Survival horror games from the PS1 ara have still held up surprisingly well, aside from the visuals. They've at least held up as well as JRPGs from the time, and MGS1.

I play lots of old games.

Though I didn't really care for the Resident Evil/Silent Hill/etc games with static backgrounds & tank controls even back when they came out. I don't find them difficult to play as I forced my way through several of them. I do find them to be more of a chore than fun, however. As much as I really want to like some of them.

The DualShock version actually had a better save room theme than RE or REmake, imo. Sacrilege, I know.

youtube.com/watch?v=0jiKienmRiQ

...you serious?
What the living fuck is that generic Christmas tale blinking shit? It's TERRIBLE.

I don't know where you get the idea I don't like these games. I've been playing RE since I was like three. I've played and finished the vast majority of those and Silent Hill and I still think it's not enjoyable in any sense to run around aimlessly and maybe just die and re-do it again. That happens through exploration, but I'm not thrilled by it like you seem to imply I MUST be to enjoy any of those games.

I'll show you my Blue Stinger save file if that stops your trembling.

Nah, this is terrible.

All rise for the national anthem
youtube.com/watch?v=0kcF7E69C6Q

Being confusing des not equal being hard

I have a harder time playing new games actually.

My head just fails to comprehend that a key element, that I'd even call one of the few appealing points in said games / genre, can be so "hated" by someone who claims to like them. Even more so since after the first run, you seldom even get "stuck" anymore anyway. Not to mention compared to some truly cryptic shit like Castlevania 2, these PS1 era survival-horror games have very small environments to roam around, and you get all the necessary tools and hints within the game, in plain English.

>I've been playing RE since I was like three.
Jesus! No RESI games even EXISTED before I was around 10.

The first note is the fall of Charlie Brown.
The rest are the stairs beneath him.

No but my point is that I don't understand how he hates backtracking, which is something that barely ruins the game, but can bear with the bad controls when that's present throughout the whole game.

This. Some older games are needlessly obtuse.

This is so bad I love it

I don't know why this upsets you. Some people enjoy the same games you enjoy but differently and for different reasons. This has been the case since day 1 and your intolerance just seems really immature. I'm a big classic Resident Evil fan, and no amount of talking down is gonna change that at this point my dude.

In the case of RE there's only so much you can do to make it "easier" so what you are actually making a scene about is not really anything that shocking.

I usually don't have much of a problem with going back and playing old action games other than the increased difficulty but usually I just use save states to circumvent that.

Old RPGs, on the other hand, I find almost universally impenetrable. Basically any PC RPG before Neverwinter Nights and any console RPG before Final Fantasy VII I'm going to have a tough time playing.

I'm not the guy who hates back-tracking. I don't like getting lost is all.

Install PGXP

Sometimes yes, sometimes no

I'd say my favorite era is from around late 90's to around mid 7th gen.
Everything after is shit because of DLC, forced online, consoles not having any advantages over PC, overpriced linear cinematic games with no real depth and the list goes on, but there are exceptions

There are some games I like on NES, Genesis, and SNES, but every other title usually has one, and only one fatal flaw. My biggest weakness when it comes to old games is usually one hit point, RNG or the game being cryptic as shit in order to progress

I like that track. But I like the original version more. The original score is a lot better.

I got the Dual Shock version as a teen, and I didn't know until years later they messed with the soundtrack. I thought RE4 had a great save theme. Had no clue it was a new version of RE1's.

Sort of.

Back then, playing a game required time and effort. You couldn't just pick it up and go. You needed to be patient and scan the environment and have the willingness to carry on with your mission. Progression was gradual, not instant or easy access. After two generations of newer games having waypoint markers, accessibility, quick gratification, and easy access to all these things as well as the speed of it all made it feel clunky in comparison. You could say that's progress getting in the way of idealogy, but it's jarring going back to it after so long. It pains me that I've been sub consciously conditioned to accept this new norm where hand holding is the way to go, when I was perfectly fine with what we had. Now it has to be quick and obvious instead of subtle and gradual, because earlier gen games forced everyone to get creative and utilize things in unique ways. That just isn't apparent anymore. Everything feels dumbed down.

Nope. I have a high tolerance for odd controls, poor cameras, bugs, etc. as long as the game is worth playing. Old PC games or PS1/N64 gen and earlier are all fair.

Replaying resident evil series right now. Played zero for the first time and dropped it. REmake was very good. And the problem is I didn't have any fun with 2 and little fun with 3 and I loved them as a kid. 2 is just the same shit from 1 but in new decorations. And I already finished silent hills and my fav when I was a kid, sh3, jesus christ it was so bad. I don't know why I liked it besides Heather maybe. SH1&2 were fantastic tho. Next I'll play eternal darkness for the first time.

This. I'm way more comfortable with games that feel like they belong in the 5th/6th gen than I am with games that are supposed to feel "modern".

No. I have no problem playing old games. If there is one game I ever had trouble going back too was classic Tomb Raider because it was a literal decade until I last played it. However, after one hour I mastered its precision platforming.

No
Good games are good forever

>SH3
>so bad
How can an opinion be so wrong?

Anything earlier than the 90s I might not enjoy very much but I play early 90s games often.

I have trouble playing shit games.

A lot of early 3d games are pretty shit. Most. Shit cameras, shit controls, yes shit graphics, but most damning of all shit pacing.

Same said for early 2d. Your Atari games don't tend to hold up. I don't have the tolerance for mediocrity I used to.

But the few that stand the test of time, well they're quite nice. As it is, I default to the NES and beyond's 2D libraries, and the Dreamcast and beyond's 3D libraries.

Hearing this out of context makes me want to boot up Megaman Legends 2 and just idle in the snow town.

It's a regular horror game with lots of enemies. SH1&2 had their unique atmosphere. SH3 is SH1 minus unique atmoshpere. It is just a short horror game with great graphicsand music but it the worst of trilogy.

SH3 isn't so different from SH1 and 2 aside from the progression being more explicitly linear. From an aesthetic perspective it's definitely the most challenging of the trilogy. The otherworld always feels like an assault on the senses compared to the previous renditions, which I think is pretty cool.

I spend more time playing old games than newer ones. I recently replayed Silent Hill 1 and CTR and enjoyed the fuck out of both of them. CTR is even more fun than MK8 honestly. Though I do think pre-SNES games are kinda rough. I wish more of the the classic Megaman games got the Powered Up treatment.

The otherworld doing that makes more sense given what's happening to Heather.

Well, see, If you like horror more, you'll like it. If you like suspence, you'll like it less.

>SH3
>No unique atmosphere
The environments were literally living in certain sections and it always gave you a decent graphic image to stare at and ponder the meaning.

Each game used horror in a different way and Silent Hill satisfied my morbid curiosity more than the first two. It's my favorite of the TETRAlogy and putting the word "worse" or "worst" on any of those games is a MASSIVE overstatement.

The only game that can even compete with that title is 4 because of the uninspired monster design and controls. Even then it's a nice side story.

no
I have a problem with Oblivion though

>No suspense
Nigger did you even fucking play the damn game?

Did you never enter the storage room in the hospital?

Oh right it changes all. If the devs themselves said it was a regular horror in the translated memories but you say otherwise then it's def suspense and has the same feeling as before. I get it that sh3 is your favourite but you're fanboying right now. And I never said it's a bad game, it's worse than the first two.

>and my fav when I was a kid, sh3, jesus christ it was so bad

?

K fanboy. Stay mad in your thread. At least your game has a waifu.

>If the devs themselves said it was a regular horror in the translated memories

What the fuck does that even mean?

Even then you have yet to rebut the atmosphere claim and suspense.

And if it was a horror movie horror, how is that a bad thing?

All three games were inspired by western horror films.

But regardless of such, Silent Hill 1 and 2 did not challenge your morbid curiosity as much as Silent Hill 3.

Heather herself reflects on this throughout the game and it plays a motif in the horror.

Silent Hill 1 had amazingly detailed environments for its time.

Silent Hill 2 had the best story.

Silent Hill 3 did the best horror. Plain and simple.

I sort of agree with him. Related: when I'm driving and find out I've been going the wrong way I go apeshit. It just seems like a waste of life for no good reason. I love when exploring games rewards you, even just with nice views or something intangible. But if you're tediously going down a path looking for something only to find there's literally nothing there.... yeah, it's annoying and feels like a waste of time.

Yeah. Heather. I got it the first time.

if it's just graphics, no.
if the gameplay aged like milk, yes.

>Educate yourself shitlord

user, why are you such a faggot?
Guess you got nothing then huh?

This nigga knows what's up.

>If the devs themselves said it was a regular horror in the translated memories
>What the fuck does that even mean?
>post what it means
>yeah shitlord

Tell me which page faggot because I'm looking at it right now and don't see it where this magical quote you cherry pick is.

Regular horror is a vague term on its own so I'd like to ask you what kind of horror SH1 and 2 are if they don't fall under this mundane category?

It really depends. Some old games still hold up really well, some are just from an era where shitty controls and 15 fps were not out of place. It's not so much the age of the game, but more of how competent the developers are. A good example would be the difference between Ace Combat 1 and Ace Combat 2. 1 has no analog controls, looks like ass, and is just not very fun to play. Meanwhile, AC2 which came out only 2 years later, is much more playable, and actually fun.

Despite beating 2,3, and 4, I've never beat the first .hack game

fuck this asshole son of a bitch

I beat the first two parts, but unfortunately I never really got to dabble with the rest of the series beyond two and G.U. part one.

Why is Silent Hill having an earthquake bro?

>The first phase

Oh no melon!

I decided to play through the original quadrilogy a few months back but got sidetracked around Outbreak. I should really get around to finishing it and moving on to GU.

youtube.com/watch?v=oYcrt8bvAmg

Depends on the game. That said, I still enjoy playing Dino Crisis. I love that game.

nope. I like how older games often expect a lot more from you as a player; I recently played through the first alone in the dark game and you actually need to pay attention to what you read, what you pick up and what rooms you enter. sure there's the occasional bullshit thing (like throwing the lantern at the boss) but on the other hand there's no feeling of success from completing a puzzle or challenge if the game just hands you directions and hints everywhere.

too bad alone in the dark 2 and 3 kinda suck, and 1 already wasn't a masterpiece