How can developers make games that don't "age poorly"...

How can developers make games that don't "age poorly"? How is this avoidable when you're building to the trends and technologies of the time?

-Dial back a bit from pushing the system hardware to the limit, and instead focus on having a pleasing art-style. Games with a big focus on realism tend to suffer in this regard.

-Have tight, responsive controls

-For story-heavy games, hire competent writers. Don't write about flavour of the month political BS. Focus on widely-applicable themes, keep things as simple as you can without diminishing the impact.

-Music is tough to say. In general, a licensed soundtrack will be dated within 5 years. Other than that, idk.

>-Music is tough to say. In general, a licensed soundtrack will be dated within 5 years. Other than that, idk.

Music is music. Being dated doesn't really hurt it.

>Tight, responsive controls
This is the big one here. It's the main reason I consider GTA3 dated

True, DoA extreme 2 has the best soundtrack.

From most important to least:

1) Decent framerate- at least 30
2) No half steps on new gimmicks
3) Decent controls
4) No hip dialog
5) ????etc

All the GTA games from that era? Because I think SA had worse control than III and SA is fucking fantastic.

It really could have used a remake though, or made it gta 5 DLC.

Pure gameplay + simple graphics + good art style + good music
I still enjoy nights into dreams gameplay, and the art style and music definitely help retain enjoyment so many years later. A perfect example of aging well is Super Mario World. The perfected platform mechanics endured that smw will stand the test of time for many more generations.

Just make a good game. Some games can feel a bit clunky going backwards. But chances are if a game in general "ages poorly" to the point it isn't enjoyable anymore, it probably wasn't any good to begin with.

Good framerate, good controls, pleasing visuals. That's really all you need.

Unsurprisingly enough these things are also what make a game good in the first place. Because good games don't really "age"

You might as well have put a picture of Sonic Adventure instead of writing that post.

Nights into Dreams is still funny even today desu

But looking at the Saturn graphics from the age is hard on the eyes, you have to admit.

Massive aliasing, fuzzy textures, and somewhat stilted animation...

Plus load times were pretty bad too.

Don't go for hardware limit, photorealism and shit. Try to use style over pure hard technology, like XIII, Okami, Wind Waker.

Of course this is only talking about graphics.

>Good framerate
So Ocarina of Time aged poorly?

>pleasing visuals
So Final Fantasy VII aged poorly?

>Ocarina of Time
Not him but yes. The 3DS version alleviated some of the issues, but making you run across Hyrule Field as a child is too boring and tedious. They only made it like that so you would take in the scenery and see how massive the 3D world was, which is a product of its time.
It's a good game, but it really shows that it was made in 1998

MGS doesn't have any of that, though. Same year, same bold use of technology.

Because MGS didn't shove in that crap I mentioned in my post.

Bump?

no

I was just playing nights into dreams.

It hasn't aged one bit for me personally. And i do take a keen on the PS2 Port. Really well made to be frank.

RREEE

What's meant by "age poorly" is that, with time, significantly better versions of what the game offered came along.. We can't help but want to put our time into something that is better, but you might play through a series from the start despite the first titles "aging poorly" in this sense.

Some games you appreciate for their masterfully designed mechanics and aesthetics, and these are exciting through the ages. Some games you appreciate for their experimental qualities, as far as they are clearing the way for better ones (while also getting you excited for the future, which is a temporary excitement you have to be there for to enjoy). It's the latter that tend to age poorly, but you can still respect their place in things and see their disseminated influence in the better games that came after.

>make cartoony graphics
>cartoony graphics dosen't age

That was hard.

But people treat aging poorly as a flaw of a game, not a consequence of time rolling on.

If that is the sentiment, then there must be a way to correct it or anticipate it.

You're onto something, but I'd say 'stylized' rather than cartoony. Stylization is basically how appearances are made extra-meaningful, extra-human, and while games get away with a lack of style all of the time (by having the latest physics engine or something), they grow pale from not having a style that can reach across the ages.

definitely true. Wind Waker looks better than its supposed HD port just because the HD port fucked with the game's art style.

Well, it changed the lighting.

It didn't really dick around too much with the actual textures.