ITT:

Post games that didn't age well at all.

Decided to play some feel good nostalgia and dug out megaman legends.
It still looks fucking fantabulous character design wise and aesthetically.

But my fucking god the voice over sounds like a bunch of hobos reading their first English sentences ever in some basement with a budge of a bubble gum and a shoe string.
You can almost hear them chuckling in the background, Christ it's like VA satire.

And the main part is obviously the gameplay.
Shit plays like ass garbage, everything is floaty and unresponsive and basically just run to point x, press square, watch a scene, repeat forever.
This is some of the most vapid game design I've seen in a long time.

Man do I remember this game being good as hell though.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=z50pFFaCcks
youtube.com/watch?v=0WQX6UdwSS4
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

It used to be my favorite game, now I can't even bring myself to play it.

It was good as hell and you are not wrong.

The reason so much people wanted a new Megaman Legends game is exatcly because of that, they want the same setting and ideas with modern gameplay, without all the technical problems and dated design choices.

Games dont age.

its still fun to play at its core but i agree with both the voice work and the gameplay, although not as harshly

mml2 improved the gameplay a ton tho holy fuck

The gameplay is WAY better in 2, i had only played the first one as a kid and felt similarly about the gameplay revisiting it but 2 is much better and kept me engaged enough to play through it and is very fun

It's a common fact that low IQ people have trouble adapting to controls that they aren't used to. Don't blame yourself.

>But my fucking god the voice over sounds like a bunch of hobos reading their first English sentences ever in some basement with a budge of a bubble gum and a shoe string.
>You can almost hear them chuckling in the background, Christ it's like VA satire.
Play Mega Man 64 :^)

The experience is relative. If you've never enjoyed smooth 3D rendering and controls then clunky, boxy PS1 games will still seem innovative. After you've been ruined by something better, going back offers a different experience. I don't know how you can believe that all games are an objective experience in a vacuum.

I don't know why people knock on horrible VAs at all, especially old vidya. Honestly I fucking love it, it's the charm of the 90s, especially because it reminds me of an era of cheap development when games were made with cheap stock sounds and voice actors were generally picked by getting random friends/neighbors to do one liners.

Just started playing Conker's Bad Fur Day and holy fucking shit is the voice acting is bad. The weasel scientist's attempt at the German accent. Geez is it bad, but fuck do I love it and fuck does it hit nostalgia.

youtube.com/watch?v=z50pFFaCcks

Same.
I tried multiple times but I got so utterly bored every single time.

Blood omen too.

>no analog sticks support
>3d movement orientation + jumping + shooting on dpad
ABSOLUTE MADMAN WHOEVER THOUGHT THIS WAS A GOOD IDEA
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARGH

As a kid I finished the N64 version around 20 times or so. In 2011 I played the PS1 version and still had fun with.

I play this game every year over the course of the year. Its still good

It's pretty clear as of 2017 why nobody at Capcom liked Keiji Inafune. Watching this hack job take all the credit for Mega Man must have been pretty infuriating to watch.

This was before the dual shock, though.

This

It takes some getting used to but considering this was made before the dualshock was standard I think they did a decent job. The VA is pretty terrible but the game plays fine. It's sort of like Resident Evil in that the control scheme is outdated and clunky but completely serviceable.

Believe it or not this is not bad.
There's a genuine attempt there, they're TRYING really well in character and it's mixed quite nicely.


MM legends can be summed up in this, it's amazing really.
youtube.com/watch?v=0WQX6UdwSS4
They clearly gave no shit whatsoever.
It's so uninspired it's almost like someone practicing his lines before lunch.

>But my fucking god the voice over sounds like a bunch of hobos reading their first English sentences ever in some basement with a budge of a bubble gum and a shoe string.
>You can almost hear them chuckling in the background, Christ it's like VA satire.
they're just canadian.

so same thing really

How the fuck is MM Legends looked back on in a positive light by so many people? I thought it was shitty

Nostalgia.
And lowpoly fags.

It's a terrible game all things considered.

he never took credit though. it was mostly the western gaming press that attributed this to him because we didn't have the level of communication we do now with devs. he's been the guy around megaman the longest, as a character designer and then producer, so people just assumed he designed megaman. After all, the actual designer left after Mega Man 1, and over the years, Inafune was basically the only original team member left still working on the series.

blame Capcom too, because they never bothered to correct it. it was good press, "the father of megaman", so they let it slide.

theres no doubt he sometimes considers himself a father figure for the character and franchise, but its understandable considering hes been involved with it for so long and clearly loved it

>i was born after 2007

because it's a good game. having dated graphics and controls and cheesy voice acting doesnt automatically make it a bad game.

as far as the first attempt at taking Mega Man into 3D, it's a pretty good attempt. Far better than the PS2 effort.

as someone who played Legends for the first time years after the PS1 was dead, I'd say it was pretty good. I liked it. it's fun. something Sup Forums knows little about, of course.

Honestly the only thing keeping me from really enjoying this as an adult is the way it controls. I'd really like another Bomberman game like this and Generation though.

>Graphics matter
Lolz

>he wants to play all his PC games in ASCII and all his console games in low res chunky 3D polygons

I wouldn't mind it at all so long as it doesn't impact gameplay.

...

Spoken like someone whos never actually played an old game with shitty graphics. ASCII is a joke and only for autism sims like Dwarf Fortress.

>want to play an FPS
>can't see shit past like 15 meters because of the draw distance
>even if you can see it you probably won't be able to make out anything as the bland shit textures of the background mix with the bland shit textures of the enemies
>no fancy particle effects so guns and explosions are garbage
>he seriously thinks atmosphere which is art style plus graphics can't impact a games gameplay

Full fucking retard.

test

>>want to play an FPS
There it is. That explains why you're a graphicsfag.

There's plenty of great games with dogshit graphics. Ski free, Dwarf Fortress, every text-based game out there, most of the 5th gen titles, and most of the games on Newgrounds from back in the day.

So long as the graphics don't impact gameplay, they're basically just icing on a cake. They're inconsequential.

>autism sims like Dwarf Fortress
>Massive amount of gameplay without regard for story or graphics = autism somehow
Gameplay is the only part that matters. Sorry if Dorfs are too deep for you to play.

Not him but I thought we were done with the FPS is bad meme.

I'm not saying that FPS games are bad. I'm saying that FPSfags are known to be complete graphics whores.

I'm sorry, but nothing will beat the look of Unreal. Your games just don't look as immersive to me.

>my example is irrelevant because it covers a genre that he doesn't personally like
>he considers flash games on newgrounds to be great games
>he genuinely thinks the PS1 and N64 have good graphics

Text Based games are glorified CYOA books. You're confusing my want for games to have good graphics with the photorealistic chromatic abberation fags of today.

Great graphics can never make a game worse, but they CAN make a game better by delivering things like better draw distance so you can see more, less pop in so you don't run into some bullshit at high speeds, less clipping/texture errors so your immersion of the game is higher, more enemies/objects on screen so game worlds aren't barren, better particle effects so your attacks or whatever have that much more oopmh, etc.

Grand strategy is as far as I'll go thank you.

Oh, my mistake, you were actually using the FPS fans are bad meme.

I don't disagree that gameplay > graphics but you downplay their significance to the point where I don't think you understand how much of an impact they can have on a game. I was actually going to get more into this but pretty much covered it in his second paragraph.

>my example is irrelevant because it covers a genre that he doesn't personally like
see It's not irrelevant because of the genre, but it IS irrelevant because I said graphics don't matter so long as graphics quality doesn't impact gameplay. In your example, it very clearly does.
>>he genuinely thinks the PS1 and N64 have good graphics
I'm LITERALLY arguing that they have bad graphics,but the games are still good because graphics don't matter

Thief: The Dark Project versus every other game ever made. The only argument you can make is graphics and it is sad so many freak out about "muh realism".

The PS1's approach to 3D makes for an eyesore. I'm not saying anything on there is bad because of the graphics but they would be much more pleasant experiences if they were actual 3D and not that jittery snapping shit.

They very much can.

someone found a way to have fun with a game but fuck them they are wrong right?

Graphics matter to an extent. Personally I prefer the SNES era to the PS1 era because I'd rather look at sprites than blocky 3D graphics with shit draw distance. Really I think we could have stopped advancing graphics around 2007/2008 as pretty much everything that needed to be done for games graphics wise had been done.

Some of my favorite games have shit graphics and while they wouldn't be better games for having better graphics, if done right better graphics can make for a better experience which leads to more enjoyment. Like San Andreas for example is still a great game at it's core but more people/cars with a better draw distance would make the game feel more alive which would help with the total enjoyment of the game.

This game is probably the reason I'm in to anime

Roll corrupted me

Explain how every graphics mod ever made for any game immediately makes the game worse then? Simply put, better graphics are a meme and make things worse. Draw distance? Who seriously needs a far draw distance when better graphics are an excuse to make everything look the same and generic?

>says graphics don't matter
>better graphics mods make the game worse

WUT

Also you're confusing artstyle/atmosphere with graphics. New Vegas has shit graphics but has great atmosphere. Battlefront 1 has amazing graphics but shit artstyle because everything is gray.

Now I know you are trolling. New Vegas looks heavily realistic. Note "quality" of graphics are an art style. Look at the original Quake. The reason that game works so well is because everything is sharp angled and polygonal. The abstract nature of the world made it better. By adding DarkPlaces and all this other garbage everything tries to make the world more realistic, which makes it fall on its face as the appeal is in the abstract.

So graphics do matter.

I see what you mean. Yes, graphics do matter in the event of it being modern graphics versus the 90s due to the latter being far superior. The less effort needed on graphics meant they could focus on other elements and make better gameplay, so in that aspect it is quite true that focusing heavily on graphics is garbage. I guess I just say graphics don't matter due to everyone usually using it to say why Call of Duty looks so amazing and why it is a thousand times better than Doom.

>Draw distance?
Draw distance impacts gameplay though. Ergo, it is important. Graphic styles, and otherwise graphic fidelity do not impact gameplay, so they do not matter.

>"quality" of graphics are an art style

that's a joke, it's not 'bad', it's supposed to be hammy.

Not really. Draw distance being increased in GzDoom matters very little. I can switch between that and DOSBox without flipping out like I have Aspergers.

Many find Call of Duty to have amazing graphics and to have "quality". Trust me, I agree with you, modern graphics are sheer garbage.

I don't get it either. I played when it came out on the psx and never understand why it is so highly regarded on here.

>Many find Call of Duty to have amazing graphics and to have "quality"
That has nothing to do with art style.

>Draw distance being increased in GzDoom matters very little
Doom was designed with its original draw distance in mind. Try playing a game designed to work with a large draw distance and see how it feels when you make it much lower.

>Draw distance being increased in GzDoom matters very little. I can switch between that and DOSBox without flipping out like I have Aspergers.
You're right. In some games it matters and it doesn't in others. A game with snipers, heavy exploration over distances or where you're moving at high speed? Yeah, you probably want a good draw distance. A game like Doom or Sonic Generations or something, where it's mostly corridor based? It matters a hell of a lot less, at the least.

It does. The art style of Call of Duty was to be realistic, to have smoke particles and lens flares. That was a choice, a certain style used.

>Post games that didn't age well

Reminder that every thread that starts with this is bait.

Really I think you're arguing more for artstyle and atmosphere than the actual graphics quality of games. Call of Duty has wayyy better graphics than Doom but it all looks like shit because it only uses a few colors and there's too much shit going on.

Again with New Vegas, the actual textures are really bad but they created this atmosphere that matches what they were doing. I can't even really explain it well but I think games that have a cohesive theme in their artstyle that creates a good atmosphere such as New Vegas, Max Payne or Silent Hill is much better than "MUH MIND BLOWING PHOTOREALISTIC GRAPHICS DUDE"

Again, graphics != art style.

Reminder that every person who thinks games don't age was born after 2000.

You got me there, games designed with large draw distances usually tend to end up being garbage. Maybe there is a correlation.

Snipers ruin games as everyone ends up camping. FPS are about moving fast and rocket jumping around, not hiding behind some crates and taking people out slowly.

As for the other two... Doom has long maps that can take up to half an hour to complete, so that is plenty of heavy exploration. Doom isn't that heavily fast paced, but Quake sure is, and Quake is just as well on DOSBox as GLQuake.

>games designed with large draw distances usually tend to end up being garbage
You know what, fuck you, you're fired.

I played it for the first time a few years ago and really enjoyed it. Took a little getting used to but I thought it was fun and charming.

Megaman Legends didn't age well, because Lost Planet took the gameplay and improved on it immensely

It still works if you're okay with playing old games in general, but it mostly ends up being circling and shooting as the old AI can't handle it

>FPS are about moving fast and rocket jumping around, not hiding behind some crates and taking people out slowly
>First person shooter games aren't about shooting
>All FPS games should be Run 'n' Gun games instead

Thief plays like shit

I actually find Lost Planet a lot more tedious to play than Legends.

Games aging is a meme. There's only good games and bad games.

The only games that age are games that include references to popular culture outside the realm of video games. Things like 13375P34K, awesome face, and most memes of the month will all date a game to a terrifying degree.

Explain why that isn't an art style.

Never touched any of the games you have talked about, so I can't really argue either way. However, from what I have seen people often use graphics as an excuse for poor gameplay. Look at the lack of control in Telltale's Games, but then look at the popularity, and tell me that "quality" graphics obsessed gamers aren't the death of us all.

They should. FPS games are about fast paced combat and killing them before they kill you by fighting in deadly arenas. We used to hate campers, now we praise them with snipers. It really is a sad development.

This. Games do not age. A good game from yesteryear is still good today.

Oh? Please explain. Or are you just an impatient modern gamer that just loves Call of Duty and being a sniper?

We do.

Why do you hate snipers?

It should be made mandatory for all children to play Duke Nukem 3d. It teaches them everything they need to know to prepare them for society.

We didn't truly understand what "good" was back then since we had no frame of reference.

Teisel's voice acting was great though

Because sniping is standing in one spot and waiting for something to happen. It is the opposite of fast paced action. Including snipers requires you to avoid getting hit from far away instead of moving haphazardly across a pit of lava to collect the red armor. It just makes the entire match revolve around camping and punishes those who rush out, which is problematic as the FPS genre is about fact-paced combat. It essentially makes everything into a dull waiting sim for "muh realism".

We knew what was good back then. Doom? Good. System Shock? Very good. Office.wad? Garbage.

Only graphic heavy games actually "look" like they age.

Games don't age, it's graphic you are thinking about. The better question would be "post games with graphic that dated worse than it should be." The answer will be graphic-heavy, photorealistic games like CoD and BF and shit. And this is ONLY about their look. BF2 may not be the most beautiful thing to look at, but you bet it's still fun to play.

Like many people mentioned, gameplay system that are good 10 years ago is still good to day. Can't say the same for grafix.

Duke is a perfect example of how atmosphere and personality can make a game better.

I fucking loved that guy.
Too bad he was such a comedy character, he never really got to play the villain part well.

And also a great example of good graphics. I have never seen a game with better explosions or fire than Duke 3d. It really was a game that had it all. Guess people stigmatize it due to age. It would be nice if we had more Duke 3d posts on here.

>It is the opposite of fast paced action
How is this a problem?

Like you said, only graphics that aspire towards realism "age". Any game with stylized graphics still looks great.

>gameplay system that are good 10 years ago is still good to day

I actually was trying to come up with some examples to debate this, but I think you're right. Everything I could think of was bad at the time. The only thing I can really say about this is something better might come along, but that doesn't relegate the original to being bad.

Games like Granstream Saga were fucking terrific but clearly limited by the hardware at the time. Graphics CAN ruin an otherwise good game. Some games that were good then are only tolerable now.

Fun games are fun. Time periods don't change that. They can be improved upon, but they'll always be fun.

How isn't that a problem? How is playing hide and seek more fun than rocket jumping around and having an opponent as equally as fast or even faster? Why do you feel hiding from snipers is acceptable? There is no satisfaction of seeing who I am sneaking by, you just get taken out if you walk in the open. It just slows down the pacing heavily and doesn't even feel rewarding.

>actual conversations with differing viewpoints with little to no namecalling or other faggotry
>barely any shitposting
>video game discussion about a wide variety of games

I wish we had more threads like this.

>it was mostly the western gaming press that attributed this to him
He never really bothered to correct it. There was an interview IGN did with him and they called him the father of megaman and he just rolled with it.

How does a game that plays magnificently suddenly become terrible because it isn't the most impressive looking thing? It doesn't make sense to me.

Let me help your points

Anyone today can pick up and play Super Mario Bros., the controls and gameplay are simple and well thought out

But even Metroid fans today would rather play Zero Mission than the NES game

The early 3D era really didn't age well at all. You can count the games that did on one hand across Dreamcast/N64/PSX.

Most shitposters are in school

I indeed wish to praise everyone for this as well. I may have extremely radical opinions to some people here and thus debate them, but I appreciate that people are willing to offer actual conversation.