What are some old games that are hard to revisit, because a more modern and superior version exists?
-
I tried playing Harvest Moon on the SNES today and having played Stardew Valley for hours, I thought I'd try and see how tolerable the original Harvest Moon was in comparison. I know and understand it is unfair because there's a 20 year gap between Harvest Moon and Stardew Valley, while also discrediting Harvest Moon's later entries since there's more than one.
Harvest Moon to me is a bit hard to revisit. Having to get used to only carrying two tools at the same time, your farm don't seem as big, you don't have a way to know that you're tired as readily, you just have to watch for the signs and the village you visit doesn't seem as characteristic. It's a basic farming sim, it has to start somewhere.
But Stardew Valley does so many things that it is easier to revisit.
wrote on 27 Mar 2025, 15:37 last edited byThose old computer dungeon crawler games, like Wizardry or Might and Magic 1-2. Jesus, they're absolute exercises in patience. You don't even have to play anything very recent to see how poorly they aged, even SNES JRPGs of 1992-4 were much better.
-
That's just crazy talk. Pokémon Blue is my favourite, although I've only played up to gen 4 (Diamond, I think is the name). It's not as good as the previous generations and the physical special split is just weird IMO. I'm sure that's an unpopular opinion for people who are used to playing like that though, I think it would make more sense to me if it was how it had always been. Abilities were a neat addition though, I'll give you that
wrote on 27 Mar 2025, 16:07 last edited byI'm sorry, I'm a young gen, so maybe that explains it but... I played the virtual console Yellow and got so damn bored...
It's hard picking a favorite gen, as 4 was my first (Platinum my beloved) but I liked 5 despite not being able to beat it, but the features they introduced after gen I are all very good. Physical Special split is good imo, makes more strategy to a relatively basic game (when you don't play against real people), abilities are great, newer types and type combos are nice additions, and a major one it the aesthetic.
Gen I characters and region are just so bland, the lack of themes, no extra minigame stuff... And I get it was the first gen so I can't fault them for that. But the characters in the modern games are fantastic even if they're weak, the music only gets better and better (each gen feels like it has a genre now), they include neat side stuff like the Poke Olympics, performance contests, berries & snacks, a ton of other stuff throughout the games. Like yeah, the newer games fall hard on the battle/difficulty aspect, and GameFreak's inability to make a good looking game is astonishing. But they do put some heart in the little things in the new games, that just made grinding all day long in OG Yellow feel like a chore...
And even those there's a lot, more Pokemon just makes that initial hour or so of a new game feel so special, like you're discovering it all over again.
-
I tried playing Harvest Moon on the SNES today and having played Stardew Valley for hours, I thought I'd try and see how tolerable the original Harvest Moon was in comparison. I know and understand it is unfair because there's a 20 year gap between Harvest Moon and Stardew Valley, while also discrediting Harvest Moon's later entries since there's more than one.
Harvest Moon to me is a bit hard to revisit. Having to get used to only carrying two tools at the same time, your farm don't seem as big, you don't have a way to know that you're tired as readily, you just have to watch for the signs and the village you visit doesn't seem as characteristic. It's a basic farming sim, it has to start somewhere.
But Stardew Valley does so many things that it is easier to revisit.
wrote on 27 Mar 2025, 16:21 last edited byThe Battlefield franchise. I went back and played 1942, and disregarding the graphics, omg it’s so slow and clunky. It was the shit for the day, but man…compared to 2042 it’s super-dated.
-
The key is to change the layout, then the only problem is really replacing a mouse with the joystick.
wrote on 27 Mar 2025, 18:31 last edited byYeah you can use two controllers to mimic the more modern twin stick ones that have become standard, but I don't think too many people figured that out back then. Still though, controller will never be as good as mouse + keyboard for FPS games.
-
I can't see myself going back to the original Half-Life after playing Black Mesa. The changes to Xen alone are massive improvements.
wrote on 27 Mar 2025, 20:38 last edited byJust started a playthrough of Black Mesa the other week after having played HL1 like fuck idk, 18 years ago? Barely remember it, but going through the levels I'm like "Oh yeah I remember this part, with the mine cart/train thingies"
Looked at screenshots of HL1 the other day and laughed that I will never play it ever again
-
007 games. But the N64 soundtrack was great.
wrote on 27 Mar 2025, 20:49 last edited byEsp given 007 on N64 varied so widely.
Idk how Goldeneye was ever playable yet it damn well was and the best!
-
This will be controversial but Hitman blood money.
I have put hundreds of hours into the Hitman trilogy, but no matter what I can't get past the first guard of blood money, that is if I can get past the clunkynes to even get to him in the first place.
I would like to try it as I have heard a lot of good about it, big portion of the fan base think it is the best game ever, but no matter how many time I trow that god dame coin the guard refuses to move and I can't progress and that combined with general age and clunkynes of the controls don't make it an enjoyable experience to try.
In the trilogy and Absultion if I got stuck it was at least enjoyable trying to get around it, this is just frustrating.
wrote on 28 Mar 2025, 10:22 last edited byThat's curious because I remember Blood Money feeling really good, especially if I compare it to my memories of the original (don't bump the banners in front of the building - the physics cause my PC to seize up!).
I'll have to check it out again so I can ruin my memories.
-
I agree. Doom 1 and doom 2 are like exactly the same fun level as Doom Eternal, just in a different way.
Tbh I didn't like "Doom (2016)" that much. I'm sure when it came out it was amazing considering doom 3 was the most recent thing, but I played Doom Eternal first and compared to the FUN of eternal, it just doesn't stand up to the "rip that guy in half then latch on that demon with a flaming chain on my double barreled shotgun so I can use a Lazer balista to shoot that other demons head off while in midair to go chainsaw the flying meatballs eyesocket"wrote on 28 Mar 2025, 10:31 last edited byWow yeah, I can say that going from Eternal to 2016 is the "wrong order" since the sequel really _ really_ ups the tempo and ferocity of its predecessor.
I think I prefer 2016 overall, because I'm just like mentally too slow to fully enjoy Eternal. I don't have those reflexes anymore lol
-
This is kind of the opposite for me. I didn't try the original Diablo until long after playing plenty of more modern arpgs. While it's very rough around the edges compared to current titles, I feel like it has something unique that later games lost - even D2. I think it's the combo of your character feeling underpowered, like not much more than a normal person immersed in a world of otherworldly horrors; the way the darkness and aesthetic really comes together to create an atmosphere; and the slower, crunchier gameplay.
Pretty much all newer games put way too much emphasis on letting you play essentially a Marvel-style superhero who fills the screen with bright lights, and more more more numbers go up.
But then again I guess I have to admit I still spend more time playing the newer games.
wrote on 28 Mar 2025, 10:42 last edited byDiablo 1 is like actually scary. I love all those other games but they are farther on the Halloweeny/spooky/edgy spectrum, if that makes sense. I mean so was the original, but in that one I felt like an insignificant little mote, a pathetic ember of humanity, up against overwhelming evil.
The PoE aesthetic definitely comes closest to capturing that feeling. But like you said, it's more of a power fantasy once you get going.
-
Diablo 1 is like actually scary. I love all those other games but they are farther on the Halloweeny/spooky/edgy spectrum, if that makes sense. I mean so was the original, but in that one I felt like an insignificant little mote, a pathetic ember of humanity, up against overwhelming evil.
The PoE aesthetic definitely comes closest to capturing that feeling. But like you said, it's more of a power fantasy once you get going.
wrote on 28 Mar 2025, 17:10 last edited byCompletely agree. I almost said something about PoE, but then I remembered how within a few areas explored I had quickly turned my character into a flying meat grinder who could bonk explosive materials out of monsters.
-
System shared this topic 18 days ago