Why Retro Video Games Are Not Too Simple - Retro Bird
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 8 ก.ย. 2022
- Ever see or hear somebody say that retro video games are too simple? I give my take on why they are not by going over what makes a game simple, how simple can be beneficial, and how depth in most good games is often lying under the surface.
Why Retro Video Games Are Not Too Simple - Retro Bird / Why Retro Video Games either Are or Are Not Deep Enough / Complex / Depth / Older Video Games / Basic
If you'd like to gain access to my retro blog or just support the channel - you can find my Patreon here: / retrobird
New videos uploaded every Friday! Be sure to ring the bell if you subscribe!
Follow me on Twitter here: / retrobirdgaming
or on Instagram here: / retrobirdmatt
#retrobird - เกม
Games played: Contra III (0:01), Parasol Stars (0:24), Donkey Kong Arcade via DK 64 (1:05), Streets of Rage 2 (1:50), Tales of Symphonia (5:20), Jackal (6:35), Mario Kart 64 (6:50)
Jackal! I loved that as a kid and have been wondering what the game was for YEARS. YES! Thank you!!
I'm watching this only eight minutes after posted!!!!! Who's a retro bird fan??? This guy!!!!!!!
Now for the important question: What is your stance on ‘nanners?
Oh ye but do u let the Ads play all the way through on purpose so my mans gets paid?
Thank you for that Anthony haha. I always wondered if anybody thought of that.
Always happy to hear, "Quuuuuick little story for ya!"
LMAO
I really like the more instant feeling of retro games. I recently beat super metroid and I like how little time it takes for you to take over and start just playing the game. Sometimes games get so bogged down in their story that they refuse to let me just play the damn game. This is why I appreciate Zelda, because even though the story is always the focal point, the gameplay is never neglected.
I hate story heavy games... I just want to get in there and go bash some enemies!
Absolutely!!! One of the big reasons ppl prefer retro games. That and their inherent retro/nostalgic charm, the 8/16 bit graphics. the feelings that lots of effort went into the making of such games, makes it feel like you're playing a playable piece of art.
Agreed. Many modern games will essentially hard stop the game in order to put in exposition. Gah. Retro RPGs have some of that too, but that's kind of the point of those games, so I don't mind. If I'm playing an action game though, and suddenly I'm not playing, I'm watching, that's not at all what I want.
My favourite 'simple' aspect of retro games is how they organically introduce the controls and what you need to do to succeed. I feel a lot of modern games are 'too simple' in this regard by having an overlong tutorial which spoon feeds all of the controls and can really break the immersive experience. Great topic!
Some games are able to masterfully teach you through the gameplay itself in clever ways (to the point it doesn't even feel like a tutorial). I love that.
I dunno I like modern games tutorials it makes you feel like you bought something special, it does ruin the Emersion but gets you excited to play it.
I don't know what modern games you play for it to be simple with controls. You are certainly not talking about Triple A titles like Red Dead Redemption 2.
Modern games still do this.
@@RetroBirdGaming yeah, mostly having things in a safe or controlled environment. Like the snake pit in battletoads where the first section you can't die so you can learn how the snake works.
The music! There is nothing like those 8 and 16 bit BGMs! Love them! :)
damn it he glued his faverite food too the painting
Two things I like in "simple" games are both how easy it is to pick it up again after not having played it in a while, and how little fluff like unskippable cutscenes, extremely long and mandatory tutorials, etc. there are in the game. I don't have time to play through games in a single sitting like I used to, so being able to put a game down for a long time and pick it back up without issues like forgetting the complicated controls or the long story is important for me. I only have time to play the game, not relearn it every time I pick it back up.
The banana on the painting!!!! 😂
My aunt: then I threw the controller at your dad 😂
That pretty much told me all I needed to know about the difficulty level of those games 😂
That would certainly be classified as a beat em up.
Thank You Retro Bird Once Again As Always I Appreciate You
Thank you! Always appreciate you watching as well!
@@RetroBirdGaming no worries at all you’re one of the many retro greats
"Simple" best Collective Soul song.
The Plug in and Play is my favorite aspect of simplicity of retro gaming :)
Excellent topic, RB! Yeah, I hear a lot of modern gamers scoff at retro games for being too simple as well. As a child of the 90s, I feel like many games _did_ have depth in that you had to actually _learn_ every nuanced mechanic to make it through. Most games at that time had little to no tutorials to teach you _every_ aspect of the game (the instruction manual only taught you so much).
I actually like retro shmups for that reason. You have to learn patterns through a bit of trial and error. The reward was ultimately simple: see more of the game until you're ready to face the final challenges and eventually finish the game! Yes, it is frustrating to get really far and run out of lives/continues, but you gained experience on how to get past each obstacle in the process. I don't need a ton of extra unlockable content to incentivize me to play a game. The fun for me is learning the skills necessary to finally overcome the game's challenges.
I'm a big fan of shoot 'em ups as well. When you get to mid '90s shoot 'em ups, they start having incredibly detailed scoring mechanics and rank mechanics that most people never even realize are there.
Modern games are frequently cluttered with pointless complexity that serves no purpose other than to distract you from the shallow gameplay. It's meant to add depth but it usually just adds width.
Funny Story at my friends house going to play a new game on his Sega & he had me close my eyes for the intro & said it was a Castlevania game on the Genesis! It was some creature with a Knight outfit on found out you can use your tail to hang on trees. Had fun but reached this wall with no trees in sight, totally stuck. He started laughing & showed me the cover it was Rocket Knight Adventures & stated you can just rocket boost over the wall. Just not knowing what your playing can make a game hard.
i think one of the reasons i have always liked retro more is because i literally don't play games for story at all
The Stories are not even that good in most Modern games. If I can I skip it if the option lets me skip. Retro games will have a story like We got to beat the main boss to restore piece or you're saving your girlfriend like the Princess. That's it.
2:10 lol yes they do. They got those metal prong teeth that make it so once that quarters in, it's gone forever! Or at least until that guy with the giant key ring comes and takes them all. Very rarely was this legend ever seen.
You saying this makes me feel like a memory just got jogged back where I learned this first hand from trying to get quarters back out at some point as a kid :)
Beat em ups are my favorite. Anyone can pick it up and have fun but really learning it is a whole other challenge
Buh buh buh Bird, Bird, Bird. Bird is the word.
Easy to learn, hard to master . Kudos from Belgium
Love the beat em up analogy. Newer beat em ups and later 90’s fighting games like the Saturn Japan library and current Switch beat em up resurgence I’m happy as could be. Add in things like KOF 98’ for PS4…I can’t think of a better time in gaming post-Dreamcast…
Theyre simply beautiful. 2D pixel art is *chef's kiss*
Igivania's. They have a pickup and play aspect that are layered and allow players to adapt their style of playing it whether that's to do the minimum or dig deep and be rewarded. Bloodstained and castlevania symphony of the night for prime examples
I like simple games like Kirby and putting fighting games on easy so you can tackle the rest of your backlog 😎💯💪🏿
Bucky O'Hare is perfect.
A lot of my favourite games hang their design on a very basic hook. I've been replaying Trials Evolution, and it's incredible how much the developers can get out of a game where you only control your acceleration and the angle you're leaning. Games that don't have this kind of narrow focus can end up feeling unintuitive and easy to bounce off of, but then, there's an intensely passionate audience for stuff like EVE Online too.
You are not wrong in saying that video game stories should have weight depending on what the focus of the game is, and yeah great video game stories existed back then for sure. It is hard to realize that games like snatcher released in 1988, graphic novels even on the famicom could have great stories. Not to mention the abundance of rpgs with a story focus and pretty great stories, even very dramatic stories like FF6.
Hey retro bird I wanted to thank you for getting me into retro games I never grew up with retro games But I got the mega legacy collection at Christmas last year and it was love at first sight!(The crash bandicoot games definitely helped, by the way will you ever talk about the ps1 crash bandicoots they're great!) You're videos are what really convinced me to save up for my glorious PS2 that plays ps2 and 1 games! You've talked about the "get on my lawn" approach before and I think you should make a whole video discussing reasons younger gamers should be interested in retro games.
Your videos are fun, corny, funny, and enjoyable. Keep up the good work. You deserve more subscribers.
Ah, the WTHDIGWTHDID games. Those were so much more frustrating back in the day before the internet (or at least before the internet became such a content-rich resource. I remember playing a bunch of those click-adventure games, especially conquest of Camelot - there was this one part where you came upon a barrier and five stones. You had to ask each stone for a riddle and solve them before you could progress. And the riddles were all abstract and super vague, especially for a 10-year-old to solve. I was stuck there for days, probably actually months. I didn’t know if I was supposed to go somewhere else to find hints or solutions, or if I should just keep trying 1 million different random words until I solve them. 30 years later and I still vividly remember “ask Stone for riddle“ lol
Anyway, I think a game being “too simple“ is a very real thing. As much as we love retro gaming, there is a line between wholesome entertainment and “this is a waste of my time. The line isn’t drawn through quality of graphics, as Mario one looks objectively worse than most SNES games and yet is objectively better than plenty of its library. I wouldn’t even draw the line through gameplay mechanics or control, as, like you said, a game can have simple controls and still be very much worth your time.
You know those game and watch handhelds, with the liquid crystal screens featuring static sprites could turn on or off instead of a dot matrix display? As neat as it is that you can emulate them, I find myself bored after about 10 seconds, and I almost feel guilty at how mirthlessly they waste any of my time at all. honestly, about 98% of the NES game library feels equally too simple.
And then you have games like Zelda, and Metroid, and blaster master, and A handful of others. You could argue that the graphics are just as simple and the control is just a simple, but there’s some thing about them that doesn’t *feel* just as simple.
So that’s where I draw the line. Depth. Not just story depth, or how much there is to experience depth, but even puzzle depth, how something may have simple rules but take hundreds of hours to master. Conversely, once you’ve played “bad dudes“ for any more than three minutes, and you’ve seen all it has to offer. ;)
All that said, I still prefer “obviously complex” games over “not a simple as its graphics and controls suggest on paper” … because at the end of the day, a game like Skyrim has so much more to offer than Joust.
Let's hope the Joust fans don't come around to see this comment. They can be feisty :) Also, I think we may still agree. It seems as though the games you feel are "too simple" are also games you would classify as bad games (or perhaps just not good). Is that correct? My argument (that I talk about at the end of the video) is that it is mostly good games that can be spared from being labeled as "too simple".
Agree with you on beat em ups. They are deceptively simple.
My favorite "simple" thing about videogames is intuitive controls / UI. Context sensitive buttons as well
Games can be praised for complexity, though usually not with the term "complicated", but complex seems to be fair game for use as a compliment.
on controls, i use a steam controller, so im under no authority on what words like "simple" "intuitive" or "good" should mean.
Though a golden rule is good controls makes you forget what controller you are using, if you're constantly thinking about what controller you use while playing, that may be a sign of bad controls.
And i tend to love the simple movement of older FPS games (mainly PC ones), they have tons of depth beneath the surface, but just generally feel good without needing any of that.
My idea of the right amount of simplicity would be: Intuitive controls, pick up and play nature with incremental difficulty and perhaps gradual complexity as you go along. AKA just plain old good game design.
I don’t like when a game forces you into a 20 minute tutorial just to teach you the overly complicated controls, which I end up forgetting half of 5 minutes after the tutorial anyway 😅
Haha. Yeah I agree with everything you wrote here. Especially learning controls for a Modern game. Some games will pause the pics for you until you do that button combination of presses to proceed through the game. The thing is most of them I don't even end up using when the tutorial is done.
This reminds me of one of those hints that would show up on Guitar Hero loading screens: "drums are the most simple instrument, but don't mistake simple for easy"
let's talk about how modern games make things too simple by holding your hand every step of the way 😂
What I love about retro games is that you're on your own to figure the whole thing out! There won't be too much help along the way, it's all up to YOU! The best part of that is no tutorials and story heavy scenarios, you get right into the action from the start!
my buddy nem really liked the video :)
I'm always for anything that is easy to pick up and play right off the bat - no need to explain controls and such. Super Mario 64 and Super Smash Bros. are good examples with an easy enough system to play around with, and they offer more depth to the player the more time you spent exploring your options and abilities. It's also nice when you can jump in immediately and play the game without sitting through any long sequences or cutscenes. Contra III is a good example of this (as seen in the video!)
Speaking of beat 'em ups that are not really talked about (I've never heard of; or played is the arcade game: "Guardians." There is so much more going on as far as move sets, background details, and animations, than almost any other game in that particular genre. I've gotten play it via emulation; and it's pretty awesome. If you've never played it; please do yourself a favor and check it out my friend.
I loved the beat em ups genre from the time. Batman Returns, Final Fight, Turtles 3 the Manhattan Project, and Battletoads were amongst my NES library and most played games. I have noticed that all those were relatively fair games that would punish those who didn't find the best way to get through the levels. I do stand by my saying that many retro games were hard because of some programmers who designed arcade games. I do also acknowledge your take on the subject.
Really digging your videos man, love the ending tune.
Great video. I enjoy the variety of playing through games from all time periods and styles. When I want to focus on beating a high volume of games I spend more time on the emulation dedicated PC. Even the harder old games are mostly very simple to get into but hard to complete. Still alot of them can be beaten within a few hours as opposed to much easier modern games that can take 20 plus hours each on default difficulty. I like to mix it up.
9:29 that bald dude is creeping me out. Link needs to evaporate that guy 😬
The right amount of simple can really depend on the game, but I think when a game nails fun movement it's something truly special. It can be wildly different depending on the game, but the jump in Mario, dashing & dash jumping in Megaman X, climbing anything in BOTW or even just walking around in Chrono Trigger. When it feels good to just move around then that's when a game has something special at its core.
Clever use of Donkey Kong 64.
"K.I.S.S." was lost on everyone in the late 90s/early 00s
2D platforners and shooters !nd beat em ups still draw a crowd...who would have guessed? *eyeroll*
Tales of symphonia was sooo good!! And you can do multiplayer come on replay value. As far as best em ups there were cross overs too new and old knights of the round SNES rpg beat ‘em up. And ps3/4 dragons crown similar in the sense of rpg beat em up which no one ever talks about
I recently beat Streets of Rage 2 for the first time. On a real Genesis with RGB on a sharp Trinitron CRT with a built in sub woofer. The game rocks!! It was one of my most memorable gaming experiences. I love how old games let you play a simple way (me) or learn and master it (nerd way). Now the only option they give us is nerd way, you have to dedicate 50 hours of your life learning about 500 weapons/powers and leveling up the stats of everything, every other button opens up a sub menu, you can't run all the time, gotta level up for that, yeah, I hate newer games. Let me keep the Demon's Souls/Elden Ring graphics and worlds but with 1 weapon and 1 button to use it, not some overly complicated "gotta learn the system" BS, just give me that instant FUN option!!
Thank you so much for the wonderful new video
Thank you for watching :)
I enjoy modern online games, such as call of duty, because I can just jump in, play a 15 minute game and be done. With more story driven games, I can't make myself stop unless it's in a good stopping place, and that can take an hour plus. I also love retro games because they're just so charming and interesting. Some retro games really utilize the imagination of the player, and that gives everyone a different experience. I just love gaming as a whole
I need a retro bird 🐦 shirt
6:22 in all reality the extra buttons are just to make it easier to control. Any game no matter what will usually only take in movement, maybe camera, and around two inputs for regular gameplay, sometimes a third button thats more rarely pressed, and then the fourth one is purely for the less gamey stuff like talking to NPCs. The shoulder buttons just make that easier for when you want to have your thumb controlling the camera at all times.
Definitely. I actually thought about making a point similar to yours in the video about how it is mostly around 2 buttons you're pressing the majority of the time anyways. Still, the point I was making in the video is that some people are overwhelmed by the mere sight of the extra buttons and joysticks on later controllers (whether they should be or not). Just knowing that they're there is enough to stress some people out (I especially notice this among those who are newer to playing games).
Weapons breaking, having to cook, scavenging for ingredients, worrying about an stamina meter running out are all good examples of how to make a game overly complicated. What will they'll think of next? Collecting 900 small turds? Oh wait...
Yeah, I think Breath of the Wild is over-hyped too.
While I did like BOTW, the stamina and weapons breaking just about made me stop playing. It took me 4 different times starting over to push through, I'm glad I finished, but it is not the best Zelda game. Link to the Past is my favorite and OOT is next.
Breath of the Wild is a fine game but its not the Zelda game I wanted. I'm getting too old(and old fashioned!)to want my adventure games to be that complex and big.
LTTP is my favourite Zelda game for nostalgic reasons but BOTW for me is an outstanding game. Weapons breaking isn’t great but it’s not a deal breaker ( no pun intended ) I still thoroughly enjoyed. For me it’s one of the best.
Yes. And breaking up the game with too much story, too much travel, does EVERY game have to be an RPG?
The n64 was my favorite. Still love it, it brought so many features that are still here today.
There are actually simple flight simulators such as Taito's Jet de Go! series (which started in arcades as Midnight Landing and then Top Landing a.k.a. Landing Gear) and Sega's Airline Pilot. In the arcade games, you have control over the throttle and yoke but not much else.
OutRun 2/SP/2006 has the right amount of simplicity vs. complexity for me; simplicity if you're just playing arcade mode but the various additional modes in the home ports add all sorts of difficulty levels and a variety of things to do. I don't know if OutRun 2 is the only game where you sometimes have to solve equations while driving fast but elementary school math is an uncommon racing game feature to be sure.
I enjoy some retro games because they are simple to pick up. If you enjoy the game mechanics, then you devote more time to getting better at the game.
Some games are too difficult to experience the depth. When it's just impossible like Battletoads, it's hard for me to care about depth if I can't get past the third level without a game genie. I prefer games I can get into a little bit before they become so difficult.
Battletoads I beat that with save states & never played the game ever again.
@@tonyp9313 that's really the only way to do it without driving yourself mad. I used a game genie as a kid and quickly realized there would be no beating battletoads for me.
Arcade games feel fast, short, but challenging and not bloated. This one of the reasons why I still love fighting games
Older fighting games (and by older I even mean as recent as Guilty Gear Xrd Rev2, but this goes back truly classic fighters like Street Fighter 3 Third Strike) are complex in all the right ways. My favorite fighters are the ones where you can mess around in training mode for hours trying to squeeze more damage out of a combo or devising devilish mixups and not get bored. I just can't say the same about newer fighters like Guilty Gear Strive and DNF Duel, there's just not enough to learn from them.
Ranger X seems complicated at first but it’s actually very easy to get the hang of it. By the end of the 2nd level, you will be kicking butt.
As of 2022 I finally mastered SFIICE. I have been playing it since it came out in the arcades, and now i can finally beat it with every single character without losing a single round. Dhalsim was by far the most difficult.
Great topic and video. I would say that sometimes the simpler controllers can have complicated controls because of button combinations. (Hitting a and b at the same time while playing double dragon 2 wasn't easy to get the character to jump).
I think a lot of the stories and the older games were very simple because the hardware and memory space might have limited the ability to tell a big story. Also the way video game creation progressed, it started off very simple so stories weren't really focused on as much. Jackal! I love that game.
Im the one that just do not get along with controllers with more buttons than four. Love a D-pad but dislike analog sticks. But I also jumped to PC games about the same time as controllers with analog sticks appeared.
My favorite games are the ones where tutorials aren't required or at the very least are executed well enough that it doesn't halt gameplay. An example of this would be the Mario games which were always simple to play but difficult to master. Later game entries also included short tutorial levels where you learned your moves through actual play instead of stopping to read text.
Watching this video also reminded me of an old review I read back in the day from Electronic Gaming Monthly. The game in question was for Mr. Gimmick. The review crew of 4 people each said that the game was too simple and childishly easy so I passed on it. It wasn't until years later when I played the game for myself that I deduced the truth: none of them had actually played the game. First, Mr. Gimmick was never released in North America so they couldn't have reviewed it. Second, Mr.Gimmick (or just Gimmick in JP) is one of the hardest games the Famicom/NES has to offer. Oh sure, it looks like a Kirby clone but there are spots in the game where if you mess up it's actually easier to reset the game and start from the beginning. The takeaway here is that people, even so-called 'professional gamers', are not always reliable for input. If you want to know how good/bad/simple/complex/easy/hard a game is you really need to try it for yourself. You are your own best judge. Incidentally, Gimmick is a fantastic game, just hard as nails. The physics alone can be a nightmare to master.
Something I would like to add is restrictions inspiring creativity. A great example is punch out on the nes. the arcade game was way too complicated for the nes too handle so they had too make changes. They made mac little so you could see and it also made the other boxers much more intimidating. And although it's game play is simple the ways you can handle bosses and situations are fun and challenging And I would argue that the nes is the better port
Yeah, I'd say the size difference between mac and the other boxers adds a lot of character to the NES game.
This might just be because I'm terrible at Punch Out, but I'm a fan of the little flash the NES version gave as a tell of when to react
Mike Tyson's Punch out is way better than Punch Out in the Arcades. Just because it's a lot easier once you master the game. The arcade is hard because it's designed to eat your quarters. I've played all the Punch out games. The hardest ones are the arcade, Wii & Super Punchout. If you mastered a punch out game the one on NES is the easiest one out of those. Only thing I don't like is that game has to be played on a CRT with a NES controller. I am talking about beating the whole game in 1 sitting. Can't do that if you play that game on a HD tv. You have to use save states constantly if you do beat it.
The arcade is better
@@magicjohnson3121 Probably the worst one out of all the punch outs
Super Mario Bros 1 through 3 on NES were the perfect challenge and length to still be a lot of fun. Just bought Rygar for the Genesis and it tested me about 4hrs (halfway) into it. Gave up. Wasn't fun any more and no longer worth the time. Simple is best for me. Co troller too. 2 buttons, A and B. Horizontally layed-out. Perfect. :)
For me it's the controls. I feel like I'm fighting the controls with modern games, and a lot of that has to do with them being mostly 3D.
This is going to sound crazy from a self proclaimed modern gamer but I really enjoy the simplicity of the graphics. Feels calming and maybe that’s because it takes me to a simpler time in life
Simple graphics work better as graphics. They are "graphics" after all; it's not cinema. They have a job to do: clearly communicate to the player the state of the game.
Come on people 1k view but only 187 thumbs up. I'll tell you what is simple, pressing that like button.
Don't forget about the button count of the Atari Jaguar controller. Also, if a game requires more buttons to play than Sonic the Hedgehog then it's too complicated.
Imo, I think this is another case of newer generations using the wrong word or less accurate word to properly describe something. Seems to happen a lot more lately. Great video once again 'Bird!👍😎
Just the right amount of simple? The shooting, particularly the shotgun in Doom, is just the right amount of simple. I find the complexity actually comes from navigation in that game and finding out where to go next, and maybe where the secrets are. That mix is what makes Doom so enjoyable to return to.
I love Doom for those reasons as well :)
I wonder if people who grew up with Coleco or Intellivision look at modern controllers like, "yeah, not complicated enough".
hahah those wild controllers :)
I grew up with an Intellvision. Never owned one. Played it at a friends house. I don't recall using the buttons ever. But yeah that would be complicated now because the technology is obsolete.
@@tonyp9313 Well, as an outsider looking in on those particular controllers, they don't appear as intuitive as modern controllers.
I love me some beat em ups. Been having a blast with Streets of Rage 4 & Shredder's Revenge this year. 4 player couch co-op with some brews & friends is so good.
I'd argue that a lot of retro games aren't "simple" but rather they're straightforward. I guess that depends on the generation being talked about, but overall they did what they could with the tech available at the time. It stands to reason that more modern games have more depth/complexity in their systems due to the fact that the tech allows more. But that doesn't really negate the accomplishments of the older games for what they were able to do.
In fact, I'd say the only "simple" retro games in my opinion are from the late 70s-early 80s such as Atari, Colecovision, etc. Now that era was truly simple.
Using an N64 controller to play NES Donkey Kong?! You madman!
It's actually the arcade version of Donkey Kong that can be played via Donkey Kong 64 :)
I don't mind simplicity as long as the game is infinitely replayable. My deserted island games would be Tetris DX, because Tetris; Burnout 3 for the road rage mode; Donkey Kong arcade, because I can't even get to the damn cement factory; Dig Dug arcade, because it's never not fun and SSX3 for endless high score chasing.
Retro games aren’t simple, modern games are just too damn complicated!
For Retro 2D games. Games have to be straight fwd with little to no challenge & they must have passcodes in them so you don't start all over again. Save states solves that problem for me. For Retro 3D games, they need to have a map laying out where to go & once you get there it shouldn't be that hard to know what to do. Zelda games while they have maps in them fail really badly at that concept.
For modern games the remake of the retro games or retro style games, they need to have save states & a Rewind feature in all of them. For the 3D modern games, A map, a numbered radar meter showing you where to go. Also difficulty settings from very easy to very hard & handicap features in all the games so that gaming can be for everyone & not just an elite of gamers.
For me I just love really short games that take 1 hour or less to beat. I find shorter game length games are the best because you can beat them in 1 sitting & just turn off your console right after.
TMNT NES, Every Megaman, ComicZone SEGA genesis, Die Hard Trilogy PS1, Mario 64, all were challenging bak in the day, I still haven't beaten ComicZone for SEGA genesis.
Mega man games are easy. Only the 1st one is hard on the nes because it doesn't have a passcode system & you need to beat it in 1 sitting.
A lot of modern games are needlessly complex with no depth anyway. They seem like they have a lot of ways to play them, but then it all boils down to one style.
I think the best balance between a good number of features but yet a simple concept is in Super Mario 3.
The game introduced a lot of new stuff, but they are not complicated and serve their purpose very well.
And for me The Witcher 3 have a lot of unnecessary game mechanics for a game with such a simple combat system. Enemies have patterns, if you learn to dodge and hit at the right time you really don't need to use all that damned potions.
But that's just me being lazy and making the game easier for me.
Games these days, for me, have to accomplish one of two things: either don't wear out your welcome and try to keep me playing for tens or hundreds of hours on end, OR be engaging enough without being repetitive to warrant that many hours.
Retro Bird is also a *simple* man...
Accurate. Bananas + Rocket Knight Adventures. Doesn’t take much for him to be content….
Pokemon Yellow and Crystal are simple but not too simple, they really nail the balance.
The rando hand putting the banana in your mouth was a bit creepy LOL
Old games that use 3 buttons is usually good enough for me, I’m always under the impression that many later control schemes often used all the buttons for the sake of using em, more like a kind of gimmick just to show off how many buttons where on the thing (specially looking at the snes & ps1 for this). In this regard less is more for me
First commentless comment!!!🤘🏻😃
Ironically in my favorite genre, fighting games, a lot of modern games have gotten too simplistic for my tastes. Older fighting games typically have more to learn about them and the complexity (and often difficulty) of their mechanics lend themselves to being more fleshed out and open ended. My favorite fighting games are the ones where I can mess around for a long time in training mode without getting bored.
Retro forever !
Simplicity is the best. Not trying to learn 40 buttons to play a modern game 😎
They’re _simply_ fun!
Still to this day I'm looking for more Contra III and Final Fight (as simple as they come). Objectively, it hasn't been that easy. Basically, more straight forward arcade action. Even a lot of retro games have issues with controls, a skill that needs to be mastered or you'll have a hard time, difficulty in general, too much strategy involved, and too much gobbledygook/cryptic mumbo jumbo overall in order to proceed. Shoot em ups are the best example of simple games to.this day but they still can have a lot of bells and whistles.
Retro games can be easy to learn yet challenging to beat. For other people modern games can be challenging to learn yet easy to beat.
I think for many, Pac-Man is as simple as you can get. You move up, down, left, or right. No buttons to press and is a game people can always come back to.
Mrs Pacman is a lot better with more choices like a speed boost & it actually has an ending.
That's not a good thing.
I come for the banana jokes tbh
🔥🔥🔥
Definitely right about a story's purpose being to stay out of the way. Mario World begins with a story that appears on screen for about 10 seconds... which is still 10 seconds too many in my opinion.
Pinball. Simple, hit the ball and dont go down the drain. Complicated,.running the table in the right order to complete all.the goals and get a high score
Imagine instead of making retro NES songs into modern remixes, but instead of making modern music into 8bit NES songs.... Check out this one and only channel that does just that! th-cam.com/video/fIeLfIBxpEw/w-d-xo.html
Street Fighter 2 always had 6 buttons
Strangely I don't mind the N64's controller at all, in my opinion it's much better then the Dreamcast, or the OG Xbox controller, or even the Steam Controller, they aren't bad controllers but I just find the N64's controller better.
I agree. Fellow N64 controller apologist here 👈
Best banana pull
I mostly just like how great 16 bit pixel art looks and think that gaming should have never evolved past that. Games take too long to make or come out incomplete, lots of devs have games out on early release for years.
I dont necessarily like how most retro games play and feel most are way too short. That's why I mostly play modern retro games that are really long but so awesome that it's okay. 2 games that come to mind are Cathedral, 2D metroidvania game looks similar to Shovelhead/Wonder Boy. Amazing game had about 40-50 hours to beat. And another I just beat was Crosscode, one of the best action RPGs I've ever played. Very similar to Secret of Mana/Terranigma if it had a baby with Megaman. That game is easily over 100 hours long. I know long games aren't for everyone but I love the immersion and story telling in that game.