Re: An Oldfag Rant

    This is intended as a response to a comment I received on a blog entry I did back in October about how much I can't stand the older generation of gamers and their constant bitching about new games and gamers. (Not ALL older gamers do this, I'm a prime example and so are several of my friends) I intended to reply to them directly, but my comment exceeded the character limit. Derp. :V


    I don't really mind a game taking some cues from older generations, partly because the reality is that not everyone draws pixel art because it's nostalgic, some people make games full of pixel art because they don't have the ability to draw anything else. (Not all programmers are artists) Taking cues from earlier genres that are no longer produced also doesn't bother me, considering the vast majority of genres that I like (Metroidvania platformers, 3D mascot platformers) have been abandoned by the gaming industry or saturated with what big companies thinks sells. (See: Ratchet and Clank, full of guns and attitude.)

    What I don't like is when people bitch about the gaming industry for no other reason than it's different from when they were a kid. If you browse Sonic Retro's forum for five minutes, you'll see everybody and their grandmother trying to reproduce an exact replica of Sonic 3's physics and gameplay while at the same time talking about how Sonic Adventure was a disappointment and the series died in 1994. Don't get me wrong, some people have legitimate reasons for their dislike of the later games, but most of the time, it's just people whining because they can't stand the idea of slow games because the games were originally really fast.

    A perfect example of this was when someone tried to hack Sonic 2 and, instead of going from point A to point B to complete a level, the player had to find collectibles. EVERYBODY flipped their shit because "OMG 2 SLO!!111" and the creator ended up doing exactly what many mainstream companies do; he dumbed down the gameplay to suit their toddler-like impatience. He gave them a radar so they didn't have to explore the level, and when that didn't satisfy, he gave everyone a "classic" mode, with no collecting of items, and then everyone just played that. At that point, the poor guy was wondering why he should even bother if the only thing the majority of the community only wanted a fucking Sonic 2 ripoff.

    This attitude is not limited to fangames either. If you've ever wonder why the past three major Sonic releases have been "hold forward to win" games where Sonic is the only playable character and the levels are all very linear, blame the fandom, especially Retro, because that shit is their fault. They bitched to SEGA about it nonstop, and so SEGA threw out the concept of making open-world games and cleaning up that mess they released in 2006 with a polished and proper iteration of their original intention to cater to the fanboy manchildren that are stuck in the 90s. And seeing as the fans are the only crowd that still clamors for Sonic games, SEGA is willing to suck their cock for money.

    This kind of bullshit repeats itself in every Nintendo release in the past 5 years. Twilight Princess was a blatant callback to OoT (Although at least it improved on several aspects) and Skyward Sword was a callback to literally every previous Zelda game Nintendo could shoehorn in there (Even Phantom Hourglass, for some reason) and that ended up being a hot mess with no identity, not to mention all of its innovative traits were broken and it exhibited the same streamlining of recent Sonic games because everybody apparently hates open-world these days.

    And look at Mario. Galaxy 1 and 2 were attempts to callback to Mario 64, a dated, half-broken N64 game by today's standards with a terrible camera and downsized levels because the N64 was barely capable of more, and Mario World, which everyone fondles like it's perfection. Seriously, Mario World is the Mario fandom's Link to the Past; oldfags cream themselves over it and jeer over 3D innovations such as expansive open worlds. Ask any Mario fan what was wrong with Mario Sunshine and they'll probably tell you something along the lines of "The water gimmick sucked!" "Well, WHY did it suck?" "Because it wasn't Mario!" Same story with Luigi's Mansion, fans hate it because it isn't a traditional Mario platformer. I have played Luigi's Mansion and it is not broken by any stretch of the word; it's a well-designed puzzle-adventure game, but it got panned in the media for "not being a platformer" which is stupid. This is coming from someone who LIKES platformers, by the way, but you don't see me giving a game the shaft because it isn't one.

    Throwing in something I'm personally attached to, I love Spyro, I have a nostalgic attachment to the first three games, and I actually think the first game has some pretty creative level design, but that didn't stop me from enjoying the later games. Attack of the Rhyptocs for GBA's isometric view might not have been ideal but the rest of the game was cleverly designed with plenty of exploring, and despite the repetitive and generic gameplay, I loved the story to the LoS games. (The Spyro reboot Vivendi Universal orchestrated) And I am not afraid to admit that some things that give me a nostalgic handjob are horrible broken by today's standards (Looking at you, Rayman 2) or could be considered embarrassingly annoying by an adult (Spyro 3's music and VAs drive me insane) or have just plain been outdone by later releases. (Wind Waker was much more open and expansive than OoT, even if some people didn't like the sea travel) I don't know why some people are so dead-set on thinking anything after a certain date sucks but it really grinds on my nerves.