Can you give an example?Like me saying you can't judge Pokemon red by today's standards because they've had 20 years of refinement and at the time it was amazing?Or somebody saying it's okay destiny was a shit show on release because "10 year plan"
Quote from: Tyger on August 27, 2016, 10:25:19 PMCan you give an example?Like me saying you can't judge Pokemon red by today's standards because they've had 20 years of refinement and at the time it was amazing?Or somebody saying it's okay destiny was a shit show on release because "10 year plan"Yeah, I was thinking along the lines of Pokémon and other older, long-standing franchises like that. Anything that began in the 8-bit era, or maybe during that awkward transitional period between 2D and 3D. Because the industry works a little different now--if your first installment sucks, literally nobody ever gives it a pass. We're pretty unforgiving these days.I gave Pokémon R/B a 6/10 in my last review, but some would argue that I should be more generous and give it something crazy like a 9/10. Because without Red and Blue, there would be no other Pokémon games, period. I do tend to disagree with that logic, because I believe the sole purpose of a review is to discuss the game itself and not the game's overall importance to the industry, or the franchise as a whole, or whatever.If I had to rate Pokémon R/B's importance to the industry, I would be remiss to give it anything other than a 10/10, right? But I gave it the score I did because I don't think it holds up to today's standards, and I think "today's standards" are the only relevant metric to go by. No one cares how good a game used to be--is it good now? That's what people care about when they're reading a review.
We're pretty unforgiving these days.
i think games should be compared to a universal standard regardless of when they came outgold and silver arent worse games because they came out a long time ago and dont have the improvements made later onbut red and blue were just broken games at the start with a promises idea and a flawed execution
Quote from: Prehistoric on August 27, 2016, 11:40:28 PMi think games should be compared to a universal standard regardless of when they came outgold and silver arent worse games because they came out a long time ago and dont have the improvements made later onbut red and blue were just broken games at the start with a promises idea and a flawed execution you know if gold and silver came out today they would be considered garbage
Y'know this has made me want to do a review of the Pokemon series, Gen by Gen
Quote from: Big Boss on August 28, 2016, 10:19:55 AMY'know this has made me want to do a review of the Pokemon series, Gen by GenPlease do. No reviews have been written in a long time.
To a point it's valid. I'm glad Fallout 1 and 2 exist, despite the fact that I don't like them, because it gave me New Vegas.That doesn't mean you should feel obligated to enjoy them. Games do age, contrary to what some believe. Some are timeless, others are not, others are improved through slight modernization (System Shock with mouse look).A shit game is a shit game, though. If it's really that shitty then that tells me it really wasn't considered to be a good game, just a game that has potential.
Quote from: Jim on August 27, 2016, 10:22:58 PMTo a point it's valid. I'm glad Fallout 1 and 2 exist, despite the fact that I don't like them, because it gave me New Vegas.That doesn't mean you should feel obligated to enjoy them. Games do age, contrary to what some believe. Some are timeless, others are not, others are improved through slight modernization (System Shock with mouse look).A shit game is a shit game, though. If it's really that shitty then that tells me it really wasn't considered to be a good game, just a game that has potential.He said bad games. How are Fallout 1 and 2 bad?
Quote from: Prehistoric on August 27, 2016, 11:40:28 PMi think games should be compared to a universal standard regardless of when they came outgold and silver arent worse games because they came out a long time ago and dont have the improvements made later onbut red and blue were just broken games at the start with a promises idea and a flawed executionA universal standard sounds good until you realize that the bar continues to get raised all the time. You might not like the 3D models for the new Pokémon games, but they're generally considered to be "better" than the old sprites--and they're only going to get even better and more detailed as time goes on. Generation VI, to me, would easily be my favorite generation if I wasn't a stubborn nostalgic baby.So while I say that my favorite generation is the second one, I know in my heart that it's probably not the best.Obviously, there's no objectivity in this, but my point is that it's hard to have a universal standard when there's theoretically no limit to how good games can get. Therefore, if a mind-blowingly awesome game that's ten or twenty levels above the best game you've ever played comes out, that means your ex-favorite game of all time is now a little bit worse. What you thought was a 10/10 has now been dropped to an 8/10 due to rising standards.There's no way you could've foreseen that, but technically, it can.
That doesn't mean you should feel obligated to enjoy them. Games do age, contrary to what some believe. Some are timeless, others are not, others are improved through slight modernization (System Shock with mouse look).
Quote from: Tyger on August 28, 2016, 09:24:47 AMQuote from: Prehistoric on August 27, 2016, 11:40:28 PMi think games should be compared to a universal standard regardless of when they came outgold and silver arent worse games because they came out a long time ago and dont have the improvements made later onbut red and blue were just broken games at the start with a promises idea and a flawed execution you know if gold and silver came out today they would be considered garbagehow do you figurewhat's wrong with gold and silver
They're missing a lot of mechanics created in Gen III that we have come to expect from Pokemon,
that and they would need a complete graphical overhaul.
Quote from: Solonoid on August 28, 2016, 05:12:50 PMThey're missing a lot of mechanics created in Gen III that we have come to expect from Pokemon,Gen. 3 made a lot of improvements, but reverting to Gen. 2's system on its own would not make the game "garbage".Quotethat and they would need a complete graphical overhaul.Graphics don't matter. At all.
You say that, but a major part of Pokemon is collecting your Pokemon and watching them smash into each other and shoot lightning, and when we know what we're capable of, there's no excuse for black and white flame sprites.
Graphics matter a lot, whether you appreciate them or not.