Neo Games That Haven't Aged Well

[andsuchisdeath]

I went into detail how ML has aged. You went on a tangent about the difference of arcade and console games, that has nothing to do with games aging poorly. Then you start getting insulting. You do you.

Ok, I'll expend a little more energy...

If you can't see the obvious differences between how arcade games and console games are designed/function, then how could you
possibly have enough contextual awareness to gauge how any game has "aged poorly"?

Your absurd statement (i'm paraphrasing) like "If you're playing it on an AES it becomes a console game" had to be addressed first. My "tangent's" intent was to perhaps give you a little insight into a different point of view before any discussion could be had on the hyper relative notion of titles "aging poorly".

My intent was not to insult you, but for someone who's allegedly been playing these games since the early 90's, there was an incredibly arbitrary, undiscerning and uneducated aura to your posts that left me feeling shocked. Like how would running out of continues to credit feed magician lord take away it's "objective of difficulty'? What does that mean? The game was designed to be cleared on 1 credit, like all arcade titles. Your personal problem/limitation has no bearing on a title "aging poorly". Is there a title that did what Magician Lord set out to do on the neo, but executed much better? I guess that would render Magician Lord irrelevant and in turn a title that "aged poorly".

It's totally cool that you're not into the early Neo titles. I'm not big on them myself! But I'm not going to say they're no good do to a potential lack of understanding.

So after stuff like that, I can't really take any claim of a game "holding up" from you seriously. Like, what makes genesis strider "hold up"? You have several arcade perfect alternatives that have been released since. Are you enthralled by the idiosyncratic products of 16-bit limitations? Is difficulty a factor to you?. If you didn't care for the former, yet you did for that latter, 16-bit strider would be quite an irrelevant title which didn't "hold up" at all.

 

[Electric Grave]

You're giving too much credit to what you are dealing with.

Here's my initial response to the matter at hand.

I can't go back to most of the early Neo games. Either the gameplay is clunky, or overly difficult, or simply boring.

Alpha Mission 2
Andro Dunos
Art of Fighting
Baseball Stars
Burning Fight
Eight Man
Ghost Pilots
Legend of Success Joe
Magician Lord
Ninja Combat
Puzzled
Robo Army
Sengoku
Super Sidekicks
The Super Spy
Top Players Golf
World Heroes

I can't get into any of these games.

Honestly, I don't think that SNK started putting out really quality content until 93-94. Once games like Samurai Shodown, and Windjammers, and Spinmaster came out, that's when the Neo started to get exciting, and I wanted one.

I'd agree to some games in that list, maybe 2 or 3, defo LoSJ. I understand where you're coming from though, a lot of casuals share the same opinion about the older games.

...and the thing is, early Neo is not competing with Capcom's finest efforts either. Robo Army and Sengoku have more in common with Capcom's Magic Sword and King of Dragons than Cap. Commando and Final Fight. We all have known that Capcom was a leading developer, but pass that SNK had plenty of good IPs, a real decent amount of games already. Think of the leap between SF1 and SF2, the missing link being Final Fight, really, as it was the FF team that grabbed what the future SNK staff left behind and made SFII. Art of Fighting is the step after SF1 done by the SF1 team (to a degree). You're talking about 2 different teams working on the somewhat same genre with different methods. The time that took this new SNK team top get things together left them on a different mindset of what was being done at the time.

I look at the first wave of neo as experimental, new system, new ideas. New teams from different companies too. Different implementations, as in the game itself, different jumps, different gravities. Fatal Fury 2 was the first SNK solid fighter to the point it still plays great, of course FFS plays better and it's overall the better game but 2 is still a tremendous effort, just as good if not better than SFIIWW, but you can't really compare as it came out a year later, however the AOF (SF1s spiritual predecessor) system kept evolving, that mindset of game developing didn't just disappear.

You just can't compare, that would be silly but then again if I didn't know anything about video games I would also look for the best and play that, why waste time on lesser products...well that's what casuals do, and I get it but to me it's different, some call it I see it with pink shaded glasses, but whatevs, that's what 're dealing with here, the judgment of the everyday gamer, nothing more.

 

[Ramad]

You're giving too much credit to what you are dealing with.

Here's my initial response to the matter at hand.





...and the thing is, early Neo is not competing with Capcom's finest efforts either. Robo Army and Sengoku have more in common with Capcom's Magic Sword and King of Dragons than Cap. Commando and Final Fight. We all have known that Capcom was a leading developer, but pass that SNK had plenty of good IPs, a real decent amount of games already. Think of the leap between SF1 and SF2, the missing link being Final Fight, really, as it was the FF team that grabbed what the future SNK staff left behind and made SFII. Art of Fighting is the step after SF1 done by the SF1 team (to a degree). You're talking about 2 different teams working on the somewhat same genre with different methods. The time that took this new SNK team top get things together left them on a different mindset of what was being done at the time.

I look at the first wave of neo as experimental, new system, new ideas. New teams from different companies too. Different implementations, as in the game itself, different jumps, different gravities. Fatal Fury 2 was the first SNK solid fighter to the point it still plays great, of course FFS plays better and it's overall the better game but 2 is still a tremendous effort, just as good if not better than SFIIWW, but you can't really compare as it came out a year later, however the AOF (SF1s spiritual predecessor) system kept evolving, that mindset of game developing didn't just disappear.

You just can't compare, that would be silly but then again if I didn't know anything about video games I would also look for the best and play that, why waste time on lesser products...well that's what casuals do, and I get it but to me it's different, some call it I see it with pink shaded glasses, but whatevs, that's what 're dealing with here, the judgment of the everyday gamer, nothing more.

Solid opinion, dude.

I still am not on the same page, because from that perspective, I'm a casual gamer because I'd prefer to play Fatal Fury Special over Fatal Fury.

At the end of the day, it's all subjective.

 

[Electric Grave]

Not at all. Fatal Fury 1 to me is like the next step in the same string SF1 left behind. Fatal Fury 2 and FFS are very different from FF1 and to me also infinitely better. FF1 was a cool concept and it plays pretty much on the same role SF1 left behind. SF2 and FF2 are what really built fighting games, the rest flow from there. Does it make you casual to favor FFS over FF1? Not at all, to me what makes you a casual is your opinion of the games, feels as if you never clicked with the games to begin with. So how did they aged poorly, perhaps a better assessment would be that you either never cared or didn't like the games. However I'm sure like most of us, seeing AOF for the first time is breath taking, yes the love wears out fast for some, mostly casuals and there's nothing wrong with that.

You can be in this hobby forever but if your love for the game doesn't get pass owning a cart and playing it here and there, I can't think of anything more casual than that. You got nothing to prove, nothing wrong with being a casual gamer, best place to be.

Edit: Just last week I played

Magician Lord
8MAN
ASOII
Top Players Golf
Sengoku

All fine games, this is before I read this post. You're right though, it's all subjective.

 

[Ramad]

Not at all. Fatal Fury 1 to me is like the next step in the same string SF1 left behind. Fatal Fury 2 and FFS are very different from FF1 and to me also infinitely better. FF1 was a cool concept and it plays pretty much on the same role SF1 left behind. SF2 and FF2 are what really built fighting games, the rest flow from there. Does it make you casual to favor FFS over FF1? Not at all, to me what makes you a casual is your opinion of the games, feels as if you never clicked with the games to begin with. So how did they aged poorly, perhaps a better assessment would be that you either never cared or didn't like the games. However I'm sure like most of us, seeing AOF for the first time is breath taking, yes the love wears out fast for some, mostly casuals and there's nothing wrong with that.

Word.

You can be in this hobby forever but if your love for the game doesn't get pass owning a cart and playing it here and there, I can't think of anything more casual than that. You got nothing to prove, nothing wrong with being a casual gamer, best place to be.

Edit: Just last week I played

Magician Lord
8MAN
ASOII
Top Players Golf
Sengoku

All fine games, this is before I read this post. You're right though, it's all subjective.

Okay, I'll bite.

What is your definition of a casual gamer?

EDIT: It doesn't really matter, it will probably be different from my idea of a casual gamer. I see anyone who goes through the hoops of owning a Neo Geo system and hunting down the games to play for it as anything but a casual gamer, but that's neither here nor there.

I stand by my opinion, but what you said makes sense, and I do realize that I've thought some of those games sucked from the get-go, so more than likely, the only way that they can age is... poorly.

 

[Electric Grave]

I guess the definition of casual can be subjective too but if I have to make an example.

Fatal Fury Special, amazing game, we're all in agreement there. You like it, so let's play online and I'll show you what a casual gamer is. You might love the game but I can guarantee you with no malice that I would win more than not, now here is the thing, I used to play a lot of FFS, a lot and it's not fair 'cause my experience with the game goes a long way. To me you are a casual in that sense.

I'm a casual at best at Nam'75 but I love the game too, however I barely get pass the 3rd level...it's a hard game but for others the 3rd level is a breeze, the game is 7 stages, I'm not even half way there, that's being a casual. If you're telling me that you are playing your games diligently and posting scores, playing online in fightcade or something, fine, but you don't, I don't think you game enough to have such a narrow view of what games have aged poorly.

SF3rdS, LWK is prolly the best player here, I play 3rdS regularly and yet I'm still green, I have been playing the game for years, still I know I'm not up to par on 3rdS. I feel like a casual, my game is slightly above average at best.

SS2T, my favorite game, I can go for days, play with everyone somewhat decent, lots of great competition in that one here, a handful but good players, Pasky comes to mind, gone back and forth with the POS, I feel like I'm not a casual on that game. I have a good knowledge and game on it, I can say I have gotten my money's worth out of that game.

You keep talking about NTM and have yet to participate in LOS TURFES CLUB, dude, you are a casual, go in there and check the records, you'll see what I mean. Prove me wrong and show me you got more than just a few games here and there credit feeding your ass off.

 

[LoneSage]

EDIT: It doesn't really matter, it will probably be different from my idea of a casual gamer. I see anyone who goes through the hoops of owning a Neo Geo system and hunting down the games to play for it as anything but a casual gamer, but that's neither here nor there.

You've been gone a long time, the person you're talking to has mental issues. He bases his entire self-worth as a person on how well he plays video games, in his mind if you're not the same then you're a casual gamer.

 

[oliverclaude]

...in his mind if you're not the same then you're a casual gamer.

What's wrong with being a casual gamer? I am one and Jag never held it against me. That's reality Sage, when you got your own family there's not enough time to waste on games or drunk threads. But then again, you wouldn't understand, right? That's ok with me, tho. I still dig your posts in my own casual n00b way.

 

[xsq]

Jag

what rimes with fag?

He'll always be EG to me.

 

[oliverclaude]

what rimes with fag?

He'll always be EG to me.

 

[Electric Grave]

You've been gone a long time, the person you're talking to has transcended into a great gamer. His worth as a member here matches his dedication to some video games and of course his extensive arcade knowledge, he simply means that if you're not the dedicated and have nothing to add as a member, you're a casual gamer and of course there's nothing wrong with that, like he said before; it's the best place to be and that's where I'm at.

Thank you DJ, you're an inspiration to us all

FIFY


Edit: Lonesuckage, dude, just 'cause you're a casual at best doesn't mean you gotta prove anything, you're a casual and that's ok, embrace it. I don't even know why you're here anymore, you don't play Neo, but hey I know you're lonely and lack purpose.