Patient Gamers

11457 readers

12 users here now

A gaming community free from the hype and oversaturation of current releases, catering to gamers who wait at least 12 months after release to play a game. Whether it's price, waiting for bugs/issues to be patched, DLC to be released, don't meet the system requirements, or just haven't had the time to keep up with the latest releases.

^(placeholder)^

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

BurntWits

What's your favourite era for video games? (lemmy.world)

submitted 6 months ago by [email protected] to c/patientgamers

102 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Era can be defined as a console generation, a decade, one specific year, whatever you want. I’d encourage you to give a list of your favourite games from the generation of choice and why it was the best to you. Nostalgia is a totally viable reason too.

I’ll go first. For me, the 360 era is my GOAT. As someone in their 20s, I grew up with the 360 so nostalgia is definitely a big factor. But on top of that, I still feel like the games during that time were some of the best we’ve had. 2011 alone was a fantastic year, with Dark Souls, Skyrim, Portal 2 and many more great games. I was going to list out my favourite games from 2005-2013 but I love so many it would be far too long of a post.

I’d love to hear some of you talk about your favourite time period of games too, whether it’s agreeing with my choice or giving different opinions

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] sugar_in_your_tea 7 points 6 months ago (2 children)

I'll break from the mould and say early 80s to early 90s, where we got:

Atari
Commodore 64
NES
DOS & Windows
Apple II (esp. Oregon Trail)
iconic

That era really defined what video games are, and built the framework for how we talk about games today.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 6 months ago

I miss the Amiga 500 in that list. ;)

[–] mindbleach 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

1980s 2D had the same "every machine sucks uniquely" vibe as 1990s 3D. If the same game on two platforms looked remotely similar then someone busted their hump getting it right. By default, you were getting a game that looked and sounded as good as this system could manage, rather than being a smoothed-over downgrade of some canonical example.

Ironically it wasn't always a great era for pick-up-and-play-ability. Late-70s games were so limited that arcade sensibilities were nearly the only thing possible, and even text-centric computer games lacked the memory to bore you with backstory. By the late 80s they could push the early inklings of an unskippable cutscene and a tutorial level. Dunno if that's better than ZX Spectrum games getting mercilessly sink-or-swim.

Coincidentally that arcade vibe also matches the late 90s: it's how most Dreamcast games feel.

[–] sugar_in_your_tea 2 points 6 months ago

One of the things I really miss from that era was the game manual. Since they couldn't put all of the backstory and tutorial stuff into the game itself, you'd get a companion booklet to read (e.g. this one for The Legend of Zelda). Some games took that too far and you essentially had to buy a separate guide. A lot of people think games from the era were obtuse, but they're really just missing the documentation.

I honestly really liked that experience and would read the guides when I wasn't able to play.

Arcades obviously didn't have that luxury, so they had to be games you could quickly pick up without any introduction. So you got a natural divide between games for home and games for arcades (with some overlap of course).

And yeah, the gaming experience varied quite a bit by platform for the same game because things like audio and graphics drivers needed to be built into the game itself, and that varied by system. But that's also part of the charm. There wasn't really an expectation that a game would look the same on two platforms, so they were often judged separately (i.e. arguments about which version is better).