I always loved retro-style games, long before I learned that they’re considered retro. I’m not sure what makes them so fun but they completely dominate my gaming nowadays.

Naturally, I became curious about the games that had inspired my favorite titles. I tried many of them, and eventually came to a conclusion: most of the time, retro games are nothing but a historical curiosity.

Ultima 4 has fairly unique concept but falls flat with its roleplaying feeling forced, its bland gameplay and its setting with no originality whatsoever.
Compare this to Moonring. Gameplay rivals many modern roguelikes (the classic definition, so Brogue, not Isaac), great setting that sucks you in immediately, and so so many mysteries.

Ambermoon pretends to be an open world RPG but is actually a linear RPG-lite with combat feeling more like a puzzle (and a wrong solution punishes you by 15 mins of you and your opponents missing each other every turn).

That’s not to say that retro games aren’t important - the modern indies are standing on the shoulders of giants. Yet I can’t say that retro games worth the trouble of getting into them, compared to the polished modern indie titles.

  • mohab@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 day ago

    I agree that I can’t talk about genres I’m not familiar with, like platformers and action games

    Kudos for acknowledging it.

    I cannot really think of any indie action game that came close to Bayonetta, Ninja Gaiden II, God Hand… etc.

    That said, I’ve seen a lot of people claim Hollow Knight is better than Castlevania: SotN, so it’s definitely genre-dependent.