No, I wrote game reviews for a TV-show. About 6 a week. I also produced the content for the show and the web site. It was fun while it lasted, but wouldn't do it again.

Ice

I did it for a year at a software developer. But I still disagree. It really depends on the game and gamer, though. I'm pretty picky, I prefer games that allow you to actually escape to a virtual world as opposed to mindless button mashing that is being dressed up as Simplicity in this thread. Obviously button mashing is what most people go for though, because that has been the rule for so long that people haven't quite expanded their imaginations yet. Well executed games set up controls that are mostly intuitive or taught smoothly over the course of the game, which is something found in more recent games where in the past the controllers were getting more complicated, but the gamer was expected to just memorize a ridiculous amount of combos.

Am I sensing an attitude here? Retrogames are not just button mashing, ever heard of "Pirates!" for one? Or "Elite"? Or any of the adventure games by LucasFilm and Sierra?

That's actually just the opposite. In the old days the controls were simple but the games were better, nowadays most games get lost with too many buttons and combos and the developers forget that there should be a game beneath all that graphics and flash.

Ice

Yeah.

Ice

First, when I think retro, I think Pac Man and Asteroids. The Sierra games were another level, I loved the Kings Quest series. They were ground breaking and at the time, exactly what I am speaking of as far as what I look for in a game.

2nd, as far as controls becoming intuitive...I didn't clarify that I mean controls that involve more than one button and a single joystick/thumbstick. They have gotten better with certain games that make use of a variety of controls while still being easy to use. Because when it comes down to it, in order to interface with an increasingly detailed and interactive virtual world, the old controllers are not going to fly. You need more options to interact fluidly...until the day comes that virtual reality systems where you strap on a harness and interact with the game as you would real life.

I agree...too often the developers forget there needs to be a game beneath the graphics and flash. I'm also not interested in basically what amounts to a 3D version of the same old scrolling screen crap ala Super Mario Bros, that worked then...not now. It's uninventive and stagnant...not really taking the current technology to the next level..complaining they've hit a ceiling in game creativity. They've simply got the wrong people behind the design desk.

oooh there's quite a nice little coincidence. i LOVED pirates back in the day. could still play it for weeks if i had the chance. found a game called sea dogs or somethign like that a coupla years ago that was basically pirates 3d, bought it and got fed up of it after a coupla days. flashy graphics and 3d sword fighting didn't make the game. it was just how easy it was to get immersed in the original.

I loved the lucas arts point n clicks as well but they were so hard it was unbelievable. i downloaded indiana jones 3 a while ago and completed it solely with the help of an online guide and back in the day, i couldnt complete maniac mansion even with a guide.

getting caught up in new games is because its easy to get immersed in GTA or syphon filter but they are rare examples of almost flawless gameplay as well as the bells and whistles. retro games was just your stripped back version.

I'm jealous! I had mine up until a few years ago. I let a friend borrow it. We had a falling out and she never returned it. :evil:

Another favorite!

I used to play Road rash endlessly and also quake :) But later on i mostly into sport games like FIFA99, Cricket2000, F1, Rally[(which is really cool game).

Too bad i dont get a time to play any games :(