Best Game Ever Made ---versus--- Outdated Crap By Today's Standards

I hear people saying stuff like, ''OMG, Half-Life or Resident Evil 4 or Halo or Quake or Doom or Warcraft 2 or Diablo or whatever is the best game ever made!'' but when it comes time to actually play them, they whine that they are outdated. ''2 YEARS! Many much better games of this genre have come out since then!''I just don't get why people get so extremist with this.edit: the games are just examples, okay, don't get pissed off at me if you're still playing them, please.:)Best Game Ever Made ---versus--- Outdated Crap By Today's Standards
As a rule I believe shooters/action games age the worst. Other genres like RPG's and maybe RTS and Adventure the least.Best Game Ever Made ---versus--- Outdated Crap By Today's Standards
The combination of the game being a classic and nostalgia will let a game maintain greatness status and that's usually how it is. Many old games are still great because they were and still are loads of fun and enjoyable. RE4 has only had one game copy it so far, and it was no where near as good (Cold Fear). Games like Final Fantasy and Xenogears hold up because of their indepth and incredible story, while older FPSs like Half Life and perhaps Far Cry (it's not that old) still maintain that magic because they did things that were innovative and involving in ways other FPSs that are much younger/newer just don't seem to achieve. It's always a combination of features that create a great gaming experience no matter how old the game is.
Sentimental value.People who have been on the PC gaming scene for decades have really fond memories of the games that got things started. The older you are, the more you look back on the ''good ol' days''. And WC2 and Half-life are still considerably new compared to what a lot of us used to play.So, its partly showing off on how long a gamer has been around and partly reliving our youths. And as great as those games were (not to mention revolutionary) they really dont match up to what we have today...but it sure is fun remembering being a kid again with our first PCs! :)
People can be fickle. I'm guessing that most of the people you describe are just interested in whatever game has the best graphics or whatever at the time. I wonder how many people will be talking about Crysis a decade or even five years from now.



However, it's not just nostalgia that can factor into judging what qualifies as the ''best game ever made''. Hell, I didn't play [url=http://sc2.sourceforge.net/]the greatest game of all time[/url] until the UQM 0.4.0 days, and yet it's somehow convinced me to give it such a high title.
[QUOTE=''morrdin'']And as great as those games were (not to mention revolutionary) they really dont match up to what we have today...but it sure is fun remembering being a kid again with our first PCs! :)[/QUOTE]Well... some of them can. Someone earlier mentioned that FPS games age the worst while RPGs/RTS/adventure games the least, and I agree with that.Graphically the gamesmay not match up but gameplay-wise or depth-wise some older games offer so much more. The RPG's of the mid-late 90's are the best example of this. The ''best'' RPG offerings of recent years (kotor 1/2, oblivion, morrowind, etc) may have fancier graphics but none canhold a candleto the experience Baldur's Gate 2 provides. It's party character development/dynamics and atmosphere are still unparalleled 7 years after it's release.
Alot of FPSs age pretty terribly but alot age wonderfully because for their time and even by today's standards they represent and provide a level of immersion that is either unparalleled or barely surpassed a la Half Life. I played HL1 for the first time in 2005 and I was amazed at how awesome it was.
For me, 2005 is new, 2003 is recent, and 2001 is middle aged. 1999 is sort-of old.