Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Retrogaming - Do they hold up today?

Falksi

Arcane
Joined
Feb 14, 2017
Messages
10,538
Location
Nottingham
Between RPG's I like to have a blast on action games. In fact I often play games in pairs to break up the pace when one of them is feeling a bit samey. One of the issues I find with this in modern gaming however is that everything takes so damn long to get in to. Even COD type games seem to have a plethora of things slowing you down before you get to the meat of the action.

So as an offshoot of that I've chosen to return to old-school games of the 16-bit & 8-bit era, and as I'm playing them I'm asking myself genuinely "do these still hold up today?"

First up Sunset Riders in the SNES.

The perfect remedy for what I've mentioned early. No loading, no tutorial, no faff. Literally straight into the action with fast paced, dumb shooting; complimented by great tunes & an appealing setting.

Responsive controls keep things flowing very nicely. Capcom do there usual thing and nail level variety very well with both a horseback section & bonus levels breaking things up. And the boss battles are all very distinctive & quite original, with the difficulty is very nicely balanced too (if sometimes a little cheap).

On the downside the enemy variety is fairly shit, with only a handful of normal bad guys throughout the whole game. And even though forementioned horse sections break things up well, they are definitely the weakest levels in the game too.

But personally I reckon this still holds up very well today. Especially as a bitesized blast to play alongside a more absorbing RPG such as Underail, which can eat away at your free hours and leave you needing a breather. Even if I played it for the first time today I reckon I'd still have a blast.

Would be interested to hear what games you chaps still think hold up, & which ones you reckon have died with age now.

THE LIST

Still Holds Up Today

*Sunset Riders - SNES
*Super Mario Kart - SNES
*Batman - Megadrive/Genesis

RIP
 
Last edited:

octavius

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Aug 4, 2007
Messages
19,185
Location
Bjørgvin
I'd say in general shooters have held up pretty well. At least I enjoy old shooters like Doom, Unreal and Half almost as much as back then, and in the past five or so years I thoroughly enjoyed old shooters that were new to me, like Duke Nukem 3D and Outlaws.
OTOH I didn't much enjoy replaying Quake, and when trying them for the first time I found Strife and Sin rather meh.

On the average my enthusiasm for shooters have waned somewhat during the years, though, maybe due to getting older and slower, and/or because I get motion sickness from head bobbing.

I kind of gave up on shooters in 2005, what with the ultra scripted Quake 4 and Pacific Assault.
 

Unkillable Cat

LEST WE FORGET
Patron
Joined
May 13, 2009
Messages
27,091
Codex 2014 Make the Codex Great Again! Grab the Codex by the pussy
The No. 1 thing that can keep an old game from being good to this day are the controls. Sometimes it's that old battle with technological limitations that result in naff controls, but sometimes they were designed by someone who didn't have a single clue about how to operate a vehicle. Tank controls should only be used in tank games, for example, and whomever came up with the controls for Cadaver by The Bitmap Brothers should be shot.

This ties a little into what octavius is saying: The simpler the game is to play the better it holds up, which is exactly what 98% of all shooters do.

In the case of games from the mid-80s/early 90s it's also important to have the best version of the game. Some (arcade) conversions turned out pretty crap on home computers, though a few stand out (and once in a while surpass the original). Bubble Bobble on the Sega Master System is considered the version to play by some because it can combine both "normal" Bubble Bobble and Super Bubble Bobble (a hidden game mode in the original) to give a 200-level adventure, with extra items and boss fights. And yet, when I played it I instantly noticed that the controls are off - it's a right pain in the ass to play because some jumps that every other Bubble Bubble version allows can't be done on the SMS.

Another example is Head Over Heels, the quintessential isometric platformer of the 8-bit computers, which was originally coded on the Spectrum. And while many of the versions are pretty good (there's even a version for Amstrad's PCW computer!) it's the Amstrad CPC version that takes the crown because it has more colors and sounds better (and that's saying something considering the Amstrad sounds like shit).

But as pippin has said many times, most of the old games just aren't worth bothering with nowadays. That's why I've been dabbling with putting together small lists of old games that I think are still worth playing today on various systems. It's still early work and I haven't covered a lot of platforms yet, but it's fun to dig up a 30-year old game now and again that's actually a blast to play.
 
Last edited:

Epsilon

Cipher
Joined
Jul 11, 2009
Messages
428
I always have one or multiple characters going on a roguelike, like Cataclysm DDA, Caves of Qud, ToME or Stone Soup. Or I'm playing some kind of strategy game like Open X-Com with one of it's mods.
But I also play games like arcade shmups through mame, or I'm playing gzdoom with one of countless wads. All of these games run extremely well and you're never removed from the flow - you're always doing something important, that makes the gameplay flow. The same can be said for many SNES games, quite a few fast paced jrpgs that are worth the time, not to mention a few good shmups like Axelay or Parodius.

Obviously I think that Underrail is one of the greatest games to come out in recent years, and it's lack of praise compared to the amount the open world bore that is Witcher 3 received is disheartening. Infact most modern games fall into the open world category and it's the most boring kinda game that exists, because you're constantly taken out of the flow of the game, due to you either hiking somewhere, or you're idly rummaging through virtual shrubberies or shelves to hunt for resources you need to build other things you might want. It's just slow and boring.
Not to mention the time you can spend hunting for mods for those games online, in the hopes of making them good.

My solution is to not play something if I have to wait around for something to happen, whether thats load times, or my virtual character is just plucking flowers or hiking around mountains.
Most older games hold up, as long as their mechanics are good and they've little to no load times.
 
Joined
Mar 3, 2010
Messages
8,820
Location
Italy
there's been a period between late '80s and early '90s during which games had lots of badly drawn icons but tooltips still were to be invented.
all those games deserve to die.
 

pippin

Guest
Well, when it comes to pc gaming, I do think there are many older games worth playing, and they do hold up today. Mostly the usual well known franchises available on GOG and whatnot. But even then, you might find some issues along the way. For instance, should you really play Ultima 1, 2 or 3? What about the NES ports, or the SNES ports of Wizardry games? Especially the latter, they do look better by the virtue of actually looking like something, and they are practically the same game. I'd say older games had as many good ones and bad ones as any other era of gaming.

I can't actually remember saying that most old games aren't worth the effort, but in certain examples that might be true. If anything, the opposite might be correct, most newer games are just meh, but that was until a few years ago. We're certainly getting more interesting games these days and at a more consistent pace.
 

fantadomat

Arcane
Edgy Vatnik Wumao
Joined
Jun 2, 2017
Messages
37,087
Location
Bulgaria
Well old games have a lot more imagination and soul behind them and i find them more fun than most modern games.I would ratter play DOOM 2 than doom 2016.
 

octavius

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Aug 4, 2007
Messages
19,185
Location
Bjørgvin
CRPGs is probably the genre that holds up best.
Wizardry 1 from 1981 is still a great game, even though I only played first time 2-3 years ago.
 

Kitchen Utensil

Guest
Sunset Riders is a blast in Versus-Mode! I played that with my friends and brother for nights (the Mega Drive/Genesis version though). :3

Many games more than hold up. Only thing that's really better today is graphics. And I don't mean design, just graphics. Design-wise (level layout and design, art design, atmosphere), most older games are more unique than today's imo. The hardware restrictions really forced devs to make up for it in the design department.

As for what games I think held up especially well, see: Your personal top ten

No particular order.

Doom 1, 2, 3 - Yeah, I liked Doom 3, especially with the RoE expansion. I never got the hate for it and think it was way better than most of the other stuff released at the time. It was a sensible "modernisation" of the old games without being as ground-breaking. I'm pretty sure most people who hate it never made it past the Alpha Labs. NuDoom sucks though.
Quake 1, 3 - The original for the great singleplayer, 3 for the multiplayer (obviously). Especially duel and defrag. 3 is the game I played the most over the years. Didn't like 2 and 4. Quake Champions is decline.
Starcraft: Broodwar - Great campaign and one of the most fun to watch esports-titles (probably due to the high skill-ceiling and near-perfect balance).
Trackmania Nations/United Forever - The epitome of "easy to learn - hard to master". Best competitive racing game.
Guild Wars - Loved the build variety and how many builds turned out to be viable in PvE and how many things the system allowed you to do. Also had fun PvP modes for casual as well as competitive people. Unbelievable how shitty Guild Wars 2 turned out while having such a good predecessor...
Sim City 4 - Still my favourite City Builder by a mile.
Dark Souls 1, 2, 3 - Hated this when I first tried it, because I thought it must be part of the overhyped decline. A couple of years later I realised how wrong I had been, and that in an age of serious decline this was one bold, shining example of how some developers are still capable of making games. Great games even. I like all three of them, 1 and 2 more than 3 though.
Dragon's Dogma - really not one of the best games ever imo, but in the wasteland that is today's gaming market, it's a gem.
Super Mario World - There are people who compare Ori to this. :|
Resident Evil 1, DC, 2, Zero, Remake - The pre-rendered graphics with fixed camera are what made this series so great. I'd like to see a game made like this again, with a great budget and devs who know what they're doing. Probably not going to happen.

Some shmups...
DonPachi, DoDonPachi, DoDonPachi DaiOuJou
Batsugun
Tatsujin Oh/Truxton 2
Ketsui
Mushihimesama Futari

...and honourable mentions:
GTA Vice City and San Andreas
Silent Hill 1, 2, 3
Forza Motorsport 4
Twisted Metal 2
Exhumed/PowerSlave
Warcraft 2
Lemmings
Turrican 2
Worms
Chaos Engine
Cannon Fodder
Rune
American McGee's Alice
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Falksi

Arcane
Joined
Feb 14, 2017
Messages
10,538
Location
Nottingham
Definitely agree that shooters are still fairly untouchable as plug in & play games. Platform games go into that category for the same reasons too.

I guess old school RPGs ala BG2 instantly get a head start on newer RPGs because they've already had a lot of the bugs ironed out. Even the likes of Underrail & Wasteland 2 get ahead of the game for me, because I know that there's way more chance they'll actually work on my PC with minimal fuss.

Also, I find that the bigger, open world type games run out of new & fresh elements FAR too quickly. The Witcher 3 is the perfect example of that for me. Apart from the odd new move, once you'd had a few fights you could pretty much play through the game using the same dodge-attack method as got you through your first few fights. The loot which you find (apart from Witcher gear) rarely holds anything new or interesting about it, and even the quests become predictable after a time. If they are gonna make games that big they need to keep them fresh by introducing new elements at a regular enough interval to keep folk interested IMO.

The No. 1 thing that can keep an old game from being good to this day are the controls. Sometimes it's that old battle with technological limitations that result in naff controls, but sometimes they were designed by someone who didn't have a single clue about how to operate a vehicle, for example. Tank controls should only be used in tank games, for example, and whomever came up with the controls for Cadaver by The Bitmap Brothers should be shot.

This ties a little into what octavius is saying: The simpler the game is to play the better it holds up, which is exactly what 98% of all shooters do.

In the case of games from the mid-80s/early 90s it's also important to have the best version of the game. Some (arcade) conversions turned out pretty crap on home computers, though a few stand out (and once in a while surpass the original). Bubble Bobble on the Sega Master System is considered the version to play by some because it can combine both "normal" Bubble Bobble and Super Bubble Bobble (a hidden game mode in the original) to give a 200-level adventure, with extra items and boss fights. And yet, when I played it I instantly noticed that the controls are off - it's a right pain in the ass to play because some jumps that every other Bubble Bubble version allows can't be done on the SMS.

Another example is Head Over Heels, the quintessential isometric platformer of the 8-bit computers, which was originally coded on the Spectrum. And while many of the versions are pretty good (there's even a version for Amstrad's PCW computer!) it's the Amstrad CPC version that takes the crown because it has more colors and sounds better (and that's saying something considering the Amstrad sounds like shit).

But as pippin has said many times, most of the old games just aren't worth bothering with nowadays. That's why I've been dabbling with putting together small lists of old games that I think are still worth playing today on various systems. It's still early work and I haven't covered a lot of platforms yet, but it's fun to dig up a 30-year old game now and again that's actually a blast to play.

Get listing those games mate. I'm gonna keep returning here to add ones which I'm playing through, whether good or bad, and I'll add any which people feel still hold up to the OP.

I always have one or multiple characters going on a roguelike, like Cataclysm DDA, Caves of Qud, ToME or Stone Soup. Or I'm playing some kind of strategy game like Open X-Com with one of it's mods.
But I also play games like arcade shmups through mame, or I'm playing gzdoom with one of countless wads. All of these games run extremely well and you're never removed from the flow - you're always doing something important, that makes the gameplay flow. The same can be said for many SNES games, quite a few fast paced jrpgs that are worth the time, not to mention a few good shmups like Axelay or Parodius.
Obviously I think that Underrail is one of the greatest games to come out in recent years, and it's lack of praise compared to the amount the open world bore that is Witcher 3 received is disheartening. Infact most modern games fall into the open world category and it's the most boring kinda game that exists, because you're constantly taken out of the flow of the game, due to you either hiking somewhere, or you're idly rummaging through virtual shrubberies or shelves to hunt for resources you need to build other things you might want. It's just slow and boring.
Not to mention the time you can spend hunting for mods for those games online, in the hopes of making them good.

My solution is to not play something if I have to wait around for something to happen, whether thats load times, or my virtual character is just plucking flowers or hiking around mountains.
Most older games hold up, as long as their mechanics are good and they've little to no load times.

Agree with all of that, especially the Underrail Vs TW3 comparison.
 
Last edited:

Morkar Left

Guest
The gameplay in modern games is introduced step by step over an annoying long time (1 to 2 hours) instead of letting me jump into the full game. That means I have to endure weaker gameplay for that time than the game could provide right from the start. And the worst is if it even doesn't feel like a natural progression in the game but instead of forced story elements just to provide you with a step by step tutorial.
Such long tutorials in action games like CoD is especially annoying and ridiculous. I have to admit there are more gameplay elements than in older games nowadays. Which is great one might think. Unfortunately all these additional gameplay elements (and even the original gameplay) are less meaningful because they rarely affect the game in the end. Everything just busywork and eyecandy without actual an actual effect on the core gameplay.
 

Ezekiel

Arcane
Joined
May 3, 2017
Messages
5,374
I don't believe in this crap. Games don't age. They're either good or they aren't. Your expectations change, but that doesn't make games worse. I can still appreciate the unique controls of something like GoldenEye and old Tomb Raider. It just takes a few minutes of getting used to sometimes. Well, with Tomb Raider, it took more than a few. If I don't like an old game, it probably was never that compelling or fun.
 
Last edited:

Alex

Arcane
Joined
Jun 14, 2007
Messages
8,750
Location
São Paulo - Brasil
A good game is a good game, no matter what year it is, that is true. However, some of the older games can become obsolete. If another game does everything an earlier game did and manages to do it better, then the earlier game can really be said to be obsolete. I think a good example of this is Wolfenstein 3D. Wolfeinstein has its own charm, the weapons are somewhat interesting and if you didn't have access to any later game, you certainly could have fun with it, even today.

But when you compare it with Doom, the game shows its flaws, especially in its level design. There isn't, as far as I can see, anything that Wolfenstein does that Doom doesn't do better (one small exception is the scoring system. Doom doesn't use a standard score system, but even then you can score yourself by map completion and time).

Today I was playing a Mega-Drive (or Genesis if you want) game called Eswat. It is a nice side-scroller. But it has several problems. For instance, your character sprite is too big, frequently there is very little room to manoeuvrer and while the different weapons are actually different and interesting, they make the game too easy once you master them, and they are a bit slow as well. If you compare it to another sidescroller on the same console, Shinobi 3, it shows a lot of improvements over Eswat (even if the games aren't quite as similar as Doom and Wolfenstein). Shinobi 3 doesn't make Eswat obsolete, that game still has some qualities compared to it. But still it comes close to (I think the only thing Eswat has going for it is its use of different weapons).
 

Jedi Exile

Arcanum
Patron
Joined
Oct 10, 2010
Messages
1,177
Project: Eternity Shadorwun: Hong Kong
Now, you have reminded me of something: it's been a while since I've replayed Quake. And I haven't finished Blood yet!
 

Unkillable Cat

LEST WE FORGET
Patron
Joined
May 13, 2009
Messages
27,091
Codex 2014 Make the Codex Great Again! Grab the Codex by the pussy
The gameplay in modern games is introduced step by step over an annoying long time (1 to 2 hours) instead of letting me jump into the full game. That means I have to endure weaker gameplay for that time than the game could provide right from the start. And the worst is if it even doesn't feel like a natural progression in the game but instead of forced story elements just to provide you with a step by step tutorial.
Such long tutorials in action games like CoD is especially annoying and ridiculous. I have to admit there are more gameplay elements than in older games nowadays. Which is great one might think. Unfortunately all these additional gameplay elements (and even the original gameplay) are less meaningful because they rarely affect the game in the end. Everything just busywork and eyecandy without actual an actual effect on the core gameplay.

The problem with "letting people jump into the full game" is how to get them ready for that first.

For many many years it involved Reading The Fucking Manual, but today's generation of ADD-infected IWANTITNOW!!!11 gamers can't seem to read a written paragraph without exploding in a blood-curdling roar of violence.

So the "gradually introduce the player to the game"-style of in-game tutorials has become the de facto standard of game design, but even something so seemingly braindead can be done wrong, as your example proves.

Let me give a couple of examples from the past by bringing up the two games I mentioned earlier in the thread.

# Bubble Bobble's "tutorial" consists of the option of just sitting back and watching the game explain the basic concepts to you. How to move about, how to trap the enemies in bubbles and then popping them, as well as what the general idea of the game is. You can then watch a brief in-game demo to see how everything clicks together, and be ready to tackle the game in about 2 minutes. The fact that Bubble Bobble has tons of secrets waiting to be discovered is NOT mentioned on purpose, and left up to the player to figure out on his own.

# Head Over Heels goes for the "gradually introduces the player to the game" approach, in a time when that was far from being the norm (one of several reasons why Head Over Heels is one of the best games ever but more on that later). You have two characters, Head and Heels. Head moves slowly but can jump really high, while Heels moves quickly but can't jump for shit. The game's opening section has them seperated, but the goal is to unite them as they're a team. So the first screens of the game introduce you to the abilities of each, as well as giving you the chance to use them to gain the equipment exclusive to each character. Head gets a donut shooter to dispose of enemies, while Heels get a bag that acts as an inventory that can hold one (1) item. Once you have the equipment, puzzles will appear that require the freshly-acquired equipment, so you can't advance without getting the hang of things. Eventually Head and Heels will meet up, Head will jump on top of Heels and they combine to form their Ultimate Form, when they move as one and have all of their strengths and none of their weaknesses. To an inexperienced player this introductory part of the game takes about an hour at the most, and counts for about 10% of the game at the most. Beyond are five worlds with different themes and motifs and plenty of puzzles and obstacles for the intrepid pair to overcome.
 

SausageInYourFace

Angelic Reinforcement
Patron
Joined
Dec 28, 2013
Messages
3,858
Location
In your face
Divinity: Original Sin 2 BattleTech Bubbles In Memoria A Beautifully Desolate Campaign Pillars of Eternity 2: Deadfire Steve gets a Kidney but I don't even get a tag. My team has the sexiest and deadliest waifus you can recruit. Pathfinder: Wrath
I still enjoy most of my SEGA Genesis library. All the Sonic games (1, 2, 3 & Knuckles) are still fantastic (looking forward to Sonic Mania) as are most of the other platformers that were cool, the action adventures (Zelda-likes) like Soleil (aka Crusaders of Centy), Story of Thor (aka Beyond Oasis) and Landstalker, most of the JRPGs like Phantasy Star and particularly the Shining Force series.

The only difference I really notice when I replay these games is that many of them felt like these incredibly epic adventures when I played them back in the day, so I was surprised that I could play through a game like Soleil for example in just two sittings. I think Thor/Oasis would probably take a day longer or so (not sure about Landstalker, that game was pretty big, particularly without a guide) but in general what felt like these epic undertakings when you were a kid really shrinks down to a few hours playtime when its a few decades later. I wonder how fast I could play through A Link to the Past.

A lot of great Genesis games are available for very cheap on Steam for those who want to check them out. Unfortunately, no SNES stuff.

In general, I think gameplay by 8bit and 16bit generation mostly really holds up and what was fun then is still fun today. Further back than that and gameplay might become really clunky (even though there are many cool Atari classics) and further forward into 32bit territory you get into a lot of really clunky early 3D shit that doesn't hold up at all in many cases. 8bit/16bit was best bit.
 

spekkio

Arcane
Joined
Sep 16, 2009
Messages
8,278
My 2 cents.

Since I'm not in touch with recent games, I've decided to grab a demo version of Desu Ex - Mankind Divided. After leeching a 77GB file and installing the game (not that long due to SSD drive), game refused to work, which - judging by steam forums - isn't unusual at all and most likely isn't related to using a pirated version.

At this rate of using hugeass textures and FMVs by current devs, my gaming hobby may in near future be 100% focused on old PC and console games.

I've had more fun with Fire Emblem 3 for Snes (3 MB rom file) than with most of the newshit games I've leeched in recent years, with majority of them being uninstalled in disgust after 5 minutes of play.

tl;dr

Re: topic:

They hold up fine... :roll:
 

Varvarg

Educated
Joined
Jun 17, 2017
Messages
168
Location
Sweden
I dont mind the graphics much in older games, even if some have a timeless beauty with that pixel aesthetics. Some age quite badly naturally, especially when they tried to mix in prerendered 3d art. Think Killer Instinct. Bluuergh

They thing that can be a dealbreaker is the interface. If it becomes too much of a chore I get tired quickly. Say what you want but new times have streamlined some shit. And I dont mean dumbed down. If you enjoy to click endlessly to do a mundane task, then I guess the future is not for you.

So for example: Civ: Alpha Centauri. Good game for its time, but the interface is literal excrement. The console games was simpler and didn't have this problem. Interface design was still in its infancy.
 

Vorark

Erudite
Joined
Mar 2, 2017
Messages
1,394
Older console games (say, up to 16 bits) hold up pretty well. Since the UI was designed to work with controllers, clunkiness isn't much of an issue -- it's very pick up and play. Being mostly 2d is another bonus. Can't say the same for older PC games, in which the interface is, at times, harder to navigate and unintuitive. Hell, you can pick up Dragon Quest I and play through it without any previous knowledge.

I shudder at the word streamline but not so much when it comes down to UI and controls.
 

JarlFrank

I like Thief THIS much
Patron
Joined
Jan 4, 2007
Messages
33,052
Location
KA.DINGIR.RA.KI
Steve gets a Kidney but I don't even get a tag.
OTOH I didn't much enjoy replaying Quake, and when trying them for the first time I found Strife and Sin rather meh.

I played through Quake for the first time this year and had a blast, it's a pretty great shooter in every aspect. Loads of fun. Fourth episode was a little bland in its architecture though.
The two official expansion sets were also great.
 

Gepeu

Savant
Patron
Joined
Oct 16, 2016
Messages
986
I'm currently playing Crusader No Remorse a little (20-30 minutes at a time) for the first time and it's really fun.
 

Moonrise

The Magnificent
Patron
Joined
Jul 7, 2017
Messages
386
Make the Codex Great Again!
Puzzles are timeless. Lode Runner, Lolo, Puzznic and Tetris are every bit as good as they were in the 80s. The same is almost true of shmups, but some are superseded. There's no reason to play Space Invaders '78 when you can play Space Invaders '95, or Infinity Gene. Platformers that were good are still good. When it comes to strategy games, the quality-of-life features of newer installments are hard to give up. I don't think Conquer the Stars is better than MoO2, but it's got that coffee break feel. RPG subgenres are distinct enough to address separately. The problem with JRPGs is that they have an inordinate focus on presentation. Final Fantasy VI wowed me in '94, but the gameplay has proven tedious. If the best examples don't hold up, none of them do. At least SRPGs give you something to chew on--Master of Monsters, and Dark Wizard, for example. Even the NES Koei stuff is worth a look. CRPGs are a mixed bag. It really depends on the interface. Gold Box is as clunky as I'm willing to go. I really enjoyed Krynn. But speaking without bias, nobody I know can stomach them. Daggerfall is one of my favorite games, but normies don't consider TES I-III playable. Roguelikes have fared better. A few are still in development, which is a testament to their appeal. And the oldest Mystery Dungeon game, Torneko, is good fun.
 

Serious_Business

Best Poster on the Codex
Joined
Aug 21, 2007
Messages
3,909
Location
Frown Town
I like to have a blast

Sounds too enthousastic to me. I do not "like to have a blast" about anything. I prefer to ruminate like a fucking cow and look down in anger at the world, myself, kids, whatever it is that reminds me that I exist. You might be here to have fun but some of us want to suffer the dark depths of our nothingness in peace :):):):)
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom