Would you consider 1987 to 1999 to be the 'classical' age of video games?
No.
Oh man I love Secret of Mana.
I wish the series was better as a whole, but SD2 and 3 are my favorite games.
Also I have no idea what makes something classical.
Why 1987?
more or less
the PS2 era is where most people's "classic" games come from, though.
This thread makes no sense.
>>333150068
I found them fun, but I don't really think they are that great. Fantastic soundtrack and art direction though.
"Classical" generally refers to an epoch that should be adhered to. It is a bit wonky to define, but interesting nevertheless if you look up the history of the term.
>>333150074
Isn't that where Metroid, Zelda and Megaman came out?
>>333150203
Dunno, most classic games as far as I can tell are from the early to mid 90s.
I generally define the "golden age of vidya" as 1990 to 2005. So approximately release of the SNES until release of the Xbox 360.
>>333150339
>Isn't that where Metroid, Zelda and Megaman came out?
In the United States they did. But Super Mario, Bubble Bobble, Tetris, Duck Hunt, and Excitebike came out before then.
>>333150339
>most classic games as far as I can tell are from the early to mid 90s.
>the "golden age of vidya" as 1990 to 2005
That is because you are young and stupid. NES is Silver era at best. Arcade games are golden age, possibly Atari
>>333149940
If by "classical" you mean the golden era we will all look back on, I'd put it from about 1991 to 2003
There were games before 91 that were really good but gaming as a whole hadn't really found its "stride" yet, and games after 2003 started to move more towards the current climate we see today.
>>333150625
>That is because you are young and stupid.
Leave him alone!
>>333149940
Maybe classical. But I think the Golden Age of vidya is from 1997-2006. There were just so many good games released in that 9 year stretch. Every year had multiple good titles come out for multiple systems. Every year has a few classics but the sheer amount from 1997-2006 is amazing.
>>333150549
Yeah, I also find 1987 an odd choice, I just listed things that seemed significant about that year.
>>333150625
Don't know how it shows I am stupid, but yeah, I am young. I was born in 1993 so obviously my own golden age would difer from your golden age.
>>333150339
>>333150625
>>333150720
>>333151292
I specifically avoided using the term 'golden age' because I think as an expression it's more subjectively loaded.
>>333152162
Classical just feels like it means "old". Like it'd be a bunch of Atari games.
Probably just use the loaded phrase, since it does mean that more contemporary games are shithouse in comparison.
>>333152487
Atari is more archaic than it is classic by vidya standards. I mean we're talking about a console that has actual archeological digs dedicated to its games.
>>333151292
>1997-2006
Early 00s on PC was full of crippled console ports.
Video games are not old enough to have "ages" yet. They just have generations.
ps2 era was the pinnacle of the genre.
everything started going downhill since then.
>>333153646
Some were, but there were also a lot of good console titles then. I think early 2000's was the height of consoles, really the only time they were bearable.
>>333154253
>tfw the PS2 was the last console you bought
>>333154393
>I think early 2000's was the height of consoles
What about the 90s?
>>333156119
They were great too, but PS2 era is my favorite console era.
