I don't believe video games age, however it seems whenever a new improved games of the same series is released, people put the former game away and focus mostly on the new game, like Mario Bros. was to SMB, or SMB to SMB3, or Wolfeinsten to Doom, or Smash 64 to Melee(Although this one isn't retro).
>>3255982
>I don't believe video games age
>except when newer games surpass them
If the new version does indeed surpass the prequel with certain "objective" improvements (I would classify graphical improvement as subjective, since you're dealing with aesthetics in that regard, but improved controls, fixing a bad camera, improving the frame rate, etc would qualify as objective improvements, I think), I would say the prequel is "dated." Doesn't mean that game isn't worth playing.
That said, I'm also in the camp that a great game doesn't "age." Some games just nailed it, and the sequels are simply a new coat of paint on the old formula. Tetris, Robotron, Defender, Ms. Pac-Man, Doom 2, Street Fighter 2 Turbo, Wipeout XL, Super Mario Brothers 3, Link to the Past, Contra come to mind as games which had sequels that didn't really "improve" on the experience and fun factor of the preceding releases.
Doesn't mean the sequels aren't worth playing nor does it mean the sequels are inherently worse games, just that you can easily jump between the games and not think one is "dated" compared to the other.
>>3255982
Do you expect people to play the same thing over and over when there's new versions coming out or something? Even if there weren't improvements just new levels or whatever people would still play the new games because they got sick of playing the old ones. And since there usually are improvements it's a no brainer. Or I guess a small brainer because the guy with no brain can't figure that out.
>>3256060
HOMM3 was like this.
>>3255982
No lie i like smash 64 the best
>>3255982
>I don't believe video games age
Play the Uncharted saga. They have aged like fine milk.
>>3255982
>I don't believe video games age
Never played a raising game or even Tamagotchi?
>>3255982
Video games do not age, though people's perception on games do. This can be due from advancements in subsequent games over time, or how its design choices are perceived once the game has been explored further.
This doesn't necessarily have to do with newer, subsequent games being "improved" or "advanced". Like with the Pokemon games for example: I may favor the design choices of older installments over the most recent installments, but that doesn't stop me or other people playing it for the purpose of a new and different experience, regardless of your opinion and whether you believe it's better or not (which frankly is not always the case).
>>3262471
I should clarify that the second half of my post was regarding why people seemingly play a newer installment once it's released and forget about the older ones, like OP mentioned.
The first half I said that advancements could affect the perception of an older game if the newer one is an improvement, not having to do with why people play it over the old ones.
