3 ms·
Honestly, the games I find the most engaging are simple 2D platformers and beat-em-ups. Maybe fighting games too, though I'm only interested in the single-playe
by amyjess 10y ago
Honestly, the games I find the most engaging are simple 2D platformers and beat-em-ups. Maybe fighting games too, though I'm only interested in the single-player mode.
Playing around with some old games over the weekend and last weekend, I forgot how addictive they were.
Yesterday, I told myself "I'll play a bit of Super Mario Bros. 3 and see how far I can get on one life"... and before I knew it, I was in World 2.
The weekend before that, I played some Golden Axe, and I got a huge chunk of the way through the game before I had to turn it off to go do other things.
It's my personal opinion that 1985-1995 was the single best era for gaming, as it was dominated by addictive fast-paced games that you could just pick up and play. One of the things that turns me off about modern games is that the "just pick up and play" mentality is gone... too many unskippable cutscenes, forced tutorial levels, etc.
- zimpenfish 10y ago> things that turns me off about modern games [...] too many unskippable cutscenes, forced tutorial levels, etc. Perhaps in the AAA space but down in the more indie spaces, you don't get those. My current set of favourite games (Rocket League, Binding of Isaac, Risk Of Rain, Rogue Legacy, Delver) certainly don't have any of those.
- amyjess 10y agoWell, now I have some names to Google... Thanks!