Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Remathilis" data-source="post: 9541461" data-attributes="member: 7635">Which is why OSR ends up constantly trying to reinvent the wheel. It can't and won't move past that late-70's era and the mythologized style of play. I have referenced it once, but I can't help but keep seeing comparisons to the retro-video game movement which seems to have fixated on early NES style aesthetics. To them, its always 1986. Obviously, there is advantages to that (8 bit graphics and sounds are much easier to make than later evolutions), but outside a small contingent of 16 bit style games, the retro-market has decided its mostly trying to re-invent Super Mario Bros, Legend of Zelda, and Punch Out in perpetuity. &nbsp;There is a lot of reasons for that. Part of it is a &quot;reject modernity, embrace traditon&quot; philosophy that believes things were better during the so-called Golden Age of gaming. Some of it is people who weren't there wishing to experience what has been mythologized by others, inflated beyond what is was to what is Should Be. Some of it is an attempt to recapture lost magic in an era of realistic graphics and microtransactions. And some of it is pure hipster culture who embrace it because its old and out of fashion. I see the OSR as basically no different. And hey, there are some great retro-game (both TT and video) made as testaments/love letters to there respective eras. They are legitimately good games. But there have emerged certain criteria that have boxed the idea in (in OSR, its the focus on the asymeticral &quot;smart play&quot; style of dungeon crawl, in RetroVids, its Nintendo-hard style difficulty spikes and limited continues/save features). Which is a shame, because I think there IS a market for a 2e-like retro-game which doesn't' think the golden age of gaming ended with Dragonlance. Then again, maybe that audicence is still happy playing 5e...</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Remathilis, post: 9541461, member: 7635"] Which is why OSR ends up constantly trying to reinvent the wheel. It can't and won't move past that late-70's era and the mythologized style of play. I have referenced it once, but I can't help but keep seeing comparisons to the retro-video game movement which seems to have fixated on early NES style aesthetics. To them, its always 1986. Obviously, there is advantages to that (8 bit graphics and sounds are much easier to make than later evolutions), but outside a small contingent of 16 bit style games, the retro-market has decided its mostly trying to re-invent Super Mario Bros, Legend of Zelda, and Punch Out in perpetuity. There is a lot of reasons for that. Part of it is a "reject modernity, embrace traditon" philosophy that believes things were better during the so-called Golden Age of gaming. Some of it is people who weren't there wishing to experience what has been mythologized by others, inflated beyond what is was to what is Should Be. Some of it is an attempt to recapture lost magic in an era of realistic graphics and microtransactions. And some of it is pure hipster culture who embrace it because its old and out of fashion. I see the OSR as basically no different. And hey, there are some great retro-game (both TT and video) made as testaments/love letters to there respective eras. They are legitimately good games. But there have emerged certain criteria that have boxed the idea in (in OSR, its the focus on the asymeticral "smart play" style of dungeon crawl, in RetroVids, its Nintendo-hard style difficulty spikes and limited continues/save features). Which is a shame, because I think there IS a market for a 2e-like retro-game which doesn't' think the golden age of gaming ended with Dragonlance. Then again, maybe that audicence is still happy playing 5e... [/QUOTE]

Verification