Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Aldarc" data-source="post: 9835948" data-attributes="member: 5142"><p>Modern is not necessarily better. Modern is not necessarily better. Modern is not necessarily better. So we are reminded ad nauseum. Modern mechanics, regardless of whether they originate in older games, seem required to justify their existence or any claims that they are better. And yet I have sometimes likewise noticed that this does not seem to apply to older mechanics and their fans. What makes older better? Why aren't fans of older mechanics required to justify that that their mechanics are better than new mechanics? Should fans of older mechanics be constantly browbeaten and reminded of the banal point that older is not necessarily better? What point does constantly raising this banal point actually serve any discussion? What is the actual argument or desire that lies behind constantly raising this point? Reading through this thread again, I just don't know, but I do know that I am tired of hearing "Modern is not necessarily better" for the umpteenth time as if it adds anything new or valuable to discussion. <img class="smilie smilie--emoji" alt="😩" src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f629.png" title="Weary face    :weary:" data-shortname=":weary:" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" /></p></blockquote><p></p>