I agree for the most part when it comes to action games. You know euroshmups? Well, shmups weren't the only problemSumez wrote:I could never get into most popular C64 or Amiga games especially because they all seem to have flaws that cause them to not age well.
Personally I grew up with Nintendo's 8 bit, and it seems to me that even someone who's never played a NES game before should be able to go back to a game like the Mega Man or Mario games and realize that they are excellent games. I have a real hard time finding a single C64 game that is as flawless as my favorite Nintendo games.
But, at the same time that the C64 doesn't have a lot of good Japanese-style platformers or arcade games, you won't find a lot of the same kinds of deep strategy or adventure games on NES that you find on the C64. For example, I was pretty disappointed in the NES version of M.U.L.E., which was a pioneering 4-player strategy game, and its version of Archon was pretty hokey too. I also attribute the fact that most gamers grew up with consoles and not computers to the way people are so amazed now by old gimmicks like open-world designs and games which ask players to make moral decisions (Ultima did both 20 years ago on C64/Apple/etc), or games with more serious adult-aimed themes (lots of adventure games: see Infocom).
Anyway, point being: the systems definitely have different strengths and weaknesses. If you're looking for NES games on the C64 or C64 games on the NES, you will be disappointed.
I'd also argue against a lot of fondly remembered NES games being all that good, though the Mario games (sans SMB US 2) are obviously amazingly well-designed. For instance, I just popped on Ninja Gaiden the other day, and it does not hold up in my opinion. But, this is another argument.
EDIT: BTW, has anyone played this?:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x_1mMhJP6Xo
I'm wondering if it is good or if it has the same oversized hitbox as Katakis.