Do you think BG&E aged well?

[Agent_Ash]

Nostalgia is a powerful thing, and sometimes we have a lot of fun replaying pretty old games just because we enjoy them the way we enjoyed them back in the day. For me games like American McGee's Alice, Rayman 2 or Psychonauts are great examples of this.

However, I missed BG&E back in the day and only really got around to it recently. And I must say... I'm not really having fun.

Don't get me wrong, I see why this game was excellent back then. Even now I can admire its style, enjoyable and responsive controls, good balance between various types of gameplay, and, obviously, well-written characters and plot.

But the problem is, it's just boring to play. The fights are simple and repetitive, the levels are small and simplistically designed, and for an action game it feels just weird to have no acrobatics/platforming. From the purely gameplay perspective something like Rayman 2: The Great Escape seems much more fun to me (but I did play it back in its time, so because of the nostaltic factor I can't be objective about this comparison). For me it's pretty hard to enjoy the game when you don't enjoy the gameplay.

Now, what do you think? Did BG&E age well? Would you recommend it to somebody who hasn't played it before? Or is it pointless to try without the strong nostaltic factor?



P.S. If anybody wonders, I don't own it on Steam, I just prefer discussing stuff here.

[Lina Inverse]

I played it pretty late,so nostalgia is a little to zero factor for me.For me some parts didn't age well,like the combat and stealth level.But other parts have some most brilliant ideas I've ever seen.Like,the fusion and balance of different genres like you said,and the photo collectibles are the best collectibles in games;Map design,especially the way it opens to you,are great too;The pacing,you don't see this kind of open world these days.For example,FFXV,the exploring and main storyline feel like two games,but in BGE I can barely tell them apart;I also love the way how they involve the mini games into storytelling,like the secret entrance in racing,the informer in the bar.As for storytelling itself,it doesn't age.Can I tell you how much I hate it when nowadays script always try to do darker and twister？
And I don't think there's something can be called purely gameplay.In Mortal Kombat,the gameplay is combat.In Life is Strange,the gameplay is explore,gather information,make choices.Gameplay vairies in different genres of games.I don't think there's a standard for purely gameplay.So in games like BGE which bend many genres together,I don't think it's fair to judge its gameplay by some parts and ignore the others.But I can understand if the part you value most doesn't age well,you surely would find it boring

[Smiling Spectre]

Originally posted by Agent Ash:

But the problem is, it's just boring to play. The fights are simple and repetitive, the levels are small and simplistically designed, and for an action game it feels just weird to have no acrobatics/platforming.

It seems, game is simply not "your" genre after all. I, personally, prefer big levels, tough fights and sofisticated design too... But I can appreciate relatively small levels and simpistic fights too. It simply two different game types - one is for challenge and one is for story and fun. They are works in different conditions and maybe for different people too.

As for me, good non-aging game is in balance of difficulty and accessibility. Psychonauts are great - but they are not tough at all, until you try to get all collectibles. Same is true about, say, Final Fantasy 7 or Anachronox. Same is true about BG&E in my opinion too.

As for me, BG&E is good for everyone - especially for people who are not hardcore gamers. And, just opposite, hardcore gamers may not have much fun in it - just because it will be too small and easy for them. :)

[Agent_Ash]

Originally posted by Smiling Spectre:

Originally posted by Agent Ash:

But the problem is, it's just boring to play. The fights are simple and repetitive, the levels are small and simplistically designed, and for an action game it feels just weird to have no acrobatics/platforming.

It seems, game is simply not "your" genre after all. I, personally, prefer big levels, tough fights and sofisticated design too... But I can appreciate relatively small levels and simpistic fights too. It simply two different game types - one is for challenge and one is for story and fun. They are works in different conditions and maybe for different people too.

I doubt that it's not my genre. I gave Psychonauts as an example of game a love, which I think is very similar to BG&E in many aspects (and many levels may seem simplistic too), and there are plenty of other similar games I enjoy. It could be that it's just not my game specifically — sometimes one specific game just doesn't work for you even tough it looks like it should. And I CAN appreciate it all, the fights and levels are good; it's just that in this case appreciating isn't the same as enjoying for me.

[Smiling Spectre]

Originally posted by Agent Ash:

I doubt that it's not my genre. I game Psychonauts as an example of game a love, which I think is very similar to BG&E in many aspects (and many levels may seem simplistic too), and there are plenty of other similar games I enjoy.

Well...are any of this games new? Can it be that your tastes evolved - and you (still) love games that are too simply just because you loved it when you loved such games more than now? :)

As for me, Psychonauts and BG&E plays on the same field in the many aspects. Simplistic fights, collectibles, simple platform scenes, small levels - you name it. So, I believe, if you love one but not love another - either you love some quality that not listed above, or there is some other reason. I am omnivore, I can eat anything, so I cannot judge here. ;)

[HyperDebtRay]

I don't have any nostalgia with this game in particular even though I've played similar games like this in my childhood. I always have to keep in mind that this is for all intents and purposes a 14 year old game so I have to cut it some slack.

The gameplay overall is great but playing modern games have definitely caused me to notice that a lot of the mechanics have not aged well, particularly in combat. Again, not entirely the fault of the game.

Story is a different matter, the story telling and character development is levels beyond modern games today imo.

[HRDSalami654]

I think it aged okay for being 15 years old. Graphically it has a simple design that held up amazingly well despite its age, and the gameplay is... problematic. When I originally went into the game I expected nothing so the game blew me away. Playing through it now it definitely shows its pedigree. I was bored at first, admittedly, but once the story started rolling I found it harder and harder to put the game down. The combat is simple, but again, the game is 15 years old and difficult combat was not a thing in action platformer games. Make no mistakes, this isn't an action game or a spectacle fighter. Ubisoft never even tried to market it as an action game and this is the main reason it failed so horribly initially. What really sets BG&E apart from the rest is that it isn't afraid to take a step back and just let you putz around at a leisurly pace while also giving you weird emergent gameplay sections that somehow fit into the game even when they shouldn't. It isn't a tight game, but it is a special game that is for sure.

As far as the small levels are concerned, again, this is a game that pushed the limits of consoles at the time. That was as big as they could make the levels. I know I might sound like I'm making excuses for the game, but at some point there really isn't a better explaination. These are not simple horizontal levels with a linear path through them, every level has nooks and crannys and verticality that isn't really shown in other games of the same genre. Overall I think it is one of the better 3D rendered games from the XBox/PS2 generation both in terms of graphical fidelity and gameplay mechanics.

[Liru]

The game was a whole lot shorter than I thought it would've been, which obviously wasn't intended to be the case from the start.

I love how the game starts out, you see all these things you can collect like the pearls and the animals, you get a job doing journalism and it all looks great. Then the game finishes. It starts spitting out pearls towards the end when you'd have to kill a boss or do a minigame beforehand. The animals are super spread out and collecting all of them was mostly an accident, I only went out of my way for one of them.

The hovercraft upgrades also show that the game was really meant to go on longer. The cannon, jump kit, and boosters are all super fun additions that also open up the story. The last two upgrades do nothing but progress the story, and even though they cost a lot more than the previous upgrades, they're actually much easier to get.

Then when you do get into space, there's two places to go, the moon or back to Hillys, nothing else is there aside from the last animal. There was obviously meant to be more planets with more story and more stuff to do, if you look at the sky with your camera you can even see named planets.

I think the combat was pretty awful due to the small areas you'd fight in, and the stealth grew really old really fast (although I really hate stealth in games anyway), but I really didn't play through the whole game because I wanted these things, so it didn't affect too much.

I think the length and combat of the game really doesn't hold up in modern times, but the level design, world, story, and non-combat mechanics are timeless.

All things considered, I'm glad I got closure for finally completing the game after 15 years, but I also wish I just left it alone. The memory I had of the game was much better than what I now know the game to actually be.

[svenoss]

, enjoyable and responsive controls

This were mentions has the bad elements from this game back in the day. Weird that you enjoyed them, especially with the camera problems. Exploration, mini games, musics and scenario were the qualities of the title.

[Smiling Spectre]

Well, to be honest, except some quirky moments in stealth and counter-intuitive spaceship controls, I feel the game quite responsive too. :)

Ah, and boat racings that are impossible in one control scheme and barely tolerable in another!

[RayRayRay]

Yep, aged well. I completed this game over 10 times in my life. It's epic. On of the best games ever.

[ar2games]

l got it last year on uplay (for free!) and now l´m playing it for the first time and l definitely think it´s aged very well, l actually was surprised by the combat and the level design. The graphics made me hesitate at first but now l love them too and the music is fantastic as well.

[Shining_Falcon]

Originally posted by Lina Inverse:

I played it pretty late,so nostalgia is a little to zero factor for me.....

@Lina Inverse
Completely agree with all your points. I'm just playing the game now so the nostaliga is also zero for me. It's partially in preperation for the next entry and partially cause I've missed out for a long time, but I want to experience this. And you're right in your examples. Certain games fit certain genres, and the best balance those without overstepping.

As for nostalgia in general, I know the feeling, but I also know that you can discover things you missed the first time around after a replay. Or fight a boss better, with years of game experience with you. Nostalgia isn't always the deciding factor, but it does help when I can make an instant comparison to something classic gem long since forgotten and unremastered.

Thanks for reading. Keep being awesome. :)

[Shining_Falcon]

Originally posted by Agent Ash:

Nostalgia is a powerful thing, and sometimes we have a lot of fun replaying pretty old games just because we enjoy them the way we enjoyed them back in the day.....

@Agent Ash
Good points, great examples of classic nostalgia games that do it right and I do understand when nostalgia fails you. It's why I have a PS2 with a huge backlog but I haven't played the system in years. It just feels different, or I feel it's going to be different and ruin my memory of it. But it still is nice to have and sometimes sentimental value is all you need from a great game.

As for Beyond Good and Evil, I'll leave a review when I finish. The last early 2000 action adventure I played was Primal (which I got halfway through) so I hope Beyond leaves more of an impression and plenty of nostalgia when the next entry releases in 5 years or so.

Thanks for reading. Keep being awesome. :)

[Vorpeseda]

Playing through this again, my opinions are:

Visually, it's aged pretty well, but cartoony graphics generally do age better than realistic graphics.

Interactions with characters is generally pretty good, defintely a game I'd still recommend for anyone who tends to form emotional connections to fictional characters.

All the moving around the enviroment, climbing, and such is pretty solid as well.

Sooo.... what hasn't aged so well?

Camera controls are pretty bad, often it's hard to sneak because you're not sure where enemies are, and you end up having a hard time controlling in fights sometimes. Especially in cramped areas.

Of course, the terrible fights tend to be ones involving Alpha Sections, who are generally best snuck past. In a way, that's kind of the point, but the stealth isn't that good either.

[R-OVERMANN]

Just Played this game complete for the first time. It's good, Age isn't a factor here. Horrible console porting though.