What Made Those Old, 2D Platformers So Great?

TheManagement writes "Many current developers of web games seem to have a fondness for 2D platformers. However, their desire to capture what made Sonic and Mario games so great is rarely achieved. In an attempt to breach that gap, Significant Bits takes a look at three common design principles that made those classic titles so enjoyable. 'To start off, the interface needs to be quick and responsive. Input should have an immediate effect on the character in order to foster a sense of full control. Granularity and different control techniques, i.e., pressing, tapping and holding, are also important as they provide a level of precision to the movement. ... Now, as far as the environments themselves, it's not a coincidence that they're often filled with all sorts of slides, bridges, trampolines, ladders, etc. In a way, they're simply playgrounds for the player, both literally and figuratively. They're catered to the moveset, and they enhance the flow of the game.'"

Nostalgia

[Blakey Rat]

That horrible wasting-mind disease known as nostalgia. On average, the same percentage of platformers were good as, for example, the percentage of first-person shooters that are good. The thing is, people still play the good platformers-- like Mario 3 or Sonic 2, and as a result, they completely forget about the thousands of crappy platformers out there.

If you want a more even perspective, take a look at Something Awful's ROM pit: http://www.somethingawful.com/d/rom-pit/ [somethingawful.com] They review the bad platformers you've forgotten.

Now, can we please stop seeing topics like this based entirely on nostalgia?

Re:One word.

[Anonymous Coward]

That, plus the fact that you didn't need to memorize 150 different keyboard commands to play one of those old games. Most of the newer games became too much like work for me to ever really enjoy them.

Clearly, you've never played Nethack...

There's still new 2D games that are good

[Anonymous Coward]

Braid, World of Goo, N+, etc.

The article talks about 2D games like they were things of the past and no good ones existed today...

Re:One word.

[boarder8925]

I'm not saying that there's a lack or nonexistence of good or great 2D platformers, I'm simply saying that the greatness of 2D platformers in general has been greatly hyped and overestimated.

Re:pixel perfect synched scrolling

[Joce640k]

3D games can also have perfect sync (and many of them do, especially on consoles...)

Re:Lifestyle investment

[ouimetch]

Because your social life was not significantly affected, playing them was less of a lifestyle decision than it is with today's video games, which require more serious consideration. I don't remember anyone worrying that their roommate might be addicted to Pac-Man.

These guys [newline.com] beg to differ.

Shenanigans

[yerktoader]

So a good number of people have stated nostalgia, and out of those the majority have said that 2d platformers were mostly or all bad. Yet I've not seen any examples of how or why.

I call bullshit.

Platformers have continued to achieve success, and while they're far less common than they used to be, many of them have received rave reviews, and deservedly:

Castlevania: Symphony of the Night(1997)
Contra: Shattered Soldier(2002)
Neo Contra(2004)
Psychonauts(2005)
Bionic Commando Rearmed(2008)
Mega Man 9(2008)

And there's many more that I haven't listed. I think what made those games great back in the day is what makes them great now - simple to interact with, but challenging enemies and environments. Great soundtracks, great graphics, great fun.