I tried playing Harvest Moon on the SNES today and having played Stardew Valley for hours, I thought I’d try and see how tolerable the original Harvest Moon was in comparison. I know and understand it is unfair because there’s a 20 year gap between Harvest Moon and Stardew Valley, while also discrediting Harvest Moon’s later entries since there’s more than one.

Harvest Moon to me is a bit hard to revisit. Having to get used to only carrying two tools at the same time, your farm doesn’t seem as big, you don’t have a way to know that you’re tired as readily, you just have to watch for the signs and the village you visit doesn’t seem as characteristic. It’s a basic farming sim, it has to start somewhere.

But Stardew Valley does so many things that it is easier to revisit.

  • emb@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 days ago

    The early Pokemon games are pretty rough, after you get used to improvements from the GBA era, particularly the remakes.

    Likewise, the original NES Metroid after playing Zero Mission? Takes some getting used to.

    • Worx@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 days ago

      That’s just crazy talk. Pokémon Blue is my favourite, although I’ve only played up to gen 4 (Diamond, I think is the name). It’s not as good as the previous generations and the physical special split is just weird IMO. I’m sure that’s an unpopular opinion for people who are used to playing like that though, I think it would make more sense to me if it was how it had always been. Abilities were a neat addition though, I’ll give you that

      • emb@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 days ago

        Even though it’s hard to go back, I think Gen I is still quite good. I replayed Red maybe 3ish years ago, and had a great time. It’s just that it’s very rough around the edges until I’m used to it again.

        The main thing that made me bring it up actually was remembering going back after playing GSC, and really missing the in-battle exp bar.

        I’m surprised to hear you didn’t like the physical/special split, I think it makes much more sense the new way.

        That split was great, the sp. atk/def split is very good, hold items and abilities added a lot. Inventory management got a lot better in later games. And monster sprites did too, although the bad sprites in Gen 1 have a lot of charm and nostalgic appeal of their own.

    • Rai@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 days ago

      Ahhhh I love how crunchy the old versions are! The only thing I wish I had on my carts is a FFWD feature for grinding.

    • ColeSloth@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 days ago

      I enjoyed the fighting simplicity of the original pokemon games. I could recognize and know the names of 151 pokemon and their weakneses/strengths. Now there’s too many pokemon and too many counters and hybrids. Too much work to keep track of.

      • venotic@kbin.melroy.orgOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 days ago

        As much as I adore, love and still prop Gen II as peak pokemon. I also have to blame Gen II for bringing in EV and IV that has served for the longest time, as fuel to the fire. Additionally so has making pokemon born and all that.

        Now there’s mega-evolutions, old pokemon have aurora forms or whatever. Why complicate it?

        • M.int@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          8 days ago

          The IV and EV system in Gen II is the same as in Gen I.
          The “mordern” EV and IV system that’s being used today was introduced in Gen III with Ruby and Sapphire.