Ever replayed a game and it just didn’t feel the same?

[Cardboardtubeknight Cardboardtubeknight]

You know we have long lives all with different obstacles and paths, but one thing thats a constant would be nostalgia. Currently I am playing Secret of Mana again. I believe its my third playthrough. Now to preface, I absolutely love this game, this series even, but man there is a lot of bullshit present: Items not telling you what they do (I got honey mixed up with how it works in Paper Mario and thought magic could be refilled with it. It's not like there's already 2 applicable healing items available), how they immediately make you face enemies that require magic to beat right after recieving it, and the place in question is only accessible after you speak to a random NPC, granted I think the NPC has different colored hair, but I had a little too much of the limbaugho if you catch my drift, and couldn't tell right away. But thats just the now. An example that I know I loved when I was younger that I'm good on now would definitely be Shadows of the Empire. Okay, enough about me. What about you guys.

 

[bjork]

I feel like that's only normal, because you'll be in a different place and point in your life when you revisit things. Your sensibilities change, games change especially in a lot QoL ways depending on how far back you're doing, and even if you were in the exact same place you played it originally, time changes everything. But I've had this go both ways, where something didn't hit quite the same as it did, or it landed far better than it had initially. I think it's just life happening, it's not a bad thing.

[edit - and I guess for examples, revisiting some Commodore 64 stuff has had those "oh wow, this wasn't as good as I remembered" moments, but revisiting The Witness after several years made it really click for me when it hadn't at launch.]

 

[DrunkGecko]

yea i played sonic heroes as a kid
it was the first game i ever played
it was awesome
then i played it again
shit sucked

 

[Jayonnaise6105 Jayonnaise6105]

Deadly Premonition 2. I still enjoy parts of that game, but my first playthrough back in 2020 was almost entirely focused on the story and how it followed up on the first Deadly Premonition.
DP2 has some pretty weak side content, so if you're not playing it for the story then there isn't a whole lot of reason to play it.
Since I know the story, trying a 2nd playthrough felt a lot more like a chore.

 

[W4SD]

I used to love the SNES Megaman X series back when i was a child, i used to play them alot on emulators but then i grew up, life fucked me over and when i tried to play it again, it just wasnt the same.

Thats just life i guess lol

 

[Segadude113]

tends to happen with older games. That's when i find new ways to enjoy them!

 

[UnDubious]

You know we have long lives all with different obstacles and paths, but one thing thats a constant would be nostalgia. Currently I am playing Secret of Mana again. I believe its my third playthrough. Now to preface, I absolutely love this game, this series even, but man there is a lot of bullshit present: Items not telling you what they do (I got honey mixed up with how it works in Paper Mario and thought magic could be refilled with it. It's not like there's already 2 applicable healing items available), how they immediately make you face enemies that require magic to beat right after recieving it, and the place in question is only accessible after you speak to a random NPC, granted I think the NPC has different colored hair, but I had a little too much of the limbaugho if you catch my drift, and couldn't tell right away. But thats just the now. An example that I know I loved when I was younger that I'm good on now would definitely be Shadows of the Empire. Okay, enough about me. What about you guys.

It was still pretty much the norm not to have item descriptions back then, to be fair. ROM space was very limited and they couldn't afford to spend it on extraneous text. The manuals would have some item descriptions at least. It was also the norm that you needed to speak to every NPC in earlier RPGs, but there weren't that many NPCs either, so it never bothered me. Later on RPGs started having towns with crazy amounts of NPCs so they had to change that.

 

[RETRO-VETRO RETRO-VETRO]

I think what you’re describing is a really common phenomenon when revisiting older games, and it ties into both nostalgia and how game design philosophies have shifted over time.

Back in the 90s, a lot of RPGs and action-adventure titles, Secret of Mana included were designed with the assumption that players would experiment, talk to every NPC, and even rely on playground chatter, magazines, or strategy guides to fill in the gaps. That’s why you see things like vague item descriptions, progression locked behind a single NPC, or sudden difficulty spikes that expect you to have mastered a new mechanic immediately. At the time, those quirks weren’t necessarily seen as flaws, they were part of the challenge and discovery loop.

When we replay them now, though, our expectations have changed. Modern games tend to prioritize clarity, accessibility, and smoother onboarding. Tutorials are explicit, item descriptions are detailed, and progression is rarely hidden behind a single conversation trigger. So when we go back, the friction points stand out more sharply, even if the atmosphere, music, and story still hit us with that wave of nostalgia.

I had a similar experience with GoldenEye 007. At release, it was groundbreaking split-screen multiplayer, mission-based objectives, and a control scheme that felt futuristic. But replaying it today, the aiming feels clunky compared to modern FPS standards, and the level design can feel restrictive. Yet despite that, the nostalgia remains powerful, because what we’re really remembering is the context: the excitement of playing it with friends, the sense of discovery, the fact that it was unlike anything else at the time.

So I think the tension you’re describing, loving a game for what it meant to you, while also recognizing its rough edges on replay, isn’t a contradiction. It’s actually a reminder of how both we and the medium have evolved. Nostalgia preserves the emotional memory, but replaying exposes the mechanics to modern scrutiny. Both perspectives are valid, and together they give us a fuller appreciation of why these games mattered in the first place."

 

[Cardboardtubeknight Cardboardtubeknight]

It was still pretty much the norm not to have item descriptions back then, to be fair. ROM space was very limited and they couldn't afford to spend it on extraneous text. The manuals would have some item descriptions at least. It was also the norm that you needed to speak to every NPC in earlier RPGs, but there weren't that many NPCs either, so it never bothered me. Later on RPGs started having towns with crazy amounts of NPCs so they had to change that.

Thing is, I did talk to every NPC except for that one. I even made it to where the king and queen moved into their room, so I had thought that was the needed transition. Turns out the NPC I had to talk to was right by the entrance to the ruins. Seemingly a recolor of a common NPC of which 80% only responded with "........" due to some curse within the town I was in. And as far as the items go, my discern mostly stems from how there is already 2 healing items. Using process of elimination I had thought "Okay theres two healing items (candy and chocolate) so surely these are two magic healing items (walnut and honey). I understand the limitations with there not being a description. I don't see how thats considered extraneous text when it should be pretty essential, but whatever. It's just odd that, as it so happens there are 3 healing items (candy chocolate and honey) and only 1 magic healing one (walnut). Plus, as I mentioned, honey is what is used for magic restoration in Paper Mario so I got it mixed up.

 

[UnDubious]

Thing is, I did talk to every NPC except for that one. I even made it to where the king and queen moved into their room, so I had thought that was the needed transition. Turns out the NPC I had to talk to was right by the entrance to the ruins. Seemingly a recolor of a common NPC of which 80% only responded with "........" due to some curse within the town I was in. And as far as the items go, my discern mostly stems from how there is already 2 healing items. Using process of elimination I had thought "Okay theres two healing items (candy and chocolate) so surely these are two magic healing items (walnut and honey). I understand the limitations with there not being a description. I don't see how thats considered extraneous text when it should be pretty essential, but whatever. It's just odd that, as it so happens there are 3 healing items (candy chocolate and honey) and only 1 magic healing one (walnut). Plus, as I mentioned, honey is what is used for magic restoration in Paper Mario so I got it mixed up.

When they literally have to cut 50% of the dialogue they wrote (which wasn't a crazy amount of text in the first place) or whatever because of space constraints then item descriptions are extraneous. It's too bad, don't get me wrong, but you can just try it and see what it does. It's not like there's hundreds of them, and like I said, it was probably in the manual which you would have had at the time. Even late SNES RPG tend to be 2-3 times larger than early ones, so by then they could afford to start including descriptions.
Missing that one NPC is definitely annoying. I don't think it's rare to have more healing items than MP items though, you tend to restore your health way more often.

 

[Morgana Veil]

Honestly, it seems like any old game I go replay now just isn't as good as I remember, though that's from a ten to twenty year gap between playing them the first time and again. No amount of rose-tinted glasses or nostalgia can make a bad game good. You will think it's good the first time due to being young, the first time playing, and dopamine hits from that new game. Hell, a lot of newer "older" games, like say DOOM Eternal, yeah, the game was amazing when I played it when it was new. Now I can barely drag myself through a couple of levels.

It's just not as fun as it was and doesn't give me that wow dopamine hit like it did years ago.

 

[Cardboardtubeknight Cardboardtubeknight]

When they literally have to cut 50% of the dialogue they wrote (which wasn't a crazy amount of text in the first place) or whatever because of space constraints then item descriptions are extraneous. It's too bad, don't get me wrong, but you can just try it and see what it does. It's not like there's hundreds of them, and like I said, it was probably in the manual which you would have had at the time. Even late SNES RPG tend to be 2-3 times larger than early ones, so by then they could afford to start including descriptions.
Missing that one NPC is definitely annoying. I don't think it's rare to have more healing items than MP items though, you tend to restore your health way more often.

Well I did see what it did... in the middle of combat... with enemies that require magic to beat them. Plus, the item shop merchant was also cursed, so in order to stock up I had to go all the way to Neko's which is a ways away.

 

[TruxtonTatsujin]

I can't say I've ever really experienced this. my tastes really haven't changed that much over the years, they've only expanded. Even games I played as a very young child I can still go back and have fun with. However I guess you could say my perspective is now wider. Certain games I used to think where "the best" I no longer do because I've played even better games since then, but that doesn't detract from the overall enjoyment of it, it just puts it into a different light. The overall quality of that game is unchanged.

I think what you’re describing is a really common phenomenon when revisiting older games, and it ties into both nostalgia and how game design philosophies have shifted over time.

Back in the 90s, a lot of RPGs and action-adventure titles, Secret of Mana included were designed with the assumption that players would experiment, talk to every NPC, and even rely on playground chatter, magazines, or strategy guides to fill in the gaps. That’s why you see things like vague item descriptions, progression locked behind a single NPC, or sudden difficulty spikes that expect you to have mastered a new mechanic immediately. At the time, those quirks weren’t necessarily seen as flaws, they were part of the challenge and discovery loop.

When we replay them now, though, our expectations have changed. Modern games tend to prioritize clarity, accessibility, and smoother onboarding. Tutorials are explicit, item descriptions are detailed, and progression is rarely hidden behind a single conversation trigger. So when we go back, the friction points stand out more sharply, even if the atmosphere, music, and story still hit us with that wave of nostalgia.

I had a similar experience with GoldenEye 007. At release, it was groundbreaking split-screen multiplayer, mission-based objectives, and a control scheme that felt futuristic. But replaying it today, the aiming feels clunky compared to modern FPS standards, and the level design can feel restrictive. Yet despite that, the nostalgia remains powerful, because what we’re really remembering is the context: the excitement of playing it with friends, the sense of discovery, the fact that it was unlike anything else at the time.

So I think the tension you’re describing, loving a game for what it meant to you, while also recognizing its rough edges on replay, isn’t a contradiction. It’s actually a reminder of how both we and the medium have evolved. Nostalgia preserves the emotional memory, but replaying exposes the mechanics to modern scrutiny. Both perspectives are valid, and together they give us a fuller appreciation of why these games mattered in the first place."

Some would see this as a deterrence but I actually really like having to figure things out for myself. I hate it when a game holds my hand and tells me how and what to do at every step of the way. A game should not be a friction free experience. The less you ask of the player the less they'll actually be engaged with the game. I wanna look at something in a game that makes me go "That's really fucked up" and then find some wild way to overcome it. That's the beauty of jank old games.

 

[PSVitaForever]

I feel like that's only normal, because you'll be in a different place and point in your life when you revisit things. Your sensibilities change, games change especially in a lot QoL ways depending on how far back you're doing, and even if you were in the exact same place you played it originally, time changes everything. But I've had this go both ways, where something didn't hit quite the same as it did, or it landed far better than it had initially. I think it's just life happening, it's not a bad thing.

This :)