Over the past few weeks, I've had a grand ol' time compiling lists of games from the past three decades (80s, 90s, and the 2000s) that have aged with a certain grace.  These were revolutionary games that changed the industry back in the day, and even today, still hold up well, and are fun to play.  But there are some games that have not done so well. I'm not talking about games that were crap to begin with, because those games didn't age well the minute they hit the market. I'm talking about games that were once great, but today, just can't compete. What once felt fresh and inviting, now seems clunky and antiquated.  Here's a list of the ones I'm talking about:

Final Fantasy (1990)

This game goes to show you how even one of the most influential games can be boring by today's standards.  This game redefined the RPG genre and made them incredibly popular here in the States.  Combining an in depth story with revolutionary gameplay mechanics (character classes, rare items, and the first game to feature a non first person POV during battles), Final Fantasy simultaneously saved Square Soft from the brink of bankruptcy while setting a new standard for the genre.

To play it today though, it's hard to see some of these things.  The game is poorly paced and requires far too much wandering around in the search of random battles just so players can level up.  Though it has been re-released a number of times, updated graphics can't really improve a game that now feels tedious - if not boring - to play.

Mortal Kombat (1992)

This arcade game exploded onto the scene in a great big slash of blood and gore.   It sparked one of the earliest and most vehement anti-video game political campaigns that eventually led to the creation of the ESRB.  This game survived and was popular for one thing: violence.  At the time of its release it was critically praised for its use of digitizing real actors to give it a sense of realism.  While that realism hasn't exactly held up, it was fairly impressive at the time to watch "real" people being brutalized and destroyed.

But even at its time, Mortal Kombat was far outclassed by other fighters.  The mechanics of the game were never terribly strong, and games like Street Fighter II and Killer Instinct (a couple years later yes) were hands down better in the gameplay department.  While it thrived on its ultra-violence in the time of Gears of War, GTA, and Mad World, Mortal Kombat has very little to bring to the table.

Tomb Raider (1996)

Lara Croft burst onto the scene in this action adventure game, and into the hearts of many males.  Despite having been released on the Sega Saturn first, this game is credited for much of the early success of the Playstation, while also helping to bridge the gap between 2D and 3D action platformers.

Tomb Raider sparked several successful sequels as well as movies, comics, and novels but going back to the first game makes some gamers wonder why?  The control scheme is unresponsive leaving many gamers trapped in walls or hung up on ledges, and when you could finally get your character to do what you wanted the camera would go wonky.  The game is a test in patience, but at least the newer iterations no longer suffer from such problems.

Resident Evil (1996)

One could say this game created the Survival Horror genre, or at the very least gave it its name.  Touted heavily for its use of atmosphere and the graphical power of the Playstation, it created one of the creepiest experiences gamers had ever had the pleasure of witnessing.  Puzzle solving, creepy monsters, and zombie shooting helped launch this into one of the most successful game franchises ever.

The problem with the game's controls are well known however.  Many gamers can claim to have been killed due to the lag in the controls and have experienced the frustration of the constant backtracking required to solve the many puzzles.  One of the main reasons Resident Evil 4 was so critically acclaimed was its restructuring of the controls, finally breaking from the clunky and unwieldy system that had been as much a staple of the series as the zombies.

Command & Conquer: Red Alert (1996)

Mixing in a little alternate world history, the Command & Conquer franchise branched out in grand style.  Red Alert did many things right and helped set RTS games on the path they lead to now.  It was highly praised for its easy to use interface, allowing players to queue commands and control their units (normal group selection and control) far easier than in the past.  The layout was intuitive; and it was welcoming to both new players and veteran commanders.  It was also one of the first RTS games to feature competitive online play and integrated a new unit balancing feature that the old standard rock-paper-scissors system.

These days it seems words like resource management and base build-up are taboo in the RTS genre.  Coming from an older generation where gathering resources and building your base faster than the other guy was still the norm, this game is definitely feeling its age.  With strategy games now (including the most recent C&C games) requiring the player to have... well actual strategy, it's hard to have fun with these older RTS titles.  In fact, the only reason to really come back to this title are for the all, too-short cut scenes of Tanya.

Crash Bandicoot (1996)

Sony did their absolute best to make Crash the poster boy for the PlayStation just like Mario was for Nintendo.  Going back to play this game, it's easy to see why he never fully caught on.  One of the preeminent requisites for a platforming game is solid controls, which Crash missed out on completely.  This game was before the glorious Dualshock controller was introduced so gamers had to move around with only the D-Pad.  While this works great for most platformers, that control scheme had a hard transition into the 3D realm.

Couple the wonky controls with an incredibly awkward camera angle and gamers found themselves dying frequently frustrating deaths.  While later games in the franchise proved far more successful (there's even clamor from fans wanting a new current-gen iteration), there is little to like from this particular title.  It's hard to imagine choosing this game over one like Mario 64.

Goldeneye 007 (1997)

Based on the James Bond flick of the same name, this title redefined the console FPS and created many of the staples now commonplace in the genre.  Finally console FPS aficionados were able to shoot each other in the face via split-screen mulitplayer.  These days split-screen is outdated, but at the time, being able to play with your friends was monumental.  Fragging each other in deathmatch, Golden Gun, Capture the Flag, or License to kill modes were incredibly fun to play.  Add in the different rules like the ever popular "Slappers Only" and you had a surprisingly deep multiplayer experience.

Unlike normal FPS games, it eschewed the traditional HUD instead using a health ring that appeared in your view even letting you know where you were being attacked from.  It's also credited with making the zoomable sniper rifle popular on the consoles.  Players were able to drop enemies from a distance with a precise head shot.  All of this sounding familiar?  It should.  Most FPS games use these structures in their games today, and have perfected those concepts, separating them from the clunkiness that keeps this title from being fun today.

Medal of Honor (1999)

Back before WWII games were cliche and everyone and their dog was making them, we were treated to Medal of Honor.  Based on the concept of taking the intensity of Saving Private Ryan and putting it into video game form, this was one of the first shooting games to put you in the shoes of the soldiers from WWII (it's hard to count games like Wolfenstein because of the lack of realism).  The success of this game helped spur a revolution in FPS games resulting in a slew of more realistically designed shooters for the masses.

The problem?  The games inspired by Medal of Honor and the WWII genre of shooters have skyrocketed in their attention to detail and features, which leaves the progenitor back in the dust.  Gamers these days like to have the visual satisfaction of implementing a well placed shot, but MoH refuses to give any.  There's no blood, and while this isn't a travesty it does take away from much of the realism the game was trying to convey.  While it hasn't aged terribly, the newer games offer far too much depth for this one to be fun to go back to.

It's easy to admit these games ate up plenty of gamers' time when they were initially released, but with the advances from games today it's hard to give them a second look.  Like milk that's gone sour, it's best to remember them when they were fresh. 

-Jordan 

[Edited By Moderator]