Jump to content
Flojomojo

"I recommend at least 3 hours of this a day"

Recommended Posts

What makes me laugh is that Dad's crusty old game from when he was a kid is GoldenEye from the late 90s.

I guess if the artist had shown an old 2600 game, most folks wouldn't even have recognized it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...yeah, but if you were a kid in the 2600's heyday, your children are likely grown now... or at least, in their very late teens.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...yeah, but if you were a kid in the 2600's heyday, your children are likely grown now... or at least, in their very late teens.

Depends when you started! Mine is 11.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...yeah, but if you were a kid in the 2600's heyday, your children are likely grown now... or at least, in their very late teens.

True - more likely to be grandpa versus grandkid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

only if you started having kids when you were like 20.

A lot of people do. I mean, I didn't, but it's hardly uncommon.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...yeah, but if you were a kid in the 2600's heyday, your children are likely grown now... or at least, in their very late teens.

 

I was born in 1976 and my only child is 2 months old. :P

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since both Atari and Golden Eye were parts of my childhood the gap between them doesn't seem that huge. It doesn't seem grandparent huge. I mean, when I watch Stranger Things it reminds me of my childhood and when my grandmother watched Little House on the Prairie it reminded her of hers.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Three hours at a time was basically my Goldeneye limit. I was definitely one of these guys: https://thehardtimes.net/harddrive/archeologists-discover-four-guys-dorm-still-playing-goldeneye/

 

My second college roommate (who I took on as a roommate because he and his first roommate were going to kill each other; I got along with my first roommate just fine) got an N64 with Wave Race and Mario 64 at release, and came back with Goldeneye once it came out. I'm not entirely sure we ever played another game for the rest of that year, and maybe not at all the next. There were four of us always playing License to Kill mode (one hit == dead) with power weapons. It was a riot.

 

No way my daughter would play Goldeneye with me now, though. She likes Mario 64 but otherwise the N64 is too "blocky" for her...as she goes off to play Minecraft. :wtf:

Edited by derFunkenstein
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

True - more likely to be grandpa versus grandkid.

My boys are just now in their later teens and I the 2600 was certainly the 'in' thing when I was kid. I'm also a grand parent as well with 7 grandkids technically.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was born in 1976 also and have no children. Too old for children.

 

Same. I don't plan on ever having children.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My kids will gladly play beat'em ups and the like on MAME or Coin Ops. They're 11 and 7 and we have played through a lot of Capcom ones together, Final Fight, Knights of the Round, Shadow Over Mystara, etc.

 

But the absolute favs are:

 

Night Slashers

Armored Warriors

Aliens vs. Predator

 

We've finished these enough times that I am sick of them!

 

I think simpler to play games are the key. If my 11 year old wants to actually have to learn about a game to be good, develop skills etc...well he'd rather put his time into Fallout. He's not going to play Goldeneye learning maps and weapon types for hours on end to get competitive. Also..when introducing a kid to a new game...sometimes you gotta be like my grandfather teaching me chess....and just let the kid win once in a while. Maybe MORE than once in a while.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the age thing- if we assume 'being a kid during the 2600's heyday' means being 10 in 1979 (to allow for a little wiggle room around the release date, as well as 'starting age'), and that 25-35 is when you're most likely to be having kids... *does some math*… then your kids would, in fact, be 25-35 now & having their own kids.

 

Sorry folks, you're old. But don't worry, my Nintendo-era self will be joining you shortly... :woozy:

 

I think simpler to play games are the key. If my 11 year old wants to actually have to learn about a game to be good, develop skills etc...well he'd rather put his time into Fallout. He's not going to play Goldeneye learning maps and weapon types for hours on end to get competitive. Also..when introducing a kid to a new game...sometimes you gotta be like my grandfather teaching me chess....and just let the kid win once in a while. Maybe MORE than once in a while.

 

Holy crap YES- being able to properly introduce someone to a new game absolutely means throwing matches. It's terribly discouraging to lose constantly as a beginner, & it's a quick way to make someone assume they'll never be 'good enough' and quit.

 

Plus, it involves YOU being good enough at the time to intentionally learn to play sub-optimally. I remember teaching kids back in my Yugioh judge days... and sometimes they were so bad, all the throwing away of good cards, careful holding of your hand to disguise how many cards you're not playing, pretending you're not attacking becuase you're setting up a combo, etc. still won't let you throw the game! But you can't just obviously let them win, that's just as discouraging. It's actually kind of hard to discreetly throw a game- probably easier with a videogame, but still.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the age thing- if we assume 'being a kid during the 2600's heyday' means being 10 in 1979 (to allow for a little wiggle room around the release date, as well as 'starting age'), and that 25-35 is when you're most likely to be having kids... *does some math*… then your kids would, in fact, be 25-35 now & having their own kids.

 

 

IF you were born in 1969, you'd be 10 in 1979, which I agree is Peak Atari Age

IF you had children at age 25, yes they'd be 25 now

 

You'd have to have children at age 15 for them to be 35 now (kid born in 1984) or be born in 1959 to have a 35yo at age 25 yourself

 

assumption: many Atari kids are "late bloomers," meaning no rush to breed

further assumption: many people on here are male, meaning much less of a ticking biological clock

 

personal: my kid was born in 2007, when I was 37yo. I am considered an "older parent" but well within the norms

 

conclusion: your math is wrong, your logic is fuzzy, your assumptions are whack, but we like you anyway. Just a little less than if you were of Atari age.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the age thing- if we assume 'being a kid during the 2600's heyday' means being 10 in 1979 (to allow for a little wiggle room around the release date, as well as 'starting age'), and that 25-35 is when you're most likely to be having kids... *does some math*… then your kids would, in fact, be 25-35 now & having their own kids.

 

Sorry folks, you're old. But don't worry, my Nintendo-era self will be joining you shortly... :woozy:

I was 10 in 1991 and it was only a few months later when the VCS was discontinued. Up until then I felt like I was in the 2600's heyday because I knew the 2600 was a current option just like the NES and it was an option I experienced before the NES launched. 10 would have felt late to start gaming. I was playing Atari before I could ride a bike.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Man I was BORN in 79. I was given a garbage bag of Atari games and the 2600 as a hand me down from step sisters in 86-87, when they got their NES. Try being an "Atari kid" (because I had no choice!!!) in the NES era....it sucked. Big time. I use to lie and tell friends that I had a NES but it had been put in the attic because I was bad!

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

You'd have to have children at age 15 for them to be 35 now (kid born in 1984) or be born in 1959 to have a 35yo at age 25 yourself

 

…...

 

conclusion: your math is wrong, your logic is fuzzy, your assumptions are whack, but we like you anyway. Just a little less than if you were of Atari age.

 

To be fair, I was doing said math at 6am after very little sleep- I hope you'll forgive me for ranging in the wrong direction.

 

I like you all too- let me know if you need any bengay or help crossing the street. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Man I was BORN in 79. I was given a garbage bag of Atari games and the 2600 as a hand me down from step sisters in 86-87, when they got their NES. Try being an "Atari kid" (because I had no choice!!!) in the NES era....it sucked. Big time. I use to lie and tell friends that I had a NES but it had been put in the attic because I was bad!

 

All through the 80s I had an Atari 2600 and then a 7800 because of its backwards compatibility. I was very happy to finally get a NES in 1989.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...