I was just listening to the MGS4 edition of the Bombcast, and in it the guys mention that all of them played MGS4 in extended sessions, finishing the game in 2 or 3 sessions. And Jeff said that he stayed up till the early morning just to see it through till the ending. I found this interesting because this is exactly the way I played MGS4, and every game in the series for the first time. MGS2 was especially hard because I had school the next day and the credits didn't roll till 6:30 in the morning, leaving me with a half hour of sleep. But it was totally worth it. I don't normally play games for long periods at a time, it usually takes me a week or two to beat an average length single player game (i.e Uncharted 2 or Bioshock) but for some reason I just have to finish the Metal Gear games as soon as possible. I guess it's due to the strong focus on plot in those games, more so than other games. So yeah, did anyone else play them this way?

I recently came across this article http://www.bspcn.com/2008/06/09/the-best-n64-games-that-still-matter-today/ which discusses Nintendo 64 games that are still relevant today and it got me thinking about our old systems. Everyone likes playing their favourite childhood games and a great deal of the enoyment comes from the nostalgia of it. How much enjoyment comes from the game mechanics themselves? I love Goldeneye as much as anyone but who can honestly say that it's a better shooter than Call of Duty 4? I feel that this phenomenon only applies to the N64 generation though, because to me games on the SNES are still unrivalled in terms of what they do. When I play Donkey Kong Country 2 or Super Mario World I'm not playing it because I enjoyed it when I was younger (well, partly), I'm playing it because they're still the best 2D platformers ever released. So what older games are still the pinnacle of their genre to you? Which older games would you choose to play over a newer one based solely on how fun it is and not on the good memories you have of playing it?