I understand that trying others' recommendations can be frustrating when you don't end up agreeing with them, true. This, of course, would be one reason why renting a game first would be better, before you buy something. I realize that's....not an option anymore though...But anyway, yeah, others' Top 10 lists are sometimes confusing. Most people do, however, agree on the same basic, well-known classics for the SNES; Super Mario World, A Link to the Past, Final Fantasy VI, Secret of Mana, etc.  Maybe you're just most comfortable with just the classics, and that's all you need? I guess that's fair enough, although I still do contend the system had a lot of great, or even good, games.

Try them out by uhh..."borrowing" them for 24 hours and see if you like them first.

I know what you mean, Mage. It can be frustrating when you finally get your hands on a classic, highly praised SNES (or whatever) game and it's not as fun as you were hoping. Unfortunately though, that is the nature of the beast. A lot, like.. a lot, of people swear by older games because they either: played the shit out of them when they were little and are already good at them, or for the nostalgia factor. So you will find countless websites that go gaga (calling them masterpieces, etc.) over certain games, and thats fine, but they played with them when they first came out. It is incredibly hard to go back to retro games that you haven't played before and really get into them. There are plenty of reasons for that depending on the game, but that's an entirely different topic. As for your problem, the best advice I can give you is to look up gameplay on youtube or wherever and see if it looks fun, because thats the most important part. Then you can start looking up other reviews to see if the controls suck or if its even worth playing.

Maybe you're just most comfortable with just the classics, and that's all you need?

One can only play the same game so many times. That is why my Genesis game collection skyrocketed.

It is incredibly hard to go back to retro games that you haven't played before and really get into them.

The thing is I have never gone back I just had to change where I bought the games.

As for looking up gameplay is I would have to go home to look it up and go back to the store but this is an issues with thrift stores here since items could not be there when you go back since where at one thrift store all video games are $2.99 and at the other 'priced as marked' (the highest priced one was for $9.99 for Super Mario World.)

What SuperGarbage might have meant is, have an idea in mind of what games you want to look for before you go to a thrift store, flea market, etc. Look up gameplay and other information about games ahead of time, then when you next go to a thrift store, flea market, etc., you're all set in what you know you want. Then you...don't have to go home and..check and go back to the store. :P

ShirowWolf summed up what I was trying to say pretty well. You have to have an idea of what games you're looking for before you go and buy one. If you're going into a thrift store, buying a random game and expecting it to be awesome, then you're setting yourself up for disappointment.

You also have to rememeber that before the internet, we all felt your pain. You bought a title based on what your friends had to say, what the back of the box showed, how the commercial made you feel. That kind of thing. By getting frustrated, you're missing out on an experience so many of us can identify with. At least you're not paying full price for a bad title.

Knowing what I want before hand is more annoying since it can take years to find it (or haven't yet), plus randomly looking for games is more interesting since some games can have very little info for it online when it went under the radar. Also the majority of the games I randomly buy for the other platforms I have are interesting to play or in the case of a few I wish the game wasn't over yet.

    I guess I'm not sure what else to suggest then. Like Mr. K said, back in the days before there was real internet, most of us have probably done this; we got games we thought or hoped would be awesome, because we didn't have any real way to know what games were good and what games were bad (for example, I had such, uh, "NES classics' as Jaws and Top Gun...If only I had known....If only I had known!!). Sure, there were magazines that reviewed games, if you happened to subscribe to one, or buy one off the racks. Then again, magazines didn't always actually review games, or...not very well anyway, and often didn't really talk much about what was actually good or bad. Things are so much different now, and you have a lot more material at your disposal to help you decide what games you might want to pursue.

      You don't have to give up on these if you don't want to! But well, your only choices are to use different strategies or......give up. :P It sounds like you're unfortunately giving up, which, well, it's up to you. :/ I just hope you realize there are other options!

Then again, magazines didn't always actually review games, or...not very well anyway, and often didn't really talk much about what was actually good or bad.

Though we still live with a rigged video game journalism industry. It's all about getting to review the next big title. Not the truth.

When I was in college, I worked for a newspaper that was a subsidiary of The New York Times. I wrote a review of Magna Carta: Tears of Blood. This is probably the worst game of all time. Worse than ET on the Atari. I was not kind to it.

Two days after it ran in the paper, I got a call from the manager of one of the chain businesses in the area.

He was upset, two fold:

1. Because he'd sold substantially fewer copies of the game.
2. Because the store's corporate owners also had significant US stock interest in Atlus.

They pulled their advertising. The editor, while upset, agreed that I had the right to be critical of the bad game, because, unlike video game journalists, real journalism has ethical standards to meet. Though the entertainment editor never asked me to write another video game review.

You can't even trust the internet when it comes to a bad game.

You still need to use your best judgement and interpretations, I guess, as to whether a game might be good for you or not. My point was just that there are better resources now than when many of us were (a lot!) younger that can be of better assistance; there are plenty of ways to investigate games now that sure would have been nice in earlier days...

Nintendo Power was good back in the day but not anymore, now it looks and reads like every other video game magazine and that's not a good thing. As for the internet some games that are hated or reviewed on average around 50% are some of my favourite games (none on the SNES though), or people are comparing them to popular franchises and the game in question is not like or similar to them.

As for "You can't even trust the internet when it comes to a bad game." that is true since I have noticed that it is the way they are playing that is the problem or that the game is not like other games or other games in the same franchise.

I love where this thread is going.

I do think there is probably some pressure put on game reviewers to be more generous when reviewing AAA games. Most of the time though, I have already decided if I'm going to buy a blockbuster game before it comes out. There is usually enough information (gameplay footage, screenshots etc.) released in order to generate hype that I don't feel the need to wait for the review if I want the game. It also helps that almost every big AAA game these days is either a sequel or a reboot, so you already have an idea of what you're going to get.

What I do love about game review sites these days is that for the most part, they review everything. So when a groundbreaking game (like Limbo or Flower) comes out, it receives the reviews it deserves. If websites like IGN or Gamespot find a little indie game that they love, they are able to spread the word with unprecedented efficiency. Not only by using their main site, but also with their Twitter and Facebook pages; its insane (awesome).

However, when we get back to Mage's problem, it becomes a different issue. Sites that take the time to create in-depth reviews of retro games these days can basically say what they want. So you're either going to get the brutal honest truth, or a biased review fueled by nostalgia.

   Something to remember about reviews though is that although opinions do vary, obviously, and not everyone likes the same things, or for the same reasons, when multiple reviews say all or most of the same basic things, you might want to at least consider what they have to say. It doesn't matter if it's a new or old game either, mind you. A lot of games do become popular and best-sellers for a reason.

   In the  end, it does all come down to your own judgement, of course.

    And of course, when it comes to finding out why new games suck, especially AAA-titles, that's what we have Ben Croshaw for! >D

Something similar happened to me with the game Uforia.  I bought it on the Virtual Console because everyone said it was so great.  It's alright but not great and the sound is horrible.  I knew I should have bought something else.