I think some of that has to do with the fact that a lot of those older games aren't really as fun as we remembered them to be.
There's some classic gems, to be sure, but they were also all we had.
There's some classic gems, to be sure, but they were also all we had.
By playing an old school game, your brain extracts these happy feelings from the memory. However, it's not a sustainable source of "fun" per say. As opposed to the newer games where "fun" is being caused by the game directly.
Restricting to arcade games is probably justified. I'd say we are in the golden age of video games right now---at least in terms of popularity. And you can still get remakes of all the good old games, or even play the originals.
Some stuff has aged, but some of the best games are in the past and have never been "reached" by any newer game. Ultima 7 is an example of such games - there's just nothing that comes close to it even in modern RPGs.
For 2D platforms the best was made in the past again. All the newer Mario games are either too easy or uninspired, or both.
There's a whole bunch of genres that has been completely a abandoned by publishers and devs for years (simulators, adventure games, RTS, even RPGs - sure we get Witcher 3 recently, but there's really nothing much else on the radar, there's too few of them now compared to how many we were getting back in the days).
It's been many years that the main production money goes into making GTA, First Person Shooters, Open World games, Racing games and that's about it. Of course the indie market is very much alive, but you can't compare the level of contents made 20 years ago by large teams versus 1-2 folks making games nowadays.
You might also find Age Of Decadence interesting - it's a super-indie made over a decade or so by a very, very dedicated team. I've not played it and I understand it's flawed, but it looks to be reaching for the same kind of freedom as Ultima VII.