This guy totally misses the point of some of these games being great. He said of Goldeneye:
The reason I believe this game is overrated is because shooter games like this age terribly. There are much more recent shooter titles which also have aged terribly and certainly wouldn’t warrant a remake.
He's basically contradicting himself here. The whole reason Goldeneye was good at the time was because... it was good at the time
. I went on a stag party with close friends a few months ago, and at the cottage we rented out for the shenanigans was an N64 and a copy of Goldeneye. Needless to say, not much time was given to it, because we also had a PS3 to play with, but that's not to say that I didn't love playing it as a kid.
Then of sonic:
Back in the good old days of 1991, I remember so fondly, well I wasn’t born yet but apparently Sonic the Hedgehog made his debut appearance. Sonic was exactly what SEGA needed in response to the mega successful Mario. The first Sonic game was okay, but SEGA made a habit of ‘whoring’ Sonic out and producing title after title of pointless games.
WAIT A MINUTE, this guy wasn't even BORN when the original Sonic The Hedgehog game came out? This basically means that he wasn't even old enough
to play ANY of the original sonic games (Sonic 1 (1991), Sonic 2 (1992), Sonic 3 (1994), Sonic and Knuckles (1994)). The whole part of the classic franchise passed him by when it was in it's golden era. Granted I wasn't old enough to play Sonic 1 when it first came out, but I remember buying Sonic 2 when it was released, and for their time, they were fantastic games (I'd argue they're still great games to this day).
I'll agree that Sonic the Hedgehog is basically Sega's brand whore now (Sonic and Mario at the Olympics anyone?), but the new sonic games get the crappy reviews they deserve. The original STH was a classic, tainting those games with the shovelware of the latest games is BS.
This whole article is basically clickbait.