You can't use classic games as examples. Screen resolutions were very fixed in that time, so they knew exactly how it would work. And yes, you're right, pixel fonts CAN be done well. But they're very hard to do well. And most of the time would still look better with "real" typefaces. I don't see any clashing created by it. I've thoroughly enjoyed it in the couple of games I've seen that have done it.

I wasn't using old games as examples, I was using old fonts as examples that pixel fonts can be done well.

And I can and will use them because the fixed resolution of those old games is still relevant. Even a modern pixel art game should use a fixed internal resolution because it makes no sense to design a pixel art RPG where someone playing at 4k can see miles further than someone playing at 720p.

If you use an internal resolution of say 640x360 then you can double that exactly to get 720p, triple it to get 1080p etc. This avoids the problem of "lumpy pixels" caused by non-integer scaling (and if you want to scale to a non-integer size then you use integer scaling to get most of the way there and then bilinear scaling to get the rest of the way).

I concede that a high resolution typeface is better than badly done pixel typeface, but it still looks incongruous. A good pixel typeface correctly fits best aesthetically. Really, the key thing is picking an internal resolution to develop for and sticking to it rather than having multiple elements with different levels of definition badly scaled and mixed together.

Few or none of the games are actually designed actually to run at low pixel count (/resolution). They just happen to use pixel art.

Some of the scaling does seem a bit weird, but overall the game looks quite good.

I'm so sick of developers (and players) justifying lack of basic functionality and quality of life with bullshit like this. nobody forces anyone to save scum, and in a single player game you're only cheating yourself anyway (and wasting a lot of time by reloading a billion times for a slightly better result, but if it makes you happy, go ahead), but just because some people don't have any willpower not to click on a button doesn't mean the game shouldn't have more options. and if there's a game that shouldn't have 'permadeath' it's definitely something like stardew valley. but hey, if you wanted, you could still play it like that, but the other way round is not possible. and the dev's second point is just laziness or incompetence (I assume the former), but I'm sure in the last 5 years he could've made it work somehow.

Stardew's save system works, especially within the game mechanics.

A full day is about 15 minutes real time excluding pauses. Usually more like 20-25 minutes with normal amount of pausing. That's acceptable duration between saves. Plus, the game allows you quick and easy pause that lasts indefinitely. That's easy to handle "things come up".

More importantly, the LOADING of saves is important to the game play. When you load a save, you're always starting as the day starts. You're going to start after every save restore by doing your morning chores, and then deciding where to go or what to do from there. In a game of overwhelming options like Stardew Valley, that's an important thing for player accessibility. It reduces cognitive load (rather, overload). Restoring a game mid-day would be an extraordinarily frazzling experience for most players; especially if it had been a couple days (or longer!) since their last play. SDV, you can easily load a save from months or YEARS ago and have no problem getting right back into it. You'll quickly reacquaint with your farm as you do the daily chores, and you'll set some goals for the day as you go through that.

This experience is easily compared to a couple other games. Two examples:
* Your choice of 4X game, such as Civilization 4. If you saved at some point during your turn, and load later -- even the next day -- you're going to spend a ton of time looking over everything before hitting 'end turn', to be sure you're not missing something. You have to take in the whole situation. If you have a habit of always saving at the start of the turn [or right before hitting end turn; effectively the same], you're reducing your wasted duplicated effort of looking over everything again since you know this.
* Or, closer to SDV, just a simple comparison to the sleep/day/night/saving in SDV vs Graveyard Keeper will immediately let you see how SDV's is superior. GYK lets you save any time (but only at your bed as a 'save point'). Thus, when you restore the game, you'll have NO IDEA what's going on. GYK has a lot of other things going against it, despite having numerous positive traits. But this is definitely a big one.

Well yes, and there is a tremendous number of 'pixel art indies' that mess this up. That was kind of my point. All of the ones that do it well use a low internal resolution and scale the output.
I love pixel art when it's done well, but I think there are a lot of developers who jump on the bandwagon without really understanding the different way of working involved with using pixel art.

Sorry, I'm with mqstout on this one. It's clearly a deliberate design decision and one I think is a fairly sensible choice. You're free to disagree about whether it's good or not, but it's definitely and issue of design philosophy rather than laziness. A "load once" suspend save would be a good idea, if you need to stop in a hurry, but as mqstout points out it's far preferable to start a play session at the beginning of a day rather than half way through.

I think you'd like this series. There are a couple of times where the author has played, "Too many typefaces" with the UI of a single screen.