Have you tried Tenebrae?

Wow, it looks amazing for a game that old and remade.

Almost all the early 3d polygon games, except some of the ones with pre-rendered backgrounds. The sprite games seemed to have held up better.
Tomb Raider looks absolutely atrocious. Ditto on Alone in the Dark. Alone in the Dark makes me want to cry. The graphics in that game are just atrocious. Also, X-Com. I can't believe how bad the graphics are and how slow the gameplay is. It's not alone, I can't seem to play a lot of the older strategy/tactics games. I forgot how slow moving they were.
I think the worst of the lot is Daggerfall. When this came out it was supposed to be revolutionary, if buggy. Today, I feel like my eyes are about to bleed if I play that. So much pixelation and screen tearing. Also the gameplay is terrible and the gamepace is glacial. Every town looks the same. The dialogue is atrocious , too. This is coming from someone who spent 1000+ hours on Morrowind, so I'm not impatient either. And then there's the music. Oh, God, it hurts. I really, really want to like it because in theory it's not much different from Morrowind and you can tell how much went into it, but I hate it completely. Ditto on the Goldbox games. I have all of them, but find them unplayable due to the graphics. I still love the Eye of the Beholder games though.
Also, most of the first wave of Ps1 titles (which looked like SNES games) e.g. Discworld and stuff like Battle Arena Toshinden.
Ditto Weclock's take on the DC. I agree completely. As a system, the DC was atrocious, but it had some good games.
In addition to MvC2 and Skies of Arcadia and of course Rez and Ikaruga, you also have one of my favorite DC titles - Maken X. Think something thematically similar to Killer 7 or No More Heroes. Except better. And done by the Shin Megami Tensei team. I still think the graphics and art direction on that one hold up exceedingly well. Also, it was years ahead of Breakdown, Riddick and Zeno Clash on the first person combat front. It still holds up well.
DC had a lot of wonderful and fairly obscure titles no one played, sadly many of which were re-released for other systems. Grandia II was another one. Pretty great JRPG game no one played that wasn't quite in the Squaresoft vein. It had character movement, unlike the Aquaresoft ATB. It was also pretty funny and lacked a sullen protagonist.
There was also Crazy Taxi, probably the most popular DC game. It basically started a subgenre of these games. Simpsons Road Rage did the same thing. It holds up very well, even if the soundtrack screams late 1990s. Play it.

Wooops I actually meant Secret of Monkey Island. Which probably shows about how much attention I gave the game. It just felt sparse and largely unfunny to me. The response it illicited from me is best described as '......bleh'. I did somewhat prefer Curse (at least what very little I have played of it) but mainly because I liked the art style in it.

wrong. you just don't like the game. doesn't mean it aged.
Both RA1 and CandC are incredibly fun and simple basic rts games. there is nothing there which could be considered as aged.
by nothing i mean graphics too. it is not worse than ds and most psp games. simple, clear.
so no. the games did not aged.
I must say Baldur's Gate aged pretty bad. many aspects such as graphics, music (dear god. what a monotony) control schemes are all very outdated.
for a new player it might be quite a hassle and a pain in the ass to get into the game
(btw. I am having a huge blast when playing the game atm. trying to play it first time now is a bit of pain tough)

Agreed. The C&C games have not aged as the graphics are still as functional now as they were then, it wasn't really a looker in its day either. The FMV is still as gloriously cheesy as it always was and ignoring the lower resolution I still enjoy watching them.

I agree entirely. When games rely on a new technology then they very quickly age as the technology ages. Just look at the original Ridge Racer. Funny you say X-Com though as I still play that. I don't think it has lost any of its luster even after all these years.

Don't get me wrong I love old games and probably pick more older titles than new ones. I love the old LucasArts adventures for instance, they are all very fun to play. However I really can't get into any of the Sierra adventures at all. The original Space Quest games and King's Quest games I find nearly unplayable. It just has such a clunky interface, you can die in about billion different ways and I can never find out what to do constantly. This could be some of the charm of playing them but I just can't figure out what to do at all. I still have the Leisure Suit Lary Collection somewhere but haven't installed it because I'm not sure how 'adult' the humour is (I'm 15 btw).

I remember thinking that Halloween Harry/Alien Carnage was really good when I downloaded the original shareware version. Now that it's been released as freeware, I haven't bothered to beat the first episode yet. I dislike the concept of having to find and rescue all those civilians. It would have been much funner as an updated version of Duke Nukem 2.
Theme Park. While still fun, it has a lot of glaring flaws that disappear in Roller Coaster Tycoon. Having played it recently again, I couldn't figure out how to re-order stuff for the stalls. And I remembered why so much micro-management can ruin your fun. I used to race my brothers from our bus stop to play this game after school.
Hocus Pocus, Mystic Towers, two shareware games publised by Apogee. I used to like both of these games when I was twelve. I find them to be barely playable today when compared to the really good Apogee titles.
Warcraft I. Someone mentioned this already for reasons I won't cover again. I will just say that I wish there was a fan-patch so you can streamline the controls. I still love the look, sound and feel of the game. It's just that managing your units is a pain in the arse.
X-Com- Terror from the Deep. It's basically the same game as the first (one of the greatest of all time; it is a shame that I can't find a version that isn't so buggy, today.) But the second entry has annoyingly long missions that can eat up so much time. Plus, other than more variety, there really isn't anything cooler or more fun about this game than the first. I pretty much like everything better about the first.
For those complaining about Goldeneye, Quake, and Doom. When did you start gaming, when Xbox came out? Jeeeeeeeeez!

I loved Red Alert 2, and RA1 was ridiculously difficult. The problem with their newest games is that the tactics haven't changed at all. I still use the same Mass Unit Rush and wipe out everything.
Halo 1 > Halo 3/ODST. It's awesome on the computer, though most people lag like shit.
Half-Life - You've forfeited your privilege to talk. I will say, however, that when I go back and play it, I cheat like hell ("impulse 101" 100x). By extension I still play CS 1.6.
"Every Dreamcast Game" - Get out. Jet Grind Radio, Shenmue, though it isnt perfect, is still playable. Ikaruga was a DC release in Japan before it was ported to the GC in the States. Marvel vs Capcom 2 on the DC was better than its PS2 counterpart. I'm sure if we went through even a few other Dreamcast games, you would retract this statement faster than Ted Haggard apologized to his wife.
"except for Super Smash Brothers" This one is contested. I play it, but I still find the controls clumsy, and all N64 games I try to play now do strain my eyes. However, I still enjoy SSB and Star Fox 64.
And your stance on PS1 games?
-------------------------------------------------------------------
One game I liked as a kid and simply cannot come back to is Ecco the Dolphin/Tides of Time. The hitbox is about 50% larger than your sprite, and add on top of that narrow passageways, no sufficient map system (your sonar doesn't tell you squat), and enemies quick to respawn. The only reason I still would come back to Ecco is the music, and the weird thing about that is the Master System soundtrack and the Game Gear soundtrack are both better than the Genesis version.

Deus Ex. I have developed a theory regarding old games.
Each type of game, differing for each, has a maximum length of time after it's released that a player can play it during before it becomes largely obsolete. This condition is NOT the case for gamers who ORIGINALLY played the title when it was current tech. For example;
Giving a 15 year old of today Doom 1 would not make much sense. Giving a 30 year old who PLAYED Doom during the halcyon days makes perfect sense.
Certain genre's have shorter "windows", primarily FPS/Platformer games, while others have longer windows such as Strategy/Simulation. Generally, it's the graphics that become obsolete first, and then the overall tech/engine.

It isn't even remade. The game itself, I mean. Tenebrae is only an engine capable of interpreting the original Quake datafiles. So all the models and textures are exactly the same as they always were. The difference lies in how they are rendered. Tenebrae uses techniques such as stencil shadows and per pixel lighting, that weren't available when Quake was made originally. The hardware wasn't up to the task either. But it makes a hell of a difference, doesn't it? :-)

I would say any spec ops game. The controls are awkward, the enemies can see farther then you, are deadly accurate at any range, your AI partner is stupid, and the game is namely move 5 steps stop, shoot and repeat. I did manage to get the the final operation but I got a bug I believe and all my saves were gone. Spec ops 2 was so buggy in training that I never played the first level.
Maybe I'm not that picky, but the only two games mentioned here that deserve that category is alone in the dark and the first two elder scroll games. The first two elder scroll games look awfully pixialted and quite muddy. Same with alone in the dark except it looks like bad MS paint the was compressed horribly.

Don't get me wrong, I love the Command and Conquer series, or rather, remember them fondly. Gameplay wise, it was revolutionary, but now it's incredibly stale.
When you play something like Dawn of War, Panzers, Company of Heroes, World in Conflict, Rise of Nations and so on and so forth.. It can be very difficult to get back into C&C.
I will always remember the Command and Conquer series for it's incredibly hammy FMV, Hell March, and awesome vibe. The gameplay has just aged badly in my opinion.

Jedi Outcast. just played through it and the level design is some of the worst ever, instant deaths, running about not knowing where to go, getting lost and just doing pointless objectives that are no fun whatsoever..i seem to remember enjoying it when it first came out. Academy is better though.

Really? the graphics are horrible but the gameplay is more advanced than anything else out there. i would say first half an hour for new players might be difficult trying to adjust to the world. after that the age of the game has no impact on how much they enjoy it.
totally agreed. reason why candc did not age badly in my opinion. the graphics is simple and not pixelized, the gameplay is also simple yet has own appeal.