Main Nostalgia Filter Discussion

Collapse/Expand Topics

01:27:49 PM Nov 6th 2013
Why exactly is nostalgia considered such a bad thing? It's just your mind's way of making you feel better and reminding you of the past. Not to mention the cases where it is simply a reality that the older version was objectively better.
01:58:55 PM Nov 6th 2013
Nostalgia = Not a bad thing. Nostalgia Filter = Not a good thing when it makes you unable to appreciate the current or skews with your perception of reality.

07:57:59 AM Oct 10th 2013
How does one go about removing the Filter? Should that be part of the article?
05:21:08 AM Oct 11th 2013
I suspect that the process of removing the filter is similar to the general process of disillusionment: broad research into the topic and experience. The hardest parts are finding motivation to do the research, and developing a willingness to open one's mind and abandon preconceptions.

As for whether this should be included or not, I suppose there could be a discussion. I personally feel that, as this is a guide to recognizing tropes in culture rather than a self-help guide, perhaps instructions for personal improvement are a tad presumptuous, or could be included in a separate "Useful Notes" page.
05:07:14 AM May 27th 2014
The best way to take the Filter off is to actually go back and watch/play/read the things you're viewing through it. If it actually was better, it still will be, and if it wasn't, it'll be apparent pretty quickly.
08:22:45 PM Aug 2nd 2013
So, if anyone says that the way a thing used to be is better than present, it's this trope? Please somebody say no!
07:06:42 AM Jan 24th 2013
edited by MartyD82
I think this trope tends to be over-generalized both in and out of TV Tropes. While there's certainly a TENDENCY for adults to become too wrapped up in the Nostalgia Filter, not every adult does this. In fact, I'm not even sure the majority of adults do. I just added this point to the main trope description.
12:50:37 PM Jan 12th 2015
I'd argue the bigger issue I see over-generalizing is the people that use "nostalgia" as a buzz-word insult. Where anyone who dares have an opposite opinion and like something better from the past is considered to be blinded by nostalgia.

Outside of this internet myopia, i'd say this is a very limited trope. Some people may let their past blind them, but i think most people don't. More people I see expand their tastes as they get older, not limit them.

Perhaps that is the reason such attacks have to be limited to online areas, because in real life both the people who are so blinded by the past and people that attack people over it, aren't really people anyone wants to listen to.
11:33:32 AM Oct 29th 2012
Just a question... Is there a real reason why out-of-universe examples aren't allowed? The reason given is that this trope applies to everything, but that can't be true, because many works started out before anyone can currently feel any "nostaliga" for them. Take, for instance, a show that started airing in 2005. There's no way that the Nostalgia Filter could really apply to that.

I suspect that the real reason is that we want to avoid complaining. But if we allow out-of-universe examples for Ruined Forever and They Changed It, Now It Sucks!, how would it be any different here?

If I'm just being suspicious, ignore this.
11:34:46 AM Oct 29th 2012
Ah, Ruined Forever is Darth Wiki. Never mind.
11:07:07 PM Jul 15th 2011
Does this count as an example? -

In the "Copy Machine" segment of Dane Cook's "Rough Around the Edges" act, he hints twice this trope. The second hint is what caught my ear... "Any time that you were alive, you think that's the generation that is the shit."
11:32:34 AM Apr 14th 2011
Would First Installment Wins be related to this?
12:03:21 PM Jun 7th 2011
First Installment Wins is more related to Sequelitis. The Nostalgia Filter requires more time to go into effect — usually enough time that your perception of something is more in how you remember it, not having actually seen it in ten years or more, than in how it actually was.
08:18:58 AM May 9th 2010
Stop with the natter! This isn't a mass blog!
02:48:44 PM Apr 22nd 2010
Chopped for Natter:
  • Also, the tendency to make the graphics a main selling point (disregarding, among others, the story) can most likely be pinpointed towards the PlayStation, which came after the SNES. Which is, of course, also an example in itself as the older fans grew up without pretty graphics and thus are more likely to shun games that concentrate on them.
    • The whole "they only care about graphics nowadays!" argument is completely invalid. Developers always cared about both graphics and gameplay, ever since the first steps of video game developing - they just do the better they can with the system they have. People fail to see that developers of SNES games were just as worried about graphics as any PS3-game developer is nowadays. But the whole "Sprites" or "Primitive 3D" was commonplace at the time...and praised. (Even the first Alone in the Dark had rather stunning graphics for its time.) And even "Sprites" are yelled at on "next-gen" technologies when they're not used by Indie-Gaming developers, who get a free pass on this.
    • If game developers really cared as much as the Gaming Methuselahs claim they did in their generation(s), that is, not at all, then they wouldn't even use stuff like video cards&Drivers, graphics processing, and other such technologies used to display graphics or even enhance it. It's incredible how, outside of the gaming industry, only about ten or eleven of us actually acknowledge this.
    • Your Mileage May Vary. Why do a lot of (not all) modern games look so unnecessarily drab and dull compared to the low-polygon/pixel stuff from the early 90s?
Collapse/Expand Topics