I find myself asking this question quite often and i think i have a explanation.
The new games are made to be easily accessible for everyone, even for people who never touched a game before! When they o this they take away what i like about the old games--
They are complex!
When playing you're not just playing the game, you are playing a game from an age where it was the "nerds" who were the only one with the skills (A generalization i know). I recently purchased Arkania and loved it! You really had to know what you wanted from your party when playing or else it would all come down on you. Just like Fallout, while not as complex, you had to figure things out mostly on your own. All you had as quest log were just a short list.
Again this can be said the other way around, we can compare Duke with Call of Duty 2. Duke is really accessible! The controls take seconds to figure out and then you can kick some alien buttocks! Meanwhile Cod2, also fairly easy to pick up and play, is not as simple.
Thats why i think old games are awesome. They have complex games that takes time and has you thinking. While also having games where you can completely detach from the top floor.
And finally think about this. Spiritual successor to Baldurs gate, Dragon age. had enormous success? Coincidence?
Thats my two cents i hope (if this was not just one long insane rambling to you) that you learned something, thanks for reading!

Sounds like it'd be better to say that complex games are awesome.
Some of the old games managed to define an entire genre at once, I mean the arcades of the 80s & 90s were all built on the back of space invaders, pong and pacman simply because those games were like the pure distillation of basic gameplay. Still great fun and all but I'd take Civilization over pong any day

Good games are awesome.

'cause they are experienced, of course. Damn GILPs

So what does a fetish for a character in an older game become? Is Fall From Grace a CIOGILF?

Yes-- that is all.

Complexity if often a by-product of poor design.
Take X-Com Apocalypse as an example. It had many beneficial layers of complexity that built up the overall experience (which is why it remains one of my all time favourite games). But it also added complexity through having a shitty UI/menu system. This is not so good and is something that newer games have streamlined dramatically.
Then there's also UFO Aftershock as another example. It added complexity through bases that achieve nothing, go nowhere research and other facets of the game they really would have been better off leaving out entirely.
Compare Mass Effect 2 to Mass Effect. Mass Effect is more complex, but nothing of value is lost in the streamlining it underwent in Mass Effect 2. All that was lost was a lot of fiddling around as you switched ammo types between armour piercing, cryo and shredder rounds (as those where the only ones worth using anyway) as just one example. More effort was placed instead in storyline development and overall gameplay and it showed.

Complexity of good game design is a great feature, complexity of poor interface design is the vile spawn of the devil and bobby kotick and should be taken out and hit with a stick, played several games where a promising game was utterly destroyed thanks to controls designed by monkeys with severe brain damage

That's exactly how I had Omikron: The Nomad Soul described to me. Only with more emphasis on how promising it was.

Well I was thinking the avatar of the trope could be the console RTS...

Console RTS. If only that were oxymoronic. Instead it's just bloody moronic. But yes, console RTS certainly takes gold for Most Retarded Controls in a Game.

Old games are hot even with no chicks in it. Newest not at all. They need chicks because they lack guts. Like who made it.

Why? I played Red Alert on PS1 and controls were great... using the mouse =)

In general old games focused more on gameplay.
Developers had a lot more to say about the game and it's development and could be really creative.
Nowadays it seems to be more about the looks, hypes and money while creativity is seen as a financial risk.

We only think old games are better because all of the old mediocre crap doesn't jump to mind as quickly as the new mediocre crap we just played last week. Really, there are great old games and great new games.