The "General Games Chat" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
I've been meaning to talk about this for ages... What, with the new consoles being released and the graphical prowess of the Next-Gen games reaching new heights. But do Super Mario Bros. and Sonic the Hedgehog still rule?
I'd have to say NO.
Actually, i'd like to say that I still enjoy older games... playing Toe Jam and Earl on my Mega Drive for the first time in ages made me realise that the whole concept of graphics AFTER gameplay was a huge blessing to the industry, especially in the early stages.
But after experiencing console games from the 8-Bit Sonic to the 128-Bit Sonic and from the 8-Bit 4x4 Offroad to the 128-Bit GTA3, i've come to the conclusion that gaming is better now.
The way I see it, is that if games were all 2D, everything would be like something done before. Games would look samey and franchises would wither and die quicker than a rose in hydro-sulphuric-killing-death acid. You can change storylines as much as you want, but at the end of the day, if you can't get it out of you head that you're playing a game that looked like that game that looked like that other game, you're not going to enjoy the game you're playing! (Oh no, i've gone cross-eyed!)
Games now are far better than they were before... real-time lighting makes games look more realistic... graphics that make characters look like real people make games more personal and easier to relate to. It isn't just about graphics either... the use of sound in games has exceled anything i've ever heard, the music in Conker, the sound effects in GT3. Gameplay, it seems, hasn't changed much, games are still as exciting and as boring as they ever were, but I can't help but think the graphics, sound and control of a game is what makes the gameplay - is there such a thing as gameplay?!
One pro for older games is that, simply, they were sorted for graphics... regardless of developer, games would look good. You could have asked for a top-down car racing game and you'd have got the same results from Polyphony Digital as you would Swordspines. But still, I don't think anyone can really say that older games are more impressive. For their time, maybe they wee good, but games nowadays are so real. You look at The Rock in the Raw is War clips for the X-Box and you see The Rock. Not a blotch of squares.
I'm NOT knocking older games, and I realise that alot of what I say is graphics related, but I can honestly say, that for me, modern games with their fancy lighting and attractive 3D models, and their digital sound and expansive 3D environments do more for me now than the older games like NBA Jam and Snake Rattle and Roll (Very Good Game) ever did.
In closing, I'd like to say that I appreciate older games, they've bought me years of joy... but there's a time and a place for everything, and digging up games of the past can only ruin what you once thought was the best game around. It's time for 3D, impressive graphics and expansive worlds... Day-Night time changing, fully polygonal vehicles, digital sound and new ideas.
Old games aren't dead, as such, but like the legends of this world, they have to pass on the torch, and sit back and marvel at what they've helped to create.
Game
I'd have to say NO.
Actually, i'd like to say that I still enjoy older games... playing Toe Jam and Earl on my Mega Drive for the first time in ages made me realise that the whole concept of graphics AFTER gameplay was a huge blessing to the industry, especially in the early stages.
But after experiencing console games from the 8-Bit Sonic to the 128-Bit Sonic and from the 8-Bit 4x4 Offroad to the 128-Bit GTA3, i've come to the conclusion that gaming is better now.
The way I see it, is that if games were all 2D, everything would be like something done before. Games would look samey and franchises would wither and die quicker than a rose in hydro-sulphuric-killing-death acid. You can change storylines as much as you want, but at the end of the day, if you can't get it out of you head that you're playing a game that looked like that game that looked like that other game, you're not going to enjoy the game you're playing! (Oh no, i've gone cross-eyed!)
Games now are far better than they were before... real-time lighting makes games look more realistic... graphics that make characters look like real people make games more personal and easier to relate to. It isn't just about graphics either... the use of sound in games has exceled anything i've ever heard, the music in Conker, the sound effects in GT3. Gameplay, it seems, hasn't changed much, games are still as exciting and as boring as they ever were, but I can't help but think the graphics, sound and control of a game is what makes the gameplay - is there such a thing as gameplay?!
One pro for older games is that, simply, they were sorted for graphics... regardless of developer, games would look good. You could have asked for a top-down car racing game and you'd have got the same results from Polyphony Digital as you would Swordspines. But still, I don't think anyone can really say that older games are more impressive. For their time, maybe they wee good, but games nowadays are so real. You look at The Rock in the Raw is War clips for the X-Box and you see The Rock. Not a blotch of squares.
I'm NOT knocking older games, and I realise that alot of what I say is graphics related, but I can honestly say, that for me, modern games with their fancy lighting and attractive 3D models, and their digital sound and expansive 3D environments do more for me now than the older games like NBA Jam and Snake Rattle and Roll (Very Good Game) ever did.
In closing, I'd like to say that I appreciate older games, they've bought me years of joy... but there's a time and a place for everything, and digging up games of the past can only ruin what you once thought was the best game around. It's time for 3D, impressive graphics and expansive worlds... Day-Night time changing, fully polygonal vehicles, digital sound and new ideas.
Old games aren't dead, as such, but like the legends of this world, they have to pass on the torch, and sit back and marvel at what they've helped to create.
Game
Armatige Shanks wrote:
> Goten wrote:
> Ghouls and Ghosts,
You prefer Ghouls and Ghosts to Ghosts
> and Goblins? ...
>But saying that, I am still waiting for the next gen
> >scrolling beat
> em up that will live up to the Streets of Rage
> name.
I think theres a GBA version of Streets of Rage on the way... ???
*Goten gets really excited*
I will certainly by this if it is released.
I don't suppose you know if Ghouls and Ghosts might get a re-release as well.
> Goten wrote:
> Ghouls and Ghosts,
You prefer Ghouls and Ghosts to Ghosts
> and Goblins? ...
>But saying that, I am still waiting for the next gen
> >scrolling beat
> em up that will live up to the Streets of Rage
> name.
I think theres a GBA version of Streets of Rage on the way... ???
*Goten gets really excited*
I will certainly by this if it is released.
I don't suppose you know if Ghouls and Ghosts might get a re-release as well.
I wouldn't say that games are getting better... just the the emphasis of games is different.
In the past games were mostly about the gameplay. And that's about all. There weren't huge storylines, nor were there cinematic cut scenes with music so good it could have been written by Mozart. Thus games like Mario Cart (SNES) were created- no story, no themes, just pure fun.
Now, of course, the market expects games to have great graphics, brilliant music, as well as the gameplay.
But will there ever be a racer as fun as Mario Cart? For all modern technologies chips and circuits, I'd have to say no.
Sonic
In the past games were mostly about the gameplay. And that's about all. There weren't huge storylines, nor were there cinematic cut scenes with music so good it could have been written by Mozart. Thus games like Mario Cart (SNES) were created- no story, no themes, just pure fun.
Now, of course, the market expects games to have great graphics, brilliant music, as well as the gameplay.
But will there ever be a racer as fun as Mario Cart? For all modern technologies chips and circuits, I'd have to say no.
Sonic
Goten wrote:
> Ghouls and Ghosts,
You prefer Ghouls and Ghosts to Ghosts and Goblins? ...
>But saying that, I am still waiting for the next gen >scrolling beat
> em up that will live up to the Streets of Rage name.
I think theres a GBA version of Streets of Rage on the way... ???
> Ghouls and Ghosts,
You prefer Ghouls and Ghosts to Ghosts and Goblins? ...
>But saying that, I am still waiting for the next gen >scrolling beat
> em up that will live up to the Streets of Rage name.
I think theres a GBA version of Streets of Rage on the way... ???
Mario Bros and Sonic will always have their days on the NES and the MegaDrive
The Game wrote:
You could have asked
> for a top-down car racing game and you'd have got the same results from
> Polyphony Digital as you would Swordspines.
Lol.
I don't think the company is that advanced yet...
Anyway, although 2D games are inferior, they're a huge breath of fresh air compared to modern games.
When Gameplay was simple, but difficult.
You expected to dies several times rather than breeze through the game first go.
I've not explained it so well but they just don't make games like they used to, and that's why Snes games are so great to play.
You could have asked
> for a top-down car racing game and you'd have got the same results from
> Polyphony Digital as you would Swordspines.
Lol.
I don't think the company is that advanced yet...
Anyway, although 2D games are inferior, they're a huge breath of fresh air compared to modern games.
When Gameplay was simple, but difficult.
You expected to dies several times rather than breeze through the game first go.
I've not explained it so well but they just don't make games like they used to, and that's why Snes games are so great to play.
Lets have streets of rage 3d for the dreamcast or the Game cube
I've been meaning to talk about this for ages... What, with the new consoles being released and the graphical prowess of the Next-Gen games reaching new heights. But do Super Mario Bros. and Sonic the Hedgehog still rule?
I'd have to say NO.
Actually, i'd like to say that I still enjoy older games... playing Toe Jam and Earl on my Mega Drive for the first time in ages made me realise that the whole concept of graphics AFTER gameplay was a huge blessing to the industry, especially in the early stages.
But after experiencing console games from the 8-Bit Sonic to the 128-Bit Sonic and from the 8-Bit 4x4 Offroad to the 128-Bit GTA3, i've come to the conclusion that gaming is better now.
The way I see it, is that if games were all 2D, everything would be like something done before. Games would look samey and franchises would wither and die quicker than a rose in hydro-sulphuric-killing-death acid. You can change storylines as much as you want, but at the end of the day, if you can't get it out of you head that you're playing a game that looked like that game that looked like that other game, you're not going to enjoy the game you're playing! (Oh no, i've gone cross-eyed!)
Games now are far better than they were before... real-time lighting makes games look more realistic... graphics that make characters look like real people make games more personal and easier to relate to. It isn't just about graphics either... the use of sound in games has exceled anything i've ever heard, the music in Conker, the sound effects in GT3. Gameplay, it seems, hasn't changed much, games are still as exciting and as boring as they ever were, but I can't help but think the graphics, sound and control of a game is what makes the gameplay - is there such a thing as gameplay?!
One pro for older games is that, simply, they were sorted for graphics... regardless of developer, games would look good. You could have asked for a top-down car racing game and you'd have got the same results from Polyphony Digital as you would Swordspines. But still, I don't think anyone can really say that older games are more impressive. For their time, maybe they wee good, but games nowadays are so real. You look at The Rock in the Raw is War clips for the X-Box and you see The Rock. Not a blotch of squares.
I'm NOT knocking older games, and I realise that alot of what I say is graphics related, but I can honestly say, that for me, modern games with their fancy lighting and attractive 3D models, and their digital sound and expansive 3D environments do more for me now than the older games like NBA Jam and Snake Rattle and Roll (Very Good Game) ever did.
In closing, I'd like to say that I appreciate older games, they've bought me years of joy... but there's a time and a place for everything, and digging up games of the past can only ruin what you once thought was the best game around. It's time for 3D, impressive graphics and expansive worlds... Day-Night time changing, fully polygonal vehicles, digital sound and new ideas.
Old games aren't dead, as such, but like the legends of this world, they have to pass on the torch, and sit back and marvel at what they've helped to create.
Game
I'd have to say NO.
Actually, i'd like to say that I still enjoy older games... playing Toe Jam and Earl on my Mega Drive for the first time in ages made me realise that the whole concept of graphics AFTER gameplay was a huge blessing to the industry, especially in the early stages.
But after experiencing console games from the 8-Bit Sonic to the 128-Bit Sonic and from the 8-Bit 4x4 Offroad to the 128-Bit GTA3, i've come to the conclusion that gaming is better now.
The way I see it, is that if games were all 2D, everything would be like something done before. Games would look samey and franchises would wither and die quicker than a rose in hydro-sulphuric-killing-death acid. You can change storylines as much as you want, but at the end of the day, if you can't get it out of you head that you're playing a game that looked like that game that looked like that other game, you're not going to enjoy the game you're playing! (Oh no, i've gone cross-eyed!)
Games now are far better than they were before... real-time lighting makes games look more realistic... graphics that make characters look like real people make games more personal and easier to relate to. It isn't just about graphics either... the use of sound in games has exceled anything i've ever heard, the music in Conker, the sound effects in GT3. Gameplay, it seems, hasn't changed much, games are still as exciting and as boring as they ever were, but I can't help but think the graphics, sound and control of a game is what makes the gameplay - is there such a thing as gameplay?!
One pro for older games is that, simply, they were sorted for graphics... regardless of developer, games would look good. You could have asked for a top-down car racing game and you'd have got the same results from Polyphony Digital as you would Swordspines. But still, I don't think anyone can really say that older games are more impressive. For their time, maybe they wee good, but games nowadays are so real. You look at The Rock in the Raw is War clips for the X-Box and you see The Rock. Not a blotch of squares.
I'm NOT knocking older games, and I realise that alot of what I say is graphics related, but I can honestly say, that for me, modern games with their fancy lighting and attractive 3D models, and their digital sound and expansive 3D environments do more for me now than the older games like NBA Jam and Snake Rattle and Roll (Very Good Game) ever did.
In closing, I'd like to say that I appreciate older games, they've bought me years of joy... but there's a time and a place for everything, and digging up games of the past can only ruin what you once thought was the best game around. It's time for 3D, impressive graphics and expansive worlds... Day-Night time changing, fully polygonal vehicles, digital sound and new ideas.
Old games aren't dead, as such, but like the legends of this world, they have to pass on the torch, and sit back and marvel at what they've helped to create.
Game