Today's Gamers

[Capcomwarrior]

Jt pretty much sums up how I feel about that. There is no real point in comparing a game like COD4 to a game like Contra, graphically. They are just too different. No one is "better" graphically, - both have great graphics, both are pinnacle for their time/style/purpose. Contra accomplished things that COD4 doesn't, just as COD4 accomplishes what Contra doesn't. It doesn't make sense to value one over the other or think one makes the other obsolete. Its kind of like how it bugs me when people say that there's no point having a Saturn if you have a dreamcast, or so-and-so sequel/version of game x renders the previous one obsolete. Statements like that are usually just not true.

[CRTGAMER]

I like better graphics in a game as long as game play is not sacrificed.

In the Arcades; the graphic "upgrade" I did not like was when the Vector games made way for how can I label it? NES generation raster scan Arcade games. Look at the Vector Empire Strikes Back compared to Raster Return of the Jedi. the older Raster Scan games such as Galaxian and Donkey Kong looked better to me. Real shame the Vector games went away, especially color Vector such as Space Duel or Major Havoc.

[Jrecee]

I like games where things are blue.

Thankyou.

[DNT 2.5]

I know this is blasphemy, but my generation (the current FPS generation) is obsessed with brand names more than anything, Good games by smaller companies are always overshadowed by Infinity ward, or MAG, or some over hyped stereotypical shooter.
Personally, I can't go back any farther than the neave version of space invaders, I have tried the Atari 2600 games, but I just don't feel the love for them, you know?

[Mod_Man_Extreme]

Quick somebody find Sam Waterstein!

[Assman]

Man, I'll defend just about any Sonic game to the death, but even I thought '06 was crap. I do think that Unleashed has been unfairly panned and that the Adventure games get a bad wrap these days for no incredibly rational reasons, but Sonic '06 was just atrocious. I finished it for the sake of finishing it since it is a Sonic game, but rarely did I find myself having anything that even remotely resembled fun while playing it.

I have nothing to add to the intended crux of this discussion, sorry. I just had to say that.

[the7k]

Remember Chrono Trigger?

I remember Chrono Trigger. I remember tons of people shitting on Chrono Trigger at the time, because they thought all it was was pretty graphics.

And now, we all love Chrono Trigger for its delightful 'retro' graphics. Remember, some long gone by day, all the retro games we love to play were considered cutting edge - and everything that is cutting edge now will one day be considered retro.

The 32X and the Sega CD did NOT suck!!

Ah. Logic is a train that has left this station, I see.

Sega CD had potential, and a lot of good games - but it ultimately failed to deliver. The 32X was an unnecessary answer to the Virtual Boy. Good God, do I remember the 32X being the butt of many jokes while I was in grade school. Nobody wanted it, even the Sega faithful, because we all knew the Sega Saturn was right around the corner.

The time and money spent on the 32X should have been spent on the Sega Saturn, plain and simple. Maybe they could have figured out a Power Base Converser style adapter that would let it play Genesis games. Maybe they could have worked Sega CD Backwards Compatibility into it. Who knows - anything they could have done to further the Sega Saturn would have been better than the 32X.

[msimplay]

I know, I know. All this has probably been said before, but I figured I'd post my own rant about it. Today's Gamers are too freakin' concerned about graphics and not gameplay!! They also raise hell when a game is too hard for them! For cryin' out loud, did no one play games like Mega Man 2 or Contra (NES)? Take Sonic The Hedgehog 06 for example. It was hard, so it was judged harshly, and no one liked it. I think that's a load of bull. It was an excellent game offering a challenge not seen in games since the days of the NES. While I will admit it had some glitches, can you honestly expect a game to be perfect? Come on!! Every game has at least ONE glitch. Look at how messed up Fallout 2 was when it was first released, but people still loved it. Anyway, Sonic Unleashed and Sega itself was also criticized because they decided to try something new. Since when is it a crime to do that, especially with something you own? Anyway, getting back on subject, today's gamers always have something to bitch about. Show just one of them a game like Mega Man 1 for the NES and see what happens. They also don't seem to realize that if it wasn't for games like Super Mario Bros., they wouldn't have they're precious Call of Duty 4. I realize I can't change these types of gamers, and I'm not trying to, I'm just saying it would be nice if I could walk into a gaming store just once and hear someone talk about the older days of gaming. Anyway, I could go on forever, but you guys are probably sick of me by now, so I'll stop here.

P.S.
The 32X and the Sega CD did NOT suck!!

I have to be honest here but games to some people were always about the graphics.
However to me they were always about how close they were to the Arcade version.
Now that, that element has been taken out and Arcades no longer really being as prevalent.
Gaming has changed for me however I will say that todays gamers are obsessed with realism in games where I was more interested in the fantasy Element of games and still to this day I prefer fantasy type games as opposed to simulation and all out realism.
Also while today's gamers moan if a game isn't realistic I have to say that the graphics on the new consoles are near enough the same as the Wii except with more processing power to allow for more affects.
Also they are no where near photo realistic they always look like smoothed over plastic to me.
Going into Game play the new game is obsessed with FPS games and personally I always feel you played one you played em all. Also I never could get into the genre because of my mild Epilepsy.
In any case the games I do play are the throw backs to the old days.
Fighting games , Platform games , RPG's.

I personally think that even with new games that come out I still look for that overall Arcade experience in them and I don't like them to be too complicated or long.
At one point I thought that maybe I had grown out of games but nope it seems I'm just not interested in the new ones I prefer to play Retro Games.

For me a few games this generation stand out such as Mario Galaxy , Tekken 6 , Street Fighter 4 , Dante's Inferno but these still fit into the same old Genres I used to play before.

Mario Galaxy = Platformer No real change Since Mario 64
Tekken 6 = Fighting Game Fighting Game same as it always has been classic formula
Street Fighter 4 = Fighting Game same as it always has been classic formula
Dante's Inferno = Side scrolling beat emup.
Zelda = Same as it always has been for ages the pinnacle of Action RPG's

So even those games are considered new I still think of them as Retro.

I know the Wii gets slated by "modern gamers" but to me it's the best Retrogamers console around and it's changed gaming so that it's not all about graphics and it has widened the demographic of who plays video games.

Also one great thing that this generation has is Retro remakes I absolutely love them.

[pepharytheworm]

^^
I mostly agree with your opinions. I find the Wii the perfect sysytem for the retro gamer.

When I was kid growing up I admit graphics played a bigger part then they do to me now. Almost all kids were the same in that respect. If I wanted to prove the snes was better then Genesis to other kids, my arguement was mostly about how much better I thought the games looked on the SNES not gameplay mechanics. Its a lot easier to prove your point visually then gameplay wise.

I still think the majority of gamers want better graphics, but during this generation of gaming it seems less so than during my generation. The retro community was non-existent in 90 and a lot smaller in 99 then it is today. Downloadable games on PS3/360, VC, and the Wii in general helped people stop focusing too much on graphics. It seems to have gotten more people interested in what they didn't play before and actual owning the hardware they came from.

How many kids did you know playing Atari 2600 games in the 90's? The first time I realized about the true importance of gameplay, after years of playing awful games because they looked pretty, was in 1993. Big Lots first came to my city. When I first went into one they mostly had old outdated stuff. I happened to fine a bunch of 2600 games all a dollar each.
I bought all of them that they had. Hooked up my 2600 and had the time of my life playing all those games with my older brother.

Never did I look at graphics the same way again. Sure I was made fun of for still playing my SNES in 97, buying a Sega CD in 96, Buying a friends Virtualboy in 98, but I knew the truth they would have to learn for themselves. Graphics aren't everything.

[msimplay]

^^
I mostly agree with your opinions. I find the Wii the perfect sysytem for the retro gamer.

When I was kid growing up I admit graphics played a bigger part then they do to me now. Almost all kids were the same in that respect. If I wanted to prove the snes was better then Genesis to other kids, my arguement was mostly about how much better I thought the games looked on the SNES not gameplay mechanics. Its a lot easier to prove your point visually then gameplay wise.

I have to agree many times I always thought SNES versions were better because they had better graphics.
However after looking back the 16bit consoles were pretty much on par with each other and many affects could be replicated with clever programming and extra chips inside cartridges and addons such as MegaCD and 32x

In those days both the 8bit and 16bit eras kind of overlapped and co existed.
The Nintendo NES and Sega Master System sold pretty well during at the same time as the 16bit consoles as budget consoles.
I remember reading promotional material for the Megadrive being the best in Arcade Entertainment in the home with many of the games I bought for my Master System.
I think the 8bit consoles served as fantastic budget consoles for those that couldn't afford the more powerful 16bitters.
Sega and Nintendo were at one point supporting an 8bit / 16bit and a handheld all at once.

Also don't forget that here in the UK home computers also had a Vibrant market with the same kind of budget vs Premium.
People were still buying Amstrad, Commodore 64 and Sinclair Spectrum games.
Then there was the premium side with the 16bit Atari and Amiga Computers.
Also PC's for those who could afford it.

All in all it was an exciting time, getting back to the point what all this meant was while people were still wanting Arcade experiences in the home it was the first time that gamers had meaningful experiences with fantastic graphics and musical scores that stand the test of time even today.

I still think the majority of gamers want better graphics, but during this generation of gaming it seems less so than during my generation. The retro community was non-existent in 90 and a lot smaller in 99 then it is today. Downloadable games on PS3/360, VC, and the Wii in general helped people stop focusing too much on graphics. It seems to have gotten more people interested in what they didn't play before and actual owning the hardware they came from.

I agree majority still want graphics but it stands to reason that gaming has changed and with the Wii and Nintendo DScoming out the graphics have changed.
It's not all about the raw power of a console anymore I've seen more talk about art direction now which to me looks just as good.
I have to say that 2d games have aged really well in comparison to first gen 3d games.
I actually still think that the old games on Megadrive , TurboGrafx and Snes still look great when they were pushed.

Final note on graphics is that to some extent it will always be about graphics I mean its big business too. Just look at Nvidia and AMD with their top range graphics cards costing as much as a brand new PS3 and Xbox360.

How many kids did you know playing Atari 2600 games in the 90's? The first time I realized about the true importance of gameplay, after years of playing awful games because they looked pretty, was in 1993. Big Lots first came to my city. When I first went into one they mostly had old outdated stuff. I happened to fine a bunch of 2600 games all a dollar each.
I bought all of them that they had. Hooked up my 2600 and had the time of my life playing all those games with my older brother.

Never did I look at graphics the same way again. Sure I was made fun of for still playing my SNES in 97, buying a Sega CD in 96, Buying a friends Virtualboy in 98, but I knew the truth they would have to learn for themselves. Graphics aren't everything.

Not many kids I guess but me personally I was actually trying out older consoles as my console days began with the Snes as prior to that I started with cheap handhelds and later moved onto the Gameboy with a background of Arcades.

I realised the importance of Gameplay over graphics too when I bought a Sega Saturn as opposed to the Sony Playstation but not because I didn't think the graphics were good but because I was always having to defend the Sega Saturn to Playstation owners at the time.
At the time my reasons were that I didn't really think of Sony as a gaming company and the N64 was still a long way off so for me the Sega Saturn was the only choice and I don't regret that decision for a even a minute to me the Sega Saturn was the place where I had some of the best experiences that most people missed out on.
Was really funny how people went Polygon mad in those days