Theory: People Who Like Electronics Like Old Video Games...

[abeisgreat]

Allow me to pontificate.

Over the past 2 days I have been at a robotics competition for highschools ages 14-18, and as we all know this is prime age for "Halo Syndrome" but what surprised me was to see people NOT playing PSPs but instead Gameboy Colors? and not playing DS but instead GBA. I know these are only a small step back but its still gave me an idea. People who enjoy looking at how things work and truly understand the amount of effort put into a console or game actually enjoy it (everyone there where nerds who like electronics and such )more as a possessed to the people who say "OH MEH NEW HALO GAM3 IS HERE |33T" I think you could almost - ALMOST - say that retro gamers are smarter. Not to put down anyone who has modern gaming friends or plays modern games but I think this just goes to show that people who know how things work and truly understand it have a better grasp of what there playing instead of just looking at the graphics.

[lordofduct]

I'd probably elect that the techy geeks who are into electronics are spending all their money on gadgets to tinker with and don't have enough left over for a PSP... maybe?

[abeisgreat]

lol could be

[peace4myheart]

I agree with lordofduct. Maybe these techies are not of affluent family, thus cannot afford those more current video games. They are pretty expensive by the way. Even I don't have one and I am 30 years old. BTW, any donation would be much appreciated for my gaming habits.

[abeisgreat]

I agree with lordofduct. Maybe these techies are not of affluent family, thus cannot afford those more current video games. They are pretty expensive by the way. Even I don't have one and I am 30 years old. BTW, any donation would be much appreciated for my gaming habits.

I dont think these people are poor, it costs 5000 dollars to enter this compo

Edit:



its obviously money well spent

[peace4myheart]

"I dont think these people are poor, it costs 5000 dollars to enter this compo"

Is that 5000 dollars coming out of their own pocket or is it completely or partially funded by the school or maybe sponsored by certain businesses??? Regardless, that is a lot of money.

[Cerulean]

I agree with lordofduct. Maybe these techies are not of affluent family, thus cannot afford those more current video games. They are pretty expensive by the way. Even I don't have one and I am 30 years old. BTW, any donation would be much appreciated for my gaming habits.

I dont think these people are poor, it costs 5000 dollars to enter this compo

Edit:



its obviously money well spent

well these tourneys are also arranged by schools and Nasa so they have funding already.

[Doctor Fugue]

Nice theory, but I'll put myself forward as someone who loves older games but knows absolutely nothing about how things work, and I'm not interested in it at all. Other smart people can help me when I'm in trouble and I can't figure out how to turn on my 2600.

[Flak Beard]

People who enjoy looking at how things work and truly understand the amount of effort put into a console or game actually enjoy it (everyone there where nerds who like electronics and such )more as a possessed to the people who say "OH MEH NEW HALO GAM3 IS HERE |33T" I think you could almost - ALMOST - say that retro gamers are smarter. Not to put down anyone who has modern gaming friends or plays modern games but I think this just goes to show that people who know how things work and truly understand it have a better grasp of what there playing instead of just looking at the graphics.

Understanding the underlining mechanics of how a game works mathematically is great, but it's not important when it comes to appreciation of games. It's a pretty broad generalization to make that modern gamers only care about graphics, and I don't think retro gamers are any smarter, just a little more in tune with the hobby. We've had out tastes refined, and we know what we like. Ten years from now, the current generation of gamers will have the same appreciation.

And I don't know why Halo always has to be the reference point for commentary on modern gamers. Halo is popular, let's just move on shall we? The same could be said for a lot of games now. No one notice all the rabid fans currently going apeshit over Brawl? All sorts of series have their cult followings these days, and there were a handful when we were kids too. I remember hearing people argue of which was better, Mortal Kombat or Street Fighter in the lunchroom at school. We had Genesis and SNES fanboys bickering over which console was better back then as well. It's one thing to bring yourself above all that now, but to act like our generation didn't do the same shit as today's gamers when we were growing up, would be a lie.

[Niode]

I agree whole-heartedly with the above. There were kids back in the day screaming about how much better the Megadrive was because it had 'Blast Processing' and all the other marketing jargon Sega spewed out. It's happened with everysingle generation. PS1 - Saturn then PS1 - N64, DC - PS2, PS2 - Xbox - GC etc. Same goes with the games people played. Graphics have always been a tipping point for gamers. You can't honestly say that each generations graphics weren't impressive at first. Impressive because nothing like that had been done before etc. Sonic was impressive back in the day. So were games like Donkey Kong Country etc. So the modern gamers are only interested in graphics is a moot point. It's always been like that for 'most' mainstream gamers.

I think it's easier to divide gamers into hardcore and mainstream. Mainstream gamers are always gonna be more fickle with the regards to graphics. It's the first thing you see and easiest to base a judgement on. Hardcore gamers have just learnt to see through things like graphics to grasp at the real meat and veg of the game and tussle with the game as an experience rather than eye candy.

Don't get me wrong I love a bit of eye-candy and it can only augment a game in a positive way for me if the graphics are impressive (note the use of impressive rather than realistic ) as long as the underlying gameplay is worthwhile. Metal Gear Solid was impressive in both factors (graphics and gameplay) back on the ps1. That game looks terrible in comparison to todays standards but it's own unique style and the sheer style of the game has led to it to be a timeless game and still worthy of playing again and again (i've completed it 12 times in total, i've never played any other game as much as that, i've only ever completed super mario bros, 4 times in total!)

I think i've gone completely off topic.

So yeah..

Just noticed something in my post....
*proceeds to wash mouth out with soap*