early and later games

Post by **dsheinem** » Fri Jun 17, 2011 3:51 pm

noiseredux wrote:
no I get what he's saying... PS3 games look better than 2600 games. Case closed.

That's debatable

Post by **noiseredux** » Fri Jun 17, 2011 3:55 pm

dsheinem wrote:
noiseredux wrote:
no I get what he's saying... PS3 games look better than 2600 games. Case closed.
That's debatable

I don't think he's looking for a debate though. Just wants us to agree I think?

Post by **dsheinem** » Fri Jun 17, 2011 3:55 pm

noiseredux wrote:
dsheinem wrote:
noiseredux wrote:
no I get what he's saying... PS3 games look better than 2600 games. Case closed.
That's debatable
I don't think he's looking for a debate though. Just wants us to agree I think?

I agree.

Post by **NeverGoBak** » Fri Jun 17, 2011 9:25 pm

kingmohd84 wrote: but i think its hard to say this graphics:

is better than this graphics:

i know this is a retro forum,
i know people has an appeal for older looking games, and so do i

but show any 1 today NES be it kirby, Mario Bros, or Donky Kong...and he cant tell if one graphics is better...its all ancient and on same level...N64 is a jump a huge one.

"Better" is a completely subjective word. I think the kirby game looks better, so there

.

early and later games

Re: early and later games

Re: early and later games

Re: early and later games

Re: early and later games