New games now a days look amazing but don't seem to have the punch older games do.
Im not talking about the classics.
I mean them too but that old games on the SNES and other systems.
comparing their graphics to recent ones their garbage.
but i bet you 10 to 1 a person playing older games would play them longer than the next gen games.
then again this all opinion.

you would be wrong.
the games of today have flashy graphics because thats what the masses want.

Are you of the people that go for flashy graphics or gameplay?

There are heaps of games with flashy graphics and gameplay - a lot of people look back at retro games with nostalgia, but the truth is the best of them aren't as well designed as new games. Some recent examples of games with amazing graphics and gameplay to match are Mass Effect 2 and Dragon Age (in RPGs), and masterpieces like Half-Life 2. Also, just because the most popular games seem to be straight forward shooters like Call of Duty, these games have hundreds of hours of quality gameplay if you enjoy the multiplayer.

I'd like you to show me one 8-bit/16-bit game that hasn't had its gameplay improved upon by a newer game.

Uniracers?
I get where your coming from
Guess im just missing the old days

I know you were just saying a random game off the cuff, but Uniracers is a stunt/racing game - there are HEAPS of modern takes on this, including the recent Joe Danger.

People that say games today are all focusing on graphics and not gameplay are just as retarded as people who only want graphics in games imo.

It's just so narrow minded because there's loads of games with awesome graphics that are awesome.

Any names come to mind then?
i know Gears of War and God of War are 2 amazing looking and fun games

I wish that more companies would focus on neat, stylized graphics over hyper-realistic graphics. I like the look of Odin Sphere more than just about anything this gen (except maybe Valkyria Chronicles).

What about Muramasa?

People that say games today are all focusing on graphics and not gameplay are just as retarded as people who only want graphics in games imo.

It's just so narrow minded because there's loads of games with awesome graphics that are awesome.

I'm not retarded for believing that most companies these days are aiming for just that. And yes, there are loads of games with great graphics that are also great games, but there's no reason to generalize gamers and call them retarded for seeing things as they are.

No, saying games had greater gameplay in the past is pretty dumb. We've come a long way in game design.

I wish that more companies would focus on neat, stylized graphics over hyper-realistic graphics. I like the look of Odin Sphere more than just about anything this gen (except maybe Valkyria Chronicles).

I agree with this - when you look back at last gen games, the ones that have aged the best are ones with stylised graphics; the 'realistic' ones look blocky and ugly. I think the same thing is going to happen with this gen. That said, some games (Call of Duty, Mass Effect) work better with a realistic style; but if you're trying to create a game that's timeless, stylised is the way to go, which is why World of Warcraft still looks amazing 6 years post-release, and why The Old Republic's controversial art style will probably hold up as well.

Well, I'm into games for the gameplay. Graphics don't really mean much to me. Most of the games I play still uses stylized graphics.

That's not to say that all great games have stylized graphics tho. The really good ones can have both.

Fair enough points made at how im wrong.
Still though there are games played that just look amazing but play is sub-par.
Names escape me.
I doubt im the only one who has had at least one game like that.

I'm certainly not looking to return to the old days of SNES and the like and it is a bit stupid to say that games these days don't have good gameplay, but I admit a lot of times I feel underwhelmed by current gen games when I compare them to similar ones from last gen. Not in terms of graphics obviously. But I firmly believe that, for the most part, games made for last gen consoles play better, imo.

I suppose i am also more into gameplay then graphics, hell i'd still play 2D games over any flashy 3D Game, if it kept me entertained. But i dont know, a good example of games that were better in the older times were Resident Evil, sure there not as flashy as the new ones, but RE4 & RE5 were imo an insult to RE Fans and garbage to play as, no zombies, stupid blobs for bosses & removing the horror from the game was a very very bad idea of capcom to do. so i suppose i can kinda see Damian Angel's point in this :P

There are a couple of points which disprove your theory, Woz.

One - Resident Evil was a well designed game - for the time. The controls these days are absolutely horrendous, and I do not know one person who would rather we go back to the days of 3D tank controls (forward to move, left and right to turn, no matter which direction the camera is facing) as opposed to modern relative controls. Saying Resident Evil 4 has no zombies is ridiculous, as Resident Evil 5 explains - the enemies in 4 and 5 are (SPOILER ALERT) a result of a mutation of the T-virus, making the zombies more intelligent, able to move faster and fight intelligently. That said, if you want the real evolution of traditional zombie games, Dead Rising is a lot closer to the original vision - Resident Evil was obviously influenced by Dawn of the Dead, and Dead Rising allowed them to take that to the next level by having hundreds of zombies at once.

In regards to Survival Horror as a genre, there are many, many recent examples that absolutely trounce Resident Evil in gameplay - Dead Space and Alan Wake just to name a couple.

I think that the gaming industry has a distinct problem with BLAND. Where my opinion differs is the whole "Golden Oldies" mentality. In general, gaming as a whole has improved. For example, ask anyone who was a gamer in the days of the NES. They will tell you right upfront that there were essentially two types of games: hard bad games and hard good games. Oh, and decent graphics were optional in both categories. So the potential for a mediocre game experience was high, especially when you take into account the lack of reviews (unless you count word-of-mouth). Contrast that with today. Getting the lowdown on a game is insanely easy thanks to the almighty 'net, and you're more likely to get "same ol', same ol'" than "WEEPING CREEPING JESUS THIS GAME SUX C0CK MURDER DEATH KILL MURDER DEATH KILL".

Don't get me wrong.....The fact that most game devs today seem to think that a game with a generic storyline and cookie cutter mechanics is fine as long as it has graphics that would make the angels sing irks me a fair bit...But honestly I'd rather have fantastic graphics and decent everything else as the average than the insane hit-or-miss of earlier eras.

Oh, and some of the classics I've played have moved me more than a whole BEVVY of today's games, even if they were technically inferior.

A good designer is a good designer, regardless of the power of technology he has at his disposal, or the era he is working in.

Designers have more firepower to work with now, and more potential to wring out of the consoles, but that is utterly irrelevant to a person's core talent. Having the tools and knowing what to do with them are two very different things.

Bad designers can only do so much to conceal their lack of imagination and creativity. Good designers however, can make even small budget games into rewarding experiences, because quality always outs.

What about Muramasa?

"LOLwii"

- the response you would get from an ignorant who calls himself "hardcore" and only has an xbox.


as for me, ive been playing games since birth, and i can safely say games today dont have the same... magic, if you will, than the games of yesteryears.
i am not generalizing, as even today there are great games that both look good, and play good.
batman arkham asylum is a great example.

however, said games are counted, floating in a sea of michael bay seal of approval games with flashy graphics, OMG EXPLOSIONS AND SHIT, and zero to none gameplay. (which, in counted exceptions, is not really a bad thing, as sometimes i just want to relax and view OMG EXPLOSIONS AND SHIT.)

What about Muramasa?

I forgot about this one because I don't have a Wii to play it on. It looks beautiful though, I wish Vanillaware made more games.


I agree with this - when you look back at last gen games, the ones that have aged the best are ones with stylised graphics; the 'realistic' ones look blocky and ugly. I think the same thing is going to happen with this gen. That said, some games (Call of Duty, Mass Effect) work better with a realistic style; but if you're trying to create a game that's timeless, stylised is the way to go, which is why World of Warcraft still looks amazing 6 years post-release, and why The Old Republic's controversial art style will probably hold up as well.

I definitely think a realistic style works best for some games, but I think there are so many other games out there that would've benefited hugely from a more unusual look, graphics-wise. I am with you completely on stylized games aging better. I play my DS more than anything else and don't think of myself as someone who is obsessed with perfect graphics, but it can definitely be hard to go back to the early, block-y 3-D stuff without cringing.

I'm not retarded for believing that most companies these days are aiming for just that. And yes, there are loads of games with great graphics that are also great games, but there's no reason to generalize gamers and call them retarded for seeing things as they are.

But that isn't the way things are at all and it's really stupid to say gameplay was better then it is today.

But that isn't the way things are at all and it's really stupid to say gameplay was better then it is today.

Don't mind me, I was in a pissy mood when I posted that. There's plenty of great newer games and I know it :D

As far as I know, the Uncharted series (an example based on my current gen favorite game series) is giving players the whole package. But maybe that's just me.

As far as I know, the Uncharted series (an example based on my current gen favorite game series) is giving players the whole package. But maybe that's just me.

<3

Uncharted has a better story than any Indiana Jones movie, better platforming than Prince of Persia, better gunplay than any third-person shooter, better puzzles than Tomb Raider, and it has Nolan 'I'm a god-damned Video-game icon' North.

Rumours that Mark 'I managed to fuck up Max Payne, and all he did in the first game was look constipated' Wahlberg has been cast as Drake in the movie make me very sad indeed. I want Nathan Fillion, damnit. He was made for the role.

I like the characters and stories of Indiana Jones more.

Every game ever made ever has Nolan North doing some voice acting.

I didn't like the stories in the Uncharted games at all. Gameplay is near perfect (even though the platforming feels a bit sticky at times) but this Hollywood bullshit Uncharted has been all about is really not my kind of thing. I couldn't bring myself to finishing Uncharted 2 more than once, Drake was so goddamn annoying.

Every game ever made ever has Nolan North doing some voice acting.

Well, at least he's not short on work :D

Everyone says that about Nolan North, but I don't remember him being in anything I've played (he probably is, I just don't recall him playing anyone I cared about).

The one I always see is Liam O'Brien. It's like that guy's following me around - he's everywhere!

Graphics don't make the games today great, they just make it look pretty and contribute to the overall feel of the game in question. For a game to be considered a great game (imo that is), graphics play a small part in that. Story, characters, music, control system etc all add to whether a game is good or bad.

Graphics don't make the games today great, they just make it look pretty and contribute to the overall feel of the game in question. For a game to be considered a great game (imo that is), graphics play a small part in that. Story, characters, music, control system etc all add to whether a game is good or bad.

I cant agree more, But its all subjective anyway. I could play phantasmagoria all day long and not get tired of it :chills: