DVD Talk Forum

DVD Talk Forum (https://forum.dvdtalk.com/)
-   Video Game Talk (https://forum.dvdtalk.com/video-game-talk-15/)
-   -   We are spoiled (https://forum.dvdtalk.com/video-game-talk/336718-we-spoiled.html)

darkside 12-24-03 07:23 PM

I just enjoy good fun games. Whether its Castlevania on the GBA, Bejewelled on my PDA or Metroid Prime on the Cube all that matters is if the game is fun to play.

I honestly don't know if 2D games were better or worse, but I have a lot of favorites that I can still go back and replay from the NES and SNES. That being said in some cases, especially sports, 3D is much better. After playing Tiger Woods 2004 and Madden 2004 I couldn't go back to something even a few years older.

Good games IMO will hold up though. The original Zelda is still fun, but even Ocarina still seems great to me. If the game is good the graphics are just one part of the whole.

PixyJunket 12-24-03 07:52 PM


Originally posted by darkside
If the game is good the graphics are just one part of the whole.
:up:

PixyJunket 12-24-03 07:55 PM


Originally posted by flashburn
I don't think it is entirely fair to say 2D ages better than 3d due to the fact that every 2d game that has been used as an example were not made during the beginning of 2d gaming in general. Yet all the 3D games mentioned were all created during the very beginning of 3d games(besides Vector graphics). Maybe some people are forgetting what 2d graphics looked like in the very early 80's.
I only brough up the NES because somebody earlier pointed it out as a comparison NES:Playstation::SNES:Playstation 2.. I remember horrible CGA graphics games and I too had an Atari 2600 and 5200..

But you also have to figure in that the 16bit era, while dominated by 2D games, started out with some 3D titles as well.. Star Fox on SNES and Virtua Racing on the Genny..

Doctorwho 12-24-03 11:01 PM

http://home.swipnet.se/~w-33411/pitfall.gif

You get to move the guy.


I think it has to do with being a new system. Look at the difference between Mario 1 vs Mario 3. Or FFVII vs FFIX

http://galeon.hispavista.com/bekaos/ff9_800.jpg

It seems that just when the developers seem to nail the systems capabilitys they move to a new system.

Galanthas 12-25-03 05:05 PM

Last screenshots from me :)

The NES was released in 1985 in the U.S

Bionic Commando
System:NES
Release date 1988
http://home.comcast.net/~galanthas75/bionic.jpg
Super Mario Bros. 3
System:NES
Release date 1987
http://home.comcast.net/~galanthas75/smb3nes.jpg
Mike Tyson's Punch-Out
System:NES
Release: 1986
http://home.comcast.net/~galanthas75/punch.jpg

The PS1 was released in 1995 in the U.S.
FF7
System PS1
release date: 1997
http://image.com.com/gamespot/images..._screen006.jpg

PixyJunket 12-25-03 05:57 PM


Originally posted by Doctorwho
I think it has to do with being a new system. Look at the difference between Mario 1 vs Mario 3. Or FFVII vs FFIX
Except that pic you posted isn't even an in-game shot of FF9.. -ptth-

Superboy 12-25-03 07:28 PM

Interesting debate.

Even Shigeru Miyamoto has said that the games of this generation have a much longer lifespan, and that 10 years from now will be easy for someone to pick up and play, whereas games from even 5 years ago are hard to play.

Anyways, graphics really aren't an issue for me. Although playing a game with excellent graphics make the games that much more enjoyable. I'm not impressed with cinemas as much as great in-game graphics.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:17 PM.


Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.