People took this more as an insult than a question. I therefore take away the OP to stop the flaming.

Well a lot of the better GBA games are actually ports/sequels to older nes/snes games: Zelda, Fire Emblem, Advanced Wars, mario etc. so comparing two systems one of which has the best games of the previous system isn't exactly fair, it's like calling the PS2 a better system than the PS1 simply because it can play all the PS1 games as well as the PS2 library.

Other than that a lot of older games are "better" due to nostalgia, you have no idea how many times I've remembered NES games as something amazing, then I go back and play them and find myself disappointed. Although I will say most older JRPGs had better storylines which significantly less time devoted to creating dull unorginial emo personalities for all their cast members.

I love classics, graphics dont make the game, its the fun factor.

I have more fun playing Super Mario Bros. then Super Mario Galaxy.

I know they're sequels (although that's not the case for Advance Wars, the original is on GBC or GBA), but still, the SNES is being said (by some) to have the greatest library by today's standard. And that's really what I don't understand.

Games like LTTP, Chrono Trigger , Super Metroid or SMW still make the lists of best games of all times ahead of any recent games, even though the lists are remade every year.Does that say something?
What you're doing is confusing technical advancements with a better gaming experience, which is really a state of mind.These classics have something in them which stimulates people(at least me) in a way the new games very rarely do. Of course it would be foolish to say that all new games are uninspired or lacking,but for me the classics will always have their own appeal.

Don't make threads when you're drunk.

That's why I used GBA to compare, but even that is flawed.

"Don't make threads when you're drunk."

Thank you for your very constructive response.

"Games like LTTP, Chrono Trigger , Super Metroid or SMW still make the lists of best games of all times ahead of any recent games, even though the lists are remade every year.Does that say something?
What you're doing is confusing technical advancements with a better gaming experience, which is really a state of mind.These classics have something in them which stimulates people(at least me) in a way the new games very rarely do. Of course it would be foolish to say that all new games are uninspired or lacking,but for me the classics will always have their own appeal."

What I wonder is if people feel that these games are truly the best by today's standard. Those list tell nothing (well, at least not a lot) about that, as it is heavily nostalgia lists.

I understand that people like them, and I like some. Honestly, I feel GBA has the perhaps best library of any console, but still none of those have gone down in history as top notch games. That is the reason I tried to go back and play the good old awesome games, as I started to feel the 2D charm. Unfortunately, that wasn't there for me with the SNES. So what I'm partially wondering is what makes them so good.

Its a thing called nostalgia tons of gamers who played thoes games 30-15 years ago enjoyed these games including myself (i still play double dragon) plus older gen games are just old they cant compete with the newschool why do you think mega man 9 was so well recieved these arent crappy 8-16 bit software these are masterpieces that became popular.

I seem to have worded myself stupidly (although I cannot find out where), so that people misunderstand me.

Just ignore this thread.

I like some classics but mainly arcade classics. Pretty much all I like with gaming classics is puzzle games like tetris and stuff. On GBA I have Dr.Mario which is ok.