| bdbdbd said: @ChirichiriMuyo: Actually, NES has more games that could be considered as art, than the current gen systems combined. You are right that most of the NES games have been surpassed by their sequels as "better" games, but not as art. You can paint similar, but better, painting than Mona Lisa, but the painting isn't going to surpass Mona Lisa as art. |
By all means name them. What games from the old days still stand up today? What games from the NES era can still be appreciated by all age groups today? I'm sure anybody could pick up Tertris and become addicted to it, I'm sure some of the early Nintendo classics could be timeless wonders for the newest of gamers, but what does that leave? Art needs to be something that transcends time. Picasso, DaVinci, and Van Gogh (among others) are still revered today because what they did is amazing even today. Starry Night, when viewed critically, puts the almost every painting made in the last 20 years to shame. What game made ~20 years ago puts almost every game made this year to shame? How many games, honestly, made in the NES era are going to out live current games as classics? 20 years from now, the Mario 3s and Zeldas and Tetrises will stand up and so too will the Okamis and Katamaris and Icos and Mario 64s/Galaxies and Zelda OoTs and GeoWs and Heavy Rains and Halos and a whole lote more later games. Gaming has only gotten better, and only the praise given to originators and the lack there of given to evolutions can make it even remotely seem otherwise. Very few games made in the modern age will be held as art in the upcomming years, but even fewer of the games that came before will be. Most will jsut be remembered as the first and never the best.
You do not have the right to never be offended.
