Forums - Gaming Discussion - Are you tired of the older generation of gamers feeling superior?

NobleTeam360 said:

I've been playing video games since the 5th gen (PS1) and I can't even go back and play any of the games on there. Almost all of them are dated and didn't age well at all (of course this is to be expected from games made in the 90's) Anyway games today are far better than anything in the 90's.


games released before you started playing will not have aged because you havn't seen them.



Around the Network

Nope, i never get tired of it, we are superior, lol. For real though, older games, especially pre-N.E.S., you literally just kept playing the game until you died, there was no real end.



markodeniro said:
NobleTeam360 said:

I've been playing video games since the 5th gen (PS1) and I can't even go back and play any of the games on there. Almost all of them are dated and didn't age well at all (of course this is to be expected from games made in the 90's) Anyway games today are far better than anything in the 90's.


games released before you started playing will not have aged because you havn't seen them.

-______- *Facepalm* 



Well I startled with "pong" and I lived in a arcade hall with "the defender" Astroids" and it was sheap since you could play them Forever ... For a quarter ! They changed that later on ....



I started gaming with a SNES, and I will admit, I can't really say I enjoy anything older. Graphics were always a selling point for games, the differences were just more subtle. Sound quality, also, was important in a game.

Most of these guys talking about how games "used to be" likely weren't old enough to experience it, or are looking at it through the rose-tinted glasses of nostalgia. I know I wasn't that old when I started gaming. I was around. . . 3 or 4, when I got my SNES, and I really didn't know what I was doing. That being said, looking at older articles, and watching videos made by older gamers, I can definitely say that graphics were a selling point of games in previous generations.

Gameplay was important too, and I'd be inclined to say more so than today's games. People might not buy a game just for the graphics, but they'd certainly factor graphics into the purchase.



Around the Network

Final Fantasy is one of the best examples of a series that has become easy to the point that it is no challenge anymore.



''Hadouken!''

thewayofthepath said:
Mr_No said:

I've played games for 20 years now. While I haven't enjoyed everything the NES and the SNES had to offer, I do admit that both consoles did have their prominent games that still hold up until this day. However, this elitism that dictates that every game back then is superior in any form to those nowadays is ridiculous.


Is this the same elitism that gives the AVGN his popularity?

C'mon, get serious.  Everybody knows there have been good and bad games since the beginning of the industry.

Heh, not according to some people in here.



I can tell you I only hated the reaction video because of the people acting all shocked and dumb founded by the tech. Not their skill at all. Do they react like that towards anything old? You look stupid with those over the top faces.



Psychotic said:
ohmylanta1003 said:


Agreed. Skill, without a doubt improves your experience. People generally like what they're good at. This is true when talking about sports, academics, games, etc.... To say that skill doesn't improve your experience is just plain ignorant. I'm not saying that you can't like something if you're bad at it, but I am saying that you would like that certain something more if you were good at it.


1) A person who disagrees with you isn't automatically ignorant.

2) Skill doesn't improve your experience, the perception of skill does. If your enemies are weaker than you, but not significantly, you feel good. It doesn't matter if the game has to be set on "very easy" or "very hard" to ensure this.

But in my mind, that person is ignorant. That's why I said it. And you basically proved my argument. Thank you. When people evaluate their own skill or someone else's skill, they must have a reference point. Therefore, skill is always a perception and there isn't really an argument against that. By saying that the perception of skill improves your experience, you are in essence saying the exact same thing that I initially said.



I bet the Wii U would sell more than 15M LTD by the end of 2015. He bet it would sell less. I lost.

Psychotic said:

I just watched a Youtube video by Rich from ReviewTechUSA where he almost &#$@ himself because apparently today's teens can't play NES games very well. That's pretty dumb, but when you look at the comments...

Today's games hold your hand all the time!
Today's games are too easy!
Finishing a game used to mean something!
Today's gamers suck at gaming!
Mainstream games are made for toddlers!

...reminds me of my grandpa talking about how I dress or talk.

(I started gaming in 1996, so I'm not a complete newb either, but I don't look down on younger gamers for not enjoying the games I used to play back then, because I realize that's just nostalgia value and these game suck compared to today's games...)

Some people just aren't very good at preventing emotions from clouding their judgment.  MGS1 was excellent, and you can argue all you want that it was better for its time than MGS4 is for its time.  BUT HELLO!  MGS4 is SOOOO much better than MGS1.