By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming - What was the best generation for Games (POLL)

Million on 13 March 2008
El Duderino said:
Onyxmeth said:
kenzomatic said:
Garcian Smith said:
Anyone who says anything other than 6th or 7th is succumbing to nostalgia.

And Citizen Kane sucked because it was in black & white. (sarcasim)

Completely different scenario. You can't compare movies and games in that way. Games are an expanding technology. Movies could be at their prime the moment a camera was first used to show them. The only thing time has given us in movies is color and special effects. The acting has been around since the 1930's. It has changed drastically from yesteryears to today but I can find as many slam dunk performances back then as I can now. I say the 70's gave the best performances ever, and no amount of Michael Bay or Gore Verbinski slap happy effects movies will ever change that.

 


Acting has been around since the 1930s ??? MUAHAHAHAHA !!! Have you ever been to a real theatre ??? I´m just messing with you, I know what your saying but still, the coparison is legit. Games like Tetris and Super Mario Brothers the Legend of Zelda, are still among the best games ever made, does it matter how many pixles and colors they had ??? I´d even say the earn bonus points for beeing great eventhough they had limitations, often having limited resources forces us to be more creative... Citisen Cain will always be among the best movies, NES and SNES games will always be among the best video games, if you think otherwise you could argue Leonardo da Vinci made worse paintings than people today because he didn´t have the technology we use to make art with today...


 By today's standards Tetris and Super Mario are crappy games , my 7 year old bro wouldn't touch it , the public wouldn't buy it and anyone with half a brain would recognise how crappy they are.

 What your doing is comparing the games by the standard that was set in that era, hell with the tools availble to me now I could have made a legendary game , for that "era".




Around the Network
kenzomatic on 13 March 2008
Million said:
El Duderino said:
Onyxmeth said:
kenzomatic said:
Garcian Smith said:
Anyone who says anything other than 6th or 7th is succumbing to nostalgia.

And Citizen Kane sucked because it was in black & white. (sarcasim)

Completely different scenario. You can't compare movies and games in that way. Games are an expanding technology. Movies could be at their prime the moment a camera was first used to show them. The only thing time has given us in movies is color and special effects. The acting has been around since the 1930's. It has changed drastically from yesteryears to today but I can find as many slam dunk performances back then as I can now. I say the 70's gave the best performances ever, and no amount of Michael Bay or Gore Verbinski slap happy effects movies will ever change that.

 


Acting has been around since the 1930s ??? MUAHAHAHAHA !!! Have you ever been to a real theatre ??? I´m just messing with you, I know what your saying but still, the coparison is legit. Games like Tetris and Super Mario Brothers the Legend of Zelda, are still among the best games ever made, does it matter how many pixles and colors they had ??? I´d even say the earn bonus points for beeing great eventhough they had limitations, often having limited resources forces us to be more creative... Citisen Cain will always be among the best movies, NES and SNES games will always be among the best video games, if you think otherwise you could argue Leonardo da Vinci made worse paintings than people today because he didn´t have the technology we use to make art with today...


 By today's standards Tetris and Super Mario are crappy games , my 7 year old bro wouldn't touch it , the public wouldn't buy it and anyone with half a brain would recognise how crappy they are.

 What your doing is comparing the games by the standard that was set in that era, hell with the tools availble to me now I could have made a legendary game , for that "era".


By those standards chess is a crappy game.



"Back off, man. I'm a scientist."

Your theories are the worst kind of popular tripe, your methods are sloppy, and your conclusions are highly questionable! You are a poor scientist. Especially if you think the moon landing was faked.

ioi + 1
disolitude on 13 March 2008

1. Wii is not this generation. I should have all 3 consoles until a clear winner is announced between ps3/360
2. the 4th generation genesis dominated most of the generation. snes took over in 95 and 96 and eventually won because geneis production stoped.
3. Great forum topic :)



Chrizum on 13 March 2008

Since the SNES has ages the best of all the consoles (PS2 gen included) I'd have to go with the 4th generation.

But why isn't the FIRST generation an option?



elgefe02 on 13 March 2008

I really loved the NES era... it was my early childhood and mark me forever



SSBB FC: 5155 2671 4071 elgefe02: "VGChartz's Resident Raving Rabbit"   MKWii:5155-3729-0989

Around the Network
El Duderino on 13 March 2008
Garcian Smith said:
El Duderino said:
Garcian Smith said:
El Duderino said:
Garcian Smith said:
Anyone who says anything other than 6th or 7th is succumbing to nostalgia.

Hell no, you can´t say one generation is better just because it´s newer and more advanced... do you think we are better than our parents just because we have Ipods and interwebs ??? IMHO the Snes era did most for gaming, the different directions gaming went at that time was just incredible... the other generations are great but they would be nothing without the advances the Snes made...


You're confusing "most influential/revolutionary" with "best." Yeah, there were a lot of highly influential games made during the SNES era, but you also can't deny that the games that built upon those concepts in later generations are better.


YOU are confusing "best" (which btw. is hard to define) with more advance graphics, more dimensions and shiny colors... for me best IS influential and revolutionary...


Then you're defining "best" as something other than what "best" clearly means. Take a basic game - say, on the SNES - and layer a few new and interesting concepts on it, and improve the graphics and sound, and why exactly don't you end up with a better game than the original?

@ Kasz216: Seriously? I mean, I'm as big of an Earthbound fan as the next guy, but the SNES simply wasn't capable of many of the things that we see in modern RPGs. I mean, could the SNES handle something as complex as Vagrant Story, let alone a modern RPG like Oblivion?


 Who died and made you king of definitions ??? You don´t get a better game by adding better graphics and sound... is Crysis better than Half Life 1 ??? Is Lair a better game than Star Fox... would the Mona Lisa be better if da Vinci had had a digital camere with 10 billion pixels ??? Hell No !!! It´s what you do with the resources you have not the resources themself... if someone came from the future and let you play a game on his PS9, sure it would blow you away from a graphics and sound point of view... but graphics and sound only go so far, if the game gets boring after ten minutes or is just another copy of games we know today it will be bad, not better. 



 

 

 

Million on 13 March 2008
kenzomatic said:
Million said:
El Duderino said:
Onyxmeth said:
kenzomatic said:
Garcian Smith said:
Anyone who says anything other than 6th or 7th is succumbing to nostalgia.

And Citizen Kane sucked because it was in black & white. (sarcasim)

Completely different scenario. You can't compare movies and games in that way. Games are an expanding technology. Movies could be at their prime the moment a camera was first used to show them. The only thing time has given us in movies is color and special effects. The acting has been around since the 1930's. It has changed drastically from yesteryears to today but I can find as many slam dunk performances back then as I can now. I say the 70's gave the best performances ever, and no amount of Michael Bay or Gore Verbinski slap happy effects movies will ever change that.

 


Acting has been around since the 1930s ??? MUAHAHAHAHA !!! Have you ever been to a real theatre ??? I´m just messing with you, I know what your saying but still, the coparison is legit. Games like Tetris and Super Mario Brothers the Legend of Zelda, are still among the best games ever made, does it matter how many pixles and colors they had ??? I´d even say the earn bonus points for beeing great eventhough they had limitations, often having limited resources forces us to be more creative... Citisen Cain will always be among the best movies, NES and SNES games will always be among the best video games, if you think otherwise you could argue Leonardo da Vinci made worse paintings than people today because he didn´t have the technology we use to make art with today...


By today's standards Tetris and Super Mario are crappy games , my 7 year old bro wouldn't touch it , the public wouldn't buy it and anyone with half a brain would recognise how crappy they are.

What your doing is comparing the games by the standard that was set in that era, hell with the tools availble to me now I could have made a legendary game , for that "era".


By those standards chess is a crappy game.


 

Wrong , chess involves a level of tactical and strategic thinking that surpasses pretty much every game released on a home console.  




dgm6780 on 13 March 2008

the next generation, 2015



Chrizum on 13 March 2008

^ Listen to the Dude (I wholeheartly agree)



Garcian Smith on 13 March 2008
Faxanadu said:
there is no I in sarcasm

show me a game this gen that is more fun to play than secret of mana, chrono trigger, link to past, zombies ate neighbours or illusion of gaia. has nothing to do with nostalgia but with fun.

Games aren't more fun to you exactly because of nostalgia. I'll readily admit that I don't have as much fun playing games now as I had as a kid. That doesn't mean that games got worse; it means that I got older. Now I have a more critical eye and a capacity to distinguish shades of grey between "bloody awesome" and "pure crap." So do you. That's why games don't seem as fun as they did back then.

@ kenzomatic: By today's standards, most 2D platformers are overly simplistic affairs where you hold right and press the jump button a lot. And compared to, say, Tetris DS, the original Game Boy/NES Tetris cartridges are pure crap, and you'd be hard-pressed to find someone who would pick the second over the first. Chess really isn't comparable.

@ El Duderino: Nobody died and made me king of definitions; I just looked up the word "best" on dictionary.com and got, as a relevant definition: "1.of the highest quality, excellence, or standing: the best work; the best students." Nowhere in any of the definitions of "best" as an adjective will you find the words "influential" or "revolutionary," or any of their analogues.



"'Casual games' are something the 'Game Industry' invented to explain away the Wii success instead of actually listening or looking at what Nintendo did. There is no 'casual strategy' from Nintendo. 'Accessible strategy', yes, but ‘casual gamers’ is just the 'Game Industry''s polite way of saying what they feel: 'retarded gamers'."

 -Sean Malstrom