Sporku Posted May 25, 2004 Which do you prefer? Personally, I prefer the older games. There are tons upon tons of great games that were made before 1993. So people say they look ugly by today's standards, but I think they not only look great (pixelation = <3), but alot of them are also very, very fun. Back in the NES days, there were games that seem really short as opposed to the games that take days to beat now, yet when playing these games for about 15-30 minutes, I feel as if I've been playing several hours. So the graphics may not be super fancy, but they were fun. What's wrong with having a game be fun? That's not to say that there aren't any good new games. Of course, there are some pretty awesome games out today, which actually manage to have good looks, and good gameplay, but there just don't seem to be as many great games out now as there were back ten years ago. Too many games now focus only on graphics, like graphics make the game. What's the use of having a great looking game that plays like shit? Kids nowdays seem to think "Hey, this game looks really good. It must be the best game evar." Overall, I mostly like the older games, with a little bit of newer ones to play as well. 0 Share this post Link to post
toxicfluff Posted May 25, 2004 I like a mix of both. I do agree that the appeal of many newer games does seem to be built around gimmicks, rather than solid gameplay. 0 Share this post Link to post
Scabbed Angel Posted May 25, 2004 Old games=nostalgia... basis upon which you compare newer games newer game=Hopefully better graphics, advanced options, etc Answer=both. 0 Share this post Link to post
Quast Posted May 25, 2004 both...old games for the memories, new games for better options/gameplay types (onslaught ut2k4) 0 Share this post Link to post
Amaster Posted May 25, 2004 I prefer games that dont suck. Their age means nothing to me. 0 Share this post Link to post
Bucket Posted May 25, 2004 A game isn't worth the plastic it's burned into unless it has some sort of lasting value. Old games still worth playing obviously have this quality, unless it's one of those things you pick up and bust through in a few hours every five years or so. RPG's are a good example... they're not pick-up-and-fuck-around games, but every once in a while you feel that itch to relive the story. Anyway, I pick "old games" just for this reason. Picking old games versus new games is like being out to dinner with a girl you're trying to pick up. Your chances of having a fun night are good-- until your old freaky-deaky ex walks by the table with her two "girlfriends" and drops a hotel key in your lap. 0 Share this post Link to post
Terra-jin Posted May 25, 2004 I don't really care how old a game is... its age means little to me for the game's value. But my tendency lies towards playing older games (though not all as old as DOOM). 0 Share this post Link to post
Silverwyvern Posted May 25, 2004 I like the classic 2d sidescrolling action / adventure game.... they seem rarer as of late. 0 Share this post Link to post
Use Posted May 25, 2004 I still play my old Segas more than my ps2 or Gamecube so, old games it is! 0 Share this post Link to post
Thesmellyone 2 Posted May 25, 2004 My favourite games ever are games like DOOM, Marathon, Damage Inc, Shadow Warrior/DN3D, Warcraft 2, etc. The only new games that come close are Max Payne and Halo. Why? Because somewhere around '98 dvelopers started to lose the point of having fun in a game... 0 Share this post Link to post
Naitguolf Posted May 25, 2004 i must say i play a lot of old games. I like Remakes, remixes and so on. I bought a high-end pc, but i use it to play Zdoom, and little else. (and able to run Morrowind, but i dont play it) Now i play GBA games, i found it more enjoyable. 0 Share this post Link to post
wildweasel Posted May 25, 2004 Assmaster said:I prefer games that dont suck. Their age means nothing to me. 0 Share this post Link to post
dsm Posted May 25, 2004 Both, though I gotta admit that fewer new games appeal to me. Still, there are a few new games that I think 'pass their test'. 0 Share this post Link to post
Dracamyl Posted May 25, 2004 Assmaster said:I prefer games that dont suck. Their age means nothing to me. The same goes for me. 0 Share this post Link to post
Fletcher` Posted May 26, 2004 There are a lot of good old games. There are a few good new games. "They don't make them like they used to." Damn you brain. You know how I feel about cliche's. 0 Share this post Link to post
myk Posted May 26, 2004 So DOOM is the line between new and old? I hate both is the more accurate choice, then. 0 Share this post Link to post
S1lent Posted May 29, 2004 Here's how I figure it. Preferances: Online Play = New Games Offline SP Play = Old games Though the single player for some of the modern games are good, they just don't have the same story line or action that the old ones had (i.e. Doom). Whereas the new games have a good online play, now I know that most old games didn't have online play but for the few that did, they weren't as good as CoD or CS or RB6 etc... 0 Share this post Link to post
Goliath Posted May 29, 2004 I still have my NES and play mario every once in a while but today games are just so much more emersive. It borders on being life like. 0 Share this post Link to post
Quast Posted May 30, 2004 S1lent said:they weren't as good as CoD or CS or RB6 etc... CS? you heathen! accept ut2k4 as your lord and savior and repent now! 0 Share this post Link to post
JamesEightBitStar Posted May 30, 2004 The gaming industry is bordering on practically being a joke now, so I'd have to say older. 0 Share this post Link to post
Thesmellyone 2 Posted May 30, 2004 Quast said:CS? you heathen! accept ut2k4 as your lord and savior and repent now! Yeah Counter Strike is Counter Crap. CRAP. Now, RtCW, Unreal etc. Those are fine games! 0 Share this post Link to post
SunlapseVertigo Posted May 31, 2004 a mix of both. to be honest, i dont know why anybody wouldnt say a mix. 0 Share this post Link to post