old school vs new school

[wrldstrman]

Who all prefers the old school gaming over all the newer stuff.
It may be the generation gaps but I like my old school games .I think a lot of the new stuff is to complicated to enjoy,especially a lot of the rpg's where there is to much dead time in the games.I myself prefer the old joystick with the one fire button fun and simple. I watch my boy play call of duty and a few others and they look like a lot of fun but I cant seem to get the hang of them.
although the graphics arent psp  I still enjoy playing my old school stuff which is just the right pace for me.

[yap]

i'm with you.  i am finding it pretty hard for any of the newer games to hold my attention much at all.

[Tynstar]

I am starting to like older games better. The controls are just getting crazy.

[captain_nintendo]

I like old and new.

The classic games are just that! Classic, timeless and I never tire of playing them. New games are graphically superior among other things. They can also fully involve you into the world in which the game takes place. This thanks to the graphics,sounds and overall gameplay.

All era's of gaming have something working for them IMO.  

[blissfulnoise]

How people can get stuck on just one generation of games is beyond me (and I'm not saying this is the case for you wrldstrman).  There's way too much on the current generation platforms that I'd deem "must play games".

I'm 27 and have been gaming, in various degrees, for 25 years.

I've owned and played extensively on every single major platform since the VCS.  I've been PC gaming since the beginnings of Sierra On-Line, Origin, and LucasArts.  I've bought graphics cards nearly every other generation.  I had a GameBoy at launch and every portable system to come afterwards.  I've always dropped quarters in arcades along the way.  I've played in MUDs, MMOs, clans, and ran gaming clubs.  I've imported must play games on all the systems I've loved.  I was at the Nintendo Power Fest in 1990.  I've been to two E3.

Without tooting my own horn too much, I've, more or less, seen it all.  And I can say it's not a generation gap that's keeping people from enjoying current and next generation offerings.  It's a perspective gap.  

Maybe the games now aren't as pick-up and play as they used to be.  And that's fair.  But a lot are though.  What I think the turn off is that a lot of people aren't familiar with the new landscape, and, for whatever reason, don't want to take the time to adjust.  Online gaming intimidates a lot of people.  The thought of an 80 hour game intimidates people.  Playing in 3D intimidates a lot of people.  And that's all valid.  

But I find that any self-respecting gamer will make the effort to adapt in order to enjoy superior gaming offerings that are out there for the taking.  I don't want that to come off as insulting, but I think, at its heart its true.

Gaming has always been about innovation and advancement.  Dedicated games to a cartridge slot, one button to two buttons, joysticks to d-pads, two buttons to six buttons, "fireball motions", steering wheels, cartridges to CD-ROMs, digital pads to analog ones.  Offline to online.  

It's just a matter of perspective on whether or not you want to keep up with the rules on playing the game.  It's ok if you don't, but I'll tell you right now you're missing out if you don't.

I could rattle off a list of 50 or so titles that have collectively shaped my experience in gaming from this generation, but I'll leave that unsaid.  I will say, don't give up on gaming yet.  Not on this generation or the next.  The Playstation 3 won't always be $600.  Microsoft has some excellent games coming down the pipe that will surely make my list of "must play" games when the NEXT-next generation comes along.  And we know Wii is going to have some very exciting content that may change the rules more then they ever have been before.

Anyway.  

I'm a proud gamer.  Retro, modern, next-gen.  Bring it all on.  Game on and all that.

[Izret101]

blissful is my new favorite board member BTW.
I don't think i have mentioned that yet.

I wouldn't have put it so eloquntly but i agree.

As the generations have been coming and going there have been changes.
For those who didn't keep up jumping from SNES or even NES or older is a HUGE difference.

That doesn't mean that you wouldn't enjoy the games because they arn't good but you don't like them because your not use to them.

As already stated there are plenty of games that are pick up and play and there are plenty of games that are more indepth.

You just need to find your happy medium.

[NationalGameDepot]

I have like 10 systems, Old and new stuff.  NES is by far my favorite, but there are great titles for each console.  If I had to choose, I would say old school is best, but I love gaming/collecting in general.  
~~NGD

[Speedy_NES]

For gaming, I prefer multiplayer in general, so I'd definitely have to go for new gen stuff, especially on-line games.  

Gameplay and storylines aside, I've always preferred colorful graphics.  2D SNES and Genesis games have my preference, as well as new gen 3D games with realistic settings.  

[Dev1anc3]

I agree 100% with what Blissfulnoise typed, and I also think that gamers and the market in general are becoming flooded by all of the stellar titles that come out now, and don't spend as much time playing the same title over and over again like we did in the past. It seems like almost every week a "must have" title comes out for one of the 7 current consoles (soon to be 9). I'm not complaining a bit, actually I think it's awsome that the market has taken off the way it has, but I don't seem to get to spend as much time with a newly released title like I used to.

I remember when Contra came out, and it seemed like that was the only game worth playing for the next 6 months, which made it an instant classic, and alot more rememorable than the week I spent playing Metroid Prime, or the week I spent playing GTA: SA before Halo 2 came out, and I never touched GTA again. In the last few years, I've found it very dificult to finish a game before it's put on the back burner for another game that just came out.
We have way more companys putting out great titles than we did back in the day, and they are spread out over all of the current consoles. It's not like when we had to wait for Nintendo, Sega, Konami, Capcom, Tecmo, ect, to put out a game on one of the two consoles, and we were lucky to get a title worth playing once a month, in the meantime we had dig through our old games to keep us entertained.

The amount of games coming out that are spread out for all of the different consoles has become pretty intimidating and expensive. It'll be interesting to see how it is in the next few years.

[yap]

Gaming has always been about innovation and advancement.  Dedicated games to a cartridge slot, one button to two buttons, joysticks to d-pads, two buttons to six buttons, "fireball motions", steering wheels, cartridges to CD-ROMs, digital pads to analog ones.  Offline to online.  

It's just a matter of perspective on whether or not you want to keep up with the rules on playing the game.  It's ok if you don't, but I'll tell you right now you're missing out if you don't.

??

How are you missing out if you don't keep up with the newest generation?  This sounds like marketspeak.  

Miyamoto's speech from E3 rung true with me.  How would a game like Tetris get made in today's market?  The publishers would say "we need more video, a movie tie in, bla bla".   It's all about the lowest common denominator right now, I'd say that you're not missing out at all if you skip by the current generation, in fact you'd do yourself a favor to ignore it.

[captain_nintendo]

??

How are you missing out if you don't keep up with the newest generation?  This sounds like marketspeak.  

Miyamoto's speech from E3 rung true with me.  How would a game like Tetris get made in today's market?  The publishers would say "we need more video, a movie tie in, bla bla".   It's all about the lowest common denominator right now, I'd say that you're not missing out at all if you skip by the current generation, in fact you'd do yourself a favor to ignore it.

So do you stop playing anything new? Because I dont see the video game market changing. It's about the money now. And there are games that make it out that are fresh and innovative!

I honestly can say that I am enjoying the hell out of Guitar Hero

[yap]

So do you stop playing anything new? Because I dont see the video game market changing. It's about the money now. And there are games that make it out that are fresh and innovative!

I honestly can say that I am enjoying the hell out of Guitar Hero

You're right about that.  New games do come out, and Guitar Hero is very rad.    I'm not so anti-new games that I won't play anything new, but I'm getting pretty jaded at all the crap coming out lately.

[Tynstar]

THey has always been a lot of crap coming out for every system. Now we just have more systems and that means more crap.

GBA / DS / PS2 / GC / XBOX / XBOX360 / PSP /

Soon PS3 and Wii

[The Metamorphosing Leon]

Meh, I just play what I can afford and what looks good. New or old they're all fun.

[blissfulnoise]

??

How are you missing out if you don't keep up with the newest generation?  This sounds like marketspeak.  

Miyamoto's speech from E3 rung true with me.  How would a game like Tetris get made in today's market?  The publishers would say "we need more video, a movie tie in, bla bla".   It's all about the lowest common denominator right now, I'd say that you're not missing out at all if you skip by the current generation, in fact you'd do yourself a favor to ignore it.

Is Dr. Mario a better game than Lumines?  Is Adventure a better game than Shadow of the Colossus?  Is The Legend of Zelda a better game than Twilight Princess?  Is Strider a better game than God of War?  Can any given NES game provide a fuller video game experience than any given PS2 game?

If you can say, empirically, yes, to those statements, then feel free to stop reading as I cannot change your opinions nor would I seek to.

But, if you're being fair, you're still reading this.  And I still say you're missing out by dismissing this generation of gaming because there are lots of excellent games out there that any self respecting gamer doesn't want to miss out on.

Again, I'm not saying that choosing not to play them is wrong in any way, but saying there are other experiences out there that are as good, if not better, than anything to come before.

That statement isn't "marketspeak", but the nature of consumerism.  Product improvements are occurring all the time.  Is it "marketspeak" to say that HDTV offers a superior television experience than standard definition sets?  Is it "marketspeak" to say that a 40 gig video iPod is superior to a 15 gig standard one?

Now to play devils advocate to those statements, you can make a strong case, and I'd buy it, that video games serve as a subjective entertainment (if not artistic) experience and can't be judged on things like presentation alone.  But I still say there are a wealth of experiences out there that can only be accomplished on this, and future generations of hardware.  And any gamer really should play if they consider themselves real enthusiasts of the medium.

But the real flaw in your argument is that you write off this whole generation as a waste due to the, admittedly, huge amount of shovelware on the shelves.  There are more then enough quality game titles out there to make up for the vast amounts of garbage.  I'd argue that the ratio of "must play" games to crap is higher than it's ever been.

We remember systems like the NES and the Genesis fondly, but really, have you looked at the absolute drizzling poo on those systems?  For every Phantasy Star 2 and Kid Icarus there are a dozen Last Battles, Dudes with Attitudes, and M.U.S.C.L.E.s.  Our blinders always seem to be in place able to make declarations like "How would Tetris do today?"  I'll tell you how; exceptionally well.  Even with this umpteenth iteration of the title, Tetris DS sold more than 150,000 units world wide in a little over a month on the shelves.  Gamers will always be able to differentiate between quality and quantity.  Even more so in this day and age with any number of outlets available to help make a better choice in what games to play.

And don't make the fallacy that just because YOU don't like a game, doesn't mean it's not an excellent game.  I personally don't enjoy Halo 2 but I can certainly appreciate it for those who do.  Likewise, I adore Wind Waker, but a lot of people can't get past the presentation.

Finally, don't fool yourself, video games have, and will always be about money (e.g. your “lowest common denominator”.  If a game doesn't stand a chance of selling, it's not getting released.  If a game can make more money by basing it on a movie license than not, it's going to get that license.  This is as true for the Atari (which has some of the worst “games” ever made on it) as it is for the Xbox.  Writing off companies today as some sort of evil empire who want to maximize their profits but singing the praises of the Nintendo of 1986 in the same breath is absurd.