Gaming has become mainstream and it's the killer of creativity and innovation when you catter to normies like netflix and tv series show, that's where we are headed , just look at the meddling and bastardization of hollywood hacks being introduced in game awards show, those hacks failed movie creators like kojima that ended up in gaming because they didn't have the chops to be a movie director, that's the final nail in the coffin.
@@Roge9 That's so not how it actually was back in the day. We just played a great game of Street Fighter II. And then we got another version, and other, etc. But no one thought the previous ones were remotely "broken". That's just a try hard statement imo. 99% of the time these old games felt fully cooked upon release, even most of the bad ones. And Street Fighter II was one of the all-time greats.
The nice thing about older games is that they were short enough that you came back to them all the time. These longer, huge, never ending games don’t really do that for me. I just get burnt out by them and then I’m done with them because it’s just too much of a commitment to dive back in.
Absolutely correct. I'm an older gamer who turned 40 this year retro is more my thing nowadays for the pick up and play factor. I don't want to commit to 40+ hours in a game anymore. Just want to have some fun and go about my business.
Yeah, the same here! For me, 10, 15 hour is the limit. Now I'm playing (again) ocarina of time on Switch Online, a perfect game, and it have about 15 hours of gameplay. Perfection!
True. I recently played Last of Us, Cyberpunk and Red Dead Redemption side by side and they're all great games but Last of Us had an edge because the first was only about 15 hours long. The perfect length to a videogame. Whereas the others took about that long just to get started. I honestly didn't know how to appropriately play Cyberpunk until about 30 hours in.
@@neoconnor4395 Steam clocked my Cyberpunk playtime at 63 hours before the 2.0 version release, I didn't even finish the game. I wanted to start over but cant bring myself to do it simply because of the time commitment.
@@dauntae24If you think a racing sim limited by the confines of real world racing is the Pinnacle of what video games have to offer, I truly pity you. I'll be playing something truly hardcore like F-Zero GX on GameCube. A game that looks, sounds, controls, and plays better despite being over twenty years old.
If you truly believe that then you're just an old man who yells at clouds. You act like Elden Ring, Breath of the Wild, Mario Odyssey, Astrobot, Baldurs Gate 3, a lot of the indie scene, doesn't exist. Id play Elden Ring over any retro game any day and I was born in the 80s and love retro games.
Why can't someone enjoy older games better than the newer ones? Personally the newer ones aren't as good, because most of the time they don't cone on the disk you buy. You have to download something. On older games every thing came om the disk or cartridge that you bought. Also as expensive as they are now they should come on the disk.
@@robertw31968 Thats a different topic entirely and I agree with you, I want the whole game on a disk. That being said it has nothing to do with the game itself. The issue is when ppl think of retro they think of the great games and forget that the NES, SNES, Genesis all had SO MANY garbage games. When they think of the present they think of all the bad games or the story heavy ones that don't feel like games, they dont think of the MANY amazing games (look at the indie scene, its amazing!). Nostalgia is blinding everyone.
This definitely tackles a big reason I enjoy retro games more. Although games were mainstream in my childhood, it obviously isn't what it is today. Games, to me, had more character, more style, more 'magic'. Game developers seemed to take more risk and made games for nerds and gamers.
That's one key thing that a lot of people miss when they say "now is so great, because there are games for everyone". Not really. The audience decades ago was different, and they got pushed out of gaming decades ago. What you're seeing now are not developers who grew up with those games, but developers who came along after the previous audience was pushed out of gaming.
Are Retro Games Really Better Than Modern Games? As far as I'm concerned the answer is "yes" - in my opinion Super Metroid represents the pinnacle of video gaming.
While I would agree that Super Metroid is an amazing game, I think Metroid Dread is as good, if not better. There are definitely amazing retro games, and there are amazing modern games. Both have pros and cons, it's just a matter of opinion.
Modern AAA gaming is like mainstream politicians nowadays: it's all appearance, no substance. As for modern indies, it's like outsiders politicians: it's hit or miss, depending of what you like.
What about games like God of War 2018/Ragnarok? Those are masterpieces IMO...so there are some wonderful modern games floating around (even if those are the minority)
I started playing video games when I was 6 in 1986 when my older brother had an Atari 2600. I've seen the evolution of games throughout the decades. Back then our fascination was all about graphics and how real they were looking. We had tons of fun games that created mainstream worldwide recognizable characters and not only Mario and Sonic but many others. Retro games were so inspirational it branched off to clothing, merchandise, toys, movies, tv shows, etc. Modern games don't have that impact at all. So much modern games copy the past. I don't hate modern games but honestly they lack having a fun experience and become frustrating fast. Where I do love modern games are when it comes to the racing genre and simulations. Those are better being as close to real as possible and no old tech could of pulled that off however games like Crusin USA, Daytona USA, OutRun, Need for Speed, are all classics that stand on their own thrones. I love Retro more than modern 100%, more fun, creative, and great variety. I can go on and on but I'll stop here. Oh btw when it came to girls, when they came by my house we always played games they loved it. Lots of girls owned SEGA and Nintendo consoles back then.
Modern racing simulations suck because they lack the creativity and variety of those older racers you just mentioned. Reality is very limiting and restrictive to creativity.
I would say it's half-and-half. There are tons of games worth playing from either era. For all intents and purposes though, there's a lot of crap to wade through from both eras. Online storefronts nowadays definitely provide quantity over quality; at least Steam has refunds.
They were better because they were new. We never saw anything like it and thr jump from system to system was mind blowing. Where as now there's nothing mind blowing and there's nothing we ain't seen already
@@JungleOfMeatThat's not true. They are just better cuz they are better. You can play retro games with save states, game genie codes, Game Shark codes, cheat codes in games & with Turbo controllers. Modern games starting from the PS3 era, you can't even do that. Also the fact with Retro games, you are playing right away, avg games I play last 30 min to 1 hour. I replay them again the next few days etc. Modern gaming, games are like 20-100 hours. Once I beat those, I don't play them ever again.
I went back to PS1 2 years ago and it's been my main console ever since and my gaming experience has been better these last 2 years than it has since 2009
I play some modern games, but honestly once we hit the Ps4/Xbox One era things really went downhill. Everything is digital, we don't really own our games, and it's all managed by updates and downloads. A sea of live service games and online stores disguised as games. To me, nothing beats physical media and simply putting a game into a console and just playing it. 360, GameCube, PS2, Dreamcast, 64. All my favorites. And the community that mods some of these systems is also very neat. I recently got my girlfriend a modded 3ds with hundreds of games on it, while also still able to play straight from the cartridge.
As someone who can't play games often, here is the main difference for me. It's not about modern and retro. A lot of newer games, when i want to play, requires updating my Xbox and then updating the game, and by the time that's over it has already eaten into a bulk of my playtime. Retro/Modern-retro, I can turn on my console and then start playing
Here’s the real reason why. Your on UA-cam after work and next thing you know it’s bed time and your actually tired. And when you try to play your eyes start hurting and you knock out with controller in hand.
Because cyberpunk was not a good game… Let’s have the same argument but with Super Mario Oddysey and arcade Donkey Kong… People don’t play Donkey Kong 30 days later. You tell me.
Retro games are better than modern games, no bs DLC, you didn’t need an internet connection just to download the game and more often than not retro games were fully complete out of the box.
I like both retro and modern gaming. However I've noticed that modern games at their current state can be unapproachable for a non gamer or someone who can't use 50 buttons. I have friends that want to play modern games they just can't get around all the systems and buttons in a good game. Even what I would consider an easier game to play other people I know just simply can't play them. You give them a super Nintendo game and controller and they can game better than me.
Videogames before it went online were better because developers had plenty of QA workers to make sure their games didn’t have any issues. Now we have to rely on patches to fix half baked games. Also, they were far more affordable to make. I miss those $49.99 days for new game releases.
Die hard gamer here since 1987. I have played and owned almost every major console since the NES and Atari up to the PS5 and the Switch. They're all fun to me. I go back and forth sometimes. One day it's PS2 or SNES. Another day it's PS5 or Switch or maybe Dreamcast. I love them all both old and new. They all have different styles through the eras.
Me and my family have ps 5’s, series x, and a couple switches. We play the switch all the time. And the others here and there. It got boring for all of us for the most part. I went out and bought a Wii and a n64 with a bunch of games. My kids are paying those wayyyyy more. It’s crazy
bought a steam deck in January and barely played my ps5 much this year it really changed my perception.Just been playing old gems from the ps2 era mostly. Max Payne fight for New York bully manhunt nba street jet li rise to honor the list goes on because of the big library of classics.Retro games were made with so much love and passion back then you can’t really convince me it’s just nostalgia I just don’t get those vibes from most newer games just feels like I’m not missing out on anything too crazy with recent games.this generation just really opened my eyes to how good we had it back then not just with gaming but entertainment as a whole
Replayability will be the decider of this question imo Games used to be designed to be replayed often as the next release was at least a year away. Nowadays games want to hold you down forever so you can never leave and they overstay their welcome so much that when you're done you never go back
@@Bitdead Yes, people still replay games from the NES, a lot, and that system is nearly 40 years old. Even the newest games from the original run are nearly 30 years old. The only reason we won't still be replaying games is if they go out of print and can't be accessed or run on whatever hardware is in use in the future. And, with the efforts that have been put into things like DOSBox and various emulators, the only way that's happening is if there are laws passed that specifically ban it.
@@SmallSpoonBrigade i mean, we can access nintendo online and play 30 year old, or more, games are still worth playing, even if u dont hav the original hardware, however i dont think ppl will be interested in more modern games in 30 years no matter whether they are available or not.
PS1 Square ... 3 banger mainline Final Fantasy games in one generation. Tons of original games mixed in too ... Xenogears, FFT, Vagrant Story, Brave Fencer Musashi, Parasite Eve and so on. I miss when companies could output stuff like that. Lots of good mainline stuff in one generation plus more creative & quirky projects throughout too.
And unlike modern indy games these older games are all original games with a lot of polish behind them. Meanwhile indies copy the same style of game millions of time over, while rarely providing anything new or of quality. And for every indy hit that people point out as great, you could probably name hundreds of trash games. PS1 and maybe PS2 era had the best overlap of big high quality games and creativity.
YES!! I've been gaming for 45 years, from black and white arcades, to the many home consoles, to my PC setup. I've witnessed BOTH arcade and console gaming industries rise and fall and rise again, to it's current failures. I've worked arcades the last 30 years and, it's similar to the arcades losing customers, due to game costs and home setups. People want to play at arcades, but are being discouraged. I plan on covering this on my channel, more from the arcade side of things. At the end of the day, it boils down to corporate BUSINESS practices. Companies follow MONEY PATTERNS, rather than finding out what people are interested in. They tell people what they SHOULD BE interested in, to capitalize on trends, then dump as much into the trend as possible and gain as much as they can until the next trend is out, then they dump any relationship to the current trend.
Arcades were essentially the original microtransactions. Extremely scummy game design centered around trying to eat someone's quarters. Nowadays, a lot of games take away obvious conveniences that would normally be there in order to make people think they are making wise payments for conveniences. Arcades did something similar for their era: they would intentionally make the games insanely hard and bullshit in order to make people want to keep putting in quarters so they don't have to start over and risk not making it as far as they did. Now obviously the social aspect of arcades was fantastic, and there were definitely games that were designed more fairly or were fun to play co-op and such. However, the scumminess of arcades was one of the reasons people were so excited to be able to play arcade games on console.
For me it's preference. I've just accepted that the 4th Generation is MY Generation and now it's all I explore and play. Works really well for me personally.
@@blacklist241 I can see that, there was a lot that they could do with that hardware, as long as you didn't necessarily need a lot in terms of 3d effects.
Yes. I've bought, played and owned every major console and franchise since the 80's. The drop off came about 10 years ago. Innovation is gone and the quality has only gotten worse. I've since gone back to the PS2 and Steam for older titles as my go to for gaming now. Content with that.
It’s not even close, retro games are beyond modern games. Granted “retro” mostly refers to Nintendo and Sega. Most of the good modern games are from Nintendo…so yeah there you go.
This is a difficult question to answer, not least because what counts as retro is so broad. Retro can mean anything from a very basic 2D game from more than half a century ago to a triple-A title from the PS3 generation, the latter being closer to our modern games than those from way back. Broadly speaking, I’d put it this way: games today are demonstrably better in many aspects thanks to modern technology, but I’d strongly argue that gaming itself was better back then. When I say gaming was better, I mean the experience of gaming felt much more meaningful and enjoyable. It’s hard to impress us nowadays, even with photo-realistic games that have taken almost a decade to complete. Back then, we were much more tolerant as gamers. The things I could tolerate from games in the past would drive me crazy today. These days, games have to be nearly perfect. I even managed to play and enjoy games that were complete technical messes.
Back then: buy physical game, insert game in console, play game, enjoy same game several times. Now: "buy" digital game, download/install game, play buggy game (or wait for patches bigger than the game itself), get bored and never finish it. This does not apply to online only games, those are a completely different money grabbing crap that I'll never understand. I guess the best retro games are the ones that lure you back into playing them again and again, they don't need hi-res graphics nor a turbine to cool down the hardware while you're playing them, and when you get older, longer games are not as enticing as pick up and play games, so IMO yes, retro games are better. The closer newer games graphics get to reality, the less enticing they feel to me. If I want to have a cinematic experience, I watch a TV show or a movie.
Modern games, even good ones, have too much padding. Some padding is explicit, but I think we've become so used to it that most will not consciously realize that even good features often pad out a product and subtract from the whole. Newer games are certainly massive and larger in scope, and the initial response can be quite positive- but once you've played enough games, I think it becomes desired to play a more focused product. Furthermore, the limitations of older games meant that putting in some features prevent other features from being present. This helped push the 'creative risk' that RGT mentioned, as a developer wanting to stand out needed to put more focus on that unique feature as the core part of the game instead of throwing it into a heap of hundreds of industry-standard mechanics.
I literally have said I feel bad for my son because he will never experience the "wow" moments I had throughout 80s-90s gaming. Seeing N64 for the 1st time was the biggest "wow" in gaming history for me. And I was 20 years old when it launched. The closest I have felt that since was the launch of BOTW, but still no comparison.
Im a 40 year old elder millennial and I loved every minute of all the advancements in technology you speak of from 1990-2000. Then the HD era came which was dope at first. I loved the 360. But nowadays it seems to be more about realism in graphics than just being fun. My fav era is PS1/PS2. 🎮🤘
Yes they are. One, I know the games (for the most part) are complete to their fullest, while modern games are constantly being updated with DLC, and not to mention most of them will never be finished. Two, No DLC required, and I can play them to their fullest, as most of them are much shorter, which means replay-ability is high. Retro games and Indie games >>>>>> Modern ones.
Games back in the 80's and 90's was all about fun and replay ability. Now it's about release now and fix later with a AAA price tag. Today's games got worse as these AAA companies get greedy and sloppy.
1000000% yes!!! Gaming has gotten so bad. Companies coming out with games with horrendous gameplay.. sacrificing gameplay for graphics. We need the opposite. Stop putting such a emphasis on graphics graphics graphics. We don't care anymore. If you're making a game and selling 1 million copies is a flop.. you're definitely doing everything wrong
Yes, retro games are FAR better than modern games. I include “retro-style” games in the retro games category. Games like *River City Girls* stand side-by-side with *River City Ransom* . Modern games are just full of dlc, patches, pay-to-play, streaming, pay-to-win, woke injected, garbage that are trying to be movies. When you play old school games, they FEEL like games! They are fun. They are challenging. They give you a real sense of accomplishment. And the music was the kind of stuff that stuck with you. Real quick, hum some music from The *Witcher 3* …. You can’t do it, right? Now, hum music from *Super Mario Bros.* Hum Guile’s theme. Green Hill Zone from *Sonic The Hedgehog* . See what I mean? Retro games were memorable. New stuff just plain sucks.
In my opinion, the modern games have become too much visual effects/visual candy, and less creative on story/challenges. I grew up with the 8bit/16bit era of Nintendo/Sega. Games overall were fun, challenging and had lasting appeal. Some modern games are not cheap, have great visual effects, meh on story, but don't have the lasting appeal. It is almost like some games are like a movie in the theater. You see it one time and then that is it. PC games for me I now hold in high regard over Game Consoles. I'm older, so simplicity is still a part of my video game world.
100% YES!!! I don't really play anything past the GameCube/GameBoy Advance/XBox 360 era (other than Nintendo). That was the golden decade of video games for me. The last 'modern' video game bought was Control.
Seeing a SNES for the first time in a Software Etc store and watching the super Mario world demo was absolutely magical. I was always into the tech specs of game systems even at an early age, so it was just mind blowing seeing new consoles coming out. 3rd-6th generations was always amazing from one to the next. Those were the golden age of gaming. Diminishing returns definitely showing itself. You'd be hard pressed to see much difference even between the OG PS4 to the PS5 Pro. We have hit that plateau I think. I've also had thoughts that we are witnessing the video game crash 2.0
retro will always be better because they were made for fun, they were made by people having fun taking risks and making new stuff to see if they could strike gold. Today games are made for a bottom line and how much they can make in returns. prove me wrong. A really good example to show this is the EA lineup. Look at the Genesis EA game list then take a look at the shovelware they produce today.
I know one thing for sure. The modern format for FPS games just loses something good we used to have. Goldeneye, multiple clearly defined levels. That made me go back time and again for ''a quick 15 mins'' We don't have that now, it's all open world, big long quests. You need a good 3 or 4 hours spare to actually have a game.
It is an interesting debate because I sometimes wonder that as well. Weirdly enough I think during the 2000s I considered modern gaming better because I guess maybe I really like the games of that time when I played them such as the great RTS games on the PC of the time. But nowadays I seem to generally prefer retro games primarily the ones I grew up with in the 90s or some of the ones I played in the 2000s as well. But there are modern games I like, but ultimately the most recent games that I play on the switch actually came out like 5 or 6 years ago. There are some that were made more recently too but not as many
As a fighting game fan, yes. Examples: - People still play competitive super turbo and Third Strike. Nobody plays street fighter 4 and 5. - Everyone with a ps1 owned tekken 3 and many people bought a ps1 because of tekken 3. A small margin % of each console & pc owners bought tekken 7 and nobody bought hardware just to play tekken since tekken 3 days. - Fighting games used to be Play to unlock, now they’re all Pay to unlock.
Maybe they should make old style games and put them in a collection for £70. So it could be 30 interesting old style games that are simple but very good just like the old days. It could include online aswell and loads of mini games to play against your friends.
I've always said, games made from late 90's to 2005 were the best in my gaming lifetime. Don't get me wrong I love the eye candy and the sound upgrades along with better controls and viewing of today. Its human nature that someone's gaming tastes change over time. I enjoy the heck out of my PS5 and Series X consoles. Heck I still own two PS2's and play the heck out of those games today even with the graphics aging sound issues. In 2001 I was one of the few that loved Shadow of Destiny it was an interesting idea, I wanted a sequel so bad. In 2024 I've played alot of story based games I think Shadow of Destiny should be tried again.
I love all eras! I'm from Sega Genesis era and, now, in2024, I'm here, almost every week and weekend playing my Playstation. Tks God and my papa and mama for all.
Retro games are better if you have internet problems. Edit: Plus what happens if internet falls for days from Blizzards. There’s your backup handhelds if power is completely out. Some internet servers are slower than others and might be weaker in areas. For internet servers, it depends on what fits your budget.
I am 39 and here are the things I value: Respect of my limited time. - Short or non existent tutorials and intuitive controls. Rewarding my effort. - Content to unlock though progress in the game or secrets, not micro transactions. Ownership of my game - if I buy a physical Indy game, please put the entire 1.0 base game on the disc. Two player local when possible. - Not everyone wants to play online all the time. Artistic freedom in development. - I don’t want to feel soulless and corporate. So if the game is, then I’m not interested.
There is equal amounts of positives and negatives for both sides. I feel for modern we see mostly negative stuff because it's what gets the most attention online because of big companies having the biggest market dominance but if you actually do your research and this isn't just including indies you can find lots of amazing experiences and thankfully its easily accessible thanks to digital distribution and there is something for everyone.
In short.... No! In my opinion 90% of all games modern and retro eventually start to age. Heck you can look at some hugely popular PS3 and even PS4 era games and see how new games in the same genre have refined the experience. However, with that said, what makes this topic interesting is that when you play a game that still holds up several generations later... You just found the definition of a classic! Classic arcade games like Donkey Kong, Space Invaders and Pac-Man are in my opinion the perfect example of perfect games. Games that had one goal back into day and they still manage to hold up in this day and age! Games of all generations have these titles (they are few and far between as they always have been) but they are still being released to this day! Tl;dR a great game is a great regardless of when it came out Quality vid mate
Facts the answer is not that straight forward. When people say retro games are better and gaming was better in the past. I am always reminded by Angry video game nerd.
There is also another way to see it: Back in the old days, it was possible to innovate and create something completely fresh and new, that nobody seen before. Today, its a case of "been there, done that" and it depends more on how welll a Game is executed and how well stuff got combined into the game to make it fun (or not)... The Standards are also much higher due to that, so a mediocre game today would be the best of the best just 20 years ago...
Yes and no- during the transition period of N64, PS1 (and Saturn) - essentially in every game you were fighting not only the CPU, but also the camera and the controls. The developers were still figuring out how the make 3D work in games, and even some of the beloved titles like 007 Goldeneye or 1080 Snowboarding are very frustrating to play at certain times in almost every level. Today's games have different annoyances..like in Jedi Order- all we really care about is wielding the light saber and using force powers....for some reason the developer thought it would be a good idea to shove a version of the Titanfall2 acrobatics engine into a Star Wars game 'just cause' in hopes of making it interesting. Despite having great graphics and sound, I still haven't played through Jedi Order because of how bored I get having to navigate with its acrobat simulator system. So I flip back over to my Switch, and will play on the NSO service games. These current AAA games are like 1 time experiences that you'll consume and never come back to...maybe you'll rewatch cutscenes on UA-cam, but you won't come back to the game ever again because of the complexity.
Though I do think retro games are better than modern games, it's pretty unfair to modern AAA games because so few are made in a given year compared to any year prior to 2010. It's also a bit unfair because we're comparing 30 years of games to like 10 years of games (compounding with the previously stated fact of there being less games made recently), so it's going to be easier to flood the conversation with retro bangers. Modern AAA games look better and usually control better (or at least subscribe to a standard control scheme), but they start to feel like the same game and aren't as responsive. Modern AAA games are safe and stale while retro games were creative, unique, and risky. Indie games are the only space currently that try something really new or fresh.
That's just it, though. Modern games often DON'T look and control better. This is in large part because of the backward thinking you just exhibited. This idea that if a game doesn't control and play like every other game out there, and the control scheme takes practice, it's somehow bad. Many modern games are just a cluttered mess of extraneous and non-interactive graphics where it's hard to know what stuff is actually gameplay related. It's harder to track your targets in many FPS because there is so many particle effects as well as light and shadows being cast onto opponents. It's just an absolute mess!
I remember being blown away by the graphics of Resident Evil 5 on Xbox360. It's a significant graphical leap from 6th generation. I don't get that feeling anymore with new games. Even if I skip Ps4 and just witness a Ps5 game coming from Ps3, I doubt I'd be that impressed.
For someone like myself who grew up in the 3rd/4th gens, I can't help but feel bad for the ones who in recent years are discovering and hopefully enjoying retro games...it's not really the same for them who didn't get the chance to grow up with and see them in their prime, is it? I mean that movie The Wizard and the SMB3 hype at the time, that kind of magic would be impossible in the modern Internet/social media world.
90's was the golden age of gaming. When devs and publishers were vying for your attention and purchase by making a better game that the next studio vs now where they basically just sell you a trailer and promise the content will come "later" or the bug fixes will come later and then sell you all the type of content you used to just *get* when buying the game and you had to actually play to unlock it, instead of just short-cut buying your way to it. ITs alot less about making a good game now and much more about making a hugely profitable game. Which are not the same thing.
Born in 83. Glad to say I grew up w nes to now. I don’t like one over the other. I’m nostalgic and modern at the same time. This IS the best time for games though. You can experience all gens at the touch of your fingertips
Another thing to consider: According to Wikipedia Numbers, last year on Steam there were more game reeases than NES, SNES, PS1 and PS2 *COMBINED* That is also an enormous problem that we not talk about, the sheer ammount of games made and thus its very hard to find the great games, because the pile of very bad games is orders of magnitudes larger these days! When you had to dig to 2-20kg of junk to find a great thing back in the day, its now 20 tons to dig through to find the same excitement. But it still exists, magic is still made, its just less obvious and depends on the mood and People...
Retro games have the advantage of the trash games have already been filtered out so you are only going back to the good games from the past not the trash because most of the trash isn't easily accessible anymore because there's not much of a market for them.
@@jammer9941 Correct, that is another thing that people never talk about! They talk about Resident Evil 4 all the time, but hardly anyone mentions "Death by Degrees" ever. Because its not a very good game... And thus we talk about the best of the best of the past, but look at the average today...
I have been gaming since I was 5 (40 now) and although I enjoy the nostalgia of jumping into a older game from time to time I must say modern gaming is more for me. I love the big story games we get these days like God of War, ghost of tsushima or the last of us. I love the remakes we are getting too! I'm a big fan of Resident Evil and I have loved all the remakes including RE3 that most of the fan base complain about for some reason. Modern gaming has it's problems but so did the older generations. I think we just have a habit of looking back with rose tinted glasses.
Some retro games are better than modern games. However some modern games based on Classic franchises have exceeded the originals. Examples such as Ultra Street Fighter IV , Tekken 8 , Mario Odyssey, Mario Kart, Ridge Racer and others.
@@arcticridge They are still modern representations. What people fail to realize it is not a Modern game issue. It is games developed in the West that are failing. It always has been that way everyone has just failed to realize that the Japanese game market has been shrinking as far as development goes so less games. Most classic games are all Japanese developed and packaged as something else by an American Publisher.
@@Japheigod seems like most japanese made games prioritize fun over pandering, but we don't know if those devs are being whipped to get those games out. Methinks they're being pushed harder than US devs but we just don't hear about it
@@arcticridge I used to publish, plan, and distribute many titles. There is literally no Independent scene in Japan and not many smaller studios left. Those that do exist do work for larger Japanese companies who publish their titles. It is like how it was here in the 80''s-90's but instead of USA publishers. Japanese people are ethnocentric and do not like pandering or political statements in their media. They are after all a Constitutional Monarchy.
The jump between 4th through 7th gen was exciting and something to look forward to. Since then the leaps are in the details, as you mention, which I don't care about.
One thing that really bugs me about modern games is the emphasis on achievements, unlockables and level grinding in games that don’t need it. It’s so meta and all about dopamine and creating addiction loops (this of course ties into money again). The game may suck, but it sure feels great to unlock an achievement doesn’t it. Or to put it another way, you paid for the game and now you have to work for it to enjoy it, level up and unlock features that should be there from the get go. Video game design has just gotten skewed.
Astro bot is a great example of why retro games are the best. A 3D platformer is still just as fun today as it was back then. You don’t need 300 million dollar budgets, hyper realistic graphics, 60fps and 68 hours of cutscenes to be a good game. Just make it fun to play. Now I love both styles but the old games just have more replay value.
I honestly blame a lot of this on Sony hemogeny. I was talking about this very thing with my mom not too long ago - when I was a kid there were entire new genres popping up. We had fighting games, first person shooters, RPG's and survival horror games showing up for the first time ever - then Sony took over, and they've more or less taken everything they had up to that point, released GTA, and sold us GTA clones where you're a guy on a screen running around shooting everything, and they release new ones for every new updated Playstation VCR thingy. When Nintendo ruled the world there were more interesting creative games being released.
Yes. Here is the thing. I fire up a retro game and can immediately tell there was passion put into it. The focus was on making the best game possible. Developers (some of the time) and publishers (most of the time) have lost their way and the focus of modern games seems to be on everything but making the best game possible. Its simple really...it's all we want.
Not only are the "generational differences" no longer significant, the sheer amount of disk space it takes to install a modern game has become insane; usually over 100 gigabytes these days, whereas in the PS4 era they were more along the lines of 50 gigabytes. So not only is it a matter of the naked eye not really being able to tell the difference, the games themselves take up at least double the amount of disk space. And they're frequently a bloated, unoptimized mess, to boot.
I wish Sega managed everything they did after the Genesis better. There was no reason to put out the Sega CD, 32X and Saturn as quickly as they did. I would truly love to have seen what they could have came up with.
I'm 42 I remember being blown away by the jump in graphics from nes to Sega Genesis. I just remember coming home and my dad had surprised be and bought a Sega Genesis. I just remember being so blown away by the graphics of Green Hill Zone on Sonic 1
Yes, for people like me who don't want to play highly involved, complex games. My types of games: horizontal and vertical shooters, Tetris, Crazy Taxi, Boulder Dash, etc.
Can't lump all modern games together. There are plenty of amazing games still coming out. Inscryption is a pretty basic game by most standards, especially graphics, but it was incredibly fun. Same with Undertale. BUT, a large portion of the industry, primarily top AAA games have thrown passion and innovation out the door for money.
😢
RGT is you with hair
Gaming has become mainstream and it's the killer of creativity and innovation when you catter to normies like netflix and tv series show, that's where we are headed , just look at the meddling and bastardization of hollywood hacks being introduced in game awards show, those hacks failed movie creators like kojima that ended up in gaming because they didn't have the chops to be a movie director, that's the final nail in the coffin.
Gaming becoming mainstream was the biggest mistake of all.
Halo infinite for PC is pretty laid back. Not gonna lie 😂
❤
One thing about retro gaming! They didn’t ever need a day one patch
Amen
nope, they instead released with broken unbalanced characters and forced us to spend even more money on another cartridge *looks the Street Fighter 2*
@@Roge9 That's so not how it actually was back in the day. We just played a great game of Street Fighter II. And then we got another version, and other, etc. But no one thought the previous ones were remotely "broken". That's just a try hard statement imo. 99% of the time these old games felt fully cooked upon release, even most of the bad ones. And Street Fighter II was one of the all-time greats.
The nice thing about older games is that they were short enough that you came back to them all the time. These longer, huge, never ending games don’t really do that for me. I just get burnt out by them and then I’m done with them because it’s just too much of a commitment to dive back in.
Mario and Luigi Brothership definitely overstayed it's welcome and felt bloated. I was expecting a 30 hour experience, not 50+.
Absolutely correct. I'm an older gamer who turned 40 this year retro is more my thing nowadays for the pick up and play factor. I don't want to commit to 40+ hours in a game anymore. Just want to have some fun and go about my business.
Yeah, the same here! For me, 10, 15 hour is the limit. Now I'm playing (again) ocarina of time on Switch Online, a perfect game, and it have about 15 hours of gameplay. Perfection!
True. I recently played Last of Us, Cyberpunk and Red Dead Redemption side by side and they're all great games but Last of Us had an edge because the first was only about 15 hours long. The perfect length to a videogame. Whereas the others took about that long just to get started. I honestly didn't know how to appropriately play Cyberpunk until about 30 hours in.
@@neoconnor4395 Steam clocked my Cyberpunk playtime at 63 hours before the 2.0 version release, I didn't even finish the game. I wanted to start over but cant bring myself to do it simply because of the time commitment.
Yes retro games are better
Go play Rad Racer. I’m be in my sim rig playing ACC.
@@dauntae24gladly
@@dauntae24If you think a racing sim limited by the confines of real world racing is the Pinnacle of what video games have to offer, I truly pity you. I'll be playing something truly hardcore like F-Zero GX on GameCube. A game that looks, sounds, controls, and plays better despite being over twenty years old.
Undoubtedly.
SOME retro games are better, not all
%1000 yeah retro games are better then modern games
If you truly believe that then you're just an old man who yells at clouds. You act like Elden Ring, Breath of the Wild, Mario Odyssey, Astrobot, Baldurs Gate 3, a lot of the indie scene, doesn't exist. Id play Elden Ring over any retro game any day and I was born in the 80s and love retro games.
It's 50/50
Why can't someone enjoy older games better than the newer ones? Personally the newer ones aren't as good, because most of the time they don't cone on the disk you buy. You have to download something. On older games every thing came om the disk or cartridge that you bought. Also as expensive as they are now they should come on the disk.
@@robertw31968 Thats a different topic entirely and I agree with you, I want the whole game on a disk. That being said it has nothing to do with the game itself. The issue is when ppl think of retro they think of the great games and forget that the NES, SNES, Genesis all had SO MANY garbage games. When they think of the present they think of all the bad games or the story heavy ones that don't feel like games, they dont think of the MANY amazing games (look at the indie scene, its amazing!). Nostalgia is blinding everyone.
The problem with retro game is the amount of great games available compared to modern games but regardless there are plenty modern games.
Retro games make me feel good. Modern games make me stress about things I shouldn't be thinking about when I play a game.
Retro games were made by nerds for nerds. Modern games are made by committee for a non-existent audience.
Bingo
This definitely tackles a big reason I enjoy retro games more. Although games were mainstream in my childhood, it obviously isn't what it is today. Games, to me, had more character, more style, more 'magic'. Game developers seemed to take more risk and made games for nerds and gamers.
That's one key thing that a lot of people miss when they say "now is so great, because there are games for everyone". Not really. The audience decades ago was different, and they got pushed out of gaming decades ago. What you're seeing now are not developers who grew up with those games, but developers who came along after the previous audience was pushed out of gaming.
The audience does exist, they’re on Tumblr and Reddit
You can thank the system for forcing women into gaming development and then forcing women into game playing.
Are Retro Games Really Better Than Modern Games? As far as I'm concerned the answer is "yes" - in my opinion Super Metroid represents the pinnacle of video gaming.
While I would agree that Super Metroid is an amazing game, I think Metroid Dread is as good, if not better. There are definitely amazing retro games, and there are amazing modern games. Both have pros and cons, it's just a matter of opinion.
Modern AAA gaming is like mainstream politicians nowadays: it's all appearance, no substance. As for modern indies, it's like outsiders politicians: it's hit or miss, depending of what you like.
Plenty of good modern AAA games. You just aren't playing them. Buying a ubisoft game for the 50th time isn't all AAA games
What about games like God of War 2018/Ragnarok? Those are masterpieces IMO...so there are some wonderful modern games floating around (even if those are the minority)
I started playing video games when I was 6 in 1986 when my older brother had an Atari 2600. I've seen the evolution of games throughout the decades. Back then our fascination was all about graphics and how real they were looking. We had tons of fun games that created mainstream worldwide recognizable characters and not only Mario and Sonic but many others. Retro games were so inspirational it branched off to clothing, merchandise, toys, movies, tv shows, etc. Modern games don't have that impact at all. So much modern games copy the past. I don't hate modern games but honestly they lack having a fun experience and become frustrating fast. Where I do love modern games are when it comes to the racing genre and simulations. Those are better being as close to real as possible and no old tech could of pulled that off however games like Crusin USA, Daytona USA, OutRun, Need for Speed, are all classics that stand on their own thrones. I love Retro more than modern 100%, more fun, creative, and great variety. I can go on and on but I'll stop here. Oh btw when it came to girls, when they came by my house we always played games they loved it. Lots of girls owned SEGA and Nintendo consoles back then.
Yeah good times.
I agree 100%
Modern racing simulations suck because they lack the creativity and variety of those older racers you just mentioned. Reality is very limiting and restrictive to creativity.
I would say it's half-and-half. There are tons of games worth playing from either era. For all intents and purposes though, there's a lot of crap to wade through from both eras.
Online storefronts nowadays definitely provide quantity over quality; at least Steam has refunds.
True 😁
I'm old, and in the beginning, I always wanted the graphics of today but gameplay from the past is still more fun for me.
I do play modern games but majority of my gaming time is spent with games that are 20+ years old...I just dig the older style I suppose.
Short answer: Yes.
Long answer: Yeeeees.
They were better because they were new. We never saw anything like it and thr jump from system to system was mind blowing. Where as now there's nothing mind blowing and there's nothing we ain't seen already
@@JungleOfMeatThat's not true. They are just better cuz they are better. You can play retro games with save states, game genie codes, Game Shark codes, cheat codes in games & with Turbo controllers.
Modern games starting from the PS3 era, you can't even do that.
Also the fact with Retro games, you are playing right away, avg games I play last 30 min to 1 hour. I replay them again the next few days etc.
Modern gaming, games are like 20-100 hours. Once I beat those, I don't play them ever again.
I went back to PS1 2 years ago and it's been my main console ever since and my gaming experience has been better these last 2 years than it has since 2009
I say that modern gaming is for a hobby, while retro gaming is for hobbyists. Retro is more about the old technologies and what you can do with it.
This is not even a debate
I play some modern games, but honestly once we hit the Ps4/Xbox One era things really went downhill. Everything is digital, we don't really own our games, and it's all managed by updates and downloads. A sea of live service games and online stores disguised as games.
To me, nothing beats physical media and simply putting a game into a console and just playing it. 360, GameCube, PS2, Dreamcast, 64. All my favorites. And the community that mods some of these systems is also very neat.
I recently got my girlfriend a modded 3ds with hundreds of games on it, while also still able to play straight from the cartridge.
As someone who can't play games often, here is the main difference for me. It's not about modern and retro.
A lot of newer games, when i want to play, requires updating my Xbox and then updating the game, and by the time that's over it has already eaten into a bulk of my playtime.
Retro/Modern-retro, I can turn on my console and then start playing
In my opinion that's why retro games are better. They are all there on the disk or cartridge.
Here’s the real reason why. Your on UA-cam after work and next thing you know it’s bed time and your actually tired. And when you try to play your eyes start hurting and you knock out with controller in hand.
@Warrenmitchum ser, you are being too aggressively relatable
@@AndrewPresnal well I work 12 hours night shift 7 days a week. Trust me I know.
Nu uhh, tried to play defender on my 2600 yesterday,
Needed a 26gb update.
But yes, it is annoying. That and releasing unfinished garbage
Of course they are.
People play Super Mario Bros 1 years later.
People don't play Cyberpunk 30 days later.
You tell me.
People don't play concord a week later 😂
@@EduFirenzedamn 😭😭😭💀💀💀
I have not played SMB in 30 years. Why would you want to play that ancient game?
@@EduFirenze, that is 100% true.
Because cyberpunk was not a good game…
Let’s have the same argument but with Super Mario Oddysey and arcade Donkey Kong…
People don’t play Donkey Kong 30 days later.
You tell me.
Retro games are better than modern games, no bs DLC, you didn’t need an internet connection just to download the game and more often than not retro games were fully complete out of the box.
I've said the same thing about music, entertainment follows culture, culture goes, entertainment goes as well
Ha! I was going to say something similar but decided not to so I didn't sound like the old man screaming at clouds! 🤣
I like both retro and modern gaming. However I've noticed that modern games at their current state can be unapproachable for a non gamer or someone who can't use 50 buttons. I have friends that want to play modern games they just can't get around all the systems and buttons in a good game. Even what I would consider an easier game to play other people I know just simply can't play them. You give them a super Nintendo game and controller and they can game better than me.
If I can choose only one… Retro, definitely retro
Videogames before it went online were better because developers had plenty of QA workers to make sure their games didn’t have any issues. Now we have to rely on patches to fix half baked games. Also, they were far more affordable to make. I miss those $49.99 days for new game releases.
Die hard gamer here since 1987. I have played and owned almost every major console since the NES and Atari up to the PS5 and the Switch. They're all fun to me. I go back and forth sometimes. One day it's PS2 or SNES. Another day it's PS5 or Switch or maybe Dreamcast. I love them all both old and new. They all have different styles through the eras.
Me and my family have ps 5’s, series x, and a couple switches. We play the switch all the time. And the others here and there. It got boring for all of us for the most part. I went out and bought a Wii and a n64 with a bunch of games. My kids are paying those wayyyyy more. It’s crazy
Are they really? That’s crazy. Kids preferences never lie.
Kids don’t care about graphics. They just want fun gameplay. Minecraft is still very popular.
@ I agree. I’m just saying I didn’t expect to be playing those systems more than the new ones
bought a steam deck in January and barely played my ps5 much this year it really changed my perception.Just been playing old gems from the ps2 era mostly. Max Payne fight for New York bully manhunt nba street jet li rise to honor the list goes on because of the big library of classics.Retro games were made with so much love and passion back then you can’t really convince me it’s just nostalgia I just don’t get those vibes from most newer games just feels like I’m not missing out on anything too crazy with recent games.this generation just really opened my eyes to how good we had it back then not just with gaming but entertainment as a whole
Replayability will be the decider of this question imo
Games used to be designed to be replayed often as the next release was at least a year away.
Nowadays games want to hold you down forever so you can never leave and they overstay their welcome so much that when you're done you never go back
Well we still replay games that are 30 years old, will we be playing this years releases in 30 years? I dont think so personally.
@Bitdead agreed
@@Bitdead Yes, people still replay games from the NES, a lot, and that system is nearly 40 years old. Even the newest games from the original run are nearly 30 years old.
The only reason we won't still be replaying games is if they go out of print and can't be accessed or run on whatever hardware is in use in the future. And, with the efforts that have been put into things like DOSBox and various emulators, the only way that's happening is if there are laws passed that specifically ban it.
@@SmallSpoonBrigade i mean, we can access nintendo online and play 30 year old, or more, games are still worth playing, even if u dont hav the original hardware, however i dont think ppl will be interested in more modern games in 30 years no matter whether they are available or not.
PS1 Square ... 3 banger mainline Final Fantasy games in one generation. Tons of original games mixed in too ... Xenogears, FFT, Vagrant Story, Brave Fencer Musashi, Parasite Eve and so on. I miss when companies could output stuff like that. Lots of good mainline stuff in one generation plus more creative & quirky projects throughout too.
And unlike modern indy games these older games are all original games with a lot of polish behind them. Meanwhile indies copy the same style of game millions of time over, while rarely providing anything new or of quality. And for every indy hit that people point out as great, you could probably name hundreds of trash games. PS1 and maybe PS2 era had the best overlap of big high quality games and creativity.
It took Squaresoft development teams 2 years to make each of those games.
I love the gameboy Advance and the N64
YES!! I've been gaming for 45 years, from black and white arcades, to the many home consoles, to my PC setup. I've witnessed BOTH arcade and console gaming industries rise and fall and rise again, to it's current failures. I've worked arcades the last 30 years and, it's similar to the arcades losing customers, due to game costs and home setups. People want to play at arcades, but are being discouraged. I plan on covering this on my channel, more from the arcade side of things. At the end of the day, it boils down to corporate BUSINESS practices. Companies follow MONEY PATTERNS, rather than finding out what people are interested in. They tell people what they SHOULD BE interested in, to capitalize on trends, then dump as much into the trend as possible and gain as much as they can until the next trend is out, then they dump any relationship to the current trend.
Arcades were essentially the original microtransactions. Extremely scummy game design centered around trying to eat someone's quarters. Nowadays, a lot of games take away obvious conveniences that would normally be there in order to make people think they are making wise payments for conveniences. Arcades did something similar for their era: they would intentionally make the games insanely hard and bullshit in order to make people want to keep putting in quarters so they don't have to start over and risk not making it as far as they did. Now obviously the social aspect of arcades was fantastic, and there were definitely games that were designed more fairly or were fun to play co-op and such. However, the scumminess of arcades was one of the reasons people were so excited to be able to play arcade games on console.
For me it's preference. I've just accepted that the 4th Generation is MY Generation and now it's all I explore and play. Works really well for me personally.
Correct 16bit era is king in my opinion.
@@blacklist241 I can see that, there was a lot that they could do with that hardware, as long as you didn't necessarily need a lot in terms of 3d effects.
@@blacklist241 This is the correct answer.
Yes. I've bought, played and owned every major console and franchise since the 80's. The drop off came about 10 years ago. Innovation is gone and the quality has only gotten worse.
I've since gone back to the PS2 and Steam for older titles as my go to for gaming now. Content with that.
It’s not even close, retro games are beyond modern games. Granted “retro” mostly refers to Nintendo and Sega. Most of the good modern games are from Nintendo…so yeah there you go.
Short answer Yes
Retro games really have that balanced hardcore feel, without being excessively difficult, and are just so much easier to get invest time into.
I think every system has it's great games but retro systems definitely had alot more. Even the bad games back then werent terrible.
This is a difficult question to answer, not least because what counts as retro is so broad. Retro can mean anything from a very basic 2D game from more than half a century ago to a triple-A title from the PS3 generation, the latter being closer to our modern games than those from way back. Broadly speaking, I’d put it this way: games today are demonstrably better in many aspects thanks to modern technology, but I’d strongly argue that gaming itself was better back then. When I say gaming was better, I mean the experience of gaming felt much more meaningful and enjoyable. It’s hard to impress us nowadays, even with photo-realistic games that have taken almost a decade to complete. Back then, we were much more tolerant as gamers. The things I could tolerate from games in the past would drive me crazy today. These days, games have to be nearly perfect. I even managed to play and enjoy games that were complete technical messes.
Back then: buy physical game, insert game in console, play game, enjoy same game several times.
Now: "buy" digital game, download/install game, play buggy game (or wait for patches bigger than the game itself), get bored and never finish it.
This does not apply to online only games, those are a completely different money grabbing crap that I'll never understand.
I guess the best retro games are the ones that lure you back into playing them again and again, they don't need hi-res graphics nor a turbine to cool down the hardware while you're playing them, and when you get older, longer games are not as enticing as pick up and play games, so IMO yes, retro games are better. The closer newer games graphics get to reality, the less enticing they feel to me. If I want to have a cinematic experience, I watch a TV show or a movie.
Yes they are no doubt about it
Games were games back then
Not live service crap
Answer to this video question;
Yes
Wait, RGT has hair? I always have seen him with a hat on and just assumed he always wore a hat to hide that he is bald.
Plot twist: he put on a wig just for this video
I thought it was like Tim Pool with his beanie 😂
@@xenobreak1160 Hahaha!!! Exactly.
Modern games, even good ones, have too much padding. Some padding is explicit, but I think we've become so used to it that most will not consciously realize that even good features often pad out a product and subtract from the whole. Newer games are certainly massive and larger in scope, and the initial response can be quite positive- but once you've played enough games, I think it becomes desired to play a more focused product. Furthermore, the limitations of older games meant that putting in some features prevent other features from being present. This helped push the 'creative risk' that RGT mentioned, as a developer wanting to stand out needed to put more focus on that unique feature as the core part of the game instead of throwing it into a heap of hundreds of industry-standard mechanics.
Yes
I might have all of the current systems,but still play more retro,or retro related games...
I literally have said I feel bad for my son because he will never experience the "wow" moments I had throughout 80s-90s gaming. Seeing N64 for the 1st time was the biggest "wow" in gaming history for me. And I was 20 years old when it launched.
The closest I have felt that since was the launch of BOTW, but still no comparison.
Im a 40 year old elder millennial and I loved every minute of all the advancements in technology you speak of from 1990-2000. Then the HD era came which was dope at first. I loved the 360. But nowadays it seems to be more about realism in graphics than just being fun. My fav era is PS1/PS2. 🎮🤘
Yes they are.
One, I know the games (for the most part) are complete to their fullest, while modern games are constantly being updated with DLC, and not to mention most of them will never be finished.
Two, No DLC required, and I can play them to their fullest, as most of them are much shorter, which means replay-ability is high.
Retro games and Indie games >>>>>> Modern ones.
Games back in the 80's and 90's was all about fun and replay ability. Now it's about release now and fix later with a AAA price tag. Today's games got worse as these AAA companies get greedy and sloppy.
Yes, there is no debate.
1000000% yes!!! Gaming has gotten so bad. Companies coming out with games with horrendous gameplay.. sacrificing gameplay for graphics. We need the opposite. Stop putting such a emphasis on graphics graphics graphics. We don't care anymore. If you're making a game and selling 1 million copies is a flop.. you're definitely doing everything wrong
Yes, retro games are FAR better than modern games. I include “retro-style” games in the retro games category. Games like *River City Girls* stand side-by-side with *River City Ransom* .
Modern games are just full of dlc, patches, pay-to-play, streaming, pay-to-win, woke injected, garbage that are trying to be movies.
When you play old school games, they FEEL like games! They are fun. They are challenging. They give you a real sense of accomplishment.
And the music was the kind of stuff that stuck with you. Real quick, hum some music from The *Witcher 3* …. You can’t do it, right? Now, hum music from *Super Mario Bros.* Hum Guile’s theme. Green Hill Zone from *Sonic The Hedgehog* .
See what I mean?
Retro games were memorable. New stuff just plain sucks.
Yes, yes, the answer is yes. Retro games are definitely better.
In my opinion, the modern games have become too much visual effects/visual candy, and less creative on story/challenges. I grew up with the 8bit/16bit era of Nintendo/Sega. Games overall were fun, challenging and had lasting appeal. Some modern games are not cheap, have great visual effects, meh on story, but don't have the lasting appeal. It is almost like some games are like a movie in the theater. You see it one time and then that is it. PC games for me I now hold in high regard over Game Consoles. I'm older, so simplicity is still a part of my video game world.
100% YES!!!
I don't really play anything past the GameCube/GameBoy Advance/XBox 360 era (other than Nintendo). That was the golden decade of video games for me. The last 'modern' video game bought was Control.
It's modern it came out in like 2020
@@Gravy12552019
Seeing a SNES for the first time in a Software Etc store and watching the super Mario world demo was absolutely magical. I was always into the tech specs of game systems even at an early age, so it was just mind blowing seeing new consoles coming out. 3rd-6th generations was always amazing from one to the next. Those were the golden age of gaming. Diminishing returns definitely showing itself. You'd be hard pressed to see much difference even between the OG PS4 to the PS5 Pro. We have hit that plateau I think. I've also had thoughts that we are witnessing the video game crash 2.0
retro will always be better because they were made for fun, they were made by people having fun taking risks and making new stuff to see if they could strike gold. Today games are made for a bottom line and how much they can make in returns. prove me wrong.
A really good example to show this is the EA lineup. Look at the Genesis EA game list then take a look at the shovelware they produce today.
"Yes."
Could've cut this video down to 1 second btw.
That sure would have been a fun video huh? I love 1 second videos....
That sure would have convinced everyone huh? I love hearing people make claims without spending time to back them up...
@@taker601 This, but unironically.
@@gligarguy4010 I could tell.
100+ comments on a channel you supposedly dislike 🤷♂️ maybe move on?
My son is13 he good and both new and old.
I know one thing for sure. The modern format for FPS games just loses something good we used to have.
Goldeneye, multiple clearly defined levels.
That made me go back time and again for ''a quick 15 mins''
We don't have that now, it's all open world, big long quests. You need a good 3 or 4 hours spare to actually have a game.
It is an interesting debate because I sometimes wonder that as well. Weirdly enough I think during the 2000s I considered modern gaming better because I guess maybe I really like the games of that time when I played them such as the great RTS games on the PC of the time. But nowadays I seem to generally prefer retro games primarily the ones I grew up with in the 90s or some of the ones I played in the 2000s as well. But there are modern games I like, but ultimately the most recent games that I play on the switch actually came out like 5 or 6 years ago. There are some that were made more recently too but not as many
As a fighting game fan, yes. Examples:
- People still play competitive super turbo and Third Strike. Nobody plays street fighter 4 and 5.
- Everyone with a ps1 owned tekken 3 and many people bought a ps1 because of tekken 3. A small margin % of each console & pc owners bought tekken 7 and nobody bought hardware just to play tekken since tekken 3 days.
- Fighting games used to be Play to unlock, now they’re all Pay to unlock.
Maybe they should make old style games and put them in a collection for £70. So it could be 30 interesting old style games that are simple but very good just like the old days. It could include online aswell and loads of mini games to play against your friends.
Sold! I’ll have some of that
They could but then that means they’d have to make something that’s actually good quality. Which they’re too lazy for
The younger generation will never understand the arcade experience we had.
The loud sound of Killer Instinct in the arcade malls 😍😍😍😍😍
I've always said, games made from late 90's to 2005 were the best in my gaming lifetime. Don't get me wrong I love the eye candy and the sound upgrades along with better controls and viewing of today. Its human nature that someone's gaming tastes change over time. I enjoy the heck out of my PS5 and Series X consoles. Heck I still own two PS2's and play the heck out of those games today even with the graphics aging sound issues. In 2001 I was one of the few that loved Shadow of Destiny it was an interesting idea, I wanted a sequel so bad. In 2024 I've played alot of story based games I think Shadow of Destiny should be tried again.
I love all eras! I'm from Sega Genesis era and, now, in2024, I'm here, almost every week and weekend playing my Playstation. Tks God and my papa and mama for all.
Retro games are better if you have internet problems.
Edit: Plus what happens if internet falls for days from Blizzards. There’s your backup handhelds if power is completely out. Some internet servers are slower than others and might be weaker in areas. For internet servers, it depends on what fits your budget.
I am 39 and here are the things I value:
Respect of my limited time. - Short or non existent tutorials and intuitive controls.
Rewarding my effort. - Content to unlock though progress in the game or secrets, not micro transactions.
Ownership of my game - if I buy a physical Indy game, please put the entire 1.0 base game on the disc.
Two player local when possible. - Not everyone wants to play online all the time.
Artistic freedom in development. - I don’t want to feel soulless and corporate. So if the game is, then I’m not interested.
There is equal amounts of positives and negatives for both sides. I feel for modern we see mostly negative stuff because it's what gets the most attention online because of big companies having the biggest market dominance but if you actually do your research and this isn't just including indies you can find lots of amazing experiences and thankfully its easily accessible thanks to digital distribution and there is something for everyone.
In short.... No!
In my opinion 90% of all games modern and retro eventually start to age. Heck you can look at some hugely popular PS3 and even PS4 era games and see how new games in the same genre have refined the experience.
However, with that said, what makes this topic interesting is that when you play a game that still holds up several generations later... You just found the definition of a classic!
Classic arcade games like Donkey Kong, Space Invaders and Pac-Man are in my opinion the perfect example of perfect games. Games that had one goal back into day and they still manage to hold up in this day and age!
Games of all generations have these titles (they are few and far between as they always have been) but they are still being released to this day!
Tl;dR a great game is a great regardless of when it came out
Quality vid mate
Facts the answer is not that straight forward. When people say retro games are better and gaming was better in the past. I am always reminded by Angry video game nerd.
@@ZackSNetwork 100% putting all old games together and all modern games together just doesn't work
There is also another way to see it:
Back in the old days, it was possible to innovate and create something completely fresh and new, that nobody seen before.
Today, its a case of "been there, done that" and it depends more on how welll a Game is executed and how well stuff got combined into the game to make it fun (or not)...
The Standards are also much higher due to that, so a mediocre game today would be the best of the best just 20 years ago...
Yes and no- during the transition period of N64, PS1 (and Saturn) - essentially in every game you were fighting not only the CPU, but also the camera and the controls. The developers were still figuring out how the make 3D work in games, and even some of the beloved titles like 007 Goldeneye or 1080 Snowboarding are very frustrating to play at certain times in almost every level. Today's games have different annoyances..like in Jedi Order- all we really care about is wielding the light saber and using force powers....for some reason the developer thought it would be a good idea to shove a version of the Titanfall2 acrobatics engine into a Star Wars game 'just cause' in hopes of making it interesting. Despite having great graphics and sound, I still haven't played through Jedi Order because of how bored I get having to navigate with its acrobat simulator system. So I flip back over to my Switch, and will play on the NSO service games.
These current AAA games are like 1 time experiences that you'll consume and never come back to...maybe you'll rewatch cutscenes on UA-cam, but you won't come back to the game ever again because of the complexity.
Modern games outside of Nintendo are barely even video games.
Though I do think retro games are better than modern games, it's pretty unfair to modern AAA games because so few are made in a given year compared to any year prior to 2010. It's also a bit unfair because we're comparing 30 years of games to like 10 years of games (compounding with the previously stated fact of there being less games made recently), so it's going to be easier to flood the conversation with retro bangers. Modern AAA games look better and usually control better (or at least subscribe to a standard control scheme), but they start to feel like the same game and aren't as responsive. Modern AAA games are safe and stale while retro games were creative, unique, and risky. Indie games are the only space currently that try something really new or fresh.
That's just it, though. Modern games often DON'T look and control better. This is in large part because of the backward thinking you just exhibited. This idea that if a game doesn't control and play like every other game out there, and the control scheme takes practice, it's somehow bad.
Many modern games are just a cluttered mess of extraneous and non-interactive graphics where it's hard to know what stuff is actually gameplay related. It's harder to track your targets in many FPS because there is so many particle effects as well as light and shadows being cast onto opponents. It's just an absolute mess!
I remember being blown away by the graphics of Resident Evil 5 on Xbox360. It's a significant graphical leap from 6th generation. I don't get that feeling anymore with new games. Even if I skip Ps4 and just witness a Ps5 game coming from Ps3, I doubt I'd be that impressed.
For someone like myself who grew up in the 3rd/4th gens, I can't help but feel bad for the ones who in recent years are discovering and hopefully enjoying retro games...it's not really the same for them who didn't get the chance to grow up with and see them in their prime, is it? I mean that movie The Wizard and the SMB3 hype at the time, that kind of magic would be impossible in the modern Internet/social media world.
Honestly I'd say for the most part yes but every once in a while we get something good
90's was the golden age of gaming. When devs and publishers were vying for your attention and purchase by making a better game that the next studio vs now where they basically just sell you a trailer and promise the content will come "later" or the bug fixes will come later and then sell you all the type of content you used to just *get* when buying the game and you had to actually play to unlock it, instead of just short-cut buying your way to it. ITs alot less about making a good game now and much more about making a hugely profitable game. Which are not the same thing.
Born in 83. Glad to say I grew up w nes to now. I don’t like one over the other. I’m nostalgic and modern at the same time. This IS the best time for games though. You can experience all gens at the touch of your fingertips
Another thing to consider:
According to Wikipedia Numbers, last year on Steam there were more game reeases than NES, SNES, PS1 and PS2 *COMBINED*
That is also an enormous problem that we not talk about, the sheer ammount of games made and thus its very hard to find the great games, because the pile of very bad games is orders of magnitudes larger these days!
When you had to dig to 2-20kg of junk to find a great thing back in the day, its now 20 tons to dig through to find the same excitement.
But it still exists, magic is still made, its just less obvious and depends on the mood and People...
Retro games have the advantage of the trash games have already been filtered out so you are only going back to the good games from the past not the trash because most of the trash isn't easily accessible anymore because there's not much of a market for them.
@@jammer9941 Correct, that is another thing that people never talk about!
They talk about Resident Evil 4 all the time, but hardly anyone mentions "Death by Degrees" ever. Because its not a very good game...
And thus we talk about the best of the best of the past, but look at the average today...
The biggest issue with modern gaming is games are sold unfinished and defect ridden. Retro games had a much higher standard in that regard.
I have been gaming since I was 5 (40 now) and although I enjoy the nostalgia of jumping into a older game from time to time I must say modern gaming is more for me. I love the big story games we get these days like God of War, ghost of tsushima or the last of us. I love the remakes we are getting too! I'm a big fan of Resident Evil and I have loved all the remakes including RE3 that most of the fan base complain about for some reason. Modern gaming has it's problems but so did the older generations. I think we just have a habit of looking back with rose tinted glasses.
The Golden Age of gaming was the PS2, GameCube & OG XBOX. Everything is just a marginal now. #Bummer. Rock On RGT🎸🌵
Some retro games are better than modern games. However some modern games based on Classic franchises have exceeded the originals. Examples such as Ultra Street Fighter IV , Tekken 8 , Mario Odyssey, Mario Kart, Ridge Racer and others.
most of those games are a few years old now though
@@arcticridge They are still modern representations. What people fail to realize it is not a Modern game issue. It is games developed in the West that are failing. It always has been that way everyone has just failed to realize that the Japanese game market has been shrinking as far as development goes so less games. Most classic games are all Japanese developed and packaged as something else by an American Publisher.
@@Japheigod seems like most japanese made games prioritize fun over pandering, but we don't know if those devs are being whipped to get those games out. Methinks they're being pushed harder than US devs but we just don't hear about it
@@arcticridge I used to publish, plan, and distribute many titles. There is literally no Independent scene in Japan and not many smaller studios left. Those that do exist do work for larger Japanese companies who publish their titles. It is like how it was here in the 80''s-90's but instead of USA publishers. Japanese people are ethnocentric and do not like pandering or political statements in their media. They are after all a Constitutional Monarchy.
The jump between 4th through 7th gen was exciting and something to look forward to. Since then the leaps are in the details, as you mention, which I don't care about.
One thing that really bugs me about modern games is the emphasis on achievements, unlockables and level grinding in games that don’t need it. It’s so meta and all about dopamine and creating addiction loops (this of course ties into money again). The game may suck, but it sure feels great to unlock an achievement doesn’t it. Or to put it another way, you paid for the game and now you have to work for it to enjoy it, level up and unlock features that should be there from the get go. Video game design has just gotten skewed.
Astro bot is a great example of why retro games are the best. A 3D platformer is still just as fun today as it was back then. You don’t need 300 million dollar budgets, hyper realistic graphics, 60fps and 68 hours of cutscenes to be a good game. Just make it fun to play. Now I love both styles but the old games just have more replay value.
I honestly blame a lot of this on Sony hemogeny. I was talking about this very thing with my mom not too long ago - when I was a kid there were entire new genres popping up. We had fighting games, first person shooters, RPG's and survival horror games showing up for the first time ever - then Sony took over, and they've more or less taken everything they had up to that point, released GTA, and sold us GTA clones where you're a guy on a screen running around shooting everything, and they release new ones for every new updated Playstation VCR thingy. When Nintendo ruled the world there were more interesting creative games being released.
Yes. Here is the thing. I fire up a retro game and can immediately tell there was passion put into it. The focus was on making the best game possible.
Developers (some of the time) and publishers (most of the time) have lost their way and the focus of modern games seems to be on everything but making the best game possible.
Its simple really...it's all we want.
Not only are the "generational differences" no longer significant, the sheer amount of disk space it takes to install a modern game has become insane; usually over 100 gigabytes these days, whereas in the PS4 era they were more along the lines of 50 gigabytes. So not only is it a matter of the naked eye not really being able to tell the difference, the games themselves take up at least double the amount of disk space. And they're frequently a bloated, unoptimized mess, to boot.
I wish Sega managed everything they did after the Genesis better. There was no reason to put out the Sega CD, 32X and Saturn as quickly as they did. I would truly love to have seen what they could have came up with.
I'm 42 I remember being blown away by the jump in graphics from nes to Sega Genesis. I just remember coming home and my dad had surprised be and bought a Sega Genesis. I just remember being so blown away by the graphics of Green Hill Zone on Sonic 1
Yes, for people like me who don't want to play highly involved, complex games. My types of games: horizontal and vertical shooters, Tetris, Crazy Taxi, Boulder Dash, etc.
I'm an old man, so yes they are to me
Retro games for life! It's too rare to see a modern gem and with all the anti consumer practices it just isn't worth it anymore.
Survey says… Yes!
I would say no, but sometimes yes also. And I’m not just talking about stuff like graphics, of course, but in terms of balance and design.
I like modern games, what I don't like is when they try to be an interactive movie. Whereas in a retro game the focus is more on the gameplay.
Can't lump all modern games together. There are plenty of amazing games still coming out. Inscryption is a pretty basic game by most standards, especially graphics, but it was incredibly fun. Same with Undertale.
BUT, a large portion of the industry, primarily top AAA games have thrown passion and innovation out the door for money.