Not everyone has a PS3. Everyone has a damn Wii. Seriously, those things are selling like Jesus Christ himself blessed every single one.
If you like your old games, keep your old consoles, simple as that. Everyone has their preferences, and if you prefer the old PS2 and GameCube thing, then keep them, plain and simple.
I like my older consoles the best. I love my PS3, and DS(s) and all, but I could never get rid of my NES and so on. Especially not just to buy a current gen. console.
I still can play NES and SNES games.. sort simple.. and based on skill.. less story line switch gets boring overtime. Zelda/Link games, Mario games, recently the new Mario are so hard to get into.. to much story line.. has anyone found my attention span.. please return it.
In a lot of cases this is completely false. Most 'older' games I really like I only started playing many years after their original release date, in a time technology was far more advanced. Therefore nostalgia can't be a factor in those cases.
For example, I became a big fan of Lucasarts adventure games from the early 90's when I first played Day of the Tentacle and The Secret of Monkey Island two years ago. Furthermore I have about 40 Virtual Console games on my Wii, 75% of which I had never played before I downloaded them, yet I had a great time playing them.
Even though technology advances and there are also quite some gameplay differences between the average game today and 25 years ago (most notably the high difficulty level of games back then) truly great titles remain great whenever you play them. It's exactly the same for other media like film.
Graphically they're clearly inferior (but then again I myself play some gems from mid 90s).
The older generations of consoles are practically dead - and yes, I'm aware that there are still some games made for PS2, I own one too.
But, yeah, older consoles are kind of like old people. Sure, they might have had fun in their 60s and 80s, but in the end of the day they're the ones who stink, suffer from STD's and heart attacks, no matter what they did "back in the day". And in enough time, you'll replace them in the same niche.
Although if you're okay with what you have, don't waste 300 bucks on PS3. There are better uses for 300 bucks... Like, you can send them to me or else you'll be forever cursed with spirits of dead treeeees. Or some shit. I don't know, what do teens do with money these days. Buy drugs, probably. That sounds about right.
TheProfessor134 said:
If game consoles from back in the day truly sucked.. We wouldnt make and download emulators of them to play with.
I was talking to a friend just now and he was saying sell all your old consoles so you can get a ps3.
I said but i like my ps2 and gamecube, but i might sell my xbox.
He asked why
I said why not, i like my old games.
He said the new games are all better than the old games.
What are your thoughts on this
Edit:Main reason my friend wants me to get a ps3 is that everybody else has one.
Edit again:Out of the three last gen consoles i have sentimental value from order
GameCube,Ps2,Xbox.
Ps3 doesn't have any games that would make selling your ps2 and gamecube worth it. Ps2 has some of the best games in my opinion and Gamecube has some pretty great ones as well, plus you can get the games pretty cheap now.
Xbox? Yeah that's not really worth keeping in my eyes. Most of the good games on it are PC as well.
I have a friend who automatically thinks that a game made by Nintendo is crap because of the quality of graphics when hes never sat down and played a Nintendo game in his life. He thinks graphics make a game good, bloody retard.
He just saying that cause he is not a long time gamer, if you said that to me I'd either poke holes in your logic or slap you depending on what mood I was in. Older games may or may not have aged well, but they work well none the less, I'm still playing Persona 3 & 4 on my PS2 and I'm playing through Tales of Symphonia on my Wii (Backwards compatibility FTW!)
It's like movies in the 80's. In the 80's acting and character development were more important then special effects and sex appeal. But we have some movies like Donnie Darko that focus more on plot and characters rather then effects. SO you see what im saying there are timeless games that were amazing now they arent as fun to play because we've beaten them so many times, we have to move on to these new games. So send your gamecube and ps2 off with love. And buy an XBOX 360.
With all due respect, I have yet to see a post of yours that I can agree on.
Your analogy makes no sense, and the small amount of money you get for older consoles can be earned in so little time that alone is enough reason to keep them; let alone the nostalgic value.
It's like movies in the 80's. In the 80's acting and character development were more important then special effects and sex appeal. But we have some movies like Donnie Darko that focus more on plot and characters rather then effects. SO you see what im saying there are timeless games that were amazing now they arent as fun to play because we've beaten them so many times, we have to move on to these new games. So send your gamecube and ps2 off with love. And buy an XBOX 360.
With all due respect, I have yet to see a post of yours that I can agree on.
Your analogy makes no sense, and the small amount of money you get for older consoles can be earned in so little time that alone is enough reason to keep them; let alone the nostalgic value.
did nintendo suck? no.
did sega genesis suck? no.
did nintendo 64 suck? no.
did ps2 suck? no.
is your friend a moron for saying todays games are better than old games? yes.
should you slap your friend upside the head because of his stupidity? yes.
Forget what your friend says. Keep your old systems until you are certain you will NEVER want to hook them up and play them again. The only reason to get rid of an old system is because you have a new system which makes it redundant (Like if you have a Wii, you can get rid of the gamecube.)
I have almost all of my consoles dating back to the Atari 2600, they all see use. Good games are good games regardless of the age.
I'd say no and leave it there but I've been warned about that already
Older game consoles do not suck because gaming (as has already been covered by one of the writers here) is not a strict line of progression in terms of quality and partially as a result not all games age horribly, I think the benefit of being an older gamer (which even though I'm 19 I can count myself as because I was part of the SNES generation) is that you don't let older graphics get in the way of other aspects of a good game.
I don't think I'd ever get rid of my older game systems, too many memories of awesome games, like Zelda: Wind Waker, the Xenosaga trilogy, the Persona games, etc., etc. Point is, my old consoles are going to stay in my house 'til I die...maybe...most likely
First and foremost, I'd like to point out that a lot of people are being quite silly in this thread. Why do people have such strong opinions of whether old games are better than new games, or vice verse? could it not be said that people just simply have different tastes in games? Some poeple actually do play games for graphics, while other prefer story or gameplay. I'll refer to my equation on gaming preference for this to be answered.
First, I want to thank Josdeb for making easily the coolest equation I have ever seen. This will easily get my point (and I believe all our points) across very accurately with a little modification. So just to get out the base equation (with modification) we'll get this:
For those confused, Development means the development of both the characters and the plot with twists and surprise endings, as well as realistic emotions and such. So basically, we get the three most contested scores for a game: story, graphics and gameplay.
Now, the one thing I would like to add is that not everyone has the same preferance in a game. A game can be good, but this is the Enjoyment Score we're trying to get, not an overall, unbias opinion of how well these three elements mix. So, we need some way to express that. I propose variables that can modify each depending on how much a person enjoys a certain main aspect (story, graphics and gameplay) of the game. So our equation becomes this:
Now, we need a few gamers to test these games out. Let's take yourself (Velocity Eleven) and Josdeb as our gamers. So, Velocity Eleven would obviously prefer games with more gameplay, so that would be his highest preferance (3), and we'll take story as your second highest (2) because I've never seen you once say anything about graphics, which will be your lowest (1). Josdeb will be ordered story (3), gameplay (2), graphics (1) as that seems to be the kind of guy he is. So when we plug in these numbers we get this:
Interesting how that worked, no? As you can see, Velocity Eleven obviously enjoyed the more gameplay oriented game and thought the story based one was alright, where as Josdeb found the gameplay one pretty drab and the story one really good. They both agreed that the graphically intense one was a bit of a let down. But now, here's the really cool part! They BOTH not only thought the game that evened out its elements equally was good, they scored it ON PAR with the game that emphasised their prefered element.
So, in conclusion, all three elements in balance are easily the best outcome, but games that focus on one element can still appeal to some gamers and not others.
In short, people have different tastes. People who argue old games are better than new games are just as bad as those who argue new games are better than old games. Think about what you're calling the person with differing opinions and apply that to yourself, because you're the exact same thing with just a slightly different message.
To answer the OP's question, you really need to look at a few points. One such point is: what types of games are you playing? Realistically, there are some games that are not going to get much better in the gameplay department unless something drastic happens. I think platformers are a good example of this. "But Hellsy!" you cry, "what about titles like Little big Planet!?" Hey, it's a great game and I think the idea is very quirky. But that's exactly it. It doesn't add anything fundamental, it only spices things up. What if you weren't interested in designing your own levels? What if you really couldn't care less what sort of emotes you could make with your guy. These people might enjoy Super Mario Bros. 3 just as much, because the quirks Little Big Planet offer are just that, quirks. Unlike power-ups in Mario 3, everything LBP does differently expand upon what could be possible outside of playing the platforming part of the game. I think, really, we sort of hit the roof of platforming when Prince of Perisa: The Sands of Time came about. It took platforming so near its peak that everything else is just small additions to a great formula. Is this bad? Not at all, but I wouldn't say buying an entire new consol for the next generation of platformers is going to be a wise investment.
Similarly, there are genres that continuously improve upon itself. I think I'll call this particular genre the "rythem" genre of gaming. From fleshed out concepts like Rock and and Guitar Hero to birthing conceptions like Audio Surf and Beat Hazard, games that are empowered by music seem to be on the rise. These types of games have an almost infinate looking ceiling at this point because they're brand new and have oodles of potential for new ideas. Yes, they borrow concepts from other genres, but that's just how gaming works. Adventure games are a lot like platformers, and action games are just adventure games with more action! My point is that using music to change the interface of a game is something we're jsut scratching the surface of in the Rythem genre and I hope to see more innovation like this soon.
Lastly, there are genres that have a little bit of both of my examples. RPGs are what come to mind when I consider this. Yes, graphics are certainly important in an RPG. Being able to render the mysteries of Azeroth in the most realistic way possible is simply breath taking, but is that all there is to the genre? Heck no! Story is another important factor that doesn't rely on new technology so much. Sure, with new technology you could fit more RPG onto one disk, but what is really stopping someone from producing a ten disk game if they really felt the story needs to be that long? Maybe the combat system is just that complex and engrosing? I don't think anyone would truly complain so long as the content matched the price. So RPGs are somewhere in the middle, as aged classics can be just as fun as new titles, depending on what you're looking for in the game.
You also need to consider that, with time, some games are just simply out done. I would never play Diablo or Diablo II ever again unless for nostalgia purposes with Torchlight now in my posession. Why? Quite simply, it's a better game in every aspect. It fixed most of the old issues most gamers had with the Dungeon Crawler forumla and added a great deal many other awesome features. It took concepts from both games (I like to refer to the class trees [D2 concept] mixed with learning spells [D1 concept]) and put them into a neat little package. I don't care what people say about the graphics being too stylized, that there are only three classes or that "Diablo shouldn't have rainbows!" because the core game itself has drastically improved over many games made in years past. simply put, Diablo & Diablo II have been phased out by an evolution in the genre. Is that bad? No. That's good, because it means we're getting better games.
But wait! You also need to consider backwards compatability! The Wii especially is great for that feature. This means that all those olds games from past generations (sadly, only Gamecube for the Nintendo) can still be played if you upgrade your consol. It adds a completely new library of games to choose from, as well as retaining your old library as well. Great concept for gamers who do enjoy their classic games, for nostalgia or other reasons.
So, taking all of this into consideration and looking at your particular scenario, I would certainly suggest thinking about purchasing a Wii. You had rated the Gamecube as your highest rated of the three consols and the Wii is completely backwards compatible with all GC titles. Again, it also adds more potential games to your library through all the Wii titles and every title put onto WiiWare from older generations. The other Wii Channels are nice little add-ons, too. But heed my warning: look at the library of Wii titles first and foremost! If you don't feel that you would put any sort of serious investment into buying up Wii games, don't get a Wii! It's just not worth the money if you just plan to keep playing all your Gamecube games on it, plain and simple.
No matter what you choose, though, keep gaming strong with titles that you enjoy!
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
