90’s better? yes. by god, yes.

definitely better in the 90’s

the only games I’ve played that feel as classic as some 2D classics are Windwaker, Metroid Prime, Mario galaxy (go figure)
and others like zack & wiki, no more heroes, and even excite truck (for the pure fun factor)

without a doubt they were better in the 90’s. games were cheaper too.

Well, you really have to look at the big picture… interactive technology was evolving SO much during the 70’s, 80’s and 90’s but (many will argue with me on this) since the original Playstation, gaming technology (and therefore the wild n crazy innovation) has kinda reached a plateau.

Modern games commonly focus on ‘immersion’ and ‘realism’ where older games (like those from the 90’s) often relied on pure action, or pure ingenuity… to succeed. This is why playing games like Pac-Man or Super Mario 3 will always be fun, because they have proven themselves as being ultimately fun.

This logic also reflects on why Nintendo has continued success with it’s handheld systems, and now the Wii. The DS is a powerful force, yet it’s graphics are nowhere near as realistic or immersive as a PSP, the Wii is nowhere near as capable as an XBOX or PS, but on both systems the games are FUN.

So to answer the question… yes gaming in the 90’s was better, but gaming in the 80’s was best.

I miss 2D games.

To clarify, the ‘plateau’ that was reached with the PS1 was mainly referring to controllers and 3D/polygon gaming. Modern systems (except Wii) basically keep the same control setups and just add more polygons, filters, textures.

And maybe a question to add to this opinionated thread… which game do you think will last the test of time? Pac-Man or GTA4?

If you’re a Nintendo gamer maybe the past was better. If you’re a Halo/GTA/Bloodfest/Graphicswhore/HDTV/etc gamer, you’re a pig in shit.

Also,

Guitar Hero and then ROCK BAND, hos. I don’t need to play real music anymore.

In terms of game music, I kind of prefer the now simply because we have more Guilty Gear soundtracks now than we did back then /rolleyes.

I agree with several parts of that list; particulary how the internet has damaged gaming, imo. Anyone remember the white block in Mario 3? Duck on it for 5 seconds to fall through it and enter the background? That was awesome, and it was even cooler when it wasn’t common knowledge and you were only able to find it through pure chance or through one of your buddies.

Now a quick trip to GameFaqs removes all that. It’s hard to explain, but I find it much less rewarding to explore a game, knowing that everything about it has already been documented on the internet.

Hard to say. I guess it depends on your interest. Obviously, the 3D games today are mostly better with the exception that Mario 64 and Ocarina of Time are arguably better than anything since. Certainly, if you like 2D games, adventure games, etc. the 90s were the decade. On the other hand, we have better rhythm games. RPGs are about the same comparing the late 90s and today, but early 90s RPGs sucked. Motion control is way better now, obviously. So… depends on what you’re into.

i still think zelda: a link to the past is the best game ever made…

I was about to make an “elitist old person” comment about how the 80’s were better than both of them put together, but I guess it was just different.

I would say that apart from some deliberately retro stuff, most of what’s popular nowadays has its roots in the 90’s…. the shooters going back to Doom, the 3D platformers going back to Mario 64, the action adventure going back to Ocarina of Time, the RPG going back to FF7, sandbox games going back to the first GTA, rhythm games going back to Parappa, etc. I don’t think we’re as blown away now as we were when those touchstone games came out, but on the other hand the games have become a lot more refined.

One thing the 00’s have going for them is the slow building of popularity for indie games. Granted, Doom and its predecessors were what you’d call “indie games” back in the day, but with the accessibility of development tools nowadays and willingness of the console makers to work with smaller publishers via digital distribution, I think we’ll see some real original ideas amidst all the knockoffs of popular old games.

As much as I love the 16-bit era, I can’t really say that it was “better”. Just “different”. Gaming hasn’t gotten better or worse, it’s only changed.

No, I think games are better nowadays. Sure, games were good and had a golden feel back then, but that was back then. I miss the old days, but I don’t think I would go back to them.

It wasn’t better. But it was the time in my life when I had a chance to finish a lot more games. For that reason alone, 90s games will always mean the world to me.

I think that nostalgia value is the real reason that people miss that time. 2D games are a bit more of a rarity these days, but I can’t say i miss most of the early 3D games. I’ll take Halo 3 over an old Doom clone anyday. And Gran Turismo 5 over Stunt Race FX.

I won’t deny the original 90’s Mario Kart is the one to beat though!!!

SHAME SHAME
I would have expected better from the people of 4cr
acting all hip and indie, “games were way better back in the day”
that’s just ridiculous
I’ll admit, a larger percentage of old games were better, but I think the number of overall great games is a tie between the games of then and the games of now or at least very close. I know I have just as many favorite new games as I do old games.

I hear that, Andre. I hear that.

I think that’s what I miss most about old games: the secrets! I don’t find it hard to avoid GFAQs though, so I wouldn’t have a problem with the internet that much. But devs need to put secrets IN the game before we can start finding them again. That’s what got me hooked on Halo 3 for a good month, the quest to find the skulls. That was a balance issue, though. Bungie made most of the skulls hard but plausible. The last one is so ridiculous I’m pretty sure the only reason it was found was game data hacking, and even then it was easy to screw up.

I know it’s basically cliched to say that older/2D games are better than what we have now, but I have to say, to call out that statement based on how popular it is is stupid as hell.

Like anyone who doesn’t want an ipod hates them because they’re popular, maybe they just don’t want an ipod.

2D games had basically reached their pinnacle and masterpieces like Super Metroid, Yoshi’s Island, Link to the Past could finally be pulled off.
Who knows how long it will be until 3D gaming reaches its pinacle

I was certainly more into video games back in the 90’s. Nowadays I can only get into tried and true franchises such as the Mario Kart, Zelda and Smash Bros. games. I have increasingly less patience trying out newer style games.

I’m going to run counter to Nostalgiafest 2008 and argue that some parts are better, some worse. I miss the secrets and hidden things. I like wifi aspects and internet connectivity: my friends and I aren’t always in the same timezone. Stuff like that. I spend lots and lots of time in airports and bus stops and given the choice between my old brick and a DS to kill time with, I prefer the DS.

Some good points made here.

The internet is a huge one for me. As an adult I don’t have the time to discover secrets and unlock hidden items in games like I used to, so I sometimes appreciate being able to look things up quickly online. But I can’t help but feel like kids who are really into video games these days are getting a less magical experience because there are no secrets anymore, in the way there used to be. The white blocks on Mario 3 are a great example of the type of thing that was passed around from playground to playground as a sort of piece of kid lore. With the internet, that kind of thing just can’t happen anymore.

And Shawn’s comment about gaming reaching a sort of plateau with PS1 is something I’ve believed for a long time. The move to 3D signaled the move from video games having their own unique look to video games trying to emulate reality. Obviously there are exceptions, but in general terms this explains why the finest of 16-bit games still look amazing to modern eyes, while PS1 games look absolutely hideous and are difficult to find nostalgic value in - because they’re just primitive versions of what you’re playing right now on 360 and PS3, and when the goal is to look “real,” the graphics will never, ever be good enough, even while the gameplay stays the same. The 16-bit games had reached an apex of their art form. They were never going to look like reality, so they enjoyed looking fantastic as something else - their own medium, like cartoons. Hence why any well-designed game from the 8 or 16-bit eras has a timeless visual appeal, while first-gen Playstation games certainly do not.

But then again, it’s true that games really are just “different” nowadays. You could probably assert that games had a more magical quality in the 90’s, and that they were more timeless… but “better” is a dangerously subjective word.

Not really, no. It’s tempting to say yes, because through the lens of nostalgia the 90’s - and even maybe the 80’s before them - certainly *feel* like they were better, but in a practical sense it’s pretty hard to defend that point of view.

Yes, obviously, some true classic games came out in the 80’s and 90’s, and they still hold up now as great games. The Mario titles, Link to the Past, the early Sonic games, River City Ransom - those games were great and will stay great forever. But *most* games back then were really not all that hot, any more than *most* games now are. I go back and try to play some games now that I really liked as a kid and realize that really, they were incredibly poor games. I loved Golgo 13 on the NES. Loved it. I loved the style it had, the sense of being a superspy. It’s a crap game, though, and I’d much rather play 007: Everything or Nothing to get that vibe now. (Tangent: why don’t we have more awesome spy games? Seriously.)

And I think we’re still making games that will become classics and stay loved long into the future, just as those games are enshrined in our “Hall of Fame” lists now. Mario Galaxy, Portal, Bioshock… we’re still trying new things, pushing boundaries, expanding gaming. And frankly, we’re even still doing the old stuff pretty well when we want to: New Super Mario Bros on the DS rocks pretty hard.

So yeah. I was very fond of gaming in the 80’s and 90’s, I’m glad it was a great time, and I’m REALLY glad WiiWare lets me play those classics again so easily. But I wouldn’t want to give up what we have now to go back.

For those saying they miss 2D gaming… you don’t have to, man. Buy a DS, and pick yourself up New Super Mario Bros, Sonic Rush Adventure, Kirby’s Canvas Curse, Megaman ZX and the 2 - soon to be 3 - DS Castlevania titles, for a start. 2D gaming is alive and kicking, it’s just gone portable.

SOmeone said it above me, gaming hasn’t gotten worse or better, it has simply changed.

why yes, my childhood was filled with video games that i remember with more fondness than any game that has come out since i hit college. games today rely far too much on flash and merchandising tie-ins over actual quality, and i really wish people would make games more like that.

speaking of, the games that are coming out for wiiware show great promise. what a good idea, seriously. indie games tend to have all the charm that people old enough to remember 90’s games with fondness want to see in video games.

yes.

Well, I personally think that gaming music is still beautiful today. Console titles like Shadow of the Colossus have beautiful music, for one. But music really shines in the 21st century influx of indie games. Cave Story has some of the most beautiful music I’ve ever heard. It is a classic that fits in right next to Super Mario World for me.

Oh yeah. I forgot about Katamari Damacy. HELLOOOOOOOOOOO

I can only think of one reason that made gaming pale in comparison with the 16 age:

memory cards.

Every game I buy I try not to save, unless I wanna really finish it, for example I like to play Guitar Hero from the beginning until the end, after a couple tries like that I save to make my score better, after a couple months I erase my save to start all over next time I play.

the one thing I loved is playing Super Mario Bros 3, beat every level and then fight Bowser. The first time I cheated was that Shortcut in Supe mario World to fight Bowser, and I felt really bad for finishing the game so soon. So that’s how I play… 90’s style…

@ Rob : Wow, I couldn’t have said it better. I just remember playing Super Mario World at my day care (I’m probably a bit younger than you) and returning each day to try to find each secret. Different kids would know different secrets and I would continue to pass them on to other kids. With the arrival of GameFAQs, gaming secrets just haven’t been the same.

@ Eric : I love my DS and I would agree that it’s the closest thing to classic gaming, but I wouldn’t put both in the same category. Pit any one of those titles against their 80s and 90s counterparts and you get extremely different games. I’ll play and enjoy the new ones, but nothing can replace the games that spawned out of the 90s for me.

‘Better’ is such a broad term. I like to think that we have different expectations in our modern day and age, thanks to technology.

Back then we were pleased with bold pixels, amusing sounds, good controls and a memorable story; today anything that doesn’t ‘take advantage’ of the machine’s powerful CPU/engine/memory/Internet and wireless capabilities/multiplayer/3rd-party peripherals/cappuccino maker is ‘bad’.

I personally hold onto the story and great dialogue, and I’m kind of sad over games that cover up a poor plot with OMFG AWESOME GRAPHIX LOL.

it was better in the 90s.
theres alot of good stuff now, but it was still better back then.

there was simply more imagination being used with all the limitations in place. the less limits you have the less there is to push, the less thought that has to go into something.

Well, both the 90’s and the last 8 years of the 00’s have had a lot of inovation in technology, great games, and consoles, but I don’t quite have an answer, as to which decade was better…yet. This is an interesting topic though, that’s for sure.

Yes I think gaming in the ’90s was really memorable. Zelda would be a great example. Ever since Wind Waker, no Zelda title has really done it for me. I would have to say the best Zeldas were the Super Fami, Game Boy, and N64 ones… But I’m still excited about what the future holds (*MGS4*).

Still, I find it amusing that the PSP games I seem to enjoy the most are the remakes, ports, and the PS1 re-releases… Dracula X, Irregular Hunter X, Street Fighter Zero 3, MGS1…to name a few.

But then, other people say titles like Robotron and Pac-Man are the best games… As for me…they’re not really my cup of tea…

I think games were better in the 90’s because a lot of games had their own (audio)visual style and nowadays most games look the same because they tried to be realistic.

That’s the reason I really like Wind Waker, Killer7, Okami and future titles like MadWorld or 2D games on my DS.

And the last machine I was really fascinated of was SEGA’s Dreamcast because it’s line-up had a lot of (3D) games with very unique style (Rez, Jet Set Radio, Samba de Amigo, Space Channel 5, Power Stone, Bangai-O …) and most of them had the same ‘feeling’ like the games in the 16bit-era.

Yes.

I can’t stand these overly complicated, repetative 3D games that have nothing going for them but good graphics. I love the graphics but the games aren’t that fun.

Play Final Fantasy IV then XII and tell me which is better.

Easily better in the 90s than today.
So many game makers, even Nintendo pretend they can get away with dumbing down a game simply because it uses a new control scheme, or looks devastatingly good, but the truth is, the majority of current gen console games are taking game mechanics backwards more than forwards.

It makes sense in light of the trend to create more “new” gamers, but as a gamer since the NES, I feel like I have to be VERY CAREFUL about what games I buy because so many of my childhood games and icons have been remade and butchered into kiddie plush toys.

There was something amazing about gaming as a kid before the internet. Every issue of Nintendo Power was a treasure trove, and every secret contained within was that much more valuable because of the fact that it contained so few secrets in comparison with how many questions there were in kids’ minds. The level maps were awesome, too.

So yeah, I can’t help but think something has been lost there. Progress, I guess, but some of the magic is definitely gone. My friends and I felt like we were in The Goonies back then, huddling together in the playground and talking about how to get past this dungeon or that boss.

I love the music of the Metroid Prime series. It’s very Steroid Maximus: http://tinyurl.com/zxwde

There’s a glaring omission in Andrew’s list. Modern gaming isn’t gaming. It’s waiting. Waiting for the game to download. Waiting for the fully rendered cut-scene to load (which takes longer than ten seconds). Waiting for your memory card to load. Waiting for the level to load. Waiting for the game to connect to the server. Waiting for your game to save. Waiting. Modern gaming is waiting. You could play an entire level of SMB during the load time of some games. You could play FFIV 3 times over in the time spent waiting to “play” FFXII. In fact, that’s how I game these days, with a DS at the ready to fill in downtime during the inevitable, illusion-destroying load times of modern games.

We early 20sers are lucky, to have played pac man at infancy, mario and ninja turtles during our early development, mario 3, sonic, megaman x as we grew, and finally wii when we hit adulthood.

What a lucky time to have been born.

“Play Final Fantasy IV then XII and tell me which is better.”

I think Final Fantasy IV is the best in the series, personally… but XII is a great game aimed at a very different crowd than VII through X were (none of which I particularly liked). Even if I believe IV is better, I can’t say XII sucks… so what’s the difference?

And my god, are some of these issues in here exaggerated. It’s like people are finding any problem they can with gaming nowadays and making it 20 times worse lol. FFXII barely has any load times at all and the cutscenes are significantly cut back from some previous releases… As if there weren’t tons of scenes we had to press A through in the SNES games? Give me a break. Just think about FFVI for a second here. Not to mention that load times on 90s CD and DVD games were even worse than they are now.

I don’t think gaming was any better in the 90s. It’s ridiculous to claim games had to try “harder” then than now simply because of what the systems were capable of. Things were different and they are different now. If I had to seriously sit down and come up with a list of the games I thought were great from each decade across all systems they’d all be around the same size.

I wouldn’t say better, just different. There are a lot of old school games I wouldn’t want to live without, and there are a lot of ‘new school’ games that I wouldn’t want to live without either. No one should feel the 90’s are better just because of nostalgia anyway.

Some of his points are good, but others I don’t understand. Internet gaming is bad (I dunno about you, but I don’t have tons of gaming friends who live in the same town as me)? Blockbuster Movie (I feel like there are games that are that, but others that aren’t…you can’t generalize so much)?

Maybe I feel this way because my ‘main’ system is the Wii, and it really is old school in it’s own way.

I think there’s also the fact that a lot of Nintendo fans only have Nintendo systems… wherein many of the people here only owned a GameCube that had essentially a dozen games of note on it (regardless of how great they might be). If I had only that through half of the 2000s I would think gaming sucked too.

The points made are well thought out. While I do look forward to new releases, I agree that the 90s were the golden age of gaming. There’s just nothing like playing a game that you beat as a kid and remembering how much fun it was. And if I had to choose 5 games to play on a desert island, they would certainly all be from the 90s.

Back then games were for gamers. Not status symbols for basketball players and hype machines.

I’d sooner play my SNES than buy Halo 3

Nothing, NOTHING beats the feeling you get when you cream someone in Brawl and they’re right next to you, and it goes for every other game that supports online. For some things, you just gotta be there.

I know I’m just adding to the masses here, but I agree with much that has been said…to a point.

I feel that 90’s gaming was more enjoyable, yes, but that’s because it’s what I had. Kids today will sit around twenty years from now and reminisce about the first time they encountered the companion cube or argue about which numbered Guitar Hero opened their eyes to classic rock the most. We twenty-somethings remember adding Magus to our party for the first time or the first time we sucessfully didn’t touch the controller for three minutes behind the waterfall in Earthbound. It’s just different.

For me, 90’s gaming was not “the best” in all respects. I enjoy rhythm games now, which hardly existed back then. I also enjoy quirky Japanese games that were impossible to come across back then (Mystical Ninja vs. Katamari, for example). I do think that the big place where games are lacking nowadays is in the RPG aspect. 16-bit RPGs were the perfect balance of story, game play, and graphics. Chrono didn’t say a word, nor did Ness, yet they were both definitely enduring characters. The only character that really gets away with that now is Link, and he’s a throwback to the old days. Like many others have said, I RPG on my DS and not a whole lot more, for the same reason others have said…2D RPGs are more enjoyable to me….graphics can’t improve a good story.

Anyway, I could go on about this forever, but it comes down to this: Games are different now. Better now? Not really. Better then? Not really. It’s what YOU like.

it was better because I was a child and I didn’t have alcohol or friends to spend money and time on

I think some aspects of games were better in the 90s, but it changed so much that it’s hard to compare. Here is my list of what was better (don’t take it too seriously):

1- No tutorials.
2- No big story, but a context and a goal for the player.
3- 2 buttons control schemes.
4- Rythmic and precise gameplay (like in 2d platformers).
5- Game Designers were not movie directors wanabes.
6- A bit harder.
7- Shorter: You could finish a game in 2 hours.
8- You could play in alternate turns with a friend.

It’s because the majority of you were kids then. stop being nostalgic about video games.

@TwoTapsyes

That’s not entirely true. There are a LOT of games on the NES and SNES that I played for the first time during the Gamecube era.

The 90’s were the golden age of gaming.

Everything that was well done at the end of the 80’s was perfected in the 90’s. Not much can top the SNES and N64 games that were released.

Most of the memorable iconic games came from those systems. From Link to the Past, to Ocarina of Time, Super Mario World to Mario 64… Goldeneye! Super Mario Kart was established then as well…

The most innovative era.

Yes, it was better because I actually had time to play the games I own in the 90s…

Adding to what I said before, I really agree with a lot of the statements above about the internet ruining gaming.

I mean unless you buy a game right away, you are likely to come upon spoilers all over the internet. For example the Twilight Princess game… I didn’t get to play it until after Christmas when I got my Wii, even though I bought it right away.

When I would browse around though IGN and other video game forums and just looking for game info, I found it hard not to stumble upon some spoiler detail. The game was semi ruined already for me by the time I played it, despite it being a wonderful experience.

The magic of encountering the dungeons for a first time weren’t as magical as they could’ve been cause I could see comments and images leaking out everywhere of all the locations.

When I played Ocarina of Time a decade ago, I had no clue what to expect. I was always intrigued by what came up, especially the Shadow Temple which was way creepier then anything Twilight Princess had to offer. Even the traveling between times was more engaging then the whole Twilight Realm, which was a really lame knock off of the Dark World concept, and the Dark World made a more lasting impression on me.

Anyways thats all I have to say

LOL @ the part about Rise of the Robots in the linked article. I share the author’s opinion on that one for sure!

Objection!

There is a contradiction in your statement! How is it fair that the 2-D Link has to fight with a flat sword!??!

@ Amauriel : Fixed.

Bad graphics can’t hurt a good story.

While I am a fan of “old school” gaming, I think this list is missing the point somewhat. It’s not weather or not gaming was better in the 90’s, it’s weather the experience was better. And frankly, yes, it was. But I stand by that not because the games were exactly better, but because of the time in our lives that they were introduced. I’m going to assume that the average reader/contributer here is between the ages of 20-30, which means that when we first started playing games we were all essentially kids. When you’re a child, it’s easier to get drawn into things, it’s easier to be captivated by them.

Many people have said it before me; they go back and play games that they loved in the past, and see that they really are not all that great. Obviously some games in the 90’s defy this, because they truly are amazing games that stand the test of time. Ocarina of Time, and Goldeneye are common, yet very good examples. But saying that gaming as a whole was better in the 90s? I don’t think it’s an entirely true statement. Gaming today pretty much works on the some basic concepts as it did back in the day, but using technology that is available now. There is still plot development, there are still interesting characters, linear and non-linear game environments etc. Sure, games back in the 90’s required more imagination, and there-fore often drew you in more, but you have to ask if that was intentional or simply because the developers lacked the tools to make it more visually engaging or deeper on a technical level? Were the truly challenging us or were they just overcompensating?

I said it before; I love older games. The 90’s to me WAS gaming. But I don’t think that’s because the games were better, they were just different. I was younger, gaming was a new concept, it was fun, and interesting. As i’ve grown up, I look at games as more of an art form than anything, so i’m often more critical of them than I should be. But I still get that sense of awe from certain games, like Mario Galaxy or Portal. That ability to capture ones imagination is still there, it just takes some more effort. In 10 years ask anyone who is a kid now if they thinking gaming was better when they were younger, and they’ll say yes. It’s all perspective. Gaming is still at it’s core what it’s always been, it’s just different now than it was. I’ve grown up with it, and I can’t to see what they do next.

Music surely wasn’t… but as far as games I don’t know.

I’m just gonna say that I more-or-less agree with those 10 points, and I’m feeling a lot of nostalgia right now.

Oh, Ladybug on the Coleco…

Music better ‘back in the day’?! Balderdash!! I dare you to listen to Mario Galaxy’s expansive soundtrack and compare it to Super Mario Bros 3 or even Super Mario World, and tell me the latter two are better. They’re great for sure - nostalgic and all that jazz…but they just don’t ompare to the quality and epic tone of today’s music.

Brawl is the best soundtrack ever, and it is those old songs you love so much made new again with today’s technology. So maybe a perfect blend is best?…

@D~N

Defintely have to disagree with you there, man. While Super Mario Galaxy has probably the best soundtrack in MANY years, I’d take the SMB3, Super Metroid, Castlevania SOTN, etc. soundtracks over almost every other game these days.

Back then I think the arcades played a crucial part in shaping what we played on our consoles. In fact one of the major sellers was the arcade ports. Everyone went to the arcades for the better stuff, and then when they wanted something for home, they wanted something just as good at the least.
We were happy with what the machine could do but arcade quality gameplay was what we looked for. Thats what we based our comparisons on.

Ever see a glitch on an arcade system? Extremly rare. See one on home consoles? Quite a bit. See some now? Well, some games are even unplayable, and yet they still get high sales on simple factors as just the name alone.
Its hard to try before you buy and technology has opened too many shortcuts.

The ninties were the video game golden years.

No, it was not. They can still capture the same level of interesting gameplay with a far more involving visual medium than they had in the ’90s. And it happens just as often now–there was about the same percentage of good games in the ’90s as there is now, and lots and lots of trash, as there is now.

If you want to say that books from the 1800s are better than books from the 1900s just because they had to write the entire thing out by pen back in the 1800s and those darned typewriters and then computers just made the whole medium so subpar then arguments like “Older games had to strive to set themselves apart from the others and had to rely more on cool gameplay elements than great graphics. Even with the music, older games had to have really memorable melodies to make them stand out, but these days developer’s can just throw any old orchestral soundtrack in their game.”, but it just doesn’t work, for books or games. Example: RE4 or Gears of War have horrendous plots in this day and age, but hey, they certainly captured a worthy gameplay element, didn’t they? GTA looked like crap prior to GTA IV, but damn if it wasn’t fun (for some of us) to play. And don’t try to tell me that you can get the same level of immersion from FFVI as you can from FFXII, because, hey, FFVI is a darn fine game, but FFXII is a darn fine game too and it looked darn fine as well.

Actually, to capture one more point, why are we comparing “fun” between the two decades, anyway? Just over the past three days I completed the original Dragon Warrior (okay, it was the Game Boy Color remake, because opening a damned window to choose “door” to open a door was a gameplay element I could live without), and I had a lot of fun playing it. But did I have MORE fun than I did playing through FFXII? Certainly not. Fun is fun, and articles like this just give people this false sense of hatred for the “modern state of gaming” or some such thing. Why can’t I just play my Ocarina of Time AND my Wind Waker? Why must they be segregated? Why? A wonderful experience is a wonderful experience, and it should never ever be thought that, between an NES game or a PS3 game, that you can find a BETTER experience in either.

BARAMOS, you make an excellent comment, however, some people miss simplicity (and maybe it’s probably just 90% nostalgic hype). Better is not the appropriate term to use. Strengths and Weaknesses in certain areas divide what the gamer who is bored and the gamer who is happy are looking for.

Oh gosh, I’m rereading that and it didn’t sound like it made a lot of sense… oh well.

Obviously the list isn’t entirely serious, but it’s telling that so many of the points are based on areas where we have more choice now.

“Couch Multiplayer” hasn’t gone away, and is better catered for and more accessible than it ever was in the 1990s. There’s no shortage of 2D games (in contrast with the deliberate move away from 2D in the Playstation 1 era). We no longer have Nintendo and Sega artificially inflating prices and limiting and staggering the release of third party games (this is supposed to be a bad thing?).

The fact is that the average consumer has easier access to more and better games than at any time in history. The main advantage that 1990s gaming has was fast development cycles and the fact that pre-internet most gamers had such a limited insight that everything appeared incredibly innovative.

I won’t dispute that this production method lead to many classic games, but are longer development cycles really so detrimental when we get games like Super Mario Galaxy, as opposed to forty indistinguishable mascot-based platform games every year?

In any case, the ability for developers to experiment on smaller ideas is coming back to consoles with the advent of digital distribution.

I enjoyed games more in the ’90s. I don’t know if they were BETTER, but they were more enjoyable to me at that point. There have been many enjoyable games this decade, though, like the Katamari series.

“games were cheaper too.”

Like hell they were. You’re forgetting how insanely expensive SNES games became when they got above 16 Mb. Chrono Trigger, back then, was probably $30 more expensive than any game on the shelf now.

Even in the NES era, SMB3 was quite expensive.

Wii and DS are giving us all kinds of new everything, and with the DS and PSP, you can take the most amazing games anywhere you like.

PS3 and Xbox 360 are giving us the ability to escape to places we’d never have thought possible (Liberty City, Willamette Mall, Tamriel etc).

WiiWare, XBLA, PSN, they’re giving us blasts of that old-school gameplay but now it looks and plays better than ever.

Flash and casual gaming cover so many genres, old and new, from the comfort of your favorite internet browser.

Oh, not including how nowadays you can download old games via online services like Virtual Console and Gametap.

The variety, the choice, from casual to hardcore, from modern to old school, from quirky and gimmicky to generic and traditional, from 2D to 3D, what’s available out there right now is astounding.

Take off those rose-tinted glasses, people. You’d have to be wearing them, or to be completely out of your mind, to think gaming was somehow “better” in the 90’s. It’s never been better than it is now, in every sense of the word.

This article seems very short sighted. First of all, yes there are some absolute classics from the 90’s & 80’s that still are fun to play, but to say that games were better back then? CLEARLY someone hasn’t looked through a comprehensive list of ALL GAMES that were out back then. The ratio of good games to shit actually stands about the same.

Furthermore, the thought that there are no decent sound tracks these days is absurd. Katamari, Okami, Shadow of the Collosus: all of these have absolutely amazing sound tracks.

What we have now is a diversification much as what was seen with film in the 30’s and 40’s. Back then, they started doing real movies instead of sideshow attractions and news reels. However TV and animation started around then too, allowing for a broader market of what was available.

Now we have a very strong Handheld market, for people on the go or those who still appreciate the pixel vibe. We have the indie games for those who like the experimental stuff. Each of the consoles offers a different unique experience. Casual games are a huge hit these days, though we often don’t consider them legitimate, your mom and grandparents are playing them. Downloadable games and episodic games are also set to change things. There may come a day where we have something closer to TV, actual quality game titles that are entirely funded by advertising, we are just having the first hiccups with how that is integrated.

To sum up, the 80’s and 90’s presented a high point for certain types of games, and certain types of gamers. The DS, VC, indie and downloadable scenes are definitely allowing for a comeback of those style of games though.

It’s better today because all the good games from the 90s still exist and are cheaper.

I disagree with the ‘harder to cheat’ aspect. I can’t remember the last time I properly ‘cheated’ in a console game. I don’t mean ‘looked up a walkthrough’, I mean ‘entered UP UP DOWN DOWN LEFT LEFT RIGHT RIGHT B A START’ at the title screen to make all the enemies in Rainbow Six Vegas wear pink tutus… where’ve all the cheat codes gone?!

@ RBELMONT:
Well, I certainly can’t argue your opinion, and so I will respect it. However, while I did claim Galaxy’s music beter than SMB3’s and SMW’s, I don’t want you to have the wrong impression. They’re both phenominal soundtracks. However, they’re great in two seperate ways. SMB3 is classic because it stays stuck in your head forever. But Galaxy is, while perhaps less memorable, a more interesting and less generic experience to the point that I, like many others, put the soundtrack on my iPod. Truthfully speaking, my entire 80 GB iPod is filled with three things, and that’s video games soundtracks, Pat Metheny Group, and Gaming Podcasts. Seriously, I listen almost entirely to video game soundtracks. Perhaps it is for this reason that I prefer Galaxy: it is more varied, more easily listened to as a casual experience, and because of the sheer production value and epic presentation of the songs.

Sure, SMB3 and SMW had some classic tunes, that’s undeniable. But if you show me “Mushroomy Kingdom” (Brawl) vs. “Mushroom Kingdom” (NES), I think the highly orchestrated versions will always win out over the pixelated bleeps-and-bloops. That’s just me though, ’cause I’m always all for the big over-the-top production and epic scale of things. Original Zelda soundtrack? “Classic! Timeless!” Twilight Princess’s soundtrack? “Beautiful! Epic!” I guess that’s ultimately the difference that I see.

Brawl’s soundtrack, composed both of old and new, is perfect for any music fan. I’d like to see more mixes like this in the future, of both old classics and newly produced orchestraated versions or guitar remixes.

The imminent problem here is the term “better”. It’s such a blatantly ambiguous term, it can mean 20 different things to 20 different people. It’s definite that gaming back in the 90s was DIFFERENT, but whether or not that difference made it BETTER depends entirely on each person’s point of view. I loved gaming in the 90s, I love gaming today. I’m not really inclined to pick one over the other, though I would point out that there were nice things about gaming back then that we’ve lost, and nice things we’ve gained along the way. Personally, I’d prefer things kept changing, because even if you don’t like the direction gaming takes, older titles will always be available. It’s not hard to relive your favorite era in gaming.

i can just picture 4cr 10 years from now… “was gaming better in the 2000’s?” And im going to say, Hell no, id never trade call of duty 16 for call of duty 4!

Well I do very much miss the good old days of Ninja Gaiden 1, 2, and 3, Chip and Dale’s Adventure, Duck Tales series, Super Mario Brothers series, Zelda series, Crono Trigger, 2D Final Fantasy series, Rad Racer, Battle Toads, Ninja Turtles series, Bubble Bobble, And a list of like, 500 other old time games or so, but I still believe that if the game is done right, we can have amazing gameplay with high level emersion.

For example, Twilight Princess had me wetting my pants over how nice the game looked. The surrounding atmosphere of the world had me exploring and falling deeper and deeper into the world of Zelda, at which some points, I would just examine closely the details of a tree, or runes on a rock, the rays of light through the forest, and stuff. The controls were tight and fun, some of the puzzles had me busting my ass to solve them, and the fights were GORGEOUS. Not to mention the boss battles, they were just absolutely jaw dropping. If that’s not good gameplay, then you’ve lost me.

I’m not saying pac-man or mario was bad, I grew up on it, and revere it to a certain extent! But ever since Super Mario 64, Ocarina of Time, and a handful of first person shooters, I’ve been addicted to the emersiveness of those games. The feeling of actually being there, as the actual hero, imagining the feeling of actually being the character you play, not just watching him as you control him has far gotten the better of me. When I first played Ocarina of Time, and gotten to the part where you approach the Great Deku Tree for the first time, I literally walked link, as slow as I could, pretending to respectfully approach the polygon God of a tree, because the imersiveness of that world really got to me. And I played through the entire game that same way, just because it felt so right. Call me a freak or whatever you want, but that’s my ultimate anti-drug. I played like that through Twilight Princess too. I felt like I was in 6th grade again, plugging in my gold cartridge for the first time.

Oh yeah, and for the record, my most favorite game of all time was Crono Trigger.

woah, some seriously long responses to this question, so i don’t think theres much more to say. when i was younger (NES and SNES era) computer games were all i could think about, now that i’m older, i’m still addicted to anything nintendo spits my way, but i’ve come to notice theres more to this world, like women, booze, recreational drugs and seeing the world.

Whilst i still think back to the beautiful 16-bit days of green hyrule, floating super metroids, and feverishly difficult mode 7 pilotwings missions, being truly awesome… games these days strive feel more like big budget movies rather than ‘video games’ and are both good and bad for it e.g. the facial animations and general graphical quality in places in Twilight Princess really added a lot to the feel of the game, but if i had to choose between the feeling i had upon completion of A Link To The Past Vs Twilight Princess, the SNES game always wins (i did it again recently), i guess that means i liked the older ones more?

Ugh i dunno, anyway, i’d say for me the 90s rocked for gaming, though i still have a great time these days playin em (120 stars with luigi on mario galaxy being a crowning moment) and i’ll be sure to stick with ninty till i die. But the point i’m trying to make is there are a lot more distractions these days for me, and that may impair my judgement… or something

I love countless games from the 90s, and gaming itself in the 90s for a number of reasons.

But I don’t think it’s better, at all.

-As has been said, the ratio of shit games to good games in the 90s was more or less the same. I know this is the case, because I played every damn thing I could get my hands on back then. —I just didn’t care if it was good or not—

The reason I get the sense that gaming was better in the 90s is likely to be because of this. I think I demand more of games today, and can’t help but feel a little disappointed in the inadequacy of games in general for a mature audience. (by mature, I certainly don’t mean GTA or ‘adult’ etc.) It’s fairly understandable that this is the case, but for this same reason it’s also a fairly exciting time for videogames /right/ now. (I speak namely of indie games, I guess, which leads me to answer the internet point with a resounding ‘NO’)

-Graphics were just as big a selling point in games in the 90s as they are today. They’ve always been a selling point.

I /do/ think the industry today is rather stale, but this may be more apparent now because of this larger demand for originality and quality. This is just mere speculation, but I hope there is! As has been mentioned, at the moment the vast majority of the videogame industry is akin to blockbusters, fail-safe, huge-budget stuff. I like blockbusters–when I don’t want to think.

The gameplay over graphics argument is quite interesting, I think. It’s highly likely that this concept is a far greater concern today than it was in the early 90s.. I imagine it’s sort of a result of comparing crap games with high production-rates from today (and the generic 3D graphics that come with it) to a stellar game from earlier that still inexplicably works today despite the graphics looking ‘old-school’ (even though they were likely awesome, in a technical sense, at the time of production).

I don’t think this really says anything about gaming in the 90s, not /really/. It’s more of an observation that ‘gameplay is important’. (that’s obvious, though. I think a better lesson to be learnt from it is that ’style’ is important)

(but I hope that’s obvious too?)

comments tl;dr

Yes, it was better in the 90s. The 90s is, coincidentally, when I did most of my gaming. I’m sure the two are unrelated.

As always though I make an exception for Zelda; Zelda games published in this decade were as good as those in the 90s.

Gaming was just a thing you did back then, now it’s all hype and flash and anger.

I think this is a good topic of discussion, but his list isn’t really accurate. I looked this over with some other animators at work, and the only point we were able to agree with him on was the durability of consoles. The rest is a case of rose colored glasses.

But one thing we were able to know for sure was that MAKING games in the 90’s was better than it is now.

I don’t know if games were really better in the 90’s, but I certainly enjoyed them more back then. DS is definitely my “portal to the past” as far as gaming goes though. Interesting, sometimes simple, usually original, fun games.

I’m playing through Super Mario World on the GBA, and I tell you, every time I jump I think to myself ‘i can see there was thought put into making this game.’ The SNES was the pinacle of gaming. It had just enough horsepower to do what ever it wanted, yet not enough to sell games that aren’t fun, as so happens today.

There was more variety in the 90’s, and games were allowed to be “fun”. I’m 28, and I kinda miss those days where game systems were allowed to be toys

Nowadays, there’s so much effort put into making a game’s graphics more realistic that the gameplay isn’t the primary focus. Also, games cater to an older audience now, so the subject matter has become more serious and the design has become less colorful. Also, because the budgets have risen to Hollywood proportions, game developers are less likely to experiment, meaning that there are a disproportionate number of first person shooters out there.

I couldn’t be more bored than I am when playing a FPS.

.

Perhaps reaching the goal of making games feel like movies make it less of an impact because we’ve seen movies all our lives.

Only because I was a teen in it.

Steve: couldn’t agree more.

It’s not just a question of nostalgia, it’s the image of games that’s taken a turn for the worse.

Developers never cared about image at first, so they had nothing to lose in the SNES/Genesis era. Game heroes ranged from the cool sci-fi hero to the quirky cartoon animal and on the occasion put a strange twist on sports as if mutants had their own league.

Nowadays today’s gamer would call concepts like Rocky Rodent and Shadow of the Beast “Faggot Shit” because it’s not GTA, Madden or guaranteed to have 50 Cent in the soundtrack. It’s disgusting.

I will agree gaming was better, BUT only because they were free to express their ideas. To those who think I’m playing “Chicken Little” why don’t you look at Konami’s games on the Super Famicom and compare that to their current line of games for today before you dismiss my claim. Those guys are afraid of their own shadow.

Say what you will about Nintendo, but you can’t deny the fact that New Super Mario Bros. is proof they haven’t lost their ways.

I wonder when developers are going to get the message that celebrity voices, brown skies and Joss Whedon writting conventions should be weeded out of the mantra of “successful game development”

The 90’s was better than every year since, except this one. Point: Edge Magazine has given out 4 10/10 scores in the last year. Only five games received a 10/10 score in the previous TEN YEARS.

I just have one comment on durability: my Dreamcast and Saturn are STILL kickin’ and I do play them still. Go Sega!

Ah, the best thing was not having any Hip Hop in soundtracks, and how much songs were more “rocky”. Gimme Megaman X soundtrack if you want to see me having a field day with instruments.

The whole thing about imagination played a big part on it as well. My friend would think the Yellow Punk on Beats of Rage 2 was an old man, while I always tought Zangief scars were tattoos. We both were utterly shocked when we discovered what those were. Sure thing, this was a lot stronger during 8 bit gaming, but it was still there.

And then we have all of Steve’s points: fun, toys, experimenting and how FPS is a total bore. Take Sparkster as an example. Colourful, different, challenging. You don’t see much of those nowadays.

Oh yeah, challenge! That was really important. If you grab any tool assisted speed run from classics, they are quick as all hell. But you’d never finish them that quick, just because you’d die and restart so many times. Today games are either superlenghty but not challenging at all, or really really short .

On a closing note, everything above was biased and generalizations. I had great fun and challenge playing Lost Planet on Hard from the get-go

Okami has some fantastic tunes!