Retro Gaming - Graphics over Gameplay?

[Kaladron]

Retro gaming is growing in popularity, but why? The popular conception is that the visuals cannot compete with modern games but that the gameplay, challenges and concepts are much more original and plyable than what we have today.

Is that really the case though? Perhaps the opposite is true.

We all hear of gamers returning to past favourites only to find that they did not play as well as they remember and wishing they had left the game in the past. I bet we've all done it at one point. I've done it and what usually prompts me to go back and revisit an old game is the graphics. Glancing over at my Mega Drive collection right now, I see some games with absolutely beautiful 2D graphics. Gunstar Heroes, Streets of Rage II, Thunderforce IV, Ghouls & Ghosts etc etc. They all look stunning and, in my opinion, have not aged a single bit.

Now, don't get me wrong. Every single one of those Mega Drive games plays wonderfully. I just believe that they look EVEN BETTER than they play. In contrast, a lot of 3D games play very well but their visuals just don't make me feel the same way as the 2D stuff. Why? I don't know. I'm not a master of art or psychology so I couldn't begin to imagine. 2D just makes me happy.

Retro T-Shirts are taking off. have you seen the shirts with Sensible Soccer characters on? They are great 2D sprites that look brilliant on a shirt, a 3D model from FIFA would look awful in comparison. Another example - gamesTM's pages often feature one screenshot expanded to fit a full two pages and I can spend ages looking at those and appreciating the artistry. I often have no desire to play these games but I love to look at them.

I love fighting games, whether they be new or retro. Virtua Fighter is perfect and Street Fighter is brilliant but I prefer Street Fighter (particularly 3rd Strike). Why? I love the beautiful 2D art. I don't think Street Fighter plays particularly better than Virtua Fighter but it, sure as hell, looks better.

So, what was the point I was making? Ah yes, in his interview in gamesTM this month, Fukio Mitsuji of Taito cites the popularity of retro as an appreciation of gameplay over graphics and sound. I find this comment extremely strange as, for me, Taito's games have always LOOKED and SOUNDED exceptional. The characters of Bubble Bobble and New Zealand Story are timeless cartoony creations and the games feature equally brilliant theme tunes. They play excellently but I like the graphics even more.

Maybe this is a real taboo amongst gamers, but I'm going to say it anyway. For me, and I suspect a few other individuals, my love of Retro comes from an appreciation of graphics NOT gameplay.

You may start flaming me...........now.

[Sketcz]

Well said, well said indeed. A fair amount of the appeal of older games (particularly a certain era somewhere from the late 8-bit consoles to the 2D Saturn era), is that visually, their pixelated imagery is amazing.

It's why I can't stand any kind of anti-aliasing on emulators, and why I loathe most Xbox emulators, since they automatically blur the pixels. If I'm playing an SFC game on an emulator, I want to see each pixel in all its super sharp glorry. Otherwise I'd smear vaseline all over my TV/PC screen (or just my eyes).

Though I would say that 2D games can have a more precise style of gameplay, precise to a single pixel, which certainly appeals to me. As noted by Konami's Koji Igarashi in an interview, he feels that greater control over design and precision can only be done through 2D pixelated goodness. I'm inclined to agree, but certainly for me it's a combination of both gameplay and imagery.

Companies have tried doing 2D gameplay, using 3D polygonal graphics (Klonoa et al), and I think that the visual effect is nowhere near as good as it could have been, had they used sprites. I'm assuming from what you've said, you'd agree with this?

Regardless, well done on promoting the spriteliscious visuals of older games!

[Ish]

Though I would say that 2D games can have a more precise style of gameplay, precise to a single pixel, which certainly appeals to me.

Very true. Some retro titles demand pixel perfect jumps and control which just wouldn't be possible in 3d. I can't even begin to imagine a game like Thrust being so finely tuned and not being pure frustration if it was a 3d game.

And even in the games where there isn't pixel perfect action you still get the impression that the developers could control to the pixel just how much slack to give the player. As opposed to 3d which frequently feels at best wooly and frequently worse - hit and miss.

Of course many old 2d games still mess this up. But **** 'em - when I've got 20 odd years of juicy retro gaming titles to choose from why bother with those!

Talking about the graphics. I recently introduced an until that point purely PlayStation generation 3d gamer colleague of mine to the Metal Slug series. His first words: "wow the graphics are unbelievable". I smiled smugly