How do you feel about today's consoles compared to the Genesis?

I don't really know why but quite a few modern games really aren't that fun for me anymore. :( I mean, I can't argue the technical merits of these games on platforms like PS3 and XBox 360. They're graphically beautiful with great soundtracks. However, it's often more work for me to finish them if I can stomach finishing them at all.
On the other hand, there are literally dozens and dozens of Genesis titles that are really a blast to play. Each week, I play the Genesis more than all three next-gen systems combined. You'd think a system far less powerful would be eclipsed by today's consoles in fun factor but, more often than not, I find the opposite to be true. I still like the next-gen systems but the Genesis is king for me right now.

I like today's consoles for the most part, but I prefer the Genesis because there were more types of good games. Nowadays every game must be "epic" and have story-based gameplay that results in one long playthrough and then the game is shelved.

Has to do with age. We grew up playing genny titles so those will always be special. When you get older, videogames start to lose their appeal. I don't really care much for any of the next-gen consoles.

I barely play modern consoles & when I do the software is usually a throwback or a recycled experience from previous generations.

The culture behind it is different these days as well. Arcade culture is completely dead & console gaming has become shallow.

I want Sega or SNK to jump back in. I don't care how stupid it would be for them.

Genesis games are mostly arcade-like so they are focused on gameplay which means they can be beaten more than once making them more interesting than, say, 40 hours of cut scenes.

Also echoing what Joe Redifer said.

I like the new releases on 360 and PS3 although I do agree with Joe that there is hardly any replay value anymore. I love the epic stories and cinematic's but, it's hard paying full price for a game only to complete it within 8 hours and then shelf it. A lot of the story based games have absolutely zero replay value and multiplayer seems like an afterthought. I've gotten 20 years of gaming with my Genesis collection by pretty much playing to beat my high scores.

I own 50 Genesis games and 13 PS3 games- two of which are compilations of older games. I'm picky about which current gen games I like- replay value is important, which is why I favor fighting games. Too many games this gen focus on complicated controls and being repetitive, while older games focus on simple controls with lots of variety between levels- they also seem more fast paced, which is also why I favor fighting games for this gen.

Modern consoles are junk for countless reasons, and the main one will be reliablility. It just seems they are made cheaper than they were. Look at the 360. It uses an IBM PowerPC G5 CPU, which Apple had no problem cooling in the macintosh (although the cooling was very complex) yet Microsoft puts the CPU away from any direct fan and uses lousy ducting. Boom goes the CPU and GPU then. The PS3 suffered from BD ROM failures in its early life, and still has OS problems to this date. The Wii had DVD drive problems, and GPU overheating problems early on as well.
Software is now nothing special. Console games are designed more to appeal to the FPS generation than anything else today. The PC is still a holdout of some good games, but that's declining also.
Older consoles tended to be scaled down Arcade designs, and would be very reliable as a result. Of course low heat and static media will not wear out as fast as spinning media and high performance heat producing semiconductors. (Excluding the NES cartslot problem and Game Gear capacitor problems)

Honestly, I find the PS2 the most comparable platform industrywise. There are just so many factors that make the PS2 appeal to me in a similar way as the Genny used to back in the day (at least now I'm begginning to see it). Right now it feels just like it did 10 years ago, being able to find great PS2 titles (Genny then) at your average store for ridiculously cheap prices, knowing now that it will soon end. Both had respectively impressive libaries (and though roughly 1000 for the Genny, it still was a sizeable amount back in the day, proportionally comparable to today's near 2000 for the PS2).

Does anyone else feel the same way about the PS2? Although I had my ups and downs with the system (especially back when it killed my beloved dreamcast) industrywise, I find the PS2 to have become the true spiritual successor of the Sega Genesis (although the PS1 would've ranked in just as likely; but being able to play PS1 titles makes the PS2 all worth the while). Sure, it was the Xbox that was the spiritual successor of the DC, but we're talking Sega Genesis here. ;)

well, nearly 21 years later my genesis still works like a charm. I wonder if we'll be able to say the same about the 360 and ps3 several years from now?

RELIABILITY.

That's the main issue for me, and I agree that the PS2 is a great platform, the PS1 as well as the XBox, also, but imho the Genesis will be around long after the disk-based systems give up the ghost.

Other reasons, the controllers are tougher than both PS and PS2, power supplies are external and easily obtainable with no rebuilding (internal to the console) necessary, and the Genesis uses standard electronic parts mostly.

You can almost build a Genesis from scratch (based on just getting parts together) compared to any new platform, they are so proprietary. Not to say the Gen doesn't have proprietary parts, just not that many.

The Mega Drive is superior to today's consoles on all accounts except for maybe graphics technology. Xbox 360 must be the worst console ever, its non existent reliability considered. How many stories haven't I heard about people being forced to buy additional fans because its production is so poor, or even being forced to buy an entirely new console because the older one broke just right after the way too low warranty went out? Completely unacceptable. The Wii is better, but that gimmicky controller didn't work very well and I got tired of it rather quickly. It doesn't have stereo sound either, so it's a step backwards compared to the Mega Drive. I haven't played the PS3, but it seems to be a dust-collecting overpriced POS that for some reason has worse hardware in PAL regions compared to other regions. I do not approve such semi-racist discrimination.

I re-gained my love for consoles with the current generation after getting out of touch with them during the PSX/Saturn/N64-era. Technologically and gameplay-wise I'm now more comfortable with them again.

It may have something to do with my personal feelings towards PC-gaming... In the Genesis/SNes-era I've felt the two of them to be completely different; in the beginnings of 3d-gaming, I could never quite warm up to the likes of Banjo Kazooie, Golden Eye or Super Mario 64, so I've largely ignored them. But nowadays, games like GTA IV, Uncharted 2 and the likes somehow reignited my console interest.

Genesis will always have a special place in my heart, though, but this is mostly for nostalgic reasons. It has special ties to my childhood, something that modern consoles, logically, will never be able to achieve.

Many xbox titles are taken too seriously and rely heavily on the achievement system and straight up competition to belittle any casual gamer who is unlucky to enter the fray known as xbox live.

The genesis however has something for everybody, competition, casual play,and party games. It was never about being hardcore, it was about playing games, on the next level.

One of the best games I have ever played lives on the 360... Castle Crashers !!!!!!!!
If I were to get a current gen game console it will be 360... I don't care about the unreliability, the controller is awesome and it has some very fun games. PS3 is nice too, but I really dislike the controller, its the only thing that prevents me from liking Sony stuff, and I've not seen any 3rd party controller to make up for that part...
Wii is something I got fed up with fast, so its unlikely if I get one, unless someone gives me one...

Never play them really. I don't own a PS3 or 360 nor do I intend to. Mind you, I'm not a big fan of the last generation either, apart from the DC. Even the PSX/Saturn/N64 is too 'new' for my tastes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zebbe

The Mega Drive is superior to today's consoles on all accounts except for maybe graphics technology.

---

What are you talking about? Don't forget that the Mk I Megadrive has "high definition graphics" just like the current generation of consoles do!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by crazyteknohed

What are you talking about? Don't forget that the Mk I Megadrive has "high definition graphics" just like the current generation of consoles do!

---

Yes, this means they are equal. The Mega Drive can't be superior on graphics if others also have "High Definition Graphics". Makes perfect sense.

I don't really like hating on new consoles too much as is often popular among retro gamers. It was the PS2 that got me back into gaming after my long hiatus due to the general turdiness of the Saturn and N64 (fuck you very much Sega and Nintendo for making those things lol). The PS3 likewise has some enjoyable material on it, like Wipeout HD Fury, Fallout 3 and the Resistance games, so I definitely do enjoy new gen games.

However, on an overall scale, I still prefer the Genesis, and if I had to be stuck in a room for a very long time and could only have 1 system, it would be the Genesis. My main concern with new games and systems is the focus on emulating reality. It started with the introduction of 3D environments. Games nowdays try to emulate real life and real life physics and environments too much. You hardly ever get games that are just outlandish, unreal fun like Toejam & Earl or Earthworm Jim. There is a certain artistry in 2D game design because it allows for the creation of environments that don't make sense in a real world context, but are enjoyable to watch and navigate in a game on a 2D screen. They have some basis in reality, but the environments and characters of 2D games are a departure from real life, and as the audience we accept that on some level, and enjoy because of it’s difference from our reality.

Take for example classic Sonic environments, they're not realistic, but they're fun as hell to play around in. New games lack that, because when they're brought into the 3rd dimension they try to emulate reality in physics and object interaction. Even if the physics are not entirely emulating hard reality and taking some liberties, they still approximate it to a fairly close degree, and you lose that cartoonish fantasy of the older games.

For example Sonic in 3D. IMO Sonic is a character that should never have been brought to 3D because he just looks ugly, no matter which incarnation of him you examine. Reality type issues crop up like: Are his spikes soft and hair-like or hard and plastic like, what about the texture – shiny and smooth or furry, are they thick singular polygonal units or are they combinations of smaller polygonal units, should they have a hair-like flow when he runs, etc... You look at all these questions pertaining to the reality of a highly unrealistic character and the enjoyment of it just fades away. You look at Sonic as a 2D drawing and he's clearly a cartoon hedgehog, he doesn't have to make sense. It’s fun watching him exist in a cartoon world that is different from our own. :sonic:

That’s my 2 cents anyway. Sorry about the wall-of-text.

...but its a good wall of text and I agree with your points :)

Thanks :D

Another thing I just thought of. With older games, there really was no time committment to playing them. You could just sit down and play a Sonic level for a few minutes if you wanted to. Or punch in the level select code and play your favourite level.

With new games, where everything is cinematic and story driven with constant character upgrading and rpg elements, you don't go into a game with the same non-committal feeling of "it's just a game". You go in with the attitude of "it's a storyline, let's watch it unfold, I have to see the character evolve". Sure you can make saves in all your favourite levels but it usually feels disjointed if you play out of order. You can have a favourite level, and a favourite point in your character's evolution, but chances are it won't synch up. Whereas with older games your character is more stable, or static, so you're really just manipulating the one variable of what level you take him to. In a way it's limited, but it's also nice knowing that you have an awesome character that won't start sucking halfway through the game lol. It's good to know that he's still gonna be the badass little 16-bit dude, with the same badass 16-bit abilities, no matter what level you stick him in.


I find that when I beat a new gen game, I typically set it down and don't play it again for a year or even more (unless I do a second playthrough for a different ending), but still after it's done, it's like a movie ended, it's over, I put it away until I feel like seeing it again. Even if I really liked it, I feel like I just finished listening to a story, and I don't particularly want to hear it again just yet.

With the Genesis games, I play just for the fun of interacting with the game, beat a few levels, stop, pick it up the next day, play another level... etc. It's more like enjoying an activity than watching a movie/seeing a story unfold. Sure there's a back story and an ending, but really the levels in between are just pure gameplay. (The exception of course being RPGs)

Mega Drive holds up extremely well, but I would still like to own a newer console.

I'm pissed off by the amount of ego-shooters on modern consoles,
which don't work well with gamepads anyway, and about the fact,
that no modern games try to be funny any more. It's mostly about serious
war right now, which is a questionable development. Mega Drive is
more about fun and parody, like the original Mortal Kombats. Platformers,
which seriously lack today, are a speciality and Mega Drive pretty much
mastered them.

But I'm also a bit unhappy with the way racing games look and play
on the Mega Drive, I'd like more detailed scaling and graphics. Sometimes
it's just playable to me, other times it's not. Anything 3D is barely fun to
play too. I also like many of the more current games, like MKvsDC,
Resident Evil, Skate, etc.

I don't own any of the latest consoles. The last one I had was a fairly neglected Gamecube. For me it's mostly about the genres being dominant on the Genesis (and old systems in general) having regressed to small niches, like shmups.

I can sum it up in this analogy.......

The genesis was like the first girl I was in love with. Ironically enough, it was around the same time period. She was my first love and I will always remember her fondly. Every girl I ever dated was compared to her. Every console I've owned has been compared to the genesis.

This generation of consoles are like the hot 20 year olds I slept with before meeting my wife 5 years ago.....Those girls were very hot, very fun for short periods of time, but ultimately didnt have much else going on.......Very similar to the ps3 and 360.....The games are very pretty and fun for a while, but I hardly doubt they will be remembered in the same way as our first love......

i honestly dont see the point in modern consoles. well, besides the obvious... they want to sell you something proprietary.

:|

the Genesis is awesome, always was.
SEGA blew it, always has ;)

There's two reasons I don't care much for modern consoles. One is the games. They're too story driven. I want to play a game, not watch someone's character develop. I've played games where it seems like for every 5 mins of game play you get a half hour of dialogue. In short today's games need to STFU and let me shoot something. Second is the systems themselves. They're unreliable, overpriced junk. Now with microsoft's Natal and Sony Move coming out everyone's going to be requiring you to wave a dongle and flap your arms at the screen. I'm going to have to take up PC gaming just so I can use a mouse. (never thought I would say that)

I think retro games were in general better as GAMES because the hardware had serious limits. This required the designers to provide something that would draw us in and keep us engaged besides photo-realistic graphics. Quite often, they succeeded.

That said, I'd agree that the PS2 is and will be viewed as a high point in the ebb and flow of gaming. It was powerful enough to have impressive graphics yet still had one foot in the previous generations such that games designed for it are quite often really quite good.

I have a soft spot for my Genesis because it was my gateway drug into console gaming, but I probably give more love to my PS2 than any system I own.

The only modern console I own is a Wii, kinda funny that I have more GameCube games for it than Wii games...... In fact, there are more GC games I'm looking to collect and not a single Wii game I'm itching to locate and purchase.

'Tis funny, I really LIKE games with a storyline and characters I can "get to know" but I don't think that has been done any better than in Genesis, Saturn and PS2 games. PS3, 360 and Wii games seem so contrived and cliche', they get so worked up about the presentation they don't seem to deliver much substance.

I have said it before but here goes, The 360 reminds me of a SEGA machine when i play it. Maybe its because of the Pad layout?

What? The 360 has a standard diamond button configuration which was started with the SNES. There hasn't been any console since the Saturn with a similar button layout. Even the Dreamcast went with a diamond configuration, losing two buttons from the Saturn while copying everyone else and making a HORRIBLE controller as a result.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Joe Redifer

What? The 360 has a standard diamond button configuration which was started with the SNES. There hasn't been any console since the Saturn with a similar button layout. Even the Dreamcast went with a diamond configuration, losing two buttons from the Saturn while copying everyone else and making a HORRIBLE controller as a result.

---

I never owned a snes thats why the 360 reminds me of the dreamcast

http://cache.gawker.com/assets/image...Controller.jpg

http://xbox360media.ign.com/xbox360/...748647-000.jpg

http://www.axess.com/twilight/console/detail/snes.jpg


The Dreamcast and the 360 look more the same to me than the snes.

The 360 doesn't feel like Sega to me, Sega bled a sense of quality hardware & software. The offline experience of the 360 is sub par & the hardware is not reliable. There's no awesome exclusives. There's no 'Magic' for lack of a better term.

The Dreamcast's controller was ridiculous. They should have stuck with the Saturn Dpad, and had 6 concave face buttons.

I didn't like the Genesis D-pad for that matter until it got the first 6-button revision. That controller is great.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Knuckle Duster

The 360 doesn't feel like Sega to me, Sega bled a sense of quality hardware & software. The offline experience of the 360 is sub par & the hardware is not reliable. There's no awesome exclusives. There's no 'Magic' for lack of a better term.

The Dreamcast's controller was ridiculous. They should have stuck with the Saturn Dpad, and had 6 concave face buttons.

---

Theres no denying the DC pad was swag, But you guys need to understand that i stoped playing consoles after the dreamcast and returned with the 360.

My Fave sega console was the MD and thats due to my age and memories. The playstation feels like im cheeting on SEGA and the Wii makes me feel like smacking my head on the wall. All thats left for me is the 360, And that reminds me the most of a SEGA machine=Dreamcast. :o

Damn, Its just a personal opinion.......;)

Well, we know for a fact that Sega and Microsoft "worked together" (read: Microsoft installed a Trojan horse) so them copying the Dreamcast controller design isn't that surprising.

Personally I thought the Dreamcast controller was excellent. MUCH better than the original Master System or Mega Drive controllers. Just think of those horrible US Saturn controllers!

The one thing I thought was a step down was the rumble pack thing. In 1999 it seemed stupid that you had to buy it and that it wasn't built-in, but it's not that surprising if you consider that Dreamcast was released at the same time when Sony and Nintendo first released a game that required the rumble pack or Dual Shock controller: Ocarina of Time and Metal Gear Solid

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MrX

360 reminds me the most of a SEGA machine=Dreamcast

---

Aside of the controller and the RROD there's nothing that would remind me of Dreamcast.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Christuserloeser

Well, we know for a fact that Sega and Microsoft "worked together" (read: Microsoft installed a Trojan horse) so them copying the Dreamcast controller design isn't that surprising.

Personally I thought the Dreamcast controller was excellent. MUCH better than the original Master System or Mega Drive controllers. Just think of those horrible US Saturn controllers!

The one thing I thought was a step down was the rumble pack thing. In 1999 it seemed stupid that you had to buy it and that it wasn't built-in, but it's not that surprising if you consider that Dreamcast was released at the same time when Sony and Nintendo first released a game that required the rumble pack or Dual Shock controller: Ocarina of Time and Metal Gear Solid




Aside of the controller and the RROD there's nothing that would remind me of Dreamcast.

---

What about sonic adventure :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Scooter

I think retro games were in general better as GAMES because the hardware had serious limits. This required the designers to provide something that would draw us in and keep us engaged besides photo-realistic graphics. Quite often, they succeeded.

---

I think the whole "back then they didn't care about teh graphix" mindset is bullshit. Graphic whoring has been a part of the industry since the pre-NES days. And it's not like we don't have serious limitations today (the whole normal mapping technique to create that awfully fake looking depth on brick walls and such, western devs can't make feasible technology for good hair so we get a plethora of bald space marines, no realistic water physics, bad animation etc etc). When every generation is in its peak, developers and gamers drool and focus over what they can do, not what they can't. Whether it be more colors, larger sprites, more polygons, or eye-gouging bloom and plastic post-processing effects.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GeckoYamori

I think the whole "back then they didn't care about teh graphix" mindset is bullshit. Graphic whoring has been a part of the industry since the pre-NES days. And it's not like we don't have serious limitations today (the whole normal mapping technique to create that awfully fake looking depth on brick walls and such, western devs can't make feasible technology for good hair so we get a plethora of bald space marines, no realistic water physics, bad animation etc etc). When every generation is in its peak, developers and gamers drool and focus over what they can do, not what they can't. Whether it be more colors, larger sprites, more polygons, or eye-gouging bloom and plastic post-processing effects.

---

I didn't say the designers didn't care about the graphics, I said that what they could do with graphics was limited by the hardware. Probably moreso on Sega consoles than any others they got as much graphics power out of the hardware that was available to get, but they appear to have put much more effort into making a good GAME in every aspect and throwing in some innovation along the way instead of just making a good LOOKING game that simply rehashes the game dynamics of whatever game type is selling the best at the time.

I have to agree with you Mark. For me, the exception to the rule was the Dreamcast. Heck, I bought mine when Sega announced they would discontinue it, but it was still an exciting time. I think what stands out is how several games were ports of great arcade titles, making it have a sort of pseudo-retro feel. I don't know what it was, but I loved the system

I went on to buy an X-Box, Gamecube, and Playstation 2, and they never made the same impact on me as the Dreamcast. I never really enjoyed most of the games that were coming out for them either. Needless to say, I sold them all and haven't even bothered getting any of the next gen systems. I told myself I would hold out and wait and see what happens, and nothing has really impressed me yet. I also don't care for the direction that games are going in regarding downloads. Downloadable content, vintage and indie games are probably only the beginning. It's only a matter of time before physical copies of new releases are only available as downloads. Maybe I'm an old fart, but when I buy a game, I want a physical copy to show for it.

I look at it like this; The years before 1984 can be considered the "Bronze Age" of video games. Programmers had to work around hardware limitations to come up with creative solutions to make a fun game. While the graphics were very primitive by today's standards, these early programmers were pioneering a new craft (That's why I call it the bronze age).

I also like to think of the period from 1984 until around 1995/1996 as the "Golden Age" of video games. The introduction of the NES marked a revolution in console gaming. Programmers were able to do more than they could with the NES' predecessors, paving the way for further innovation in games. Music and visuals, for the most part, were greatly improved. Another thing that makes many of the games from this time so timeless is that so many of them are very much "pick up and play" in nature. You didn't have to spend 20 hours to get all the way through it. Saves were usually reserved for RPGs.

In the mid-90's 3D took a stranglehold on gaming, and things have changed a lot. Of course, don't get me wrong, there are a number of great titles that were released from that period up until now. But as a matter of personal preference, I'm just not all that gung-ho about 3D.

Fortunately, for us, many of the games we couldn't afford as a child can be obtained relatively cheap today (ok, so it depends on the title). :D

I rather like my XBOX (read: XBOX, not 360). It provided hours of fun gameplay, which is all I ask for from a game system.

I adore my 16-bit gaming, but there isn't any way I could play games like "Burnout 3" or "Gauntlet: Dark Legacy" on my Genesis.

The one thing I always wanted in the 8 & 16 bit years was an (affordable) game system that had graphics exactly like the ones in the arcade. Today we have systems that do that, but arcades aren't much of anything anymore. :?

[ I also don't care for the direction that games are going in regarding downloads. Downloadable content, vintage and indie games are probably only the beginning. It's only a matter of time before physical copies of new releases are only available as downloads. Maybe I'm an old fart, but when I buy a game, I want a physical copy to show for it.

:D[/QUOTE]

I also highly prefer a physical copy of a game in some form rather than a simple download. For instance, I have a PS2 dvd copy of Marvel vs. Capcom 2. It's not in 1080 progressive scan like the recent downloads of the game but I like having a physical copy that will survive the death of my consoles.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by QuickSciFi

Does anyone else feel the same way about the PS2?

---

The PS2 is OK, but I've never really gotten into the Sony platforms, I've played some games I've liked with friends who had the console, but only ended up getting ports/multiplatform titles (GC/Xbox/PC) instead. Granted we still don't have a lot of the hot titles from last gen. (just picked up MechAssault II and Burnout 3 for Xbox for ~$4 each with shipping)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nathanallan

RELIABILITY.

That's the main issue for me, and I agree that the PS2 is a great platform, the PS1 as well as the XBox, also, but imho the Genesis will be around long after the disk-based systems give up the ghost.

Other reasons, the controllers are tougher than both PS and PS2, power supplies are external and easily obtainable with no rebuilding (internal to the console) necessary, and the Genesis uses standard electronic parts mostly.

---

The caps will eventually go bad though, I've got one genesis with the sound in RF bad on most TVs and causes the CD to crash. For pure genesis games it's OK for now though. (undoubtedly that will eventually change and need total capacitor replacement)

It's a bit odd that the Genesis and GameGear seem to have problems with capacitors when many other old platfomrs (namely the older NES and VCS) don't often have problems.

Depending the amount of use, abuse, and quality parts, newer consoles could last a good 20 years as well. (the hard drives might go first though)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rusty Venture

I rather like my XBOX (read: XBOX, not 360). It provided hours of fun gameplay, which is all I ask for from a game system.

I adore my 16-bit gaming, but there isn't any way I could play games like "Burnout 3" or "Gauntlet: Dark Legacy" on my Genesis.

The one thing I always wanted in the 8 & 16 bit years was an (affordable) game system that had graphics exactly like the ones in the arcade. Today we have systems that do that, but arcades aren't much of anything anymore. :?

---

I end up playing our N64, Genesis+CD, SNES, and possibly GC most overall, Xbox isn't set-up right now, but that should change soon with some new games and 2nd controller I finally got. (burnout 3 and mechassault 2)

I like the xbox, that's what I played most at my best friend's house 4 or 5 years ago. (before he moved) We got our xbox with 1 controller and a couple games from my uncle about 3 years ago. (still don't have halo though, heh -that one's holding it's value better too)