I guess this is a bit of an offshoot of another thread I started a little while ago, but I was interested in getting peoples thoughts.

As for what Im talking about, I guess its not too far removed from retro style vs. modern gaming.
As some fo you may be aware Im always playing around with something or other "creative" on my Amiga. Being a one man show with a small attention span however usually means, apart from ports, my harddrive just fills with partially completed games.
Because of the work involved and my attention span I tend to favor retro style games as they can reach a "playable" stage more quickly. The problem there however being that you're left with something that may not be as interesting to "NG amiga" people, who might bypass a new "classic/retro" style/looking platform game (as a random example), for the latest/greatest higher resolution open source SuperTuxCrashBros.64 port, especially if the retro game costs a few dollars to cover packaging, manual, etc.


So, now Ive got a bit of my background thoughts out of the way, the question becomes something like:

Does perception of a good quality game change with the increased specs of a persons main computer?

Would a game that wouldve been considered commercial quality (and good), if newly released today still be as enjoyable to a person whose main computer regularly does much more impressive things?

Personally Im leaning towards yes, but its hard for me to have a clear perspective as Im a bit of a retro fan to begin with, which not everyone is.

@fishy_fis

dunno, i mean, i love retro gaming and i love "todays games" but i am more of a ... A good game is a good game no matter if it's old or new.

Normally one knows it within minutes that the game will be awesome and it havent got to be a AAA title.

Specs to me was always about lazy developers and or time constraints aswell as if one optimized it too much it would eventually break backwards compability and make it harder to update over the years (change of devs etc).

Ofcourse evolution has played a big part in the specs but i honestly think that evolution actually made it worse for developers in terms of how to code and i'd like to think that pure coders are the ones who know machine code and the old ways over todays point and click tools.

ok, i am a retro geek just like you so maybe i missunderstood the question .

_________________
See my blog and collection website! . https://www.blog.amigaguru.com

Insightful question. Specs have a weird effect on me: I own this monstruous pc which wasn't even meant for gaming. I love retro games, doom 1 is the maximum amount of complexity I can tolerate. YET, having all that power under the hood make me feel guilty, and I end up installing super demanding games just to play them for a few days and then erase them.

@fishy_fis

I think a lot depends on the type of person you are. I don't play many games, what I do play is more RPG and puzzle so to me it doesn't really matter. If I like the game I don't really care about the specs, unlike some people I know who back in the '90s would bring their PC's to the amiga club and spend the evening tweaking their gfx cards to get to highest possible FPS for a particular game. Although I never saw the point to that, as long as it's above the refresh rate of your monitor it makes no difference. why generate 400 fps when you can only see 50-75 on an average monitor...

You will always get the numpties who won't run a program because it's 68k, doesn't use hardware acceleration, doesn't run at the highest resolution or 'looks blocky' etc. but at least there's a few people like ToAks out there who just have to have every game ever published to counteract the numpties

_________________
OS4 Rocks
X1000 beta tester, Sam440 Flex (733)

Visit the Official OS4 Support Site for more help.

It may be that your sole purpose is to serve as a warning to others.

@fishy_fis

Well, I doubt you could find a question with less objectivity in the answers

Seeing awesome graphics is of course very impressive during the first two minutes of gameplay, but after that it's really about all the annoying things designers put in their UIs

That being said, there's a limit to how many strip pokers we need even if we now have 24 bit graphics

_________________
This weeks pet peeve:
Using "voltage" instead of "potential", which leads to inventing new words like "amperage" instead of "current" (I, measured in A) or possible "charge" (amperehours, Ah or Coulomb, C). Sometimes I don't even know what people mean.

@fishy_fis

Well, I enjoy fancy/high quality graphics if its joined by nice gameplay.
But its gameplay that makes or breaks the game.

I still love Bruce Lee from 1984 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jHzW7T-bwBc

Not exactly high defenition graphics.
Even my yonger cousins that wasnt brought up on c64/spectrum, loves the gameplay
focus from back in the days. They initally started their "career" with PC's.

That said; A game like Battlefield with amazing graphics takes it to another level.
Co-op gameplay gets enhanced by the realism.
Same with Flight Simulator X for example. I got a pilot lisense and while graphical realism isnt required
to train instrument and procedures, it certainly enhances the expirience (thru the myriad of addons)

SO, I would say a game isnt dependent on graphics. And in some cases the eyecandy will distort
gameplay.

Same goes for music. For the most part I prefer the actual SID tunes instead of instrumental remakes/remixes cause musicians often loose the "soul/sound" of the original.
Fancy high quality sound/instrument isnt a guarrantee of High Quality end product.

Last edited by Overflow on 30-Aug-2013 at 10:06 AM.
Last edited by Overflow on 30-Aug-2013 at 10:06 AM.

@Severin

me like games not numpties :p

seriously i think i'd actually buy a boxed turd if it came on/or with a cd or floppy...just to support my collection (and the dev...) lol


@overflow

well Bruce Lee is one of the greatest classic made in the early years of gaming...shame it's so damn short tho.
I play Bruce Lee,California Games,Giana Sisters and Combat school quite a bit still these days (C64).

Last edited by Toaks on 30-Aug-2013 at 10:44 AM.

_________________
See my blog and collection website! . https://www.blog.amigaguru.com

@fishy_fis

Quote:

Does perception of a good quality game change with the increased specs of a persons main computer?

It surely does. Many Amiga and C64 classics from 80s are simply boring, are too easy or lack content.

And we have got older, too. Hide and seek was maybe fun when we were kids. To adults it is just boring. But they love paint ball which is basically just an enhanced hide and seek game.

_________________
Amiga Developer
Amiga 500, Efika, Mac Mini and PowerBook

@itix

Your answer doesn't really match the question.

I would sum up your answer as "no, more important is what level of complexity you're used to"

Many titles of today are simply boring, are too easy or lack content. Children of today still play hide and seek. So while you've changed, I'm not sure you can blame that on the spec of your PC.

_________________
This weeks pet peeve:
Using "voltage" instead of "potential", which leads to inventing new words like "amperage" instead of "current" (I, measured in A) or possible "charge" (amperehours, Ah or Coulomb, C). Sometimes I don't even know what people mean.

@olegil

Quote:

That being said, there's a limit to how many strip pokers we need even if we now have 24 bit graphics

But if a game adds something different eg live interaction its appealing.

Look at PS4 they introduce stream while playing, instant replay and online video share.

Resume game instantly exactly where stopped.

different features makes game interesting enough.

Old games can be revamped with higher quality gfx, but it only caters for that generation of game players.

New gamers are used to 3D, the next gen want something different at tech progresses.

Look at the new Team17 release of Superfrog HD.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1pL9PZK0P2E

Last edited by asymetrix on 30-Aug-2013 at 06:00 PM.

_________________
Download 499.26 Mbps, 659.94 Mbps Upload :)

@asymetrix

Not sure where the improvement was in that Super Frog HD, the old one looked better apart from the resolution.

_________________
This weeks pet peeve:
Using "voltage" instead of "potential", which leads to inventing new words like "amperage" instead of "current" (I, measured in A) or possible "charge" (amperehours, Ah or Coulomb, C). Sometimes I don't even know what people mean.

@olegil

Quote:

olegil wrote: @asymetrix Not sure where the improvement was in that Super Frog HD, the old one looked better apart from the resolution.

i agree!, the frog itself has been dumbed down...looks like a duck IMO...
that said, still good game but too easy.

_________________
See my blog and collection website! . https://www.blog.amigaguru.com

To me it's all about play-ability and entertainment. I've played the original Formula One Grand Prix on the Amiga for years. Really. So when I did get me a PC I was eager to get, I believe, Formula One Grand Prix 3 and... I was disappointed. Sure, the graphics were way better but it was no longer the start-up and go game it used to be. It started to look like working.

A week or so a go I had a go at the re-make of Leisure Suit Larry... it took not much longer than 10 minutes for me to look on the net for the original Amiga LSL and play that. Again, the new graphics are much better, but the play-ability of the first version was way better in my opinion.

Don't I like 'new' games? Well Return to Castle Wolfenstein was a good play. As was Age of Empires (which are both rather old now). I guess I'm just getting old... at 40.

_________________
Back home...

@Toaks

Quote:

i agree!, the frog itself has been dumbed down...looks like a duck IMO... that said, still good game but too easy.

So... you expected better graphics?

As far as look of that frog is concerned... I dont think in the original it looked like a real frog either... =P

_________________
Amiga Developer
Amiga 500, Efika, Mac Mini and PowerBook

@fishy_fis

Yes, when I put my specs on, suddenly I can see the pixels, and that the game wasn't smoothly antialised after all....

_________________
BroadBlues On Blues BroadBlues On Amiga Walker Broad

@olegil

It is indeed a bad port. Its not sharp and gfx weren't properly created and it look like the game was redone for a younger audience.

Allister Brimble was already working on Amiga games music, Team 17 didnt even bother contacting him to redo the music.

Last edited by asymetrix on 30-Aug-2013 at 06:04 PM.

_________________
Download 499.26 Mbps, 659.94 Mbps Upload :)

@fishy_fis


What I think about 3D vs 2D, 3d graphics can really help the game look better, but does not effect the game play, or the story.

Simply a bad games is bad game if its 3D or 2D, some times when then they do a 3D version they destry the game play, but not always.

Trine 2 is Excellent game it has warm nice atmos fare, the gameplay is excellent, it has story, and its 3D.

Then you have games like Streetfighter, where there is just few animations, its nicely hand drawn, but game it just looks whered in 2D, and then you compare it whit modern game like DC universe or Teken, the 3D version is just so mutch better.

Lemmings 3D was a example of 3d used wrong, it might have worked if they just kept the it from the side view.

I a big fan of Blizzard starcraft / Warcraft games, I can only say that 3D version is so mutch better, 3d has really helped the look of the game.

I did not like Simon the sorcerer 3d, they destroyed the game, the 3d effects makes game look ugly, compared to wonderful hand drawn graphics in I and II.

This what makes or breaks a game.

It has to be a challenge, but not too hard.
The control has to be logical.
The game can't be too reparative, give the player some thing to look forward too.
Good graphics helps.
The game has be some thing new, we have played teretis and pacman before, its boring.
Voice also is also nice.
Good sound effects.

Last edited by NutsAboutAmiga on 31-Aug-2013 at 01:30 AM.
Last edited by NutsAboutAmiga on 31-Aug-2013 at 01:22 AM.

_________________
http://lifeofliveforit.blogspot.no/
Facebook::LiveForIt Software for AmigaOS

@asymetrix

Superfrogs was always ment to be for younger audience, maybe you have forgotten you have gotten older

_________________
http://lifeofliveforit.blogspot.no/
Facebook::LiveForIt Software for AmigaOS

@itix
Quote:

itix wrote: @Toaks Quote: i agree!, the frog itself has been dumbed down...looks like a duck IMO... that said, still good game but too easy. So... you expected better graphics? As far as look of that frog is concerned... I dont think in the original it looked like a real frog either... =P

Graphics was sharp enough (especially in the VITA version) but it annoyed me how they tried to reuse assets but still managed to make them too... dunno plastic looking?.

As for original superfrog design, the look fit perfectly with the old game but even in the cut down and tried to fake intro from the new game the frog and boy looks nothing like a frog. also the devs was so lazy that they even included the original frog look in many of the textures/bitmaps (wall paint etc in pyramids)..it's almost like they had no idea what it was... .

sounds are missing too, music is not as catchy as the original.

anyways it is a good game and i enjoyed it but only on my Vita, i got it for the PS3 too (crossbuy) but i decided to not play it there.

_________________
See my blog and collection website! . https://www.blog.amigaguru.com

@fishy_fis

There are several "Retro" styled games that are fun to play (even if simplistic). Ones that spring to mind are Organ Trail which is available on pretty much everything (iOS, Android, Steam), Beat Trip Runner, Beat Trip Runner 2, (the hard as nails) Super Meat Boy, and Fez.

Then you have the nice graphics in a side on platformer from games like Vessel and Trine/Trine 2.

Fantastic graphics are not all that makes a game. Great games can have very simplistic graphics - but naturally not everyone appreciates that. Some people hate these sort of things. The old 8-bit games from the C64 may not be all that to look at these days because of the chunky blocky nature of the machines, but they had a much higher difficultly curve than most modern titles.

Someone mentioned Simon the Sorcerer 3D above, which was a truly horrendous game. Not only did the 3D graphics ruin the look and charm of the original, they also made it unplayable with camera issues, pixel perfect sections that infuriated and threw in a complete humour bypass which lost the charm of the first two games.

Adding the 3rd dimension hasn't worked for a lot of titles which started life as 2D - Worms 3D was awful, Lemmings 3D was awful, Simon 3D as mentioned above and Speedball 2 Tournament. However, done right it can work well Trine/Trine 2 and Streetfighter 4 for example.

_________________
Test sig (new)