Old Gamers and Graphics

[ZedClampet]

I ran into an older gamer once who said that he'd lived through the full evolution of game graphics, and that this made him more picky. He didn't want to go backwards and play pixilated games. I agreed with him, and I've used his excuse ever since to avoid certain games.

I ran into an older gamer the other day who said that he had lived through all sorts of graphics, so he didn't need for a game to have good graphics. That being an older gamer made you more flexible.

Both are probably BS. It's probably just personal preference and has nothing to do with age, but if you are an older gamer, I'd like to hear which, if either, applies to you. Or maybe you have a third philosophy regarding age and graphics.

 

[Zloth]

... and, if you run into me a third time, I'm going to start wearing spikes!

I really don't like to deal with the pixelated 2D graphics and sprites. Final Fantasy 6 has one of the best stories in gaming, but I couldn't get through it.

If you make it 3D, though, I can forgive a lot. The original Thief and Deus Ex are getting awfully rough, but you don't have to go too many years past that for me to get to the "good enough" stage. I would still like better, but I can deal with it.

 

[Pifanjr]

For me, it seems like I'm fine with art styles that look like games I played as a kid, even if the graphics are bad, but I can't really deal with equally bad graphics in a style I'm unfamiliar with. So it's mostly a matter of art style, not really art quality.

 

[Brian Boru]

didn't want to go backwards and play pixilated games … didn't need for a game to have good graphics

I'm in between. Don't want the pixelated, but fine with some 00s graphics, or some 90s remasters—eg Civ4, Crysis, C&C Remastered.

For me, graphics are like story and music and location—all side shows to the main event, but I'll take better of each over lesser.

 

[Kaamos_Llama]

For old games that I dont have any nostalgia for, the problem is usually about how clunky the game is more than the graphics. If something has a pixel art style but modern mechanics and UI then I'm totally fine with it.

 

[Pifanjr]

I decided to look up some examples of games I somewhat recently decided not to play because of their graphics, though I think the UI plays a big part in it as well independent of the graphics:

Battle for Wesnoth

Spoiler

Unciv

Spoiler

FreeCiv

Spoiler

 

[Slasken]

I am 45 years old, and started gaming in the early 80s. I have in other words seen all kinds of graphics. What I can really say is pixel based graphics holds up a lot better than 3d graphics. Look at the 3d graphics from 98 to ca 04. They now look terrible compared to pixel graphics released more than a decade earlier.

 

[Alm]

I'm 40. I used to avoid aged graphics because I liked the most technologically advanced experiences and to appreciate the best of the era.

But now there are games I appreciate that are retro in looks. I agree that it's personal preference. I think if it's a good game, graphics can work in many different styles, including aged graphics, and I appreciate older games more than I did at the time.

It reminds me of the relic divide among guitar players. Many people can't understand wanting a pre-beatup guitar but as you get better there is something more appealing about guitars with character and that comfortable feeling.

 

[ZedClampet]

I decided to look up some examples of games I somewhat recently decided not to play because of their graphics, though I think the UI plays a big part in it as well independent of the graphics:


Unciv

I thought Unciv looked pretty okay until I right-clicked and opened that picture in a new tab. Yikes.

 

[Colif]

I ran into an older gamer the other day who said that he had lived through all sorts of graphics, so he didn't need for a game to have good graphics. That being an older gamer made you more flexible.

that sounds ... familiar...

Graphics don't impress me. I seen games go from not having any graphics to now... and its just window dressing... if the game isn't fun, it doesn't matter how good it looks. Having said that, I will point out if it looks bad.

I don't need to play nes/snes graphics again, I did that the first time.

 

[ZedClampet]

that sounds ... familiar...

Graphics don't impress me. I seen games go from not having any graphics to now... and its just window dressing... if the game isn't fun, it doesn't matter how good it looks. Having said that, I will point out if it looks bad.

I don't need to play nes/snes graphics again, I did that the first time.

Haha, it wasn't you I was thinking of. I would have remembered that. It was someone I didn't know over at the main site.

 

[Rolfil]

I'm 48 and have seen graphics go from the Atari system through Spectrum and Amiga. Then moved onto the PC scene where you would have to customise your system startup to run games. The advancement of graphic cards in the last 20 years is kind of amazing.

I've enjoyed games on all of these but as graphics got better so did my expectations. I really can't get on with pixelated 8bit graphics anymore. The games might be great, but some part of my brain is telling me no!

But I don't need completely flashy graphics. I enjoy indie games like Planet Crafter, Ship Graveyard simulator 2 and non AAA like American Truck Simulator.

What is annoying is that some games specifications are just getting too high. The graphics are either better than they need or they are badly optimised.

 

[BeardyHat]

Graphics aren't irrelevant, but they're less important to me these days. I'm 39, I grew-up when we were seeing huge advancements in technology and each graphical leap was enormous; when I was a teen experiencing all this, I lived for the next graphical generation, what it could bring and stopped caring about older stuff.

Now? I care much less. In the past several years, I've started exploring old games that I missed and I've found that I don't care much about graphical fidelity anymore. Style and atmosphere are still important, but realistic graphics aren't much of a concern anymore.

That said, I still have a strong preference for those styles that were popular when I was younger, generally SNES/Genesis, Early 90's-00's PC games, so there may be a nostalgia bias there, especially considering I have absolutely zero interest in anything before the NES. We owned an Atari 5200 before our NES, but I can't go back and play any of those games. They look atrocious to me and their gameplay is so simplistic it doesn't hold my interest at all.

 

[ZedClampet]

I'm 48 and have seen graphics go from the Atari system through Spectrum and Amiga. Then moved onto the PC scene where you would have to customise your system startup to run games. The advancement of graphic cards in the last 20 years is kind of amazing.

I've enjoyed games on all of these but as graphics got better so did my expectations. I really can't get on with pixelated 8bit graphics anymore. The games might be great, but some part of my brain is telling me no!

But I don't need completely flashy graphics. I enjoy indie games like Planet Crafter, Ship Graveyard simulator 2 and non AAA like American Truck Simulator.

What is annoying is that some games specifications are just getting too high. The graphics are either better than they need or they are badly optimised.

I think I must have blacked out and wrote this comment. I second all this, including the indie games.

 

[DXCHASE]

37 here, graphics have never been too important for me. As ive gotten older and tech has improved, ive found that even FPS is more important to me than graphics because a smooth-liquid like game on an ultrawide feels so good at high FPS regardless if its Red Dead Redemption 2 or Quake. Story, sound, gameplay all comes before that as well to me.

 

[ZedClampet]

37 here, graphics have never been too important for me. As ive gotten older and tech has improved, ive found that even FPS is more important to me than graphics because a smooth-liquid like game on an ultrawide feels so good at high FPS regardless if its Red Dead Redemption 2 or Quake. Story, sound, gameplay all comes before that as well to me.

I've honestly never gotten good FPS because I've always played on subpar equipment (I'm almost always on a laptop--so forget the ultrawide, too), so FPS doesn't bother me as long as I'm in the mid-40s or above. Below that and I struggle, although I played a bunch of games on PSNow that were locked in at 30, and I enjoyed them okay. Somehow those games locked at 30 felt smoother than a PC game where I'm getting 30.

 

[Zloth]

I don't think I've ever seen a game with graphics "better than they need" before!

37 here,

You're 37, you're not old!

View: https://youtu.be/t2c-X8HiBng?si=WxgHSLbdartsoOO7&t=18

 

[Pifanjr]

I don't think I've ever seen a game with graphics "better than they need" before!

For the vast majority of the games I've played I didn't play on the highest settings, meaning those games had better graphics they didn't need.

 

[Zloth]

For the vast majority of the games I've played I didn't play on the highest settings, meaning those games had better graphics they didn't need.

Yes they do! They need them for

ME!​

(And I suppose you could use them, too, if you play again sometime in the future.)

 

[Colif]

i hate digital foundry. They rank games based on graphics alone. So the Gollum wasn't a bad game to them because it was stupid to play, it failed because its graphics were bad... No... that isn't right, games aren't movies...

I wonder what they would have ranked The Order 1886 as most of the "game" was cutscenes. You spent most of the game watching it... I guess I don't need to wonder...

Must review graphics... bah

they are pathetic... but I guess lots of people get sucked in by pretty graphics long enough to pay for the game, the problems ignored because its so pretty... weeks later they start to notice. refer Starfield.

 

[Reola]

I've honestly never gotten good FPS because I've always played on subpar equipment (I'm almost always on a laptop--so forget the ultrawide, too), so FPS doesn't bother me as long as I'm in the mid-40s or above. Below that and I struggle, although I played a bunch of games on PSNow that were locked in at 30, and I enjoyed them okay. Somehow those games locked at 30 felt smoother than a PC game where I'm getting 30.

Yeah, I also played for a few years with so FPS, and then I bought a new laptop, and how cool it is to play with normal FPS, everything is so beautiful and smooth, the game is like real life or a movie.

 

[Brian Boru]

i hate digital foundry. They rank games based on graphics alone

I hate credit check companies. They rate me based on creditworthiness alone. There's so much more to me… I just hide it well.

And medical clinics, they rate me on health alone. The cheek of 'em, who do they think they are? If I still had 2 lungs and legs, I'd scream and kick at 'em

 

[Colif]

When comparing DLSS to Amd Fluid Motion Frames, they say its a minus for AMD that their technology can't use Nvidia cards info but DLSS can access FSR2 info or Intel, so Nvidia are better... BUT the reason why AMD can't access Nvidia info is its not open.

FSR works on all cards, DLSS only on Nvidia. They don't share so how could AMD use it?

fan boys being fan boys.

 

[mjs warlord]

As per usual i recognise all the people who have added to this thread.

I am 68 and been a die hard gamer since 1982 , as a teenager my dad would not let me use a tennis games machine as he was convinced it would break the tv.

When i left home i got a zx81 with a free gift ....... ram pack wobble lol.

Next was a spectrum , i was in a piracy circle and had every game that came out for it. When companies tried 3d graphics the processors just could not cope they were not powerful enough. Some put a 1 pixel border round the edge of each sprite to try and stop colour clash slowing the processors down but it did not have the desired effect.

I remember one day i went shopping for a game only to see that all the major stores had literally pulled them off the shelves overnight. The only thing you could buy now was the first generation of sega machines. The only place to buy games for all the different machines was a little independent shop , he had lots of customers but struggled to get supplies of what customers wanted.

I started pc gaming in 2003 and as you can image just like guys i have seen some amazing progress.

JOKE OF THE CENTURY ......

I remember a range of machines called msx , the games were all on cartridges and the idea was that regardless of who made the machines , the games would work on them all , they did not last long. SO fast forward many years later and we have WINDOWS the same games will run on any make of machine.

So i have gone from ram pack wobble to stuff like satisfactory and horizon zero dawn ..... thats one hell of a journey.

 

[Frindis]

As long as the overall atmosphere is good, I don't really care that much about the graphics. Graphics is just one of many things that makes a game good and if you don't have the other parts, then you probably have a shitty game. I do think being an older gamer makes you more appreciative of different types of graphics standards and that could make you more prone to try them out. I also know from experience that some born decades later can also appreciate older games because they see that the game has a good atmosphere and even if they might not like the graphics, it does not matter because the game is just really good overall.

This is also the same reason why games like Brotato and Vampire Survivors are extremely popular even if they visually do not look flawless. They don't need to be because they have the other elements that make the game sought after.