Support NeoGAF

[Imru’ al-Qays]

2D games of the 16- and 32-bit generations can still be beautiful, but they're definitely from another era. 8-bit era and before games are totally unapproachable.

32/64-bit 3D games generally hold up extremely poorly, though there are a few exceptions - Tekken 3 and Xenogears spring to mind, maybe some of the later Crash or Spyro games. Mostly the games that still look good make heavy use of 2D character models or they have an extremely stylized/cartoony art style, though. Tekken 3 is the only one I can think of that has a realistic art style, and that game was viewed as something of a technical marvel at the time.

I'd say that the first generation where a lot of the games still hold up reasonably well today is the PS2/GC/Xbox generation. A game like FFXII or DQVIII or Wind Waker or MGS3 or Shadow of the Colossus still looks great.

 

[Hunnybun]

I'd put NARC (Jason Patric and Ray Liotta) up against any cop/thriller movie in any era. Good movie. Even Busta Rhymes was solid in it.

An awesome documentary is Dawn Wall about crazy guys climbing vertical cliffs.

Whether it's fiction or based off real life, you'd never get any movies way back like this.

Not heard of NARC, I'll check it out.

I really find it hard to get reliable recommendations. Most professional critics go for pretentious or "woke" stuff, which are generally too boring to even try to watch. If you just ask friends they'll be at the opposite end and say stuff like Avengers or whatever, which let's face it, is basically just for children.

In the last 15 years, the list of films which I'd say are, let's say, among my favourites, is:

No Country For Old Men
The Lives of Others
Ford vs Ferrari

Er, that's it.

I quite liked Nightcrawler too, but it's not at the same level. Oh and I really loved Spectre, the Bond movie, but hey I think that's just me.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

Not heard of NARC, I'll check it out.

I really find it hard to get reliable recommendations. Most professional critics go for pretentious or "woke" stuff, which are generally too boring to even try to watch. If you just ask friends they'll be at the opposite end and say stuff like Avengers or whatever, which let's face it, is basically just for children.

In the last 15 years, the list of films which I'd say are, let's say, among my favourites, is:

No Country For Old Men
The Lives of Others
Ford vs Ferrari

Er, that's it.

I quite liked Nightcrawler too, but it's not at the same level. Oh and I really loved Spectre, the Bond movie, but hey I think that's just me.

Shit. I totally forgot about Ford vs Ferrari. I'll watch it if it ever comes to NF.

NARC is great. And even better, it's probably the fattest Ray Liotta you'll ever see. Looks like he's 300 lbs!

Old movie from the 90s Glen Garry Glen Ross is good too, albeit the first 15-20 min is really slow. A bunch of grumpy a-list actors at a real estate company. Purely a drama, so dont expect any thriller action scenes or anything.

 

[Aesius]

Look at a game like REmake. Yes, the backgrounds are pre-rendered, but it holds up nearly 20 years later. Especially the HD version. Now imagine those pre-rendered backgrounds are real-time. The level of detail is such that the game will always look good, regardless of the rendering style. But it required reaching a certain level of detail and accuracy. So I think that as tech continues to advance, games will continue to age better. For example, outdoor scenes in RDR2 will age very well. There's just not a lot of glaring visual flaws in that game. But something like Oblivion or even Skyrim? Yeah, even at release and maxed out on PC, there were obvious visual flaws there. It was clearly apparent those games weren't going to age well visually.

 

[SF Kosmo]

For sure modern games are going to age better than early 3D stuff, in the same way that, like, Toy Story 2 still dates pretty well; once a medium reaches maturity the gains and improvements feel smaller.

But things will age. We're already getting to a point with animation where the old way of doing things looks a bit funny. And lighting models are changing a lot with RTX. But I don't think it's gonna be jarring to younger gamers in the way that 20 year old games are now.

 

[Hunnybun]

Shit. I totally forgot about Ford vs Ferrari. I'll watch it if it ever comes to NF.

NARC is great. And even better, it's probably the fattest Ray Liotta you'll ever see. Looks like he's 300 lbs!

Old movie from the 90s Glen Garry Glen Ross is good too, albeit the first 15-20 min is really slow. A bunch of grumpy a-list actors at a real estate company. Purely a drama, so dont expect any thriller action scenes or anything.

Ford vs Ferrari is fucking awesome. I really loved it. And it's true that they probably just couldn't have made it so spectacular until recently.

I've seen Glengarry and I'll never watch it again. Great film but I only have so many wrists to slit.

 

[SirTerry-T]

I'd put NARC (Jason Patric and Ray Liotta) up against any cop/thriller movie in any era. Good movie. Even Busta Rhymes was solid in it.

An awesome documentary is Dawn Wall about crazy guys climbing vertical cliffs.

Whether it's fiction or based off real life, you'd never get any movies way back like this.

That's two.
Here are some "old" films that may open your eyes a bit more...just friendly suggestions, nothing more.

The Conversation, Electraglide In Blue, Nashville, Serpico, Dog Day Afternoon. any Sergio Leone film (no boring cinematography there), Midnight Cowboy... there's loads but that's probably a discussion for another part of this forum

 

[Rudius]

that is a FF1 remake

the one in NES looks like this

The main problem with a game like that is not the graphics, but the gameplay. Go back and play NES games to see how most are frustrating, with stiff controls, repetitive, lacking in ways to save your progress, and in the case of Final Fantasy not even the story or music in the oldest ones is very good. I played them for the first time in 2007 via emulator; Final Fantasy IV from the Snes was playable to me but not very engaging. Final Fantasy 6 however was great, in terms of presentation, music and story.

 

[AJUMP23]

Standing the test of time has probably more to do with your age when you played them vs actual quality of game. I think there are some games like SMB SMB3, LttP, that will always be great by any standard, but most people love a game because of nostalgia than its genuine quality.

 

[tsumake]

People said that early 3D games (like FF7) look horrible. Now it’s the graphic style du jour of the indie scene. See also: Minecraft.

What’s old is new again.

 

[Kupfer]

I played HL2 (Update) one or two months ago from start to finish for the first time in like 10 years and what other could I say than it totally stood the test of time.
The gameplay in modern games is not as much different, if not worse, as it was in HL2 17 years ago. Physics, the presentation of lighting, water and characters and the pacing are still top notch and the movement and levels are designed for the player to have fun. Running the game today in 1440p 144hz is just a beautiful experience. I'm hyped to continue my back to the past trip with Ep1 and Ep2.

But strangely enough, this post counts for Half Life 2 only, other 2004's games like Far Cry and Doom 3 don't feel as timeless as HL2.

 

[Codes 208]

The one thing about pixel art is that it’s more of the art than the graphics. I think classic sonic is easily more recognizable than modern sonic as classic sonic has rarely changed from game to game whereas when you compare, say, sonic forces to adventure 1, there’s definitely a graphical leap but years from now another graphical leap will make the current modern sonic obsolete while classic sonic will maintain its 16-bit charm.

though admittedly older n64/ps1 graphics were so new to the experience and unique that some do still retain a certain charm that indies keep trying to copy. But when it comes to simple photorealistic graphics: no. Because a new game will always come along and make it look obsolete (like going from rdr1 to rdr2)

 

[tsumake]

I played HL2 (Update) one or two months ago from start to finish for the first time in like 10 years and what other could I say than it totally stood the test of time.
The gameplay in modern games is not as much different, if not worse, as it was in HL2 17 years ago. Physics, the presentation of lighting, water and characters and the pacing are still top notch and the movement and levels are designed for the player to have fun. Running the game today in 1440p 144hz is just a beautiful experience. I'm hyped to continue my back to the past trip with Ep1 and Ep2.

But strangely enough, this post counts for Half Life 2 only, other 2004's games like Far Cry and Doom 3 don't feel as timeless as HL2.

HL2 still has a refined quality to its graphics and lighting. Its subtlety is still striking today.

 

[namekuseijin]

By PS3 characters were already pretty well defined as well as environments - on PS2 polygonal edges were still pretty evident and on PS1 they were all boxes and triangle tits.

so it's now all up to artwork - but sadly some people insist on "artwork" dictated by hardware constraints of past times, like jaggie mess, aka, "pixelart" or fictionalized boxy looks of minicrap like PS1 really never was...

 

[polybius80]

The main problem with a game like that is not the graphics, but the gameplay. Go back and play NES games to see how most are frustrating, with stiff controls, repetitive, lacking in ways to save your progress, and in the case of Final Fantasy not even the story or music in the oldest ones is very good. I played them for the first time in 2007 via emulator; Final Fantasy IV from the Snes was playable to me but not very engaging. Final Fantasy 6 however was great, in terms of presentation, music and story.

lot of gaming limitation comes from the specs not just graphics, saves on that era where a lot of trouble, it wasnt uncommon to wipe your progress just because you forgot to press reset before turning the console on

I started with the atari 2600 and also have FF on NES, when I strated gaming a new level simply mean everything is faster or the powerups last less time, the games changed immensely during NES era so maybe in my eyes they arent that bad because I knew worst cases

there are modern games that are also very repetitive in nature, grinding is part of RPGs and I do grinding on FF1 as I do in World of Warcraft and I think even more in WoW as its a much longer game and another type of RPG so maybe its not as good comparison but everybody understand that grinding is part of the experience, I am not saying there are not repetitive games apart form RPG on NES but some times modern games are not that great in comparison, I find the last Doom game more repetitive than let say batman on NES(one of my favorite games of all time), in Doom is the same enemies over and over just the encounters are different in quantity, while on Batman in NES there are specific enemies that appear in one or two levels of course batman has too few levels and its very short it can feel very long and can take lot of time to finish it its because its a very difficult and unforgiving game while doom is much longer game but feels more repetitive

 

[Lokaum D+]

maybe, i miss killzone games

 

[StateofMajora]

My opinion:

- Pretty much all 2D games up until the 16-bit generation have aged like fine wine graphics-wise, and many of them also gameplay-wise.
- Not one single 32-bit polygon game looked acceptable even back when they were new, and look like utter trash today

What a load of crap. Plenty of ugly snes and genesis games, let alone prior to that.

A lot of modern games I think will age worse than 3D classics simply because some techniques today are pretty ugly / degenerative and the focus on photorealism will land them in the not quite real but also not good artistically.

 

[Elektro Demon]

It depends on how fast the graphics technology advances. If it continues to be as slow as it has been for the past few years, then yes, in 15 years time current games will still look awesome.

 

[hououinkyouma00]

Yes and no.
Art style is most important and always will be. Something like Persona 5 will hold up way better then like Black Ops Cold War.

Take something realistic from the 6th generation and compare it to Wind Waker.

 

[EDMIX]

I mean....sure, they are just as likely as the games back in the day as its not like a lot of those people who made those games then STOPPED making games NOW.

I'd argue some of the same titles people have stated "stand the test of time" still have entries that the same argument can be made.. I believe with how graphics are headed in a photo realistic way, they will last longer and longer as its not like we will stop understanding what humans look like in 15 years or something lol

So I'd say the future titles will last much longer as we likely won't just have a handful of amazing looking titles with humans, but the default way they are scanned in will be much more common.

 

[Men_in_Boxes]

Considering the most popular games of today all look like they came from 2010, I'd say yes.

We've gotten to a point where everything is clear and easy to identify, which is mostly what matters.

Games from early 3D generations don't age well.

 

[meanspartan]

I think anything in the HD generations and on will age just fine. For example, I played Bad Company 2 on gamepass recently, first time I've played that game in nearly a decade. It took my eyes a couple minutes to adjust, but once I did the game looked fine, and the graphics still hold up fine too.

When I plug in my SNES, it too looks great, as does my genesis, especially if I use an upscaler. Sure it isn't photorealistic obviously, but they are playable games with cool art styles.

But the Ps1/Ps2 generations have aged mostly terrible, though Dreamcast/Ps2/Gamecube/Xbox a lot less so than Ps1/N64, which are just atrocious. Early 3D titles that blew me away as a kid just make my eyes water now.

So I think it's really just the transitional generations to 3D that haven't aged terrifically.

 

[anthraticus]

Standing the test of time has probably more to do with your age when you played them vs actual quality of game. I think there are some games like SMB SMB3, LttP, that will always be great by any standard, but most people love a game because of nostalgia than its genuine quality.

Or some might like them for reasons other than LOOKS....crazy, I know.

 

[AJUMP23]

Or some might like them for reasons other than LOOKS....crazy, I know.

certainly, multiple things can factor into the nostalgia of a game. Could be the soundtrack or the character control. Lots of factors.

 

[Belmonte]

I think RDR2 and its ilk will be top of the list for games that age, because it’s the games that look the most realistic that age when realism advances. Even if there isn’t as far to go as there used to be, unless it’s the most realistic game ever made it will age because it’s trying to be realistic.

Mario 64 will never age. It will forever be exactly what it set out to be: bright, colourful, simple. It can’t be surpassed in tree detail because it’s not trying to give trees any detail. Mario 64 will always look good, because it’s timeless.

I agree that cartoonish games like Ratchet & Clank will age better.

But my point is that RDR2 got in a graphic level where it is acceptable. People in the future will start playing it and find old and not realistic but after 5-10 minutes, they will be immersed and forget the game imperfections. Like Toy Story 1 or old black and white movies. After the impact of a movie without color and the bad resolution the viewer accept its limitations and gets immersed in the story.

 

[linkroi]

Always the same things since the realism at "all cost" is great when the game comes out, but it rarely passes the test of time. I mean when you look at Uncharted 1 today... it's kinda "meh" when it comes to realism but when the game came out in 2007, wow it was something ! Wind Waker in the opposite is still beautiful today cause of the cartoonish style.

 

[Vaelka]

I think that generally speaking the more '' realistic '' a game is the faster it becomes outdated.
It's kinda like CG in movies vs practical effects, even if CG can look more real if it's really good and up to date practical effects and puppets tend to age better and CG ends up looking really awkward and obvious with time.
Even if practical effects and puppets look fake there's still that realness to them because they literally are real so it doesn't feel as bad, and similarly I think with more cartoony and stylized graphics your expectations change.
You don't really expect it to look real anymore so it doesn't feel weird because you're not looking for things.

I kinda feel this way about the D2 remaster when looking at it and comparing with the old graphics, both the designs and sprites just look more vibrant and unique in the original.
In the remaster things kinda looks very generic and dull, even if it's more detailed.
Like the Amazon for example, it's not just her face it's also her overall silhouette.
The colors and the proportions of her body and armor, her hair and her pose and the way she moves it feels so much tighter and dynamic in the original.
Same with Warcraft 3 Reforged which was a massive complaint post launch, I complained about it pre launch too and people attacked me for it but look at where we're at now and basically every tournament and good player plays it in Classic graphics and when they don't people complain because it's hard to see what's happening.

Mortal Kombat and Injustice are also good examples of this, even tho they have the best graphical fidelity of fighting games their animations are really poor and it makes it look and feel very stiff.
And the silhouettes just aren't as strong as in something like Street Fighter or Guilty Gear, because they're all just humans with basically the same body type wearing not very expressive clothes.
It kinda just all blends together and feels boring to me, but then you look at a game like Street Fighter or guilty gear and the animations are so much better and more expressive. And the character designs are a lot more expressive and have better silhouettes.

 

[anothertech]