44 replies to this topic

[Room 34]

The thread in Modern Gaming about "Why don't you own a PS2?" has inspired me to create this thread... Why don't you own ANY modern consoles?

I'm sure I'm not the only one here who obsesses over the '80s classics but has little to no interest in modern consoles. I can explain my reasons, as well.

First off, here's what I own:

Atari 2600
Intellivision
NES
Atari 7800
Sega GameGear
(And soon, an Atari 5200 as well...)

I would actually consider the GameGear "modern"... but it's not really a "console." (Plus, it's basically a handheld SMS, which is a contemporary of the NES and 7800.) Anyway...

Here are the reasons I don't own any modern consoles:

1. Few really creative ideas in games these days. It seems to me that most modern games are just refinements of older ideas. Sure, the 3D-rendered stuff is "new" in that it couldn't be done before (at least, not without being complete crap), but the concepts are not that much different. It just seems like there's way too much rehashing of the same ideas: First-person shooter. Platform. RPG. Sports simulation. Car racing. Yawn. All this technology, let's see some original ideas!

2. Console games -- and controllers -- have gotten excessively complicated. This actually leads into my third point. But basically, I don't want to play a console game if I first have to read a 50-page manual, pop in a CD and wait for the game to load, and wield a goofy controller with 50 buttons and no intuitive feel.

3. All the modern games I am interested in are better on the computer. Most of the good games I am interested in these days rely on complex key commands or high-resolution graphics, and are therefore really better-suited to play on the computer than on a console with a proprietary controller and the low resolution of a TV screen.

So, now I pose two questions to you:

1. Why don't YOU own any modern consoles?

2. Where do you draw the line between classic and modern?

(On the latter question, since I didn't explicitly give my answer... I consider the NES/SMS/7800 period to be the end of classic gaming and the SNES/Genesis/Jaguar period to be the beginning of modern gaming, or at least the transition phase into the modern era ushered in by PSX and N64.)

[Sharky]

Simple why I dont own any consoles at all, cause ive got a PC.

I actually dont enjoy playing games from consoles as much as playing them on a crystal clear monitor on a PC.

To draw a line between Classic and Modern, I would serperate them when games started arriving on CD-ROM like the Sega Saturn and PS1

[icbrkr]

Room 34 said:

The thread in Modern Gaming about "Why don't you own a PS2?" has inspired me to create this thread... Why don't you own ANY modern consoles?

Easy... I can pick up 7 old consoles and games for the price of a launch price new console. Now when the GC, PS2 and XBox are $99 or less, I'll get one.

Brian

[Gunstar]

I'm not sure if this topic is going to get a lot of responses. I'm sure there are others like yourself that only have classic consoles, but the fact of the matter is that the vast majority of people that hang at AA are into BOTH classics and modern systems, and like them equally. I own systems from Pong of the 70's too the Xbox and tons in between and I enjoy playing them ALL. Every system ever made has good and bad games and I like simple stuff for a quick ten minute "fix" as well as the complicated modern stuff that requires endless hours and can take a few just to get going. personally, about the only format I DON"T play games on is the PC.

[birdie3]

There are a few reasons:

- Minimalism. Seeing the big in the small.
- Perfection. Everything after Pong is a derivative and not as pure.
- Nostalgia. It is a part of who I used to be and still am - even more so.
- Marketing. I do not match the demographic.
- My kids. I would like them to see where it all came from and learn to appreciate the technology.
- Violence. Glorified violence in video games conflicts with my beliefs.

[MrRetroGamer]

Being the old dinosaur I am, I've resisted the urge for "modern" systems for a very long time. I own stuff pre-Nintendo; Atari, Colecovision, Vectrex, some dedicated Atari Pongs, etc. As a matter of fact, I have never even PLAYED a Nintendo (which is the dividing line for me), nor any of the newer systems, except for maybe one or two times on a PlayStation at a friends house. Many of the reasons people gave above are valid for me. Plus, these older systems play the games that I grew up with when I was a teenager in the early 80's, and these are the games I want to play now.

However, I finally broke down and recently got a Dreamcast. Two reasons, first I really wanted to play Crazy Taxi since I played it in an arcade a few years ago, and second, the great emulation scene that is available for the DC. So there you have it, I have become "modernized" (OK, I know, the DC is technically dead, so it's not really modern anymore, right?)!

[Sharky]

Gunstar said:

personally, about the only format I DON"T play games on is the PC.

Interesting, how can any modern console match the magic of a Voodoo 3D Card with zooming sharp 3D effects that you almost feel like you could touch.

Also not to mention the Surround stereo cimena subwoofing sound with a good set of speakers.

Modern Consoles to me feel like a cut-down version of a PC minus Keyboard, Mouse, and Monitor.

[desiv]

Systems I own:

Apple //e
Coleco Adam
Odyssey II
Vectrex
Atari 7800
Nintendo Gameboy (original)

Where do I draw the line?

7800/NES time frame....
SNES/Genesis/TG16 are "Modern" to me...

I also have a Mac IIsi, which I consider non-modern, because the games are so WOEFULLY behind the times for it! :-) Although I love Daleks and Continuum!!!

Why don't I own anything "Modern?"

2 reasons..

1: Gameplay. I just like older games better...
2: I have a PC, which I can use for moder games, tho I don't much..
3: Nostalgia. (I know, I said 2. I changed my mind! :-)

Also, I have another PC in an Arcade machine running ONLY OLD Vertical arcade games!!! None of that Streetfighter/MK junk!!! :-)

desiv

Now, to be honest, if I had won the lottery, I'm sure I'd have all the newer systems too. But I have to pick and choose, and I'd rather spend money on Vectrex games than an XBox..

[Phosphor Dot Fossils]

I'll answer things in reverse order here...

2. The NES was the end of the classic era as we knew it. It was the last console for which there was a steady stream of innovative games. The SNES brought us, kicking and screaming, to where we are now: mostly formulaic games, most of which fit into a handful of genres - sports sims, fighting games, FPS, MMORPG, and so on. And that stuff doesn't interest me! Once in a blue moon I might go for such a game, but my tastes are generally more offbeat. Ever look at what's coming out in Japan? Wacky stuff! Stuff that can't even be nailed down to a genre. I miss those days when such a game could hit the streets here before a console was on its way out (i.e. the current trickle of interesting "twilight games" for the PS1).

1. I don't dig the games or the controllers. Graphics and sound are great, and I don't have a beef with disc-based loading times. But the games just don't grab me. I don't care too much for the violence factor either, but that usually goes back to the "don't like the games" issue. Also, the whole tendency to need to unlock something like half of the bloody game or have to by the strategy guide, that's just stupid. It's a racket is what it is. I hate that.

I have a PS1, but 99% of what gets played on it is old-school retro stuff, with old-school controllers attached.

[MichaelJMcKernan]

I consider the Sega and the SNES the last of the classic consoles.

Why don't I own any of the new systems?

I'm kind of ashamed to say this, but the 3-d imaging and whatnot makes me dizzy and quesy.
I knew I was over the hill when my brothers got the N64 and I tried to play Super Mario Whatever, and I started sweating and felt like I was going to vomit.
I almost had a seizure playing South park.
Anyone else had experiences like these?

I don't know what it was, but that N64 was like taking Ipecac.

[Gunstar]

Sharky said:

Gunstar said:

personally, about the only format I DON"T play games on is the PC.

Interesting, how can any modern console match the magic of a Voodoo 3D Card with zooming sharp 3D effects that you almost feel like you could touch.

Also not to mention the Surround stereo cimena subwoofing sound with a good set of speakers.

Modern Consoles to me feel like a cut-down version of a PC minus Keyboard, Mouse, and Monitor.

I have an awsome surround sound system hooked up to my consoles that no PC speaker system can match, period. As for the "zooming sharp 3D effects that you almost feel like you could touch" I have two words: XBOX, Halo.

I prefer a large 36 inch screen with component video or even S-video any day to a VGA PC monitor, I like to sit back on a couch, not in a chair hovering over a keyboard. I also prefer controllers for games over a keyboard and mouse (A LOT!).

[Jasoco]

I don't own a PS2 because I don't want one and they don't cost less than $50 yet. Good enough reason?

I own a GameCube because I'm a former fanboy.

I own an Xbox because my friend has one and LIVE rocks.

I own an NES, SNES and N64 because of reason 1.

I own a Genesis because I missed out back in the day.

I own a Dreamcast for this same reason.

I own a 2600 because it is what we had Pre-NES.

I don't own a PS1 because I slipped back into Fanboy-ism for a short while.

[z28in82]

While I do have a few modern consoles I felt as thought I should answer these questions.

I like playing all kindas of games and there are systemes that just seem to do some games better. But I as well have a hard time playing some of the 3-D games out there now a days especially flight sims. I get very nasty headaches from it and actually get disorientated while sitting in a seat.

I think side scrolling platformers were perfected in the NES/SMS days.
But racing games are a definate modern thing I love racing games on my DC and PS2(Tokyo Xtreme Racer )
Fighting games just seemed the best to me in the 16-32 bit era.
And the whole 8 bit and under catagory was a great foundation which pushed alot of boundries and spawned alot of innovation and gave us alot of classic games, which despite being remade/rehashed over and over again never were really duplicated

1) The only uber modern console I own is my DC and a PS2. the GC just strieks me as being behind before it got out the gate, the Xbox is just an old PC modded to play games in my mind and I already have a PC

2)the modern/classic line for me is the SNES & Genesis(in all it's forms and versions) /and the PS1 and Saturn. I think the whole cart based to CD based change is a fairly decent dividing line and the N64 is modern despite big N refusing to admit the disk was the way to go.

BTW my console collection goes like this

7800
O2
C64
NES
SNES
Genesis (with CD and 32X)
Saturn
PS1
Jag (with CD)
DC
PS2

with these portables
GBA (non SP thank you very much )
Nomad
NGPC
Game.com

[Artlover]

Ok.

#1: I don't own a PS2 for 5 reasons already stated in the "why dont you own a PS2" thread.

#2: As far as I am concerned, everything before the N64/Saturn/PS1 is classic, and everything after & including n64/saturn/ps1 is modern.

My console list goes like this:
Atari 2600 (4)
Atari 5200 (2, 1 2-port & 1 4-port)
Atari 7800
Atari Jaguar
Coleco Telstar Alpha
Coleco Telstar Ranger
Colecovision
Mattel Intellivision
Microsoft XBox (3, 1 stock, 2 modded w/flashed TSOP (one w/toshiba dvd drive))
Nintendo Gamboy (untested)
Nintendo GameCube
Nintendo N64
Nintendo NES
Nintendo SNES
Sega Dreamcast (2)
Sega Genesis (2 - Model 1 and Model 2)
Sega CD attachment (Model 2)
Sega Saturn (Model 2 w/mod chip)
Sony Playstation (Original style)

[Gunstar]

Well, as far as "modern" consoles go, I consider only the latest generation to be modern, this includes the DC, it was just the first. I consider anything from the 8/16-bit era to be classic, and the 32/64-bit era is just yesterdays news still, not old enough to be classic yet, but not new enough to be considered modern. I include the 32X, 3DO and Jaguar into the post-classic catagory too, though, since they are 32 or 64-bit and really not that far behind the Saturn/PSX (especially the 3DO and Jag).

That all being said, I don't own a GC or PS2 because I have an Xbox, which I think makes the other two look like yesterdays news. The GC is the closest though. The PS2, from what I've seen (which is a lot, I have family&friends that have them) is no better than the DC and I have the DC, so why buy a PS2? I'll eventually buy them all when they are in the bargain bin, I do this all the time, as can be attested too by my list of systems at the bottom of my posts.

I like games from all generations and think they all have good and bad qualities. I really don't think that modern games have lost anything like some of you die-hard classic fan's, it's just that they haven't added much over the classics except 3D virtual worlds and better graphics all around. What modern games have added is the immersion factor; i love classic RPG's, but modern ones like MorroWind make it much easier to imagine actually being there than do classics like ultima which basically represents everything with icons.

[MegaManFan]

I can't think of any reason, cause quite frankly I own old AND new systems. I enjoy the best of both worlds.

[Mendon]

I own modern consoles and classic consoles. I play both equally; just depends on the mood I'm in. If I just want to relax and kick back to take away the stress of the day, I go for the classic and its simple gameplay and rules. If I want to get involved into a game and enter new realms, I go modern.

In regards to the comments about PC gaming verses consoles, I think PC games are better but prefer gaming on a console.... strange you say?

Because games look better on the PC and can be more complex and involved because of the keyboard/mouse controlling system, I enjoy PC games more. But I'm tired of having to constantly upgrade my system because a new game release push's my 8 month old system to the obsolete category. New video card, better sound card, more memory, faster processor, etc etc etc etc.....

I figure for the price of a new video card I can buy a new console or two and several games and be happy, while keeping the "obsolete" computer for internet use, productivity work, and business.

I'm also tired of constantly patching PC games. I go buy a new game at EB and two days later I'm downloading the first of 176 patches to fix the bugs.

I buy my Xbox or PS2 or GC and it will play any game that is being released for it and I don't have to worry about any upgrades for a few years until the next gen version is released.

Mendon

[Happy_Dude]

$$$$'s. Simple as that.

[Chris++]

I own a PS2 because I love first-person shooters, and the FPS libraries on the other two popular modern consoles are pathetic. I also find the Sony analog controller extremely comfortable and intuitive.

The fact is, no classic system is going to get even close to approaching the level of excitement of a modern FPS if you're into that sort of thing. Forget the pretty graphics and stuff; I just like a game that surrounds you. I'm not going to get that from my 2600!

Having said that, my playing time is probably divided 50-50 between "classic" (i.e. old) systems and the PS2. I don't play PC games because I hate PCs. They're designed to slowly break themselves. You also have to keep adding shit. I don't have the time, patience or knowledge for that. Computers aren't cars or phallic extensions for me. Plug in the game and play the damn thing! That's what I do. (Unless you count programming on the C-64, but I'm still learning. )

Quote

Everything after Pong is a derivative and not as pure.

I hope you're joking. Pong is terribly boring. In fact, you should read my review for the Atari Times:

http://www.ataritime...s/rev_pong.html

Regarding "nostalgia," do I even have to go into detail about how pathetic and digressive that is?

[Ze_ro]

Room 34 said:

1. Few really creative ideas in games these days.

Y'know, people always complain about the lack of creativity these days, since there's so many genre games that come out... but I think it's being overstated. There's actually been a decent amount of innovation in games over the "modern" years. Stuff like Grand Theft Auto and Jet Grind Radio may be in the minority, but I think that comparing things to all the Pac-man clones and multitudes of space shooters makes things at least equal. There's enough genres now that it's pretty easy to find something you'll like.

Quote

2. Console games -- and controllers -- have gotten excessively complicated.

This is probably the main reason I don't have any of the newer consoles... I don't mind investing $250 or so in a console, but the games are expensive enough that I can't afford to buy them very often.... Especially when you compare that to $5 or so for Genesis games that I can still enjoy.

You're completely right about controllers too. I remember when I had a C64, and my brother and I would break controllers all the time, and just go out and spend $6 on a new one. Nowadays, finding one for less than $30 is tricky. With all the goofy analog sticks and such, buying used controllers is a lot more risky.

Quote

3. All the modern games I am interested in are better on the computer.

I completely disagree here. I'd much rather be able to just drop in a disc and turn the system on, instead of having to go through the hassle of installing the game, making sure there's no conflicts, making sure my computer is actually powerful enough to play the game (which is no longer as easy as checking MHz/Megs of memory anymore), and then installing patches to make sure it works with all my broken video drivers because the company wasn't smart enough to debug them properly. Monitors definitely have a higher resolution, but as long as you get a decent TV, I don't think it's that big a deal. Plus, with HDTV's around the corner, this advantage won't last.

However, computers are very useful for stuff like online gaming, homebrew games/emulators (although some consoles have some good homebrew communities... Dreamcast, GP32, and X-Box come to mind), and you can upgrade without buying a whole new one if you know what you're doing. I have to admit though, that playing first person shooters without a keyboard and mouse is complete and utter garbage. I have no idea how you people ever managed to play Goldeneye and Perfect Dark on an N64 controller. I was quick to pick up a keyboard and mouse for my Dreamcast when I bought Quake 3.

Quote

1. Why don't YOU own any modern consoles?

It's completely a monetary concern at this point. I'll gladly snatch up a Gamecube as soon as it hits the next price drop. However, a long time ago when the Jaguar came out, I bought one right away... ever since then, I've learned that patience is a virtue, and that it's best to wait a while and see how things are going to pan out before jumping into things (I still love my Jaguar, but if I had bought an X-Box when it first came out, I wouldn't be too happy right abou tnow).

Quote

2. Where do you draw the line between classic and modern?

Sigh... it's not really that simple... and it completely depends on your definition of "modern". At this point, I think I'd say that anything that does 3D accelleration can be considered modern (that is, PSX, Saturn, and everything newer). Systems that are relegated to 2D (including the SNES despite any SuperFX junk) I guess are now classic. The 3DO and Jaguar are kind of a grey area I guess...

--Zero

[chrisbid]

i own consoles from across the specturm. i currently have a PS2 and a cube, i do wish to pick up an xbox, but i mainly want that for MAME on my TV with above average controllers

I also agree with the arguement that there has always been shovelware. Although with the bigger companies like Sony and EA driving the market now, they are pushing out the last few developers that were willing to take risks. Sega took too many risks and are now just rehashing their old successes.

If you dont like modern consoles, i would suggest that you pick up a cheap dreamcast. They arent that expensive, and there is a ton of quality software for the machine. It was the machine that got me back into gameing after taking a hiatus during the waning days of the 16 bit era. Games like crazy taxi, chu chu rocket, typing of the dead, samba de amigo, and mr driller are as intuitive, simple and addicting as pac man was 20 years ago. (i would also check out either Super Monkey Ball game on the Gamecube, great old school simpe design and gameplay, with modern sharp 3D graphics)


I dont remember where i read this, but i find that the best way to define eras is to look at the primary methods of control

old school - joysticks (pre 1985)
middle school - crosspads (1985-1996)
new school - analog sticks (1996-present)

The release of the N64 was the defining moment of the "new school" with its analog controller. Sony and Sega soon followed suit with their own analog pads, and 3D gaming had busted all the way through.

I do agree that the industry has become stale, like every other form of mass entertainment. I will not buy a next gen console after the x-box unless there is a killer app that gives me the same feeling of wow that Super Mario, Sonic, Street Fighter II, or Crazy Taxi gave me the first time i played those games.

[MegaManFan]

chrisbid said:

The release of the N64 was the defining moment of the "new school" with its analog controller.  Sony and Sega soon followed suit with their own analog pads, and 3D gaming had busted all the way through.

That's something that's always irked me - N64 gets ragged on for being cartridge based, limited, behind the times and all that - but then you look at the N64 controllers with their analog sticks, rumble packs, memory slots and transfer packs not to mention an ergonomically pleasing design and I'd say they were AHEAD of the curve. Dreamcast took the formula and improved on it, although the controllers aren't as ergonomically pleasing.

[Room 34]

Ze_ro said:

Quote

3. All the modern games I am interested in are better on the computer.

I completely disagree here. I'd much rather be able to just drop in a disc and turn the system on, instead of having to go through the hassle of installing the game, making sure there's no conflicts, making sure my computer is actually powerful enough to play the game (which is no longer as easy as checking MHz/Megs of memory anymore), and then installing patches to make sure it works with all my broken video drivers because the company wasn't smart enough to debug them properly. Monitors definitely have a higher resolution, but as long as you get a decent TV, I don't think it's that big a deal. Plus, with HDTV's around the corner, this advantage won't last.

A couple of things here...

First off, I said the modern games I am interested in are better on the computer. My modern gaming is pretty much limited to stuff like the SimCity series and Age of Empires. Lots of tiny stuff on the screen that demands resolution much higher than a TV can provide!

Second... and don't jump to outdated conclusions here... The computers in my house are 100% Macs. I am sure hardware compatibility and drivers and whatnot get to be a major pain with PC games but it's pretty much a no-brainer on the Mac. I own Macs for the same reason I own Honda cars... because I don't want to have to worry about what's going on "under the hood."

Now as far as the outdated conclusions I mentioned... I just want to stave off a tired tangent on the lack of available Mac software. All of the GOOD software is available for the Mac, and a lot more games are being released simultaneously on both platforms these days...

[Chris++]

Someday I will have a Mac. Speaking of which, it's time to write up a request for another raise.

I've heard (many times, now) the sound quality you've gotten via recording with a Mac. There's no way I'm sticking to PCs once I can afford Apple's box. (And then I'll be comin' to you for advice!)

[joeybastard]

Chris++ said:

Someday I will have a Mac. Speaking of which, it's time to write up a request for another raise.

I've heard (many times, now) the sound quality you've gotten via recording with a Mac. There's no way I'm sticking to PCs once I can afford Apple's box. (And then I'll be comin' to you for advice!)

I've recorded on both platforms and never seen a difference in sound quality if the conditions of the recording are the same. Same mics, same sampling rate, sound cards of similar capabilites etc. I'm not trying to deter you in anyway from getting a Mac, just that it may not be the solution to your problem.