Suppose 90s video games had the same graphics as games now.

Obviously, I know they don't, but for the sake of argument lets suppose they do. Saying that, do you think that video games are better now than they were back then? Why or why not. Remember. Graphics and other technical qualities are equal (for the sake of argument).

A lot besides graphics has changed in that time.

Gamers expect more complexity, depth and variety. The stories and voice acting are also vastly superior these days.

@thereal25:"The stories and voice acting are also vastly superior these days."

Which is IRRELEVANT i want to PLAY a game not watch a damn movie!

They would be infinitely worse because today's graphics wouldn't allow for massive, sprawling levels and an insane amount of content. For the most part.

@SovietsUnited: That makes more sense. If developers actually wanted to utilize more massive, sprawling levels, then today's graphics would be exceptional for that. Look at Dark Souls and its vast, interconnected world for an example. And an insane amount of content? Sure, content in some games might have gotten shallow, but there's no denying that today's games offer a hell of a lot more to do than games of the 90s.

You speak my words.

Compare modern remakes to the old, especially Thief: The Dark Project vs. Thief 2014. It's almost insulting. Hell, even the much better Dishonored doesn't rank up. And it's all because of system limitations and the immense work and design required for those graphics.

I love the derelict world of Dark Souls, the amazing design and the old-school feel of it in particular, but its territory size pales in comparison to RPGs of the 90's and early 2000's.
Besides Dark Souls doesn't have too much content in the first place

I see your point but its doesnt apply for all games. I might have not have played all the Mass Effect games if there wasn't a strong story and good voice acting.

Imagine the "The Last Of Us" if it had a terrible story and bad voice acting, I bet not has many people would have enjoyed it and it might not have been praised as much either.

For some games now its part of package

Wow, I say that VR would cause problems and hurt games more than it helps.

Then again all we are getting right now is 3D goggles with head tracking.

Yeah I think the games today would still be better because more then just the graphics have improved since then. Things such as gameplay mechanics, story, voice-acting, etc. have also improved.

@thehig1: Exactly.. that's one thing no one seems to bother with! The last of us had a pretty damn generic&mediocre gameplay.

GTA 4 is the same deal.. i loved its production values,story&Characters but DAMN hell its a massive downgrade from San andreas!

Yes the story may be damn good but the gameplay is the meat of any video game so you're just going to be left saying "The story was amazing but only if the gameplay was more fun".

A video game should primarily be focused on gameplay and then story.. silent hill 2 a good example for this it has a great story which is mostly conveyed through your gameplay no scripted events,no overblown cutscenes just regular gameplay!

Thumbs up * 100.

Could you elaborate on this please?

No disrespect, but what does this have to do with what I asked in my OP?

So where does this leave Gran Turismo?

It is hard to say. Take Wave Race, for example. The sequel, Blue Storm, is on a far more advanced machine yet has worse aesthetics imo. The games with good art direction stand the test of time. The biggest benefit would be framerates, if that is taken into the equation..................yet Twisted Metal 2 plays just fine.

You could easily pick a bundle of late 90s games that are better than anything released over the past seven years. Mainstream gaming is far too dumbed down nowadays, typically devoid of challenge, depth or creativity

Pretty much the only thing modern mainstream gaming has improved is presentation. If you improved the graphics and UI of the games from the 90s...it wouldn't even be close.

then current gen would be a laughing stock.

Its funny, 90s games offer more replay value than current gen. 48hr-120hr+ games were replaced with 5hr campaign modes like in COD.

#

Hm. It's kind of hard to say whether cut-scenes are a good or bad thing. I would lean towards saying they're a good thing.

Hm, come to think of it I can think of a couple of examples of where the "old" game was better than the new, (apart from graphical inferiority, of course):

Deus Ex > Deus Ex Human Revolution.

Serious Sam the second encounter > SS3.

@thereal25: They're neither bad nor good they're just there to provide a narrative,they're not the most important thing in the game,i'd rather have pre-rendered cut-scenes have replaced with in-game cutscenes.