Do you think *Arcade* Gameplay/Style can still work in 2009 and beyond ???

[Agent X]

Seriously here.  I'm tickled pink that a lot of the members in this community are like 12, 13, 14 years old and even know what a Famicom/NES is, let alone collects and plays them.  But I wonder, and I'm specifically targeting you younger peeps here with this question, though anyone of course is free to put in their 2cents... but for those of you who didn't grow up with the evolution of home consoles and the arcade scene of the 1980s through early 90s,  do you think the style/gameplay still works?  Everyone is gaga over the latest and greatest damn near photo realistic gaming of the PS3 and XBOX 360 systems, and no one is going to argue that the 3-D worlds playable today are awesome in their own right... but for current systems and future generation systems... is the "quick to learn, lifetime to master" type gameplay something you'd plunk down money for, or is it relegated to the dodo bird?

I still like making forays into stuff like MAX PAYNE, or stuff like Freedom Fighters (highly underrated 3rd person RGS/Strategy/Action game from 2003, and basically "Red Dawn" the video game), because it provides a world not possible in 2-D... but when all is said and done, I like looking at and interacting with a game that has that pseudo Japanimation/Anime look to it with brilliant sprite based graphics, and the fact it is a *surreal* medium that's not anchored in reality at all, but has aspects of it.  Back in the day, (for you youngsters) we'd hit up the local Pizzaria, convenience stores, devoted video game arcades, grocery stores, and literally anywhere there was an arcade game cab and go nuts.  Hanging around sipping on sodas... watching someone's skill and picking up tips, and that was prior to the whole Street Fighter II: The World Warrior boom and SNK's dive into exclusive VS. FIGHTING games.  When a "port" came out be it for the 8-BIT systems or 16-BIT systems (or  Hyper 8-Bit if we're talking PC Engine) it really was a big deal because it wasn't exactly like the arcade older brother but usually damn close.

But the play mechanics were, simplistic... damage collision (unless it was Pole Position) was usually forgiving and unrealistic BUT FUN... and depending on how good you were, you could probably blast through a game in 45 minutes tops.  Now I see gaming as something that is closer to the Cyberpunk fantasies of "Virtual Reality" (V.R.) only we're not yet interfacing the gaming program and/or console with our minds and data gloves... but it's more like living an alternate life versus, knowing you're involved with a quote on quote "GAME".  I hear a lot of people say that Arcade style gaming is indeed dead, but with seeing so many people get into retro gaming, I often wonder if there is a demographic, niche as it might be where there might be some kind of a resurgence.  And if so, would the next generation support NEW games in the old style?  On that note I've seen an odd mindset as well.

Ppl (across the board) will often play/accept a 2-D or 2.5D game filled of sprite drawn, parallax goodness etcetera... IF IT'S ON A HANDHELD/PORTABLE, but if it's on a current home system, it's like it's a deal breaker or something.  But if one is going backwards and buying/playing the older stuff, then that's cool too.

So...

#1> Does Arcade style/gaming have a place in today's world and tomorrow?
#2> Why (if younger than say, 25) do you bother with *Retro* Gaming?
#3> Do you yourself understand the hypocracy of the 2-D is cool "only when" syndrome?

[nintendodork]

I'll answer #1 and #2

1. Yes, arcade gaming needs to live on fo as long as it possibly can.
2. Because games today are black bar, except for the occasional Mario, Zelda, and a few others.  There's obviously something great about "retro gaming" or otherwise, my friend and I wouldn't have spent over an hour playing Donkey Kong Junior Math

[son_ov_hades]

As an under 25 year old, I grew up the NES, Genesis, SNES, etc. So I guess this doesn't really apply to me. But I think arcade style games still work. I mean look how popular Megaman 9 was, or Geometry Wars.

[UglyJoe]

Arcade-style games have a chance of survival thanks to digital distribution (XBLA, WiiWare, etc).  A large budget and large price tag can't be justified for a simple or 2d game (unless you're SNK/Sammy/Playmore).  Digitally distributed games are generally cheap, so arcade-style games can really thrive. 

[Drakon]

#1> Does Arcade style/gaming have a place in today's world and tomorrow?

no.  Arcades are dieing left right and center.  Even ones that get new games.  And the ones with new games I feel more like I'm playing something meant for home use instead of an arcade.  Arcade games are now on flat screen hdtvs.  And you never see kids getting into arcade stuff anymore because they can get the exact same experience or even BETTER of an experience at home.  It's a shame really because I've made so many friends at arcades in my lifetime.  And truthfully the arcade is probably my favourite social place to go to.  People these days don't seem to care anymore about the "quick to learn lifetime to master" type games.  I always preferred these types of games because it's very easy to start and stop playing them whenever I want.

#2> Why (if younger than say, 25) do you bother with *Retro* Gaming?

I'm 28 so I'm not qualified but I can guess.  Most people who retro game just emulate these games and systems on a current gen console.  Retro games are something that's from a different time.  They're games meant to be clever with very limited hardware.  They're mostly very short so making them fun is also hard.  And they're meant to be enjoyed with friends in the same room, not over the internet.  Due to technology and consumers nobody really makes games like these anymore.  So if you want this sort of experience, then playing a retro game is really the only solution.

#3> Do you yourself understand the hypocracy of the 2-D is cool "only when" syndrome?

I didn't know anybody was that stupid.  I always preferred 2d games.  3d games I find fun but not as timeless as 2d games.  It's always the 2d games that I keep going back to and never become bored of.  Maybe I just don't understand what this syndrome is

[Rogles]

1. Not in the mainstream. Games like Rockman 9 and Gradius Rebirth are strictly for the niche gamers, it seems.

2. Because rather than trying to make an interactive movie, older games focused on gameplay and replay value.

3. I myself don't understand it.

[nintendodork]

You're right about number two...

Today, modern games are pretty much super-charged versions of those shitty interactive games that come with every single Disney DVD now.

[133MHz]

Arcade style/gameplay is here to stay, but 80s/90s arcades will never come back. .

For everyone who remembers the arcades during that time, it was a magical place where you went to be amazed beyond belief. The arcades were a place where the latest gaming technology made its debut and made you drool over stuff that just wasn't possible on home computing equipment. The good ones always had at least one full simulation cabinet, electromechanical games that gave tickets which you could exchange for prizes, and games like laser tag. It was a dark and noisy place illuminated by cheesy neon lights and the light from the CRT screens. In other words, it was heaven.

The arcade place as such died when the home systems became powerful enough to match and beat what was seen in the arcades. The technology is not going to amaze you anymore. The only reason for gaming outside your house today is stuff like racing sims or dancing games. Some places still exist, albeit smaller, not as profitable and relying on niche markets like DDR, Pump It Up, Beatmania, etc. You might even be lucky and find a retro arcade, or even better, your local arcades might have survived the test of time, you can still have great fun in those, but unfortunately it's not the same. The spirit of the 80s/90s arcades died long ago .

[Blue Protoman]

1. Arcade games today?  Yes, they still have a place, if you make them real cheap.  Just put them on digital download services, or put a bunch of the min a compilation.

2. Why do I play classic games?  Well, why not?

[JC]

I'll add the comments of a Nintendo executive in the Tokyo Metropolitan Museum of Photography Family Computer 1983-1994 history book:

There was an incredible advance in the performance of the hardware that came after the Family Computer. Software competed through powerful visuals and music, and the contents changed drastically, becoming more complex. As a result, games have become difficult to play, and there are signs people are stepping back or are actually being excluded.

The evolution of game machines has already reached its limits. Still, people are trying to come up with new things; for example, there are people that are giving great attention to online games, but the thing is that new games won't be able to sell many copies since the user will start playing with the same software for long hours, with an unspecified number of people. I think this might put the income of the companies and the sellers at risk.

From past to present, the software and the hardware have kept the master-servant relationship, a basic element for the game business that will never change. In my opinion, the crucial element of the development of the game industry is up to whether software developers will be able to create games anyone can enjoy, over the advanced hardware, by honoring the old Family Computer that was once a big hit, and following this as a good example.

[Agent X]

Some interesting responses indeed, and thanks.  But I feel I might have confused some of you as to what I was originally going on about.  I didn't mean to invoke the idea of "Would THE ARCADE" still be a viable place with it's brand of games in our modern world... what I meant was,  could Arcade style games still draw a crowd and loyal demographic in today's home console/VCS market?  In other words:  Would people be willing to buy Physical media (not downloads) where the games of today and tomorrow returned to the more user friendly (but sometimes annoying), quick-to-learn-lifetime-to-master play mechanics and unrealistic physics/damage interface, where a game could be beat in less than an hour, or an hour and a half tops with multiple paths... or would you think this form of gaming is just gone forever.

A lot of people (I'm kind of on that boat, but I'm a knuckle head and want to be optimistic) believe it's the other reason SEGA failed with the Dreamcast.  #1> Most (myself included) were still hurt from all of their dumb hardware moves from the Mega CD onwards and #2> they specialized in Arcade Gaming, and the populous wanted something more.  On one hand I agree with that ideology.  On the other hand, speaking of #2, I do not because there are simply too many people now that are seriously getting into the Retro scene, and a lot of these people were still swimming around in their father's nutsack when some of us were like 7, 8 or 13 going nuts over such & such title.  This to me would indicate a resurgence of sorts, but then maybe it's only a resurgence when it's free ROMS on an emulator, or must be downloaded for little money on a current system like XBOX 360 or PS3???  Basically (and I can only speak for myself), I'd like to see a whole slew of games come out that evokes the razzamatazz synergy that Street Fighter 4 seems to be pulling off right now in 2009... only stay true to form and be more quarter munching style game play, and less emphasis on how photo realistic it can be, or if a car handles in the game world the way it would in real life.  On that note I'll forever vote:

Rage Racer > (any) of the Gran Tourismo games.

[Blue Protoman]

I'd like to see a whole slew of games come out that evokes the razzamatazz synergy that Street Fighter 4 seems to be pulling off right now in 2009... only stay true to form and be more quarter munching style game play, and less emphasis on how photo realistic it can be, or if a car handles in the game world the way it would in real life.

This.